Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1916-02-28

, t,onaiiy. for all tho people OF the
state. reCoucilin". If possible, their
conflicting interests Conccivably
what is best for the university mag
not hc best for IN. higher education
Of women. and what is best for the
higher education OF women may not
be best for tn" univcrSity. If a Co
ordinate c"llcg" :"r women. "a, or near
the university. threatens injury 70
that institution, in the judgment of
many thoughtful men and women the
Legislature should forhcur 10 try the
experiment. unless in no other way can
the just claim of the women COR State
supported collegiate education he sup
piled. if there be- no other way i,
may become the duty of the I.crisla-
turc 20 injure tho university as mems
school for the benefit OF the women
Fiat justitia, ruat coclum.
Would IL probably iniure the uni.
versity for the LEGISLATURE to cStab-
lish a co-ordinatc college for women
in its vicinity? Such conilictinG views
are expressed on this point that tho
Legislature may. perhaps. be I'm doubt
But TO be in doubt. unless justice 10
women demands tn. college. is to be
resolved and resolved against the CO.
ordinate college. The Legislature
should see 10 it that no harm comes
TO the university-nc iuid dctrim.rtti
put IN jeopardy unnecessarily.
What harm can tho proposed CO.
ordinate college do the university?
| Tho legislature should consider the
following dangers:
1, That the university would lose
men by reason OF the presence Of
women.
The inpiacahle opposition Of the
vast majority OF the students and
/ 4 4 ~, vi
crystaliizcd ny six years Of discussion.
must he rcck"ned with. Their loyalty
ANA Jealous support have brought,
many students to the university i'm
the past. They claim it as a mems
school ana deprccat" the presence of
women which they believe will change
the genius loci. as they have known
1t and loved aud cherished IT,
Eut IL * said that the alumni do
| not own the university THAT Is true:
but II is also true that the university
! does not own the alumni. The alumni
can 90 without the university better
ttan the university can do without
them. The alumni can adopt Other
institutions To which they MY send
their sons. but how can tho uuiyer-
sity find other alumni"
IL is SAID, however. that the "scntl-
incht OF the students and alumni is
based on ignorance and prejudice aud
should not hc pittcd against tho indy
inent' OF the majority OF the visitors
! ana faculty. Grant this as to tho
merits Of coordination as an oriri-
MAJ proposition. Nevertheless, it is Il
condition. and not a theory, with which
inc Legislature is confronted The
sentiment exists, and has hardened into
CONVECTION. whether right or wrong
10 outrage this sentiment may do in
calcuiaolc harm to the university Its
patronage outside OF Virginia. widely
/ Is NOR
depends almost entirely on tho efforts
or loyal alumni resident in other
states Aiicnate them. chill their ar
dor. and the university may lose i,s
diStinction ana prestige as "a cosmo-
pohtan scat OF learning, and take it's
place with many other state uuivcrsi-
tics as local school for men and
women. This dccadcncc the alumni
fear and dread. Is it certain that they
are wrong"
:. That til" university would loyo
| scholarship by reason OF the presence
! of women
This danger arises. not from any in
i"riority OF the feminine mind hut
/ from the avowcd purpose to utilize
The academic faculty of the university
az teachers in the college for women.
| This. we arc told, Will enable the col
. ioSe a. once Ia share the prestige for
learning and scholarship Of the uni
/ vcrsity. and il is claimed that in no
other way can such teachers he OBJ
| tainod for the college. And this double
ferricc of tho faculty is ono OF the
! economies" which will follow from
! placing the coordinate college at or
! near the university.
f; This proposition mus; rest on the
assumption that like the Hebrews in
/ Egypt. the faculty OF the univcrsit.
"be idle" and should have their tasks
| doubled. But II they have time and
/ strength 10 teach women in the co-or-
dinate college in separate classes dor
/ u is not To lie coeducationaD what
| is the reason for the numerous in
/ structors. assistants and student as
! siStautS who how assist them in their
| labors? And if these are now necrs-
| 5ary viii not the number be increased
when the professors in the academic de-
! Dartment conduct separate classes for
women: And VIII not this result in
! placing the students in the college for
mon more largely in the hands OF in
! structors. to The injury Of the uni
| versity? Or. if the academic faculty
add to their labors (alrcady supposedly
4 hcayyl tn" teaching Of the women
! VIII not this dctract from schola rship
/ by diminishing their time for pre- para
/ ton and opportunity for research?
/ 3. The other dangers to the uuiy.r-
sity can be disposed OF briefly. as corol-
larics OF the TWO great dangers al
ready discussed 1t is manifest that
/ the loss of male students Especially
! from other States) will mean loss OF
money; the loss of reputation for
! scholarship and learning will mean
world. ThiS Will cooperate with the
! alicna ton OF the alumni in other States
| i'll reducing the university 10 Il local
] institution, with the danger ever prcS-