The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1910-03-25
(By q staff Correspondent. }

(By q STAFF Correspondent
BI4ACRSBURG. VA, March 10
Summarized. the charges against Dr.
Barringer embrace carelessness, mac
curacy and dealing parsimoniousiy
with the truth In speaking OF condi-
tions at the v. p. L.; lack Of tact, dis
erection and failure to take the initia-
tive in important matters: inability to
command respect and discipline; In
sincerity; lack OF broad sympathy and
a keen, discerning sense Of 5usticei
not being well informed as to educa-
tional methods, needs and policies;
lack of high ideals and not having an
irreproachable character.
In filing the charges with the board
of visitors OF the v. p. l., President
Priddy and the welfare committee or
tho Alumni Association declare 1t Is
a source OF deep regret to them that
DR.. Barringer has not demonstrated
his fitness and capacity for admins
tering the affairs of the institution.
The complainants say: We come be-
fore you to present clear and ra-
tional statement of facts and condi-
tons which, in our opinion, consti-
tute conclusive proof that our former
appeals to you We're warranted. we
have no desire to dictate. but we 90
most earnestly request your ears ana
an unbiased elaboration. Our desire
is to cooperate on frank and square
basis, and In expressing this hope in
behalf of your attitude. we are doing
no more than is gladly recognized in
every institution where safe, sane and
constructive policies prevail. Reasons
why such cooperation IL necessary for
best results are obvious. The progress
sive and ohservant student who
spends four or five Years In an In
! stitution gains an acquaintance with
| IL of a character which can be OBJ
! tanned by no other except by SINH
lar residence II he Is loyal alum
! nus he watches with keen and con-
/ slant interest the steps and stages OF
! progress We believe we have been
! faithful and unabating In our interest
I In the institution, and our presence
here Is In further proof that our IN
terest Is real and not merel! pfo-
! fessed,'
Opinions Of Educators.
/ The coynplainants reinforce their re-
ouirements Of the president of the Nir-
ginia Polytechnic Institute with opln-
ions from a number of prominent edu-
Gators who have written letters to
members of the welfare committee on
the qualifications a man should have
to All the position satisfactorily.
Among the educators are President
Thompson, of the Ohio State Univer-
sity; President Snyder. of the Michi-
gan Agricultural College; President
Mees. Of the Rose Polytechnic Institute
(Terre Haute, Ind. President Stone,
of Perdue University; President
Schurman, of; Cornell University
President Humphreys. of the Stevens
Institute of Technology: President
Sparks, of the Pennsylvania State Col
lege; President Craighead, of Tulane
University, and DR. Henry s. Pritchett
president of the Carnegie Foundation
All of them set the highest standards
for the executive of a polytechnic IN
stitute. Doubtless these letters were
written by the presidents without any
knowledge as to what use would be
made of the missives.
Using these letters as the standards
to which DR.. Barringers executive ant
personal acts of commission and omis-
! sion should conform, the welfare com
mittee then arraigned him on a seriei
or charges challenging his fitness tt
. preside over the destfntes of the insti'
tuition. He liz alleged to be guilty o.
"injudicious and inexcusable blunder:
In administration" failing to keep {
watchful eye over the students and thu
physical equipment of the institution
: and 10 have gane=aYer- heads=a
men in charge of departments ant
made changes in the curriculum with
: out consulting them. The welfare com
Tn4ttee also charges that DIR. Barrin
gers statistics and statements mad
on the platform and In print do no
agree, and the complainants furthe
! aver that his speeches have beel
Z perile and that his sense Of humor i
not elegant
. False in One; False In All.
, Replying to the charges. DR.. Bar
ringer seems to successfully contra
! diet a number of allegations. ant
concludes his answer with the lcga
maxim "Faisus in uni. falsus in ON
q nibus''--False in one, false in ii.
DR. Barringer replied to the charge
a ! at full length. analysed each ant
: every one of them. reviewed the HIS
tory of the institution during the pas
r three years. and quoted literally fron
: letters received and written by him
81 and from documents and catalogue
OF the institution "A number of year
n back.
q There are altogether 46 charges
These fill pamphlet of considora b
: size. The reply to Dr. Barringer
d which takes up the charges one b
n one, makes nearly so pages of close
o ~ ,typeWrttten manuscript anu Woui
: MI three pages OF The Virginian.
The first charge involves a question
of accuracy or veracity, or both. an
charges:
: so far as the progress of an In
stitution and the perpetuation of higl
: ideals is concerned. 1t matters littl
g whether errors and misleading state
ments from Its administrative head b
= the result of ignorance or maliciou
Z misrepresentation. We propose t
= prove that DR. Barringer, the prcsi
! dent Of the Virginia Polytechnic In