Dear Sir: June 10. 1853.
We have had Dr. Higgins'  [ca]se under consideration; and, inasmuch as, by the [law] ``he shall be subject to removal onlyPage 198 for infi[delity to] the trust reposed in him, or incompetency [in] the discharge thereof''---we think the resolution [o]f removal, not placing the removal on either [of] these grounds, is, on it's face void; and we further think, that any removal, without giving the Dr. a chance to be heard in his defence, on the questions, of infidelity and incompetency, one or both, will be void. Quo warranto, we think, is the way; [an]d we think it some better that he should [h]old on, and leave his adversaries to proceed; but if his holding on would embarrass the institution, he might, without much disadvantage, leave, and commence the proceedings himself. Yours &c.
S T LOGAN