University of Virginia Library

I read with interest your
October 8th editorial entitled
"Barber Bigots." I was especially
interested by the fact that amidst
the indignation there was a sense of
irony and wonderment.

The editorial seems to be based
on what I believe to be a quite
commonly held fallacy here at the
University, i.e., that we are a
basically liberal, progressive,
concerned student body that is
appalled at individual acts of
discrimination.

After a little over a year here at
the University I have a feeling that
the average "Cavalier" is at heart, if
not in speech, rather racist, and is
not particularly ashamed of it. I
believe that he feels either that
private barber shops have a right to
cut (or not to cut) the hair of
whomsoever they please or at least
that it is not the duty of any
individual to bring such bigots
around to equalitarianism by
anything so drastic as a boycott.

However I may be wrong; so I
propose a test.

After the true policies of the
barbershops are determined by Mr.
Charles Murdock, if any shops still
refuse to cater to Blacks, let the
names of these shops be published
in The Cavalier Daily. Ask all
concerned, right-thinking people
not to patronize these shops. Then,
wait for a reasonable time. If the
boycott and the offending barbers
are idle, I will concede that I am
wrong and take the verbal thrashing
on your editorial page that I will
justly deserve.

If, however, the boycott is a
failure, you must reassess on your
editorial page the racial situation at
the University and throw the full
weight of your efforts behind more
forceful methods of coercion such
as picketing. Are you game?

Dan Sullivan
Law II

We will indeed publish the
names of those barber shops Mr.
Murdoch's study finds will not cut Negroes hair when he provides
us with a list of them. We are
certain that we will not have to
encourage all concerned, right-thinking
people not to patronize
them. It's the unconcerned, not-so-right-thinking
people that we have
to worry about. —ed.