University of Virginia Library

Your Committee on the Nomination of a President, appointed on 14 June 1958, to find and
recommend to the Board a suitable successor to President Colgate W. Darden, Jr., presents
herewith a report of its work in performance of the assignment and its recommendation to the
Board with respect to the election of President Darden's successor.

PRELIMINARY -

The Rector and the Executive Committee having been informed of President Darden's intentions
prior to formal announcement of his resignation, certain preliminary work was done prior to the
appointment of this committee which it is proper to report here. After discussion of the need
for increase in the salary of the President, Messrs. Greear and McWane and the Rector called on
the Governor in June of 1957 and presented the needs of the University in this regard. As a
result of this conference the President's salary was fixed in the succeeding budget at $20,000,
which is the same salary paid to the Governor. Furthermore, since that time it has been
determined that certain additional perquisites are available, which, in the opinion of the
committee, has placed us in a competitive position with respect to compensation of the President.

In the fall of 1957 Messrs. Berkeley and Talbott had a profitable interview with Mr. Harold
Helm, Chairman of the Princeton University Trustees and Chairman of the Board of Chemical Corn
Exchange Bank, New York. Mr. Helm had then recently been chairman of the Princeton Trustees'
committee on selection of a new President at that University and gave us some valuable advice
on methods and procedures, as well as a list of nominees considered by the Princeton authorities
in the later stages of their search for a President.

It was agreed that the Faculty of the University should be informed of the President's
decision as early as was practical so that prompt steps might be taken to secure the advice and
cooperation of the Faculty in connection with the committee's assignment. Accordingly, President
Darden informed the University Senate of the decision on 18 March 1958, and on 6 May the University
Senate created a special committee of ten, representing the ten schools of the University located
in Charlottesville, to advise and cooperate with the Visitors' committee in finding a successor
to President Darden. This committee consisted of Dean C. C. Abbott, Graduate School of Business
Administration, Professor J. M. Buchanan, School of Commerce, Professor H. C. Dillard, School of
Law, Dean T. K. Fitz Patrick, School of Architecture, Professor R. K. Gooch, College of Arts and
Sciences, Professor C. Henderson, School of Engineering, Professor B. S. Leavell, School of
Medicine, Professor R. A. Meade, School of Education, Dean Margaret Tyson, School of Nursing,
and Professor W. S. Weedon (Chairman), Graduate School of Arts and Sciences.

On 14 June the President's resignation was presented to the Board and on the same date this
committee, consisting of Visitors Berkeley, Bryan, McWane, Pollock, Smith, and Talbott, was created.
The services of Mr. Francis L. Berkeley, Jr., formerly Secretary to the Board, were sought as
Secretary of this committee and, fortunately for us, Mr. Berkeley accepted. Being impressed with
the magnitude and overwhelming importance of its assignment, the committee was prepared to proceed
at once with its work.

FIRST MEETING -

At its first meeting, convened on 14 June, your committee joined with the Steering Committee
of the Senate Advisory Committee, consisting of Professor William S. Weedon as Chairman and
Professors Hardy C. Dillard, Robert K. Gooch, and Charles Henderson. At this time your committee,
in agreement with the Steering Committee of the Faculty group, arrived at the unanimous conclusion
that certain basic qualifications should be sought in any nominee presented by us to this Board.

WE AGREED THAT WE SHOULD LOOK FOR A MAN WHO HAD ATTAINED DISTINCTION AS A SCHOLAR, PREFERABLY
IN THE FIELD OF LIBERAL ARTS, AND THE ABILITY TO REPRESENT AND ENGENDER RESPECT FOR THE VALUES OF
HIGHER EDUCATION, THAT HE SHOULD HAVE A SYMPATHETIC UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROBLEMS OF VIRGINIA AND
THE SOUTH WITH RESPECT TO INTEGRATION, THAT HE SHOULD HAVE THE CAPACITY TO ACQUIRE AN INFLUENTIAL
RELATIONSHIP WITH THE GOVERNMENTAL AUTHORITIES OF THE STATE AND TO CREATE A FAVORABLE IMPRESSION
IN PUBLIC ADDRESS, THAT HE SHOULD HAVE THE CAPACITY TO DELEGATE AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITY AND
TO CREATE MUTUAL UNDERSTANDING AND RESPECT IN RELATIONS WITH THE STUDENT BODY. WE AGREED AS A
MATTER OF PREFERENCE THAT HE SHOULD BE A MARRIED MAN AND THAT THE IDEAL AGE WOULD BE IN THE NEIGHBOR
HOOD OF FIFTY, OR YOUNGER THAN THAT IF THE OTHER QUALIFICATIONS WERE FOUND TO EXIST.

Subsequently in our screening operations the age qualification was modified by a decision not
to consider nominees born prior to 1904, in the absence of unusual circumstances. In determining
the age qualification your committee felt that any nominee past the age referred to would not have
sufficient time prior to retirement to achieve maximum usefulness.

Related to decisions reached at the first meeting is the subject matter of the "Report from
the Special Committee of the University Senate", a copy of which has been heretofore given to the
members of the Board. This document was impressive in its underlying reasoning and was a valuable
reference for basic study of our problem. At this same meeting we also reached an understanding
with the Faculty Advisory Committee as to procedures to be followed, which are reflected in the
remaining portions of this report.

REQUESTS FOR ADVICE AND SUGGESTIONS -

On 16 June the Senate Committee addressed a circular letter to all Faculty members, soliciting
advice, suggestions, and nominations. On the same date the Rector, as chairman of the committee,
addressed a letter to Lawrence Lewis, Jr., President of the Alumni Association of the University,
requesting that he circularize all alumni chapters to the same effect, and this was done. Simultaneously
the committee received and proceeded to study the files of Mr. T. Benjamin Gay, a former
member of this Board, which reflected the activities of the Visitors' committee in its selection
of President Darden in 1947, and the files of Mr. McWane showing procedure on selection of the
Chancellor of Mary Washington College in 1955. Following a prearranged plan the committee addressed
letters to Mr. Arthur S. Adams, President of the American Council on Education, Mr. Henry T. Heald,
President of the Ford Foundation, and Mr. Dean Rusk, President of the Rockefeller Foundation, asking
their advice on the problem before us. During the months of June, July, August, September, October,
and November individual members of the committee or its Secretary had personal interviews for the
same purpose with Dean Rusk of the Rockefeller Foundation, James A. Perkins of the Carnegie
Foundation, ex-President of Princeton University, Harold W. Dodds, Henry M. Wriston, ex-President
of Brown University, President John A. Perkins of the University of Delaware, President Courtney C.
Smith of Swarthmore College, and Dr. Robert M. Lester, Director of the Southern Fellowships Fund
at Chapel Hill, North Carolina. All of these persons were regarded by us as having intimate
acquaintance with the nature of our problem and with prominent figures in educational circles who
might be considered eligible to fill the position of President of the University of Virginia. At a
special meeting called for the purpose the Raven Society of the University developed a "Report on
Qualifications of a University President", which was filed with the committee, received with respect,
and studied with interest. The Committee, also on solicitation, received advice from Dr. Pauline
G. King, Chairman of the Faculty General Cooperative Committee at Mary Washington College, the
Clinch Valley Chapter of the American Association of University Professors, J. N. G. Finley,
Director of the Northern Virginia Center, and Dr. Oliver C. Carmichael, the distinguished Southern
educator whose advice had also proved useful to the Visitors' Committee of 1947 which nominated
Mr. Darden to the Board.

THE SELECTIVE PROCESS -

As a result of the efforts recited above and the general publicity attendant on the need for
choice of a new President, nominations came in from faculty, alumni, friends of the University,
and the specially informed sources whose advice we had sought. All these nominations were referred
automatically to the Faculty Advisory Committee, which acted as a screening group. All of them

were measured against the qualifications previously established and except in a few special
instances all of those born prior to 1904 were rejected as ineligible. The Faculty Committee
has reported the results of its screening activities periodically to this committee, which
has studied and evaluated such reports.

The total number of nominations received was 161. Of these more than 60 were rejected
because of age requirements and other apparent and compelling reasons. With respect to those
remaining, biographical material and other available information with regard to each nominee
was assembled and put in written form for study by this committee and by the Faculty Advisory
Committee

As a result of the above procedure, prolonged discussions at six meetings of this committee,
including three joint sessions with the Steering Committee of the Faculty Advisory
Committee, organized correspondence between members of this committee, and personal interviews
by members of your committee with distinguished educators and others whom we considered
to have pertinent information available, the number of potential nominees was reduced by 8
November to eleven.

Your committee then began by personal interviews with the group remaining and by the
assembly of additional intimate information from available sources to screen this group
further. By 17 January your committee had completed its personal discussions with all of
them. On Sunday morning, 18 January, we met for a four-hour session devoted to discussion
of the names then under consideration. As a result of these deliberations the number of
nominees in active consideration was reduced to four

On these remaining four nominees your committee and its Secretary have since worked
constantly in an effort to gather any facts bearing on their careers which might be pertinent
to our decision. The information so assembled has been derived from study of their records,
both academic and otherwise, interviews with educators and others familiar with their performance
in undergraduate, postgraduate, and subsequent phases of their careers. Detailed
examination of military service records has been made where available. The results of our
investigations concerning these four nominees have been communicated orally to the Board.

REVIEW -

It is not possible in this report to review completely the details of the day-to-day
work of the Visitors' and Faculty's committees from June 1958 through February 1959. It is
pertinent, however, to record that there have been twelve meetings of your full committee
since its appointment on 14 June, that members of your committee and its Secretary have had
(in addition to formal discussions with nominees at committee meetings) twenty personal
interviews with distinguished educators and others concerning problems before the committee
and qualifications of the nominees from time to time under consideration, and that we have
studied and evaluated six reports on their screening operations submitted by the Faculty
Advisory group, representing an outlay of time and thought on their part which must be equal
to or greater than that involved in our own deliberations

CONCLUSION -

Acting now with benefit of the cumulative effect of the work that has been done, the
advice received from outside sources, and, most important of all, the advice and consideration
of representatives of our own Faculty group, we are prepared to recommend for election as our
next President Dr. Edgar Finley Shannon, Jr. We have searched far and have finally come to
you with a man from home, who is a native Virginian, for the past three years a member of
the faculty of the Department of English at this University.

Measuring him by the qualifications first set out as our guide, he has, notwithstanding
his relative youth, attained distinction as a scholar, and that in the field of liberal arts,
he unquestionably has the ability to represent and engender respect for the values of higher
education, with the background of a Virginia breeding and undergraduate education, he has a
sympathetic understanding of the problems of Virginia and the South with respect to integration.
The record of his military service of five years in the United States Navy, which
included combat duty in practically every major action in the Pacific theater, indicates
qualities of leadership and the kind of executive ability required of the office of President
in dealing with governmental authorities and with internal administration. In our oral
presentation we have given you details concerning his undergraduate and postgraduate life,
his work as a Rhodes scholar at Merton College, Oxford, in fellowship study at Leeds and
London Universities, and as a member of the faculty and tutorial staff at Harvard. His wife,
herself a Southerner, a holder of the B.A. and M.A. degrees, a member of Phi Beta Kappa, and
formerly Dean of Women at Southwestern College, Memphis, is equipped to give invaluable aid
to him if he is chosen as our President

We believe that we are fortunate to find among our own a young man whose past performance
indicates so clearly the qualities which we have sought. We believe that Dr. Shannon in the
position of President will deserve and receive the strong and enthusiastic support of our
faculty and we unanimously recommend his election