Ogden 
 
 A Defence of Columbia College fror 
 the Attack of Samuel B. Ruggles
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 LOS ANGELES
 
 M 
 
 A DEFENCE 
 
 I 
 
 i 
 
 OF 
 
 I COLUMBIA COLLEGE 
 
 i 
 
 FROM 
 
 i'-A 
 
 THE ATTACK 
 
 P 
 
 i 
 
 OP 
 
 SAMUEL B. RUGGLES 
 
 
 BY GOUVERNEUR M. OGDEN, 
 A TRUSTEE. 
 
 I 
 
 NEW-YORK: 
 
 J. p. WRiaHT, PRINTER, 146 FULTON STREET. 
 1854.
 
 
 \ 
 
 i • 
 
 I
 
 A DEFENCE 
 
 OP 
 
 COLUMBIA COLLEGE 
 
 FROM 
 
 THE ATTACK 
 
 OF 
 
 SAMUEL B. RUGGLES. 
 
 BY GOtVERNEUR M. OGDEN, 
 A TRUSTEE. 
 
 NEW- YORK: 
 
 J. p. WRIGHT, PRINTER, 146 FULTON STREET. 
 1854.
 
 
 DEFENCE. 
 
 A Pamphlet has lately been issued from the press under 
 the title "The Duty of CoUimbia College to the Communi- 
 ty, and its Right to exclude Unitarians from its Professor- 
 ships of Physical Science, — considered by one of its Trus- 
 tees." It goes forth under the name of its author. Though 
 this production is in form, a letter to one of his colleagues, 
 yet it is apparent it was originally intended to have, what 
 has now been given to it, general circulation. This may 
 be inferred from its contents, but more conclusively from the 
 fact that it was not distributed to the Trustees earlier than 
 within four days before the day on which the election was 
 expected to be and was actually made. The Trustees had, 
 previous to that time, several meetings, at which the subject 
 of the vacancy of the Professorship of Chemistry and Natural 
 and Experimental Philosophy, and the claims of the several 
 candidates, were under consideration ; and several unsuc- 
 cessful ballotings had taken place. Mr. Ruggles, therefore, 
 must have well understood that the mind of each Trustee 
 was so settled as to be beyond the reach of his arguments. 
 The pamphlet probably was understood by some of those gen- 
 tlemen, for whose eye it was primarily intended, as an intima- 
 tion of a future appeal tlirough its pages to the public, should 
 they venture by their votes to disregard the admonitions of its 
 author. If so, their suspicion has been turned into reality. 
 For now, whatever may have been the original design of 
 the writer, after the Board of Governors of one of the oldest 
 and most respectable institutions of learning in this State 
 
 rie';><~>*~»f!r ^*J
 
 has, by a legal election, filled a vacancy in one of its Pro- 
 fessorships, an unsuccessful candidate is brought before the 
 pubUc by one of his warmest advocates, to complain that 
 his claims to the office have been unjustly and even illegal- 
 ly postponed to those of another. One would suppose that 
 the presumption against the justice of such complaint was 
 very strong, and that it would require reasons of extraordi- 
 nary weight to overcome the considerations of propriety 
 which might be expected to induce him quietly to acqui- 
 esce in the selection of another, a fellow-worker in the same 
 walks of science in which he moves. In the judgment of 
 Mr. Ruggles, such reasons exist. 
 
 Upon examining the pamphlet in question, it will be 
 found to start upon the position that the Trustees who 
 did not vote for Dr. (Jribbs, but voted for the gentleman 
 who was finally elected, did so knowing that, apart 
 from considerations of religions faith, and of the means 
 which had been used to effect his election, the former had 
 the superior qualifications — was pre-eminently fit for the 
 Professorship. His pre-eminent fitness being established, 
 Dr. Gibbs is in the position of being rejected, deprived of a 
 right. And it is asked on what grounds was this rejection 
 justified. These grounds are then stated to be — 1. That 
 indecorous, intemperate and disrespectful means had been 
 used to assert the superiority of his claims ; and 2. That 
 he was a Unitarian. Both of these objections are argued 
 against at great length, and it is insisted that neither can 
 enter into the motives of any Trustee in giving his vote 
 without injury to the best interests of the institution and to 
 science which it ought to promote, and without violation of 
 his duty to the public, to his trust, and to the law. 
 
 First, then, as to the allegation of the acknowledged pre- 
 eminence of Dr. Gibbs. Mr. Ruggles is entitled to express 
 his own conviction of the superiority of the gentleman whose 
 claims he so warmly and assiduously advocated. But with 
 what right can he assume that others, who thought it their 
 duty to take a course different from that he followed, enter-
 
 tallied the same conviction ? It is utterly denied that in 
 the Board of Trustees, or out or it, such pre-eminence was 
 ever admitted by any who gave their support to other can- 
 didates. Still less is it true that the act of the Board itself, 
 in making choice of a Professor to fill the vacancy lately 
 existing, can be shown to have been, or was in fact, any- 
 thing but the deliberate expression of its judgment as to the 
 relative fitness of the candidates. The testimonials of all 
 the candidates were before it. The duty and right devolved 
 upon the members of that Board to consider the weight and 
 force due to the evidence of the quaUfications of each ; to 
 take into consideration all such facts as their own niquiries 
 might bring to light, or might otherwise come to their know- 
 ledge, and which they judged bore upon the character and 
 attainments or the evidence in favor of any whose merits 
 were in question. The testimonials of one of such candi- 
 dates, through the zeal of his friends, have been printed ; 
 and Mr. Ruggles deems them conclusive. None of the 
 others have been printed, nor will be : yet they show high 
 capacity in those to whom they relate ; and in ihem the 
 Board has found a sufficient justification of its choice. Many 
 Trustees, as respectable and conscientious, and devoted to 
 the interests and proper objects of the College, as Mr. Ruggles 
 himself, deemed one of those candidates to be the most 
 competent to fill the chair of all whose names were submit- 
 ted ; yet it is true, that when it was found that he could not 
 be elected, it was proposed by two of them, for the sake of 
 harmony, that both the most prominent candidates should 
 be abandoned. It is then asked, "How could they with- 
 draw his name, and vote for some other candidate whom 
 they considered less fit, and perhaps did not know to be fit 
 at all ?" The answer is plain : They abandoned him be- 
 cause he could not be elected, and then cast their votes for 
 one abimdantly qualified for the chair, and whom they 
 deemed next in rank. They did know him to be fit, and 
 were well assured of his fitness by his testimonials, by his 
 wide-spread and well-deserved reputation, and by the can-
 
 didly expressed opinions, personally elicited, of gentlemen 
 of science, in whom they had confidence, amongst whom 
 was a member of the Board itself. 
 
 But a member of the Board of Trustees of this institution 
 has reconciled it to his sense of duty to make an appeal to 
 the public from its legally expressed judgment, and to put 
 himself in an attitude of hostility against her : and depart- 
 ing from the well understood custom under which frank ex- 
 pressions of opinion have been considered confidential in a 
 small body of gentlemen, amongst whom hitherto the great- 
 est freedom of intercourse has prevailed, he has thought fit 
 to seize upon such expressions, and to proclaim them to the 
 world as evidence of the sole motive for votes cast more 
 than two months afterwards. More private declarations, 
 alleged to have been made, are also dragged to the light 
 for the same purpose. How far this can be reconciled to a 
 true regard for the interests of this institution, is a distinct 
 question. But the motives, under the influence of which 
 each member of the Board finally cast his vote, after the 
 interval had given him full opportunity to form an opin- 
 ion, are known only to himself, and to those to whom he 
 has revealed them. As to all others, they must in a great 
 measure be matters of conjecture. The writer of this paper 
 has as much right to form a judgment on that head as Mr. 
 Ruggles, and has had equal opportunities ; and he asserts 
 that the above positions are true. 
 
 If then the foregoing be a just exposition of the true intent 
 and force of the act of the Trustees, as an expression of their 
 judgment upon the relative merits of the candidates, what 
 becomes of the cry of religious persecution — of rejection for 
 opinions' sake ? If Dr. Gibbs was not pre-eminent in the 
 opinion of the Trustees — and upon their opinion the question 
 depends, — then it was their duty to choose as they have done, 
 him they thought best qualified. And Dr. Gibbs was not, 
 as has been arrogantly claimed, rejected. Yet this allega- 
 tion of intolerance, though without legitimate place in this 
 controversy, has its end to serve, like many other means
 
 resorted to witli the same intent. Of those, as indicating the 
 true motive of the present attack upon the College, we will 
 hereafter speak. So also it is evident that there is no perti- 
 nency to the matter in hand, of all that Mr. Ruggles so elo- 
 quently writes of the objects of the College — the purposes of 
 its creation — its alleged past culpable neglect of Physical 
 Science — its duty to the public, and the great need for the 
 faithful performance of that duty — its present indifference. 
 All these topics are ostensibly introduced to enforce the pro- 
 priety of the election of Dr. Gibbs, on the assumption that 
 he, of all the agents whose services the College has the 
 power to secure, is pre-eminently qualified to accomplish as 
 to Physical Science, the end the Trustees ought to have in 
 view. The pre-eminence gone, and all this able display of 
 zeal for the promotion of science has no force as argument. 
 But this too had another purpose, as will presently be seen. 
 But though, as above shown, it is in reality immaterial 
 whether or not the Trustees of the College individually had 
 the right to take into account the religious helief of the gen- 
 tleman whose qualifications for a chair of science have 
 been made the theme of public discussion, because, in fact, 
 the result of the ballot did not depend upon that question : 
 yet the positions in this respect of the pamphlet of Mr. Rug- 
 gles, are so unsound and so dangerous, if generally preva- 
 lent, to the independent management of every institution of 
 learning in the State, as to call for a refutation. 
 
 This, it should be remarked, is a question of right and of 
 law : and ill-defined notions of religious liberty, and sympa- 
 thy of friends of the party supposed to be affected by the 
 application of the law in a particular instance, have noth- 
 ing to do with it. They are artfully brought in to subserve 
 the end in view. 
 
 It may be thought a case of hardship, that any indi- 
 vidual, by reason of his religious faith, has failed to 
 procure the votes of men in whose power it lay to give 
 him an office he sought and was qualified to fill ; that, 
 though not disqualified by any act of the body of which
 
 8 
 
 those men were members, he yet for that reason wanted 
 their suffrages. This may seem very unreasonable and 
 very unjust, or may not seem so, according to the views of 
 those who censure or praise. But it has nothing to do with 
 the question of law. Nor in the supposed case, would there 
 be any infringement of the right to the free exercise and 
 enjoyment of religious freedom and worship. He could, 
 notwithstanding the disappointment, fully exercise and 
 enjoy his religion, without restraint. His freedom in that 
 respect would be as perfect after, as before ; and therefore, 
 the mere fact that he was not elected, would not constitute 
 any violation of his constitutional right. If the law protects 
 him against such a misfortune, then he has a right to com- 
 plain of legal wrong, but not otherwise. 
 
 How, then, does this question of law stand? The 
 charter of the institution, and the acts of the Legisla- 
 ture confirmatory of the same, are quoted. By the first 
 of these, the Governors are prohibited from enacting any 
 ordinance, order, or by-law of the College, which shall 
 extend to exclude any person of any religious denom- 
 ination whatever from equal liberty and advantage of edu- 
 cation, or from any of the degrees, privileges, and immuni- 
 ties of the said College, on account of his particular tenets 
 in matters of religion. And by the second of these, it is 
 provided that none of the ordinances or by-laws of the Col- 
 lege shall make the religious tenets of any person a condi- 
 tion of admission to any privilege or ofiice in the said 
 College. In addition to these enactments, we find quoted 
 the General Law of the State applicable to all incorporated 
 colleges and academies therein : that " no religious quali- 
 fication or test shall be required from any trustee, president, 
 principal, or other officer of any incorporated college or 
 academy, or as a condition of admission to any privilege in 
 the same," 
 
 The question may be asked in reference to this pro- 
 vision. What does the law mean by " required T' By 
 what act, and by what authority, in what mode, must this
 
 exaction of a religious qualification or test be made, in or- 
 der to constitute a violation of the law? Can it mean any 
 thing else than that the act to constitute a violation of the 
 law must be done by the established authorities of the col- 
 lege or academy, to which in any instance particular appli- 
 cation of the provision is to be made ? In what mode, 
 then, is it forbidden to be done ? Common sense indicates 
 the answer : By the act of the body in which the man- 
 agement or government of the institution is vested. It acts 
 collectively, and expresses its determinations in the shape 
 of resolutions, by-laws, and orders. Acting in this way, it 
 has the power to remove from, or to admit to offices in its 
 gift. Its constituent parts have no such power ; and with- 
 out that power, they of course can exact no condition 
 whatever under which persons shall be admitted to or hold 
 such offices. The party to be restrained can be none other 
 than that in which the power rests, upon which the re- 
 straint is intended to operate. It is intelligible to say, that 
 the acts of such body thus expressed, done in violation of 
 the law, are illegal. But to say that the law does, or 
 meant to, control the motives of individual members of 
 such a body, is to engraft upon it an additional provision, 
 — a principle to the enforcement of which legislation in 
 this State has not yet reached. 
 
 Again, are we to understand that this legal provision of 
 such general scope, overrides all the clauses in particular 
 charters directed to the enforcement of the same principle, 
 or calculated for the promotion of particular branches of 
 learning ? Whether made before or after this enactment, 
 such charters are contracts made between the State and the 
 particular institutions to which they relate. If made before, 
 they cannot be affected by such law ; if made after, they 
 repeal it so far as inconsistent with it. Else there is not 
 a chartered Theological Seminary in this State that is 
 not, equally with us, subject to the consequences of such 
 a construction. We must therefore resort to the charters 
 themselves, of the College, in order to form a just idea of
 
 10 
 
 this principle, right in itself, and only mischievous in the 
 attempted application. 
 
 Referring then again to these charters, we find that the 
 Trustees are forbidden, by any ordinance, order, or by-law, 
 to exclude any person from office by reason of his particular 
 tenets in matters of religion, or by ordinance, or by-law, to 
 make a religious qualification or test a condition of holding 
 office or of admission to the same : or more properly speak- 
 ing, they have no power to pass any by-law or ordinance 
 having such effect. This provision is inserted both in the 
 original charter and in the charter granted by the State as 
 a proviso, limiting the power to make by-laws and ordi- 
 nances. It is merely a restraint upon that authority. How 
 then can this be made to reach beyond its proper object: 
 in place of prohibiting the act of a specified kind of the 
 whole body — to forbid the exercise of a very different power 
 in the members of that body. It is said that, because the 
 College has no power to enact a by-law making religious 
 profession an exclusion from office, no member of the Board 
 of Trustees has a right to take the religious profession of a 
 candidate into account, as a motive governing or influencing 
 his action in casting his vote for a person to fill a vacant 
 office ; and the denial of the justice of this inference is stated 
 to be the assertion of a higher law of conscience, claimed to 
 override the obligation of a human law. But Mr. Ruggles 
 has not supported his position further than by the bare as- 
 sertion that the general principle, which he contends for, is 
 enforced by the laws above referred to. How enforced '} 
 Not by their terms. Those laws do not say that the discre- 
 tion of each Trustee shall be so fettered, nor can by any 
 process of reasoning, when they deny one power, be made 
 to restrict the exercise of a very different power. The sec- 
 ond section of an act relative to Columbia College in the 
 City of New- York, passed 23d March, 1810, and comprising 
 the charter of the College in one act, gives power to the 
 Trustees to select and appoint, by ballot or otherwise, such 
 professor or professors, to assist the President in the govern-
 
 11 
 
 liient and education of the students belonging to the College, 
 as to the said Trustees shall seem meet. The Trustees 
 have then a right to elect by ballot, with an uncontrolled 
 discretion. The charter contains no provision by which 
 this important right is restricted or made subject to any 
 inquisitorial power to ferret out the motives by which each 
 Trustee may have been actuated in exercising it. When 
 therefore it may seem expedient, for any cause bearing upon 
 the interests or the good government of this or any other 
 literary or scientific institution, to take into consideration 
 the religious profession of any candidate for a vacant pro- 
 fessorship, in preferring another to him of equal attainments, 
 or even adequate attainments, it would be sufficient to jus- 
 tify the motive for the act of each particular Trustee or 
 manager, influenced by such considerations, to say that he 
 violates no human law, and therefore is not reduced to the 
 necessity of availing himself of the plea put into his mouth 
 by Mr. Ruggles, of preferring the law of conscience to the 
 law of the land. 
 
 The allegation of prosecution for opinion's sake, set up 
 in the pamphlet imder review, raises in this particular case 
 a false issue, as it would appear to further an ulterior design. 
 But its positions of law are mischievous, not only as dissemi- 
 nating loose and inaccurate notions of the meaning of the 
 law, but also as tending to fetter and control the proper man- 
 agement of the concerns, not only of Columbia College, but 
 of all similar institutions. Although in some features of its 
 government — the necessity, growing out of a condition under 
 which it holds a great part of its estate, that its President 
 should be in communion with the Protestant Episcopal 
 Church — the form of daily worship according to the liturgy 
 of that Church, prescribed by the same condition — and the 
 accidental preponderance in its Board of Trustees of persons 
 in the same communion — connect it more particularly with 
 one Church than with any other : a feature common to 
 almost every similar institution in the country, and as secur- 
 ing to it a religious character, not regretted by any of its
 
 12 
 
 true friends : yet it has never confined its privileges or offices 
 to any religious denomination, but has given equal advan- 
 tages to all. This fact, statements in the pamphlet under 
 review will show. It tells us, that by a statute of the Col- 
 lege in force, any religious denomination, endowing a pro- 
 fessorship in certain branches of science, shall forever have 
 the right of nominating a professor to the same, subject to 
 the approbation of the Trustees. And it is justly inferred 
 that the Trustees could not rightfully reject such nomination, 
 for the sole cause that the nominee belonged to the religious 
 denomination who proposed him. In the case of the very 
 vacancy which has been the occasion of the present un- 
 sought controversy, a further proof of this may be found. 
 We have paraded in the public papers, with the reckless 
 impropriety which characterizes the whole conduct of this 
 war upon the College, the assumed statement of the votes 
 of the Trustees ; and it will be found, so far as that state- 
 ment is entitled to credit, that all who voted for a Unitarian, 
 with one exception, belong to the Episcopal Church, and 
 that the successful candidate, who does not belong to that 
 Church, was elected by the votes of members of the Epis- 
 copal, Dutch Reformed, and Presbyterian Churches. Where 
 then is the foundation for the accusation that the College is 
 exclusive, or that there is a disposition in its Trustees to 
 keep its offices for the benefit of members of the Episcopal 
 Church ? 
 
 But although this exclusive character cannot be charged 
 upon the College, yet many cases might occur in which it 
 might be highly expedient in the judicious management of 
 its concerns, and with a proper regard to its interests, and 
 to the promotion of its usefulness, to take the religious pro- 
 fession or belief of a candidate for a vacant professorship 
 into account. For instance, this College supports a profes- 
 sorship, one branch of the duty of which is to teach and 
 explain the Evidences of Natural and Revealed Religion. 
 Ought this duty to be committed to an infidel, who attach- 
 es no weight to those Evidences ; or to a Mahommedan or
 
 13 
 
 Jew, who believe them not at all, so far as they vindicate 
 the truth of the Christian religion, which, in a Christian 
 institution, they are relied upon to instil and enforce in the 
 minds of its students ? Or, suppose that when a vacancy 
 of one chair should occur, it should be found that all the 
 others, then being tilled, were occupied by gentlemen of 
 one and the same religious denomination, — might not the 
 Trustees rightfully, with a view of preventing the convic- 
 tion becoming prevalent in the community, that the College 
 was used as a means of patronage and support of the 
 members of a particular Church, and of averting the evil 
 that would in consequence fall upon itself, take this matter 
 into consideration ? And might they not, when two candi- 
 dates were presented of equal qualifications, choose him at- 
 tached to the Church to which the other professors did not 
 belong ? Or suppose that, in case of a vacancy. Trustees 
 should see, in such way as to produce conviction in their 
 minds, that an attempt by intrigue ar^d intimidation to 
 force a candidate of a particular religious belief into the 
 College, was the precursor of future attempts to remove 
 by the same means from their chairs their present occu- 
 pants, to make room for others of the persuasion of him 
 sought then to be introduced, — perhaps to the entire des- 
 truction of the character of the institution of which they 
 are the guardians, — may they not in such case prefer, by 
 their votes, one of equal attainments to him supported by 
 such influences ? In all these cases, the discretion which 
 each Trustee would be left free to exercise by a reply in 
 the affirmative, would be proper and necessary, if we have 
 regard only to the promotion of education, to the usefulness 
 of the institution, or to its due government : yet the motive 
 in each case for the choice would be drawn solely from the 
 consideration of the religious profession of a particular can- 
 didate. And to the same extent that the exercise of the 
 discretion manifestly proper in such cases would be benefi- 
 cial, would the refraining from its exercise be hurtful, and 
 subversive of the prosperity and good order of every college
 
 14 
 
 or academy whose trustees might regulate their conduct by 
 the arbitrary rule now attempted to be enforced. 
 
 The error is in not distinguishing between a disqualifi- 
 cation by virtue of a rule operating upon a class and a dis- 
 crimination in the case of a particular individual of that 
 class. The one is impolitic and unjust, as well as illegal ; 
 the other is legal, and may in particular instances be both 
 just and consistent with sound policy. And care should be 
 taken that a principle should not be advocated or adopted 
 through a mistaken regard for the rights of one person, 
 which, carried into practice, would be an infringement of 
 the rights of a large number of persons. As an illustration 
 of this : religious profession is not, and ought not to be, a 
 disqualification for any political office ; yet, who shall pre- 
 vent, — what law prevents, or ought to prevent, an elector 
 from taking such profession into account in forming his es- 
 timate of a candidate, and as a motive for throwing his 
 ballot for or against him? 
 
 Among the grounds of objection to Dr. Gibbs, stated by 
 Mr. Ruggles to have been made by Trustees, are the means 
 that have been used outside of the College to further his 
 election. These are enumerated as " the petition of the 
 Alumni for his appointment — the concurrence of some of 
 the parents of the under-graduates in that petition — news- 
 paper paragraphs, intemperately and indecorously asserting 
 the superiority of his claims." And we are told that " the 
 objection made to these was, that they constituted an outside 
 pressure, in which it did not become the Trustees to ac- 
 quiesce, and which their official dignity required them to 
 resist, by electing some other candidate." This is a mode 
 of stating the matter well suited for the purposes of satire, 
 but neither calculated to persuade the colleagues of the au- 
 thor who diff'ered from him in opinion — to bring whom to a 
 better mind he affected to write, —nor consistent with the 
 truth. 
 
 The papers signed by the Alumni were not petitions. 
 They were simply recommendations of the appointment of
 
 16 
 
 Dr. Gibbs for the vacant chair, and as such were submitted 
 with and as part of his testimonials — as evidence in his 
 favor. As such they required no answer. They did not 
 purport to give any qualification of the gentleman in whose 
 favor they were presented, nor any fact to assist the Trus- 
 tees to form an opinion as to his abilities, acquirements or 
 character. They might therefore properly be regarded as 
 the respectful expression of the wish of the signers that, if 
 foimd in all respects the best suited for the place, he might 
 be put int<D it. And in the case of two candidates, in the 
 judgment of the Board equally fit, a proper regard to that 
 wish would have cast the choice in favor of him possessing 
 the recommendation of a considerable part of the Alumni. 
 This implies no disrespect to the Alumni. The Board of 
 Trustees have ever studiously treated the Alumni with re- 
 gard and respect. As the sons of the College, and more 
 than all other men in the community attached to her in- 
 terests and welfare, their good will and favorable opinion 
 has always been the hope and reliance of her managers as 
 inseparable from her prosperity. None, it is believed, of 
 those managers has departed from this just view of the re- 
 lationship, nor from the respect which is its consequence. 
 The writer of this answer is alone responsible for the views 
 here put forth of the force properly due to the application of 
 the Alumni in question. To those among them whose 
 friendship for the party concerned does not unhappily mis- 
 lead their judgment, they will appear sound. There was 
 no disrespect then to the Alumni, either through any dispo- 
 sition made or omitted to be made of their communication, 
 or in not acceding to their recommendation. Why are they 
 then, or any part of them, to be arrayed against the College 
 or its Trustees ? In place of standing by her, to join in the 
 cry against her, and to lend the weight of their intluence to 
 give probability to the accusations which are made the 
 foundation of a Legislative Inquiry directed against her 
 very existence? The reason for this, it is most respectful- 
 ly said, ought not to be because men, to whom the guar-
 
 16 
 
 dianship of her concerns has been for the time committed, 
 have firmly done what they considered their duty to her. 
 
 Thus much may however be stated in regard to the re- 
 commendation of the Ahimni, tiiough not, as far as the 
 knowledge or recollection of the writer extends, ever said in 
 the Board of Trustees! A large number of the Alumni 
 signed that paper, and, so far as they are concerned, it mat- 
 tered not under what circumstances they had affixed their 
 names. Whatever those circumstances, the signers were en- 
 titled to respect. But as to the party in whose favor they 
 were collected, it is a different question. And when it came 
 to the knowledge of several of the Trustees that, instead of 
 the signing of that paper being the spontaneous act of those 
 whose approbation it purported to express, the Alumni had 
 been laborious'ly canvassed, and in some instances repeat- 
 edly solicited to affix their names, it became a matter of re- 
 gret to such Trustees that resort should have been had to 
 such a measure to enforce the claims of an applicant for a 
 scientific chair. 
 
 But we are told that some of the parents of the under- 
 graduates concurred in the alleged petition of the Alumni. 
 It is true that printed circulars, praying the Trustees to ap- 
 point Dr. Gibbs, were issued by persons to the parents of the 
 students for their signatiu-es. It may be conjectured that 
 the energy and industry of the friends of that gentleman 
 left none of the parents of the one hundred and forty (whom 
 Mr. Ruggles states the College teaches) unsolicited. Yet 
 but twenty-two yielded by signing the proffered petition. 
 Yet not one word of comment was made by any one in the 
 Board on the subject, nor was this in any manner alluded 
 to as evidence of " outside pressure," 
 
 We come now to the other means resorted to for the pur- 
 pose of securing to Dr. Gibbs a chair in this College, which 
 (according to Mr. Ruggles) formed a reason for preferring 
 another to him. But first among such, it is proposed to 
 examine the allegations and arguments contained in the 
 pamphlet, so far as not already answered, which, although
 
 17 
 
 they could not be expected to produce any beneficial effect 
 on his colleagues, yet are of importance as throwing light 
 upon the motiv^esof the author, and the credit due to him, and 
 as a link in the chain of evidence to connect many things 
 that have been done with the actors. But this examination 
 has likewise an interest of a different kind : for, under the 
 cloak of the advocacy of the claims of an individual, the 
 Pamphlet contains grave charges against the management 
 of an institution of which the author is a Trustee, calcula- 
 ted to injure her in the estimate of the community — charges 
 not confined to the case of the particular individual whom 
 it is ostensibly written to sustain, but reaching to the gen- 
 eral management of the College in past and present times. 
 These would be injurious if coming from without; but, 
 emanating, as they do, from one whose duty#it is, from his 
 relationship to the College, to guard, protect and sustain 
 her, there is hazard that the public may suppose that he is 
 not unmindful of that duty, and that imperious considera- 
 tions of right and truth have impelled him to the course he 
 has adopted. Talent and plausibility, joined to the person- 
 al position of the inflicter, it may justly be feared have given 
 for the time effect to the blow. And now it seems necessa- 
 ry for some friend of the College, who will undertake the 
 gratuitous labor, to defend her from this attack. 
 
 In arguing against the force of the objection that Dr. 
 Gibbs is a Unitarian, Mr. Ruggles bestows upon his co- 
 Trustees an exposition of the objects of the College, drawn 
 from the charter, and he tells us that they are the Educa- 
 tion and Instruction of Youth in the Learned Languages 
 and the Liberal Arts and Sciences. He then dilates upon 
 the little that has been done within our walls, for the time 
 past, for the promotion of Physical Science, — which ought 
 to have a distinguished place in the instruction furnished 
 by tho institution ; reminds us of our duty to the public, 
 and of our persevering neglect of that duty ; ably sets forth 
 his views of our obligation to found a great seat of learn- 
 ing, the necessity for its foundation, and the conviction of
 
 18 
 
 sach necessity existing in the public mind. And this all 
 ends in the conckision, that Dr. Gibbs ought to be elected, 
 as being the only instrument within reach, so far as his pe- 
 culiar province is concerned, fit to carry out this great and 
 beneficent design. Yet, if it shall be shown that the Trus- 
 tees are not justly chargeable with past or present neglect^ 
 and that they were, when the author wrote, as fully con- 
 scious of the importance of enlarging the sphere of useful- 
 ness of the College as himselfj and had to his knowledge 
 given the best evidence in their acts of such consciousness, 
 then it is evident that his censures were not necessary, 
 either to remind his colleagues of their duly ar to enforce 
 the conclusion to which all tended. He might in that case 
 have done them the justice to put his argument in this 
 form — that, "-whilst the Board were anxious, and were 
 taking the best measures to improve and enlarge their 
 course of instruction in the Physical Sciences, they ought 
 certainly not to fail to avail themselves of the services of 
 the agent best fitted to carry a part of their design into ex- 
 ecution." He might thus have mitigated in some degree 
 the severity of the blow he has aimed at an institution to* 
 which he professes Ho owe his best affections, and for whose 
 interest and honor' he avers 'he has never ceased to strive 
 during the many years in which it has been his pride to 
 serve hei-' ; and yet not have failed of the avowed object he 
 had in view. In other words, he might have written more 
 truly and justly, yet with no less force ; and if it can be 
 shown that his censures are not justified by the fact, he has 
 not only injured where he was bound to protect, but the in- 
 juiy is gratuitous, even on the supposition that his main de- 
 sign was laudable. 
 
 Now admitting the importance of Physical Science, and 
 the duty of the College as a public institution to give ade- 
 quate instruction in it, according to its ability, and the needs 
 and demands of the community — a proposition which no 
 one of Mr. Ruggles' colleagues denies, or has been heard by 
 him to deny — what is his accusation either as applied to
 
 19 
 
 the past or the present ? It will be understood to be, 1. That 
 the Trustees have not properly filled up their present course 
 of instruction — have not appointed professors enough to ren- 
 der that course effective ; nor given to the Professor of the 
 Natural Sciences, lately occupying the only chair they have 
 instituted, adequate accommodations. 2. That the course 
 of instruction is too narrow, and ought to be expanded into 
 a University, where, in place of being taught as now, in 
 their elements, the Physical Sciences might have the im- 
 portance given to them which modern discoveries sug- 
 gest, and a thorough mastery of each or any might be 
 imparted to the student — (at least this is understood to 
 be the comprehensive idea intimated;) and that the Trus- 
 tees are, and have ever been dead to the consideration 
 of the wisdom or practicability of any such extension, 
 or to the giving instruction in the same sciences to any who 
 might not be willing to come up to the high standard of the 
 College in classical learning. 
 
 On the first head. It has for some time been the favorite 
 object of Mr. Ruggles to procure the division, by the Board 
 of Trustees, of the duties of the chair of Natural and Expe- 
 rimental Philosophy and Chemistry, and to make Chemis- 
 try the subject of a distinct Professorship. His efforts to 
 this end have been constantly and steadily resisted. If this 
 resistance had been grounded upon any denial of, or failure 
 to realize the wide range of the sciences the tuition in which 
 was committed to a single professor, or indifference to the 
 subject, there would be truth in the complaint. But such 
 is not the fact. The reason for not yielding to Mr. Ruggles' 
 motion has always been stated to be, that so long as by our 
 present course we professed and attempted to teach only the 
 elements of the sciences assigned to the chair, one compe- 
 tent to fill it could always adequately discharge its duties. 
 In this opinion the Board were fortified by the judgment of 
 scientific men inside and outside the Board ; and this view 
 of the subject Mr. Ruggles has never, in his proper place, 
 even attempted to answer. But, as will be shown, the Triis-
 
 ;^0 
 
 lees, while unwilling to make any partial change, ar to slip- 
 port two Professors to be charged with duties that could be 
 perfectly performed by one, were yet not contented with the 
 system of instruction the continuance of which justified 
 their then action. So far then, and as to this point, the 
 accusations of Mr. Ruggles are falsified by the fact. 
 
 As to the neglect of the Trustees to afford the Professor 
 in the department named better accommodations than those 
 he had for years occupied, the facts substantiate it to a 
 degree. He has had in occupation a room partly below the 
 surface of the ground, sufficiently lighted in the front and 
 rear by windows, fitted as a laboratory, and commodious 
 enough, until recently, for the accommodation of his class. 
 With a magnificent apparatus, purchased at an expense of 
 ten thousand dollars, he has needed an additional room up- 
 stairs for lectures and experiments not requiring the use of 
 the Laboratory — a necessity always admitted, but which 
 the want of sufficient buildings and a limited income have 
 compelled the Trustees to postpone. In the time, however, 
 of the late Professor, a measure was devised, under the direc- 
 tion of a committee, with the consent of the President, by 
 which the abandonment by the President of his room, (an 
 inconvenience which he expressed his willingness to submit 
 to temporarily, and until time would allow of a better ar- 
 rangement,) would have obviated the oifficulty. This how- 
 ever has not been carried into execution, owing to discus- 
 sions which have taken place relative to the early removal 
 of the College. This statement, however, ought to be suffi- 
 cient to repel the charge of past or present indifi'erence on 
 the subject. 
 
 The second ground of complaint is, that the College has 
 not been expanded into a Great Seat of Learning, and we are 
 told that it is not the want of means that has prevented this. 
 He says: "The difficulty lies deeper than the want of 
 money. We have wanted Trustees — more zealously to 
 carry out the purposes defined by our charter. We have 
 avowedly and perseveringly neglected, undervalued and
 
 •21 
 
 disparaged the Liberal Arts and Sciences, and the world 
 has avenged the neglect, by neglecting us." 
 
 So far as this censure affects the past, what truth is there 
 in it? The condemnation extends not to the living only, 
 but to the dead : and Livingston, Hamilton, Mason, Hari- 
 son, Hobart, Morris, King, Miller, Troup, Jay, Ogden, 
 Fish, Irving, Jones, Campbell, Lawrence — hitherto hon- 
 orable names — in common with Mr. Ruggles' cotempora- 
 ries, share the odium. Now, successive annual reports 
 of the Treasurers of the College for the seventeen years 
 last past, (which is as far as access to records of them 
 has been convenient,) show that whilst the income of the 
 College has been faithfully applied to the purposes of educa- 
 tion for that period of time, the Trustees have not limited 
 their expenses to that income, but have incurred a constantly 
 increasing debt, the accumulations of which have sustained 
 and increased the means of instruction which they have 
 been enabled to afford to the community. To enable it to 
 do what it has done, the College has increased its debt by 
 such gradual accumulations from the sum of $51,500 31, at 
 the end of the financial year terminating on October 1,1837, 
 to the sum of $78,500, at the end of the financial year end- 
 ing on the 1st October, 1852. The debt was not increased 
 during the year ending on the 1st October, 1853, owing to 
 the increase in the rents of the College, and the absence of 
 any large extraordinary expenses for the payment of assess- 
 ments on its property. The incurring this indebtedness, for 
 the purpose of keeping the institution in a state of efficiency, 
 was justified by the certainty that the increase in the value 
 of its landed estate would, in the progress of not many years, 
 aftbrd the means of discharging the debt. But it is mani- 
 fest that the Trustees proceeded to the verge of prudence in 
 order to meet the just demands of the conununity. But Mr. 
 Rugglos says if we had done more, the means would have 
 been added to us. Could more have been done by the Trus- 
 tees of this institution without just censure of another kind, 
 that they had mismanaged, and squandered or impaired its
 
 22 
 
 estate 7 Even in the past, in common with some other col- 
 leges in this country, a parallel Scientific Course was estab- 
 lished by the College, upon which students might attend 
 without any proficiency in, or attention to classical studies. 
 This was discontinued after a trial of several years, only 
 because so few were found to avail themselves of it as, in 
 the judgment of the Trustees, to render its further contin- 
 uance inexpedient. All then has hitherto been done that 
 could be done with judgment, and the means were not added 
 to us. 
 
 It is no doubt deeply to be regretted, that private gifts to 
 this old established College (which were heretofore solicited) 
 have not enabled it hitherto to extend its usefulness, and to 
 become what is greatly needed, a University for the com- 
 plete instruction of youth, not only in the Natural Sciences, 
 but in all other branches of human knowledge proper to be 
 taught in such a seat of learning. But this expanded idea 
 has not yet been realized in this country. Neither private 
 nor public liberality has afforded the large pecuniary re- 
 sources necessary to realize it. What has been done has 
 had a more limited scope. Private liberality has founded 
 institutions of a more limited aim — independent founda- 
 tions, with peculiar organizations, bearing the impress of 
 the plans and intentions of the founders, and the very in- 
 dependency of which is inseparable from their existence. 
 Such are the Astor Library, and the Cooper Institute, There 
 is no probability that any of the means that have found 
 their way to these, or to the Free Academy, would have 
 been available for Columbia College, had she ventured, re- 
 lying upon such support, to incur expenses far beyond her 
 ability from her own resources to meet. The means for the 
 support of the Free Academy are drawn by periodical taxa- 
 tion from the people, whilst it is governed by officers elect- 
 ed by popular vote. The State does not give such large 
 donations as would have b(;en required in this instance, to 
 incorporated Colleges independent of her direct control. It 
 may well be doubted, therefore, whether any of the large
 
 23 
 
 donations or resources which liave supported the three in- 
 stitutions named would ever have been ours. 
 
 The state of society, and the want (at all events until of 
 late years) of wealth and of adequate sense in the commu- 
 nity of the usefulness of such institutions, it may be con- 
 jectured, have prevented the endowment by public or pri- 
 vate means of great Schools of Science in this country ; and 
 it is even now necessary to resort, as Mr. Ruggles admits 
 when he speaks of the expectations of men of science with 
 reference to Columbia College, to existing incorporations 
 whose endowments, swelled into importance by lapse of 
 time, are supposed to enable them to imdertake such vast 
 designs. 
 
 But now, he says, " poverty is no longer a valid excuse." 
 The Trustees offer no excuse, but realize and acknowledge, 
 as fully as Mr. Ruggles can do, their duty to the State as 
 well as to their other benefactors, to administer the property 
 within their charge so as to alford to the community every 
 advantage for education which their means will allow. 
 This is their whole duty. 
 
 The income of the College for the past year has not 
 been more than sufficient for its wants. Its whole net rev- 
 enue has not exceeded $17,516 74, including tuition fees; 
 and the ordinary expenses of the institution have consumed 
 that amount, except a balance of $621 84, which remained 
 in the Treasurer's hands at the expiration of the financial 
 year, on the 1st October, 1853. After the 1st of May, 1854, 
 however, the rents of the College will be increased by the 
 sum of $5,000, from which must be deducted so much as 
 must be allowed for rent to two or more Professors, wlio 
 may be removed from their houses to give additional ac- 
 commodations for instruction. This dedttction may leave 
 an additional revenue of from $2,000 to $3,000, disposable 
 for the increase of the usefulness of the College. 
 
 The above statement includes all the revenue that is de- 
 rived, or can be derived for many years to come, from the 
 College property in the lower part of the city, not immedi-
 
 24 
 
 ately in the occupation of the College, all of which, includ- 
 ing the present site of the Grammar-School, is subject to 
 long leases. The rest of the College property is at present 
 unproductive. It comprises the site of the College, with its 
 Green, and the estate commonly known as the Botanic Gar- 
 den. Of the latter it may be said, that whilst, when re- 
 duced to the city grade, it may be made productive of a 
 large revenue, yet this will require a vevy large outlay, 
 which, united to the cost of erecting new College buildings, 
 will balance to a large extent the resources of the College 
 which would otherwise be derived from other portions of 
 its estate. 
 
 Still, there can be no doubt that when the work of fitting 
 for the market the Botanic Garden shall be finished, it will 
 immediately and rapidly become productive of revenue, 
 and by its increased value amply repay the cost. This 
 work, when commenced, will require two years for its com- 
 pletion. If the advice of Mr. Ruggles had been followed by 
 the leasing or sale of the Botanic Garden four years ago, 
 when its market value did not exceed $150,000, he would 
 not now have it in his power to set down its value at 
 $400,000, in his inventory of the estate of the College. 
 
 It must be evident from the foregoing statement, that any 
 increase in the revenue of the College beyond that which it 
 will enjoy for the present year, is prospective merely ; and 
 that that present increase is inconsiderable, as a means of 
 carrying out any grand design. 
 
 But have the Trustees been unmindful of this prospective 
 large increase of revenue, or careless to make provision for 
 a wise use of it, such as would satisfy the great ends for 
 which the College was endowed? 
 
 On the 4th October, 1852, a Special Committee was ap- 
 pointed, who, besides other matters, were charged with the 
 duty " to consider and report upon the expediency of en- 
 grafting upon this College a scheme of University Professor- 
 ships and Lectures in the higher departments of Letters 
 and Science, and to report in detail as to the extent to which
 
 25 
 
 such a scheme is now practicable, and as to the means of 
 adequately endowing the Professorships." This commit- 
 tee, of which Mr. Ruggles was a member, made a partial 
 report on 13th December, 1852, and asked leave to continue 
 and report as to the other matters referred. At the same 
 time they reported two resolutions, one of which was refer- 
 red back; and the other, which recommended that in order 
 to afford free tuition, advantage should h) taken of tho tlien 
 (supposed) high price of real estate, to lease or sell portions 
 of the College property as should be deemed advisable, es- 
 pecially the portion then in the occupation of the College, 
 was referred to the Standing Committee, who afterwards 
 reported adversely to such a disposition ; and wisely, as the 
 result has proved. 
 
 The same Special Committee, on the 3d January, 1853, 
 read the same report they had previously made, but they 
 never made any other or further report. 
 
 But the subject was not suffered to drop here : for, on the 
 7th February, 1853, a reference was made to a Special Com- 
 mittee of Four, of which Mr. Ruggles was Chairman, ''to 
 inquire into the general condition of the Department of 
 Chemistry and Natural and Experimental Philosophy, and 
 whether any and what changes were necessary to be made 
 therein." After this committee had reported, making a di- 
 vision of the duties of the department unsatisfactory to the 
 Board, their report was recommitted, and three members of 
 the Board were added to the committee. And a majority 
 of that committee, consisting of Dr. Henry J. Anderson, 
 Hamilton Fish, Edward Jones, and Gouverneur M. Ogden, 
 on the 3d October, 1853, made a report recommending that 
 no action be had in reference to that Professorship solely, 
 as being partial and very probably inconsistent with the 
 comprehensive Scheme of Education which might eventu- 
 ally be adopted. And, in accordance with the recommen- 
 dation of that committee, the following Resolution was 
 passed : 
 
 " Resolved, That it be referred to a Committee of Three, to be 
 
 D
 
 26 
 
 elected^ by ballot, to inquire whether it is expedient to take any and 
 what measures for the removal of the Seat of the College ; and in 
 the event of that removal, whether any and what changes ought 
 to be made in the Under-graduate eourse, and whether it would be 
 expedient to estabUsh a system of University Education in addition 
 to such Under-graduate course, either in continuation thereof or othei*- 
 wise. That such Committee report fully as to the principles and de- 
 tails of any plan that they may recommend, and whether in their 
 opinion it can be successfully carried into .execution ; and in connec- 
 tion therewith, that they consider whether, for the more effectual 
 carrying out such plan, and extending the benefits of this institution, 
 it ought to afford rooms and commons, or rooms alone, for resident 
 students, and ought to have its seat isolated." 
 
 Mr» Rnggles dissented from this report ,- and whilst he 
 may claim that he conld not assent to that part of it which 
 recommended that no action should be had in reference to 
 that chair, which has been his peculiar care, yet he might 
 at least have granted his approbation to the inquiry. 
 
 The Committee elected were William Betts, Dr. Henry 
 J. Anderson, and Hamilton Fish, — to whom, in consequence 
 of Governor Fishes necessary absence in Washington, was 
 afterwards added the Rev. Dr. John Knox. 
 
 The task confided to this Committee was one of great 
 difficulty. To write indeed of this subject, as Mr. Ruggles 
 has done, gracefully and with faciUty ; speaking in glow- 
 ing terms of the advantages of Universities, the needs 
 of the community, and the gi owing sense of those needs, 
 yet dealing in generalities — requires rare talent. But, by 
 study and thought, to ascertain the true principles that 
 ought to govern the creation of an enlarged system of edu- 
 cation, and to apply those principles to all the details of a 
 well-considered plan, having regard to the proper design of 
 education, the demands of the community and the means 
 of support, is a work of infinitely greater difiiculty. It re- 
 quires great powers of analysis and judgment, drawing to 
 the use of the occasion the thoughts and experience of other 
 men, but modifying and departing from them as difference
 
 27 
 
 of circumstances, or as the manifest errors in old systems 
 may require. 
 
 To this task the Committee have with industry and abili- 
 ty addressed themselves. And on the 7th November, one 
 month after their appointment, they made a partial report, 
 showing the research, thought and judgment they had ap- 
 plied to the subject. Though stating their views as imma- 
 ture, they say in that paper, in the following extract : 
 
 " The instruction of the College, covering the period of life be- 
 tween boyhood and manhood, and forming the bridge by which we 
 pass from home into the world, is of most peculiar importance. To 
 the College is committed the mind of the future Man, at this critical 
 time : and it is the mission of the College, to use a modern but not 
 unmeaning term, to direct and superintend the mental and moral 
 culture, and to form the Man or the Mind. They are identical. " The 
 mind is the man and the knowledge of the mind. A man is but 
 what he knoweth." Moral and intellectual discipline, it is agreed, is 
 the object of collegiate education. The mere acquisition of learning, 
 however valuable and desirable in itself, is subordinate to this great 
 work. Not only is this the peculiar business of the College, but 
 in the College alone, as a general rule, can this work be performed. 
 The design of a College is to make perfect the humaa intellect in 
 all its parts and functions ; by means of a thorough training of all 
 the intellectual faculties to attain their full development : and by 
 tlie proper guidance of the moral functions, to direct them to a pro- 
 per exertion. To form the mind, in short, is the higfe design of edu- 
 cation as sought in a College course. A Liberal Education has been 
 well defined to be "An education in which the individual is cultiva- 
 ted, not as an instrument towards some ulterior end, but as an end 
 unto himself alone : in other words, an education in which his abso- 
 lute- perfcM^tion as a man, and not merely his relative dexteritv as a 
 professional man, is the scope immediately in view." 
 
 " We cannot however conceal from ourselves, that, however man- 
 ifest and just this sentiment may seem to us, it does not meet with 
 universal sympathy or acquiescence. On the contrary, the demand 
 for what is termed progressive knowledge, so loudly uttered, and for 
 fuller instruction in what are called the useful and practical sciences,
 
 28 
 
 is at variance with this fundamental idea. The pubUc generally, un- 
 accustomed to look upon the mind except in connection with the body, 
 and used to regard it as a machine for promoting the pleasures, the 
 conveniences or the comforts of the latter, will not be satisfied with 
 a system of education in which they are unable to perceive the di- 
 rect connection between the knowledge imparted, and the bodily ad- 
 vantages to be gained. For this reason, to preserve in some degree, 
 high and pure education and strict mental discipline, and to draw as 
 many as possible within its infliience, we must partially yield to 
 those sentiments which we should be unable wholly to resist. Your 
 Committee therefore think that while they would retain the system 
 having in view the most peifect intellectual training, they might de- 
 vise parallel courses, having this design at its foundation, but still 
 adapted to meet the popular demand. A judicious modification of 
 the present College course, aiming at thorough and harmonious in- 
 struction in the Classics, Mathematics, Philosophies and kindred 
 branches, in just proportions, may attain this object. And your 
 Committee think that experience, authority and reason admonish us 
 that we should not diminish, in the slightest degree^ the high value 
 which has been placed on the right acquisition of the Greek and 
 Latin classics. Other courses, as the means of the College increase 
 may at the same time be instituted ; perhaps with different faculties 
 and in dift'erent halls ; in some of which the mathematical element 
 might be more largely infused ; in others, the sciences directly and 
 practically useful for the purposes of daily life. The details of this 
 plan the Committee are not yet ,prepared to report, and they ask for 
 further time for that purpose, but they have thought it proper to 
 submit to the judgment of the Trustees the proposition, by which 
 they suppose that the College may preserve the paramount system 
 of thorough intellectual training, and still meet the demand for use- 
 ful professional or active learning. 
 
 " AVith regard to the establishment of a University system in 
 addition to the under-graduate couree, the Committee are not pre- 
 pared to say more than that they regard it favorably in such respects 
 as it may be practicable : and they hope that it may be in part 
 reached by the plan suggested by them. But they are admonished 
 that this design is not free from serious difficulties. The proposition 
 to engraft University education on the College courses has been agi-
 
 29 
 
 tated in relation to the English Universities, and inore especially in 
 connection with Oxford ; but hitherto without any practical result. 
 It has been thought, and your Coffiinittee do not consider it inappro- 
 priate to repeat the suggestion, that ' this system in the first place 
 had never yet been properly sifted : that there had been a vague call 
 for some years for an expansion of the University in this direction, 
 but nobody had gone below the mere surface of the subject, by 
 which was meant one man saying what he heard another say : and 
 the public intelligence had stopped at an idea, instead of pushing on 
 into the solid interior of the question. The Uuiversity, it was ob- 
 sarved, had little chance of any large accessions from the great profes- 
 sional and trading body, simply for the reason that this body could 
 not aftbrd the time for a prolonged general education ; but an acces- 
 sion from the higher portions of this body, if proper concessions were 
 made, did not seem impossible.' The Committee however are not 
 discouraged at the slow progress, or fruitless attempts of these 
 learned bodies. They do not despair of arriving at some means for 
 the advancement of learning beyond the usual point of a Collegiate 
 or Gymnastic course. The Medical and Theological Schools have 
 here already done much, perhaps all that can at present be done in 
 that direction ; but for the profession of higher Jurisprudence, and 
 for the practical sciences in all their variety, the door is yet open, and 
 possibly much may be done by the College in advancing a know- 
 ledge of those branches. The Committee simply report this subject 
 as ha\-ing engaged their attention ; but they reserve further observa- 
 tions for a future occasion, and they offer the foregoing suggestions 
 to the Board, with the hope that the thoughts of the Trustees may 
 be brought to these points, and that they may be guided and en- 
 lightened in their future deliberacions by the sentiments and reflec- 
 tion which this partial report may educe from the several members 
 of the Board." 
 
 The Committee again made a report on the 6th March, 
 1854, showing the outUnes or scheme of a Collegiate course, 
 with the addition of University studies, which, however, 
 was reported by them as incomplete, and subject to such 
 modifications as further consideration or suggestions from 
 members of the Board of Trustees or from the Faculty might 
 seem to render expedient. That scheme is hero inserted.
 
 30 
 
 " Outline or Scheme of a Collegiate Course, with the addition of 
 the Studies usually called University Studies. 
 
 " The Classical Course^ as now in use, to be preserved, with the 
 alterations and modifications mentioned below. A co-ordinate Scien- 
 tific Course, witli due regard to Classical and Ethical instruction. 
 
 " The principle of the j^resent College Course, as far as attainment 
 is concerned, &c., before a Degree of A. B. shall be conferred, to be 
 retained, and applied to both the above Courses, as mentioned below. 
 
 " I. The Classical Course, as at present estaljlished, to be substan- 
 tially preserved for three years ; that is, the Freshman, Sophomore, 
 and Junior, with adaptations, however, to the future studies, both 
 sub-graduate and post-graduate of the College. 
 
 " The Co-ordinate, mainly Scientific Course, to occupy two years, 
 and a third when the demand shall justify it. 
 
 " The requisites for admission into this Course to be so regulated 
 that the attainments of the attendants upon this Course at the end 
 of two years, and upon the Classical Course at the end of three 
 years, will equally qualify the Students for admission into the Senior 
 or Graduating Class. 
 
 " At the end of the Classical Term of three years, and of the 
 Scientific Term of two years, a certificate of proficiency to be given, 
 in Arts, or in Science, as the case may be, which will entitle the Stu- 
 dents to admission to the studies of the concluding year. 
 
 " At the end of the studies of this concluding, or Senior year, the 
 Degree of A. B. shall be conferred on those Students who may be 
 found deserving of it. The studies of this year shall be conducted 
 in one of the three Schools or Departments now to be described. 
 
 " II. After the three year Classical, and probably two year Scien- 
 tific Course, the Course of study shall be divided into three Schools 
 or Faculties, the studies in one of which, for the first year of the 
 Departmental Studies, (being the same as the present Senior year, 
 and to continue to be called the Senior year,) shall be required for 
 the Degree of A. B. for those who have pursued the Classical Course, 
 and for the Degree of Bachelor of Science for tbose who have pur- 
 sued the Scientific Course. 
 
 " These Schools or Faculties shall be — 
 
 " I. A School or Faculty of Philosophy or Philology, com- 
 prising * * *
 
 31 
 
 "II. A School or Faculty of Jurisprudtnce arid H'ldory^ com- 
 prising % * * 
 " III. A School or Faculty of Mathematical and Physical 
 Science^ com])rising * * * 
 " The Studies of the three Schools or Faculties to be distributed 
 throughout three years, the first year of which will require, on the 
 part of the Student, fifteen hours per week of recitation, excepting 
 vacations. 
 
 " A less number of hours per week, perhaps ten, will be required 
 in the second and third year, which two years comprise the post- 
 graduate Course. 
 
 " Students may be admitted into either of the three Schools or 
 Faculties upon examination, without having been connected with the 
 College." 
 
 At the same meeting (on 6th March, 1854,) the Commit- 
 tee recommended the adoption of the following Resolutions, 
 which were then passed : 
 
 " Resolved, That in view of the approaching necessity of dividing 
 and redistributing the duties of the existing Chairs, including the 
 one now vacant, the subjects entrusted to those Chaii-s, their Titles, 
 hours of attendance, and modes of compensation, be considered as 
 necessarily held ad interim, and liable to modifications to take effect 
 at no distant day. 
 
 " Resolved, That in furtherance of the proposed modifications, 
 the Professors be invited to present to the Committee on the Course, 
 such improvements in the College plan of Education as they, in the 
 exercise of their discretion, may deem it proper to suggest, and that 
 the Committee be authorised to address to the Professors such ques- 
 tions in relation to the College Course as it may be thought advisa- 
 ble to propose." 
 
 The Professors had, on the 3d April, 1854, in commimi- 
 cations in writing made by them respectively to the Com- 
 mittee, responded to these Resolutions ; and on that day, 
 upon the reconmiendation of the Committee, a Resc^ution 
 was passed that such comnmnications should be given to 
 the President, with a request that he would examine them
 
 32 
 
 and return them to the Committee, with such suggestions 
 as might occur to him. 
 
 After the production of this evidence it may safely be 
 asked, Are the Trustees of tliis institution vindicated from 
 the charge made against them by Mr. Ruggles ? Have 
 they " avowedly and perseveringly neglected and disparaged 
 the Liberal Arts and Sciences ?" Have they shown them- 
 selves unmindful of the duty, so far as it rests upon them, 
 to found a University? On the contrary, does not this 
 statement of facts (concerning which there can be no dis- 
 pute) show that they are at this moment, and had been for 
 months before he wrote, taking the most judicious measures 
 both to improve and enlarge the Course of.lnstruction of the 
 institution, giving due prominence to the Natural or Practi- 
 cal Sciences ? 
 
 But, to expose more completely the unfairness that cha- 
 racterizes this attack, compare his statements with the fact. 
 Speaking of the Free Academy, on page 19, he says : 
 
 " Two Universities, — two great centres of scholarship 
 and science, — cannot exist together in the same city. One 
 or the other must be absorbed or annihilated, — and we may 
 live to see this so-called democratic school, founded avow- 
 edly because we did not satisfy the just demands of the 
 community, (a fact which may be doubted,) giving intel- 
 lectual tone to the city, and through the city to the nation, — 
 while we lemahi travelling round the narrow circle, to which 
 inveterate habit has accustomed us." 
 
 Again, on page 22, — 
 
 " It is not to be« denied that members of our Board esti- 
 mate very differently the necessity, value and dignity of 
 Physical Science. The fact is abundantly manifested, not 
 only in the open disparagement of that branch of human 
 knowledge, but" * * *' * 
 
 It «s untrue that we are travelling round such narrow 
 circle, or that inveterate habit has accustomed us to such 
 gyrations. And it is equally untrue that members of the
 
 33 
 
 Board have openly disparaged Physical Science. It may 
 be conjectured that Mr. Riiggles intended this censure to 
 apply to those of his colleagues who found it their duty to 
 differ with him on the subject which has been the pretext 
 for these imfounded statements. And yet some of that ob- 
 noxious class have originated and devised, or are actively 
 engaged in the execution of the very measures which he 
 now reconmiends, as if they had never even been hinted at 
 in the Board except by himself. And it is remarkable that, 
 on the 6th March, when the Report of the Committee on 
 the Course had been read, Mr. Ruggles expressed his appro- 
 bation of it, and yet, on the 29lh of the same month, he 
 sent to each of the Trustees his pamphlet, containing state- 
 ments and inferences so entirely irreconcilable with the fact 
 that such a report had been made. And this is the witness 
 upon whose testimony all the prevailing excitement is 
 founded ! 
 
 There are other statements in the pamphlet under review 
 which may be answered in a few words. 
 
 Mr. Ruggles argues against the supposed position that 
 the College is so connected with the Church to which he 
 professes his attachment, that its managers are entitled to 
 confine their selection of Professors to men of her commu- 
 nion. Whatever of this kind may have been said without 
 its walls, such a proposition was never advocated by any 
 of its Trustees. So of the insinuation that Dr. Gibbs had 
 been accused of infidelity : no one did him the injustice, or 
 allowed himself to be guilty of the indecorum, of applying 
 such a term as infidel, to that gentleman. 
 
 And for the contradiction of Mr. Ruggles, last in order in 
 this connection. His positive assertion that Wolcott Gibbs 
 " was called to account, by members of our body represent- 
 ing at least three separate religious denominations, for his 
 want of conformity to a Theological standard of their own, 
 compounded from incoherent and opposing creeds, and agree- 
 ing only in hostility to the denomination to which he be- 
 longed,'' is wholly unfounded in fact.
 
 34 
 
 The statements last alluded to, and those which relate 
 to the management of the educational and financial con- 
 cerns of the College, unfounded as they are shown to be, 
 were in addition entirely unnecessary. They could have 
 been left out of his argument without at all impairing its 
 force. They do not touch the merits of Dr. Gibbs. or, except 
 the last two, if true, in any degree elucidate the objections 
 which prevented his election. But they are a part of a 
 series of attacks, seeking an end regardless of the means, 
 and by those means casting unjust discredit upon an insti- 
 tution which their author was bound by considerations of 
 duty and honor to serve and protect. He has accused his 
 colleagues of a violation of their trust. How has he per- 
 formed his? 
 
 Reference has been made to the means, other than the 
 printing the pamphlet, which have been used to secure the 
 introduction of Dr. Gibbs into Columbia College as one of 
 its Professors. It is necessaiy to extend this pamphlet by 
 a narrative of occurrences in connection with this vacancy, 
 in order to give a correct understanding of the character of 
 those means, and of the nature of the controversy which 
 has compelled the present statement. 
 
 The resignation of Prof. Renwick was accepted on the 
 21st November last, and on the same day a committee was 
 appointed to receive testimonials in relation to the vacant 
 Professorship. That committee did not report until the 
 succeeding 9th January: and on that day, be it clearly 
 understood, before a word had been said in relation to the 
 vacant Piofessorship, — before the committee had reported, 
 and when, a» yet, tlie Board of Trustees had not been put 
 into possession of the names of any candidate for the vacant 
 chair, Mr. Ruggles moved certain resolutions which after 
 an argumentative preamble asserted, 1st. That in filling 
 the vacant Professorship, the memloers of the Board could 
 not lawfully or rightfully exclude or object to any candidate 
 "on account of his particular tenets in matters of rehgion," 
 nor "make the religious tenets of any person a condition of
 
 35 
 
 admission" to such Professorship, or a ground of exchision 
 therefrom, nor "require any reUgious qualification or test" 
 from such candidate: and 2d, that in filling such Professor- 
 ship, the Trustees were legally and morally bound to select 
 such Professor, with reference solely to his fitness for the 
 place, without regard to his religious opinions. This was an 
 abstract proposition. It was uncalled for, and took the 
 Trustees entirely by surprise. It had relation to no indi- 
 vidual. And by it the Board was asked to restrict, so far 
 as its action could do it, the independent right to vote of 
 its members. And the condemnation of the principle of the 
 resolutions was general. They were indefinitely postponed. 
 But what was the end proposed to be reached by moving 
 .the resolutions '? Did it seem to Mr. Ruggles to be good 
 policy to advance an untenable proposition which, by the 
 indignation it should excite, would call out declarations of 
 opinion from those against whom particularly it was aimed ? 
 Nothing is hazarded in saying that those resolutions ought 
 not to have been passed : and subsequent developments lead 
 to the well grounded suspicion, that his expectation was to 
 gain a foundation upon which to base the allegation of per- 
 secution for rehgion's sake, to be afterwards loudly uttered 
 abroad. If this was the design, it was unsuccessful. For 
 no one at that, or at any other time, declared that he would 
 not vote for Dr. Gibbs on account of his religious profession, 
 or pronounced any favorable opinion of his character or 
 qualifications as entitling him to an election over his com- 
 petitors, apart from his religion. This was on the 9th of 
 January, and the election was made on the succeeding 3d 
 April. Much occurred in the meanwhile. 
 
 At the meeting of the 9th January, after the disposition 
 of the resolutions, the committee on the vacant Professorship 
 reported that they had received several nominations. These 
 were not then read, but the Board adjourned to the 17th 
 January for the purpose of hearing them read. 
 
 On that day, there being an impression that sufficient 
 means had not been taken to procure the applications of the
 
 36 
 
 distinguished scientific men of the country for the veiy 
 important chair then vacant, which might be supposed to 
 offer a very desirable position to some of them, and that the 
 Trustees were therefore more restricted in their choice than 
 might be for the advantage of the College, the committee 
 were, by resolution, instructed to take such measures as 
 might be in their power, to present the names and testimo- 
 nials of other candidates at the next meeting. 
 
 The result was, that on the 6th February the committee 
 reported six additional applicants with their testimonials, 
 amongst whom was Professor McCuUoch, who eventually 
 received the appointment. 
 
 In the interval between these two meetings of the 17th 
 January and the 6th of February, numerous articles ap- 
 peared in the newspaper press of this city, advocating and 
 enforcing the election of Dr. Gibbs. The contents of these 
 may be briefly summed up. They asserted the pre-emi- 
 nence of Dr. Gibbs over all other candidates, and that such 
 pre-eminence was admitted; they stated that he was about 
 to be rejected because he was a Unitarian ; they contained 
 gross misstatements and misrepresentations of the manage- 
 ment of the property of the College, and of the motives of 
 the Trustees, both in regard to the filling this vacancy and 
 to other branches of the government of the institution ; they 
 ridiculed the Trustees, and charged them with being ineffi- 
 cient and indifferent to the proper ends and aims of the 
 College ; they spread the names and religious professions 
 of the Trustees before the public ; and ridiculing the con- 
 duct of the financial concerns of the College, they threaten- 
 ed that if the particular system of management of its pro- 
 perty therein suggested should not be pursued, or if Dr. 
 Gibbs should not be elected, individual Trustees, who might 
 by their votes disregard either injunction, would be legally 
 proceeded against. 
 
 Now as to these articles : Whilst if they were the sponta- 
 neous opinions of the public press, however injurious to the 
 College in creating false impressions on the public mind in
 
 37 
 
 relation to its management, they could not jiistiv lie any 
 objection to the claims of a candidate thus "indecorously" 
 pressed upon the consideration of the Trustees ; yet if they 
 were resorted to by the friends of a candidate as means to 
 secure his election, and were part of a settled design, then 
 a different question was presented. In that case it might 
 well occur to Trustees of an institution such as this — was 
 it safe to establish the precedent of a successful attempt to 
 introduce a Professor by measures like these? Would they 
 not, if efficacious now, be renewed in other cases? What 
 effect would their success have upon the future government 
 and discipline of the institution ? 
 
 Many Trustees believed them to proceed from the most 
 active friends of Dr. Gibbs. with a design thereby to pro- 
 mote his election, and that one or more members of the 
 Board were cognizant beforehand of their publication. 
 
 It was apparent on their face that they were the produc- 
 tion of persons feeling a deep interest in the election of Dr. 
 Gibbs. Their object was manifestly to promote his suc- 
 cess. They were published at the very point of time when 
 their influence might be supposed to tell with the greatest 
 effect— immediately before the election was expected to be 
 had. They were founded upon statements of such par- 
 ticularity, and characterized with so much admixture of 
 truth with falsehood, as showed that they must have been 
 based upon information furnished by members of the Board 
 of Trustees. No evidence could be expected to be procured 
 of the agency of any member of the Board further than was 
 furnished by the agreement of the tone and spirit of the ar- 
 ticles with the course of proceedings within the Board it- 
 self. There was enough, however, to excite serious suspi- 
 cions. 
 
 To what was then known has now been added the Pam- 
 phlet reviewed ; and a comparison of tlie imfoundod state- 
 ments of that Pamphlet with those of the articles tend to 
 prove that they had the same contriver. In both, there is 
 the same basaless assumption of the admitted pre-eminence
 
 38 
 
 of a particular candidate, — the same unjust and untrue 
 statements of the inefficient and negUgent management of 
 the institution, expressed with more decorum, indeed, in 
 the production the authorship of which is avowed, — the 
 same false and injurious allegation, that a claim of an ex- 
 clusively religious character for the College was set up,— 
 and, in short, the same reckless pursuit of an end regard- 
 less of the means. 
 
 But further, at a meeting held on the 17tli of February, 
 the attention of the Board was called to these articles as 
 being, what in reality they were, attempts to force a pro- 
 fessor into the institution by threats and intimidation, con- 
 nected with the display of great disrespect of the govern- 
 ment of the College, and indications of a general design, of 
 which this was the first step. The result of the remarks 
 then made was to elicit expressions of opinion fron some 
 Trustees, which were calculated to alarm the friends of Dr. 
 Gibbs. No personal allusions to any Trustees were made : 
 on the contrary, they were expressly disclaimed. But it was 
 stated that the information upon which the publications were 
 founded must have come from some member or members of 
 the Board. Mr. Ruggles, under the excitement of the occa- 
 sion, — without having been accused, alluded to, or hinted at 
 as in any way connected with the articles complained of, — 
 asked, 'Why should he be suspected of doing any thing to 
 injure his colleagues?' at the same time expressing his at- 
 tachment to some of them. This was the substance of 
 what he said, distinctly recollected. Why this depreca- 
 tion of suspicion? A profound judge of human nature put 
 into the mouth of another man a similar expression : 
 " Thou canst not say, I did it." 
 
 This was on the 6th of February, (to repeat it again,) 
 and the election took place on the 3d of April following. 
 From the first to the last of these dates, the Press was as 
 silent, (except to announce the result of such ballotings as 
 were had,) as if it had never taken the least interest in Co- 
 lumbia College or its scientific chairs. When it seemed
 
 39 
 
 for the benefit of Dr. Gibbs to speak, it would speak : whan 
 it seemed for his benefit to be silent, it would be silent. 
 How was this close connection between the management 
 of his cause within, and the management of his cause 
 without? 
 
 All these things were followed by the Pamphlet : its con- 
 tents and first use : its real but una vowed purpose to pro- 
 duce an effect upon the public mind, giving the contradic- 
 tion to its pretended aim : its reliance upon the voice of the 
 press as indicative of public opinion, urging that " we can- 
 not close our eyes upon the fact, that the community is ex- 
 cited and offended by the objection to Dr. Gibbs that he is 
 a Unitarian" ; and again in another place, " Rely upon it, 
 the community never can be convinced that if Wolcott 
 Gibbs be now rejected, he is not rejected by reason of his 
 religious tenets." 
 
 Taken together, the facts and circumstances which are 
 here collated, show beyond reasonable doubt, that every 
 step in the progress of these proceedings, inside and outside 
 of the Board, were directed by the same controlling hand, 
 and were parts of a scheme which probably had a wider 
 object than the introduction of a single Professor into this 
 institution. 
 
 Upon such of the Trustees of the College as might, before 
 these things were done, have formed a favorable opinion of 
 the comparative fitness of Dr. Gibbs, these most unusual 
 and unwarrantable means for securing his admission to a 
 Professor's chair might justly be expected to produce the 
 effect to change their judgment, both as to his real merits 
 and as to the policy of admitting him, even if in point of 
 abiUty well qualified, or even quaUfied in a superior degree, 
 for the office. We are told that none of these proceedings, 
 including the printing of his testimonials, (and we may sup- 
 pose the assertion to extend to the present circulation of 
 these,) were in any way suggested, instigated or encouraged 
 by Dr. Gibbs. We are not told whether they had his con- 
 sent. We do not know that he has ever expressed his dis-
 
 40 
 
 approbation. And we know, moreover, or have the best 
 reason to beheve, that they all had for their author or prompt- 
 er, his main advocate in this sharp contention for office. 
 
 At this stage of the argument there will appear little rea- 
 son to believe that Mr. Ruggles has been in any degree ac- 
 tuated by a desire for the preservation of religious freedom. 
 The facts negative the allegation that the gentleman whose 
 claim he advocates was rejected by the Trustees by reason 
 of his religious faith. The assertion (upon which that 
 proposition depended) that his supreme excellence was ad- 
 mitted, and that his religion was made the sole objection to 
 him, has been disproved. But the case now presented 
 shows a device and design of Mr. Ruggles to make the re- 
 ligion of Dr. Gibbs a means for his introduction, on the 
 plea that other Trustees made it a ground of his exclusion. 
 It was to be the instrument to compel such Trustees to give 
 him their support. His religious profession, his alleged 
 merits and his persecution, were shouted to them and to 
 the world : their opposite creed was as loudly proclaimed : 
 the contrast between their religious belief and his was made 
 as manifest as possible to gain greater credit for the accu- 
 sation : and then they were told, ' rely upon it, the commu- 
 nity will never believe that you have not rejected Wolcott 
 Gibbs by reason of his religious tenets.' They were thus 
 urged, by all the external pressure that could be brought to 
 bear, to put him into the chair on account of his religion, 
 lest they should be deemed to keep him out on that ac- 
 count. And the necessary consequence was, that they 
 could not exercise their judgment by preferring to him 
 another whom they really believed better fitted for the 
 place, without incurring the odium now cast upon them. 
 
 Enough has now been stated to enable the reader to un- 
 derstand the nature of this controversy. Down to the time 
 of the election, it was simply a contest for place. That 
 place was a Professor's chair in a College. In submitting 
 the name of an applicant for this chair, it was becoming 
 and proper that he and his friends should have relied upon
 
 41 
 
 his qualifications alone, leaving the Trustees of the Institu- 
 tion to their free and unbiased judgment to determine 
 whether the true interests of the College would be j)romoted 
 by his election. If this would have been the course proper 
 to be pursued by him or his friends, not officers of the Col- 
 lege, it was eminently the duty of any of its Trustees, who 
 were interested in his success, not to depart from it. Yet 
 we find that, instead of confining himself to this rule, a 
 Trustee of the College, professing to have her interests and 
 welfare deeply at heart, has so far forgotten his duty to her 
 as to be her assailant before the public, and by unfounded 
 statements to do her great injustice and disturb the judg- 
 ments of his associates, in order to compass the elevation of 
 his favorite. We find that he has overlooked every other 
 consideration but the accomplishment of this one end — in 
 his view so desirable as to render justifiable the most ex- 
 ceptionable means to obtain it. He would gain for the 
 College a good Professor for her benefit ; and to persuade 
 her Trustees that it was for her benefit, he has inflicted 
 upon her great injury. So that now, no explanation of his 
 conduct seems probable except this — that he would destroy, 
 to build again. 
 
 It has been said, that down to the time of the election 
 this was a contest for place. Even without regarding what 
 has occurred since that time, the so- great eagerness of a 
 Trustee in such contest is hardly comprehensible, on the 
 supposition that his design reached no further than the ob- 
 ject then contended for. But what is now the end in view? 
 Six members of the Board of Trustees of Columbia College 
 are clergymen. It may be conjectured that some of them — 
 it is impossible to say how many — perhaps all — are aimed 
 at in the attack of Mr. Ruggles. An attempt seems now to 
 be made to remove them from the Board, because their pre- 
 sence and votes are inconvenient, or interfere with some ul- 
 terior designs upon an institution of growing importance, 
 and in order (as we have been told by writers for the press,) 
 that others may be put in their places by the votes of those
 
 42 
 
 that would then remain. No evidence of such designs is 
 possessed by the writer beyond what has met the pubUc 
 eye. But it may be asked, Why the industrious dissemi- 
 nation of the Pamphlet by thousands 1 Why this pubhc 
 excitement perseveringly kept up? It is not to put Dr. 
 Gibbs into the coveted chair. That is filled. It must be 
 something in the future. What that something is, must be 
 left to conjecture. 
 
 This controversy has not been sought. It would have 
 been gladly avoided. And the unpleasant duty of entering 
 upon it has been put off until the call for its performance 
 was^imperative. The w Jter entertains the hope that he 
 has not fallen into intemperance of expression in regard to 
 the party mainly involved in those transactions upon which 
 he has found occasion to comment. Of this, the public 
 now appealed to must judge. But to none of the others of 
 his colleagues does he attribute any other motive than a 
 desire for the best interests of the institution over which 
 they are the governors. In the matter which for the occa- 
 sion divided them, there was an honest difference of opin- 
 ion, which — though the cause from the importance of the 
 subject, of earnest feeling — will not interrupt, it is believed, 
 the mutual respect and cordiality which have always cha- 
 racterized their official intercourse. 
 
 For the rest : It may be said with truth, and it ought to 
 be said, out of justice to the gentleman who was lately 
 elected to the Professorship of Chemistry and Natural and 
 Experimental Philosophy in Columbia College, that on the 
 ballot upon which he was so elected, those who voted for 
 him, one and all, believed him the best fitted for the place 
 beyond all for whom any ballots were then cast : and that 
 the result would not have been different had Dr. Gibbs be- 
 longed to either of the Presbyterian, Dutch Reformed, or 
 Episcopal Churches. 
 
 The eleven gentlemen who cast their ballots on that oc- 
 casion for the Professor elect, had the firmness to do so not- 
 withstanding all that was done to compel a different result.
 
 43 
 
 Without fear or favor, they have performed their duty to 
 the institution of which they are Trustees. For that they 
 are denounced : and at the call of the friends of an unsuc- 
 cessful candidate for a scientific chair, — setting up his pre- 
 eminence in derogation of the decision of a Board upon 
 whose judgment alone the question of his fitness rightfully 
 and legally depended, — it has become necessary not only to 
 justify those Trustees, but to vindicate the good name of 
 the College itself, tarnished by his advocate, whose rela- 
 tions to the College ought ever, whilst they continued, to 
 have protected her from his assaults.
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 Los Angeles 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 
 b'orm L9-30m-ll,'58(.8268s4)444
 
 5 Qgden ~ 
 
 jl226,5 a defence of 
 
 from the attack 
 of Samuel B. Ri 
 
 J 
 
 u Vv^ jT^ 
 
 L 009 575 179 8 
 
 AA 001324 937 
 
 LD 
 
 1226,5 
 
 d34dZ