| OCR Text |
Show ,1. q. 1 -- . 4.112.111- L) Knofi§jffl Is the charge against Protessdr Question 11. me n 1 now ation" administr the against that he had "worked J t» C‘v L (. tained by the Board -LT€: u:1' of Regents? "r7 l U C) 1 a .: . H's"; {.1 1...". (.Il‘. Yes, as explained in our answer No. 13. Answer ll. subdivision (0). Question 12. of action a.re, If so, (a) What Specific acts, by the above expression, or modes charged against Professor Knowlton? (b) Has the Board taken evidence as to the truth of this charge? Answer 12. (a) The Board of Regents acted on the judgment and recommendations of Dr. Kingsbury, who, we understand, is answering certain questions submitted by you and we refer you to such answer. (b) 1 . The facts are that Dr. Kingsbury made a statement?; to a committee of the Board and to the Regents including-'Ig such information as he had before March 17, 1915; Dr. Knowlton was apprised in writing of these charges. » He wasms notified to appear before the Board at its meeting of march 17, 1915, to make a statement if he so desired. Dr. Khowlton sent the following letter, which was read to the Board at the above meeting: "March 17, 1915." "President J. T. Kingsbury, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah." "Dear Sir: . W I have your letter of March 15th, stating your reasonsfi for not nominating me for re-employment. You give two rens ons e2.nd I wish to make a sta.tement concerning each. " f "You write, 'I am convinced that you have worked agairq the administration of the University'. I assume that thifi has the same n1eaning; as your statement made in our convere tion of march 1st, when you said, 'I think you have work¢11 against me.‘ That is, I understand this charge to invol**‘ a charge of personal loyalty rather than of loyalty to the University. My position upon this point is, I thinKjfi made sufficiently clear in my letter to you dated March and delivered in person on that date.. If the charge 1 1.1 ‘ 1x 1H A mfg-f". an", I. 1‘ll1 1 -. V 1 . u 1»- E11 ,b‘: 11' 1;"? 11; .1- 4‘ |
