1919 Crisis – The Five
John Mead Adams
Born in Massachusetts on 6 June 1882, Adams received his A.B. (1903), M.A. (1905), and Ph.D. (1907) from Harvard, where he also taught as Assistant in Physics from 1904-1908. A scholarship enabled him to study in Leipzig and at the Cavendish Laboratory in Cambridge during 1908-1909. Upon his return, he taught at the Occidental College until moving to Queen’s University in 1912. In 1916 Adams accepted a position with the University of Saskatchewan, where he remained until 1919 when he accepted a position as head of the Department of Physics at the University of California, Los Angeles. Overwork, particularly on war research projects, significantly damaged his health, which was notably poor from 1942 onward. The stress of his condition appears to have been a factor in his suicide in 1944. [Document | Database Entry]
Samuel Earl Greenway
Greenway’s original letter to the Board: [Page 1, Page 2, Page 3]
Murray to MacCallum (Adisory Council for Scientific and Industrial Research), 15 April 1919: [Greenway’s] action is explicable only on the supposition that he has been led to believe that the opportunity has come for him to expose a dangerous person and to lead a great crusade for the purification of public life. … I am asking for a probe, and expect that we will discover a lot of putrid matter in the body academic.”
[Page 1, Page 2 || Database Entry]
John L. Hogg
Although he declined to allow his letters to be made public, Dr. MacCallum of the Advisory Council for Scientific and Industrial Research certainly held strong views on MacLaurin and Hogg. Of the latter, he wrote Murray (22 April 1919) “I sympathize with you very much in your struggle against these individuals. I have always wondered why you selected Hogg for your staff. He was a trouble-maker at Toronto in 1900 to 1904, even when he was on the McMaster staff, intriguing with students at the University of Toronto against President Loudon and Professor McLennan. … I hope you will down all these people. They poison academic life and they ought to be driven out of it.”
[Page 1 | Page 2 || Database Entry]
Ira Allen MacKay
“This, no doubt, I shall live to regret, and if not I, then my sons or sons’ sons who shall no doubt see the statues of the rest of you on the square.”
The abstention by MacKay was the one true surprise in the events of 1919. A former student of Murray’s, MacKay practiced law in Winnipeg prior to joining the University as a professor of philosophy. When the College of Law was formed, he may have anticipated being named Dean – a position which went instead to Moxon. He was a popular professor, and no doubt a compelling advocate for the Four with the public and with law alumni in particular. He may have had some principle in mind regarding his stand – a more democratic university, perhaps – but also if true, surely could have made that evident without either abstaining on the vote of confidence in Murray, or by simply responding to the Board in a timely fashion. Chancellor Haultain wrote of MacKay: “He has always impressed me as a very clever, impractical sort of fellow, perpetually prancing about with his head in the clouds….My general impression of him is that he is rather silly and vain and weak.”
MacKay’s letter to the Board: [Page 1, Page 2, Page 3 || Database Entry ]
Robert Dawson MacLaurin
Six months before Greenway’s visit to provincial treasurer CA Dunning, MacLaurin was resolutely petulant over the decision of one of his research assistants. “I fail to see why O.J. [Walker] must go to McGill. He is familiar with the work and if allowed to continue for another year will really get somewhere. We have spent a lot of money getting equipment at the expense of the Province and University and the only available man in Chemistry left must go to McGill. …Harvard offered O.J. credit for his research work done at Sask so why can’t McGill do the same thing? The reason is too obvious to even be worth while discussing but that game can’t be worked very long. … We can’t get a man here less than $2500.00 … I can assure you I am not pleased at the action of the Council [Advisory Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, precursor to NSERC] in this matter and I propose to inform Dr. MacCallum to that effect. …. I have worked mighty hard this summer and to think of being without any help this winter doesn’t agree with me very well especially when it is only to satisfy the selfish ambition of someone else.” [Page 1, Page 2, Page 3, Page 4 || Database Entry] As it happened, the unfortunately maligned Walker was being married “in a day or so,” as Murray noted in response. “This matter of Walker is not a device simply to send men to McGill.”
MacLaurin did meet with Dr. MacCallum of the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, who, on 25 March 1919 (note that CA Dunning had only asked Murray and Rutherford to meet with him concerning Greenway’s allegations on 24 March), wrote Murray about that exchange. “…he spoke passionately about yourself. I had to pull him up at one point because of his discourteous attitude, when he had to apologize. … He is an exceedingly difficult person, I judge, to deal with. …He has an extraordinary notion of his own ability and merits, not justified, I believe, by his temperament. …What with Prof. MacLaurin and, also, similarly with Prof. Hogg, whom I formerly knew, I do not envy you your position as praeses. I, nevertheless, sympathize with you.” [Page 1, Page 2, Page 3 || Database Entry]
Murray’s response (“I have proceeded on the assumption that patience is a virtue…” [Page 1 | Page 2 || Database Entry]
As late as 4 August 1919, MacLaurin was still acting as if nothing had happened, telegraphing Murray in Nova Scotia that estimates for the equipment he would need the next year “amount to approximately four thousand dollars” and asking that Murray authorize placing the order. [Document || Database Entry]
Letter from MacLaurin recalling a letter “prepared and read” by Murray regarding MacLaurin’s teaching, or lack thereof, was “due to a misunderstanding on [Murray’s] part.” [Letter || Database Entry]
Letter from Murray regarding MacLaurin’s failure to return from his leave and teach his classes: [Page 1 | Page 2 || Database Entry]
