Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (April 19, 1927)
(S)E£gutt iatlg litttetalii University of Oregon, Eugene BOL ABRAMSON, Editor EARL W. SLOCUM, Manager Bar Nash —— Harold Mangum Florence Jones - EDITORIAL BOARD Managing Editor Henry Alderman - ..._ Sports Editor Bertram Jessup - Literary Editor— Paul Luy ...-. News and Editor Phones, 655 Contributing Editor Contributing Editor _ Feature Editor DAY FDITORS: Beatrice Harden, Genevieve Morgan, Minnie Fisher, Barbara Blythe, Bill Haggerty. Alternates: Flossie Radabaugh, Grace Fisher. NIGHT EDITORS: Bob Hall. Supervisor; Wayne Morgan, Jack Coolidge, John Nfence, Henry Lumpee, Herbert Jonas. ; SPORTS STAFF: Jack O’Meara, Assistant Sports Editor; Dick Syring, Art Schoem, Hoyt Barnett, Dick Jones, Bob Foster. FEATURE WRITERS: Donald Johnston, Ruth Corey, John Butler, Joe Sweyd. LaWanda Fenlason. . . _ , „ „ „ UPPER NEWS STAFF: Jane Epley, Alice Kraeft, Edith Dodge, Bob Galloway. NEWS STAFF: Grace Taylor, Herbert Bundy. Marian Sten, Dorothy Baker, Kenneth Roduner Betty SchulUe, Frances Cherry, Margaret Long Maij McLean, Bess Hiikp Ruth Newman Miriam Shepard, Lucile Carroll, Eva Nealon, Margaret 2 k i v Mnrirarpt Clark John Allen Grayce Nelson, Dorothy Franklin, Eleanor W.7t£cS' Amos Bur, ’Betty Ha*en. Leola Ball, Dan Cheney, Ruth Newton. __ business staff Milton George _Associate Manager Francis McKenna .... Circulation Manager Herbert Lewfs ' Advertising Manager Ed Bussell .. Ass t Circulation Mgr. Joe Neil Advertising Manager Wilbur Shannon ....... .... Circulation Ass t iTrrv Thielen Foreign Advertising Mgr. Ruth Corey . Specia ty Advertising rST street . Advertising Manager Alice McGrath . Specialty Advertising Advertising Assistants: Flossie Radabaugh, Roderick LaFollette. Maurine Lombard. Charles Reed, Bob Moore, Bill Hammond. Oliver Brown. Office Administration: Dorothy Davis. Lou Anne ChaBe. Ruth Field. Emily Williams. The Oregon Daily Emerald, official publication of the Associated Students of the University of Oregon, Eugene, issued daily except Sunday and Monday during codege year Member of Pacific Intercollegiate Press Entered in the postoffice at Eugene Oregon, as second-class matter. Subscription rates, $d.B0 per year. Adver ting rats upon application. Residence phone, editor, 2293-L; manager, 1320. Business office phone, 1896. _ . __ Day Editor This Issue—liarDara Miyrne Night Editor This Issue—Leonard Delano. __ Unsigned comment in this column is written by the editor. Full responsibility U assumed by the editor for all editorial opinion. THE sun might as easily be spared from the universe as free speech from the liberal in stitutions of society.—Socrates. All of Which Proves What? OUTSIDE of being a doubtful tribute to those persons who re vised the A. S. U. O. constitution not so long ago, what is proved by the existence in the constitution of publications—committee control ov er the Emerald? Nothing. And wo willingly admit that it has been the Emerald's good fortune and, may we say, the University’s, for many years that the by-laws provision, whereby the policy control is vest ed in the editor, lias had precedence. But just notv, all this means lit tle. While proponents of the con trol-shift legislation nro able to point out that the change is simple —simple in crossing out a para graph on page 77 of the “Hello” book and writing it in on page 89— the possible effects are no whit dif ferent than they might be if the measure wero altogether now. Let it not be forgotten that the authority given the publications committee, enforcement of which will be decided upon soon, is so vague as either to promise ineffec tiveness or threaten “gag” rule. Who is going to interpret the au thority? Who is going to interpret the best interests of the student body? Who is going to decide whe ther the editor will bo required to submit his policies before-hand to the committee (ns was outlined in student council meeting) or wheth er lie will simply be called upon to repent after outraging somo coun cil’s feelings? Whichever is done, students may rest assured that any writing done under the shadow of a big stick can no more be intorost ing, sincere and worthwhile than | thin dishwater can be substituted j effectively for turtle soup. The publications committee, un der tho dormant section of the con stitution, is supposed to watch ov er the “best interests of tho student body.” Let us suppose then that tho executive council—and this is moro fancy—should vote to appropriate $5000 of student money for deep ening the mill-race so that hazing might be miore effectively carried on. Suppose the editor thought this was wrong and wished to protest. Suppose tho publications commit tee, exercising its wide range of au thority that may be included under “best interests,” decided that ,the best interests would be served by suppression of criticism. Then whatf Wo would have “gag” rule, but glory be to God, the “best inter ests” would have been served! Let us suppose, on the other hand, that the council, lost in its maze of authority, or perhaps outwitted by a naughty editor who denied having an.v “editorial policies” that might be inspected, decided to keep quiet. What then1! Status quo. And this is the condition the pro ponents of the measure think most likely. If so, why bother with chang ing the bylaws? If, on the other hand, the publications committee, perhaps cheered on by a belligerent president and an insulted council, decided to apply censorship, we would have “gag” rule. That is why the amendment should be de feated, not because of what the committee probably will do, but be cause of what it might do. The evil lies in the possible exercise of a vicious power. This, we hope, answers the com municant who can’t see the forest on account of the trees. Why wor ry, he asks in substance, over a little shift in the constitution f Well why not! Let him try to edit a paper under threat of censorship and he will find that one’s style can be considerably cramped by the threat of decapitation if tho cam pus folk-ways are left behind. It perhaps would become a sin to dif fer in opinion from the council, which, as another correspondent points out, perhaps never is selected on qualifications and convictions but on various and sundry points that are of questionable value in interpreting student sentiment. Tor after all, the council members fol low their own minds, and trust that their constituents approve. They would deny this privilege to the edi tor. Why not simplify the whole process and leave the editor not to the people's servants but to the people themselves? If the recall is too cumbersome, simplify it. Any editor would rather take a chance with the people who elected him than with the councilmen or a pub lications committee bent on scalp ing him. But to got back to our communi cant, while wo thank him for deliv ering the communication columns to the editor, wo must inform him that that is usually reserved for the readers . However, it may be that the editor will be reduced to that level if the measure ho supports wins. As to tho testimonials from with out, let us hastily assure tho writ er that we forgive him his insult. Many of tho messages were unsol icited. Thoso that woro, aro from persons who know something about nowspapers, eollego newspapers par ticularly, and more to tho point, tho Emerald. One such appears today from a former editor, well-remem bered, and surely our correspond ent won’t say that this man doesn’t know whereof ho speaks? Tho mes sages that brought tho statements were simple statements of fact. The original copy is available for all who wish to see. So let us forget the petty detail that so unfortunately irks the at tacking army (and wo have often heard say that the truth hurts) and get down to the point. Shall the Emerald bo free to ex press honest opinion and honest criticism, or shall it bo subjected to censorship? Shall tho students them selves too given the power (and we again suggest an easier method of rocall) to decide whether or not their best interests aro being served, or shall an appointive committeo do their thinking for them? And if, as so many speakers re ported in so many houses last night, the editor’s power will not bo cur tailed, why the amendment? Why run tho risk of abuse? These are the questions for the proponents to answer. Postscript on Personalities IT has boon the Emerald ’a hope that the amendment under con sideration might be discussed on its merits and without reference to personalities. This, we are certain, has been the intent of the leaders in the war to adopt the legislation. That is why we take this special op portunity to reply to a communi cant who accuses the editor of per sonalities and insufficient regard for the facts. First of all, we demand that the writer substantiate the charge that the Emerald is taking unfair advan tage and disregarding facts. Every statement prepared by the opposi tion has been given “top-head” po sition. Every communication, re gardless of its fairness or unfairness (such as the one with which we now deal) in support of the amend ment has been published. What else does the writer askf As to personalities. Ho refers to one specific ease. We refer him again to the communication that in spired the Emerald’s •'personali ties.” He may perchance find as we did that the writer started the “personalities.” Should the editor say nothing when he is accused, without proof of any sort, of having TSe SEVEN SEERS BEST DRESSED MAN CONTEST Here’s the final count on the lead ing six men. There were so many votes cast that we decided it would be fair to include the six and se lect the winner from these. WENDELL GRAY . 6010 HAROLD BRUMFIELD .6400 FOREST EHLERS .4740 GUS GREULICH .4660 DICK GORDON . 4290 BILL JAMES . 4220 And now for the selection of the winner. We’ve decided to have bal lots printed and distribute them to all the persons at the Seven Seers ball Saturday night and allow them to vote then and there. The ballots will be counted and the winner will be announced during the evening. We feel that this will be fair to all the men and that the vote will be representative of the sentiment of the campus. THE FIRST FLORIDA JUNE PEAS ARE NOW ON THE MAR KET. Proportionately the women won more debates than the men this year. Only one more indication of their argumentative ability. Architecture .students may adopt the Wilcox hat if they want to. That’s all right, but gosh, I do hope they don’t keep on with the idea and all appear in capes one of these days. 36 KILLED IN KUSH TO TAKE BATH IN INDIA (Hdline S. F. Examiner) Sounds very much to me like most any Sunday morning in a one tub rooming house. A freshman newswriting student called the moot court trials the mute court trials the other day in a paper. Quito a bit of irony in those words, frosh. POME Mr. and Mrs. Smith don’t speak to each other much. She beats eggs with his brand new crutch. • • • CAL HORN isnt’ running for an office or a street car but he is mak ing a little house to house pigging. There are surely some advanced merchants in the town of Suther 1 in. I saw a grocery window full of Fly Tox down thero the other day. SHOOTING FARMER HELD (Hdline Portland Oregonian) We’ve heard of shooting stars, but we always thought farmers were inclined to be slower in mo tion. Gretclien thinks the R. O. T. C. is like a dentist. The soldiers drill and the captains bore the soldiers. OUR MEANEST MAN The bozo who gives his friends homing pigeons for presents. BOB HUNT still thinks the Alpha Gamma Deltas should havo won the singing prize. He says they served a real meal. BUGHOUSE FABLE Once upon a time a candidate kicked a dog and uono of his oppon ents said anything about it, but that was once upon a time. caused continual disruption in the student body? Shall he fail to take notice of the charge that for no reason whatever, save possibly an evil temper, he has disagreed with the council just for the sake of creating discord? Who, Mr. Writer, started this? But now comes the catch; a de bate is suggested. We mean to in sinuate nothing, but. does it interest our readers to know that this idea originated with other backers of the measure and that the letter was delivered not by the gentleman who signs his name, but by two members of the ouncil (women) who arc fighting valiantly for the proposal? We wonder who inspired the sug gestion. Thanking the kind gentleman for his compliment about about orator ical ability, we choose to decline the offer. We would rather settle this question on its merits and on facts than by flights of oratory. A debate would 'bring the question down to the personal level. This matter is not a quarrel between the editor and the president of the stu dent body, and we do not choose to make it such. We admit that a houseful of unbiased (sic) listeners such as the writer of the letter would most likely decide in favor of the suggested opponent. We are not seeking to decide the issue on personal popularity, but we do choose to deal in facts, and facts can beat down even the specious ar guments of our communicant. Commun ications —• For the Defense To the Editor and students: My reply to the question, which Hugh Biggs says is fundamental, concerning the editorial column: “Should the editor of the Emerald consider the editorial column an agency for the expression of his ideas alone without regard for stu dent sentiment, or should the edi torial expressions seek to interpret and represent student opinion. . . V’ is as follows. First, it is clearly impossible tor the editor to express his ideas “with out regard for student sentiment,” because he is himself a student. Second, it would be absurd for any person, be he editor, president, or committeeman, to pretend to know or represent student opinion, or even a considerable minority of it. Something approaching unanim ity of opinion may exist in grade schools and in very small towns, ■but certainly it can not and ought not to exist within a university student body. I doubt that any two students who do their own thinking could quite agree on any question. The number of different policies suggested by a committee (whose members are optimistically supposed to represent the “various ele ments”) will probably be exactly equal to the number of its members. A process of addition of those policies would leave the editorial column as unhampered (and effec tive) as it has been in the past. The complete policy would contain permission for almost any kind of expression. If, on the contrary, only the parts common to all or a major ity of the policies were retained, the limitations of the editorial col umn would make it useless. Since the committee could go little further in the futile task of determining student opinion than the editor, whose training has brought him many more than the average number of contacts, what is the use of paralyzing him to gain such a small advantage? Did any of the members of the council ever try to write a forceful essay using some one else’s ideas? Who is like ly to know the art of editorial-writ ing better, a heterogeneous commit tee, or an outstanding senior in journalism? It is a kind of insult to the whole student body, to insinuate that an editor cannot be chosen whose abil ities and judgments are worthy of respect. Why assume that the stu dents are better fitted to choose a president -who is able and trust worthy, than an editor with the same qualities? And is the student body to be considered too dull witted to recall any editor who is doing apparent harm? If it happens that council mem bers and others feel sure the editor is wrong, why can’t they try to prove their theories to the editor and students? Why haven’t they? Very probably the editor will be open to conviction, and ready to mend his ways. “There can be promoted a closer unity of purpose, a better spirit of co-operation . says Mr. Biggs. This spirit should not need to be promoted. The editor will give sup port where he thinks it is deserved. It seems to me that what the coun cil members actually want is a vin dication for their actions, which have been held up to public critic ism. Freedom from criticism would be beneficial to office-holders’ un dying fame, but not to the “stu dent interests” they speak about so eupliuistically. Tho recognized function of an ed itorial column is to give expression to the frank, honest, heartfelt opin ions of the editor. All the rest of the pnper is devoted to facts, and to thoughts and opinions of others, likewise freely expressed. Let the administrative cjomm^ttees admin istrate, and let the popularly chosen editor write his editorials. ROBERT T. HALL All So Simple To the Editor: So much space upon the front page of the Oregon Daily Emerald has been devoted to the so-called threat of “Gag-Rule,” and stifling of the much cherished right of free dom of the press, that the topic, seems to be foremost in discussion on the campus, even putting the pol iticians into the background on the eve of nominations. If all the propaganda regarding the danger of “gag-rule” should be true, one would think that the early exponents of freedom of the press, who fought so valiantly that the rights of the editor should not be questioned, would aeise in their graves in holy horror at the very thought of such a catastrophe af fecting the power of the editor of the Oregon Daily Emerald. But so far as I can see the appeal does not go back so far as that, but is only being extended to a number of the leading newspapers throughout the state, and to other college dailies for support against the threat. Why should the simple matter of the amendment of a by-law to a measure already long standing and previously unquestioned of the Ore gon Student Body Constitution arouse such a sudden burst of right eous indignation from our capable editor. No one questions the fact that the present editor is sincere in his stand, or that he should be denied the right to express his opin ions. But it does not follow that the style of any future editor is going to be seriously cramped by the passage of the amendment of this by-law. The constitution already provides for a committee on publications, and the present amendment is simply to amend the by-law so that said com mittee may cooperate with the edi tor in forming a constructive edi torial policy. The editor may still have his say and even use the com munication column if such should become necessary to freely express his opinion. At least that is the best that others can do. The measure is one which can hardly be said to affect those other than members of the Oregon stu dent body. Then why should not the pjopaganda either for or against the measure be restricted to the bounds of the campus itself? The state newspapers, presented with only the one side of the question, namely the editorial comment and press dispatches of the Emerald, could hardly benefit the amendment anyway should it come to a vote, even if they did have an unbiased understanding of the effect of the measure. Oregon students alone must decide and so why the state wide propaganda? As a matter of procedure it would seem that much-ado is being made about nothing, which in fact threat ens the power of the editor of the Emerald, or which stifles either his originality, his initiative, or his ambition for bigger and better things. WARD COOK Another Defender To the Readers: I wish to express my hearty sup port for Sol Abramsou in his fight for a better, cleaner, truly repre sentative rule of our Student Body. He is much to be commended for the stand he has taken, and for the unwavering courage he has dis played; nor does he shrink from criticism. All year he has been trying to raise a feeling against the rule of the student governing bodies as it has been carried out. It is true that the officers of the Student Body are elected. But there are never any issues involved more than those of social position—of what “house” is the candidate a member, or some thing of like importance and appeal. ' There is a large proportion of un affiliated students, but nevertheless students, who take no interest in elections; who never vote; whose interest is never aroused by any campaign. These students cannot ; be disregarded in considering what I the will of the students as a whole is, simply because their will is un i expressed. But Sol Abramson has j adequately expressed by opinion of those actions of the Student Coun I dil, of freshman hazing, and of the i use of student funds. As one of them, I know that there is a very respectable number who agree with the editor. Then who can say that the editorial columns of The Em erald have been used to express the opinions of one man, the edi tor? He has really expressed the attitude of many students who have not made themselves heard. But he has also awakened these students to action, and if the question comes to a vote, there will be a number sur prising tio the Student Council who support Sol Abramson with a larger proportion than one to fourteen, which is his power in that council claiming to represent student feel ing. Already the largest class in the University has unanimously de clared its support for the editor, and many upperclassmen are with them. AN UPPERCLASSMAN So Personal! To the Editor: The present controversy concern ing the justice of restricting the power of the Emerald editor through a publications committee lacks, in the writer’s estimation a sufficient regard for the facts. The editor, in exercising his power of refutation, a power which his position gives him while it is denied his opponents, has allowed his statements to be come highly personal in tone, ac cusing dissenters of mental imma turity, ignorance of journalism, et cetera. The editor’s advantage of the last word in all discussions car ried on in the Emerald guarantees the student body a biased if clevtr lv worded interpretation of all argu ment in variance with the editor’s opinion and, it seems, detailed in formation about the personal de ficiencies of the opposition. In order to equalize the advan tage to both factions in the support of their causes and to give the stu dent body a clear knowledge of the facts, may it be suggested that the editor and the president, as repre sentatives of the two opposing camps and as orators of known re pute, meet and debate the merits of their respective stands publicly at a convenient time and place? LEONARD HAGSTROM. Have You Hear dr PAJAMAS are to be the rage nVn Innovations ®“/ Faultless r-^. \ cvVobelt? ' / PAJAMAS at the— Seven Seers Ball Saturday Night If you want to be distinctive, cut a big chunk in the evening, so to speak, wear a pair of No DeltS-With the colors that The last word in Pajama Comfort make a rainbow blush, and styles and patterns - - - you should see! Here’s a wonderful opportunity to initiate your spring night wear and at the same time have a splen did evening. STORE .^MEN 71S WfLLAMXTTB ST. KNOWN FOR GOOD CLOTHES LAST DAY Lewis Stone Anna Q. Nilsson Chester Conklin MIDNIGHT LOVERS Comedy Int’l News MON. & TUES. Apr. 25 and 26 N Two Days Matinee at 3—Evenings at 8:30 The First and Only Presentation Here This Year of The Superb Cinema Spectacle Cpicfcarizdtrorv founded on the mighty drama of that: name/ •rorr\^ Lev Vallace's immortal star/ I PRICES _Tax Included Matinee: floor, first 4 rows 75c, last 14 $1.10, balcony, six rows, 75c, last 7 50c, night: floor, first 4 rows $1.10, last 14 $1.65, balcony, six rows $1.10, last 7, 75c. Presented Exactly as in New York and Los Angeles with Touring Orchestra OF TWENTY PIECES and Complete Auricular Effects Direct from the Auditorium, Portland MAIL UKULK3 Box Office Seat Sale Saturday