University of Virginia Library

Mr. Jefferson Would Be Proud

Ed.)

Every university, whatever its
location, that can claim any special
merit is in some measure unique. Its
uniqueness may reflect its structure
or environment, the quality of is
faculty and administrators, the
distinction of its graduates, or the
promise and behavior of its
students. Such variables, reflecting
both the physical and the human,
account for whatever special
qualities and traditions any
university might possess. What
separates the University of Virginia
from all others is its relationship to
Thomas Jefferson and, in lesser
measure, to the other two members
of the Virginia dynasty, James
Madison and James Monroe.

It seems clear that Mr. Jefferson
intended to establish a University
dedicated to the search for truth in
an atmosphere of freedom.
Whatever the failures of the
University and the State of Virginia
to live up to those high standards,
those failures are for us a reminder
of unfinished tasks, a challenge to
our minds and consciences to recall
and practice the humane precepts
which Mr. Jefferson imparted to
this University. The forces which
free the human spirit have always
been beset by the fears of liberty
and change. The quest for
freedom, understanding, honor, and
courage is eternal.

Unique Tradition

At this early moment in the new
academic year we shall consider
that unique tradition of the
University known and revered as
the Honor System. For over a
century the Honor System has
guided successive generations of

Virginia's students in their efforts
to establish a right relationship with
themselves and with others. At
Virginia no less than wherever
human relationships are satisfactory
the name of the game is honor.
Without honesty there can be no
successful and enduring relations
among nations. Without it there
can be no sound business
transactions, sound politics, sound
education, or sound personal and
family relationships. Where there is
no honor there is only distrust,
calculation, and expediency, all of
which restrict the scope of human
endeavor.

Recorded History

Perhaps more than traditions
generally the Honor System of
Virginia has a recorded history. The
early University, as was common
enough in the Jacksonian era, was
governed under the assumption that
in age there is wisdom; in youth,
ignorance and the absence of
responsibility and good judgement.
The result was a body of rules and
regulations now difficult to
understand. Students in good
standing arose at dawn and retired
at the sound of the college bell at 9
p.m. They did not gamble, drink, or
play cards, although drinking,
which required no special
knowledge, was more common than
card-playing. Students wore
uniforms at all special occasions
and whenever they left the grounds
of the University—much of the
time, indeed, except when they
attended classes.

Regulations governing the
classroom were equally rigid and
extremely onerous to students and
some of the faculty alike. Honesty
in the laking of examinations was
enforced by the most rigid
controls. Members of the faculty
were never permitted to leave the
room during an examination:
students could not leave their
seats, much less leave the room or
communicate with one another,
until the examination period ended.
Such supervision not only created a
spirit of rebelliousness but also
eliminated any sense of obligation
which the students night have felt
toward one another.

Student Complaint

Historically the University
Honor System began in 1842 when
Professor Henry St. George Tucker
responded to the student complaint
that the close faculty surveillance
of examinations implied distrust by
proposing a resolution to the
faculty which read: "In all future
written examinations for
distinctions and other honors in the
University of Virginia, each
candidate shall attach to the
written answers presented by him
in such examinations a certificate in
the following words: 'I, A.B., do
hereby certify on honor that I have
derived no assistance during the
time of the examination from any
source whatever, whether oral,
written, or in print, in giving the
above answers." The faculty
adopted the resolution and later
extended it to include the giving as
well as the receiving of aid.

This examination policy
inaugurated a new age in the
student-faculty relationships at the
University. In 1851 the
enforcement of the Honor System
passed into the hands of the
students. Thereafter it was they
who determined what students
could not return to the University,
thereby eliminating the right of
appeal to the faculty. Yet
throughout the nineteenth century
the students established no
formalized system of enforcement.
Not until 1909 did the University
establish a Honor System with
formal rules and procedures and a
permanent Honor Committee.
Students can study in detail the
machinery and procedures of the
Honor System as it functions today
by referring to the printed "Blue
Sheet."

Love Of Freedom

Some find authority for the
Honor System in the words of
Thomas Jefferson. "The human
character," he wrote, "is
susceptible of other incitements to
correct conduct more worthy of
employ than fear, and of better
effect." Mr. Jefferson possessed an
inordinate love of freedom as well
as a deep faith in human
responsibility under conditions of
minimum restraint. When properly
disciplined men would scarcely
need the presence of a controlling
power at all. What central power
existed would be concerned less
with curbing human excesses than
with creating an environment
condone to individual progress
and satisfaction. In large measure
the Honor System has underwritten
Mr. Jefferson's ideal of individual
responsibility at the University by
providing students an opportunity
to develop their own potentialities
with a minimum of outside
interference.

Why despite human
imperfection everywhere does
Virginia's Honor System continue
to function? The answer lies in the
careful restriction of the system's
jurisdiction to fundamentals.
Throughout its history the Honor
System has maintained a sharp
distinction between honor and
university regulations. The Honor
System is not concerned with
questions of excessive drinking,
sexual immorality, the use of drugs,
the shooting out of street lights,
disorderly conduct, the passing of
bad checks, or the failure of
personal debts. Such offenses may
demand punishment by a
disciplinary committee of the
University or by civil authorities,
but they are not strictly violations
of the Honor Code.

Limited Scope

Those who have influenced the
evolution of the Honor System
were careful not to endanger it by
overloading it with a wide variety
of offenses. Although the
jurisdiction of the Honor System
extends beyond the classroom and
the integrity of written work, it is
limited largely to conduct classified
as dishonorable and to cases where
the pledged word has been violated.
For that reason the Honor
Committee discourages the use of
pledges in matters of minor
concern.

Spirit of System

Honor cannot be codified in
several columns of rules and
regulations. To attempt a detailed
codification would destroy the
spirit of the system. In early years
the list of offenses that could bring
dismissal went far beyond the three
fundamental infractions of
honor—cheating, lying, and stealing.
During prohibition days any
student who stepped on a dance
floor gave the automatic pledge
that he had consumed nothing
more alcoholic than water since
noon. If he wandered about the
dance floor drunk he would awaken
the next morning to find himself
dismissed from the University.
There was a time when the breaking
of athletic training rules was cause
for dismissal.

The Honor Committee settled
the disturbing problem of
jurisdiction in 1934 when it
accepted a statement which remains
part of the Honor System: ".....it
is essential that the Honor System
shall concern itself solely with those
offenses which are classified
dishonorable by the generation
involved." Thus the system is not
static. It has responded to changing