University of Virginia Library

A STATEMENT MADE BY PRESIDENT MORGAN L. COMBS TO THE MARY
WASHINGTON COLLEGE COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD OF VISITORS OF
THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA AT ITS MEETING IN FREDERICKSBURG,
December 9, 1954.

Since this is the first time that I have had an opportunity to appear before the Mary
Washington Committee in over a year, and I feel that the present members of this Committee are
unbiased and would not under any circumstances knowingly and willingly condone an injustice or
aid or abet any attempt to discredit anyone, I feel compelled, with your indulgence, to make
the following statement

Twenty-six years ago, on December 8, 1928, I was elected President of this institution
I believe that most of you are familiar in general with the status of the institution at that
time, the changes which have come about since that date, and the prestige of the College today
as compared with the small, poverty-stricken teachers college of twenty-six years ago

Until a year ago, the College was noted not only for its wonderful and efficient plant
and equipment and its high scholastic standards, but for the splendid spirit which prevailed on
the campus and the high morale among students, faculty and staff. As far as I know, there had
never been the slightest intimation that the administration did not have the full approval and
confidence of the Board or had failed in any way to carry out the policies of the Board, or that
the College was not being administered in accordance with the provisions of the Act of the
Legislature in 1944 making this institution a liberal arts college.

During the latter part of 1953, I became the victim of what appeared to be a "conspiracy"
resulting in a tragic miscarriage of justice. We now know that this "conspiracy" was
participated in by five members of the Mary Washington College staff and faculty—Edward Alvey,
Jr., Dean of the College, Edgar E. Woodward, Bursar, Mary Ellen Stephenson, Associate Professor
of Spanish and former Acting Dean of Women, Margaret S. Russell, Assistant Professor of Home
Economics, and Mrs. Zella Jacobus, a housemother who had been questioned in regard to her
alleged attempt to foment a riot among student waitresses in the dining halls. Evidence shows
that this group was given encouragement and sympathetic support by Mrs. Bertha P. Wailes, chairman
of the Mary Washington Committee for approximately ten years, and who on many occasions appeared
antagonistic toward the President of Mary Washington.

As a result of the efforts of this group, and Mrs. Wailes' activities in her effort to condemn
me, a series of secret meetings were held and also at least one meeting of the full Board to
consider these charges while I was going about my duties as usual absolutely unaware that anything
of this kind was going on. It seems strange that, during this time, she did not contact the
President of the college, and I was completely taken by surprise when a newspaper reporter called
me from Richmond about four o'clock on Friday afternoon, December 11, 1953, and asked me if the
Board had been in communication with me and whether or not I was aware that at the meeting of the
Board in Charlottesville that day charges were being made against me.

The transcripts of the testimony at these meetings show that no witnesses were sworn, and
the charges constitute an amazing distortion of facts, including personal opinions, contradictions,
innuendoes, half-truths, and outright falsehoods, and I have in my possession ample material to
substantiate my statement. It was absolutely impossible for me to refute these charges at the
time they were made since I had heard none of the evidence, and Rector Black failed to give me
copies of any of the testimony except garbled statements made by the housemother, Mrs. Jacobus,
false and contradictory statements made by the four waitresses; and some remarks made by Ann
Lewis Payne, President of Student Government, consisting of rumors, personal opinion, and
brazen falsehoods.

At the meeting of the Board on December 22, 1953, at Fredericksburg, the one and only time I was
ever permitted to meet with the Board after these charges were made, in my written statement
addressed to the members of the Board I said that I was greatly embarrassed and handicapped
because I did not have all of the complaints or full information in regard to the specific charges
or what members of the faculty and staff had made them. On January 15, 1954, I wrote the Rector
as follows

---

385

As you no doubt know, neither the full Board nor myself was ever given the promised
opportunity of listening to these witnesses, nor was I ever given an opportunity of telling my
side of each incident. Instead, when the Board adjourned its meeting here on February 12, 1954,
after handing down its devastating decision, I still did not know the full charges and the
motives and implications involved.

I had also expected the Board to take ample time to hear numerous witnesses who were ready
and anxious to testify in my behalf. Instead of that, they either proposed to my attorney or
he proposed to them, without my permission, a humiliating compromise which I accepted under
duress because of my ignorance in regard to the charges or the factors involved and my desire
to avoid undesirable publicity and hurt the College.

In spite of my efforts to avoid publicity by submitting to an unprecedented decision by the
Board, immediately I was subjected to the most horrible public humiliation through the newspapers
covering a period of several weeks as a result of information given out by the Board consisting
of innuendoes, insinuations, baseless rumors and implications, which indicate that they had been
misled by false rumors and statements in regard to my physical and mental health.

Not only, as stated before, was information withheld from me, but it was not until three
weeks ago that we were able to secure the minutes of the Board meetings of December 11, 1953,
January 8, 1954, and February 12, 1954. My wife and I were shocked to see that at the meeting
of the Board on December 11, before I even knew that any charges had been made against me,
Thomas B. Gay, a member of the Board at that time, stated that I should be suspended immediately
and implied that it was dangerous for me to remain here. The implications were that I was a
monster and a threat to the peace and safety of the people at Mary Washington College

The records show and the witnesses who appeared before the Board on December 22, 1953, have
stated that some of the members of the Board were hostile and apparently were interested only in
information that would convict me, and yet the Rector refers to this procedure as a "careful
investigation". It would appear from all of the information and records that it was more like
an inquisition. It is evident now that even before I appeared before the Board for the first and
only time on December 22, 1953, some, if not all of the members of the Board had been informed of
my alleged "mental condition" and that my fate was already sealed. It was not until six days
after the Board met at Mary Washington the last time on February 12, 1954, that we accidentally
were given access to full information in regard to the charges, transcripts of statements made by
the staff and faculty members of Mary Washington referred to before, the astounding and false
statements in connection with my health and mental condition, and the real reasons back of the
whole thing, which I do not believe were known by many members of the Board.

As a result of this comprehensive information showing that the housemother and the
waitress affair were not the real reasons back of the so-called investigation, many leading
citizens, alumnae, and friends of Mary Washington College, as well as my personal friends,
became alarmed that such a thing could happen in the State of Virginia. A movement was started,
which spread rapidly, to inform the Board of the fact that it had been misled. Many efforts
have been made by many different people to have this case re-opened, in view of the fact that
we now have both documentary evidence and witnesses to refute all of these charges beyond the
peradventure of a doubt. In general, these appeals have fallen on deaf ears. For instance,
one prominent citizen received the impression, after talking to the Rector, "that the Board, right
or wrong" would not change its decision. Can any Board or Body representing the public afford
to take such an attitude?

Regardless of anything else, I am sure you must realize that this whole unfortunate affair
has been a long and dreadful nightmare to my wife and myself. With each passing day, it
becomes more and more evident that the decision of the Board on February 12, 1954, was based upon
false and prejudiced information, and motives which I did not understand at that time, and
that, as stated before, I was induced to agree to this compromise without the slightest knowledge
of what crime I was supposed to have committed except talking to a housemother and attempting to
discipline four insolent students.

I feel sure that when these charges were made, had the Board sent a small committee to Mary
Washington College, and that committee had stayed here long enough to ascertain the facts and make
a first-hand investigation, and had been able to talk to the approximately ninety per cent of the
faculty and staff who were absolutely loyal to the administration, I would have been completely
exonerated.

I now appeal to you in the name of American standards of justice and fair play to use your
influence as members of the Mary Washington College Committee to have this case reopened and
arrange a public hearing, at which time the witnesses on both sides are sworn, or to have the
Board authorize the Mary Washington Committee to make a thorough first-hand investigation of
everything pertaining to my record as President of Mary Washington College and report back to the
full Board.