I N T R O D U C T I O N T O V O L U M E 1 5 l x x i x The intellectual governance of the university had to remain outside of Palestine, as that was where Jewry’s intellectual center of gravity lay (Doc. 145). In March 1926, Einstein expressed his astonishment at Magnes’s refusal to retract his version of the minutes. He had concluded that it was “futile” to continue negotiating with Magnes, and he intended to forward the matter to the board for its decision (Doc. 214). After learning of Weizmann’s intention to resign from the Zionist Executive, Einstein expressed the hope that he would dedicate himself fully to the university, thus rendering Magnes superfluous (Docs. 213 and 250). In May, after visiting the university in Jerusalem, Weizmann sent Einstein a highly critical report in which he detailed his unfavorable impressions of Magnes, who was “dilettantishly bungling about” in the Institute of Jewish Studies (see Il- lustration 6). He did not see any way to replace Magnes but was convinced that his “autocracy must be broken” (Doc. 281). In reply, Einstein proposed that “a person with a scientific mind and managerial and psychological predisposition” should function as the permanent representative of the board of governors (Doc. 285). In early July, Einstein wrote to the board calling for Magnes’s removal. He could not continue to be involved in university matters until Magnes’s resignation had been implemented. He stressed that his letter should be treated as confidential to avoid public harm to the university, but then added a note in the margin of the letter that the demand for Magnes’s removal was “retracted” (Doc. 318). In his cover letter to Weizmann, Einstein clarified that he would adhere to his intention not to be in- volved in university matters until Magnes was dismissed (Doc. 319). Weizmann expressed great dismay and implored Einstein to tell him how to prevent such an action (Doc. 320). By the time of his arrival in Bern on his way to Geneva, Einstein had resolved to follow through with his demand for Magnes’s removal (Doc. 326). Thus, merely a little over a year following the inauguration of the Hebrew Univer- sity, Einstein had de facto resigned from active participation in its governance. There followed a four-month hiatus during which no letters by Einstein on this matter are extant. In November 1926, he informed Weizmann that he could not ac- cept reelection as chairman of the university’s academic council because of “the current circumstances” (Doc. 409). No substantial correspondence followed until May 1927, except in February 1927, when numerous newspapers reported that Einstein intended to resign from the board. But Einstein denied the reports (Abs. 760). The correspondence on the Hebrew University in this volume ends with Einstein’s informing Leo Kohn that his involvement was “precluded under the present circumstances.” However, he would not resign formally so as to not harm the institution (Doc. 527).