The Undergraduate Chair
IN the beginning Dartmouth was big. Hundreds of wide-eyed companions milling around the Inn corner, leering Vigilantes ready to pounce on pinless freshmen, and the first scramble for the lower bunk all added to the impression. The mass production lines at the gymnasium and Dick's House, the placement exams for language courses and the multitude of strange faces on campus did little to sharpen and broaden the new comers's view of the College.
The freshman year passed, and Dartmouth grew smaller. Interests had been , clarified and boiled down, and extracurricular activities began taking on meaning. Scholastic interests also sharpened, and for many the liberal arts education had pointed out a path. An adjustment had been made, not only in terms of Dartmouth, but also in terms outside of the ivory tower. Not a complete adjustment by a long shot—but there were new faces, new ideas and a more adequate means of self-expression.
Somehow the senior year is always the fullest, the most revealing, and yet the saddest. Certainly this year was no exception for the Class of 1952. Much was accomplished and the groundwork for even more was laid. Last fall a revised fraternity rushing program was put into operation by the Interfraternity Council to eliminate the more unpleasant aspects of fraternity pledging. With the addition of a neutral adviser to each house and a rule forbidding organized contact between brothers and prospective members before formal rushing, the new program did help to alleviate the tense atmosphere which accompanies rushing each year. Palaeopitus successfully introduced a plan for freshman orientation "without coercion" after severe criticism of school spirit and the whole hazing program. The Vigilantes were eliminated, but the traditional freshman duties were kept intact. Palaeopitus pointed out that the program "aims at being a constructive program only—one that inspires a desire on the part of the freshman to want to conform to the plan."
Within the last month two more important steps were taken. The College Trustees approved Green Key's recommendation that a snack bar be established and that the game and recreational facilities at College Hall be improved. This plan had the strong support of most of the student body which felt that the strengthening of a social center on campus for freshmen and non-fraternity men was a necessity. The facilities will be available to the entire student body and will be ready next fall. And after two years of careful planning, extensive correspondence, heated debate and revision, the proposed honor system was ready for its test before the undergraduate body. The Undergraduate Council chose Thursday, May 15, as the date for the honor system referendum and provided for absentee ballots to include students who would be out of town that day. The new system must have the approval of 75 per cent of the student body, and if it does receive the necessary vote, there will be a review referendum after three semesters of operation.
The College has been made very conscious of the honor system proposals through the extensive publicity given it by the Academic Committee of the UGC. Pamphlets, exhibits, thorough coverage in The Dartmouth, public discussions and broadcasts have all helped to acquaint the student with the need and the pros and cons of such a system. The main attack against the proposed Dartmouth honor system centered on the reporting clause by which a student was obligated to report any offender who did not report himself. After much debate the clause was changed to give the student more freedom in the choice of methods of upholding the sys- tem. The clause now reads: "Any student having reason to suspect a violation shall report the offender to the honor council, or take such other action as will in his judgment best maintain the principle of academic honesty."
There was still criticism that the honor system should place the responsibility directly on the individual, that the proposed plan would not put the student on his honor, but the general consensus was that some sort of an honor system was needed and a start had to be made. Much of the opposition is related to details, not principle. Undoubtedly most of the undergraduates, as well as the Academic Committee, hold the conviction "that honor is an indispensable aspect of individual maturity."
(Ed. Note: The honor system was rejectedwhen only 58% of the students voted forthe proposal in the undergraduate referendum. Next year's Academic Committeewill undoubtedly attempt to revise some ofthe details that were opposed.)
The Undergraduate Council has faced many problems in the last year and handled most of them with great skill. The 1951-52 Council was the most active, thoughtful and productive body since its organization in 1947. Commenting on the interest in student government The Dartmouth remarked: "The few men were not so few as in past years. Their abilities and capacities were greater. They were also more experienced than the past groups of few had been. Some had served three and four years on the Council." On April 25 the Council faced its biggest test and made one of its biggest decisions.
In the face of Interfraternity Council opposition, the UGC voted to support the recommendation of its Review Committee that Theta Chi be suspended from interfraternity competition for one year for failing to comply with Council regulations concerning efforts toward the elimination of fraternity discriminatory clauses. The recommendation, still to be acted on by the Trustees, provided that Theta Chi could be reinstated at the end of the first semester next year if it satisfies the regulations established by the 1952-53 Review Committee. Immediately following the Council's action, Theta Chi voted unanimously to disregard its "Caucasian" discriminatory clause and to select new members of the fraternity without any such restriction. The fraternity's action, however, did not affect the suspension which the UGC imposed upon the house.
The Council's decision stems from an undergraduate referendum held in February 1950 in which 1,354 men voted for Proposal Two, which stated: "By the end of each school year, review the efforts undertaken by those fraternities whose constitutions restrict or might be interpreted to restrict membership because of race, religion or national origin.
"If it can be established that any fraternity has not exhausted all possible means of eliminating such clauses, short of disaffiliation with their national organizations, the Undergraduate Council shall withdraw all recognition of that fraternity, this resolution to take effect immediately."
Last year two fraternities received warnings from the UGC when the Council judged them to have fallen short of the stipulations in Proposal Two. Theta Chi, as well as the IFC, admitted that the fraternity was guilty of failing to live up to the requirements, but it felt that such a severe censure would only hurt the discrimination issue and the rest of the fraternities. Nevertheless, most of the students hesitatingly agreed that the Council had only one choice if it were to maintain its dignity, respect and honest leadership. The Council had a very rough decision to make, but it made the right one—the only one possible in the circumstances.
The repercussions to the suspension and Theta Chi's subsequent decision to ignore its clause were, and will be, extremely important, not only at Dartmouth but also at colleges all over the country where the drive against discriminatory clauses has already started. The controversy deals with fundamental principles, principles upon which our democratic way of life is based. Upon receiving official notification that the Dartmouth chapter of Theta Chi no longer abided by the discriminatory clause in the national constitution, Theta Chi's national council placed the fraternity on "tentative probation." Definite action will probably not occur until the national convention assembles next September in Los Angeles.
President Dickey stated that "if the Undergraduate Council after mature consideration of the question recommends action to the Administration, the Council—as far as we can now foresee—need have no fear that the Administration will not support the Council decision." He added that he "doubted if the Board of Trustees would want to act as a board upon the present Undergraduate Council recommendation .. . since the Board has previously taken the attitude that this matter of fraternity discrimination is a problem best left at this stage to the undergraduates." The College's final decision, however, would have to wait until next semester since the Trustees do not meet again until June 4.
As the semester drew to a close, there was a last-minute flurry of excitement and urgency. Theta Chi won the interfraternity hum contest with a marvelous rendition of The Three Bells, class elections were held, the traditional Wet Down saw the presentation of annual awards and the flying belts along the gauntlet, and the College announced the reduction by one of the number of major courses the Class of 1954 will be required to take due to the present ROTC program. The Dartmouth came out with its first extra in over a year when Dean Neidlinger's resignation was released by the Administration, to the student body's complete surprise. Dartmouth certainly was not static.
There were bigger problems looming up ahead—the proposed drinking regulations, the enactment of the honor system if approved, the cut system which still seemed to satisfy only a small percentage of the students and professors, and the continued conflict over fraternity discrimination in the national charters. Green Key, however, smoothly side-stepped the packed nightmare of Carnival as perfect weather greeted the College's last weekend of the year. The only sour note in the festivities was a Friday night fire in a fourth-floor room in Streeter Hall causing considerable damage.
As the four-year span came to an end and the different aspects of Dartmouth life crystalized there was one phrase overshadowing all else—the very symbol of Dartmouth. That phrase is simply—academic freedom. Early in May TheDartmouth received a letter from an angry junior who was thoroughly disgusted with the newspaper's individualistic views and unrestricted power of expression. "He (the editor) has used this position of authority to attempt to thwart the wishes of the college community. He has, by virtue of his influence, employed the same sort of demagoguery that other influential student leaders display, again in an attempt to foil the majority. And he has continued the painfully liberal editorial policy of The Dartmouth's several previous editors." The student declared that the only solution was the appointment of an editor-in-chief who would represent the views of the majority of the student body.
What the irate letter writer failed to point out was that The Dartmouth is the undergraduate newspaper at Dartmouth College, not of Dartmouth College. The editor-in-chief, it is hoped, does not state his beliefs and his opinions in terms of what the majority believes or does. TheDartmouth's editorial policy should arouse and stimulate discussions on campus; it should lead, not follow. It will be a sad day for the College when The Dartmouth simply becomes the means of expressing the majority point of view. The newspaper and other, campus organizations have always received a free hand from the Administration, and President Dickey has emphasized time and again that liberal arts education is one "befitting free men."
The ultimate obligation of the College is to human society, striving to teach the student "the will and capacity to serve." Dartmouth has certainly done its share.
A SUCCESSFUL DRAMATIC UNDERTAKING by the German Club this spring was Goethe's "Urfaust," earlier version of part of "Faust." Above is the Auerbochskeller Scene of the play directed by Prof. Schlossmacher and taken to Loyola University, Montreal, and Harvard after its Hanover performance.
WINNERS OF THE LOCKWOOD DEBATE PRIZE this year were William P. Rilling '52 of Findlay, Ohio (left) and Charles R. Buchanan '53 of Appleton, Wis. (center), shown with Prof. John V. Neale, debate coach. Together or separately the winners averaged .800 in all debates this year.
