EDITORnThomas FlemingnMANAGING EDITORnKatherine DaltonnSENIOR EDITOR, BOOKSnChilton Williamson, Jr.nASSISTANT EDITORnTheodore PappasnART DIRECTORnAnna Mycek-WodeckinCONTRIBUTING EDITORSnJohn W. Aldridge, Harold O.J.nBrown, Samuel Francis, GeorgenGarrett, Russell Kirk, E. ChristiannKopff, Clyde WilsonnCORRESPONDING EDITORSnJanet Scott Barlow, Odie Faulk,nJane Greer, John Shelton Reed,nGary VasilashnEDITORIAL SECRETARYnLeann DobbsnPUBLISHERnAllan C. CarlsonnASSOCIATE PUBLISHERnMichael WardernPUBLICATION DIRECTORnGuy C. ReffettnCOMPOSITION MANAGERnAnita FedoranCIRCULATION MANAGERnRochelle FranknA publication of The Rockford Institute.nEditorial and Advertising Offices: 934 NorthnMain Street, Rockford, IL 61103.nEditorial Phone: (815) 964-5054.nAdvertising Phone: (815) 964-5811.nSubscription Department: P.O. Box 800, MountnMorris, IL 61054. Call 1-800-435-0715, innIllinois 1-800-892-0753.nFor information on advertising in Chronicles,nplease call Cathy Corson at (815) 964-5811.nU.S.A. Newsstand Distribution by EasternnNews Distributors, Inc., 1130 Cleveland Road,nSandusky, OH 44870.nCopyright © 1991 by The Rockford Institute.nAll rights reserved.nChronicles (ISSN 0887-5731) is publishednmonthly for $24 per year by The RockfordnInstitute, 934 North Main Street, Rockford, ILn61103-7061.nSecond-class postage paid at Rockford, IL andnadditional mailing offices.nPOSTMASTER: Send address changes tonChronicles, P.O. Box 800, Mount Morris, ILn61054.nThe views expressed in Chronicles are thenauthors’ alone and do not necessarily reflect thenviews of The Rockford Institute or of itsndirectors. Unsolicited manuscripts cannot benreturned unless accompanied by a self-addressednstamped envelope.nChroniclesnk II A G A I I N E OF A M E I I ( Ik N C U IT U t En4/CHRONICLESnVol. 15, No. 4 April 1991nPOLEMICS & EXCHANGESnOn ‘Martin LuthernKing, Jr.’nFor a short while recently, I was persuadednthat the reports of plagiarizingnby Martin Luther King were mistaken.nWhat persuaded me was the letter fromnJon Westling, acting president of BostonnUniversity, in the January 1991 issue ofnChronicles. Perhaps because I grew upnin a time when dishonesty was lessnrampant than now, I tend to accept asntrue (or at least honest) such unequivocalndeclarations as “Not a single instancenof plagiarism of any sort hasnbeen identified.” Unless things havenfallen apart, one has to believe annassertion like that, coming from a mannin Wesding’s position.nBut things have fallen apart. Aboutnten minutes after I was persuaded bynWestling’s letter, I learned that it was antissue of falsity. That is, I read thenarticle on King by Theodore Pappas.nPoor Westiing! It was a grotesque misfortunento have his letter appear in thensame issue as Pappas’s demonstrationnthat King committed plagiarism galorenin his doctoral dissertation. I almost feltnsorry for Westling, being shown up sonbadly, but as they say in boxing, he lednwith his chin.nAnd what a punch Pappas landed!n— William BowennDobbs Ferry, NYnThe article by Theodore Pappas in thenJanuary 1991 issue of Chronicles suggestsnthat Jon Westling of Boston Universitynwas either complicit in a coverupnor incompetent in the pursuit of thenfacts regarding the King plagiarismncase. These charges are grossly unfair.nI was the dean of the School of Theologynwhen Martin Luther King, Jr. wasnpursuing doctoral studies in the GraduatenSchool. L. Harold DeWolf and S.nPaul Schilling were first and secondnreaders respectively of King’s dissertation.nDeWolf is deceased and Schillingn(retired in 1969) now lives in Maryland.nDeWolf was also the major professornfor Boozer, whose dissertation isnnncited in the recent article.nWhen Ad Interim President Westlingnreceived a communication fromnJohn Shelton Reed regarding a forthcomingnarticle on King’s dissertation,nWesding contacted me for any informationnI might have about the allegednplagiarism. I had never heard of such anthing. I telephoned Professor Schillingnon May 28. He assured me that De-nWolf and he had read the dissertationnwith care and to his knowledge thisnkind of accusation had never beennraised. (Schilling was not on the facultynwhen Boozer wrote his dissertation.) Inadvised Jon Westling of my conversationnwith Schilling. Also, I suggestednthat the Center for King Studies innAtlanta might appropriately be informednof the allegations.nJon Westling directed the University’snlegal counsel to inform Mrs.nKing’s counsel about the allegations.nAt or about that time Westling got inntouch with Clayborne Carson at Stanfordnand the latter unambiguously deniednthat there was any plagiarism innKing’s dissertation. Reed was so informed.nThe upshot of all these effortsnwas that no evidence by anyone — notnby Reed, or Carson, or Schilling, ornMrs. King — supported the allegadonsnso far as President Westling or I knew.nIt was on the basis of this lack ofnevidence that Jon Westling wrote hisnletter to Chronicles.nWhatever evidence has been forthcomingnsince last May is a matter to bendealt with on its own merits, but the AdnInterim President of Boston Universitynhas in no way been involved in anyn”cover-up” or “incompetence” or falsificationnof history. In fact, as soon asnthe story broke in the Wall StreetnJournal this fall, he acted promptly innsetting up a committee of investigation.nIn May both Westling and Inbelieved that the rumor of plagiarismnhad been laid to rest as just that. Likenothers, we were startled to learn thatnquite another scenario of facts andnaccusations had been evolving allnalong. I trust that this correction of thenarticle in Chronicles will clarify Jonn