ORAL HISTORY INTERVIEW
with
ALBERT TEICH

Norfolk, Virginia
[April 7, 1976]
by James R. Sweeney, Old Dominion University

Listen to Interview

Sweeney: This is James Sweeney, the archivist at Old Dominion University. I am happy to be interviewing today Mr. Albert Teich, a faculty member in the School of Business Administration.

The first question, Mr. Teich, is could you tell me about your background. For example, your family background, your early education and interests?

Teich: I'm not too sure exactly what my family background has to do with the Archives of Old Dominion University. However, at this time, I am one of the oddities in that I was born in Norfolk; my mother was a native of Norfolk. I was born in Norfolk on February 22, 1929 in what formerly was called Norfolk Protestant Hospital. I lived here for the first nineteen months. Do you want me to give you my complete life itinerary or what?

Sweeney: Summary of it.

Teich: Well, my father originally was from Brooklyn, New York, He was in the Navy as a Navy enlisted man; met my mother here; lived here for nineteen months; spent much of the next eight years in San Diego, California and Honolulu, Hawaii. Returned here in '37 and basically have lived here the rest of the time.

I attended originally... I graduated from high school at Springfield High School, Springfield, Ohio. I started college at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio and after one summer and a winter semester, transferred to then the Norfolk, what, College of William and Mary, or College of William and Mary, Norfolk. Something like that. Norfolk Division, College of William and Mary then continued on.

Sweeney: Why did you choose to enter the Norfolk College of William and Mary in 1945 and is it true you were only sixteen years old at the time?

Teich: I was sixteen years old; I was homesick. I didn't think I was doing particularly well out at Miami University and decided to come home and to the school here. We'd heard it was good and it turned out to be a most fortuitous transfer.

Sweeney: Do you recall any lasting impressions of the campus during your student years?

Teich: Quite a few. First of all I was just thinking recently, as I understood this question was going to be asked as to how much different our students were back in '47 and '48. While they probably had a lot less money than the students do today, they dressed better, much neater. We were full of returning veterans who were interested in obtaining an education. I think that helped in the academic standards that we had at that time. The university was a small college. It was a very pleasant school.

[2]

The temporary director at that time was a man by the name of Dr. Gray, an English professor. Professors were accessible, probably grossly underpaid. We knew the student body fairly well. Everybody gathered together at Bud's Emporium. It was in what we called the New Administration building. I don't know exactly what you call it now. But it was the main building on the campus at that time. As you will notice in one of your other questions we had a terrible time with parking.

Sweeney: You have perhaps answered this partially already. To what extent did war veterans dominate the student body in those years?

Teich: Well, I believe they were probably in the majority at the time. They were an asset. They were interested, as I said previously, in obtaining their education. There was not a whole lot of fooling around. We didn't have the college hazing. If I am not mistaken, they did away with the beanies at that timer or maybe that was another school. But there wasn't a whole lot of what you call "rah rah" college.

The classes were crowded. The halls were crowded. We didn't have a lot of extra space. But there was a good spirit among the students as such. Maybe not necessarily a college spirit, but camaraderie among the students themselves. I found as a sixteen-year-old, I really had no difficulty with the students who were quite a bit older. Between a sixteen-year-old and a twenty-two or twenty-five year old there's a great difference. They were always most helpful, most interesting, and I think we got along very well.

Going back to lasting impressions, I guess one of the original impressions was of course Dr. Gerald Akers. Dr. Akers every year for the yearbook would, for instance, one year he would put on his blackboard for his picture a statement in Spanish. The next year it would be German. I believe his Spanish statement, (and I am no Spanish scholar, nor a German scholar), but he said Spanish was a beautiful language, and I believe he did the same thing for German. You might happen to notice that. So he alternated every year.

Of course there was no sports to speak of. Scrap Chandler was an institution at the University at that time, as he remained for quite a long period of time. Shortly after I entered I believe Lewis Webb took over as the director of the university. Dr. Gray was sort of an in-between professor.

I also remember a certain history professor by the name of Gordon, who left us, went on to another school. He was quite a little bit of a tyrant with his temper tantrums. I remember particularly in one case where he disagreed with the book and a student tried to say that the book said such and such. Dr. Gordon made a very lasting impression on us at that time, because when confronted with this, he said, "When

[3]

I disagree with a book, I am right and the book is wrong." Those who didn't agree with him, or course, didn't pass his course.

Dr. McClelland was one of our old individuals. He was a cantankerous type of person until you got to know him. But quite frankly he was going through marital difficulties at the time and it made his life very difficult. Most of us didn't know those situations. We later found that out. Dr. McClelland, by the way, was one of our more interesting faculty members because of the fact that he had worked his way up in life. I think he started out in the coalmines of West Virginia. Then eventually worked his was through college and then came over to our school. He was an instructor and finally wound up as Director of the Evening Program before he retired. Of course he's since passed away.

Sweeney: Could you tell me about any student activities in which you participated, for example the International Relations Club?

Teich: I believe we did have an International Relations Club at that time. When the question was posed to me in the beginning I know that we had the World Federalists under Robert Stern. I attended a couple of meetings of theirs. We had an International Relations Club; I was very interested in that. My other one was the yearbook, which was known as "The Voyager" if I am not mistaken.

I was the business manager of that. In fact, I was such a successful business manager, we lost money. I think we lost two thousand dollars. There was very little or no supervision on the part of the school. Ethel Pollock was our, let's see, she was the editor, or Kathy Knight was the editor. At that time we did a lot of work on the yearbook actually at the homes of the various members. It was a very small body of people who worked it out. Again it was one of those nice groups of people where we had a very good time working together.

I believe those were most of my activities. Again being a commuting school, we didn't have a lot of campus-related activities. Everybody took their classes and went home.

Sweeney: Do you recall your letter to the editor in the High Hat, in 1946 complaining about parking problems, and the hostile response written anonymously which censured you for not riding the bus? Could you tell me more about this incident?

Teich: It just simply shows that times change and we never seem to solve our problems. We have parking problems now. In fact I become so aggravated at not being able to find a parking place if I've come to the University and cannot find a parking place, I turn around and don't go to the class that day.

[4]

We've never solved it. I'm not sure that the college or the administration of the University have ever made a serious effort at solving it. At that time the only parking that we had was basically in the lot next door to what I would call the Administration Building. I've forgotten what it's called chemistry and biology labs and that's where Bud's moved over and had the cafeteria. They had some beautiful old magnolia trees there and that was our basic parking lot.

I did not have a car of my own back in those days. I couldn't afford it, but my younger brother, who is ten years younger than I am, had rheumatic fever, and Mother was home with him, so I often had the opportunity to drive to school. We lived at Wards Corner in the Suburban Park Apartments then.

What really brought about that letter was the inconsiderate action on the part of someone, and it happened several times parking in back of a car and blocking the way so you could not get out. So I wrote a letter basically about that situation and yes, the anonymous letter did come in and take me to task for that. It is something I always remembered, but never regretted, writing the letter. I follow the practice of writing letters from time to time to various newspapers when the mood so strikes me,

Sweeney: As you mentioned, you were the co-managing editor and the business editor of The Voyager in 1947. Could you recall your experiences in this position? Were the editors of the yearbook closely supervised by the college administration as to the content of the yearbook?

Teich: No, there was no thought of supervising the content of the yearbook. And to be quite honest with you there was no thought on the part of the people who put the yearbook together to do anything. We were not crusaders. We were not attempting to do anything risqué or put anything in there. We were attempting to basically be a chronicle of the student shall we say, or calm than they have been in recent years. No problem with the administration. The administration was always great. In fact there was no animosity in those days between the students and faculty, students and administration, faculty and ad ministration or anything.

In fact one of the things you will find, then, from what I could see and also from the time that I first started teaching at the University which was not then an independent, but nineteen years ago when I started, was the fact that then there was a very close relationship between faculty and administration. Lewis Webb was always accessible. It was a family. It was then in the forties and I found it to be the case when I returned in the fifties, like a close family.

[5]

None of the, what I would call, the academic bickering, the academic in-fighting.

In fact, I have said in the past that having been active in the governmental political field and having been active in the political field of our University today, the politics in the University are far more vicious than the politics out in the government. Very good relationship with the students and we had a very nice relaxed atmosphere. We had no problem as students with the administration and our yearbook, nor do I remember at that time, as far as our own newspaper was concerned.

Sweeney: Would you say then that the students in general had a positive attitude toward the administration of Dr. Webb?

Teich: Oh yes. Everybody had a positive attitude. You know the Second World War was over and the masses of people for the first time through the GI Bill were able to obtain a college education. We were not as wealthy a country, nor as wealthy a student body as we are today, So the students were there basically to obtain an education. They were interested in getting as much as they could out of the school and paid little attention to such things as the student government and the other activities that maybe the students would pay attention to today. Some people might call it apathy. Others might say that it was a difference in values and what they wanted to do with their lives.

Sweeney: I have read that you pursued a pre-legal course of study at the College. Could you describe this?

Teich: Again remember that we were only a two-year school. We really didn't specialize in anything. You put down what you wanted to do and I said I was going to go to law school, so that was (at least I hoped I was going to go to law school), so that was pre-legal. In those days we didn't have the variety of courses, the choice and selection. I simply took the normal thing. I took degrees that would prepare me to obtain a Bachelor of Arts degree at the University of Virginia because I wanted to go there.

I took courses such as Sociology under Stanley Pliska, who is still with the University; German with Dr. Gerald Akers, Economics, which was a horrible course. A horrible course under a horrible instructor and I only stayed there one year. A little item about that, We found out soon if you sat in the front row or wrestled with him, you got an A. I didn't wrestle so I sat in the front row. The second row got B's; the third got C's. As I say he only lasted a year. I had a math teacher and right now all of a sudden her name seems to slip my mind. She was very good. At that time I was about ready to drop math because I

[6]

am not mathematically inclined. I was going to take Philosophy. Luckily I didn't, because I would have had to have taken it at the University. We soon found out from that delightful teacher that all of our tests came from the homework. If you did the homework, and corrected it and memorized it, you could pass the tests and from her exam, all questions came from the tests. So I simply memorized all th So I simply memorized all the problems and the answers, and luckily, being blessed with a good memory, I passed the course. I think her name was Hill.

We did not have a great variety in courses and selection. So I took basically what we would call a liberal arts course. A core course. The English, the history, the government, and oh, I took science under Robert Stern, It's the only course that when I transferred I lost credit for, compared to government. That's basically what we called pre-legal.

Then I went to the University of Virginia and majored in political science. Now when I say I majored in political science, that was my main major, but I had sufficient hours in many other courses. For instance, in Foreign Affairs, history, and in science, so that I could have obtained a major in that if I had wanted to major that way.

Sweeney: In retrospect do you feel that the two years you spent at the Norfolk Division provided a good preparation for your two years at the University of Virginia?

Teich: There's no doubt about it. They were a happy two years for me personally, and academically they were excellent. Especially in my German, as I had a very good background in German under Dr. Akers and I would say that I am not a scholar and not really even a student of languages. I probably was a little better prepared when I was taking my German at the University of Virginia, than those who had taken the course there. The other courses were fine. I had no difficulties whatsoever in transferring and as I said, they accepted all of my credits except for my credit in Comparative Government. Of course, that was a major subject and the University wanted me to take it there under Dr. Robert K. Gooch.

Sweeney: I imagine there was quite a contrast between the Norfolk College of William and Mary and the University of Virginia in atmosphere, attitude, and backgrounds, of the students. Could you compare and contrast the two institutions?

Teich: Well, of course at the Norfolk College of William and Mary, or the Norfolk Division of William and Mary we didn't have to wear coats and ties to classes, in contrast to that however, we

[7]

at the University of Virginia. You had your choice of wearing a coat and tie or not going to class. The University of Virginia was larger, although at that time it only had about 5500.

It also was full of veterans. Living accommodations were much shorter in supply. But I found that at the University of Virginia you made your friends in the dormitory in which you lived. Or if you were a fraternity man which I was not you made it there. I had no difficulty. The University of Virginia had an excellent faculty. A faculty that was interested in the students. The University of Virginia however did not rank academically in its under-graduate departments as high as it does today. The University has become a very prestigious school, not only in its professional departments, but it's under graduate department as well. Back in the 40's the University was known even then for its law school and its medical school. Its graduate schools were good; its undergraduate was not as strong as it is today.

The school spirit in Charlottesville was, of course, much greater. It was a resident school, unlike ODU, or the Norfolk Division. We had no football team. I've always been a fan, although I don't particularly like football, a fan and advocate of a school having a football team. This is because of the school spirit, which it builds up. In '47 or '48 when I was at the University, the University of Virginia was riding high in its football fame. It was one of the outstanding ones in the nation and we had a lot of color at the University, which we did not have at the Norfolk Division. Both were good, and there was no difficulty in making the change. Maybe I've been accustomed to living in so many different areas, it didn't bother me. Both schools were good in their own way.

Sweeney: After your graduation from the University you taught at Maury High School briefly, and subsequently served as an intelligence officer in the U.S. Air Force in Korea. Would you care to comment on these experiences?

Teich: Well, let's put it this way. After I graduated from the University of Virginia in 1949, by the way you mentioned my age when I went to the Norfolk Division, I was fifteen when I graduated from high school. I decided to stay at the University an extra semester, so that I was twenty when I graduated from the University of Virginia. My family, quite frankly, had run out of money and I did not teach at Maury High School at that time. I went to work selling first of all, hospitalization -Jobs weren't as plentiful, but then I got a job with a Superior Life Insurance Company on what I call a nickel or dime a week selling substandard industrial life insurance. After about four months became assistant superintendent and worked basically there until I went to law

[8]

school in 1950. I had been admitted into the class of September 1949, but we needed money.

In September of 1950, when I did enter law school, the Korean War had started the previous June. So I took one semester and then volunteered for the Air Force, and went on out to active duty in spring of '51. I did go into Korea. At that time I was a very fortunate individual in that I applied for a direct commission in the Air Force. In fact it was in intelligence and I did get it. It may have been that at the time I went for my interview on the commission we were winning the war and thought it would soon be over, so not a whole lot of people showed up over at Langley Field for the interview.

I still chuckle over that because there was a lieutenant-colonel and two majors. I couldn't tell the difference in the rank, having come from a Navy family. I knew the Navy ranks, but not the Air Force. I did get the commission and volunteered for active duty.

When I went for my physical, I had another interesting situation. When we came to the color chart they had and I knew I was going to have trouble with the color chart, so I tried very carefully to listen to what the man in front of me said, and I said the same thing. The doctor looked up at me and he said, "Are you Al Teich's son?" I said, "Yes." He said, "Well, he made a machine for me." My father had made several machines for military doctors. He said, "Tell me, do you want in. or do you want out." I told him I wanted in. He said, "That's good because you just flunked the test; you're in." I'm not really colorblind; I just have difficulty with certain colors, especially blue and green. In fact when I was growing up I thought that most of the green traffic lights were blue, I wondered why everyone was always talking about green lights and red lights.

So that's how I got in the service. I went down to San Antonio, Texas for processing. Went to Colorado Springs to Ent Air Force Base, which was part of old Camp Carson. There was a Strategic Air Command Survival school there and I was in the intelligence wing. I met my wife there, but didn't marry her for another ten years.

My duties in the Air Force at that time was to do research on the people and the terrain of the Soviet Union. I did that and wrote several books on the subject, which, to this day, have remained classified. I chuckle about that because I got so much of my material from unclassified sources. So that was my main duty. We were transferred to Reno and after a short period they opened up their own survival school in the mountains of Nevada. After that I went to Korea and was stationed at Kimbo, which at that time was approximately fourteen miles from the front line, Not what you would call particularly hazardous, but not particularly non-hazardous either. We had our share of excitement, but not as much as someone in the front lines.

I lost a very dear college roommate of mine, who was a pilot and crashed on one of his missions. That affected me quite deeply and still does. We were roommates at the University of Virginia. I often go by our room and recollect what was going on. In fact he wrote a letter to me the day he was killed. He said he was going to run his bomber out of gas and land at our airfield so he could come see me. He was worried about me because I was so close to the front line. But he was the one to be worried about.

[9]

We had attempted guerilla raids every once in awhile. One of our air raids we found the guerillas had in the fields surrounding the airfield put burning arrows pointing to our runways. But they were caught and promptly dispatched. There was very little worry about due process of law on the part of the Koreans. In fact that was one of the first sights I saw when I went into Korea. I had seen the pictures of World War II and my wife had been present at Pearl Harbor. She and her family were machine gunned during an air raid. I saw on the newsreel the destruction of the house we used to live in when we lived there. I saw it burning and I always wondered what it would be like to see a city that had been destroyed by war.

I saw Seoul, Korea. It was a very shocking situation. It had not been destroyed by bombs. It had been destroyed by shells and fire. When you do it that way, the walls are left standing generally. It was basically a deserted city. I would love to go back and see it. It obviously was a beautiful city before the war. It was the first oriental capital I understand, in many centuries that had been destroyed. Usually they fought before and after the capital, but never destroyed it.

Driving into Seoul, we saw another sight that was a little chilling. That was, hanging from one of the bridges, the railroad bridges over the river right there at Seoul, were several bodies of infiltrators. As I said, they did not worry about the niceties of due process of law. If a North Korean was caught, the South Koreans immediately dispatched him by hanging. That time they were caught trying to blow up the bridge and they hanged them from the bridge they were trying to blow up. Again I don't know how far you want me to go into my war reminiscences, I'll cut off anytime you want.

I came back and then went to law school. I worked for awhile because I did get out of the Air Force by January. I worked as a claims adjuster for an insurance company, went back to law school in the summer. In the fall I came down with hepatitis. I got infectious hepatitis from going to a party for underprivileged children. Three of us went to the same party. I was seriously ill. I lost six months there. Then I went to school for about a semester and a half and had a relapse. It was while I was recovering from one of my bouts with hepatitis that I taught at Maury High School. I substituted at Granby and Maury for one semester. And for a semester I taught at Maury in the Social Studies Department. It was very interesting to teach at that time, School's a lot different, I wouldn't teach public school today.

Sweeney: After you entered the University of Virginia Law School, what aspect of the law did you decide to specialize in?

Teich: In law school you really don't specialize, You don't specialize until you get out of law school. The first year of law school you have no electives, At that time we had no electives in the first and second year. The third year we had a few prescribed courses and then you were allowed to take what we call electives.

I did not decide to specialize in any particular course. Early in my third year, I knew I was going to come to what is now ODU to teach. I knew that I would be teaching hopefully in the field of labor law. We didn't have labor law or administrative law so I worked as a student assistant for T. Munford Boyd in creditor's rights. He's the blind professor up there, an excellent professor. Also I worked as a student assistant for Professor J.A.G. Priest who is a professor of corporations.

[10]

Normally if you wanted to specialize in law school you take a couple of extra courses in your field such as taxation or labor law. But in those days you really didn't specialize. You got your job and was glad to get a job and then you specialized afterwards.

Sweeney: Why did you join the Norfolk College faculty in 1957 after you received your bachelor's degree in law the previous year? Was private legal practice unsatisfactory?

Teich: No. I went directly from graduation of law school to teaching. I came to this school to teach and practice at the same time. In fact I was hired with the understanding that I would do both. It was my contention and many people's contention. In fact we had Dr. Everett Hong who was then the chairman of our Business Department; we didn't have a business school. He and I and many others have agreed that a man or person should not teach law unless they practice it. So I went with the understanding that I would teach and practice. In fact I would not agree to anyone teaching law at ODU, without being in the active practice or having been in the active practice. I went there with the intent of teaching and practicing law and I intended to make it a combined career. It's been hectic, there's no doubt about it, but I would not consider specializing or doing either one to the exclusion of the other. I enjoy both. I have found that my practice has greatly enriched my course in teaching. And vice versa.

Sweeney: During your early years on the faculty what courses did you teach?

Teich: My main course has been business law, some people call it commercial law. I did teach labor law for awhile, In fact after I was at the University the first year, I received a supplement .to go out to Stanford University and there I studied under Archibald Cox. He taught labor law at Harvard. I was told by Professor Gregory at the University of Virginia that since he was not teaching labor law that summer, I should find out where Archibald Cox would be and go study under him. Archibald Cox later became the Solicitor-General of the United States. And also was the Watergate prosecutor as you may remember. He also was one of the outstanding labor arbitrators of his time. I imagine he still would be, He was an excellent teacher,

I've taught what we might call administrative law or the legal environment of business, then in the early days we also didn't have enough courses in the business law and I taught at night, to supplement my salary, Introduction to Business. Those have been the only courses I've taught since I've been here.

Sweeney: What were your impressions of the faculty in the School of Business in 1957?

Teich: I wish we had the same faculty now that we had then. I say that. And I also say that when I first went there we were probably a glorified high school. A few years ago I said we had finally reached college status and now we are a university, not in name but in quality.

We have always had a good faculty in our Department of Business and the School of Business. It was a pleasant faculty. We were a very close faculty and worked in harmony with one another. After we grew so big, we lost that harmonious relationship and it's really something I wish we could have, It's wishful thinking of the past. I miss our friendships. I am sorry we had so much faculty in-fighting, jealousy, and shall we say prima donnas? I guess we do, I guess that's the mark of having a faculty qualified. We liked

[11]

each other. I don't think we had more than twenty people in the whole department at that time. Today we have a whole lot more. I sort of chuckle, because I've been there through Everett Hong who left shortly after I came, John Tabb was the dean, followed by Jack Turner, then Ollie Johnson, now we have Ben Perles and I expect he'll go any day. Let's see I guess I've been there through five chairmen or deans of the school. I guess if I stay there long enough I'll see five more or so come and go. . They don't have a long life. Part of that fact is that I really don't think we have a faculty that likes each other at the current time, We may not even respect each other and maybe that comes from having a larger faculty than one with specialists in small fields.

Sweeney: Did you note any changes in the school or the students in the ten years since you had been a student when you began teaching in 1957?

Teich: No. I did not, because when I left there we had World War II veterans and when I came back we had the influx of the Korean War veterans. So I would say it was basically the same. We may have had more girls at our school. We didn't have much more in the line of buildings. We had added two one-story buildings next to the administration buildings, and the old Technical Institute and another old barracks building, a two-story frame building.

As far as the student body was concerned the activism, or what activism we had (I think sometimes our administration and faculty sometimes panicked a little bit too much over any activistic students) we had did not start until the sixties. So there was very little change. It was still a "nice" group of students, and while we were a little larger, we still got along fairly well, and I think we had a good quality. Although I say this, Basically speaking I think maybe the students I'm receiving now are a little better prepared. It could be that my course was a 200 level course when I started and they raised it to a 300 level.

I went there under the instruction of Everett Hong that business law was to be a "weeding" course. I was to teach the course as I saw fit maintaining high standards and not really worry about students passing or failing, in the point that this was going to be one of the courses that "separated the men from the boys". We did it so well, we decided we better put it on the junior level, and we've kept it there ever since. That way, quite frankly, we can demand more of the students and I think we get more out of them, and I hope they get more out of the course.

Sweeney: What kind of pressure did the first-year faculty member experience in 1957?

Teich: Other than butterflies in the stomach going into the classroom, none. None whatsoever. I know what some of your other questions are going to be. I went there without even knowing about tenure, I had heard about it, but didn't worry about it. We didn't have the "publish or perish" which quite frankly, we do have today, whether they say we have it. When I went there we wanted our faculty to excel in teaching. We didn't worry about anything else. We didn't have the money to hire a whole lot of people with terminal degrees. We hired people then that we would not hire today. For instance, Jack Wilsey with his masters degree, a graduate of the Naval Academy, who I don't think they would ever hire today to teach our business math. He was a very good teacher.

[12]

But I felt no pressure whatsoever. We never worried about contract renewal. In fact, we thought a contract would come out in the spring and we waited for it to come. We didn't worry about that or our salary increases. We certainly did not worry about being cut off, given a year's notice or six months notice or 18 months notice, that a contract was not to be renewed. It was a very pleasant place for a young man to come and start his teaching career.

Some may say that you don't force him to work and you don't force him to do the research and the publishing, you won't get as much out of him, and you don't "sharpen" his skills. I'm not so sure that's correct. I am of the school with many of our faculty members, who think a university is primarily for the teaching of the students and not for publication for the gratification of the egotism or the reputation of the university. So I saw no pressure.

As a matter of fact, I'll tell you a little thing about tenure. I didn't even know when I received tenure. I came in 1957 and then everyone started talking about tenure in the late sixties. So I went to whoever was dean of the school and said, "Hey, by the way, do I have tenure?" We decided, "We don't know." So we looked it up. We looked it up and found out that in 1965 when everyone started talking about tenure, Lewis Webb went in and looked up the faculty that had been there a while and granted tenure to just about everybody. It took me about three years after I received it to realize I had it. I never received a letter on it.

So it was a paternalistic situation. If I had a problem as a young faculty member, I could go in and see the chairman of the department of later, John Tabb, who was our first dean. If I felt I didn't really want to talk it over and ask Norma Hamilton if I could see Lewis Webb. I would walk over and say, "is he available?" She would say, "Just a minute." And if he wasn't busy doing something else at that time, sure he was available.

And we could stop and chat. So it was paternalistic. Now as we grew and expanded, I could see that maybe that type of a friendly and paternalistic. I don't use the word paternalistic in a sense that some people would like to pervert it. Those who might be listening to this in years to come. It wasn't where he looked down and patted us on the head. We looked to Lewis Webb as a friend, a confidante, as the head of our school, and a colleague.

By the way, his salary was not much greater than our salary. There was no gulf between administration and faculty that we have today. This has been a most important situa-

[13]

tion. I've always decried that. I don't worry about my salary over there; I supplement my salary here. So we won't talk about mine.

But I bemoan the fact that in many of the administrative fields, and some of the fields where I don't believe they're serving the University that the salaries are far above that we have. I think we've lost sight of the primary purpose of the school. In the early days we all went over there to teach for the benefit of the student. I think we lost sight of part of that as we grew. Maybe that's inevitable as you grow. But that's what happened. But we did have a very happy situation.

I think you've already answered the following question on when you decided to pursue two careers apparently right at the beginning. Have there been any serious problems or conflicts posed by your pursuing two careers, and what has been the attitude of the University administration?

No, I don't think there's been any conflicts in doing it. In fact when I first went there I helped balance the budget for the first couple of years by going out and collecting delinquent bills that they had had for many a year. You didn't have to pay your tuition ahead of time as I under stand you do now, and we had a lot of students who tried to pay and some who didn't. They gave them to me and I think one year I had to collect a couple thousand dollars to pay the bills. I was paid a percentage of my collections - 15%

I have never had any outright conflict from pursuing the two careers. Every once in awhile you hear a rumble from faculty members outside the School of Business. There's a little bit of jealousy for some and some feel that I earn a whole lot of more money than I really do. Yet I would say that many faculty members in our School of Business in particular do consulting work, and earn as much as I do in the practice of law, with less overhead. I found that I've had to work hard to keep it up, because when you run a law office, you have a tremendous overhead that you have to meet.

I started out by the way with my law office over in one of the old buildings. In fact I had my law office and my academic office in the same place. They were very kind to me. In fact they let me have a little cubbyhole to put a secretary in. Then when Dr, McClelland of the evening school moved out of the old two-story building where the School of Business was, they gave me Dr. McClelland's office and there was a bigger room to put a secretary. When they moved me over to Chandler Hall they allowed me to have a double office. It was designed for two faculty members.

[14]

Probably February or March under the presidency of John Ely. At that time we got together again at that old Burrow's Restaurant out on Granby Street. We discussed the fact that we had a $2500 revolving scholarship fund at Old Dominion, then Norfolk Division, and it wasn't being used. People didn't want to borrow; it was a loan fund, Students did not want to repay it.

So I was commissioned to go over and see Lewis Webb in late winter or early spring of 1958 to find out what the school needed, what we could use that money for. He said, "We need an educational survey with that $2500." We, the Junior Chamber of Commerce, got together to find out how we could obtain an educational survey. We talked to Mr. Webb. We talked to some other people and found out that the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, really then the Department of Education, did conduct educational surveys. By the way, my statement about the education department of the government might be incorrect.

So I had been active a little bit on the Democrat side of politics at that time. I was a fan of Porter Hardy, who was excellent. I was commissioned by the Jaycees to go up to Washington and find out how we could get an educational survey accomplished for the least amount of money. Now this educational survey was the needs of Hampton Roads, higher educational needs not lower.

I remember I drove up in one of the biggest blizzards we had. I had a little 1958 English Ford, an Anglia. Drove up there, started knocking on doors, and the federal departments couldn't care less to see me. In fact I was very rudely, crudely, and coldly treated. Stopped over at Congressman Hardy's office, talked to Thad Murray, who was a past president of the Norfolk Jaycees and was then an administrative assistant of Congressman Hardy. He later became an administrative assistant to Congressman Spong and is currently with Congressman Daniel of the 4th District.

We talked about it and Congressman Hardy wrote a letter to the proper person, Dr. Marta Rance was one of them, over in the federal department. Back came the letter saying, "this we have been wanting for a long time, to conduct a survey of higher educational needs in the Tidewater Virginia area." So we figured out what it would take, Our Jaycee organization dealt with all local governments. In fact we had to deal with city council, with Norfolk, then Virginia Beach, Princess Anne County, county boards, the other side of Hampton Roads, Newport News and their cities. Also the state government of Virginia because the contract had to be made between the federal government and the state government. It was quite an experience. We had to raise $10,000. That was our expense.

That survey, by the way, came back and recommended that ODU, or currently ODU, be made independent. Said there was a need for a full four-rear, which we were, degree-granting institution. There was a need for a university in this area. We should be separate from William and Mary.

Other recommendations, by the way, as a result of that survey were used for the establishment of Virginia Wesleyan and for establishing a community college out in Hopewell. We used it to go to the Norfolk delegation of the General Assembly to create an independent school here. As a result I remember

[15]

very well sitting on the floor of the Senate with Senator Breeden. I wrote the law that separated, that originally created ODU as a separate institution. In fact it made it as the Norfolk College of the College of William and Mary.

Lewis Webb called me one day and said that we had to have a bill drawn and he was afraid we weren't getting a proper one. That William and Mary, Chandler was then president would have the bill drawn so we weren't really independent. I sat down and looked at I sat down and looked at the law. Went up to Richmond with Henry Shriver. Shriver and Holland Architects was on the committee. I forgot who else. Amos Camp was then president of the Jaycees. Drove up there and negotiated with Senator Breedon. He said, "Well, I've got the bill right here. We had to sit on the floor of the Senate and change President Chandler's bill to the way we wanted it so it would let us be an independent institution.

We would not divorce completely from it. But eventually we did become a second one. That was not the final separation; that simply made us basically separate in that our departments had no relation to theirs and we were called... Well, basically we were set up under the structure called the Colleges of William and Mary in Virginia and we were one of those colleges. We were responsible to the Board of Visitors of the College of William and Mary, but not to the administration of William and Mary.

That really made us our first independent step. Then of course you know that survey gave us the impetus to become a full independent one. That takes you up to '57 when I became president of the Norfolk Jaycees. I was very active in the Jaycees and the Young Democrats in the 1960 Kennedy election.

My greatest activity with the University, of course, was with the educational survey, which was obviously one of the most meaningful activities I've ever had. I don't think the Jaycees ever received proper credit. You'll find it in the library. I have a couple of copies of the reports, I believe, still in my office. But that is what I would call the foundation stone of our now current independent university. That took us a couple of years of my work at the University.

Sweeney: One follow-up to that. Did you play any part in the final separation of the college from William and Mary in 1962?

Teich: Yes, in the political aspect. I say "in the political aspect" in that the Jaycees were still interested, and we were still dealing with the delegation to the General Assembly. By that time we had built up enough support in the community. In fact, to be quite honest with you, one of the people who was a little quizzical about our further growth was Frank Batten, who later became an outstanding rector of the University. But it was as a result of that survey and the continued push by the Jaycees that we eventually became independent. So I still continued working along that line.

[16]

The only time we had a little bit of pressure was when Dr. Turner came in as dean and he indicated I shouldn't use the University telephone anymore. So I put my own telephone line in.

Then there was some question as to whether I should have a double office when there was a shortage of office space. I had built an apartment house down where the gym is and I just moved my office down to that and used one of the apartments.

Other than the time during the administration of Dr. Turner I had no real problems. I still don't think I see any. In fact the current dean, Dr. Perles, is of the belief also, that a person who teaches law should also practice law. He has been most cooperative in letting me either mesh my schedule or to miss a class here or there to go to court. I try to limit my cases and try to schedule them so they do not conflict with classes.

I know when I first started there was a question about whether or not the bar association would like a person being on the University payroll, practicing law. But that fell by the wayside. I think it's been beneficial for me and I think beneficial for the University. I've become quite well known, I believe, in the community and if there's any need for faculty members to be well known and knowledgeable, fine you bring in things. I will talk about some of the other activities in a short while where I think it's been beneficial to the University.

Sweeney: Returning to your early academic career, did you ever consider going back to school for a doctorate in business management?

Teich: No. I couldn't think of anything worse, to be quite honest with you. I'm a lawyer; I like the law. In fact I love the law. I can't stand most of the business subjects. I have no interest in them, I am interested in law as it relates to businessmen and we tailor it that way.

Law is considered, if you are a lawyer and a member of the association as considered by the AECSB and many other accrediting associations, in the past as basically being a terminal degree. So I never think about going back for anything in the business management field.

Sweeney: From 1957 to 1962, there does not appear to be any mention of your activities in the school publications. Did you devote yourself exclusively to teaching during these years or do you recall any activities I might have missed?

Teich: I'm not too sure you would find a whole lot of my activities in school publications; since that time I have not really found our school publications ever being very comprehensive, expansive, or skilled in covering the activities of all the faculty. In fact one of the biggest things they missed was something I participated in which was basically for Old Dominion University being at the current time a separate and independent institution.

Shortly after I graduated from law school, in fact in September of 1956, I joined the Norfolk Junior Chamber of Commerce and the following winter.

[17]

Sweeney: You've already discussed tenure, so we'll pass then to the next question. Tell me something more about how you became involved with the Norfolk Chamber of Commerce. One of the offices you held was as president of the Chamber, also international commission coordinator for the State Jaycees.

Teich: Well, it's the Norfolk Junior Chamber of Commerce, now known as the Norfolk Jaycees. Elmore Baylor, a friend whom I met while riding a street car to the Norfolk Division when I came back to town, was a member of the Jaycees and invited me to join in September of '57. I didn't do much until that Christmas when I sold Christmas trees. I was a bachelor. Didn't have much to do. Didn't have much practice. Didn't have many girlfriends, having just been back a short period of time, so I sold Christmas trees so well and so long they made me their Speak-up Jaycee Chairman. I did so well with that, I was elected director in April of '58. From there I became active in Alvin Reynolds' campaign for the presidency. I became State Director under him and ran for president the next year. Was defeated by Lenny Freeden. Became state/national director, which was supervision-responsibility for this chapter, then came back to be president of the Norfolk Chapter.

It was called international relations coordinator or international director, and I also wound up becoming Executive Vice-President for the Virginia Jaycees. Became active basically because a friend brought me into it and realized that the Norfolk Jaycees was a training ground for young men. I still am very much in favor of the Norfolk Jaycees or any Jaycee organization. It gives a young man an opportunity of failing and not being fired.

We say that we basically are building young men through community service. That was exactly what I liked. We had a tremendous amount of community service programs going on - our educational survey and others. It's an excellent training ground for young men. So I got involved through a friend of mine and continued because of its interests and the opportunities if offered.

Sweeney: You received several civic awards in the early 1960's such as Norfolk's Outstanding Young Man for 1961, Virginia's Outstanding Young Man for 1962, and the State Junior Chamber of Commerce Distinguished Award. Would you describe your reaction to these awards and assess their significance?

Teich: Naturally, I was very pleased to get them. At that time there was only one man in the city selected, and we didn't have all the other outstanding young teacher, young fireman, young policeman and other things like that. In the state we only had one person - the outstanding young man of the state.

So it was naturally quite flattering to be chosen out, to be selected the outstanding young man of the state or the city for a year, when you know that others are striving for them. Significance is, well, without being flattering, I think it's significant that an organization of young men recognizes the service of young men to their community. They, then, and I hope today, don't just give it to anyone on a popularity contest. It's given on the basis of his community service and his activities.

[18]

I had been active in the Heart Fund, the March of Dimes, the Junior Chamber of Commerce, the Wesley Foundation, of course the practice of law, teaching at the school, a few little business activities of my own at that time. So it was... And it has helped, I think it gave me an extra push in later activities in the political field and I'd say recognition in the bar.

Sweeney: As you mentioned, your community activities were surprisingly numerous for a young faculty member with two careers, and you served as campaign director for the 1963 March Of Dimes campaign in Norfolk and chairman of the Heart Association. What motivated you to become so involved?

Teich: I served as campaign chairman for the March of Dimes, I think, for about five years. Only one or two years for the Heart Fund. I guess what motivated me was for one thing I enjoy civic activities and I was asked. I didn't know how to say no to a great extent at that time. In the Heart Fund I stepped in to fill a position in fact I was chairman of the Heart Fund and the March of Dimes at one time one year. The reason is the Heart Fund chairman dropped out of the picture, and there was an emergency for me to come in. So I stepped in to do that.

I was and still am interested in the Heart Association although I have done very little with it. With the March of Dimes I am still active and I am the vice-chairman. I've forgotten how long I've been with them. I think that I have become even more motivated in t even more motivated in the March of Dimes being a father and learning the blessings of having two normal children and the great possibilities of eliminating birth defects through diet and medical care of a child while the child is still unborn. The possibilities of advancement in the future, and the fact that we have so many children born every day with birth defects.

It's a challenge and you know maybe I can give you a little bit of my philosophy. One day I asked my students what they would consider to be success and what they were looking for when they graduated from school. Of course we listened for awhile and then one student said, "Okay, Mr. Teich, what is your definition of success?" And that put it to me. I gave them a definition that I think it's a good one. I believe that a man is a success if at the end of his days he can look back over his life and say that he's attempted to make the world a better place. You don't always have to be able to see the tangible means of making it a better place, but if you attempt to make it a better place, I think in one way or the other, it's going to be.

That reminds me of a teacher of freshman science I had in high school, who once told me that if you dropped a pebble in the ocean there would be a cause and effect of that on both shores. I thought she said ripples. Well, we had quite a bit of controversy over that. Later I was reminded that she was correct. In the law of physics there would be a cause and effect. I think that every human being has a cause and effect in this vast ocean of life that we have. It can be good or it can be bad. I would like to see mine be good. Through my activities I feel that I have attempted to make it a better place. Successful in some not so successful in others.

[19]

I think I have been very successful in helping to make ODU a separate school and helping it to grow. That is something that will be here long after I'm gone, which I think has been a blessing and an asset to our community and will continue to be.

Sweeney: At Old Dominion you served as president of the Wesley Foundation as you also stated. Did you head this method of student organization or were you the faculty advisor?

Teich: No. I was the head of the corporate body. I was not a faculty advisor and had no relationship basically with the school. It was an organization with the Methodist church. I became active in it because when I was in college at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio, the Wesley Foundation there was a blessing to me. It was my home away from home, Being a little sixteen year old boy away from home for the first time, I got lonesome and homesick.

It was an excellent thing for Methodist students. I had wonderful times there. I have great memories from it even today, and I had hoped we could create a Wesley Foundation at ODU that would be the equivalent of what we had at Miami, We were not successful. We were not a residential school; there was not the need for it, The times and the places were entirely different.

Sweeney: Do you believe that the students of the early 1960's were more responsive to the campus ministry than the students today?

Teich: I don't know. I really don't know. I don't know what campus ministry we have today, as I am not active with it anymore. I believe, yes, but by the same token I myself see a beginning of a revival, not only among young people, but among older people as well, of an interest in religion. That may have come because I also notice people turn to their god at times of difficulty. Here we've had our little recession recently.

I think they were more interested in religious activities in the late fifties, early sixties than they are today.

Sweeney: For many years you have served on the Board of the Old Dominion College and University Credit Union. How did you first become interested in the credit union?

Teich: I sort of chuckle at that because I've been at the University, come September, nineteen years. Therefore I've been on the Board for eighteen years. Professor Sinclair, quite a character at our school, started it at the end of my first year. He was the first president and I was the first vice- president. I was the lawyer, so to get free legal services, they made me the vice-president, made me a director, and I drew up the charter. The article of corporation following what help from our credit union, Virginia League. Sinclair left after the first year of operation and I succeeded to the presidency. I've been there ever since.

I knew very little about it; knew very little about the philosophy of it. Could care less to be perfectly honest, when I first started it. It looked as if it was a good activity and that it could do something for the people and the faculty. I never expected it to grow to a million and a half-dollars in assets as it is today.

[20]

We're basically big business. I have become more interested in the credit union philosophy of helping its members and I think again it has been a good asset to the University.

Sweeney: Could you tell me about the credit union's, well, you have discussed this role on the campus, but the responsibility of the Board to see that sound policies are followed in the management of the credit union?

Teich: Well, of course, the Board is charged by law with overseeing the sound management of it. If we didn't, we'd be personally liable for it. I think that was brought to bear with the collapse of the Norfolk Savings and Loan here several years ago.

Again, as a regional organization we were a very small, very informal situation. We're rapidly growing, in a couple of years we'll be at the two million-dollar level. We have to have, well, we used to keep our books by hand, hand posting. Today it's all done on a computer. We have a computer service that handles it. We get monthly statements and a computer printout twice a month. We have our audits; our bank examiners come in. In the past we didn't even have them for a long period of time. We've become a big business organization.

By the way, the University until just recently was very kind to us, we never paid rent, we used the University phone system. Unfortunately, I think the University or some of the university officials have not been as friendly towards us so we now have to pay rent for our space. In fact I think there has been some effort upon some administration officials even to move the credit union off the campus.

You know, they lose sight of the fact that under the administration of Mr. Webb, that quite frankly, we even made loans to the president of the University or the president of the College. When they didn't have money to pay moving expenses for the faculty members, we made loans. In fact I used to take my bankbook. One time I had two thousand dollars in my savings account and went down to the bank and borrowed two thousand dollars for the credit union; we needed money. I pledged my account; went back; put the two thousand dollars in another account; took it down to another bank; pledged that account book and borrowed another two thousand dollars from another bank so we would have money to meet the needs of our faculty at the University.

Today we have more money than we know what to do with; we've got to find a way of loaning it out, I would say that in the early days under Mr. Webb we had excellent cooperation with the University.

I'm not saying I'm anti-Bugg. I was chairman of the faculty committee that recommended his selection. I think he's done wrong in his dismissal. I think it was handled in an abominable way, but as I told him at the time when he left, "I told you when you came, you were going to stay four years; you stayed longer."

There is no president who is worth his salt and is going to do any work and do any great changes for the University, which I think we needed at that time, who can stay. He's going to ruffle too many feathers.

[21]

He's going to cause too many personal animosities, and there will be too many people out there kicking at him. But I will say this. He has built his administration too high. He's built an administrative hierarchy. He's created a gulf between the faculty and the administration, and either he or I would say (and I don't think he even realizes it) that he has certain members of his administration quite frankly who are unfriendly to the credit union. As a result, we've had a little bit of a difficult time.

Added to our difficulties in the last year, we have weathered it and we are capable of overcoming the difficulty. Now what we have as a difficulty is that we had to move at the time when we are having a business recession. We got caught short of money about two years ago. At that time we had to move, we had to pay for moving and start paying rent. Last year we actually cut back our dividends from 61/2% to 6% and part of it was due to the fact that we had increased overhead because of $150 rent, $25 a month telephone, $25 a month burglar alarm system and fees we had to pay. Our overhead was increased by $250, I'd say, to $300 a month and it came at the wrong time.

Now, of course, we're independent and it probably came as a good thing. We can do as we please. If we want, we could pick up and move off campus. In fact we have even power, that no president would really want us to do it.

Sweeney: How did you first become involved in politics?

Teich: I was born on February 22, 1929. I would say that's how I first became involved in politics. I remember distinctly... I think it's born in you, let me start with that, My maternal grandfather, William Frank White, was involved in Norfolk County politics in a minor way. He was a county constable at one time. In fact he was known as cleaning up Titustown back there many, many years ago. I never had the opportunity of knowing him since he died in the September after I was born in February.

I remember the 1936 presidential election. We were in Hawaii and I remember listening to the radio when Franklin Roosevelt was elected to his second term. I've been interested in it ever since I can remember, even though as a child I always said I was going to be a medical doctor, I always said, "But then I'll be a congressman. The only medical doctor in Congress." It just came naturally. I think all lawyers, not all lawyers, but most lawyers have an interest. If you're going to deal with the law, you're interested in the making of the law, So I just naturally gravitated to politics when I left the University of Virginia and started my practice here.

Sweeney: Could you recall any interesting anecdotes or personalities from your days as president of the Norfolk Young Democrats and District Chairman of the Virginia Young Democrats?

Teich: I certainly do, but since you're going to make me give permission that it be used and since someone may listen to it and since some of these

[22]

people still are living, I don't think I'm going to tell you some of those interesting anecdotes because some are still in the General Assembly and that would be quite frankly damaging to their political career, if it were published. Some day if you want to have a confidential one that we'll keep quiet, I'll say, until all of us are dead, then maybe I'll use that. Yes, anecdotes of course, in the days when I was active in the reorganization of the Young Democrats back in 1960 during the Kennedy election campaign, many interesting activities there. Tom Moss, Joe Fitzpatrick were all active. Binky Taylor, J. Hume Taylor, a lawyer in town were active. Breck Arrington, and some other people.

I remember one time when the moderates had a fight with the liberals and the moderates won, controlling the Young Democrats, It was on my anniversary in fact, my wife and I usually go to Williamsburg on our anniversary and have dinner. I had to come back early because of that election of Breck Arrington. I think he was running against Mike Caprio at that time, who later went back in the Navy. They were running and Allen Reynolds was with us, a lot of what we call the moderate or the conservative Democrats got together and had our friends at the meeting. Breck Arrington, Charles B. Arrington, who is no longer practicing law in Norfolk, became president of the Young Democrats. Tom Moss was president one time, I was, Joe Fitzpatrick was a president of the organization. Even back in those days we had a split between the liberals and the moderates and the conservatives in the Democratic group. I could see then and even more so when I left the party that the Democratic Party here was going to be a party of the liberal thinkers and that eventually the moderates and the conservatives would be frozen out. And they will.

They're friendly at the current time, but the liberal Democrat is a dedicated political creature, who has a long-range goal in mind who will take over. The moderate and conservative Democrat, the ones who have been in control for so long, are not required to struggle that much, so they are gradually being picked off. As a Republican I hope we can get the moderates and the conservative Democrats to come to the Republican Party. We were doing fine until Mr. Nixon and his Watergate situation, and I think that stopped the trend. Whether we'll ever be able to re-do it in Virginia. But I became disenchanted. I realized that I was not a liberal.

Also very much worried about the party loyalty oath. Congressman Hardy retired. I took part in the Democratic primary supporting Jack Ricksey. He lost to Bingo Standt. It bothered me. I felt morally bound, ethically bound to support the nominee of the Democratic Party even though Bill Whitehurst, I felt, was far more qualified. I remember I felt I was very thankful for the secrecy of the ballot box. Even though I did contribute to the Democratic campaign when I got there, I realized that I could not support the liberal candidacy of Bingo Standt because he just did not represent what I believe, that Whitehurst was a superior individual.

I vowed and declared to myself that I would never find myself in that predicament again. In fact, the morning after the election I went to Bill Whitehurst's office at the school and left him a one-word message -hallelujah! And he has that in his diary, he kept it. And it was that

[23]

following winter or spring that I left the Democratic Party at the invitation basically of Robert Doumar, who was a classmate of mine at the University of Virginia. We both discussed the fact. I saw the way the Democrats were going, and I really don't believe there was any position for me in it. If I had stayed a Democrat, I I had stayed a Democrat, I'm sure I would still be in the General Assembly today.

People, unfortunately especially in the black community, still vote as they're told to vote. If you look at the election when I won, first of all the goldenrod ballot did not list seven Democrats, only listed six and left a blank. But still, the seventh Democrat received more black votes than I did, but the blacks were still single-shotting the black candidate. We were all Candidates on the same line. A lot of people didn't know the party designation. When I lost my bid for re-election, the blacks came out on the goldenrod, endorsed seven democrats and they voted in much larger numbers. They voted how they as they were told. They still are not free. As long as they are being told how to vote by a small group of people, they cannot be free. And I've told them this. I won in all the white precincts. If you look at the results the first time I lost, I lost by about 2500; there were 7500 black votes. I came out of the white precincts with about a 5000 vote lead, and lost in the black precincts.

The second time, I lost when I ran for the state senate. There were a combination of factors again. But a tally of the vote showed that I won in the white precincts, and I lost in the black. No one likes to lose an election. You always have sadness about it, especially if you consider you did a good job. And I do.

In my first year in the General Assembly I had more bills passed than several of our other freshman delegates from Norfolk, I worked very well with them and I think I had an impact on legislation. I'm sad about the fact that people still don't vote for the qualified candidate but vote emotions and vote as they're told to. But that's a fact of political life. That's to be recognized. You realize it, and I realized it.

Sorry that I changed? No. I live with my conscience. My conscience is good and I'll be quite honest. I could never oppose Bill Whitehurst. If I were a Democrat, I would have to be opposing him, if I were going to stay one. I couldn't and so I won't.

Sweeney: In February of 1966 you engaged in a topical debate with Michael Bottino of the Geology Department on the topic of academic freedom; specifically the college speakers policy. You stated that the community was not ready for an open campus speakers' policy. "Only a well-entrenched college can afford the luxury," you noted. "At the ODC the administration should have the authority to keep a speaker off campus." Could you provide anymore information on the debate and the reasons for your position? Do you hold the same views today?

[24]

Teich: Al Teich is still here; Michael Bottino is not. That may be a very appropriate comment. Where he is, what he's done, I don't know. The view that I expressed then was a perfectly valid view. We were a fledgling institution, which was relying upon the support of the people. The people in Norfolk at that time were not accustomed to a university with the diversity many of us would call our scatter-brained or hare-brained professors. They were not accustomed to the academic debate which goes on and which did go on in many universities.

No. I would say this. I think that the populace of our area now, the people of our area have become accustomed to having a University in their community. They expect all sorts of radical ideas, intelligible and unintelligible ideas from members of our faculty. We're not as dependent on the support of the community today as we were then. At that time I think we could have ruined our progress for growth. I think we sacrifice some items to achieve greater goals, which were of some import. But at that time it was just exactly what we should have had. I think we needed to get the favor of the people of the community so that we could provide the education for our students. We didn't have a University. We didn't have a full-scale college; we had many people who couldn't go to school because they didn't have the adequate educational opportunity here. If we had indulged in '66 in many of the things we are allowed to indulge in today, I don't think we would have grown. We would have therefore deprived our young people of the education, which I think they needed. And which I think they deserve.

Today we don't have to worry about it. We're bigger, we have more money. Greater educational opportunities that we offer. We can provide the education we need, so now we can seek to educate the people of the area as well as the students.

I don't change my views. Then they were one way; I don't think I've changed them. They were valid then. Today I think that's what we needed then, a little... We had faculty members then, we have faculty members now who would just as soon thumb their nose at Governor, the legislature, and the people of the town and say, "So what. We're here." That's an arrogance on their part, which is a short-ranged view and doesn't look to the welfare of the people at large.

Sweeney: One thing I noted and didn't write down on the list of questions is the fact that you were the chairman of the convocations committee in 1967-68. I wondered what kind of convocations program you were trying to present? Did you have any difficulties in selecting speakers?

Teich: No. I didn't have any difficulty in selecting speakers and to be quite honest with you, I never consulted with the University as to the speaker I would have. I believe also that I had the intelligence to bring in a high quality of speakers.

[25]

For instance one of the speakers we had was a man by the name of John 0. Marsh, Jr. who later became Congressman Marsh and currently is serving as counselor to the president of the United States. We also had Professor Clarence Long - I think he was at the University of Maryland at that time - who is now Congressman Long. I have really forgotten some of the other speakers. I think really at that time I believe I brought in Bill Spong who is running for the Senate. A Republican (I wasn't a Republican then) by the name of Taylor who was running for Senate on the Republican ticket. That year I did not support Spong; I supported the losers. I supported the Democratic primary, A. Willis Robinson and Booth. I supported him for the Senate seat. Times change quite a bit. We had a very good program I thought. I think I was on two years as chairman and I tried to bring a varied program of speakers who had something to offer to the school and to the students and which in turn would give us good coverage in the newspapers and the media in our own area. I think it worked out very well. There were no problems with the administration.

Sweeney: In 1967 you were elected chairman of the ODC faculty senate. What was the faculty senate's function under President Webb and did it play that role effectively?

Teich: You know that faculty senate started out as something I didn't even like. And then when they started the one that had faculty input, my comment was "The administration lets me teach; I'll let them administer. I should care less how they administer." But we had people on the faculty, Leland Peterson one of them, McNally, Stern who wanted to run the school as well as teach in the classes. They haven't changed. Leland Peterson has mellowed at the current time.

I didn't even go on the University Senate - Faculty Senate - in fact I believe I was elected and I was just trying to figure out. Oh yes, the first year I did not even run. The second year I was asked to run. Oddly enough I was asked to run and I was asked to run against Leland Peterson who wanted to be the chairman. He was far-out and I was pro-administration. Basically I still am, although I will tell them where I think they're wrong. I didn't win. I didn't organize properly.

The second time I ran, at the end of Leland's second year we had a very nice campaign going and I had a majority of the senators pledged to me for election and Leland decided not to run. It was only a sounding board, I believe, in the beginning. The beginning of an organization. And it had a good potential. It served to begin to allow the faculty to have an input in matters other than the classroom. And I came to see when I was serving on it, that it did serve a valid purpose. I also saw that there was too great a gulf even then beginning between administration and as we grew bigger, and faculty, and that the faculty had an expertise. The administration basically, historically, was there to serve the University. We could see a trend there and we have it today where the administration treats the faculty in many cases as if they are the peons and we're here to serve.

[26]

What was it in the original European aspect of the university where students went and hired the teacher, finally got so many the administrators to do the work.

So the gulf was beginning. There was a need to have a vehicle to allow the faculty to have input in the growth of the University, the college, in the academic growth. There was a need.

You know this is in history as well as business, unions do not Often go into business organizations where there is a respecting by management of the views of employees and where employees can have a freedom of exchange of information. And they're considered as more than just plain dirt or scum, or disposable or expendable items or commodities.

At that time we were trying to advise. We didn't have much force; it was a beginning. It was a good beginning. I quite frankly would prefer to have a faculty senate today than to have a university senate. I think the faculty lost a large voice in aspect of input. At any rate we were a beginning, a sounding board, an effort to bring the views of the faculty to the attention of the administration in a united faculty voice. I came to respect and understand the need for a good strong faculty organization as an adjunct of the University. As a voice of the faculty, but not exclusive voice in making suggestions for the academic growth of the educational institution.

Sweeney: Did you find many prima donnas in the faculty senate or did the faculty work together on problems facing it?

Teich: I can answer that by saying do you find that every pope of the Catholic Church is Catholic? The answer is yes. Anytime. You still have them. You've got them all over the faculty. And yet I like the idea of having a prima donna. Because a prima donna is one who in great measure states a view, takes a stand, causes changes to be made. Some of them can be aggravating, and some of them still aggravate me. Just thinking of them, I can get aggravated. Some of them make a perfect ass of themselves and I don't see where they have any value. But in many instances you have some good ones, and they have been a benefit to the University.

Sweeney: I would like to discuss the Faculty Senate's role in the so-called "Leland Peterson Affair" in 1969; that is Peterson's role as faculty advisor to the controversial literary publication. How effective was the Senate in protecting individual rights in this case?

Teich: I don't know that I could say that. We were greatly effective. The Gadfly was trash in my opinion. I doubt The Gadfly should ever have been published. By the same token in the Leland Peterson affair, if my mind serves me, we find that his contract was held up. Everyone else got their contract, except Leland and there was a controversy as to whether or not the contract was delayed because of action of the Board, the Advisory Board, or whatever we had, or because of action of governmental officials.

[27]

But I thought at that time that it was trespassing upon a faculty member's academic freedom. I believe faculty members had academic freedom and the withholding of it was an intrusion upon that freedom that we could not have. Mr. Webb was a good friend of mine then; he's a good friend of mine now. At that time I felt that my stand as the partisan, as the president of the Faculty Senate and I did take the part of it and did defend the Faculty Senate's proposal. I think that that did have repercussions in a minor way. Nothing that I could not surmount. I think it might have made a little gulf between Lewis Webb and myself, but at the same token, he was my campaign manager in two elections. We are the closest of friends today. I think highly of him. I think he was a great asset for Old Dominion. I think he got caught between the devil and the deep blue sea and he wasn't really the main party as a culprit. Now, of course that gives me the opportunity of saying that now as hindsight. In those days we weren't sure exactly of what was occurring. It was necessary for the Faculty Senate to take a strong stand, and I believe the Faculty Senate being the united faculty voice in the Leland Peterson affair, did deter similar instances from happening in the future.

Sweeney: What did you mean by your public statement that President Webb had "insulted" the entire Faculty Senate in his handling of the Peterson matter? Have you altered your view since then?

Teich: No. I think he did it. But I think he intended to do it. Lewis Webb has never been a mild-tempered namby-pamby individual. He had a great temper. It is one of his strengths. I admire him for it. And I think he did. But so what? It's a matter that is over with and we all later worked together for the benefit of the university.

Sweeney: In summary, concerning the twenty-three years that President Webb served as the chief administrator of the college could you assess his administration, how successful it was?

Teich: I think it was outstandingly successful. I don't believe that a man of the caliber of Dr. Bugg could have built the college as Professor Webb did. He was known by the people; he was loved by the people in the city of Norfolk - old line people, the powers that be, the silk-stockinged set if you want to call it that, the people who had the purse strings, the people who were in the legislature. He had weaknesses as we all have strengths and weaknesses. But he was the right man at the right time at the right place. And without Lewis Webb I don't think we would have grown as we did,

But Lewis Webb also had another trait. And that is Lewis Webb knows that there is a time and place for every person to step down. Not many men know when the time has come, but he knew. He was wise. I think he could have stayed as President, I think times would have become rough. I think he realized he had taken the University as far as he really could take it. And he really did a great job. The whole community owes Lewis Webb a great debt of gratitude. I am an ardent fan of his. There's no doubt about it. Would never want anyone to

[28]

think otherwise. You may hear others who think he was too paternalistic, too arbitrary, too dictatorial. But they have to remember that when he came in we had what-we had the old school building, one new building that was built with WPA PWA funds, a whole lot of shacks, a small faculty, and he built it into a full-scale school. A man of lesser caliber or different talents I don't think could have done it. We're lucky to have had him.

Sweeney: Would you describe the attitude on campus toward the university especially among faculty as President James L. Bugg began his administration?

Teich: He started under good auspices. The Board of Visitors worked quite closely with the Faculty Senate committee. We went over more than one hundred applicants and vitas. He was our first choice that is the Senate committee. We interviewed him. He had great potential. We thought he was the man to come. He had done a good job. He has the personality defect of being very cold. Maybe shy, doesn't get out. He could have been a great man. He had a great opportunity. He could have been loved if he had had the ability to be loved.

But maybe a person who wanted to be loved couldn't have done the job that needed to be done. The job of changing us from a college to a university. I think he's too bureaucratic-minded. I think a president should do as Lewis Webb used to do - walk the campus. Lewis Webb knew his faculty. Of course he could, it was a smaller one. He was always around. We could stop him on the campus and talk to him; discuss our problem. You don't do that. Even though I think I have access to Jim Bugg's office anytime I want it, I don't see any need in having it. Yet, I am a fan of his. I like him. I see how he can aggravate some people. When he put in basically what I would call the "publish or perish" he made a radical change in the University.

I've had long talks with him. I believe he wants to help the faculty, he wants to work with the faculty, increase it, and he realizes that faculty members, if you allow them, want more and more money to do less and less work. They're normal human beings I guess. He has required more work. And we're getting it. We're getting much more work out of the faculty than we ever did under Lewis Webb, If it's better or worse, I don't know. He had the opportunity of being liked. He also had the opportunity of stepping on toes. He did the job and he stepped on toes.

I don't like the way his resignation was handled. I think the Board of Visitors serves a very sound purpose. Jim Bugg deserved better than they gave him. In fact I even heard of his dismissal before it came out in the news media. That shows how much like a sieve the Board of Visitors leaks. If they wanted him to resign they should have given the courtesy of allowing him to resign later very quietly and go to do something else instead of handling it the way they did.

Sweeney: You have talked about the Faculty Senate Advisory Committee on the selection of the new president. I wondered what amount of input this committee had on the selection? Do you have any recollections of this committee's deliberations?

[29]

Teich: Yes, I remember quite well that I lost money in the practice of law that year because as chairman of the Faculty Senate and chairman of that committee, I was spending a tremendous amount of time on University activity and could not make the amount of money necessary to pay for my law overhead. I think we had over one hundred applications we went through or vitas on individuals. We met with the Board of Visitors committee. Frank Batten was very interested in our selection. We interviewed Dr. Bugg. We were most impressed with him, and I felt we had a very good relationship with the Board of Visitors. In fact I like the structure that we had then much better than I like the structure now. I think there was a greater interchange of information with the faculty than now.

Under the current president that we will be hiring, he'll come in under a cloud of secrecy, even though the three finalists are there. But I think that's most unfortunate. But we had very good cooperation. In fact that was one of the first great cooperative efforts that the faculty had with the Board of Visitors.

Sweeney: Apparently you held high expectations for the Bugg administration, and would you say on the whole these hopes have not been realized?

Teich: They were not realized in that I would prefer the University to have been healed the last year or so of Lewis Webb. Lewis Webb made a mistake of announcing his retirement and then taking a year. Re should have retired and then walked out. He should have simply said, "Ladies and gentlemen of the faculty, I hereby retire." And then let them go with an interim president; a lame duck president always has a difficult situation. We were torn apart; there is no doubt about it. I had hoped that Jim Bugg could feel the rift among the faculty; he's not bee able to do it. He's widened the gulf between the administration and faculty, but by the same token he's increased the quality of the faculty, he's increased the work. I don't think he's done as much to get the money out of the legislature as he could have or some presidents could have. If we're going to balance it, he's been an asset; he's been a good thing to have. Didn't do everything I wanted, but maybe no one could. But I did have hopes that we could have brought the faculty back together to be a harmonious organization. Maybe that's impossible in a faculty of prima donnas.

Sweeney: Do you believe that the faculty's interests are as well represented by the University Senate created under Dr. Bugg as the Faculty Senate under Dr. Webb?

Teich: No.

Sweeney: Could you say why that is true?

Teich: Because the faculty had the complete voice in the Faculty Senate. We didn't have to put up with administrators and students in there. So we could do that which we saw fit or let's say we could act as we saw best for the entire University without having to put up with a whole lot of other people. I served on the University Senate in its first year and I was miserably disappointed. In fact I refused to run for it since. I think there's a certain expertise that the faculty have and can offer that

[30]

it cannot offer as a faculty part of a University Senate.

Sweeney: In 1970-71 you served as the faculty representative to the Board of Visitors from the University Senate. Did the Board of Visitors that year have a good grasp of the faculty's needs and the University's objectives?

Teich: No. In fact we were sort of second-class representatives and whenever we did anything important, we were excused from the meeting. Frank Batten was the strong man on that and basically what Frank wanted, Frank got. Many other members of the Board of Visitors were there in honorary positions and they were not particularly strong. I think we have a better Board now although I am quite frankly glad to see one or two members leaving. They don't know yet that they're leaving, but they are.

Sweeney: You've already discussed your political party affiliation from Democrat to Republican in the early 70's so we will pass to the next question. When did you begin thinking about running for the Virginia House of Delegates and were any individuals influential in your reaching the decision to run?

Teich: I had thought about running for the Virginia House of Delegates back in my days as a Democrat when William Mazel, now currently sharing a law office with me and a professor over at the University and Paul Kaplan came to me, but I didn't have the money; didn't have the backing and did not do it. After I switched to the Republican Party Robert Doumar, chairman of the party, Bill Whitehurst, congressman, Wayne Lustig, second district Republican chairman, all encouraged me to think about running and I guess the fact is that I wanted to run also,

Sweeney: How did the University administration react to your political plans and were they receptive to the prospect of having a faculty member as a spokesman in the General Assembly?

Teich: One of the greatest disappointments I had in my service is the lack of relationship between the University administration and myself in my legislative capacity. First of all, they did not object to my going, but I did lose my salary while I was there. We found that Dr. Robinson over at Norfolk State remained on salary. I did not. There was no cooperation, other than the fact that they said, "You can take a leave of absence if you can find someone to take your place during that time." One time there was an effort to make me take a leave of absence for the full year. I was able to overcome that.

We found the University administration going to Richmond and I didn't even know they were going. In fact it was most embarrassing to hear a member of the General Assembly say, "Oh your president is up here. What's he going to do today?" And I didn't even know that he was coming. I believe that I had the opportunity of helping the University in many situations in the legislative way if they felt inclined to call upon me, but they did not, They did not take advantage of my position, and I think that was most unfortunate.

[31]

Sweeney: Do you think that was because you were a Republican and they were Democrats?

Teich: Oddly enough I don't believe the president of the University was a Democrat. I think that at that time the Rector of the Board of visitors was a Democrat, still is a Democrat. I wanted to bring a law school to the University. The comment of the Rector of the Board of Visitors was, "Oh that's just Al Teich's idea and he's Republican and we're not going to support it." I think the ad ministration may have felt that I was Republican and I couldn't do anything. I could have swung one fourth of the votes with my success at getting bills past and also my success at getting bills killed in the second year, which I found was one of the most important duties of a legislator is to kill bad bills. I think I could have been a greater asset to the University if they would have seen it. I could have also arranged meetings with other legislators and I even suggested that the administration make a concerted effort all year round to meet with those people. I don't know who the new president will be, but I remember one time that I belonged to the Norfolk-Virginia Beach Executives Club. We had an executive vice-president of VPI come to speak at our club. I went up to welcome him and thank him and tell him how much I appreciated the work of Dr. Marshal Hawn with us. He was always there at the General Assembly working. Was highly visible; got what he wanted. Before I could do it, the speaker, the vice-president of VPI got up and introduced himself to me; he recognized me; knew all about my work. VPI maintained, shall we say, a little dossier on the legislators and pictures of them and knew to recognize them by face and know their interests and continued to consult with them and to talk with them. We have never done that at Old Dominion. We'll never get to be successful and to do two things: one, that we do that - we politick on a year-round basis in a subtle way, and two, until we get a law school and start sending law graduates to the General Assembly.

See I want a law school here, not only for the fact of what it can do for our students, but the fact that we'll start having ODU graduates in the General Assembly. The majority of the General Assembly is made up of lawyers.

Sweeney: To what do you attribute your success as a candidate for the Virginia House of Delegates in 1971?

Teich: Well, as I previously said: one, I worked hard. Two, the blacks did not vote in great numbers and those who did single-shotted for the black man on the ticket running for the House of Delegates and then dropped off noticeably for the other white candidates. They had all the candidates on one line; you couldn't tell the difference between party organization. Democratic Party discipline is much greater, has been much greater since my election than it was during my election. As I say again, if you will notice, I win in the white areas; I lose in the black areas.

[32]

Of course the first time I ran we had six people running on the Republican ticket and never had a full ticket after that. I think Republicans must in a multi4member district run a full slate, you handicap your candidate if your don't. Then again many people may very well say I did a bum job as a legislator. I don't think I did. I think my record of legislation being enacted and modified will speak for itself. I will let others look at it that way. I attribute those other reasons as to why I was not re-elected.

Sweeney: How did you arrange your teaching responsibilities to fit your commitment to be in Richmond for the 1972-73 legislative session?

Teich: I hired substitutes. The first year the University paid them and I lost my entire income. The second time I just ignored the University, to be quite honest with you; did not ask for a leave of absence; told them I was leaving and I hired my own substitutes; paid them out of my own pocket.

By taking a leave of absence, you know, my hospitalization, my insurance and my retirement benefits were affected. That was a difficult situation. Made it very complicated. The second time I went up there, since I just left, and had substitutes and paid them myself, I received my salary, paid my substitute and it did not affect my retirement, my hospitalization, or my life insurance.

Sweeney: What attitude did you find to be prevalent in the 1972 and 1973 General Assemblies toward Old Dominion University?

Teich: I think the same thing you find now. It's a nice little school down in that ultra-liberal step-child of Virginia known as Tidewater and Norfolk, Virginia. Unfortunately Dr. Bugg has never had a very good rapport with the Finance Committee. He speaks to them as if he's lecturing to them. Many of them told me they thought he talked down to them. But I did find this. I remember back as a younger professor going up there for consideration on the budget, UVA, VPI, VMI, the Finance Committee, House Appropriations Committee listened intently.

When Mr. Webb went there he was just a president or a director of one of those little schools who were going to get a little bit, and they didn't pay much attention. They do pay more attention to Old Dominion now. Basically we have more representatives down here, and they do give proper lip service to the benefit of ODU. I think the General Assembly is also realizing that we have come of age and we are a quality institution whereas we were not before. We still don't get a just amount; we still don't get our fair amount, and it's going to be a long time before we get it. It's going to be a question of politics.

Sweeney: As a legislator did you see yourself as having a special mission in regard to Old Dominion University? Obviously you were not a liaison man for the administration, but even though they did not give you a great deal of consideration, did you still see yourself as having a mission to perform in regard to the University?

Teich: No. I saw myself as being a representative of the people, and as such I felt I had to represent all the people. Those who voted for me, and those who voted against me. And I think it would have been in violation of my

[33]

oath as a legislator, and the intent and purpose of a legislator if I were to have considered myself, shall we say, as a representative of Old Dominion University. That doesn't happen as far as legislators from other colleges and universities; some do and some don't. When I thought at first when I went up there I could do a whole lot to help the University, but since they didn't really see fit to seek my help, then I devoted myself to other fields.

Sweeney: The criticism has been made that College professor experience a conflict of interests when they enter the General Assembly. I wonder how you would react to this?

Teich: College professors have a conflict of interests just as much as the lawyers who elect the judges of the courts have a conflict of interests, or the lawyers in the General Assembly who practice before state agencies have a conflict of interests. You're not going to be without it, are you? What conflict of interests are you going to have? Are we going to vote more money for our school? Maybe so. But the electorate is going to get rid of those people if they do it too much and maybe that's what the electorate might want. We never got more money and I think you look at my salary being one of the lowest paid full professors at the University and you will find that it certainly didn't feather my pocket as far as finances are concerned. I could have devoted my time to being a department chairman and increasing my salary more than it occurred there.

Sure there is a problem. If we could avoid all of the conflicts of interests, it might very well be a good rule to have that we don't have state employees serving in the General Assembly. I can see a potential there. We have one from Norfolk State, one from William and Mary, one from Mary Washington, a couple of public school teachers, and I think yes, we have several public school teachers, and so whatever conflict of interests is for a college professor, you find it elsewhere as well.

Sweeney: You did stress the idea of establishing a law school in the south Hampton Roads area in your 1971 campaign. You made it clear why you made this proposal. What I would like to ask now is in view of the surplus of lawyers that seem to exist, do you think a law school is still needed in this area?

Teich: Yes. Because you see, one, there are so many students in this area who are qualified to go to law school but cannot because of the expense. Two, there may be a surplus of lawyers and as a practicing lawyer, I would just as soon there not be one, I can make more money with fewer lawyers. Three we also find that you do not necessarily go into practice. You go into many other fields. So four, I feel quite frankly, that we've got to get more ODU graduates in the General Assembly so ODU will be treated as it is supposed to.

I sat in the House of Delegates and I sat with classmates at the University of Virginia. When you start counting the lawyers who were fifty percent or more of the body, and count the fact that most of those came from UVA, then why do you think UVA gets so much money? Now it makes common sense, but to be quite honest, it was a Republican idea. The Democrats did not support and we're not going to get it, I'll tell you where the next one's going to come. The next one is going to be a George Mason University

[34]

where Delegate Jim Thompson, House Majority Leader, wants it. The State Council for Higher Education doesn't want him to have it, but I've said before and I'll say it again, "What Jim Thompson wants, Jim Thompson gets." And the sooner the State Council of Higher Education realizes it, the better off they're going to be.

Sweeney: What would you say were your major concerns as a state legislator and your chief accomplishments?

Teich: Well, it's hard in one term to say you have chief accomplishments and main concerns. The first year you try (the fall is. only a 60-day session) to learn the ropes. I was concerned in the economic area and my main committee was on Health, Welfare, and Institutions. So I played quite a large area in helping in the rewriting of many of the laws pertaining to juveniles and also in the occupational safety and health. We helped quite a bit. Also consumer areas: the dating of milk cartons, the dating of dairy products were all coming about as result of bills which we introduced. Bills which were killed, but we got them done by regulation.

I would say that my main concern was trying to bring government closer to the smaller voter, elector shall we say and to work with them in that right. I think that the main accomplishments the first year was getting certain bills passed, the second year my main accomplishment was to kill bills I thought were not in keeping with the best interests of our people.

Sweeney: What were your chief disappointments in the legislature?

Teich: Oh, I can't say that I had any chief disappointments in the legislature. Maybe the chief one was that I did not have support from the Norfolk delegation to really push the idea of the law school to Old Dominion University. That's one.

Another disappointment is the lack of interest on the part of the University in the professorial delegate from ODU up there in the General Assembly. All in all I found it was a very fine time and I'm glad I went there even though I was not re-elected, it was beneficial to me. I learned, and I accomplished something and I have no regrets.

Sweeney: Did the faculty also exhibit little interest in your career as a legislator?

Teich: No, I think the faculty showed quite a bit of interest. In fact, I found that a lot of the more liberal members of the faculty actually supported me. They were glad to have me there. They were pleased with what I did up there, I didn't get the whole one hundred percent support, but many of the liberal people liked the late Dr. Nixon who one time thought it was terrible that I was going to be elected. Then turned around and supported me for re-election, So I think the faculty was pleased and the faculty would be glad to have another member of the faculty on the General Assembly.

Sweeney: You've already answered this question about your defeat in 1973. Would you cite any other reasons? I wondered if you felt the media lost interest in you as a candidate and say developed a great interest in Evelyn Haley who was running at the same time?

Teich: No. I don't think they developed a great interest in Evelyn Haley. I'll be quite honest with you whether you publish it or not, I think she is

[35]

basically a nonentity. And she's a great failure. She wasn't elected because of her great ability or the fact that she was a woman. She was elected because she was on the Democratic ticket and if the Democrats had thought they were going to be able to pick up my seat, which most of them didn't; they would have run someone with greater capability. And when we get someone of greater caliber than her, this area will be better served. That's a very strong statement to make of someone out of business. By the way I don't consider it a defeat. You are defeated if you knuckle under, I lost an election, but I wasn't defeated. I further the two-party government by running, being elected, and running again.

So yes, the news media did take a less interest. In my first time around I could always get TV and news coverage. By the way, the Democrats complained that it got so much coverage. I worked hard for that coverage. I did not get it in the second go-round. I did the same thing the second time, and the third time, but could not break through on the news media coverage. Could not, because of complaints and other reasons. That's not why I lost, you can't describe any one particular reason. But I will say this, one particular reason, the blacks just voted. I'm not trying to be racist on it, Read the election returns and see what happened in the first election, the second and third,

Sweeney: In 1973 you introduced a bill to create a commission to study the feasibility of compensating victims of crime for losses and injuries. Such legislation was passed by the 1976 General Assembly. What is your reaction to this?

Teich: I would just simply say I was a prophet before my time wasn't I? Not being conceited about it. Pleased to see it. Did I get any credit when it was passed or mentioned this time? No. I was surprised you even knew about it. You did pretty good in looking it up.

It was needed then. It's needed now. I'm glad that it did start I want to make sure that we don't abuse it, Certainly the innocent victim of crime has had to bear the loss and it's time for us to give some help to him.

Sweeney: Since you left the General Assembly, what have been your major interests in regard to the University? Have you been called upon by the President to act as a lobbyist for the University with the General Assembly?

Teich: No. I haven't. My major interest in the University has been basically on our promotion and tenure committees over at the School of Business. Also teaching, and to be quite honest, I have concentrated on my other outside political activities, working very closely with Congressman Whitehurst and his campaign, being the Republican chairman of the city of Norfolk. I feel that at the current time there basically has been no call upon me for my services over there, and I see nothing there that I'm particularly interested in other than teaching. I'm devoting my time to keeping the Republican Party going and practicing law and trying to recoup some of my financial expenses. It cost me about ten thousand dollars a year to serve in the General Assembly. In my own campaigns I spent a large amount of my own money. I find that I have to recoup my financial losses.

Sweeney: What are your aspirations for the future? Do you intend to run for the legislature again?

[36]

Teich: No, I don't intend to run for the legislature again and I'm not about to put on tape what my aspirations for the future are since people are going to be using it for the current time. I'm not being caustic about it, but no one should think if they have aspirations and ideas what should they be, normally a politician is coy about it. I have ideas and I have aspirations, but I'm not about to tell anyone about it now. It's always a question of timing.

Sweeney: As an alumnus of the college, as well as a faculty member, what do you see as the university's mission today and do you believe that the university is fulfilling that mission?

Teich: Oh yes. I think the university is providing educational opportunities not only for the young people of the Hampton Roads area, but also for the young people of Virginia. I think we're going to grow, we're going to become a greater residential school, and I look forward to it, I look forward to us increasing our graduate fields, and I hope that in the future we will have professional schools that will make us truly a university.

I myself would like to see a relationship between ODU and the medical college that we have here. I would like to see a good strong engineering school built. I think it's going to come, especially with the impetus of the Iranian activity, which I hope we still will be able to bring here. In the future other graduate schools of greater import will come. I think we're fulfilling our mission of providing an educational opportunity to the young people, and to the older people. You know those over 21. And I think we'll continue, I look forward to it.

Sweeney: Thank you very much, Mr. Teich.

Interview Information

Top of Page