University of Virginia Library

Upon reading Mr. Whitlow's
letter of December 16, I was
astonished at the inadequacy
of his arguments in support of
the Honor System. For the
most part he has simply stated
his version of the
indoctrination which all
students must suffer through
during orientation. This kind
of reaction to criticism is
totally insufficient, and it
avoids the issues at hand. Mr.
Whitlow reports that the
majority of students support
the Honor System and agree on
the types of cases it should
handle. All of this is interesting
and, I am sure, accurate; but
no one, yet, is protesting the
existence of the system.

The real issue confronting
the Honor Committee, the one
not mentioned by Mr. Whitlow
and the one indicated in the
letters of Mr. Carmona and Mr.
Henggeler, concerns the
penalty. Expulsion can be cruel
and unusual punishment. Such
was the case in the decision
reported last December 7.

In order to prevent future
repetitions of that injustice, a
system of graduated penalties,
like that of the Judiciary
Committee, should be adopted
for the Honor Committee. The
idea of graduated penalties
usually elicits the phrase:
"There are no gradations of
honor."

This argument is specious.
There are, indeed, no degrees
of honor. Lying is lying;
cheating is cheating; and
stealing is stealing-no matter
how insignificant the act. But
no legal system would sentence
a person to life imprisonment
for stealing a loaf of bread
from the local grocery store. It
is not that serious a crime.

Likewise, dishonorable
deeds committed at the
University vary in their
seriousness. Certainly, not all
are equally injurious to the
academic community. Why,
then, should each offense,
where guilt is determined,
warrant the same heavy
penalty? If the logic of this,
system were applied to the
American legal system as a
whole, there could be no
misdemeanors; and life
imprisonment would be the
only possible sentence for
every crime.

In summary, students are
demanding changes in the
present Honor System. I feel
that the adoption of graduated
penalties would satisfy these
demands. In any case if the
committee does not change in
response to this criticism, it
may soon find itself fighting
for its very existence.