The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1916-01-15
Il IS reprinted as a matter OF interest
10 the people OF Virginia:
Dr Armistead c. Gordon

Ny Dear Sir,--I do not often saC
Virginia papers. but ] have had thu
great privilege Of reading in The
Times-Dispatch Of. Februar. your
letter to Henry Taylor. Jr l cannot
claim that you know me, though
/ have grateful recollection of our cor
respondence some years ago. But as
/ one of the oldest living alumni Of the
University of Virginia IN. \. 1859,
ana as teacher of perhaps the
/ longest and widest experience of all in
the South. ! hope I may venture a
, few remarks upon what | understand
TO be the salient points of discussion
between yourself and Mr.. Taylor,
whose letter | regret ] have not seen.
/ understand you to draw careful
, distinction between Coordination
and "coeducation." Believe me. dear
sir, coordination means coeducation,
IL not at once, at least inevitably
later. The adaEe. Give an inch and
take an elf' lis never so true as when
the "giver is man and the "taker is
woman. for of all creatures in the
universe she Is the most artful, the
most insinuatlng, and the most ire
s!stible, 'Obste prinCipiis' Is motto
as sound in education as In law or
politics. ] have great confidence III
of the university, bur / ASSURE you
from experience that this system Of
"Co- coordination" once begun under
whatever limitations this Trojan
horse once admittcd-therc will soon
a. st conditions and claims az co
education" which cannot be resisted
or controlled, Hence, at least the ut
most caution should be observed be-
fore admitting even the sharp edgN
of the wedge.
Secondly. understand you to advo-
cate a ce-0rdinatn, college but not
coordinate university distnc-
tiou clearly expressed in youi letter,
which therefore. ! need not repeat.
Here | would exactly reverse your
argument. For men aud women of
mature years and experience there is
no danger from association in post
''a"rate classes or in professional
studies, no more than in any oThei
relations of mature life. Their uni
NcrsitN work might be safely pur-
sued together. But it Is precisely dun
ing adolescence---the period covered
by the college" as you define it
that the danger exists, and this dan
ger | believe to he Inevitable and
harmful TO both sexes. | do not refer
to sexual immortality, but rather 70
the opposite peril, OF that familiarity
which Is said to breed contempt
If it be said that the present plan
does not mean CoednCati0n. reply
that ii involves largely similar eondi-
tions--and | refer you to & letter in
The Times Dispatch some weeks age
by that clcarheaded and ar-sishted
Virginia teacher. Or. l. &. Wood
ward. in which hg shows that CO.
ordination without class community
would present All the worst features of
coeducatlou without the corrective OF
class control aud discipline. Such
conditions would he intensified IN an
institution IKE the University of viz
ginia. where. for lack Of the oppor-
tunities offered Int larger cities. the
two communities would he almost
wholly dependent upon each other
/ have seen something OF cordpcn-
ton i'll college, ana / regret 70 say,
my experience convinces me that II
/ is harmful % both sexes 1t tends
to weaken that delicate respect. that
flne sense Of Difference, with which
( each should regard the other and,
/ in so far, to make the boys less
/ manly the girls less womanly. in
their attitude to the other. | be-
/ lieve too. that where the experiment
! has been tried under the most ia
! vorablc conditions there has been a
general reaction # sentlm, Mt and a
/ growing tendency 10 modify the free
/ dom OF association think. too.
/ that the soundest philosophy of eiu-
/ cation, such as is represented by DIR.
( Stanley Hall. is growing more and
! more conservative. and averse to all
/ forms of cueduCatiOu---and | repeat,
/ ] regard coeducation as inevitably in
I volved in any possible form Of CO.
ordination,
But after all dear sir, why all
this discussion? Why not let we'll
enough alone? Why graft this per
ilous. or at least doubtful experiment
upon the University of Virginia? Is
not that stitution--already the
glory of Virginia, the admiration OF
. the country. the pride and darling OF
its aiumni-is il nor great enough and
useful enough, and has it not yet
enough to do and need to grow
within its own sphere. without in
vitng this new departure, so foreign
10 it's history and trad tons ana So
l'repugnant to many, If not most, OF
Its alumni? Let me beg. dear sir
that your great influence may be used
. in behalf at least Of delay and Of
caution. before venturing upon such
an experiment. Virginia is surely
sufficient provision for the higher.
even the highest education of her
daughters.
Perhaps ! should ask your par
don for this intrusion. but thirty
years in South Carolina have left me
not less a Virginian, and not less de
voted to the interests OF my dear
/ alma mater.
Very respectfully,
! EDWARD 8. JOYNES,
Emeritus Professor. University OF
! South Carolina
| February 2 1912,