Favored Rigid Supports

Mitchell's controversial magazine article was basically an argument in favor of the existing rigid price support program. He criticized the flexible support plan on the grounds that "no one has yet proved that farmers will make the economic response to price flexing . . . There is good evidence that most farmers will not. Much of a farmer's costs is fixed and much of his property is in sunk investments, in specialized equipment and skills, which force him to keep right on producing even though the price is falling."

Mitchell stated that rigid supports provide a solid base for planning and raise farmers to almost even terms with industry, "I'm not too concerned over charges that 'the inefficient are rewarded' or the farmer is regimented," he wrote. "Farmers have concluded that one of the freedoms they enjoy under production controls--a good price--is more valuable than the supposed freedoms they might have under an unsupported program."

Press Backed Mitchell

Local newspapers spoke out in defense of Mitchell's right to express his views--no matter how controversial. Campus groups praised the professor and denied allegations that he had tried to indoctrinate his students.

Without delay the Board of Regents asked Mitchell's superior, W. V. Lambert, dean of the College of Agriculture, to investigate and report to them as soon as possible. Lambert subsequently opened his remarks to the regents with a powerful statement of principles (see box) which they liked so well that they adopted it and incorporated it in the University's records as a declaration of university policy.

During the meeting Lambert told the regents, "If teachers and research men in our public institutions are to make contributions to social problems, they must have the solid backing of the governing bodies of these institutions. I urge you as strongly as I can to give such backing in this case."

Mitchell was exonerated from all charges and was in fact praised as a "good teacher, honest and courageous."

Nebraska's Principles

The foundation of America's strength is diversity . . .

Under the philosophy upon which this nation was founded, a great educational system has developed and flourished. At its apex is the realm of higher education where the responsibility for furthering the routes of truth and knowledge rests more heavily than in any other area of the educational system. In the realm of higher education the American right to question, to explore, to express, to examine and re-examine, is of necessity exercised continually. Were it not so, our diverse intellectual resources would become stagnant.

The man and women selected by this university . . . are expected to understand both the rights and responsibilities of their positions, including these:

1. The full right to speak as a citizen.

2. The responsibilities of citizenship.

3. The right, as a professional person, to freedom in research and to publication of the results thereof, limited only by the precepts of scholarship and faithful performance of other academic responsibilities.

4. The right, as a professional person, to free and thorough expression in the classroom.

The rights to uphold, to discuss and dissent are the moral fiber of America's greatness. They are likewise the strength of a great university.