The Undergraduate

New Plan Proposes Greater Measure of Self-Government; Editor Player Comments on Disappointing Football Season

AN ISSUE of vital importance to future generations of Dartmouth under graduates, but an issue whose final outcome is as yet undecided, is the matter of the newly proposed student constitution.

The collected persiflage and hot air that has been bandied back and forth across the campus, both for and against its seven articles, would go towards filling a brace or two of student notebooks, but, as this issue' of the ALUMNI MAGAZINE goes to press, the entire matter of student government is still hanging in the balance although it has actually been approved by the necessary two-thirds vote of the student body and by the Faculty and the Board of Trustees in principle.

Designed primarily to give the undergraduate body of Dartmouth College an opportunity to exercise democratic self-government, this new constitution, in its present form, replaces the comparatively ineffectual but highly respected Palaeopitus, a war casualty of 1943. This original experiment in undergraduate government, sometimes vaguely referred to as a "student council," was founded as a secret society at the turn of the century. It published its own constitution two years later with the announced intention "to bring into close touch and working harmony the various branches of college activities, to preserve the customs and traditions of Dartmouth, to promote her welfare and good name."

It had no clearly defined functional duties and its position depended largely upon the personal prestige of its officers rather than any specific liaison powers between the student body and the college administration. This new constitution is designed to replace Palaeopitus (although the executive committee of the new council will use the old name) and to provide a democratic ruling device for the under graduate body which it is intended to represent.

Its purpose, as set forth in Article 11, is fivefold:

a) To require individual members of the members of the student body to derive the maximum benefits from education.

b) To define and interpret the interests of the student body and to coordinate these with the educational objectives of the College as defined by its officers.

c) To coordinate undergraduate organizations for the common welfare of the College and to insure responsible leadership of undergraduate activities.

d) To provide for responsible participation by representative undergraduates in the government of the College in cooperation with the faculty, administra- tive officers, Alumni Council and other executive agencies acting under the authority of the Board of Trustees.

e) To promote the welfare of the College, protect its good name, and insure to all undergraduates equal opportunity to derive benefit from their membership in the College.

Objections to it as it now stands, however, seem to stem largely from its method of representation. To be known as the Undergraduate Council of Dartmouth College, it will be made up of 109 members composed of all the athletic team captains, the presidents of the four undergraduate classes, the presidents of all fraternities and functional organizations, honorary societies and publications, and the chairmen of all dormitory committees. One objection to its apparent lack of proportional representation was raised with reference to one member being chosen from the Phi Beta Kappa society as against seventeen team captains, stressing an undue amount of emphasis on athletics.

The powers of the proposed constitution, in Article III are as follows:

a) To require individual members of the undergraduate body to account for their conduct and to prohibit them from continuing actions discreditable to the undergraduate body.

b) To require undergraduate organizations established in the College or soliciting the support of the undergraduates to account for their activities; to prohibit such organizations from activities that are without benefit to the undergraduates of the College or detrimental to their interests.

c) To accept responsibility from the Trustees, President, or Faculty to act under their authority in exercising the powers here described.

d) To submit an annual report in writing to the President of the College embodying the current activities and deliberations of the Undergraduate Council therein.

There have been some objections raised because the power of the Undergraduate Council is still greatly limited and would actually be just another rubber-stamp group much like the defunct Palaeopitus.

But whatever the outcome, which will not be definitely decided upon until President Dickey returns from his western tour of alumni clubs, the move to advance the cause of student government has had its postwar introduction, has been approved by two-thirds of the student body and by the Faculty and Trustees, and is now finally up to President Dickey, whose decision awaits a further report on student objections. It would seem that some form of democratic ruling with a representation of the student body has earned its place on campus.

THIS FALL the great enigma, both here in Hanover and undoubtedly in alumni camps throughout the country, has been the third-rate performance of the Dartmouth football team. Why, after a rather successful beginning against Holy Cross and Syracuse, has the Big Green taken such an overwhelming shellacking at the hands of Penn, Yale, Columbia and others on its roster of Ivy League foes? Why, in this first postwar season, when many teams throughout the country are screaming about the best lines and backs that they have ever had, has Dartmouth been consistently at the bottom of the pickle barrel and called the "Ivy League doormat" by sportswriters? It is a question which demands answering, yet one which is not easy to answer. I have been asked about this from the players' point of view and offer here a composite of what many men on the squad had to say when they were canvassed individually.

There are two points where this fall's team has been deeply on the debit side in comparison with the opponents they have been up against. One, quite naturally, is weight. The other is depth in material for certain positions—certain vital positions. The two-team system, which worked well in the opening games against Holy Cross and Syracuse, had to be abandoned after the debacle at Philadelphia when it was impossible for Coach McLaughry to continue this strategy because of injuries. I honestly don't believe the outcome of the game surprised anyone, although the score might have been less one-sided. Dartmouth was playing way out of its league in weight, team work and individual player ability, and the psychological effect was disastrous.

Another important weakness which has been a big factor in the scores of opposing teams has been our pass defense. Constant drilling on the practise field all during the week, against scouted pass plays, has brought a certain amount of success by Thursday, but the same slips have been made over and over again under the pressure and excitement of the actual games.

The team throughout the fall has shown an amazing inconsistency. The breakdown of individual players, both in the line and in the backfield; a missed block; running through the wrong hole; a bad pass from center. These have been the things that have cost us games. And why this inconsistency? Why have we not been able to operate as a team? I believe it is due in part to lack of the pure physical strength and stamina needed by the men on the squad to move the opposition which Dartmouth has played against. It is also due in part to an agonizing indifference shown by veterans who have returned and have no longer displayed their prewar "spirit" to win or die, a radical change which is equally apparent in almost every other phase of college life. And it is also due to the inexperience of the younger men who look and act like schoolboys opposite the older and mature men whom they have played against.

Dartmouth has played nine major games this fall, and the competition has been stiff. It is my conviction that the coaching staff is adequate, but if the Athletic Council is to continue arranging the rigorous type of schedule they have this fall, the coaching staff will continue to lose games unless they are given the material strong enough to be moulded into a unit that can stand up against the teams they play.

FALSE ALARM. Those "Harvard Crimson" jokesters gave the Dartmouth campus a taste of what the Lampoon has to put up with when they sprang this fake issue of "The Dartmouth" on the startled Indians on the morning of the Harvard game.