Part III: Antarctica and Academe - Scott Polar Research Institute

September, without saying why. Second, the Fellowship was divided and the
meetings at which the issues had been raised had been acrimonious. {Whose fault
was that?]. Furthermore.the Association did not have the final power of
interpretation of its Articles. "It is to avoid further acrimony and to safeguard what
we conceive to be the constitutional rights of the Fellowship that we have decided to
pursue our petition to the Visitor, with the aiom of obtaining an authotitative ruling."
Finally they had been advised that in connection with the proposed resolution about
costs, they had been advised that the payment of the legal costs referred to was a
matter for decision by the Visitor, not by the Association.
Elsmore, writing on 15 February, in response to The Cardinal's solicitor, informed
him that a member of the University's Law Faculty, "who has considerable
experience of advising on, and dealing with matter of, University and College law
and practice to prepare a submission to the Visitor a comprehensive Opinion on all
the issues raised by the petition and the correspondence. It would deal with "(a) the
powers and duties of the Visitor of a College; (b) the nature of the legal questions
raised by the petition; 9c) the way in which the petition has now been handled, and
(d) the procedure that ought to be followed before the Visitor gives his decision on
it."
On the same date Elsmore wrote to me a letter, copied to all Fellows but not to John
Holifield. He was most disturbed by the situation and the likely outcome of events
in the coming months. Even if the re-election of Holifield were confirmed at a future
meeting of the Association, it would be extremely difficult for him to operate without
radical changes in the attitude towards him of myself and some other Fellows. "The
present hostility is apparent to us all" [but not eh hosility towards me?!} Unless it
should change a satisfactory working arrangement would be impossible both for him
and the College. If he was defeated, he would be advised by his lawyer to appeal to
an Industrial Tribunal for unfair dosmissal on the grounds that undue pressure put
upon him had rendered him unable to perform his dutiesproperly. Or he might
resign before the election and pursue a similar claim. Both courses would involve
the College in adverse publicity, with considerably more expense and cause more
division within the Fellowship. In pursuing the course of action first brought to a
crisis by my letter to him in March l988, "the die was set and all attempts by some of
use to break it have so far failed." This was a travesty of the truth; the die was set by
Holifield declining to take his complaint to the Association as he was entitled under
his conditions of service, presumably because he judged that the Fellowship would
not accept his claims.
He went on to write that he believed the Fellowship should try to conciliate "by
taking steps immediately to remove the pressure [on Holifield} , reduce the acrimony
and attempt by every means possible to achieve a just solution." We must get help
for Holifield and reorganise the Office and expand the staff. [ This was something
that Holifield had been asked to consider but had steadfastly resisted up to now].
The aspect of the Working Party that was concerned with scrutinising the past
should cease. It seemed to him "that the College has very serious problems. I am
sure we should all pause and think again of what is the best solution for the College
360