[. . . ] Professor Adolph Bredesen closed his connection with the college at the end of the academic year 1877-8, and entered in the pastorate of Perry Congregation, Dane Co. Wis. Dr. Anton Sander, who came to the college in the autumn, occupied the rooms upstairs in "Sunnyside" that Mr. Bredesen had used. Dr. S. took his meals with us, and we became very good friends and I enjoyed much of his company during the year, 1878-9, of his stay at Luther. This same fall, 1878, Professor Halvard Roalkvam came to the College. The staff now consisted of 9 members: Larsen, Brandt, Bothne, Jacobsen, Narvesen, Reque, Veblen, Sander, [and] Roalkvam.
[. . . ] October 14th is at Luther College "Dedication Day." It is observed as a holiday and the chief event of the day has been the illumination of the building in the evening. In every window were placed several candles. Three strokes of the bell were the signal at which the candles were simultaneously lighted in all windows. The sight was a fine one, and it never failed to bring out a large number of people to view the spectacle. Many of these came up to the campus, and the number of young people who on these occasions mingled with the students, made the campus a place of considerable gaiety during the evening. Exercises were generally held in the chapel to end up the day, and there would be music and addresses, forming a short program, ending with a short devotional service, such as was usually observed at the close of each day of the week.
In the fall of 1878, there was a movement among the boys to celebrate the day more elaborately than had usually been the case. A mass meeting, or a committee, of the students considered the question of serving refreshments to the visitors who might come. An application was made to the President for permission to carry out this purpose. The request came before the faculty in regular meeting; but objection was raised to the feature of the proposed treat which specified the use of wine among the refreshments. The president asked each member in turn to state his mind, and I for one was surprised to find that some of those first asked were favorably disposed toward granting the request, allowing wine to be served. When my turn came to express myself I objected emphatically to this part of the preposition. Dr. Sander, who was the next to be asked said he agreed with me. We both said that we should consider it very unfortunate if such a request was allowed. President Larsen therefore remarked that in the face of such determined objection he should not wish to grant the petition. Dr. S. and I were then taken to task for being "puritans" and I can not recall what else we were that was objectionable by certain members. But the use of wine on Oct. 14th was not granted.
But the matter was not allowed to rest so simply as all that. Prof. Th. Bothne was at that time acting as secretary of the faculty. When the minutes of the meeting at which the matter was discussed and passed on, as stated, were read as the first item of business at the next faculty meeting, the secretary devoted considerable space to a report of the action. In it he told how certain members, among whom he named Prof. Reque and himself as having emphatically rebuked "professorene Sander og Veblen" for hindering the boys in their liberal project by obstructing it on the ground of puritan and illiberal objection. This was altogether contrary to the usage in the record of faculty meetings. In accordance with this, the minutes simply stated the questions voted upon and the results of the vote. No names were ever entered as to how any one voted, unless there was a specific request to have one’s position recorded, as might be in anyone's entering a protest or otherwise asking to have a record made of a personal nature, and then only by specific action or general consent. Consequently both Dr. Sander and I objected to the form of the record in this case, appealing to the faculty to have the minutes amended. Professor Bothne was directed by the President to rewrite the minutes until the next meeting. He rewrote them, and read the amended version at the next succeeding meeting. But the only change he had made was to change "professorene etc." to "De herrer professorer Sander og Veblen"; and adding one or two further epithets, evidently meant to make the intended rebuke more pointed and emphatic, and leaving his own and Reque’s names as the authors of the rebuke. As neither Dr. S. nor I, nor any other member, said anything further, it is presumed that the records, if in existence, show that Sander and Veblen hindered the use of wine on the campus or in the College on Oct. 14, 1878 and that they were taken to task for this "puritanic" attitude by professors Bothne and Reque.
[. . . ] Dr. Sander became very popular among the students, and by reason of his modest personality and his correct manners and conduct he fully deserved the loyalty and devotion that the boys gave him. But this popularity was not calculated to endear him to some of his colleagues, some of whom regarded him as being too good an American. After the episode in connection with the celebration of Oct. 14, with the accusation of puritanism, this feeling naturally was intensified. During the winter 1878-9 there was a temperance revival in Decorah, conducted by the church people in town. The meetings were very successful and began to attract many of the Norwegians. The participation of the members of the Norwegian church, was of course not relished by the pastors and other leaders of the church; and temperance meetings were started in the church which were conducted by the pastor, to be in accord with orthodox evangelical doctrine and practice. It was by some speakers explained that the “reformed” temperance meetings then in progress in town were proceeding along lines that Lutherans could not approve, and in which they should not participate. One specific objection mentioned was regarding the pledge of abstinence which was circulated for signatures in the general meetings in town. One prominent member characterized this pledge and the whole total abstinence movement as un-Lutheran because they would be "unequally yoked with unbelievers." (2 Cor. 6, 14) -- "drage et fremmed aag med Vantroe." -- Dr. Sander did not agree with this view, and made his position clear in a short speech. Ordinarily his remarks would have provoked some discussion in defense of the stand taken by the church leaders, and would most likely have caused no stir. But his remarks suited the meeting so well that a large number -- it seemed to be the greater number -- forgot themselves and broke out in a vigorous hand-clapping. This was of course an awful desecration of the sacred place in which the meeting was held, and the pastor immediately dismissed the meeting with a very curt rebuke; The occurrence was afterward by some spoken of, with bated breath, as a "scandal," though there were some who thought Dr. Sander was right, and that he at any rate could not be blamed for the impropriety on the part of the applauders. But the incident led to Dr. Sander’s being dropped from the teaching staff at the end of the year. At a special meeting of the faculty, which Dr. S was not called to attend, the president reported on interviews that he and the pastor had had with him; and the result of these were that they did not think he was as firmly orthodox as a teacher of the young men at the college should be, and that the president had better let him know that his services would not be required the following year, provided the faculty agreed. Prof. Bothne said that, so far as he was concerned, he thought we should be excused from discussing Dr. Sander's fitness if there was any question as to his orthodoxy. No one spoke further that I can recall; and I heard later from Dr. S. that he had been told that it would be best for him to begin to look for a position elsewhere. It must be remarked, that Dr. S. had been employed "temporarily," that is only for the year; but if he had been found doctrinally safe (or harmless) he would most likely have been reemployed; for the synod was in need of men and his going away could be looked on only as a serious loss.
I am not sure that the Rev. Mr. Koren was present when Dr. Sander’s case was reported on; but if not then, at another time when Dr. Sander’s case was the subject of remark by the president and possibly others, Mr. K. said he thought Sander was a "søgende sjæl," [searching soul] who was absolutely honest and eventually be found correct in his belief. I received the impression very distinctly, that while Koren did not think Dr. S. unfit on doctrinal grounds, he probably thought his retention on the faculty would have continued to be accompanied by friction due to the character of some of his colleagues. There was no mistaking the disappointment of the students when in the autumn they learned that Sander was not to return; and some were emphatic in their expressions of regret. The same manner of disappointment was voiced by the citizens. But I must record that on occasions when the matter was spoken of to Professor Larsen, in my hearing, while he refrained from finding explicit fault with Dr. S. there was always a distinct and unmistakable note of disparagement in what he had to say.
[SOURCE: “At Luther College” (1887-1881) by Andrew Andersen Veblen (written 1918?), pp. 24-30. Transcription made by Sam Preus (original document in Minnesota Historical Society archives) (32 pcs.) Undated. Luther College Library Archives. Andrew Andersen Veblen Collection. 85:1:1.]
