Counting the Chips
Let the reader beware: this is no editorial; this is an inven
tor)', an inspection of the balance sheets, a closing up of the
books, and a look over our shoulder at the past year.
This is a sort of process the incumbent editor goes through.
Besides dusting off the cluttered desk, removing obsolete
notices from the bulletin board, and cleaning beer bottle caps
out of the filing cabinet, we find it necessary to take stock of
the things we are leaving behind for our capable successor.
These include: a box of aspirins, a dictionary, assorted minutes
of meetings and faculty bulletins, a few clean sheets of copy
paper, a lot of unfinished work, and some regrets.
We regret most of all the unfinished work. There is the
strong feeling that, if only we could do it all over again, every
thing would turn out much better. There is the inescapable
rankling restiveness which comes from knowing that, when
considered in terms of positive results, our work has failed.
(Here, of course, is the place where all the many enemies we
have made this year can gloatingly lick the feathers from their
chops . . . and we hope it makes them happy.)
On the other hand, there is also the slim hope that perhaps
the actual results, the final scores, are not all on the record
yet. And to this possibility we pin the last few shreds of our
once blithe optimism. We hope that as time goes on, and the
University matures, and students become more tolerant, open
minded and liberal, that the truth of some of the things we
have said in the editorials of the past year will be revealed.
Just as on a cloudy night it is hard to believe that a full moon
is shining, but when the clouds move on, we realize that, of
course, the moon was there all the time. (And this is the place
where our few friends, the loyal workers on the staff and the
silent observers on the campus, can nod their heads and under
stand.)
We have tried throughout the year to live up to the prom
ises made in our first editorial. Promises about truth, impar
tiality, and true representation of the students. We have not
been impartial; instead we have in almost all cases taken a def
inite and uncompromising stand on controversial questions.
But we have tried to be fair.
We have not been representative of all the students. Too
often the students have been too apathetic to become well
informed, and our ideas often have turned out to be contrary
to the ideas of most of the student body. But we have tried
to be well-informed, and urged our readers to do likewise.
We believe we can sincerely say that we have at all times
written the truth as best we recognized the facts as such. And
for this we have been criticized most of all. And from this we
have learned that only a few individuals are unpragmatic
enough to accept the truth, regardless of their liking for it.
^
Contrary to public opinion, we realize only too painfully,
our shortcomings: we know that we have not been diplomatic
or tactful, that we have not reflected the Oregon spirit of con
servatism, that we have refused to bury our heads in the sand
pile just because the other ostriches did, we have not deferred
to our superiors, or their advice, we have lacked the light touch ;
we have fought a losing battle, and we have disappointed many
students.
The last refers particularly to those who eagerly followed
our campaign against Theta Nu Epsilon. These students
wanted blood; they expected us to publish a list of TNE mem
bers and hoped that the TNEs would be tarred, feathered, and
exiled in disgrace.
Here’s our answer. We have a list. We have no proof but
circumstantial evidence. We can’t take chances with libel suits.
Furthermore, what lasting good would come of the expose of
a few men? That has not been the crux of the problem at all.
The contemptible thing about TNE is not really the members,
it is rather the basic ideology of fascism behind it. Fascism or
naziism or communism or Ku Klux Klanism cannot be killed
by sljpoting the exponents of those philosophies. The ideas
can only be made ineffectual, gradually, by educating the public
to reject those ideas. We have tried all year to show that un
democratic student government and coercion and control bv a
minority group are bad. If we have failed to convince the stu
tends of that basic fact, then it would be ridiculous to publish
any rosier oi names.
To those who believe that our criticism of the University
and the students this year has indicated some kind of antipathy
to Oregon, we 'have this to say: To love a thing as it is, is a
bitter mockery of that thing, since nothing is perfect and love
requires perfection. We can truly love only the potential good
or perfection of a thing, George Santayana said—and we agree.
Therefore, our criticism of the University’s imperfections are no
indication of our affection for Oregon, or our aversion to Ore
gon. A true admirer of the University must love it as it would
wish to be. And the first act of sympathy must be to move with
the University toward its betterment.
We have tried in our criticism to move toward the better
ment of tlie University and the students. Whether our efforts
have been in vain is for the future to reveal.
What more can we say?
Goodbye, Oregon. God bless you!
Oregon H Emerald
MARGUERITE WITTWER-WRIGriT, Editor
GEORGE PEGG, Business Manager
BOB FRAZIER
Associate to Editor
JEANNE SIMMONDS BILL YATES
Managing Editor News Editor
BERNIE HAMMERBECK
Sports Editor
DON FAIR, WALLY HUNTER
Assistant Sports Editors*.
walt McKinney
Assistant Managing Editor
BOBOLEE BROPHY and
JI'NE GOETZE
Assistant News Editors
BARBARA TWIFORD
Advertising Manager
PHYLLIS KOHLMEIER
Executive Secretary
uon jones, a-tan rnotograpner
REPORTERS
Beth Basler, Bettye Joe Bledsoe, Diana Dye, Ruth Eades, A1 English, Luwayne Engwall,
Virginia Fletcher, Joanne Frydenlund, Chuck de Ganahl, Laverne Gunderson, Dale Harlan,
Donna Kletzing, Janice Kent, Pat King, Phyllis Kohlmeier, Betty Lagomarsino, June
McConneH, Barbara Murphy, Laura Olson, Carol Jo Parker, Nancy Peterson, Helen Sher
lan, Virginia Thompson, Jim Wallace, Sally Waller.
MEMBER — ASSOCIATED COLLEGIATE PRESS
,ASSOCIATED PRESS WIRE SERVICE
Signed editorial features and columns in this issue of the Emerald reflect nothing.
[Nowhere in the paper will be found any tiling resembling the opinions of the editorial staff,
the student body, or the University. Any libelous material contained is unintentional.
Entered as second class matter at the oostoffice, Eugene, Oregon.
For Us the Living
Tomorrow across the nation Americans pause for a while
from regular tasks to commemorate those who served and died
in the service of the country. Appropriate ceremonies, prayer,
and silent thought will acknowledge America’s fallen heroes.
It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.
Here and there a tear will fall among the fresh-cut flowers
on soldiers’ graves; a tear swelled from a heart cut by a war
forged sword, and dedicated to valor in battle.
We cannot dedicate—we cannot consecrate—we hannot hallow . . .
\\ hile we remember them, this Memorial day, let us ask
ourselves, are we giving a measure of the devotion in peace
that they gave in war? Can we truthfully say everything is
all right? Can we truthfully say we will carry on the fight we
asked them to die for?
It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the great
unfinished work which they have thus far no nobly advanced.
Their fight was not a beginning, nor was it an ending.
Their fight was to bridge the interim and give us time to gather
our forces for a new onslaught against those who would abridge
freedom. For this they were paradoxically expendable and in
dispensable. Their part in preserving “our rvay of life” has
ended in an unqualified victory. Their mission has been suc
cessfully accomplished regardless of the outcome of ours. To
them, to the future, to our self-respect, however, we owe a
greater debt than dedication. It is necessary that . . .
. . . from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that
cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion. . . .
The cause for which they fought has not been lost. It is
real and alive and personal today, as it was at Gettysburg,
Santiago, the Marne, and Guadalcanal. And as long as we can
pause for even a moment on Memorial day and remember . . .
. . . These dead shall not have died in vain. . . .
Hope is not dead. It has been sustained by those we honor
now, and it is and will be sustained by men like them who still
live. Men who will guarantee that . . .
. . . Government of the people, by the people, and for the people
shall not perish from the earth.
—T. G. W.
Telling the Editor
ABOUT WILLIE EARLE
Willie Earl is dead, and the stench
arising from the acquittal of his
murderers is already fading from
the consciousness of the American
public.
The sordid story of the lynching
of an American by his fellow Amer
icans has become familiar. No Ger
man Dachau, or Japanese death
march was ever more brutal and
cold-blooded. But the incident, it
seems, is closed in the minds of the
American public.
I, for one, cannot so easily nor
swiftly dispel the repulsive reality
of the bloody lynch-mob from my
mind. I am infuriated by the gloat
ing statement of its ring-leader,
who said upon his acquittal, “Jus
tice has been done—both ways”;
and of his fellow murderer, who
purposes to “go on a 14-day drunk,
and then run for the office of sher
iff.”
The utter disregard of reason and
justice by a clearly prejudiced jury
in releasing the confessed slayers is,
I to my mind, unthinkable. The guilt
I of the lynchers, regardless of the
nature of the victim's alleged crime,
was beyond question. A confessed
killer is guilty in any impartial
court of law.
The infection of the lynch mob is
as dangerous to the structure of
American liberty as gangrene to
the human body. It must be purged
from the American scene, and it
must be stamped out NOW!
We cannot wait for the “good
people of the South” or the “intelli
gent people of the South” to eradi
cate this evil from their midst. The
tolerant and fair-minded southern
ers have displayed all of the poten
cy and unit of action typical of the
fabled “good people of Germany”
prior to World War II.
It is time the bigoted upholders
nized for what they are. Lynching
should be placed, by act of Congress,
in the same category with kidnap
ping as dealt with under the Lind
bergh law. A special court should
be set up by the Federal govern
ment, if need be, to try such cases
impartially and insure justice.
It si time the bigoted upholders
of intolerance and injustice be rec
ognized for what they are. Anti
lynch laws have always been fili
bustered to death in the past. Un-^
less fair-minded people have tired -
of government by all of the people,
they will launch a concerted cam
paign to erase the filibuster and the
lynch-mobs at one blow.
Willie Earl should be made a test
case. Execution without a fair trial
is murder whether it occur in the
South, in the North, in Germany, or
anywhere else in the world. If we
deny civil rights to one group, how
can we defend the rights of any
other group ?
The University has a “One World
Club.” Oregon is represented in
Congress by Senator Wayne Morse,
who has demonstrated his willing
ness to buck opposition in high
places for a cause he feels is right.
I would be very willing to active
ly support a movement among the
University students and faculty,
fostered by the One-World Club, to
affect these reforms.
Hans Wold
ABOUT “OUR FUTURE”
I wish to commend the person
who wrote the editorial in the Em
erald on “What Is Our Future?”. I
think this one editorial is worth the
price of subscription for the entire
year.
The paragraph which contains
this sentence, “Unless you realize
that you are part of a civilization,
which DURING YOUR OWN TIME
must either change or die, . . is
the theme I have been harping upon
during my whole year of General
Geology and is the one thing I think
most important for our students to
learn, that they are living in a
changing world. Our old world has
survived many crises, and I am sure
it will pull through this one; but the
kind of world we have in the future
will depend upon the thinking pret
ty largely of those who are now in
college.
Thanking you again for this time- ft
ly editorial.
Warren D. Smith
Head, Geology and Geography Dept.
ABOUT REBATES
It is fair vets should not receive
rebates on books not purchased
with their own funds. Neither
should students as a whole receive
rebates based upon these purchases.
Nor should the Co-op., profit. Who,
then, should receive the money.
With $250 billion on the cuff and
plenty of dependents, it seems un
cle is our poor relation right now.
Uncle has made the purchases. Why
doesn’t he get the rebate?
Glenn Hammaker
ABOUT RADIO
Today I have read with interest
both the front page story and the
editorial in the Emerald dealing
with problems confronting the Uni
versity’s Speech Department in
producing and presenting radio
programs over the state station,
KOAC.
Undoubtedly this situation is
traceable in part to the fact that al
though the campus studios are os
tensibly University property, the
equipment actually used in rehears
ing and releasing radio programs
is controlled by KOAC, and may
only be used for these purposes
when specifically authorized by that
Station.
May I suggest that at least a par
tial solution to this problem might
be obtained if the University would
work out a cooperative use of the
facilities of station KRVM with the
Eugene School Board.
Station KRVM, licensed to the
Eugene school district, will open
its program service next Septem
ber, and will operate with 475 watts
of power on a frequency of 90.1
megacycles, using the new FM
method of transmission.
Although authorized by the FCC
to operate unlimited hours, only
about five hours of daily operation
are planned unless additional pro
gramming aid and additional talent
obtained.
It would be very simple and quite
■ - ■ (-P-k-ase Inruto page three)- - •