What We got in the Mailbox.

I cannot sit back passively and observe the good names of other men dragged in the mud, as has been done in the last edition of Salient over the Rotherham vs Lee case.

I am not making a comment on the incident of the 5th March, for I cannot be the judge, but I do wish to say something on the way in which the whole affair has been handled.

Every man has the right to a good name and every man must see to it that he respects the good name of other men. If this is not the case, what sort of society do you want? The difference between what is right and wrong would become of little consequence. Yes, I am writing in defence of a Principle, for which I make no apologies.

Whatever the act in question was, Mr Lee's right to a good name has been violated. I would call it straight out detraction, and the abuse of a human value. (Thrifty anti-racists would take this incident up as another example of the subtle forms which racism is taking in our "fair land".) It doesn't matter what was done, the varsity library was not the place from which to tell the world. It looks suspiciously to me like a crafty advertisement for the Hart organization, which, curiously enough, is devoted to the cause of oppressed human rights. Just where is your revolution leading to if, in the fight for a better life you abuse the rights of others?

If I am to be logical I must also complain about the editors comment which appeared after "a Malaysian student's" letter. You were equally as destructive of the standing of certain other men in our community. The Verbal Violence which was engaged upon, was the cause of much damage which is irreparable. This form of violence is far worse than any form of physical violence and equally more contemptible and ought to be dealt with in correspondingly stringent ways.