New Housing Regulations
The Office of Student Affairs has in
formed some 458 University students that
they are living in unapproved housing. In
an attempt to enforce an old regulation,
the students have been informed that they
have until next fall term to either move or
have their landlords do something about
getting their premises on the approved list.
This regulation is a clear infringement
of liberty of the students living off-campus
in the abrogation of their rights to choose
where they wish to reside. Of course cer
tain rights are always surrendered when
one enters a given communal society, under
the premise of protecting the individual
from harsh and unjust treatment. But this
ruling oversteps the bounds of protection
and imposes a penalty not on the apartment
landlord alone but also on the student.
The ruling is a basis for long and contin
ued difficulties. Administrative problems
will be endless. The University has no idea
where a student is living until he has com
pleted registration. A student that moves
into an unapproved unit prior to registra
tion will not be discovered until his ad
dress can be checked, at which time he
will be told he cannot attend school and
continue living in the unapproved dwelling.
Of course if he is married or 21 or lives
with relative in Eugene he is excepted
from the rule. These items will have to be
checked also. Registration will be delayed.
The landlords must sign a non-discrimi
nation pledge and submit to an inspection
by county health and safety officials in or
der to be placed on the approved list. It is
idealistic to assume that all discrimination
will be brought to a halt by invoking writ
ten pledges from proprietors. And it is un
likely that the dwellings of all students now
pass all safety and health regulations re
quired by the local government. Discrimi
nation by race, religion or creed is illegal
and cases are dealt with by the Oregon
State Board of Labor, Civil Rights Division.
The student has avenues of recourse
through this agency; the University ruling
in this area is repetitive and unjust by deny
ing enrollment to the student not in ap
proved housing.
The University has attempted to move
away from the sheltering “in loco parentis”
concept of government through the student
oriented conduct program. The philosophy
of the program assumes that the student
will develop judgment and maturity neces
sary to become a responsible citizen. Such
edicts as the housing regulation assume
that the student is not able to determine
criteria of a reasonable choice of residence.
Instead of offering suggestions through the
approved housing lists the student is given
a command.
Another problem can be foreseen by sim
ple logic. Given a not improbable situation,
3000 studentS'could be given a choice of
2500 approved off-campus units. The sur
plus of 500 is offered a choice. The leftover
students could live in dormitories, w’hich
are filled to the brim each fall term. They
could live in Greek houses, financially not
feasible for many, or in co-ops. which offer
only limited openings. Or they could not at- -
tend school.
Students under 21 must get permission
from their parents to live off-campus unless
they are married or live with relatives in
Eugene. The permission card does not now
require listing the intended residences. If
the proposed dwellings must be listed,
which the administration has offered as a
possibility, problems will arise for the stu
dent w'ho does not rent a unit before his
parents sign the card.
The new regulation does not fall under
the Student Conduct Code now' and unless
it is incorporated into the code by next
year, the student is offered no avenue of
appeal. We feel the regulation is destined
to create problems that do not now occur
and will only aggravate minor situations of
discriminatory policy that do exist at the
present time. The administrative ruling
should be reconsidered in light of these
circumstances.
Rotating Meetings No Solution
The first ASUO Senate meeting of this
term will be held in Dyment Hall, a fresh
man men’s dormitory. Plans voiced in the
last Senate* meeting of fall term indicate
that if the meeting proves “worthwhile”
future meetings will be rotated among
other “interested” living organizations.
This plan is a faulty one, and should be
rejected when it comes up for re-considera
tion in the Senate.
The idea of “rotating meetings” came up
when the men of Dyment voted to extend
an invitation on the Senate to hold a meet
ing in the dormitory dining room. Meetings
are customarily held in room 101 of the
Student Union, opposite the Post Office.
Backers of the proposal said it was desir
able because it would bring Senate mem
bers into closer contact with the students
they represent, and it would give more stu
dents a chance to see the Senate in opera
tion.
It would be fine if a way could be found
to interest and involve more students in
their government. But this is not the way
to do it. Senate meetings are supposedly
business meetings in which Senators deal
with weighty problems, but anyone who has
attended a dorm meeting knows how pro
ceedings can deteriorate when irresponsi
ble and uninterested elements are present.
The bill passed by the Senate says, “Few
students take the time or have the oppor
tunity to witness a meeting . . .” Senate
meetings are publicized prior to the meet
ting time, and the room number in which
they are held is posted in the Student Un
ion. A person who seriously wishes to at
tend a meeting can do so easily. Persons
who would “take the time” to witness a
Senate meeting merely because it is a novel
ty are not likely to gain much; and the
Senate is not likely to profit by their atten
dance. The ASUO Senate is a legislative
body, not a circus.
Attendance at Senate meetings by the
members themselves was not the best dur
ing fall term. One meeting even had to be
adjourned due to lack of a quorum. And if
the members must keep track of a schedule
in order to know where the meeting is to
be held each week, attendance is likely to
be worse.
Another consideration, laughable as it
may sound, should be the dignity of the
Senate. An example of such a consideration
may be seen in action taken, or rather not
taken, by the Eugene City Council during
the recent dispute over the cross on Skin
ner’s Butte. The council refused to move
from its regular chambers for the meeting
in which the cross was to come up for dis
cussion, even though they knew a huge
crowd was sure to be prerent. The council
members knew the kind of atmosphere
which was likely to be generated by the
topic at hand, and they realized the value
of the dignity and stability lent to the
council’s proceedings by the existence and
maintenance of of a regular meeting place.
Although closer contact between Sena- '
tors and constituents is a laudable goal, the j
rotation of Senate meetings is not a satis
factory means of achieving it. Likewise,
any student who would seriously like to see
the Senate in operation can do so easily
under the present system. The Senate ,
should vote down the “rotating meeting” 1
proposal when it comes up for re-considera
tion.
i
*>«frf+-lELK
“We Ought To Get Some Idea F'rom The Cast”
Publish or Perish:
Professor s Dilemma
Bv JACK APSPITZ and
ROBERT HOROWITZ
The Harvard Crimson
Collegiate Press Service
Two hundred Harvard stu
dents staged an angry rally re
cently to protest the dismissal
of several popular young in
structors.
The instructors were asked
to leave the University for fail
ing to meet departmental re
quirements of scholarly publi
cation
The controversy swirls around
four teachers in the History of
Religions Department who have
published little.
Wrote Nothing
One, an assistant professor,
taught a popular course in
early Christianity, but wrote
nothing. On mild days, he habit
ually shepherded his class to a
small mountain for his lecture
Departmental officials charg
ed that the lectures were given
in an unscholarly manner and
amounted to little more than
sermonizing. The faculty was
also concerned about the pro
fessor’s dubious parentage.
When questioned, the profes
sor said only, “They know not
what they do.”
Another instructor, a beard
ed expert in Jewish theology,
hos composed only ten sentenc
es while at the University Even
these, the department charges,
were written by someone else.
Fhe instructor has been passed
aver for promotion several
times.
95 Theses
The faculty also dismissed one
if the department's more pro
lific members, whose work in
cludes 95 theses. The depart
ment had complained that nail
ng theses to the instructor's
iffice door did not constitute an
icceptable mode of scholarly
mblication.
The final case in the religions
lepartment involves an instruc
,or in oriental studies who
;pent much of his time sitting
ander a tree with his feet cross
ed, contemplating Holyoke Cen
;er.
“I have no desire for pro
motion. In fact, I have no de
;ire,” students quoted him as
;aying. His department charged
‘lack of initiative.”
The controversy threatens to
viden when the faculty takes
ip other cases next week. In
;ome instances, failure to pub
ish is coupled with other eriti
:isms.
Classics Teacher
An instructor in the Classics
department, for example, well
mown for his course in the his
ory of the Trojan War, has
>een charged with ‘‘lack of vis
on.”
The most scandalous case,
lowever, involves an instructor
in Greek philosophy He is
accused of copying all his pub
lished works, word for word,
from casual comments made by
a senior professor at cocktail
parties.
This instructor is also sus
pected of being a monarchist He
allegedly planned an abortive
coup in which members of the
philosophy department sought
to rule the t niversily. Some
students also hint that he in
vited the very youngest boys in
his section to ‘‘wild parties.”
One instructor of medieval
theology, however, has been
jumped to full professor He re
cently completed a treatise of
some 50 volumes on matters of
the highest theological value No
senior faculty member has yet
read the work, but all are great
ly impressed by its table of
contents and the cute review it
received in the Crimson.
LETTER POLICY
All letters to the editor must
be signed and must include the
student's major and year in
srhool. Letters from persons
other than students must in
clude the writer’s address. I n
der ordinary conditions, no an
onymous letters will be publish
ed. Letters will be run as room
is available.
Letters under 300 words in
length will be given priority for
publication. If letters are sign
ed by more than five persons
only the first five names will be
printed. The remaining signa
tures will be on file in the Kin
erald office. The Emerald
reserves the right to cut, edit,
or not to use any letters which
it receives. Letters become the
property of the Emerald and
will be returned to the writer
only upon request.
OREGON DAILY EMERALD
The Oregon Daily Emerald is pub
lithe*! five time* in September and five
day* a week during the academic year, ex
cept dtirmg examination periods, by the
Student Publication* Hoard of the Univer
sity of Oregon. Entered as second class
matter at the post office, Eugene, Oregon.
Subscription rates $5 per year; $2 per
term.
Opinions expressed on the editorial
page are those of the Emerald and do
not represent the opinion* of the ASUO
or tlic University.
Cathy Neville, Editor
J. Craig Mathie.en. Hu sines* Manager
Chuck Begg*, Managing Editor
Kenneth R. Kappel, Advertising Manager
Stephen Green, News Editor
Dave Jordan, Associate Editor
Phil Sernas, Sports Editor
Phyllis Riving, Associate News Editor
Joe Frazier, Rich Itabow,
Assistant News Editors
Irma Dawn Mo«r,
Associate Managing Editor
Bob Carl, Assistant Managing Editor
Nancy (,'ollins, Eutcrtainrncut Editor
Bob Denniston and Bruce McCurtain,
Co*Photo Editors
Mary Stamp, Feature Editor