xt7crj48q181 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7crj48q181/data/mets.xml Lexington, Kentucky University of Kentucky 19190219 minutes English University of Kentucky Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees, 1919-02-feb19-ec. text Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees, 1919-02-feb19-ec. 1919 2011 true xt7crj48q181 section xt7crj48q181 



        Minutes of the ULeeting of the Executive Committee
 of the Board of Trustees of the University of Kentucky for its
           regular monthly meeting February 19, 1919

     The, Executive Comrittee of the Board of Trustees of the Univer-
sity of Kentucky met in regular session in the President's office
at the University of Kentucky at 11 a' Sw February 19, 1919.
Tkhe following members were present: R. G. Gordon and P. I P. Johnston,
Jr.   Mr. Stoll, the chairman of the Committee, was unable to be
present and Senator ;. 1i. Froman attended in his place.  President
Frank L. LhcVey was ill and unable to be present at the meeting.
Wellington Patrick, the Secretary of the Committee, was present.

     The meeting was called to order by Senator Froman, and. on
motion made and seconded, the minutes of the previous meeting mere
considered as read and adopted.

     At the suggestion of President !CVey, Dean Thomas P. Cooper
was invited to appear before the Co=wittee to present some matters
pertaining to the Experiment Station.

     (1) Dean Cooper read to the Committee a number of letters
pertaining to the resignation of Dr. Fred me. Lutchler, director
of extension, explaining that Doctor 'utchler had tendered his
resignation effective June 30, c119; that Director 1L;utchler was
resigning to take a position as state agent for D. C. Heath and
Company of New York and Chicago.  Dean Cooper indicated that Doctor
Mutchler's decision to resign was reached only after careful consid-
eration and his desire to accept a position with greater financial
advantages was the chief factor in determining the matters  Dean
Cooper indicated that the matter had the approval of the President
and recommended that the resignation b,e accepted to take effect
June 30, 1919.   In the discussion which followed the members of
the Executive Committee expressed regret that this action was deemed
advisable and referred to the long period of service in which Doc-_
tor iLutchler had been engaged with the Institution.  Dean Cooper
indicated that Doctor `Jutchlerls advice and counsel was needed at
least until June 30. and stated that Doctor - iutchler had brought
the Alricultural extension work of the State from a very small or-
ganization to one that vas a benefit and assistance to Practically
every farmer and home in the State.  On notion made by 2:ir. Johnston,
and seconded by -r. Gordon the recommendations of the President and
Dean of the College of Agriculture vwere concurred in, and the Presi-
dent vras authorized to grant to Doctor UIutchler from time to time,
prior to June 30, such leave of absence as ie deemed. wise.


       (2) Dean Cooper then stated to tne Coinrdittee that after full
 discussion, the President had decjded to recornen'i to the Comnittee
 that Dean Cooper should be designc..tad as director of extension and
 that Mr. Thompson R. Bryant be designated senior a2ssistant director
 of extension and TIr. Geoffrey Eorgan be miae assistsnr.t director cI^
 extension,   In vie-w of the increased duties and reoponsibilities,
 Dean Cooper stated that the President had decided to recormend .hat
 the salaries of Mr. Bryant and Mr. Morgaz be each Mrae $3,600,
 effective July 19, 19-1,

      On motion made by ir. Gordon, seconded by TrD, Jo.nston, the
recoin.-endation of the President was approved.

      (3) Dean Cooper then presented a statement regarding the matter
of mileage for owners of motor vehicles discussed at a previous
meeting as follows:

                                          February 18, 1919

President F. L. 7cVey,

     University of Xentuczky.

Hy dear President Ac-'Vey

     Under date of November0 S0. 'ast, I subitbted the following
recomaendati ons:

     The adrministrat,5.ve authorilies of the University of Xentucky
ry authorize the use of persona3ly ovmed motor' vehi.cles and the pay-
ment of mileage ircurred in aactual and necessary travel in the per-
form-nce of duties, at the rate of six cents a mile.    Such expense
may be incurred only when the vehicles are necessarily used as a
moans of transportation,.  Each individual to wtom the privu5.ega is
extended sall be given d`-rect authorization from adminst.rative
authoritIies andr. mileage for vhich charge is made shall be auditod
mid checked as are other accounts.

     The matter was referred bUack by order of the Zxecutive Gorrmittee,
vrlth the request for additionaa .nformation.   The purepose of a1l"c-,
ance of mileage is to reimburse. partially at leastO the ov. er Cf
the car, wzho is ovr employee, for its use,  The reimwrse-me-,t ,s
for the purpose of paying for gasoline, o1, repairs to the car. tires
and various features of upkeep and depreciation, payment to be made



while the car is used for official purposes only.   Previous to
this time, we have allowed for gasoline and oil only.   This is
unfair to the employee and vwe believe results in lowered efficiency, as
or cmz scarcely expect a person wvorking on a salary to cover the
territory he should whenetL he is but partially reimbursed for the expense

     Practically every state allows for mileage or a fixed monthly
rate for use of car.   Cut of 35 states with which vie have taken up
the matter, 26 are paying a flat rate a mile to persons using auto-
mobiles, varying from 6 to 11 cents, depending upon the character
of roads ard the conditions that prevail in the state.   The pre-
vailing average rate would be approximately 7 cents.   The federal
department thru its various organizations allows 6 cents.   Five
states pay the entire experse of the autorobile or provide for a
fixed rental charge from the o,-mer at so much a month, and two arrange
that the county shall pay the expense.

     I enclose copy of a form vwiich is to be used in rendering the
account.   This requires a statement of the place of departure and
the number of miles travaled.. This account is checked Up with the
weekly report rendered by the county agent showing the work that
has been carried on.

     I trust that either in the finer recoanended or in some other
satisfactory way, authorization may be given to make payment for
personally used automobiles.   The rate requested is lovw -- lower
than for which one may actually operate a car at the present time.

                                         Yours very truly,

                                                  Thomas P.- Cooper,

e -                                             C Dean and Director.

     After discussion the recomnendation was approved, subject to
the approval of the President, with the request that the Dean of
the College of Agriculture make a report at the December meeting
of the Board in order that it might be 2mown whether or not it was
wise to continue the practise.

     (4) Dean Cooper then presented the following conianIcation
relative to a soil experiment field in Taylor County:



                                        February 18, 1919

President 7P. L. NcVe7,

     University of Kentucky.

?ly dear President LIcVey:

     Some time ago, we recqueste:1 authority from the Board of Trus-
tees to accept certain land in Taylor County for the purpose of
carrying on a soil experirrent field.  The fiscal court of Taylor
County has forwarded the order and deed for our acceptance.  I
desire to recommend that the University of Kentucky accept the
deed to 23.56 acres of land as provi5ded for in the accompnying
cwrtveyance, and that the director of the Agricultural Experiment
Station be authorized to accept the same for the institution.

     I may add that tche coniveyance uses the wording as provided
by the Board of Trustees, but in taking up the matter with 1\Ir.
R. C. S1oll, he suggested a calnge iM the phrase "from any unavoid-
able cause become unfitted for experimental-rork9. I have consid-
ered the matter carefully and believe that Lr. Stoll's advice
would be a greater protection to the Institution, yet in order to
make the change suggested. a special meeting of the fiscal court
of Taylor County is required and a new deed and conveyance from
the Crittendens, who are selling this land, is necessary.  It
appears to me, therefore, that we are accepting this land in good
faith and they are giveing it to us in the same manner, it is un-
necessary to mak.e these further arrangements.  Zlr. Stoll suggested
using in place of the phrase mentioned above the.phrase "an the
opinion of the University of Kentucky".

                                         Yours very truly,

                                             'Thomas P. Cooper,

C:&                                      Dean and Director.

     On motion duly made and seconded, the suggestion was approved.

     Dean Cooper then withdrew from the meeting and the Committee
proceeded to take up other matters such as could be disposed of in
the President's absence.

     (5) The Secretary of the Committee then presented an opinion
from Attorney General C. H. iorris pertaining to the annuity of
Doctor James R. Patterson.   Qn motion, duly made and seconded, the
opinion was ordered incorporated An the minutes, and referred to
the Board of Trustees for further action.   The opinion is as follows


                                    Frankfort, Kentuck:;,
                                         January 30, 1919

Honorable F. C. Stoll,

     Lexington, Kentucky.

Dear Sir:

     I have ytours of the 26th of December, 1918, vzich sets out
the controversy between Dr. James X. Patterson, formerly President
Emeritus of Kentucky Ur.iversity, and the Board of Trustees of said
University, in relation to cladin of payment of salary alleged to
be due to Doctor Patterson.

     I should have given ycu a reply much sooner brt for the fact
that this de-artment has been unrasually busy during the past thirty

     Permit me to say that I approach any suggestions looking to
a decision of this matter vith some hesitancy, because of the fact
that should it seem clear to rre that Doctor Patterson is entitled
to his claim and the trustees should not feel themselves inclined
to abide by mr decision or suggestions and should act so as to
necessitate court Proceedings, I night be placed in a sorme-v'hat ea-
barrassing positi.one  However, since I have been accustomed to
thus being placed and have become somewhat hardened, I shall ven-
ture the following conclusions or suggestions:

     The four questions submitted by you are to my mind. mostly of
a legal nature and there is very of the fact to be deducted, since
as I read the exhibits, letters and suggestions presented by the
parties to the controversy, there is little disagreement as to the
facts pertaining to the entire ratter.   I shall adhere, as nearly
as possible, to the "iemrorandum relating to the muaui.ty of Dr.
James R. Patterson, President Eweritus", as furnished by the Secre-
tary of tae Board, referring occasionally to facts or statements
taken roin other files furnished me.

     It appears that on or about December 14, 1909, Doctor Patter-
son exntessed a des.re to :rketire from the office of President of
the University and made kliowrn to the Board his desires, and at tihe
same time expressed certain tezms upon which the retirement would

     At a meeting of the Board of Trustees on December 14, 1909,
a Committee recoinenoded to the Board the conditions upona which Doc-
tor Patterson should retire as President of the Institution.



    "First:  That President Patterson be paid 60o of his present
salary of $5,000 a year, in equal monthly 12staJ.l1flents.

    "Second: That President Patterson be designated President
Emeritus of the University and that he continue a njemnber of the
facul ty.

     "Third:  That he be permitted to sit with the Board of Trustees
into its annual and semi-alncual sessions and participate in the
deliberations of the Board mithout a vote.

     "Fourth: That he be recognized as adviser to and affiliator
with the Vice President until a new president is elected.

     "Fifth: That he be given the privilege of representing the
University at meetings of the 1sational Associations, Kentucky Teach-
ers' Association, District Associations, County Associations and
High Schools of the Commronwealth, and that when he did so represent
the University all his expenses be paid by the University, but the
privilege of representing the University shall not be exclusive nor
take precedence in such representation over that of the new presi-
dent at such meetings.

     "Si.xth:  That the University rent to President Patterson the
house and premises he now occupies for and during the remainder of
his life for an annual rental of $240,1

     Upon the adoption of the foregoing report, President Patterson
submitted his resignation, to. take effect between January 1, and
June 1, 1910.   I gather from other files than the one referred to
above that President Patterson's resignation became effective Jan-
uary 10, 1-10.

     At a meeting of the Board of Trustees, Uay 30, 1911, President
3arker (who has in the meantime been elected President) raised the
question of the legality of the pact under and by which President
Patterson and the University had been acting up to that time.   Ac-
ikioWledging his responsibility for what he terms the "error" by
which the funds were divested, he asserted that. the Board was with-
ont authority of law to do what it had done.

     The report of President Barker, above memtioned, was referred
to a Committee composed of 2r. Ellsworth Regenstein., ir. T. L. Edelen
and Lr. lylwell Davies.

     On the same day (Ilay 30, 1911), the Connittee, in a signed re-
port, recommended as follovwa

     "We approve the report in full and recommend that the Executive
Committee be empowered and directed to carry into effect the recom-
mendations embodied therein, except as to so much of tihe report as



touches the annual salary now being paid to the President Emeritus.
As to said salary, we recormend that same be continued.   Signed:
T. L. Edelen, Hyvwell Davies, Ellsworth Regenstein.  On motion
this report was unanimously adopted."

     Nothing further seers to have been done about the matter in
question until October 3, 1911, when a committee composed of Messrs.
Clay and Nichols were appointed to take up with President Patterson
a matter of an alleged overdraft in favor of President Patterson on
the last year of service as Presidentiof the University.   This
Committee repo-rted back that they had met with President Patterson,
but were unable to reach an agreement.   Thereupon motion was unani-
mously adopted that "no further payment of money be made by the
State University to President Emeritus James R. Patterson until
this matter is adjusted".

     At a meeting of the Board held on April 12, said meeting being
called for several specific purposes, one of ihich was as follows:
"and to consider action on, reaffirm or appeal the order of the
Board of Trustees made December 14, 1909, prescribing the conditions
of the resignation and retirement of James K. Patterson, as Presi-.
dent of the University.".

     I assume that the W.ord "appeal", as vritten in the orders,
may, without question, be construed to mean "repoal", and that the
Board intended to consider action upon the appointment of President
Patterson as Emeritus , as vuell as to consider the matter of his
resignation.   It would appear so from the use of the words "prescrib-
ing the conditions".

     At this meeting (April 12, 1912), President Barker offered a
resolution that the contract of December 14, 1909, between the Board
of Trustees and ex-president Patterson be set aside and held for naught.

     Some member of the Board then made the suggestion that the action
about to be taken vas an effort to "adjust discordant elements in
the University", and suggested that if action be delayed for a few
hours an amicable adjustment might result.

     Thereupon a committee composed of Messrs. Clay, Davies and
Terrell were by motion appointed to take up the matter and report
later in the day.

     The committee later reported that it had met with President
Barker and President Emeritus Patterson, and that both bad agreed
to this:  "That President Patterson was to have his pension and re-
tain his residence on the grounds at $2o a month, but on the other
band, President Patterson was to give up all official connection
with the University; to resign his trusteeship by the first of June;
to resign his position on the faculty; to resign his position on the



library Committee; to gave us) his office in the library and all
connection with the Libras-; to pledge himself net to criticise
adversely the present adi-nnistration; to be absolutely neutral and
to assist the aiministraiion "  Cn motion of ir. Stoll, the CON-
mittee adopted this report by a vote of 12 to 0.

    However, at a meeting heldo on k-agast 5, a statement was read
by President Patterson in which he refused to comply with the agree-
ment between himself and the Board, of date April 12, 1912.  The
reasons why do not appear in the records, but the President Emeri-
tus, in a writing filed with the papers, says it was because some
of the parties to the agreement appeared not to be acting in good
faith and that the payments were not resumied.

     Thereupon at the same meeting (August 5, 1912), the following
resolution was adopted by a 9 to 2 yea and nay vote:

     "Whereas a special committee -was appointed by the Board of
Trustees of the State University of Xentucky to take up with James
K. Patterson, as President of this University, the question of his
retirement; that the oonmmttee on December 14, 1909, at a regular
meeting of this Board made its retort vwnich was adopted and which
was as follows: (See supra resolution of date December 14, 1909.)

     "INow, therefore, be it resolved that the Whole of said report
or resolutions be set adide and held. for naught as of this date."

     I have emphasized the words "as of this date" simply because
it appears that these w-ords aere hot in the original, but were
added by way of a motion to amende d And, digressing from a mere
rdoita1 of the facts, we may here say that this action fixes be-
yond doubt the time of the cancellation of the agreement of Reeem-
ber 14, 1909, and so far as we see this may now be dismissed out
of any discussion.

     Resuming our statement:  it Y.as then moved by INr. Stoll that
the proper officer be directed to issue a check to President Patter-
son for the amount 61 his allowance.  M.1r. Terrell moved that the
notion be postponed until some action was taken in the courts.
?or. Terrellts motion prevailed.

     However, I find that the minutes of the Executive Cormnttee
in the meeting April, 1912, shoves the -ollovnng:

     "Upon motion made, seconded and unanimously carried, the money
due Dr. James R. Patterson, on his retiring allowance, shall be
paid him wvhenever he sends to the Chairman of the Executive Cbm-
mittee, to be herded to the Board of Trustees, his resignation as
a member of the faculty; his resignation as a member of the Library
Cokmittee, and also a statement of relinquishment of his claim to



an office in the Library Building on the campus.   The chairman of
the Executive Committee, 11r. Nichols, will furnish him a copy of
this order."'

     In 1913, an effort was made to reopen the original question
of Doctor Patterson's annuity by petition, wherein it was asked
that Doctor Patterson be reinstated to his annuity.   The matter
was referred to a committee composed of Rr. Davies and 2.r. Carpen-
ter, who later reported that they were unable to reach any conclu-
sion, "and asked to be excused from any further connection vith
the matter",

     In 1914, the Board of Trustees appointed another committee,
of which Senator Camden was a member.   Senator Camden fell ill
and the matter was dropped.

     On December 20, 1918, Doctor Patterson submitted his claim
by way of statement, holding that the University owied him nine
monthly payments of $300 each, from October 11, 1911, to June, 1912,
inclusive, v.hich amounted to $2,700 and interest thereon for five
years, fourteen months and fifteen days, amounting to $870.75, the
total claim being $3,570.75.

     No action seems to have been taken on the claim by the Board
of Trustees .or the Executive Committee, but it appears that at a
meeting of the Executive Committee, on July 17, 1918, the matter
of the claim was taken up and discussed and referred to the Attorney
General for an opinion.

     The foregoing seems to be undisputed facts. They are comas_
pletely borne out by the records, as shown by excerpts furnished
me, and I assume them to be accurate.

     The questions propounded to me by the Comnittee are as follows:
(a) Did the Board of Trustees do a legal act in granting the pension?
(b) If they did, was the pension annulled by their act of October 3,
1911, and can interest and additional payment be called for from
that date? (c) If they did not act.legally, is it incumbent upon
Doctor Patterson to return the amount paid to him?

     To these questions, Er. Stoll adds the following: (d) Does
the University owe-Doctor Patterson the amount of the account which
he has filed with the Board?

     If I should undertake to answer the question marked (a) in
the form in which it is asked, I fear that my reply would be in
the negative.   However, I shall not answer that question but shall
look to the entire matter from the beginning and see What is the
real question.   W7hat I mean is:  That if the question is whether
or not the Board acted legally in granting the pension to Doctor



Patterson, I should say that We inov of no law authorizing the
Board of Trustees of the University to grant a pension to any person.

     The words "Pension" Land "annuity" have crept into the records,
then it appears to me that the payments made to Doctor Patterson
were not pension or annuity payments, but from the resolution were
payments made for services rendered or to be rendered.   By that
resolution, he (Doctor Patterson) vwas to be and become an officer,
President Emeritus; he was to continue a member of the faculty;
he v.as to be a member of the Board of Trustees, without voice; he
was to be a counselor and adviser, and he vwas to represent the
Board or the University in National, State and County meetings,
educational in their nature.   \ith these provisions in view, I
cannot conclude that he vas to become in lawv a pensioner or a re-
ceiver of an annuity.   He had services to perform, and in the
absence of a shoving to the contrary, it must be assumed that he
performed such services as might be required of him.

     Without recourse to the law on the subject, it occurs to me
that the Board, in its discretion, had the right thus to employ
4octor Patterson.   Certainly it had the power to employ him as a
member of the faculty, and to do all other things that are indi-
cated by the resolution.

     Awhile I shall not attach =mch importance to the fact, the
Statute (Section 46-c6a, subsection 16) provides that the Board
shall have power. to appoint presidents, and under this they might
appoint a President Emeritus, but under the clear provisions of
the statute, they have ample authority to employ or to appoint
"professors, assistants, tutors and other officers, and to determine
the salaries, duties and official relations of each".

     It may be naturally assumed that the appointment of Doctor
Patterson was made under this statute, rather than under a notion
that a pension should be granted him or that there was an attempt
to grant to him separate and distinct special emoluments, as de-
manded, by the constitution and as discussed in the case of Barker
vs Crum, 177 Klentucky, 637, Which case I think has no application
here.   The point I am trying to make is that the words "pension"
and "annuity" have no application here, because the contract essen-
tially comprehends service on the part of Doctor Patterson.   That
the salary received by Doctor Patterson from the University w7as
based on some consideration wras at least manifest in the minds of
some of the Trustees.   I have a copy of a letter (official) written
by President Barker, Professor Crabbe and Dir. Cassius ,4. Clay, jr.,
in which the following expression advances the idea that there was
a quid ro quo:   (To Doctor Patterson)   ""We rejoice, however, that
while we lose your services as President. we vwill still have you
with us as President rmeritus and as a member of ,he Board of Trus-
tees and that vie may in the future still draw upon the fountain of



of vwsdom and experience that has been so potent for good in the past."

     There is no question before me as to whether or not the salary
was too high or as to whether the services, if rendered, vwere or
were not sufficient to require the payment of the annual stipend.
Nor do I think we should discuss the question as to thether or not
the contract for life was a legal one, this since it is apparent
that the contract now stards rescinded and the liability was rec-
ognized by all parties during the time which it was alive.

     Without going further into details and making this vriting un-
necessarily lengthy, I express the opinion, that the contract -wth
Doctor Patterson was legal and could well be sustained.

     (2) I am clearly of the opinion that the contract or agreement
was not nulled by the action of the;Bcard on October 3, 1911.    In
the records I find that some contention was made about an over-pay-
ment of salary to Doctor Patterson while he vas President, and it
was ordered that no further payment of money be made to Doctor
Patterson until the matter was adjusted.   The matter to be adjusted,
I assume, vas the making good the alleged overdraft.    The further
payment of money obviously referred to the payment of the salary
to Doctor Patterson.   So the agreement vas recognized at this time.

     At the session of August 5, 1912, a motion was made to (then)
rescind the contract, and, apparently in order that there be no
question as to when the rescission was to be effective, the original
motion was amended to read "as of this date".    This clearly recog-
nized the agreement as effective until that time.    In fact, no
positive action is shovw prior to that date, so I conclude that the
agreement stood unrepealed and was not vacated until August 12, 1912.

     (3) The foregoing conclusions seem to answer fully the inquiry
as to whether or not miy repayment of money theretofore paid Presi-
dent Patterson be returned by or demanded of him,

     (4) In the account filed by Doctor Patterson he asks for 42,700,
being nine monthly installments of W3OO each.    Under the agreement,
Doctor Patterson was to receive hP250 a month.   If he is only entitled
to nine months pay, it would appear that he should claim only 02,250,
but I note in his account he says "It had been agreed that the $3,000
be paid in ten monthly installments instead of twelve".    I do not
find any such agreement in the copies of records furnished, but assuir-
ing his statement to be correct he is entitled to I~2,700.

     (5) I am inclined to think the iayment of interest should be
denied.   The claim vws no doubt disauted in the best of faith, and
Doctor Patterson vwould hardly be equitably entitled to it.   Again,
if payment wlas delayed, it vas by officers of an arm of the State
Government, and the State should not be made to suffer by reason of



the laches of its officers and agents.   Further, it appears that
an adjustment Of the matters were at one time had, and Doctor Patter'
son for good reasons perhaps declined to abide the adjustment: hence,
he would not in law be entitled to the entire claim for interest.
I suggest a payment of the $2,700 if it will-stazid as a quittance
of his entire claim as presented.

                                        Very respectfully,

                                              Charles H. Morris,

CMli-ALD                                         Attorney General.

     (6) The Secretary of the Comnittee then presented a letter
from Mr. John }S. Downing regarding the bond for the trusteeship of
the George Peabody Fund, which was as follows:

                                   Lexington, Kentucky,
                                        February 6, 1919

Honorable R.. C. Stoll,
     First and City Bank Building,
          Lexington, Kentucky.

Dear Sir:

     Eeferring further to our conversation, if you ,All look up
Section 611 Kentucky Statutes you vwill see that it is not necessary
in ordinary procedures for a trust company to give bond, their
capital stock being considered sufficient.

     In this case I can see no reason why it is necessary particu-
larly as the bonds are to be registered in the name of the Trust
CoMpany as Trustee for the University of Kentucky.   I- am sure that
you will see it in the same light as I do.

                                         Yours very truly,

JED: MOS                                     John E. Downing.

     Section 611 reads: When acting as executor, administrator,
guardian, trustee, receiver, assignee, cormittee or curator., or in
any other capacity in which the duties, powers, liabilities, rights
and compensation are fixed or regulated by law, or under the control
or supervision of the courts, it shall be subject to the same duties
and responsibilities. have the same rights and powers, and recieve
the same compensation as is allovwed to individuals holding or exer-
cising similar offices or trusts, except that upon all bonds re-
quired to be executed by such corporation in or before any court



the capital stock shall be taken and considered as the only security
required for the faithful performance of its duties; and no other
security sh'l. berequired unless the court or officer in or before
whom the bond is executed, or some party in interest, dermand it.

    Afar discussion, a motion was made, duly seconded and carried,
that the matter bereir'd to a meeting of the Board of Trustees
in April for action.

     (7) The Secrutary of the Cozmittee then presented a list of
appointments, resignations, transfers, and applications for leave
of absence, -which he said the President had prepared for presenta-
tion to the Conmrittee for confirmation.  On motion duly made,
seconded, and unanirrnusly adopted, the list was approved as read.
The list follows:


     Appointment of C. S. Crouse as professor of metallurgy in the
Department of Lining Engineering, at a salary of $1,100 for the
remainder of the scholastic year, vwith the understanding that if
his services are satisfactory, the appointment is to be continued -
next year at a salary of Q2,250 a year, effective February 13, 1919.

     Reappointment of 'V. J. Carrell as associate professor of
structural engineering at a salary of 42,000 a year, effective
February 1, 1919.  Professor Carrell returns from the Army to re-
sure his duties.

     Appointment of Miss Pauline Klaren, stenographer in the Presi-
dent's office, effective February 3, 1919, at a salary of $75 a

     Appointment of. J. C. Grimes, College of Agriculture, to an
assistantship at a compensation of 40 a month, for a neriod of six
months, beginning January 1, 1919.

     Appointment of 4. H. McCord, College of Arts and Science, to
an assistantship, at a co",ensation of $40 a month, for a period
of six months, effective January 1, 1919.

     Appointment of hliss Isola George, stenographer in the Steno-
graphic Bureau, effective February 19, 1919, at a salary of 455 a

     Appointment of R. 0. Bate, county agent, Harrison County, Ken-
tucky, at a salary of $166 2/3 a month, for a period of twelve
months, effective February 16, 1919, to be paid $10 a month by the
United States Department of Agriculture, Federal Smith-Lever funds
',jl02.50 a month, and Harrison County, $54 1/6 a month.  This is a