New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-11-03
EPEEDOU or TEACHING.

Considerable fuss is still sporadicay raised
over the departure. some time ago Of certain
instructor from the faculty of leading western
university Different accounts of the cause ana
circumstances Of his exit are put forward. TN
one side il is said that he was dismissed because
OF certain opinions expressed by him on Inc
subject Of labor and capital. In the cant phrase
Of the day. he was sacrificed to the juggernaut
Of capitaliSm' On the other side it Is declared
that he was dropped at the end OF the term Tor
,vhch he had been engaged because the results
Of his work did not make renewal OF the Ell
eocement seem desirable We are not aware
that absolute proof has been adduced on either
side. nor is there promise of profit in extended
discussion Of their comparative credlbllty. III
10 sufficient TO observe that the one statement
rests chiefly upon the word. or the conjecture,
of the professor alone, while the other is sup
ported by the explicit affirmation of a number
of the officers Of the university. On the race OF
the case therefore, 1t seems more reasonable
10 think he Is mistaken than that they are de-
liberate falsfers; and we have no doubt that
view of it is taken by the vast majority OF we'll
informed people.
Suppose however, the professors statement
of the case to be the true one. Suppose him, or
onv man. TO have been dismissed for utterances
or teachings obnoxious to the principles of the
institution he was connected with. What OF
that? What better cAusc could be required:
If that is not sufficient to justify and to compel
instant dismissal. we should like to know what
would be. There is lot Of talk extant about
"freedom Of teaching" which some imagine to
be mperled by this incident. 1t Is idle talk,
and such imaginations are worse than idle
c oballa limo ri 1orn of
teaching 50 long as it be not teaching of actual
crime Freedom Of teaching prevails. and will
nreyall. lust as much as freedom Of worship
But because Quakers will not have mass said
in their meeting houses is religious liberty there
fore in danger? Or IL Presbyterian minister
begins preaching doctrines contrary to the basic
| principles Of Prcsbyteransm, and his church
declines TO hear him and demands his rcsigna-
ton from its pulpit, is the lnqusition therefore
about TO be restored: The priest is free to say
| mass wherever he can gather Il congregation
that desires il. and the minister to preach what
| he will to wh0msoeyer will listen But religious
liberty does not mean that people are to be com
pclled to listen To what they do not want to
hear. Neither does freedom Of teaching mean
that schools and colleges are TO be compelled to
admit the teaching of that which their founders
| and governors regard ms error.
| Most Of our seminarles and colleges are found
| ed on some definite principles Their presidents
| and faculties conduct them according 10 those
| principles 1t Is absurd To say they must open
their doors TO every Weary Waggles who may
wish TO air his peculiar doctrines. just rs 1t
would be To say our schools of science must
give a hearing TO Brother Jasper and his theory
| that de sun do move" The college must he
| as free to teach or 10 reject teaching rs Is the
! individual professor. There is no interference
| with rights" As said the Sage Of Jaalam:
The right to be a cussed fool
Is safe from all devices human.
But there Is no compulslon upon The rest OF us
| to accept rs teachers and leaders those who con
| spcuously exercise that right. II men wish to
teach that 'de sun do nave" or tina; property
il robbery" or any other doctrine, they are free
! to do so, II they can find schools in which such
doctrines are acceptable. They have no bust
ness to inirude whcrs they are not wanted II
they cannot find schools willing to hclr them.
| why not found some of their own? The Social
| lists Of Germany did that. and II was most
| commendabe enterprise; especially slace their