SMAD. An Organ of Student Opinion. 1935. Volume 6. Number 18.

The Cockpit

The Cockpit.

Questionaire Questioned.

Dear "Smad"—

The editorial in your last issue states that the Peace questionaire "avoids the danger of vagueness" but, to me, it appears that the answers depend too much on supposition, and I contend that it is ill-framed and badly constructed.

I have no doubt as to my answer to question A 1, but A 2 contains a rather misleading phrase, viz., "no matter what the cause or occasion." After due thought I have come to the conclusion that I should be insane to support Great Britain blindly. For instance, I can conceive the possibility of a radical British Government to whose policy I did not conform, assisting in an attempt to establish Communism in Germany. In these circumstances I would most certainly not enter such a war.

Questions A 3 and A 4 depend entirely on the interpretation of the phrase "League of Nations." does it mean a truly representative League or the present group of nations from which three of the most powerful are absent. I decline to commit myself to answering this question until such a serious doubt is removed.

Admittedly questions B 1 and B 2 are straightforward, yet in B 3 we are again faced by a most important alternative which revolves round the meaning of "peace time." Does it mean a world in which every nation is living in amity with its neighbours or does it mean to-day's troublous peace time with its threat of imminent war?

To my mind question B 4 immediately gives rise to the question "what sort of war?" Until this is definitely answered I cannot express an opinion.

While admitting that the third part of the questionaire is the least vague I still criticise. Before answering C 1, I must know what substitute is offered for capitalism. It is conceivable that with the overthrow of Capitalism with no practical or definite substitue in view we may be involved in chaos.

To any intelligent person the evils of fanaticism are obvious, yet we are asked to give "yes" or "no" answers to question, the majority of which, only a fanatical pacifist could answer one way and a fanatical jingoist the other. I am like most people a pacifist, but take the liberty of considering myself between the extremes and consequently capable of expressing the opinion of the general student. As such I fully appreciate the importance of obtaining such a consensus but I demand that there should not be the slightest doubt that it is the opinion of the collective whole. As the questions are now framed the student will query the majority, and we shall obtain a consensus of a few extremists either one way or the other. That will defeat the objects of the ballot, and I cannot see how this is to be avoided unless the Committee responsible for drafting the questionaire will elucidate the debatable issues I have indicated. Within two months of the exams the students' difficulties are great enough without needlessly increasing them.

—C. R. Hutton.

Lamentation.

Professor! Your droning verbosity

Is a ponderous, palling atrocity,

Your circumlocution

Is slow execution.

—why man! You're a verbal monstrosity.

—Kaire.

Ballot Explained.

Dear "Smad"—

As the committee responsible for finalising the questionarie in draft form we thank you for giving us an opportunity of replying to the above letter.

We shall try to answer Mr. Hutton's points one by one. He has, after due thought come to the conclusion that he would be insane to support Great Britain blindly. He should therefore answer the question in the negative. There is then no criticism here.

Your correspondent next attacks Questions A3 and 4. It is surely obvious that the League of Nations referred to is the one at present located at Geneva, and not some future perfected League. Had the indefinite article been used there would we agree have been a doubt, but in the circumstances there seemed to us to be no room for doubt. If Mr. Hutton bases his hopes on some future league of nations he should answer C2 in the affirmative.

Mr. Hutton is again in a quandary when he sees the phrase "peace time." This must be construed as meaning a time when New Zealand is not at war with another state.

We think Mr. Hutton has stronger grounds when he wishes to know to what sort of war we refer in B4. Yet he should realise that in a questionaire of this sort it is not possible to provide an elaborate classification to cover all kinds of war. If any student feels that the question is too broad he may clarify his position by comments on the back of the paper, and indicate his difficulty by a cross in the query column.

The issue in C1 is whether or not capitalism in itself is a serious provocation to war, and the question of alternatives to capitalism does not really arise.

Finally, Mr. Hutton thinks that most students will query the questionaire and that only the fanatics will express their opinion. We have more confidence in the average student. We are convinced that the average student will not shrink from these issues. If we are wrong the questionaire must fail in its effect, as any questionaire would, for it is, of course, not possible to ask students to write a book on the subject: as Mr. Hutton says, the exams. are very close now and we realise with him that "the students difficulties are great enough without needlessly increasing them."

—The Drafting Committee,

N.Z.U.S.A

Peace Ballot Notice.

The first issue of the Peace Ballot papers was made on Wednesday last. After the issue had commenced it was discovered that one of the questions of the ballot had been omitted due to confusion and doubt on the part of the sub-committee as to the intentions of the N.Z.U.S.A. This omission is deeply regretted and the issue was at once stopped.

At a subsequent meeting of the N.X.U.S.A. executive, the secretary's action in having the ballot papers printed in Wellington, in view of the fact that the Auckland printer had failed to complete the printing in accordance with his contract, was confirmed and approved, and the ballot papers have been reprinted on red paper, the previous omission being rectified.

All students, therefore, who have recorded their votes on white ballot papers are asked to vote again on the red papers.

Esprit De Corps.

Dear "Smad"—

On Saturday, 14th September, Weir House played the rest of the Varsity for the Jack Ruru Memorial Shield. It so happened that the opening of the tennis season took place on the same day, and the regrettable thing was that so many of the present residents of Weir House found it more important to be present at the tennis opening than to attend at Kelbrun Park and encourage the House team.

While loyalty to any club is a thing to be admired in any student, there are numerous Saturdays to follow on which they could play tennis, and it was the least that any of the residents could have done to deprive themselves of one Saturday afternoon, Opening Day included, from the tennis court and attend this football match and do their part in assisting in some form of organised barracking.

The organised barracking was conspicuous by its absence and it is hoped that in other years these thoughtless residents will realise the position and help the House team to gain a victory in a match for which such an excellent trophy has been acquired.

—"2 Country Cousins."

Christmas Trip.

The Tramping Club will spend Christmas at the Kaimanawas. A base camp will be set by the clear waters of the Tongariro, a feeder to Lake Taupo. Numberless day trips, easy and strenuous are available. To the west, Waiohonu Hut and National Park peaks are near at hand, while to the east, the Kaimanawas rise to 5000 feet; the source of the Rangatiki, Maowhango and Maugaraire. Members intending to go on this trip are expected to go out on at least two of the tramps between the exams. and Christmas. The leader will be A. R. Perry.

Have You Voted?

For Law Students.

Dear "Smad"—

A bill entitled "An Act to Amend the Law Practitioners' Act 1931," is to be presented this session, by the Attorney-General, which will, if passed, detrimentally effect a great proportion of the Law Faculty at V.U.C.

The Bill provides that after its enactment "no person shall commence practice as a solicitor on his own account, whether in partnership or otherwise, unless he has had at least three years' experience in the office of a solicitor or firm of solicitors in active legal practice," and that no person shall be admitted as a barrister unless he has been a solicitor for not less than five years.

This Bill may have the laudable aim of preventing undesirables from handling trust moneys, but it will also prejudice all present students taking law, who are not at the same time in law offices.

Surely a student, who begins a course at a University College, and is led to expect that on completion he will enjoy certain privileges, can reasonably assume that those privileges will remain open to him, and not be placed beyond his reach, after he has begun his course. Moreover, the Bill does not apply to those who are at present qualified for admission, and of those whom it does not affect, there are many who have not had experience in a legal office. If the Bill exempts those from its provisions it should also, to be consistently fair, exempt present law dents.

Apparently, however, the Law society has other views and the hardship caused to present law students, is a matter of indifference to it. Something must be done by the students affected to forward a protest to the proper quarter. It is up to the various law students societies to take a stand in the matter.

—K. A. Gough.

Peace Ballot closes on September 30th.