The Daily Missoulian. [volume] (Missoula, Mont.) 1904-1961, 1912-01-15
Head Of University Of Montana Gives Answer
to Statement Issued Recently From Helena.
POINTS Of MEN IN CHARGE OF EDUCATION REVIEWED
Discussion of Reasons for Decision "Not to Renew DR..
Dunway's Contract at the Close Of the Year, Sep
tember 1, 1912" Are Taken Up One by One
for Consideration.

athletic policy. and reasonable stand
ards of scholarship, together with cor
rect principles Of conduct, the prcsi-
dent has found " necessary % deal
more or less sternly with some, ut
least, whose opinions seem 10 have
impressed the committee The process
that was used to obtain student senti-
mcni IL noteworthy. chiefly because ~
the absence of students whose chict
concern ~ scholarly work or scholar
iy distinction 70 the members OF
the faculty It has appeared somewhat
remarkable that the management Of
general student affairs In Tho univer-
si,y has been accompanied with SO lit
tie friction aud with So much genuine
good Will
with regard to the second point on
the alleged dissatisfaction between tho
ALUMNI ana the president, Il IL note
worthy that the request Of certain of
the alumni which Is said to have pro-
duced this investigation was signed
by two members Of the class OF 1911,
the other three being undergraduates.
one OF these graduates had been Sc
verely disc cplined for various dein-
auencies, both under the preceding
anu UIfHtI'i hhlliiiHlIdNl'llHt AAp"
many Alumni, apart from these two,
testified IS auitc unknown To the presi-
dent feN persons seemed ta be
considered the alumni 1t should be
/ added that some of the alumni, like
| some of the students. have been dis
/ satisfied with the presidents en-
I forcement of athletic eligibility rules
| and his necessarily vigorous efforts
I to prevent professionals from getting
plsces on football teams. A very few
also have been dspleased because the
/ pre sldent declined 10 perpetuate So
called honor society oathbound and Sc
cret In character, composed of three
members of the faculty anf u handful
of third and fourth year men. Such
an organization was not healthy in
! fmence with regard either to the gem
cral student body or To the faculty,
whatever may have been It's ideals
and hopes In it's earlier history
very few also, when they heard or
discipline being applied to members OF
their fraternity chapters. were more
I or less critical. Certainly n judleious
( inquiry would consider questions of
the nnimus and credibillty OF wit
nesses. Finally, 1t should be re-
marked that there has been no eN-
preston by the alumni of dlssastis-
faction with the president on the con-
trary many of them have been eN-
eeedingly helpful and most cordial In
advancing the plans OF the president.
Tho Third Point.
with regard 10 the third point on
lack OF CO. operation between the pres
idont and a large portion Of his fac
ulty,' It Is difficult to see any real
justification for such "A statement. In
an authorized interview published in
the Mlssouia Sentenel on october 20
the chairman of the committee ID
quoted as saying that ho desires to
correct the statement published by tho
Sentinel yesterday that any OF tho
faculty had been disloyal to DR.. Dun
llway' The members of the faculty
who were summoned before the nni-
yersty committee voluntarily and in
dividually told the president that they
had not been dissatisfied with the ad-
minlstration and that they had so
testified 10 the committee. 1t would
seem that the committee has construed
a reasonable amount Of candid differ
euce of opinion such as right minded
members of any faculty are sure to