Princeton University Returns Small Part of Donation Ensnared in Court Battle

Princeton University last week reimbursed $782,375 to the Robertson Foundation, a fund that endowed the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs

and has been at the center of a dispute between the university and heirs of the original donors, who believe the university has misspent the gift.

The university said it was returning the money because it had provided “inadequate disclosure” to the Robertson Foundation board, which includes four Princeton trustees and three Robertson family members, about how that money was being used.

The relatively modest reimbursement will not affect the continuing legal battle over the foundation, which was established in 1961 with a $35-million donation by Charles S. and Marie H. Robertson, and now has assets of more than $800-million. The current generation of Robertsons say that their parents wanted the money used only for graduate programs within the Woodrow Wilson school, particularly to help prepare students for international jobs in the federal government.

The heirs have sued Princeton, accusing it of misusing more than $200-million from the foundation, and asking that those funds be returned to the foundation so that they can be used for other purposes. The family members are also seeking control of the Robertson Foundation board.

Princeton has denied any misuse of the funds. In November, the two sides argued before Judge Neil H. Shuster in the Superior Court of New Jersey.

Warning About Reaction

Princeton is reimbursing money that were used in a program that supported graduate students in economics, politics, and sociology, academic departments that are “closely related to” but outside the Woodrow Wilson school. The three-year program was discontinued in 2002, the same year the heirs filed suit against the university.

According to The Wall Street Journal, an adviser to Shirley M. Tilghman, the university’s president, warned her in a 2002 e-mail message that a document would soon be sent to the Robertson family detailing the payments for the program, and that the spending would “greatly upset” the family. The university later acknowledged that it revised the document so that the spending wouldn’t be revealed.

Princeton officials said last week that the payments to the graduate students were “fully compliant with the purposes of the foundation and plainly authorized by its charter.” But they acknowledged that they had erred in not telling the Robertson Foundation’s board that the foundation would be paying for the program.

“This is a gesture of good will demonstrating our commitment to good governance and good stewardship in light of the history of concerns over disclosure,” said Cass Cliatt, a university spokeswoman.

Princeton officials said that Ms. Tilghman had instituted changes over the past four and a half years, such as the appointment of an independent secretary-treasurer, to improve governance of the foundation.

Seth Lapidow, a lawyer for the Robertson family, said the e-mail record made this alleged misuse of the money easy to document, but that similar examples will come out in court.

“We view this as the tip of the iceberg,” he said. “It’s really indicative of how they’ve treated the entire relationship between the university and the Robertson Foundation’s money.”