University of Virginia Library

Letters: Harris Cited As Scholar, Educator

I recall with some clarity when
it was announced that Robert J.
Harris had accepted an appointment
to the University. Conversation
among the faculty and the
students invariably concluded that
the University had succeeded in
pulling off a major coup in enticing
him to come to Charlottesville.
As the years since he has
been here have passed, Dean Harris's
contributions to the University
have only been subject to
praise. Now with the heated debate
over the promotions of professors
in the economics department,
past accomplishments have
been forgotten and his personal
integrity has been called into
question. This simply can not go
unchallenged.

The Department of Government
and Foreign Affairs has a tradition
of obtaining men who are
not only scholars in their field,
but who are students' professors.
Men like Robert K. Gooch and
George W. Spicer set a tone in
that department of never being too
busy for their students, of never
responding in but a helpful and
instructional manner, and of never
reacting except in an objective and
scholarly way. Dean Harris
exemplifies this tradition.

It is difficult to believe that
a man, to use the words of a reviewer
of one of his books, who
has a "powerful perspective on
political theory and on American
constitutional and judicial history,"
would be, to use Mr. Buchanan's
words, "susceptible to professional
jealousy over the
successes of Mr. Tullock and myself
in the political economics
field." Such an accusation is
not only petty and unfounded, but
not worthy of such a respected
"scholar" as Mr. Buchanan. Dean
Harris is no upstart trying to
make his mark on the political
science profession. He is recognized
to be a man possessed
with a brilliant mind and is a
leader in his field. His reputation
is such that on a recent Graduate
Record Examination the student
was asked to identify him. Surely
such a man is above "professional
jealousy."

Furthermore, as Dean of the
Faculty, he has been instrumental
in bringing to the University many
first-rate men. It becomes absurd
to accuse a man who is charged
with improving and who has improved
the quality of the faculty
at the University with a design
to destroy that which he is obligated
to protect and to promote.

A man's personal integrity
should never be attacked, especially
by a "scholar," without the
most clear and convincing documentation.
Innuendos have no
place in an academic community.
Many people owe Dean Harris an
apology.

Cowardly Council

In his letter, "Council is racist,"
Mr. Caperton makes a case for
the council's "dishonorable" and
"immoral" action in tabling the
non-segregation rule. He accuses
the council of being racist. If the
Student Council was racist as Mr.
Caperton suggests, the Student
Body would have reason to wage
a healthy "fight," and we would
probably win the day. But the
council (its majority) does not
have the gumption to be racist,
nor the imagination to implement
its (would be) convictions.

They are complacent, not active;
they are opinionated, not educated;
and they are not deliberative and
thoughtful at all; they are merely
frail cowards who can be made
to act by the responsible Student
Body.

Dignified Respect

The use of racially segregated
facilities by organizations approved
by the Student Council
attests to the black view that even
the most highly educated whites
readily compromise with segregation
when personal inconvenience,
no matter how small, is asked of
them. Who can deny the hopelessness
of the quest for acceptance
as a human by a Negro when
the future generation of leaders
of Virginia can suspend their
principles as has been done so
readily this past week.

I hope that this University community,
including the Student
Council and the Nurses Association
will see this issue as one in
which an evening's entertainment,
which the nurses most certainly
deserve, must be weighed against
a commitment to dignified respect
for human rights.

Segregated Facilities

Last spring the Student Council
effectively promised all students of
the University that it would use
its power to help prevent the perpetuation
of racial discrimination.
This promise took the form of a
rule stating that no "recognized"
student organization could patronize
racially segregated establishments.

The Council broke its promise
last week; it suspended the rule.
Supposedly, suspension is necessary
to allow a special committee
time to study problems in the rule
of application, enforcement, and
punishment. Obviously, the reason
is to allow the student nurses
to have their dance at the segregated
facilities at Fry's Springs
this Friday without punishment
or censure.

Tuesday night the Council was
given another opportunity to
choose which of the two conflicting
promises is most important.
The Council defeated a motion
to reinstate the rule immediately.
It thereby gave priority again to
the convenience of one student
organization rather than to the
individual rights of each student
of the University.

The fact that a special committee
has spent much time during
the past week working out the
problems (of application, enforcement,
and punishment), but that it
will not have any definite proposals
for another week, shows that the
committee has not spent enough
time to make equal opportunity
any more immediate at this crucial
time. The application in this case
where a "recognized" student organization
is involved is quite
clear-no use of segregated facilities.
"Application" is no reason
to suspend the rule to avoid a
question of its violation. Furthermore,
since enforcement and punitive
measures for violators would
be a Student Council matter, initial
violators could be handled and
then the committee's proposals in
this area could be spelled out more
clearly.

The fact that the Council intends
to reinstate this principle
conveniently after this Friday night
clearly demonstrates its unwillingness
to use the power given it
by the students to protect each
student's rights. The Council protests
that it is not "racist," that
it is opposed to racial discrimination.
The words are fine semantic
exercises. The action is plainly
hypocritical and dishonest.

The fact there are no Negro
student nurses involved and,
"therefore," probably no problems
of racial discrimination at
this one particular function has
nothing to do with the application
of the rule. The force of the rule,
in the first place, derives from
its power to help prevent the
perpetuation of racial discrimination
by keeping all recognized student
organizations from financially
supporting segregated establishments.

No student nurse can so much
as contemplate having a Negro
date at this dance, nor can a
Negro student consider himself
as a possible date at this dance.
A very real stigma exists: people
are being excluded before students
can choose to include them. Try
to put yourself in those shoes
and to confront this situation
and the decades of slammed doors
in your face. Either we have the
courage to make it a fact that
where one of us goes, we all go,
or we don't have the courage.

To think that avoiding the present
violation of our principles
will gain us more than we shall
lose is to be stupid. The whole
matter is an issue of individual
rights, rights which our Student
Council blatantly chooses not to
protect at this critical time. The
time is critical and crucial because,
after the inaction last month by
the Council on the rule's violation
and now before the violation
this Friday evening, the Negro
students here, prospective students,
and others are watching to
see whether the principles about
which we whites talk have any
depth.

Either University students stand
for racial equality, or they don't.
Today the Council is sitting. Tomorrow?
I urge all students, nursing
students especially, to think
hard about whether this dance is
worth its weight in hypocrisy and/
or convenience. No segregated
facility deserves our support, especially
our financial support.