Word: oaths
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1950-1959
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...manner in which the Board of Regents dismissed Fox increased faculty opposition to control of educational policies by the Regents. However, by February 24 of this year 86.5 percent of the 4,000 faculty had taken the oath, but the remaining 13.5 percent were intransigent in their refusal to swear to any oath other than the regular oath of allegiance for state employees. On that date, after a three-hour closed session with Governor Warren presiding, the Regents voted 12 to 6 (with six members absent) that if any employee did not sign the oath by April 30, his "connections...
This decision came to be known as the "sign--or else" ultimatum, and served to unite the faculty still more strongly against the Regents; even some of those faculty members who had already signed the oath began to take an active part in the opposition...
...division between faculty and Regents seemed to have been made almost irreconcilable by the ultimatum. Joel H. Hildebrand, dean of the College of Chemistry and a member of the four man committee of the Academic Senate which had been advising the Regents on the oath, said, "No conceivable damage to the university at the hands of the hypothetical Communists among us could have equaled the damage resulting from the unrest, ill-will and suspicion engendered by this series of events." He later remarked, "If there are Communists among us they are lying so low they at least do not constitute...
Regent John Francis Neylan, San Francisco attorney who voted for the oath and ultimatum, stated that the whole issue could be reduced to the question "shall the Regents accord to each card-carrying Communist the confidence, the respect, and the privileges accorded to the distinguished scholars who have made the university a great seat of learning?" but an authorized spokesman for the Academic Senate made it clear that the faculty did not want Communists on the faculty. "We have patiently tried to settle this bugaboo of repudiation, but Regent Neylan has been unwilling to listen," Professor Malcolm Davisson stated...
...issue continued to be that of the Faculty opposed to control of educational policies by the Regents--not, for the most part, opposition to the loyalty oath as an abridgment of academic freedom. Earlier, the four-man committee of the Academic Senate had suggested to the Board of Regents that instead of signing the oath, the employees might simply affirm university regulation 5 which "prohibits the employment of persons whose commitments or obligations to any organization, Communist or other, prejudice impartial scholarship and the free pursuit of truth." On March 23 a poll of the faculty revealed that...