EDITORrnThomas FlemingrnMANAGING F;DIT0RrnTheodore PappasrnSENIOR EDITOR, BOOKSrnChilton Williamson, Jr.rnEDITORIAL ASSISTANTrnChristine HaynesrnARTDIRKCTORrnAnna Mycek-WodeckirnCONTRIBUTINC; EDIlORSrnlohn W. Aldndge, Harold O.J.rnBrown, Katherine Dalton, SamuelrnFrancis, Ceorge Garrett,rnE. Christian Kopff, Clyde WilsonrnCORRESPONDING EDITORSrnJanet Scott Barlow, JohnrnShelton ReedrnEDITORIAL SECRETARYrnLeann DobbsrnPUBLISHERrnAllan C. CarlsonrnPUBIJCATION DIRECTORrnGuy C. ReffeftrnCOMPOSITION MANAGERrnAnita FedorarnCIRCUI .ATION MANAGERrnRochelle FrankrnA publication of The Rockford Institute.rnEditorial and Advertising Offices:rn934 North Main Street. Rockford, IE 61103.rnEditonal Phone: (815)964-5054.rnAdvertising Phoire: (815) 964-5811.rnSubscription Department: P. O. Box 800,rnMount Morns, IE 61054. Call 1-800-877-5459.rnEor information on advertising in Cliwindes,rnplease call Rochelle Frank at (815) 964-5811.rnIt S. A. Newsstand Distribution by Eastern NewsrnDistributors, Inc., 1130 Cleveland Road,rnSandusk>-,OII 44870.rnCopyright © 1993 h The Rockford lastitute.rnAll rights reserved.rnChronicles (ISSN 0887-5731) is publishedrnmonthly for $24 per vcar by The RockfordrnInstitute. 934 North Klain Street, Rockford.rnIE 61103-7061. Seeond-elass postage paidrnat Rockford. IL and additional mailing offices.rnPOSFMASTER: Send address changes tornChronicles, P. O. Box 800, Mount Morris,rnIL 61054.rnThe views expressed in Chronicles are thernauthors’ alone and do not necessarily reflectrnthe views of The Rockford Institute or of itsrndirectors, llnsolieited manuscripts cannot bernreturned unless accompanied by a self-addressedrnstamped envelope.rnChroniclesrnVof 17, No. ^ March h)’)3rnPOLEMICS & EXCHANGESrnOn ‘Boston Universityrnand Martin Luther King’srnPlagiarisms’rnIn his review of the first volume of ThernPapers of Martin Luther King, Jr. (Opinions,rnNoveiTiber 1992), Theodore Pappasrnerrs in asserting that Boston Universityrnwas part of the effort to “whitewash”rnthe plagiarism in King’s Ph. D. dissertation.rnMr. Jon Westling, who was thenrnpresident ad interim of the university,rnwas among those who took the King papers’rneditor, Dr. Clayborne Carson, atrnhis word when he said he and his colleaguesrnhad found no evidence of plagiarismrnin the dissertation.rnThe rumor that Dr. King plagiarizedrnsome unspecified part of his dissertationrnfirst reached the university in Mayrn1990, when Professor John Shelton Reedrnsent the university a copy of what purportedrnto be a forthcoming article inrnChronicles. Even though the article offeredrnno specifics, Jon Westling respondedrnimmediatelv by asking me torncall Clavborne Carson. I did and reportedrnDr, Carson’s unequivocal assurancesrnthat the rumor had no foundationrnin fact. Mr. Westling nonetheless followedrnup by contacting all the livingrnmeinbers of Dr. King’s dissertation committee,rnas well as other members of thernfaculty who taught Dr. King when hernwas a student at Boston Universityrn(1951-1955), and asking them if theyrnhad any idea what lay behind the rumor.rnFinally, he began the laborious process ofrnreviewing the dissertation to search forrninstances of plagiarism from an unknownrnsource.rnThe short-term result of these effortsrnwas that we found nothing to contradictrnDr. Carson’s claims. Mr. Westling subsequentlyrnwrote back to Professor Reedrnand said that if he had specific evidence,rnhe should reveal it, and if he didn’t haverne’idence, he should refrain from makingrnsuch serious allegations. Reedrnreplied that he was withdrawing the article.rnFour months later, with no further noticernand without citing any evidence,rnChronicles printed the still unsubstantiatedrnrumor that Dr. King’s dissertationrnwas plagiarized. Mr. Westling subsequentlyrnwrote to vour magazine withrnthe facts as they then appeared. His letterrnexplicitly said that “if you or anyonernhas evidence . . . it should be presented.”rnMr. Pappas now quotes that letterrnout of context to make it appear thatrnMr. Westling was among those willingrnto bend the truth to protect Dr. King’srnreputation. Mr. Pappas is fully aware ofrnthe actual sequence of events. His deliberaterndistortion of the record in thisrninstance (and how many others?) taintsrnhis demand for a more forthright accountingrnof Dr. King’s career as a plagiarist.rnHis review is a reminder thatrnthere is more than one way to be intellectuallyrndishonest.rn—Peter WoodrnAssistant ProvostrnBoston UniversityrnMr. Pappas Replies:rnBoston University has apparently learnedrnnothing from its embarrassing correspondencernof two years ago—when itrnsent for publication in the January 1991rnChronicles a letter claiming “not a singlernreader has ever found anv nonattributedrnor misattributed quotations, misleadingrnparaphrases, or thoughts borrowed withoutrndue scholarly reference in any of itsrn[King’s thesis] 343 pages.”rnI closed my January 1991 article withrnsoine simple logic, that no inatter howrnthis matter played out, B. U.’s reputationrnhad been seriously damaged. B. U.rnofficials either knew about King’s pilferingrnand deliberately withheld the evidencernor were incapable of detecting thernplagiarisms in the first place and remainedrntoo incompetent to find themrnnow. These were and still are the onlyrntwo possible conclusions.rnThanks to Mr. Wood, we now know itrnwas the latter. Apparently Jon Westlingrnwasn’t lying—he truly was incapable ofrnfinding the plagiarisms, even after “thernlaborious process of reviewing the dissertation,”rnwhich produced “nothing torncontradict Dr. Carson’s claims.” Mr.rnWood apparently believes that he doesrnhis university credit by highlighting thernineptitude of its administration. Howrnreassuring this defense must be to B. U.rnstudents and their parents, alumni andrnfaculty.rnMr. Wood calls the job of detectingrn4/CHRONICLESrnrnrn