1960

Several years ago, a zealous young staff person at the Alumni Magazine suggested that I should delete a controversial comment from one of my columns. My response was immediate and, for me, probably predictable. I said something to the effect that my words were accurate, but the magazine had the power to edit (censor) them if they chose. I also said that if they took such action, they also would assume the responsibility for filling an immediate vacancy on the class secretary rolls. For that staff person, at least, a Greek bearing bad news was not welcome, but was a lesser evil than an irate Greek. Thus was my first brush with freedom of expression at Dartmouth.

Recently I received two thoughtful letters from classmates who are attorneys and equally concerned about that issue. Their words are better than mine, but space constraints require limited quotations. JimBurns said, in part, "Despite Gene's contentions, I find it difficult, in view of Justice Silberman's comments and Justice Mohl's determination, to conclude that Dartmouth is, in fact, committed to preserving the right of freedom of expression to members of the Dartmouth family with whose views the administration disagrees. As a result, one has to wonder just who it is being irreparably harmed by the current controversy.

"As a management (mostly public-sector) labor attorney who, nevertheless, has successfully represented numerous individual plaintiffs in federal and state court in connection with allegations of denial of constitutional rights and discrimination, I feel well qualified to comment on the legal aspects of the current dispute. The Indian symbol and shanty issue aside, it is the absence of a level playing field at Dartmouth vis-a-vis its treatment of various (mostly conversative) students and their right to freedom of expression which is most troublesome. Because of his legal background, many of us expected President Freedman to remedy the situation. Instead, it is obviously much worse, a fact which evokes even more concern."

Bruce Hasenkamp responded in a similar vein. "I feel strongly when it comes to free speech, and especially the expression of unfashionable or unpopular views. They are the toughest to swallow sometimes and the most in need of protection. Nothing chills the expression of opinions like the disapproval of authority figures (Munroe) and a trial and exile to the Gulag (read suspension/expulsion).

"Freshman year I got a copy of Eisenhower's injunction not to join the book burners, delivered at Dartmouth's commencement before we arrived on campus, as perhaps did others. I framed mine, and it's been on the wall by my desk ever since. I reread it last night and it's still true. "We (must) not," the President said, "try to conceal the thinking of our own people. They are part of America. And even if they think ideas that are contrary to ours, their right to say them, their right to record them, and their right to have them at places where they're accessible to others is unquestioned, or it's not America.' "

156 Overleigh Road, Bernardsville, NJ 07924