Repository: UIHistories Project: Board of Trustees Minutes - 1942 [PAGE 896]

EXTRACTED TEXT FROM PAGE:

IQ42]

UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS

893

dent and with the knowledge and authorization of the Board of Trustees. It was inevitable that these activities incurred the displeasure of local individuals and groups. Such resentment eventually falls upon individuals, and in the situation I have been discussing a great deal of the resentment for activities engaged in at the request of the Board of Trustees and the Governor was centered upon fudge Johnson and one or two other University officials who were representing the Board. At the time of Judge Johnson's appointment as University Counsel in 1926, the following were members of the Board: Messrs. Merle J. Trees of Chicago, and J. W. Armstrong of Rock Island, Mrs. Helen M. Grigsby of Pittsfield, and Messrs. George A. B a r r of Joliet and F r e d W h a m of Centralia. The Board, I think, is faced with a critical situation. In my judgment it may be boiled down to the question: Is the Board of Trustees to determine who shall be appointed to the staff of the University of Illinois and when such person shall be retired, as it alone is empowered to do by law, or will some other State official exercise such functions ? Aside from the issue of public policy and the element of justice to one individual, the situation is fraught with dangerous implications which may affect the morale of the entire faculty, the student body, and the effectiveness of the University as a teaching and research institution. Sincerely yours,

A. C. WILLARD

President Mr. Cleary presented the following exhibits: 1. L e t t e r f r o m J u d g e J o h n s o n t o A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l B a r r e t t , d a t e d M a y 6, 1 9 4 1 . 2. M e m o r a n d u m , d a t e d M a y 9, 1942. 3. S u m m a r y of a c t i v i t i e s of t h e U n i v e r s i t y C o u n s e l . May 6, 1941 Hon. George F. Barrett Attorney General Springfield, Illinois

MY DEAR M R . ATTORNEY GENERAL:

In conformity with your suggestion when we conferred on Wednesday last that I write you concerning the cooperation between the Attorney General and the University, I submit the following outline. 1. Suits or Proceedings Invoking the University (a) Workmen's Compensation—Large Claims W h e n the Attorney General forwards copy of complaint in the Court of Claims, we take the testimony, obtain the d o c t o r s certificates, make such stipulations as serve to expedite the hearing, but always expressly subject to the approval of the Attorney General on seeing and reading the record. (b) Other Suits Such as the W r i g h t will contest, etc., such cooperation as the Attorney General may require. Illustrations: W h e n the H a m m e r case was tried (suit for $50,000 damages against the University), the University Counsel sat with the Assistant Attorney General during the trial in Chicago. H e assisted the Attorney General in investigating the facts, and in locating and interviewing witnesses. In the tax exemption cases in Cook County we worked with the Assistant and under his direction. All legal proceedings to which the University is a party are, of course, entirely under the control of the Attorney General, but we give such assistance as he may require. 2. Workmen's Compensation—Small Claims Here is a troublesome class of claims, due to the fact that most of them are in nominal amounts—from $2.00 up—and, as a practical matter, preclude the employment of counsel. A plan of cooperation has been worked out and followed for many years, the nature and character of which are well known to