New-York tribune., 1901-02-27
lem" will come to speedy and benefcent solu-
ton
FREEDOM OF TEACHING.

ErOIeSSof tfcniy van ~. he, VI Iiuectoh'
| troduced a recent address at the Peoples Insti-
tute on the moral law in art, with reference
to the dismissal of Professor Ross from Leland
Stanford. Jr.. University. He said that the
action of Professor Ross's associates who had
followed him into retirement and of other econ
omists who had espOused his cause should in
spire pride in American scholarship and conf
dence in the men who are promoting the cause
of education in our colleges. 1t meant. he said.
that academic freedom of teaching is not dead
here by any means and he added in conclusion:
Personally don't know how many of Pro-
fessor Rosss theories I agree with. One of the
things he believes in. free silver, | do not be
lieve in at all Yet would rather see the sill
question decided the wrong way than see
Professor Ross silenced. Learning and phlloso-
ply are precious but liberty is more precious
than either
The views thus deliberately advanced by a
man of Importance in the educational world
invite examination Perhaps a clear under
standing of Professor Dykes conception Of
academic freedom can best he obtained by stat
ing few hypothetical cases
Suppose that a professor in the Princeton
Theological Seminary should see fit tn instruct
his classes that God is a mere "stream of ten
dency': that. there is no assurance of a future
life. and that in any case the theory of divine
atOnement for human faults is absurd. Would
the professor asserting such propositions and
urging his pupils to accept them be dismissed
with or without the forInality of a forced resig-
nation? Or would he be retained and honored
as a noble example Of freedom of teaching at
Princeton? Perhaps DIR. van Dyke would adj
vocate the former course the ground that
though his colleagues private habits might be
perfectly correct his teachings We're. under the
circumstances, essentially immoral and condu-
Give 10 immortality in others
Without stopping to consider whether or not
that position would he impregnable from the
point of view which DR.. Dyke has adopted
let us. for his convenience. imagine the case Of
professor of physiology at Princeton who
should endeavOr to convince his classes. and
through them the world. that Harvey did not
make a great discovery. but 4 gross blunder;
that the blood does not circulate, but remains
stationary in the body. Would he be secured in
the possession of his chair as long as he desired
to keep it? Or would he be discharged? And If
he We're discharged. would he be a martyr: Or
what would occur If an instructor AT Princeton
should teach that the sO-called law of gravita-
ton Is not q law at ALL but a false assumption
which has been carelesSly accepted by great
majority of Intelligent persons while natural
events were all the while conclusively refuting
it? Which would have to go in such a case
would protest be proper and valid If a surc-
cal Instructor and demonstrator should advise
his pupils 10 reject the germ theory. discard
disinfectants and antiseptlc processes, and occa-
sionally, by way OF proving their faith. smear
their instruments with gangrenous matter?
Once more. in order TO avoid all possibility Of
complicating the question with moral consider
ations. may respectfully ask Or. van Dyke
to conceive of professor OF English literature
who should zealously employ all his resources
of eloquence and authority 10 overturn the
standards which the world has accepted. de-
caring that Shakespeare was man of inferior
mental powers and destitute of the true poetic
faculty, and that Upper the one colossal
figure in English poetry? Would the right OF
academic freedom still be inviolable? Or. even
if its fearless exponent We're Or. van Dyke him
self. would the Princeton authorities first remon-
strate. and then, because he remained firm. say
TO him: Your liberty of private opinion is
absolute. but you cannot use your professor
ship 10 make the university ridiculous and you
will have 10 leave u.s.?
While we have seen no cause for doubt that
Professor Ross was reasonably dismissed from
Stanford University, we are at present consider
ing not his specific case but the remarkable COM
ments upon It which DIR. Dyke has made,
and which actually mean nothing less than this
that n college instructor. once installed. can be
properly got rid OF only by being convicted Of
ignorance or immortality. DR.. Dyke de
tests the free silver heresy. yet he would rather
"see the silver question decided the wrong way
than Professor Ross silenced." But. of
course. Professor Ross is entitled to no excep-
uonal immunity, and consequently all the col
leges Of the country may be converted into nur-
series OF financial deluson and dishonesty II
their professors in one department desire to
make them such Moreover, there Is nothing
sacrosanct about free silver. and hence it fol
lows that our educational institutions may one
and all be perverted from the service of truth
10 the propagation of any error. however fan
tastic and deplorable
Ii may be- indeed think II must be- that
In the discussion arising out of recent occur
rences at Stanford University some Jealous de-
Tenders OF intellectual liberty have been be-
trayed into an assertion of views which they do
not really hold Freedom Of teaching. truly
discerned is an Indispensable condition Of edu-
catiOnal development We believe that 1t Is
safe every where in the United States though the
attempt 10 foist caricature into it's place may
involve dangerous possibilities.