On November 23, 1837, the docent teacher Snellman announced his intention to deliver a series of lectures the following Monday under the title  Akateemisen vapauden todellisesta luonnosta ja olemuksesta (‘The true nature and essence of academic freedom’). However, the rector of the University, Fredrik Wilhelm Pipping, refused to grant the young teacher permission to address such a contentious subject. As a result, Snellman wrote to the governing body of the University, the Consistorium, to appeal against the prohibition.

The Consistorium decided not to intervene, so Snellman made another appeal. When this too failed to elicit a verdict, Snellman asked permission to table the appeal in the minutes of the Consistorium, stating that he had been denied the right to fulfil his docent duties, i.e. to teach. This drew the response that such an objection was of no significance and the appeal was almost certainly filed in the rector’s wastepaper basket.

Snellman’s threatening behaviour led to him being summoned before the militaristic pro-chancellor of the University, General Alexander Amatus Thesleff, who threatened in turn to have him sent to Siberia. Snellman doggedly resisted and his next move was to get permission to print the offending lectures. Meanwhile the University authorities and Snellman were to go head to head on another matter.

As Snellman saw it, the students were a part of the University and both they and the organisations representing their interests, the ‘nations’, were entitled to a degree of autonomy. Indeed, these student organisations had been allowed to select their leaders, but now the Consistorium wanted to name Snellman kuraattori, or head of the north Ostrobothnian nation. Snellman refused, declaring that he was under no legal obligation to take up the position. A number of professors in the consistorium sided with Snellman, but the majority view was that Snellman had no reasonable grounds for turning the job down. The University’s pro-chancellor, and successor to Thesleff, Count Robert Henrik Rehbinder, sent a letter to the governing body, in which he chastised Snellman in no uncertain terms:

"The fact that, from a philosophical standpoint, a will has been expressed to present the student youth with academic freedom, demonstrates a level of thoughtlessness unbefitting an academic teacher […] the orders require no further explanation, only unconditional compliance. Snellman […] has not consented to obey the rector’s decision in the matter. Rather he has had the temerity to appeal, even though decisions of this nature are binding.”

These stern reproaches, coming as they did from on high, did nothing to change Snellman’s mind: he would not accept the position of kuraattori. In May of 1838 the Consistorium decided to take the matter to court, claiming it to be an instance of official misconduct. The University’s lawyer in charge of the case demanded an explanation from Snellman. In his response, Snellman gave the executive body to understand that it had failed to grasp what the University was all about, mistaking it for a mere school. At the end of his rebuttal Snellman recognised that nothing good would come of his response: there remained for him “only one consolation, namely banishment from the University.” Snellman therefore knowingly sacrificed his career at the University in order to safeguard his idea of it.

Many at the Consistorium naturally took umbrage at Snellman’s criticism, and the matter went to court. The case was finally heard in June, 1839, by the Imperial Court of Appeals in Turku, and following a vote, Snellman was ordered to pay a fine. The statesman in the making had to leave the University, but the following year in Stockholm he published his own views on the idea of a university.

Sources:

• Juha Himanka, ‘The University as a Community of Selves. Johan Wilhelm Snellman's "On University Study"’, Higher Education 2012, 517–528.
• Juha Himanka, ”Kuka yliopistoa ohjaa? Yliopistoko itse koulun penkillä?” (’Who governs the university? Is the University itself in need of a lesson?”), from Timo Aarrevaara & Jatta Herranen (eds.), Mikä meitä ohjaa? (’What governs us?’), 2005, 15–28.
• Matti Klinge, Ylioppilaskunnan historia I (’The History of the Student’s Union. Vol 1’), 1967, 59–63. (”Snellman rettelöijänä”, ’Snellman the troublemaker’).
• Ilkka Niiniluoto, ”Akateeminen vapaus” (’Academic freedom’),  rector’s speech, 2004 opening ceremony of the University of Helsinki, from Dynaaminen sivistysyliopisto (‘Dynamic Civic University’), 2011, 223–232.
• Thiodolf Rein, Juhana Vilhelm Snellmanin elämä: Edellinen osa, (’The Life of Juhana Vilhelm Snellman: Part one’), 1895, 113–126. (”Snellman sankarina”, ’Snellman the hero’).