Newspapers / Daily Tar Heel (Chapel … / May 5, 1946, edition 1 / Page 2
Part of Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
SUNDAY, MAY 5, ltMS PAGE TWO Now Hear This THE DAILY TAR HEEL ii TU offieUl eipper of thm PsWictton. Union of Um Unry fEtolf aSri EO. wbcre it Is printed daCy. xeept JfTo I2?Pr5 Batd m econd elm matter at tfa port effies at Cbpd Hill. N. C rader ta mes w Harsh 1. 1X7. Solerlptfcm prie fa HJH9 for the cong year. Complete Leased Wire EOBEET MORRISON : WEST If FENHAGEN BILL HIGHT CARROLL POPLIN and BILL WOESTENDIEK BILL SELIG : CLIFFORD HEMINGWAY FOB THIS JACK LACKEY CARROLL POPLIN STUDENT LEADERS FACE GREATER ENEMY THAN EACH OTHER The students to whom this editorial is primarily directed wuj not read it, but perhaps those who will read it will become more aware of what Thursday and Friday's balloting proved to be a major danger in student affairs. - The constitution of the student , body passed by a 66.79 favorable vote (at least 66.67 was required for ratification). This-constitution represented over a year of work by the fore most student leaders, elected by the student body. This con stitution was hotly debated and many times amended by al most a month-long session of the student legislature, and was finally approved by an overwhelming vote of that "represen tative body." An overwhelming majority of the student lead ers approved the 'document, and with one or two exceptions no elected student leader actively campaigned against it.' Even with this powerful array of support, the constitution was passed by a hair-line margin Of those voting, 624 voted against ratification. Does this demonstrate that almost one third of the campus is totally out of sympathy with its leaders, and totally out of sympathy with both of its political parties? We think so, but we do think that our leaders are very repre sentative of those students who are vocal and active m stu dent affairs. It might be said that our leaders are represen tative of the more social-minded students, and of those who are interested in the welfare of the University. To substantiate, let's examine some facts: During the constitutional convention there was little or no vocal objection to having a constitution. The students who disliked the idea of a constitution did not attend the meetings, and did not express their ideas in the student press. When the constitution came up for, campus ratification, all students were begged to vote. Ballot boxes were even taken to their dormi tories and placed in convenient public places. Those who kept the polls often called to passing students to come and. vote. The result was that even the uninformed, the uninterested, and the socially ignorant found little difficulty in checking a ballot. From actual observation of activities around the polls, we think that those who voted against the constitution can be classified as follows: 1) Those who were well informed, but reactionary or of the belief that some particular part of the document was disastrous to better student government. Students like Wallace Murchi son, legislature representative from the law school, are in this category. We do not blame them, we admire them for ex pressing their sincere convictions in the face of strong opposi tion from their colleagues. This group does not include more than a few dozen students, and they were not particularly in fluential in changing other students against the document. 2) Those who were totally ignorant of the provisions of the , constitution, and would not have voted except for the fact that the poll keepers made it convenient for them. They just chanced to vote against ratification; as many like them voted "yes." This group we pity more than blame. They should have attended a meeting of the constitutional convention or should have at least read the DTH's printed copy of the con stitution. If familiarizing themselves was physically impos sible, they should not have voted. 3) Those who were fooled by some of the vicious rumors which were circulated by anonymous persons. This group voted against ratification because they ignorantly thought that the constitution would break down the honor system, or caust their fraternity or sororoity to be controlled by the legislature, or make coeds subsidiary to men in student government, or put fraternities into power, or they believed other such erron eous propaganda. This group is a danger to democracy, for they believe without reason or investigation. 4) Those who are suffering from some anti-social or infer iority complex. Many members of this group envy the stu dent leaders who planned the constitution, but do not possess the initiative or ability to become leaders themselves. They form the potential criminal class in our democracy, and want to tear down anything which is scholarly or masterful, and which offers a threat to their own mediocrity. This group start ed the rumors which the second group believed. The first group mentioned is the smallest of the three, and is a valuable asset to our democracy. The last three must be converted by social reforms, educational programs, and con tact with leaders. Student leaders must spend less time fighting among them selves and recognize the common enemy represented by groups 2, 3, and 4, for those elements always retard our progress, and on occasion they accept the leadership of the fourth group and rise in a revolution, smashing the culture of the Roman Em pire, robbing banks, electing senators like Theodore Bilbo, and destroying painfully constructed student constitutions. Groups 2, 3, and 4 do not run for student offices, they are poorly represented in our legislature and councils, but they con-, stitute a constant threat to student government. The ballot ing on the constitution made us more aware of this ; let's not forget a lesson learned at the price of a several-vote margin . from the overthrow of the work of many unselfish workers. R. M. Serric. of United Press . Editor Managing Editor . Associate Editor Co-Sports Editors Business Manager Circulation Manager ISSUE: . Night Editor Night Sports Editor Columnist Calls for Better Officers Under Constitution By Jack Lackey The University of North Carolina has long been noted for its student self-government. Ever since the doors were first opened here at Chapel Hill the students have been given a great deal of the responsibility of governing their own" conduct. At first, since all the students belonged to either the Philanthropic or Dia lectic Literary Society, the rules of these clubs were used to govern the whole school. Later an Honor Council was set up which was fer many years the whole government, in itself. Not many years ago a student legislature was created, which gradually had more and more authority given to it. Until recently no one was quite sure just what on the campus this legislature did not have control over. Besides these two groups, the students had, over the years, created a Publications Union and a Publications board, a De bate Council, Dance Committee, House Privileges Board, Inter dormitory Council, Interfrater nity Council, and many, many other small governmental bodies. When coeds started to attend the University, they too set up an Honor Council and developed a system of government which was almost as complex as the ne which the men had set up. All these groups on the cam pus derived their authority from the same source, the stu dents, and were recognized by the school administration. Since both the Honor Council and the Legislature had authority from the same source, it was never quite clear where the jurisdic tion of the one left off and the SP Attempting to Regain Former Campus Supremacy By Roland Giduz Some townspeople, faculty, and old timers on the campus such as Joe Travis, Jimmy Wallace, Turk Newsome, Pete Pully and a few others remember the days back in the 'roaring forties' when the Student Party swept the annual campus elections by a land slide, walking off with 90 per cent of the major student govern ment posts. s According to 'old timer' Jimmyf Wallace, the present Student Party was organized in 1938 to provide some competition for what was then thought of solely as a fraternity group, the Uni versity Party. In contrast to the liberality of the present party, which is open to all individuals, and opposed only to 'block' mem bership and voting, the old group was supposedly "in direct oppo sition to fraternities and sorori ties." Mitchell Britt, now a UNC law student, was one of the charter members, of the party, and was elected to its chairmanship in 1940. "The party was then based on an organization of the lower quadrangles," stated Jim my Wallace, who came to the campus as a freshman in the fall of 1940. "Leaders had the party well arranged with district chair men, dormitory chairmen, floor chairmen, and many lesser ward heelers talking the party up so that the campus was completely covered. Membership, however was always completely wide open." Spring elections of 1941 turned well for the incumbent Student Party with their candidate Tru man Hobbs winning the presi dency of the student body, and W. T. Martin, also SP, taking the vice-presidency spot. In one of the most hotly contested races in many years Orville Campbell won by a very narrow margin over UP candidate Louis Harris for the editorship of the Daily Tar Heel. other began. This situation pre vailed all through the student government setup and gave it a tendency at times to be very in efficient. Student leaders have real ized this for some time, and there has been movement on the campus for over fifteen years to write a constitution, a constitu tion which would eliminate these differences and clarify the situa tion. By the narrow margin of less than 16 of one per cent over the required two-thirds vote, the students have at last ratified a constitution. The proponents of this document have called it a great step forward. Its oppo nents have declared that it will mean an end to the Honor Sys tem and that it will ruin stu dent government here at Caro lina. Now that it has passed let us hope that its proponents have been right. In a few weeks the officers who are to work under this Con stitution will be selected. They will have a greater responsibil ity than any of their recent pre decessors have had. Whether or not this new plan of government will work is largely up to them. Let us hope that the men who can do the job best are select ed. Over a hundred and fifty years of student freedom are at stake.' Many veterans recall the ter- rific mud slinging campaign of 1942, when the Student Party fell into a slump which lasted through the war years. Bert Bennett, UP, was elected presi dent in that campaign, followed by another University Party candidate, John Mose Robinson, in 1943. When dormitory organization was injured due to the coming of the V-12 and Pre-Flight pro grams, Student Party- activities virtually lapsed due to the impo tence of their organization. The opposition party was hurt little by the war, due to the retention of fraternities which formed a nucleus for organization, where as the Student Party, with only Steele dormitory' as its head quarters, was faced with the dif ficult task of organizing the town vote. , " Third parties, including the Carolina, United, and United Carolina Parties, sprang up and lapsed, during the declining war years of the SP. "The V-12 and ROTC vote went almost solidly UP through the influence of Navy fraternity men, who influ enced most of the unit to play follow the leader," stated Jimmy Wallace, summarizing U P growth from 1942-46. With fraternities at their peak in 1944, the United Party, which was essentially the old Student Party was defeated ignominious ly, with Snooky Proctor, head cheerleader, their only major candidate who was elected. And Proctor promptly pledged the Moore Thinks Parties Here Are Artificial Dear Bob : Here's the way the stink raised over Pete PuUs nomina tion looks to a newcomer. (Inci dentally, I don't know the man.) The party leaders of both major parties here seem to think that Pully was either a good man or a good candidate. Party loy alty is much more important than school loyalty it seems; otherwise the Student Party can didate might have been an en dorsement of the University Party's candidate. Political parties are ordinar ily based upon differences of opinion or policy. Either the line of demarcation here is purely artificial or the party leaders don't examine the ideas arid viewpoints of candidates before trying to nominate them. Sincerly yours, J. A. Moore. Watkins' Phi Attach Is Unjust Says Giles Dear Bob: Martin A. Watkins attacked the Phi Assembly yesterday be cause, he said, eighteen mem bers and visitors voted for a bill which stated that labor unions were a detriment to the nation and to the South. Regardless of whether the Phi would favor such a bill or not, the attack was entirely un justified since the Phi never passed the bill he referred to. The only bill the eighteen voted for, and presumably the one he referred to, was a substitute resolution asking that union power and union "gangsterism" be abridged by appropriate leg islation. It seems a little strange that Mr. Watkins, a labor organizer, waited nine days, or just long enough for most of the student body to forget the wording of the bill, to make his attack. John Giles. America Should Establish Colleges Abroad, Says Prof. By United Press An American college professor recently returned from a teach ing tour at the GI university at Biarritz, France, wants the U. S. government to establish American colleges in Europe on a per manent basis. . Dr. Charles R. Wilson, head of Colgate University's history dpnartment. said the foreign institutions could be supported either by Congressional appro priations or through operation of an endowment fund from the sale of American surplus prop erty abroad. Such universities, he said, would be -welcomed in foreign countries and would assure greater international under standing and cooperation. - "What I envision are Ameri can universities abroad with American students, staffed by American faculties and based Sigma Nu's. A slight comeback was staged in April 1945 when SP nominees Douglass Hunt and Fred Flagler won posts as Speaker of the Leg islature, and Yack editor, respec tively. N Reorganized last month with many of its former leaders and some former UCP members pres ent, the new Student Party faces its first test in a race for a return to former supremacy in the May 14 election. Abernethy Criticizes Farrell; Lands Swalin Dear Sir: Mr. Charles FarrelPs com ments concerning the orches tra's alleged inability to rise above what he termed a "gen eric third-class" status and his reasons for making this state ment were totally fallacious as far as the criticism of Dr. Swalin went. In maintaining that the quality of the latter's conducting handicapped the or chestra, the "critic" totally over looked the fact that the most significant progress made by the orchestra has been made through the efforts of Benj. Swalin and that the evidence of this fact lies in the approval ac corded him by the public and by the critics, alike. Witness com ments in The Musical Courier, Stars and Stripes, The Charlotte Observer and numerous others. Hall Abernethy. Money Cannot Support Pully for President Dear Editor: I have noted with some inter est the statement made by Chuck Heath concerning Pete Pullys changing his mind to accept the UP nomination. This digs a new low in campus politics. Mr. Pully, who was once a member of the UCP, which stood, for hig"h standards, and was at one time Delegata of the Grail, which also stands for all that is commendable in campus activities, according to Mr. Heath's statement, scraps all standards of honorable conduct to hop on the winning wagon. This seems to me a flagrant vio lation of the Honor Code. If we believe it fair to kick out an or dinary Carolina student for cheating, surely we can not ap prove the nomination of a man of Mr. Pully's calibre to enforce our Honor Code. I invite the attention of the Honor Council to this matter. C. O. Money. jupon the American pian, ne said. He expressed opposition to a pending Senate bill which would authorize the use of $2, 500,000 annually from the sale of war surplus goods to pro vide scholarships for American students in any one foreign country. "I have seen too many for eign students in American uni versities," he said, "not to real ize that, except in unusual in stances, language handicaps, strange educational techniques and a general feeling of being uprooted combine literally to overwhelm the students." The professor said that es tablishment of the institutions would aid in "building a back fire to what may prove to be a prairie fire of isolationism when the rank and file of the troops get home." Father: "What's the idea of going out with that soldier half dressed?" Daughter: "Don't you know everything is 50 per cent off for servicemen?" i
Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
May 5, 1946, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75