Woodrow Wilson & The Jackass

When I saw the email pop up in my inbox from Princeton University Library Special Collections, I hoped I was about to find out what Woodrow Wilson’s least favorite professor had to say about him. This was the professor whose son Wilson fired from the university, in what the editor of the Woodrow Wilson Papers calls the greatest controversy in Wilson’s tenure as president of Princeton. This was the professor he badmouthed for decades. This was the professor a 19-year-old Wilson called “the jackass.” 

I’d been reading the personal correspondence of Henry Clay Cameron, longtime professor of Greek at Princeton, with his son, Arnold Guyot Cameron, a future professor of French there. The Camerons are two of the most colorful characters in the whole of the Wilson Papers. But the letters I’d been reading were part of the little known archive of the Cameron Family Papers at Princeton University. In one letter, written April 17, 1893, the elder Cameron begins to reveal his thoughts on Woodrow Wilson, and specifically on the professor-turned-president’s book about the Civil War and its impact, Division and Reunion. The letter in the collection was truncated; the last sentence of the last page began as follows: 

“Prof. Wilson’s ‘Epoch of US History’ – Disunion and Reconstruction (sic) is rather sharply criticized in The Nation. I read the article today but had already formed my opinion by an examination of the work in the College Library. A Southern man is hardly qualified to...”

And thence the letter abruptly ends, the final pages of the letter missing. A Southern man is hardly qualified to what?! I wanted to know. To analyze the Civil War? To vote on matters of concern to the North? To speak knowledgeably? The beginning of Cameron’s thought did not sound like a compliment was on its way. 

I had written Princeton to ask if the problem might be a simple error in the digitization of the collection, as I was reading it in an online format. The extremely helpful librarian had told me it was a 50-50 chance that the problem was with the digitization. We both hoped the team that had scanned the letter might have accidentally missed the final page. But the email read: “I am sorry to say that it looks like that is the entirety of the letter! I wish I had better news.” 

Thus we have Woodrow Wilson’s thoughts on Professor Cameron, but only a fragment of Professor Cameron’s thoughts on Professor Wilson and his book. But the story of Woodrow Wilson and the professors Cameron is one of the least told and most entertaining in the whole of Wilson’s career as a student and then professor and ultimately president of Princeton.  

 

Hated for his politics

One of the reasons Wilson, a Democrat, hated Henry Clay Cameron, a Republican, was his politics. The story of this Greek professor, who was viewed as pedantic, boring and persnickety at least by Wilson and his friends, begins with a vehement argument between Cameron and Wilson's father in the lobby of the Princeton Hotel on September 11, 1876. Wilson's dad, Dr. Joseph Ruggles Wilson, was a slavery-supporting southern Presbyterian minister, and Cameron was a Radical Republican at a time when that meant supporting equality and the vote for African Americans. Wilson would go on to write scathing articles opposing the vote for Blacks. When the subject came up of whether the so-called "Solid South" would ever depart from its loyalty to the Democratic party, sparks flew.

The following is from Wilson’s diary as a sophomore at Princeton University in 1876:

“September 11th Monday. Immediately after breakfast I went to the hotel to see father before his early start. We met Professor Cameron in the hall of the hotel and father had quite a discussion with the jackass on the southern question. He is one of the kind of men that have rent the country and are the curse of the South. He is one of those who says that he was born in the South and knows all about it when they know less than a two year old baby. Such men are a scandal to leaders, as Macaulay said of Croker. Father left on the 9:45 train. I accompanied him to the Junction. It was chilly and rained all day.”  

Apparently the argument culminated in this exchange of bitter one-liners:

CAMERON: I am happy to say that I was never in the state of South Carolina.
WILSON'S FATHER: I have no doubt, Sir, that the state of South Carolina reciprocates.

Wilson’s future brother-in-law, Stockton Axson, who himself would become a professor at Princeton, provides this detail in his memoir, Brother Woodrow: A Memoir of Woodrow Wilson (1993). He says Joseph Ruggles Wilson's retort was "prompt" and "dignified but stinging.” In the footnotes of the memoir, editor Arthur S. Link says the allegedly bigoted northerner was “undoubtedly” Cameron. 

The “southern question,” in 1876 Reconstruction politics, was usually the question of whether the “Solid South”, which voted consistently Democratic, would ever vote Republican. Six years after the event in the hotel lobby Wilson would answer that question by saying that the south would absolutely vote Republican as long as the Republicans stopped insisting on the vote for African Americans. 

 

Hated for his teaching and preaching

Cameron’s politics were not, however, the only reason Wilson hated him. James Axtell, in his book The Making of Princeton University, lists Cameron first on a list of “some of the worst” Princeton professors in Wilson’s day:

“According to the shrewd analysis of Dean ‘Billy’ Magie, [a contemporary of Wilson’s at Princeton] the older underperformers on the pre-Wilsonian faculty seemed to outnumber the younger stars … Some of the worst were:
“Henry C. Cameron ’47: Presbyterian minister and pedant with an ‘almost encyclopedic’ knowledge of Greek grammar and vocabulary. Assuming that his students were ill-prepared for anything better, he made them ‘parse, and parse, and parse,’ line by tedious line, which naturally ‘killed any interest in Greek as literature.’ For which offense “disorder was rife in his classes” and the sophomores regularly destroyed his hat … On the last day of class, the students would steal his felt hat, cut it into pieces, and distribute them as souvenirs.”

In the days following the argument at the Princeton Hotel, Wilson’s diary was full of complaints about Cameron’s teaching and preaching. (Cameron was also a Presbyterian minister and gave sermons on campus.) Here are some highlights of Wilson’s diary.

“[September] 15th Friday. … Made two recitations to Cameron on Demosthenes De Corona, which recitations he made very stupid as usual.”

“[September] 19th Tuesday. Went into recitations with Packard[,] Hunt and Deffield in all of which I learned something which is more than I can say of all my recitations. In Cam[eron’s] I learned nothing.”

“[September] 25th Monday. Went into Greek Testament and Greek recitation with Cameron twice by both of which I was much bored. Studied Greek during the morning. Immediately after dinner having nothing else to do and feeling very little like reading or any kind of confining work I loafed around very generally … and then was bored by Cam for an hour.”

“[October] 8th Sabbath. Got up about 8:45 and ate a late breakfast—not alone however. Went to church this morning and heard a sermon from Cam. He preached in his usual dull style.”

Wilson was not the only classmate to consider Cameron a jackass. Axtell’s book features a drawing of Cameron with the body of a donkey, made by one of Wilson’s friends. Cameron’s reputation for schoolmarmish eccentricity preceded Wilson. In the days when James McCosh, university president from 1868 to 1888, first arrived at what was then the College of New Jersey, Cameron was in charge of lending books at the library, which was at the time open only one day per week and had a desperately small collection. Still, says Thomas Jefferson Wertenbaker in his book Princeton 1746-1896, even with such skimpy resources, Cameron “somewhat grudgingly” opened the library each Monday “to hand out a few volumes.” With such a library policy, Wertenbaker observed, “there would not be much intellectual life on campus.”

 

What were Cameron’s politics?

Yet there was a political dimension to Wilson’s dislike of “Cam.” In November of 1876, two months after the incident at the University Hotel, one of the most notoriously disputed presidential elections happened, as Republican Rutherford Hayes virtually tied Democrat Samuel Tilden. Cameron made a speech for the Republicans, which Link said, in perhaps a significant understatement, was “not reverently received.” Wilson doesn’t mention this part of the festivities in his diary, which Link says “suggests he did not listen to the Republicans.” He did, however, record others of the day’s events in his diary, noting the tense relations between the campus Democrats and Republicans: 

“Last evening and all day today the returns have come in heavy for Tilden. From today’s outlook we might judge that Tilden was elected. I sincerely hope that it may be so. This evening we Democrats had a large bonfire around the cannon on the campus and fine speeches in honor of Tilden’s supposed election. The bonfire and jollification was appointed to take place at 7 1/2 o’clock but about that time reports arrived that Hayes had carried the Union by a majority of four votes in the electoral college. This report made the Republicans jubilant and they immediately got up a procession and tried in every way to demoralize us—jeering at our fire etc. But later in the evening more encouraging reports were received and with confidence once more restored we proceeded with our Democratic demonstration. Our bonfire was a perfect success and the speeches from … Democratic speakers were some of the best that it has been my good fortune to hear.”

 Cameron stayed a devoted Republican, as his own papers attest. On November 15 1892 he wrote his son an analysis of another hard-fought election, in which Democrat Grover Cleveland lost to Benjamin Harrison: 

“It is raining hard as I write and will prevent the great Dem. Parade tonight. I am sorry for them. As to the election do not blame the Tribune. The Democrats are as much surprised as the Republicans. Outside of N.Y. I was of the opinion that it would be a close contest – a Waterloo I did not expect. If you will take a map of the U.S. you can easily understand it. 

"1. A solid South (159 votes) where the Republican party is practically disfranchised, the whites ostracized and the Blacks terrorized. 

"2. New York City ruled by Tammany who are nearly all foreigners with a State (stolen?) and laws as to elections, naturalization and registration made a farce of. Even respectable Democrats who know the facts do not condemn the crimes but even enjoy the fruits. 

"3. N.J. and Conn. are made Dem by the overflow from N.Y.  

"4. Chicago overwhelmed Illinois. 

"5. The general desire for cheap goods as if free trade would produce them, and abundance of money as if the free coinage of silver would give that result. 

“I am not sorry they have the Senate now that they have Pres. & House. They will not dare to carry out their platform.”

 

1899: The Wilsons dish the Camerons

Seven years later, the Camerons would begin appearing in the letters of Woodrow Wilson, now a professor at Princeton himself, and his wife Ellen. By this time Cameron's son Arnold Guyot Cameron too had joined his father on the faculty of Princeton, teaching French. If the gossip in Princeton is to be believed, it seems Guyot Cameron was getting married to a woman of whom his parents did not approve. The Wilsons' letters are uncommonly catty and dishy, as the Wilsons refer to the elder Cameron couple as “the old people,” make fun of the way Guyot Cameron walks, and describe the family’s patriarch as “wicked.” The series of four letters is so entertaining and amusing it is worth reprinting the sections on the Camerons in full: 

July 3, 1899
Ellen to Woodrow:

“[And where do you suppose I went today? To the Guyot Cameron's.] Everyone is rushing to see them, and exhorting everyone else to rush, for a singular though good natured reason. It is because the old parents are behaving scandalously about it; they actually refuse to speak to either their son or his wife; and for no reason whatever except that they were madly determined that he should make a ‘brilliant marriage’!--which, I am informed means that he should marry a rich any rich New York society girl. It seems he was engaged to this girl for years,--ever since he was a professor at Miami College (she is from Ohio) -- and has been trying in vain all this time to get their consent, and postponing his marriage solely on that account. He is supposed to feel this sort of thing more keenly than the average American because of his Parisian training; for in France, it seems, it is actually against the law for even mature men to marry without their parents’ consent. So it seems we have a ‘stage father’ among us too. I believe it is the only thing Mr. and Mrs. Cameron ever agreed upon--a fine one on which to begin!”

 

July 6 1899
Ellen to Woodrow:

“Had rather a shock last evening from a most terrific thunder-bolt,— the worst I ever heard. I was sure the house had been struck …The bolt, I learn today, struck Mr. Guyot Cameron's house and knocked down a chimney. His parents will probably consider it a ‘judgment’ on him for his disobedience, It was rather a trying experience for one's honeymoon,--but doubtless it only afforded him a golden opportunity to show her how brave and ‘noble’ he is.”

July 16, 1899
Woodrow to Ellen:

“Your letters are infinitely interesting, my love. I have just read the one about Guyot Cameron’s marriage, the woman he married and their home. It is better to read your descriptions than to see with one's own eyes. As for the attitude and iniquitous action of the old people, it is unspeakable,-- the crowning wickedness of their foolish lives, whose very folly has been essentially wicked. It has been some time since I could trust myself to speak of Dr. Cameron himself,--but this is more grossly and unintelligently wrong than I supposed even he could do! It almost makes me resolve to like his son, whom he has so brutally mistreated. Let us hope that his young wife will cure him in some degree of the things we find distasteful in him, and will make him more like other men in walk and conversation. It is hard to think of such a mimic man (and a poor, extravagant mimic at that!) having a tragedy of his own, and choosing the way of love rather than the way of filial submission. But that fact alone invests him with a little dignity, and we must give him the benefit of it,--at any rate in our thought.”

 

July 31, 1899
Ellen to Woodrow:

“I was amused at your vivacity of language in condemning the Camerons, yet I feel more than ever today that they deserve it; Mrs. Cameron is going about talking in the most outrageous way. The sympathy of the community is with her son and his wife now, but someday it will be with her when her reasons are known. Oh, she could tell such things, if she chose, about the woman, but she will be silent," &c. &c. Just think how completely such hints might ruin that poor young woman's reputation. Most fortunately, though she is a stranger, there is someone here who knows all about her; she is an intimate friend of Ethelbert Warfield's wife, they taught in the same school and lived in the closest relations. Needless to add they declare [Guyot’s wife] above reproach or suspicion in character, social standing, &c. Mrs. C. also wrote such insulting letters to her that she attempted to break her engagement, but Guyot prevailed with her. And their love affair began ten years ago!”

 

August 13, 1899
Woodrow to Ellen:

“This dear letter of yours, just received (oh, how your letters fill me up, heart and mind!) is the one which tells of Mrs. Cameron’s abominable conduct about her daughter-in-law. I cannot trust myself to speak of it! Even if all that she intimates about the poor girl were true, she ought to be tarred and feathered for speaking of it. But it goes without saying that what such a she-devil says is necessarily false and conceived in mere malevolence! It is indeed most fortunate that there is someone in Princeton who knows Mrs. Guyot's character and antecedents familiarly and can of knowledge offset the slanders of the false mother.”

 

The controversial firing of Guyot Cameron

When Wilson found out that Guyot Cameron had received a promotion in 1900, he complained to Ellen that it was a waste of university resources and boosted the old guard at the expense of improvement. As Axtell reports, he ranted, “How complete it all is. Not a pound added to our working force; not a name added to our list, or prestige; money saved and second-rate men promoted!” Guyot Cameron’s classes were popular, but his lectures were reportedly rambling discourses on everything but French. He was widely considered eccentric, or (if one asked Wilson’s classmate Magie) insane. Axtell writes, “His faculty photographs show a handsome narrow-eyed man with a full dark beard neatly trimmed, but sporting an ostentatious handlebar moustache and an arrogant tilt of the head. He may have affected the look of a boulevardier among the staidly attired Protestants of Princeton.” Axtell points out that when Link knew him – Axtell says as late as the 1940s – Guyot Cameron wore “a French-like flowing cape, beret, and moustache and was known for his flamboyance and exaggerated manners.” He was also guilty of a level of sexism that Wilson felt had to be called out: Guyot Cameron said in a classroom that “women were good only for raising bread, babies and hell,” as Link reports in the Wilson Papers, prompting Wilson to say his lectures “went beyond the bounds of decency.” 

When Professor Wilson finally became president of Princeton University in 1902, Henry Clay Cameron finally resigned. And not long after that, as early as November of 1903, Wilson’s draft letters make clear he was considering removing his son from the faculty as well. The following spring he began checking with other faculty members about the idea. He fired Guyot Cameron in 1905. Both Axtell and Link in the Wilson Papers do a very good job of covering the controversy. Stockton Axson, who conceded that Wilson’s reasons for firing Guyot Cameron were “all very intangible,” describes talking down a protesting student from going to the newspapers about the firing: 

“I had a visit one night from a student who was a correspondent of one of the New York papers. He came in great anger to tell me that the next day's papers were going to contain an exposure of the whole matter and wanted to know if I had anything to say. I told him exactly what Mr. Wilson's attitude was toward the gentleman and gave him an unimpassioned account of the reasons why Mr. Wilson did not think this gentleman was competent for his position. Rather to my surprise, the student was convinced and, before leaving the room, he told me the articles would all be suppressed. And so the matter never got into the papers.”

But it was stormy internally. Wilson initially told Guyot Cameron in a meeting in the Wilson home that he was going to give him a year to find another job. The French professor became so heated that Wilson rescinded the offer. A member of Cameron’s class told a trustee of the university that Wilson “had ‘hounded’ and ‘persecuted’ Cameron until he had become excited and almost beside himself,” as the trustee wrote in a letter to Wilson. “I told him that those were general terms; and asked him to specify the acts which he called ‘hounding’ and ‘persecuting.’ He said you had attacked Cameron's scholarship. I asked him to specify how you had attacked it. He said by talking about it.” The same trustee was accosted as well by Guyot Cameron’s parents. “Cameron tackled me at Princeton and earnestly protested against what he called an ‘outrage.’ Mrs. Cameron waylaid me outside of Alexander Hall and to use a classical phrased, ‘gave it to me in the neck,’ as a trustee—and I may add, she did not spare” Woodrow Wilson. 

Wilson would eventually relent and give Guyot Cameron the year to find another teaching job, but he never did. He continued to live in Princeton, though he supposedly never set foot on the campus again (“a very difficult feat for any Princeton resident,” Axtell notes). He sent all of his many sons to Yale, at which he had taught beginning in 1891. Link speculates the children attended Yale on scholarship. Though the family fell on hard times, Link says, Guyot Cameron would destroy food baskets left on the back porch because he refused to accept charity. Guyot Cameron did eventually do some writing for the Wall Street Journal and other financial publications, Axtell adds. 

In 1911, the year Wilson began as governor of New Jersey and the year before he became president of the United States, Guyot Cameron wrote a report of his own activities since graduating Princeton as an undergraduate in 1886. 

“I have been ‘out of a job’ for six years. I shall not discuss this, nor the causes of these results. Into that tissue of falsehoods, hypocrisies, hereditary enmities, and personal ones, due to entirely honorable reasons, I shall not go. … In 1905, thrown out of Princeton, I was out. And these six years have been another story, in which many vicissitudes and adversities have been mine, but in which I would not [trade]—I respect myself too much, which is no fatuous remark—with the men who have done wrong and have then lied to cover it.”