ASUO Elections Endorsements
As Close Observers of Campus Politics,
We Will Once Again Make Our Choices
Once again the Emerald Editorial Board
will interview candidates for ASUO Senate
positions and endorse the candidates it
thinks best suited.
We do this because we think the Emer
ald is the only student organization on the
campus which is able to consider all can
didates objectively and make recommenda
tions based on first hand observation of stu
dent government. We do not intend to tell
students how they should vote, but we do
feel an obligation to tell the students what
candidates we think are best. The stu
dents are free to accept our judgment or
not as they see fit.
Interview's of candidates who survive the
primary elections will be held Saturday.
The rocmendations will be published the
following Mofiday and Tuesday, April 15
and 16. and th£ general election will be
held Wednesday, April 17.
This year wre will not endorse candidates
for ASUO President, for two of the three
candidates have been connected with t h e
Emerald and an endorsement for either
might be misunderstood. We will, likewise,
not endorse a candidate for any office where
one of the candidates hase been connected
with the Emerald, or where we think the
candidates are equally qualified.
On April 15. the Emerald will publish a
four-page pull-out section containing state
ments by all candidates for office. We will
also ask candidates for ASUO President to
answer a series of questions and will print
their answers to these questions, in order
to help the students evaluate the positions
and competence of the candidates.
We think that the procedure outlined is
the best way to insure that voting students
are properly informed about candidates so
they can make an inlelligent choice for the
various offices. In this way, the Univer
sity can maintain an informed and respon
sible student government.
The Discipline Code...
Editor’s Note: At the request of the
Discipline Committee we are reprinting
the Discipline Code of the University of
Oregon. For several months the Commit
tee has been re-evaluating both the con
tents of the code and the philosophy be
hind it. Since both the minority and
majority reports of the committee will
be publicized in the near future, and the
code itself will be the topic of consider
able discussion among students and fac
ulty, it seems appropriate that the stu
dents be given a chance to refresh their
memory as to what the code contains.
* * *
The Discipline Committee is responsible,
by faculty legislation and by delegation
from the President of the University, for
the formulation of policies relating to stu
dent behavior, for delegating the enforce
ment of these policies, and for imposing
penalties under them.
The Discipline Committee consists of six
University faculty members, three upper
division students, the Dean of Women arid
the Dean of Men. The University of Oregon
is one of the few major state universities
in the country where students have a voice
in the administration of discipline. The
Deans serve as advisers but do not vote on
Committee motions.
The Discipline Code is presented so that
the entire University and the student body
may know the general policies and proced
ures followed by the Discipline Committee
and the Office of Student Affairs.
„ Article I—Expulsions
The following offenses may result in ex
pulsion or such other penalties as may be
imposed. Expulsion means unconditional
dismissal from the University.
1. Wanton destruction of property.
2. Drunkenness.
3. Gambling.
4. Falsifying information concerning
overnight off-campus privileges.
5. Immorality.
6. Gross indecency.
7. Fraudulent registration.
8. Any action punishable under the State
of Oregon Criminal Code.
Article II—Suspensions
The following offenses may result in sus
pension or such other penalties as may be
imposed. Suspension means involuntary
removal for a fixed period of time or until
specific conditions are met.
1. Cheating.
2. Unauthorized absence from a living
organization after closing hours.*
3. Living in unauthorized housing or mis
representing a place of residence.
4. Visiting lor permitting visits) by un
chaperoned University or non-University
women in men's living quarters.
5. Participation in an unchaperoned par
ty in a hotel, motel, or other public lodging.
6. Providing or possessing liquor at any
University-sponsored activity or in any Uni
versity-controlled building or grounds.
7. Any other action that discredits the
University of Oregon.
Article III—Organizations
1. Each University-sanctioned student
organization on the campus is expected to
conduct its affairs in a manner that reflects
credit upon the good name of the group
and the University.
2. Any student organization that violates
a provision of Article I or Article II, or
whose members do so in a manner that
places responsibility on the group, is sub
ject to such action as the Office of Student
Affairs or the Discipline Committee may
impose.
Article IV—Administration
1. Administration of this Code shall be
the primary responsibility of the Dean of
Women and the Dean of Men who may
make final disposition of all cases except
expulsion from the University.
2. The Dean of Women and the Dean of
Men shall refer to the Discipline Commit
tee all cases in which they recommend ex
pulsion from the University.
3. The Dean of Women and the Dean of
Men at their discretion may refer any case
to the Discipline Committee who will con
sider the referral itself as evidence of the
gravity of the alleged offense.
Article V—Inter-Campus Activities
Officials of the University of Oregon and
Oregon State University have mutually
agreed to take severe disciplinary action
against any student who engages in van
dalism, kidnapping, and/or other malicious
acts. These acts may result in suspension
from the institution.
Article VI—Automobiles
All students must register their cars.
The privilege of any student to have a car
on the campus may be revoked at any time
for due cause. Students must not park in
restricted areas. In driving they must ob
serve the basic rule and other traffic regu
lations.
i V
StcptT WJEAPoNi
a>^M> 5w»
rJCetter to tie ^dilor
More Than Sentiment, Age
Involved in ‘Saving the Side’
This letter is not specifical
ly designed to support the cru
sade to preserve the College
Side Inn: for I feel its destiny
has long been determined. But,
it is meant to be a direct reply
to Brian M. du Toit's letter.
Mr. du Toit’s letter seems to
burp up the thought that crying
over the College Side Inn is a
ridiculous state of affairs, which
stands in the way of progress
which rest on a sentimental
foundation, and must be changed
for the “new" In belaboring
these ideas, Mr flu Toit used
many strange and varied analo
gies. It is my expressed wish to
examine these analogies and
related thoughts
IN WRITING this letter, I
will sincerely try to refrain
from using such ambiguous
words as repose, respect, dig
nity, purpose, and other psy
chogenic words, which are many
times part of the architectural
jargon; which are very difficult
to define and many times are
used in a very vacant, empty
manner.
First of all, Mr. du Toit wants
to find out why all the arciii
tects are “shouting to save a
lousy old building." It’s curious
to me that he can so easily call
the Side a lousy old building,
when most professional archi
tects consider it a rather good
building. Yet maybe Mr. du Toit
is an architectural historian, in
that case, his opinion would
seem to be a worthy one. But,
maybe Mr. du Toit is not an
architectural critic. Well then,
what is he? What does he lep
resent? We shall find out.
A major part of Mr. du Toit’s
letter was concerned with being
sentimental He stated he could
not understand “whv people in
the first place get sentimental
over a building.” Here. I be
lieve, he is truly naive: he has
burped-up something that not
even he should be able to Swal
low. For if we look beyond the
fact that architecture is ultili
tarian, primarily the housing
and protection of human activi
ty, we find that architecture is a
reflection of society, of people,
of man: Greece, through its
classical orders in architecture,
mirrors the simple, the direct,
the idealized glory of its -ancient
world, producing an everlasting
image of a highly sophisticated
Greek society; the Romans also
used the classical orders, but
their massive, weighty architec
tural forms were not tha« of a
Greek image, no, they were re
flections of the pomp, the png
entry, and the power of empiral
Rome. The history of man has
everywhere shown that archi
tecture has played an integral
part in man’s expression of his
society, his goals, and his aspira
tions; be it good or had, we have
to decide this—the good we take
to heart, and the had we east
aside. In architecture's evolu
tion, the good seems to be
known: when we think of
Greece, it is the Parthenon in
Kngland, it is Westminster Ab
bey; in Home, it is the Colos
seum; in Venice, it is St Marks;
in Paris, it is Notre Dame These
are monuments the world has
taken to heart: these arc the
emotional, the romantic, the
sentimental hallmarks of archi
tecture these truly evoke sen
timental attachment for thous
ands
I NOW HOPE the sentimental
is better understood For we all.
at some time or another, have
to sympathize with man’s past
to better understand man's pres
ent and future. Architecture is
an expression in the drama of
man’s struggle; to sympathize,
to understand, and become sen
timental is also part of this
drama—it is part of being hu
man
Before I go any further. I
must say that I have no inten
tions of comparing the College
Side Inn to the Parthenon, or
any other architectural monu
ment. The Side is a good piece
of architecture, but it is not a
Parthenon It never was and it
never will be; praise and eulogy
will not lift it to the level of a
Parthenon A building is never
(Con limit'd on page 3)
OREGON DAILY EMERALD
The Oregon Daily Emerald i» published
•even time* in September and five day* a
week during the uchool year, except dur
ing examination and vacation period* by
the Student Publication* Board of the
University of Oregon. Entered a* second
cla»* mater at the po*t office, Eugene,
Oregon. Subscription rate*: $5 per year;
$2 per term.
Opinion* expressed on the editorial page
are those of The Emerald and do not pre
tend to represent the opim mi of the
ASUO or the University.
RON DUEL, Editor
MARTY KKTKLS, Bu*inc*i Manager
TRD MAKAR, Managing Editor
EVERTTTE DENNIS. New* Editor
PHIL COGSWELL,
Editorial Page Editor
LARRY WILLIAMS,
Advrrtiiring Manager
JOHN BUCHNER, Sport* Editor
DULCY MOHAN,
Assistant Managing Editor
RON COWAN, JIM ERAKK,
JANET GOETZK,
Assistant News Editor*
GEORGE IU(H1 AM, Photo I'ditof
LINDA HR OWN, Entertainment Editor
CATHY NEVILLE,
Associate News Editor
DICK RICHARDSON,
Feature Editor
EDITORIAL BOARD:
Ron Buel, Phil Cogswell. Ted Mahar
Everette Dennis,
Dulcy Mo.an, Lindt Brown
Bob Forsyth, Hal inow,
Grant Ledger wood, I')< ug Ragen
Janet Goetze, and Bill iutchison