The Oregon Daily Emerald, published daily during the college year except Sundays,
Mondays, holidays, and final examination periods by the Associated Students, University
of Oregon. Subscription rates: $1.25 per term and $3.00 per year. Entered as second
class matter at the postoffice, Eugene, Oregon.
Represented for national advertising by NATIONAL ADVERTISING SERVICE,
INC., college publishers’ representative, 420 Madison Ave., New York—Chicago— Bos
ton—Los Angeles—San Francisco—Portland and Seattle.
Editorial and Business Offices located on ground floor of Journalism building. Phones
1300 Extension: 382 Editor; 353 News Office; 359 Sports Office; and 354 Business
Offices.
(JPPER BUSINESS STAFF
Anita uacicuerg, L,iassinea A overusing
Manager
Ron Alpaugh, Layout Production Man
ager
tsm reterson, t-ircuiarion .vjanagor
Mary Ellen Smith, Promotiion Director
Eileen Millard, Office Manager
LYLE M. NELSON, Editor JAMES W. FROST, Business Manager
ASSOCIATE EDITORS: Hal Olney, Helen Angell
immfe Leonard, Managing Editor
£ent Stitzer, News Editor
Fred May, Advertising Manager
Bob Rogers, National Advertising Mgr.
UPPER NEWS STAFF
Fat Erickson, Women ■
Editor
Bob Flavelle, Co-Sport»
Editor
Ken Christianson, Co-Sport*
Editor
Kay Schrick, Ass t Manag
ing Editor
Betty Jane Biggs, Ass’t
News Editor
Wes Sullivan, Ass’t New*
Editor
corrine wignes, ttxecuuve
Secretary
Mildred Wilson, Exchange
Editor
More Support for the Band
fJ>OMMY Mayes’ letter to the Emerald of a few days ago
lias caused considerable comment. “Is what he says about
the University band really true?” students are asking. Several
have requested that the question be brought up and discussed
here.
The problem of what to do with the band is not a new one.
Tommy has brought up a very old question, but has presented
new arguments for a change. He is right in several of his state
ments and wrong in others. For the benefit of those students
who are interested, in the following facts might prove helpful.
First, Tommy is right when he says that the University
baud — the one that plays at football games — is under the
sponsorship of the ROTC department. At the time of organ
izing the new band it was thought best to combine it with the
ROTC band and put both under the one sponsorship. The
present football band practices in the ROTC shack, stores its
equipment there, and depends tipon the department for many
of its members.
=» * #
XOMMY is wrong in implying that everything is left to
the ROTC department and that the rest of the University
doesn’t “give a hoot.” An investigation of the budget of the
educational activities board would find quite a sum set aside
each year for the band. That sum is for uniforms, cleaning,
repairing instruments, and other similar items.
The educational activities board has supported the football
band—perhaps not enough at times—through its budget. It
has never assumed control of the band because it felt that such
a step would be unwise.
* * *
'J^MIE important point contained in all of Tommy’s argument
is that the University band now should be taken out of
the ROTC department and put where it can receive more atten
tion—and the support of the entire University. This is not
meant as a criticism of the heads of the ROTC department
because with more important things before them they can
hardly afford to spend much time with the band.
The band has simply outgrown the niche cut out for it and
should be found another. Its importance to the University—for
it is the show part of every football game—can hardly be over
estimated. No means of gaining support for the band should
be overlooked.
Parade of Opinion
By Associated Collegiate Press
“As the College Man Sees the War,” by Willard Thorp,
Professor of English, Princeton university, condensed from
the New York Times Sunday Magazine.
What are the young men in our colleges thinking about the
war? Their elders are worried. Cynical professors are suspected
of having corrupted their faith in democracy by a too critical
exposition of its failures. Proof of the reasonableness of the
attitudes of most students emerges from the survey on which
this article is based. A group of Princeton upper classmen were
asked to answer at length the questions below.
1. What is your view of the 1914-18 war? The problem of the
causes and results of the World war is to these men enormously
complex, but they concur in the opinion that “Everybody
wanted it and nobody won.” They believe the peace was
outrageous and that the Nazi movement stems from it. Some
believe a stalemate might have been better than the victory
which we made possible but which we refused to use for estab
lishment of a decent world order.
2. How far shall we go in aid to Britain? Some advocate
mxaimum aid. Some regret we have gone so far. The significant
note in all replies is self-defense. All too clearly, thoughtful
students have been made aware of the failures and evasions
of British statesmanship since the last war.
3. Should we enter the war? If so, when? Only one man
says “Never.” A number say “Only if attacked” or “When
England is in danger of collapse.” Several fear an inevitable
trend to totalitarianism here if we go in, and feel this is a
more immediate danger than Nazi penetration or invasion.
Only one believes we have a moral obligation to fight as soon
as we can.
4. Have the Nazi anything? People who fear youth may
have been misled will find comfort in the answers to this
question. On the credit side of the Nazi ledger, as these men
see it, are efficiency, military astuteness, economic ingenuity,
complete exploitation of resources, unity of purpose. They
suspect that negative morality, lust for power, and denial of
freedom to the workers will be Germany’s undoing. Most re
assuring is their belief that the Nazi virtues are not virtues
when one looks beneath the surface.
5. What is positive in American democracy? Let no viewer
witli-alarm fool himself—these men value highly the sense of
responsibility for government which Americans have, the civil
liberties they enjoy, the capacity for peaceful change their
institutions evince.
6. What part have school and college played in shaping your
present conclusion? Those who replied insist that their present
attitude has resulted as much from family influence, conversa
tions with friends, reading, and opinions of commentators as
from professorial indoctrination. They are grateful to their
university courses for helping them clarify conflicting testi
mony. “My schooling has above all opened my eyes to the
measureless value of democratic institutions.”
All these students have looked forward with enthusiasm to
a profession after college. To throw aside all their hopes for
a good life is not easy. But it is evident, too, that if convinced
they must fight to make it possible for those who succeed them
to have the kind of life they want, few of them will hesitate.
International Side Show
By RIDGELY CUMMINGS
In a letter notable for its re
straint, dignity, sincerity, and
freedom from personal innu
endos, Charles A. Lind
bergh has tendered his resigna
tion as a coionei
in the air reserve
and the resigna
tion has been ac
cepted by the war
department. The
noted flier has
been in the fore
front of those
who are trying to
keep us out of
Cummings war and because
he lias had-the courage to express
views in direct disagreement with
those of Roosevelt he has been
made the object of a smear cam
paign.
The president has implied that
Lindy is a “copperhead,” the name
applied to those northerners who
during the civil war believed that
the South was going to win. This
is an unjust accusation, it seems
to me, for so far as I know Lind
bergh has never said that Ger
many would defeat the United
States.
England Doomed ?
He has publicly declared that he
believes England is doomed to fall
under Hitler’s war machine—but
apparently Roosevelt thinks the
same thing, else why is he so an
xious to have this country enter
the. war on England’s side if it is
not to save the British empire ?
Lindbergh certainly has a right
to publicly express his opinions,
regardless of how distasteful they
may be to Mr. Roosevelt. The
president's remarks certainly do
not show such a profound belief in
tolerance and in freedom of
speech and conscience as he has
professed on other occasions.
Quote the Tribune
Quoting from the New York
Herald Tribune for April 26, in
the story dealing with Roosevelt's
attack on Lindbergh there is the
following paragraph:
“Any mentality, he (Roosevelt)
indicated, which could lump
Cromwell and Washington with
the other three (Alexander, Cae
sar, Napoleon), was not much of
a mentality. He was awfully sor
ry, he added, that people of those
mentalities were in such high
places that they could write or
talk at all. It was just dumb.”
If that is how the president is
talking at his press conferences
it looks bad for freedom of speech
and press in the near future. He
is ‘‘awfully sorry” that people
who interpret history differently
from him are in such positions
‘‘that they could write or talk at
all.” Page the concentration
camps! There is not much writ
ing and talking done in those vile
abodes w'hich Roosevelt presum
ably wants to see eliminated from
Europe.
Lack of Confidence?
Even Mrs. Roosevelt, McAr
thur court speaker, seems to have
missed the boat in a recent Los
Angeles interview in which the
United Press quotes her as say
ing that Lindbegh “seems to have
a strange lack of confidence in
our own people.” If she was re
ferring to Lindbergh’s statement
about England’s defeat then she
implies that “our own people”
are guaranteeing England’s vic
tory. But wTe can’t do that short
of war, and “our own people”
have not yet signified their will
ingness to jump completely into
the European maelstrom that will
eat up our men and resources and
leave us once again holding the
bag.
That's the spinach, gentle
reader, and now here is the
whipped cream dessert—rather
frothy.
$ $ $
Character Sketch No. 3
The object of my objections
Suffers from ingrown teeth.
Her many fickle affections
Show' a warm heart underneath.
She recently nursed a black eye,
Just one of her many woes,
But why should she sigh, ai, ai,
When Wraller goes where she
goes?
She has a record collection
Which she holds very dear,
Although a choice selection
Sometimes gets hocked for beer.
This gal has a pale complexion
And her hair is recently clipped;
She promised to keep a date with
me,
But fears “they” may think she's
slipped.
UNION
NOW!
By Ann Reynolds
The one point that has been
agreed upon by everyone connect
ed with the student union is that
politics and personal opinion must
not be used as yardsticks by
which the question of sites will
be decided. Recently with the
sudden spurt of interest in the
movement that several groups
have shown we’ve seen definite
opinionated support of certain
sites.
This is the very element that
must not enter the student union
movement. In this program, if in
no other campus activity, it is
hoped that unbiased reason will
for once replace controlled pre
judiced scrapping for ulterior
selfish motives.
Future to Consider
The primary point that should
be considered by every person ex
pressing an opinion is that this
building will not be built for pres
ent campus power houses but for
the large majority of students
who in the future must use the
building. It would be well for the
ardent advocates of certain sites
to remember that if they are suc
cessful in high-pressuring student
opinion into their prepared molds,
they would also be held responsi
ble for the ultimate success, or
failure of the building.
Here’s something more to con
sider about the Deady property.
The decision of the University’s
architects is that if the building
were planned for this site we
would have to wait three years
before the plans were started.
The reason for this is that the
expense of utility and service
branches installation would be
too great for the present budget.
Although we have the $250,000 in
bonds to be sold, more security
must be raised to back them.
This decision, perhaps will put
a different slant on the choice of
the site. If students are willing
to wait three years, we could have
the building on this property.
More Funds Needed
Further investigation has re
vealed that if the building was
planned on the Sheldon block ad
ditional funds would also have to
be raised. The estimated cost of
building is $264,000. Thus ap
proximately $20,000 would have
to be secured. This would neces
sitate a longer period of time un
til we could start building.
In other words these two deci
sions suggest that unless the oth
er sites are seriously considered
students will have to wait longer
for their building than was first
expected.
Oregon Emerald
Night Staff:
Ardie Alexander, night editor
Fred Treadgold
Betty Anunsen
Doris Jones
Copy Desk Staff:
Bill Hilton, city editor
Mary Wolf, assistant
Bob Frazier
Kent Stitzer
John Kahananui
Don Ross
Betty Sevier
Helen Flynn
Bernie Engel.
Infirmcxryites Miss
Listening to “The Lone Rang
er” instead of Eleanor Roosevelt
last night were infirmaryites
Mary Robinson, Evelyn Johnson,
Alice Lucas, Frances Baily,
James Crump, Bill Campbell,
John Ryel, James Kurtz, Tom Ox
man, Bill Hoyt, Fred Foster, Al
len Van Duyn, James Durkheim
er, and Burson Ireland.