Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  


    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Salient. An Organ of Student Opinion at Victoria College, Wellington, N.Z. Vol. 13, No. 9. May 9th, 1950

Pros . .

Pros . . .

First it was noted that two irrelevancies had nothing to do with the case (according to Mr. Curtin). The first was that the resignation of the ex-president had nothing to do with it. The second that the amended motion referred to approving the action, and did not take account of whether the Dean was actually invited or not.

The arguments in order were:
1.That the Executive had exceded its duty.
2.That the Executive had brought disrepute on the name of the college.
3.That it had engaged in party politics.

These three, raised by mover Frank Curtin, were the backbone of the case. They were amplified by him, when he said that the first was not to suggest no-confidence, but to direct future policy; that the second suggested the action should have been left to one of the clubs, and was not one for the Executive; and the third argued that the Executive, by inviting the Dean here, had sponsored his views—and had therefore been, guilty of partisan action.

Other arguments—some of which were supplementary, some unnecessary, and some repetitive—added to these. The chief ones were that the gesture had been "most imprudent" (Mr. McIntyre) under the circumstances, considering that people down town who had just paid for our building would probably not like to think we were inviting the Dean here; that the course the Executive took was "unwise" and not in line with, the policy of the Association (Mr. Newenham); that the Dean was not an accredited official of any organisation (livid objection to this from Mr. Milburn, who was 'most concerned lest a dignitary of my church should be maligned by these remarks"); that the people who supported the Exec's decision were in two camps and he didn't know which to tackle.