Majority Report
(Editor’s note: In an attempt to give a
well-rounded analysis of Wednesday’s
Charter Day Convocation attendance,
we have allowed two opposing view
points of editorial board members to be
viewed here. The titles of the editorials
are significant.)
Certain dormitory officials put one over
on the freshmen Wednesday by tricking
them into attending the Charter Day con
vocation. Dormitory students, both male
and female, were assigned gates in which
to enter McArthur court and were told that
their dormitory counselors would be wait
ing there to see which students attended.
One dormitory counselor reports that roll
was actually taken.
THE PUNISHMENT, either actually
threatened or inferred, was to be a trip to
one of the dormitory officials’ offices for
a little chat.
This action seems harmless enough since
every freshman should attend the Char
ter Day activities. Those freshmen who did
attend were very impressed with the pomp
of the occasion from what we have been
able to determine.
But what about the University’s policy
towards its students? Generally the Uni
versity administration has adopted the at
titude that students are adults when they
come to the University and should be
treated as such.
EACH FACULTY member, for examp
le, makes his own class attendance rules.
While there is no official poll, it would
probably be safe to say that the majority
of the faculty feel that it is the student’s
responsibility to attend. The same is also
true of University assemblies and similar
events.
This is not, as true in our sister institu
tion of the pasturelands to the north and,
except for administration policy, need not
be here.
But considering this long standing liber
al pqlicy, we wonder why dormitory offi
cials suddenly took it upon themselves to
change it. Traditions are fine and the tra
dition of attending Charter Day should be
encouraged, but perhaps the tradition of
treating students as mature individuals is
more important.
HOWEVER, it is entirely possible that
the fault does not lie entirely with those
dormitory officials who instigated the
piece of trickery. Much of the fault lies
with those students whose anticipated lack
of interest prompted the event.
Perhaps, though, in the long run the
greatest damage will have been done to the
prestige of the dormitory system itself.
What respect can a system expect if a rule
is promulgated one day and retracted the
next ?
What happens if later this year it is nec
essary to yell wolf again?
Minority Report
For once in the history of Charter Day
a decent sized audience attended. It’s about
time enough students showed up to give the
impression that students are interested in
something other than the chances of a date
with a Carson girl.
GRANTED, NOT EVERYONE showed
up of his own accord. A little coercion was
necessary on the part of the dorm counsel
ors. For girls roll was taken, and for boys
dorm counselors were waiting at the gates
to see who didn’t show up. The penalty for
not attending was for girls a conference
with the assistant director of dormitories;
there was no penalty whatever for boys.
Maybe there should have been. If students
are so indifferent to their University, per
haps they have no place here.
It is true that we come here to learn and
that attending Charter Day will not help
any classwork. People <lo not come to school
for a lot of horsing around with traditions
and ceremonies.
OR DO THEY? CERTAINLY no one
spends his entire college career behind
books. Everyone makes it over to the SU
once in awhile. In fact, some people make it
away from the SU only once in awhile. Cer
tainly the movie houses are not suffering
from lack of student attendance. Somehow
it seems that people who have time for so
cial activities and other extra-curricular di
versions should have time to attend Charter
Day ceremonies; especially when they are
excused from class expressly for that pur
pose.
The only unfortunate aspect of the “for
cing” of dorm residents to attend the con
vocation is that the forcing was necessary.
Letters to the Editor
i^meraui jsaitor:
Congratulations on selecting
the editorial under “Our Con
temporaries” that appeared in
Wednesday’s Emerald. Al
though. the candidates’ religi
ous beliefs, financial status, pub
lic speaking ability, and poise
may be of interest to the gen
eral public-, they should not be
elevated to major issues in the
campaign.
Tom Hoyt,
Sophomore, Pre Law.
* *
Emerald Editor:
Like many other loyal Demo
crats, I hurried over to the li
brary the other evening after
the last Nixon-Kennedy debate,
intent upon checking the records
of any possible use of earthy
tonguage in recent times by
high ranking Republicans.
I FELT that the diggings in
this mine must surely be rich
in view of all irritations and
reverses that Republicans have
suffered in recent years—rang
ing from such petty annoyances
as the cessation of the flow of
gifts and favors from industrial
ist tioldtine, to the blow up of
so many of their most impor
tant projects such as the Dixon
Yates Power deal, the Vanguard
I rocket, the A1 Serena timber
mine, the Paris summit con
ference, the president’s visits to
Russia and Japan, our pater
nal relationship with Cuba, and
so forth.
Our library staff prides it
self on the completeness of the
subject indexes, bibliographic
and cross reference system. It
is their contention that you can
find information on anything—
yes, anything, there. So it was
with a confident smile that I ap
proached the card catalog.
FIRST, I TRIED to find the
information under the general
heading “Republicans.” This
seemed promising as there was
a whole tray and a half of cards.
However I could find no sub
heads such as “Republicans-use
of profanity by,” “Republicans
—colorful language of,” etc.,
though I tried every such lead
I could think of.
Perhaps, I thought, the infor
mation desired would more log
fcally be assembled under the
general heading “Profanity,”
under some such arrangement
as “Profanity — presidential,”
"Profanity — senatorial,” "Pro
fanity—Republican,” etc., but it
turned out that there was only
a small handful of cards in this
category, none of them rele
vant to my problem.
I did, however, run across an
antriguing little volume by S.
O. Bee, entitled Profanity
Through the Ages in which were
gathered together some of the
most colorful expressions from
all the civilizations of the past,
including such choice phrases
as the ancient Egyptians, Chi
nese and Greek.
(Editor’s note: We regret that
we had to delete some Chinese
writing, Egyptian hieroglyph
ics and Greek words—not be
cause we fear their meaning —
because our printers could not
find the appropriate type.)
Soon I had forgotten all about
the Republicans and was hap
pily enriching my own vocabu
lary oblivious of all else when
(Continued on page 3)
Little Man on Campus
c-no*
tra
Two Voting Groups Make
Election Outcome Unclear
There are two groups exist
ing now which make an early
forecast of the presidential elec
tion outcome impossible. They
are the non-voting registered
voters and the switch-party vot
ers.
THERE IS A movement, par
ticularly in California, to ab
stain from presidential ballot
ing. mostly because of a feeling
that neither candidate is suit
able for the position. This
movement has been featured in
a leading magazine, The Satur
day Review. With this abstain
ing population of voters in many
states, which may include vot
ers who will fail to decide
which candidate they want by
Nov. 6, forecasts of individual
states are impossible. It Is the
electorially powerful states that
are active in this campaign. It
was started approximately two
to three months ago and has
been growing in momentum
since. Hence, this facet creates
a stigma in election forecasts
and election actions more than
any other factor viewable to
this writer. It causes a catering
to this group from both can
didates and hence an unsurity
of position in both camps.
ANOTHER VARIABLE that
can make early poll tabulation
a grade A headache is that of
the register-one-way-vote-an
other-way voter. This is some
thing that can best be shown
by the example of California.
In California the majority of
registered voters are Demo
cratic, and have been for the
past two presidential elections.
Yet the state has voted for the
Republican nominee in the two
previous elections and is ex
pected to present their vote to
Mr. Nixon. There are many
states where this is the rule.
Extreme cases are the south
ern states which have almost a
60 per cent to 75 per cent ma
jority of Democratic registra
tion and yet seem to be tending
to the Republicans and have
in the past two elections.
THERE ARE several factors
that contribute to this tendency.
First, these voters tend to ex
ercise their freedom of choice
and deviate from party lines
during a presidential election
more than at any other time.
At this time conservative Dem
ocrats and liberal Republicans
will shift to the other party if
their party goes too far from
what they believe is right and
the opposing party sticks to
what is closer to their politi
cal beliefs. At this time this
kind of voter keeps his rcspec- .
tive registration but votes for
the opposite party's candidate.
This exertion of freedom is
one that can be quite disturb
ing to the political analysis and
result in several dozen head
aches.
Another reason for this
switch in vote and continuance
of party is that people are re
luctant to break a tradition —
such as registering in one party.
This is sometimes called "op
erational npathy" because of
years of accepting party affili- ,
ation without the responsibili
ties and participation that sup
posedly come with registration.
This could be nicknamed "rut
ism,” but perhaps this is too
smutty a tag. It exists, this
complacency, and it is only a
part of human nature, for once
we are accustomed to some
thing, the habit is hard to
break.
POLITICS TODAY are also
more non-partisan than they
were 20 years ago. This means
that party lines are not so frigid
and forebearing as they were 4
before. Politics have become, in
most cases more statesmanlike, »
and perhaps this very fact is
the crux of the entire discussion
here presented: both non-voting
registered voters and party
switching voters are, to this
(Continued on par/e 3)
OREGON DAILY EMERALD
The Oregon Daily Emerald in published
four time* in September and five day* a
week during the school year, except dur*
injf examination anil vacation periods, by
the Student Publications Board of the
University of Oregon. Entered as second
clasH matter at the post office, Eugene,
Oregon. Subscription rates: $5 per year,
$2 per term.
Opinions expressed on the editorial page
arc those of The Emerald and do not pre
tend to represent the opinion of thf ASUO
or the University.
KERNAN R. TURNER, Editor
SI EVE MILLIKYN, Husiness Manager
/IM BOYD, Managing Editor
I ED MAHAR, News Editor
LOUIS TURK. Advertising Manager
DULCY MORAN, KEITH POWELL
Assistant News Editors
AL HYNDING, RON UUEL
Sports Editors
ARHAKA CHANTRY. Womru’s Editor
DAVE SANDS, Photo Editor
FRED ( RAFTS, Entertainment Editor
EDITORIAL HOARD
ell a?"? Turner. Tod Mahar, Keith Pow
tv’.f. yS'ni^"K. Marge Langeiits, Fred
C rafts, Jim Boyd, Ron Hnel. Gary Sula.
liowaid McGlasson, Sue Hunter.