Letters

Praises West Point

To THE EDITOR: May I take issue with Louis P. Benezet '99, whose long and rather baffling letter you printed in your May issue? I say baffling because it is difficult, in spite of your helpful caption (Universal Military Training), to put one's finger on Mr. Benezet's major peeve, or point, as the case may be: like the Irishman of the fable, he is agin' the government; he is of course agin' war like the rest of us, and he appears to be also agin' most things that have happened since 1812, particularly the direction of United States foreign policy. In passing, he seems to resent the French for holding in World War I, thanks to universal military service, until this country was in a position to participate in the common struggle. He is worried lest the setting up of a West German army provoke the peace-loving East German regime. Through all these varicolored threads of thought, however, seems to run the underlying obsessive idea that somehow West Point and West Pointers are to blame for so many sins of the past and troubles that plague us today.

His comments reveal him to be so fundamentally misinformed—nay, ignorant—when it comes to West Point that I am impelled to speak up in meeting and attempt to enlighten my fellow alumnus and colleague. My qualifications for this are modest, yet I speak of what I know: graduate of Dartmouth ('34), volunteer for the Army ('43), onetime rifleman replacement (MOS 745), Reserve officer on extended active duty with nearly nine years service, currently assistant professor of French at West Point where I have spent three years in close daily contact with "that type of mentality." What I have to offer in the way of comment is of course my own private and unofficial opinion as citizen and taxpayer.

West Point today (and it hasn't changed fundamentally since our fellow-alumnus, Colonel Sylvanus Thayer, Dartmouth 1807, USMA 1808, left his imprint on the Military Academy as Superintendent, 1817-1833) is a highly efficient and specialized educational institution, celebrating its 150th Anniversary this year. The literate public is surely aware that although the primary mission of the Military Academy is to produce Second Lieutenants for the Regular Army and Air Force, it gives its cadets a very broad and solid foundation in the humanities. The shavetail who leaves West Point with his golden bars and a B.S. also carries with him more than a smattering of literature, language and history. During his four-year course a cadet devotes about 60% of his class time to scientific subjects; the remainder is given to the more humane letters. Objective confirmation of these statements may be found in the comparison of mean scores attained by USMA cadets and those attained by a control group of seniors from 24. liberal arts colleges on the Graduate Record Examination prepared by the Educational Testing Service, Princeton, N. J. [The figures tabulated by Captain Germann show the class of '48 at West Point to rank higher in all of eight sub-tests including social studies, literature and arts, and in total to have a General Educational Index of 589 to 506 for the liberal arts college seniors.]

What many articles fail to bring out, and what I suspect Mr. Benezet has not realized because he has associated with so few West Pointers, apparently, is that the West Pointer, by and large, also carries away with him a quality of mind and character which the liberal arts colleges so seldom succeed in developing in their students today: intellectual humility, the willingness to concede that for most problems the perfect "approved solution" has not yet been found, the realization that he has still much to learn, and the habit of approaching problems with an open mind. ...

West Point encourages clear thinking and concise expression. Rigidity of thought is fought continually, discussion is fostered, originality applauded. There is, withal, an undeniable stamp which marks most graduates of the Military Academy as "West Pointers." As I recall, we liked to think there was something about a "Dartmouth man" which set him a little apart; a cachet in which the granite of New Hampshire having infiltrated character somehow merged with tolerance of mind and broadness of outlook. Yet the diversity of types of Dartmouth men is nearly as vast as the numbers of those who have broken their pipes at the Bema. The same is true of West Point. A certain colonel, West Pointer, may well have remarked with sottovoce effects whose intention was possibly misinterpreted by his too-serious audience, that the United States had never fought an aggressive war. Does this mean that West Pointers as a group are obtuse, cynical or ignorant? Does this reflect on Bradley, for example? And as for "that type of mentality," do Grant, Lee, Pershing, MacArthur, Patton, Eisenhower, Clark, Clay, Somerville, Gruenther, Taylor, Vandenberg, Collins, Smith, Van Fleet and Ridgway, to name only a handful, appear to have been stamped out by some inhuman assembly line which produces "the military mind?" Their eventual successors will graduate from West Point in June, not as "military minds," but as young officers with a broad basic education who have proved themselves determined to live up to a motto which is as inspiring as our venerable Vox clamantis indeser to, and which is proudly displayed on the Banner of the United States Corps of Cadets: Duty, Honor, Country. Men of Dartmouth, give a rouse for West Point!

Captain, Infantry

West Point, N. 17.I7.

Student A ttitude

TO THE EDITOR:

In reading Kenneth Roman's article, "The Undergraduate Year," in the May issue I have discovered that he has brought out a point of attitude among the undergraduates which causes me and perhaps others some concern. I think this attitude prevails throughout the student bodies of a majority of colleges today and is to the effect that most undergraduates are fearful of an experience as enlisted men in the armed forces and are willing to undergo all sorts of gyrations in order to avoid this fate, or as Mr. Roman puts it, "rather than face a two to four year hitch as a non-com."

There are certain aspects of this question which I am glad to admit; namely, that the country needs leaders and must turn primarily to the colleges for them. Also, it is certain that Dartmouth and other colleges depend upon the ROTC and related programs at least in part for survival at times like these. I have no doubt that the program is an excellent answer to many needs of the country and I would not want it curtailed in any way. Nor is this an implication that Dartmouth men were lacking in fortitude and ability during the past emergencies.

But, I believe there is something deeper within the minds of these students which compels their attendance at college at this time. There must be a better way to channel the meaning of betterment than to admit that it is in avoidance of the common and honorable experience of the ordinary enlistee.

Laramie, Wyo.

Chief Meyers '09

To THE EDITOR:

Frank Graham in his recent book, The NewYork Giants, an Informal History (G. P. Putnam's Sons) makes the following statement on page 65: "John Tortes (Chief) Meyers, a Mission Indian out of Riverside, California and a Dartmouth man .. ."

Is it true that this battery-mate of Christy Mathewson and others (perhaps even Jeff Tesreau) was a wearer of the Green? In those deluded days I understand baseball players assumed fictitious names at times while gathering in the wampum (as Eddie Collins at Columbia). Perhaps the good chief in Meyers' case merely mixed names for the heathen teams for the goodness of his soul and his gradus ad Polo Grounds (should be accusative, I. know). Perhaps we could use him now but mayhap the Yankee element is too strong in Hanover baseball circles.

Oxford, Ohio

EDITOR'S NOTE: Chief Meyers is a member of the Dartmouth class of 1909. He attended college for only one year, 1905-06, and never played varsity baseball for the Big Green. Formerly Chief of Police at the Mission Indian Agency, Riverside, Calif., he now resides in San Bernardino, Calif.