Part III: Antarctica and Academe - Scott Polar Research Institute

about the decision reached." If true this was because of the misleading leaks and
lobbying done by the opposition.
On 8 June Brading wrote to resign his Fellowship, saying that the decision not to reappoint
the Bursar "was but the concluding act in a carefully orchestrated campaign
sustained over 18 months. Throughout this period Dr. Laws pursued his quarry with
implacable resolve, not hesitating to violate College Statutes and Ordinances,
heedless of the reasoned protests of senior Fellows." This too was nonsense; their
protests were not reasoned in the generally accepted sense and many senior Fellows
took the other view.
On 9 June Robert Gordon wrote to resign his Fellowship, saying that this was a
decision that had grown gradually over the past months. His was a civilised and
friendly letter; although he had distanced himself from the politics, he was clearly
unhappy about the way things had gone. I think that the bitterness, division and
distrust was too much for him and he just wanted a quiet life. I was sorry to see him
go. He had earlier written to say that he would probably vote "'for the defence', but
then we shall each have to act according to conscience and think no less of one
another for that." What a contrast to the behaviour of the opposition! His resignation
was later used with the Press as if it was in protest at my bad behaviour.
There was also a letter from the President and Vice-President of the Combination
Room (CR) Executive, representing the student body. At an extraordinary meeting
of the CR a motion had been passed expressing deep concern at the sequence of
events which had led to the resignations of two of the most prominent members of
the College fellowship. The student body was perturbed by the negative
repercussions this would have on the academic life of the College, and was
disappointed that it could not have been avoided. Although the CR appreciated the
complexity of the issues involved, nevertheless it felt that the resolution of the matter
gave cause for concern about the future of the College. I knew that the critics had
been feeding misinformation to the students to elicit sympathy for their views;
neither I nor (so far as I am aware), my supporters, had discussed these confidential
matters with the students, and so I was pleased that they had not been more
prejuduced against me personally. Their letter was reasonable but I did not share
their concern about the future.
On 12 June Mary Thatcher wrote to resign her Fellowship. She was to retire in
September in any case, but wished to make her protest clear and public. She found
the procedures and methods leading to the Bursar's non re-appointment "lacking in
justiuce, compassion and honour."
Four Fellows had now resigned and two of my critics remained, Elsmore and
Lehmann.
Bernadette O'Flynn, Secretary of the Association and a catholic, wrote to congratulate
me on the way I had handled the meeting. She believed the result was a "major
breakthrough of 50 years of conservative catholicism in the College. I now had
369