The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1890-10-12
-------------
LIBERALS AND THE UNIVERSITY.
To the Editor of TIE HERALD:


better &c not discuss such matters in the public
journals but your article may do great injury
to the university, and 1 think you a,e misin-
formed in regard to many of the facts. 1T the
first meeting OF the new board, Dr. PARK was
unanimously elected president of the faculty.
At that time the new members OF the board had
no knowledge that there was such want of
harmony between hin and some OF thu plo-
fessors that changes must be made Dr.. PARK
did not recommend the employment of two of
the former professors, and they were rot en-
ployed. his want of harmony was the sole
reason assigned. Both were understood to be
Liberals who al voted the Liberal ticket
70: years. There was no question as to their
capacity and the board egeetted the want Of har-
mory prevented their employment. A law Of last
winter made IL unnecessary to employ the
librarian, who was q Liberal, and he was not
retained. One professor, member Of the
Peoples party, was not employed, though his
employment was recommended by DR.. PARK,
and the reco mrnend was disapproye by q
divided vote. No political reason was assigned
II the meeting. There was present one regent,
member Of the PEOPLES party, who did not
vote. and he certainly would have voled had no
understood the opposition was political in its
character. Had he voted, should have given
a casting vote to sustain DR.. PARKS recon-
mend. II am right in these statements three
Liberals and one member Of the Peoples party
have not been re-employed. am not entitled
to the credit OF being the oaly member who has
tried u keep politics ous ef the University but
SO FER rs know every m ,mber has avowed t Q
same purpose and line of policy. OF course it
is difficult to avoid iealou5ies and
sus ocons of political bias and that
INV, chnnll
to have the University Judged by what shall be
done, rather than have it drawn into public
discussion. regretted the mention of it in the
Liberal platform, bee iuse 1 foresaw 1t would
lead to discussion which might prejudice it.
There is no doubt that the University owes to
DR.. PARK. more than to any other man. the
measure of success; it has achieved, and the
only suggestion of his resignation has com,
from him. He has been intending TO resign,
but wants to do it in way that he can continue
to work in It; interest, and his only reason was
that he had worked in the institution so many
years that he felt the need OF relief. He was
urged to remain the year, and have personally
asked him to not refuse 10 remain another
year if the board asks il. I refer you to DR..
PARK, Prof STEWART and every member of
tie hoard for confirmation Of the facts state,
know THE HERALD and all parties would be
glad to see this university built UP, so the terri
tory could feel pride in IL, ard you know the
6i hcu.ties it has had 10 meet in the pas. and
must overcome in the future, and hope you
will not regard this note as in any sense contro-
versial, but only written to show the board has
not departed from eutral policy, and that Il
the University is thrown as football between
| the political parties it viii be supported by no
purity. Very truly,
R. HARDNESS.
| The real points in our statement of what
the Liberals have done for the University
seem to have escaped the notice of Judge
HARNESS. They are, that the support of
from tho Peoples rarty; that Peoples
party regents made no inquiry into the
politics of the professors recommended by
the president for employment; that they
employed indifferently members of both
parties; that among the Liberal regents,
one of them inquired whether the professor
of political economy was not a free-trader
and voted against hin, as such that another
| inquired if q certain professor was not q
member of the Peoples party aud voted
against him on that ground; and third
asked what the views OF one professor were
on the silver question. This much we
know. And we may add that the professor
who was decided member of the Peoples
party had been employed by the regents
had refused another situation because OF
the assurance of his employment from Tho
president and the chancellor, aud haC
worked week into the new year before he
learned of the action OF the board in dis
missing him None of the Liberal regent:
except the chancellor had ever met him
and to this day he knows of no charge made
against him by the regents or any of them
Below We take up the points which Judg,
HARNESS mentions:
We agree with Judge HARNESS tina
it would be better IL this discussion had 10
been introduced into the public journals
But it has been introduced. We did not in
troduce tho subject, though We have beer
lconversant with tho facts for some time
and we have refrained from ans mention o
these facts for the sole reason that w
feared such mention might be prejudiciai t.
the interests OF an institution that has beer
our pride in the past, and in which we hav
great hopes for the future Like Judg
HARNESS, too, we regretted to see tn
mention OF it in the Liberal PLATFORM bu
when that declaration as TO what the Lib
erals have done for the University wa
made, it was our imperative duty to NEE
that declaration with tho facts, howeve
unpleasant that dirty might be. And it wa
with merely natural pain that we refute,
the senseless, challengeful boast in tn
Liberal platform. The complaint in regar
to public discussion of this matter lie
against the Liberal platform adopted Octo
Der s, and not against THE HERALD. w
kept silent for two days and then spck
out. We also regret that Judge HARKNEs
did not deem it necessary to speak GU
when he saw the Liberal platform, instea
of waiting till we found it necessary t
puncture the blatant boast Of that docu
ment. So long as only the Liberals dragge
the University into politics there appears
no objection, When we refuted the state
ment the whole matter is deprecated by tn
gentleman.
2-Whatever disagreement there was be
tween the president and two professors
had occurred two years before the ne,
board took action on that disagreement, s
that this is rather slim excuse for tn
radical change that was suddenly effected
Sit is incorrect that three of the Pre-
! fessors who were not re- employed wer
, Liberals One of them was neither oiti
zen nor Liberal. Another was an actiy
worker in the cause of the Peoples part,
/. no 1icr rf frryO
ended with voting for part of the Liber;
ticket in February. One Of the latter hs
since been elected to Office on the People
, ticket. But il there were any doubt as |