University of Virginia Library

V. The Presidency—William Gordon McCabe

Although the two reports were read with keen interest,
yet, for the present moment, no change was brought
about by the practical reasoning of the majority of the
committee. In time, however, the vigorous and lucid
argument in favor of the Presidency embodied in their
report encouraged the friends of at least one conspicuous
scholar to advocate his appointment, should the office be
created,—as many alumni now anticipated it would be.
In a previous volume, we have described the successful

part which Colonel McCabe took, as a member of the
Board of Visitors, in liberalizing the courses assigned to
the principal academic degrees. When the supposed
need of the Presidency became, in 1896, a topic of popular
discussion, attention was at once directed to his
striking fitness for discharging the varied duties of the
office. Apparently, indeed, he possessed all the qualifications
which the incumbency of that position called for.

First of all, he was a citizen of the world, who had
associated, on a footing of intellectual equality, with
many of the most famous men of his age, regardless
of their country or clime, profession or business. His
personal charm, originating in his keen wit and genial
temper, and enhanced by culture and travel, would make
him an almost unequaled host in entertaining the eminent
guests,—the literary and scientific lecturers of
high reputation,—who would be visiting the University
from time to time. He was an alumnus of the institution
—therefore, he would, by the force of intuition, understand
its peculiar spirit, value its traditions with
filial loyalty and tenderness, and, at all times, be willing
to sacrifice his means, his energies, and his hours for the
furtherance of its welfare. He was a native of Virginia,
—therefore, he would be conversant with all those
local currents of sentiment and opinion which had to be
taken into tactful account in managing the affairs of the
University. He personally knew all the influential men
of the State, and enjoyed the friendship of many of them
and the respect of all. During many years, he had been
a member of the Board of Visitors, and had thus gained
a thorough knowledge of the diversified interests of the
institution. He had displayed remarkable capacity as a
man of business,—which would aid him to perform with
success the administrative duties of the Presidency. He

was a scholar whose attainments were admired by the
greatest classical students of his age; he was a litterateur,
the productions of whose pen had won popularity by
their brilliant and varied merit; he was a public speaker
who never failed to captivate by his polished wit and
instruct by his solid information; and, in addition to
all these very pertinent characteristics, he had been
both a soldier and a teacher, and in the one school of
discipline had learned how to command men, and in the
other, how to control the young.

No one knew Colonel McCabe more intimately on
every side of his individuality than Professor Thomas
R. Price, himself one of the most accomplished gentlemen
of that day, a gallant officer, an inspiring instructor,
a finished writer, the pink of courtesy and urbanity in
his personal deportment. "McCabe," he affirmed in a
letter to Dr. W. C. N. Randolph, the rector of the University,
"is the one man, that, by a strange combination
of gifts, is exactly fitted, as perennial chairman, to do the
institution a noble service by his sagacity, his shrewdness,
his insight into things and men, his prudence, his
perfect honesty, his ability to make friends and acquire
personal influence, his rare and delicate scholarship, his
brilliant form of eloquence, that would enable him to
represent the University and the Southern system with
splendid force and effectiveness."

In answering this commendatory letter, Dr. Randolph
voiced an opinion which was held by many others during
this period; namely, that the creation of the Presidential
office, without restriction in its general powers,
would (I) destroy the independence of the different
schools which had existed from the time of Jefferson;
and (2), deprive the Faculty of their right of discipline
over the whole body of the students,—which would remove

the most direct means of encouraging a sound
public sentiment within the precincts. Dr. Randolph declared
himself in favor of the introduction of the Presidency
provided that all questions involving discipline'
should be left to the decision of the chairman, as recommended
by Mr. Gordon and Mr. McIlwaine in their
majority report. "The name of President," he said, "I
hate. It is almost as common as that of the time-worn
Virginia and Southern Colonel." Professor Price also
thought that there was "something odious and vulgar"
in that title. Both preferred the designation of "chancellor."

Dr. Randolph, as time passed, became more firmly
convinced that an executive head, by whatever name he
might be called, was indispensable. "Such an officer is
needed," said he, "in order to cope with the rapid
growth in the external business relations of the University;
to develop further the practical relations with
the alumni; and to get in closer bonds with other educational
institutions. In Jefferson's day, there were no external
relations, no educational societies, no alumni to be
taken into consideration. The chairman of the Faculty
cannot give the proper amount of attention to all these
interests, as his time is absorbed in discharging the duties
of his position. The proctor cannot give it, as he has
eight hundred accounts to keep, and can leave his office
only for a few hours a day. The Rector and Visitors
cannot give it, for they hold office only for a short time,
and are constantly occupied with their own private
affairs."

What was the attitude of the members of the Faculty
in the course of this anxious and conflicting debate?
A resolution adopted by that body in May (1897)
would seem to reflect an emotion of resentment because

they had not, from the threshold of the discussion, been
taken into the confidence of the Board of Visitors. A
rumor that found its way into the columns of the newspapers
was said to have been the first information which
they received that a change in the University's form of
government was contemplated. They asked for a "full
and free conference" with the Board; and this request
was accompanied by a feeling statement of their position.
"By long and constant residence," they said, "the Faculty
are intimately acquainted with the internal operations
of the University, not only in minute detail, but also
in general bearing; and by personal experience are enabled
to appraise accurately their deficiency and sufficiency.
Moreover, the Faculty are able to judge clearly
and exactly concerning the external relations of the University,
—to the State and its citizens, and to the educational
institutions in Virginia and elsewhere; and also
to estimate rightly the comparative advantages of different
policies in organization and management, and the
comparative efficiency of various systems of education.
The several members of the Faculty have devoted their
lives to the work of University organization, management,
and instruction. This is their distinct and formal
profession,—a profession to which all their abilities and
acquirements are devoted; in which their public and
private reputation is involved; and of which, they were
supposed to have competent knowledge. Besides, it is
their livelihood, both at present and prospectively.
Thus with the University are bound up their personal and
professional reputation, their year-by-year sustenance,
and whatever of disinterested regard they may be granted
to have for the cause of good education, and for the
general welfare of the State."

So soon as the Faculty's request for an interview

reached the Board of Visitors, they sent back an affirmative
reply; but at the very hour that this favorable announcement
was received by the former body, the members
of the Board put themselves on record as being
hostile to the creation of the office of President. The
influence of the Faculty, joined to that of numerous
alumni who were inimical to the proposed change, seems
to have been powerful enough, at this time, to prevent
the adoption of the recommendation so warmly urged
in the majority report drafted by Mr. Gordon and Mr.
McIlwaine.