Blatant transgression

Sir,—I must protest at what I myself consider to be a blatant transgression of some editorial privileges which you enjoy. I am referring to your editorial of Tuesday 19-3-68, wherein you gave a list of needs for more student power.

While I agree with most of your proposals, I think it is wrong from the point of view of editorship to publish as an editorial the personal views of students however prominent they may be and in addition ask them to sign their name on the editorial in agreement. The shepherds have spoken — now the lambs must follow.

I must ask Sir, whether you have fully considered the task of editorials. For in my view an editor can publish any editorial he likes; but have you ever seen Mr. Holyoake and others sign a Dominion editorial. These prominent members of our student body could have written a letter to the editor, or an article in which they have every right to express their views. But they should never have been asked by yourself to subscribe to your personal view to give it weight. You have enough power as editor not to need the backing of others. Your axe is strong, Sir. Wield it well. Wield it or not at all.

J. N. Lenart.

[(1) I wrote only a minor part of the editorial. (2) I see no reason why an editor should necessarily have any part in an editorial so long as he agrees with it. (3) I do not intend to follow the example of the Dominion or Mr. Holyoake. (4) In this specific case I will leave the results to explain my actions.—ed]