University of Virginia Library

I.

In 1842, the faculty by resolution adopted the rule that students
should certify on honor that they had received no assistance during
University examinations. The rule commended itself to the students,
for by 1851 they had taken enforcement of it into their own hands.
After the Civil War, the System gradually expanded to conduct outside
the classroom, for in 1886 the YMCA's Students' Handbook revealed:
"[The] honor system exists, too, in the dealings of the students among
themselves, and everything bordering on dishonesty and dishonor is
frowned upon." This expansion does not appear, however, to have been
completely settled even as late as 1905, as revealed by a student quote
of that date:

"We are glad that it [the Honor System] does hold sway in the
examination room, but why should it be limited to that sphere? We see
that it has benefited the University there, why should its spirit not
pervade all college life?..."We believe [a way can be found to] lead to a
wider prevalence of the spirit of honor in our student life in matters
both small and great."

Before 1909 the System was not formalized: there was no set
procedure for handling violations; the custom was the for the student
body to deal with infractions. In 1909, the composition of the Honor
Committee was settled as the Presidents of the various departments
(schools) of the University, and in addition procedures for making,
appealing and deciding accusations were adopted. In 1917 and again in
1934 proposals for substantial changes in these procedures were made,
e.g., whether department meetings should be held to publish the name
of a dismissed student and the particulars of his offense. Some were
ratified and others rejected by the students.

Newspaper records of this modern period reflect continuing efforts
to delineate satisfactorily the scope of the System. Illustrative of this
process are the Honor Committee attempts in 1913 and again in 1923
to devise a workable solution for the handling of "bad checks." By
1935 the Honor Committee seems to have fully assumed the function
of interpretation. For in that year the Committee issued an extended
statement of the System's scope. Therein the Committee stated; "it is
essential that the Honor System shall concern itself solely with those
offenses which are classified as dishonorable by the public opinion of
the student generation involved."

In recent years problems as to the reach of the System have
continually arisen. For example, during World War II, a major
controversy developed over whether misrepresentations concerning
military regulations governing naval V-12 students at the University
were covered by the System. The controversy was marked first by a
decision to exclude, then reconsideration including a poll of student
opinion which favored exclusion, and finally by a Committee decision
to include. The period after the World War saw similar problems, with
increased efforts by the Committee to keep the student body informed
of what were violations through published clarifications of problem
areas. Recent events have resulted in changes in the System's
procedures, e.g., right to a public trial and a written accusation, in order
to guarantee the accused a fair trial. A concurrent development has
been an effort through open hearings to encourage, in so far as is
possible, the future sound development of the system.

The Committee wishes to acknowledge particular indebtedness to
Thomas Taylor's "History of the Honor System" (1958) and Chester
Goolrich's "The Origin and Growth of the Honor System at the
University of Virginia" (1907) for the material relied upon in this
summary. Also the Committee cautions that any summary as brief as
that reproduced above must make significant omissions; those
interested in a fuller account are urged to consult the two above
references available in Alderman Library.