The New York herald., 1922-10-26
High School Organizations
Censured for Their 'Arti-
ficial Superiority
SEE HARMFUL EFFECT
Greek Letter Men Vainly At
tempt to Find Heads of
Their Mockers.
This Is the fifth and last article on
the subject of high school fraternities.

Tt is a somewhat curious fact that
among the opponents OF high school
secret fraternities, which the New
York Board of Education wishes to
suppress by means OF State law, are
college secret fraternities.
At fewest eight of the national Greek
letter college societies have voted to
exclude any student who has been a
member of one of the high school
"frats"
The interfraternity conference. COM
posed of delegates from the mems col
lege fraternities, for several years has
opposed the Juvenile imitators. The
conference unanimously adopted a
resolution in 1913 suggested by its
committee on fraternity legislation in
this form:
1.-THE committee recommends that
this conference declare it's opposition
to so-called public school secret fra
ternities and recommends that the fra
ternities represented in this conference
ton of those who have belonged to
such high school organizations"
Calls Frats "BOyish."
High school fraternities were charac-
terized as a nuisance" In committee
report made to the Interfraternty Con-
ference in 1916. The same conference
received report from n special COM
mittee made up of John Calvin Hanna.
Otis W. Caldwell and Spencer r. Smith.
Il said:
"The need for college fraternity de-
pends on the artificianty Of college life
ard the separation for four years of
young men from home ties. 1t Is n
definite social need. which the university
and the college failed to supply, and
that unique institution. the college fra
ttrnity. grew up to supply II.
"Theresis no such need in public high
school life. The youth away from home
needs an artificial brotherhood. The
adolescent at home does not. There is
Il vastly greater immaturity In these
secret, boyish, self perpetuatng organ
izations, without any real purpose that
cannot be better secured otherwise"
The committee also reported the re-
suits of a QUESTIONABLE TO the princi-
1877 cities and towns. including the ma
jority of those schools which had fra
ternity chapters. There were answers
from 140 cities and lS6 schools. The
verdict was overwhelmingly against the
public school fraternities. A great ma
jCrity Of the principals gave 1t as their
belief that the effect was bad on MEM
bers. other students and the school.
Fifty cities favored exclusion and four
did not Fifty-one cities reported hav-
ing abolished them At that time they
were legally prohibited in fourteen
States. The number Is now larger.
New Jersey was added to the list last
year.
In the following year the special COM
mittee, then consisting OF Messrs
hanna, Caldwell, j. s. Masters and
to the Interfraternity Conference:
ANY highly organized organization
o. adolescent5 and youth which is kept
VI by an arbitrary selection OF new
members made only by those who are
already members and upon the basis
only Of personal liking or preference
with social aim only or chiefly. IL
raiptained among those who are living
at their own homes and In their own
community where social reeds can bo
supplied without such organization is
sure to be harmful"
"ArtiHcfaI supcrforfty.v
The harmful influence. the committee
said. was seen. FIRST in their effects
upon individual members: second, in
their effects upon others in the school