SPOTTING THE TROUBLE

The conflict raging between Wisconsin's Glenn Frank and his political and educational antagonists has exceeded the bounds of ordinary removal proceedings. Unquestionably in the minds of the people as well as the students and teachers, President Frank's imminent dismissal was actuated by partisan prejudice, for the majority composed only of La Follette appointees, voted to dismiss President Frank. It is, of course, true that a Board of Regents, in continuous association and supervision of a university and its president, must have the power of dismissal, but the motives in this instance were open to question.

Decisions advanced by the Board of Regents convince the people that they are just and unprejudiced. It is necessary to examine, as President Conant stated, the relationship between state and university. Possibly the Governor's power of appointment of regents requires careful reconsideration. More important, however, is the solid building of a tradition of non-partianship that exists in several other state universities, an actuality of independent conduct, unmarred by suspicion of political prejudice.

President Conant did well not to become involved during the muddy battle itself, particularly under the stipulations of Governor La Follette's invitation. His reply, emphasizing the difference between a professor and a president, pointing significantly to the essential problem of respect and independence, struck the heart of the whole problem. As President Conant said, "The question before the educational world and the people of your state is whether they have confidence in the Board of Regents."

There is only one way of determining that question, and that is to follow President Conant's suggestion of appointing a committee to investigate the connection between state and university. If Governor La Follette wishes partly to redeem his name, if he is honestly interested in a solution, and at the same time wishes to remove himself from the "hot seat," he will amorously embrace this proposal.