University of Virginia Library

Alumni Association Feels Funds Pinch
As Life Memberships Decrease Sharply

By Mike Gartian
Cavalier Daily Staff Writer

Lifetime memberships in the University
Alumni Association have decreased
sharply as compared to the average total
of preceding years, according to Gilbert J.
Sullivan, the Director of the Alumni
Association.

In a conversation with Mr. Sullivan
yesterday, the director said that membership
subscriptions from a graduating class
usually total between 400 and 500. An
estimate of memberships from the Class
of 1970 made at the end of June shows
just over 200 subscriptions received, a
decline of about 50 per cent.

Lower Contributions

Clay E. Delauney, Director of the
Alumni Fund, said yesterday that contributions
from alumni were lower for the
period from May to September of this
year than the average total for previous
years. Mr. Delauney was quick to point
out that this decline cannot serve as a
basis for comparison against previous
years because there is usually little incentive on
the part of alumni to contribute except during
the fund raising drive.

Mr. Delauney said that the annual fund drive
for the alumni runs from September 15 until
December 15. He said also that alumni contributions
are characteristically slow during the
summer months.

When asked to explain the decline in lifetime
subscriptions. Mr. Sullivan could not
specify any particular reason for the decline. It
has been voiced by many sections of the
University that the suspicion and misunderstanding
surrounding the Alumni Association's
telegram that was sent last May to many
parents of students here, are primary reasons
for the decline. This telegram concerned the
student strike here and caused a furor when it
was learned that alumni funds were used in its preparation and delivery.

Alumni Dissatisfaction

Alumni dissatisfaction has been seen in
Letters to the Editor that appeared in various
newspapers around the state during the summer.
These letters presented both positive and
negative opinions on the strike, but a large
number of these letters expressed a negative
attitude towards striking students. It would
appear that alumni grumblings are a major
concern of the fund raisers at this time.

This year's letter from the president of the
Alumni Fund, Mr. C. Waller Barrett, speaks at
great length about the events in May. This
letter, which marks the beginning of the annual
fund drive, stresses that the University was kept
open throughout the strike and credited the
"unremitting vigilance and good judgement
exercised by the administration" in keeping the
doors open.

Student Survey

The letter continues by saying that "the vast
majority of the student body is opposed to
illegal and irresponsible policies." In an analysis
of students which was described in the letter, it
was stated that "98 per cent who are at the
University [are here] for the purpose of pursuing
the educational process."

When asked who made this analysis, Mr.
Sullivan replied that he did not know. He said
that he had heard the same estimate echoed by
several prominent members of the administration.

The letter also discusses the future at the
University. It points out that two committees
have been formed, one charged with developing
means of combating future attempts at disruption
and the other to devise suitable disciplinary
action for those responsible.

Mr. Edwin M. Crawford, Vice President for
Public Affairs, described these committees for
The Cavalier Daily. Mr. Crawford said that
the committees were authorized by President
Shannon in a statement made after the
June meeting of the Board of Visitors.

The first committee was appointed by the
Rector of the University, Joseph H. McConnell,
was charged with changing the student conduct
code. This committee was chaired by Chase
Stuart Wheatley, a member of the Board of
Visitors.

The second committee was appointed by
Mr. Shannon to serve as an ad hoc group to Mr.
Wheatley's committee and to draft the final
rules of conduct. Mr. Frank Hereford was the
chairman of this group and was joined by
several members of the administration whose
duties involve student affairs.

The result of these committees was the
formalization of the rules of conduct for
students. The former code contained no specific
rules governing student conduct, according
to Mr. Crawford, and these rules are the first
formal standards of conduct at the University.