Carnegie Mellon University - Thistle Yearbook (Pittsburgh, PA)

Page 24 text:

Student Council WILLIAM A. SMITH .... President CHARLES FEGAN . . . Vice-President NANCY McKENNA .... Secretary H. EVERING WEBB, JR. ... Treasurer s ROLLIN V. DAVIS Executive Secretary Editor's Npte:—In view of the fact that the Carnegie Tartan has carried any number of articles on Student Council in the past year, and knowing that any student not already well acquainted with the intricate worlpngs of the Council never will understand it, we talp this opportunity to speal{ editorially. What is stated below is the opinion of the Editor of 1939 Thistle, and should not be construed to be the opinion of any organization or group or any persons connected with them. Student Council is in the transition period; whatever the outcome shall be is still a matter of grave doubt. The present plan of election, organization and development has more good qualities than any of the other so called “remedy” plans proposed. The trouble attributed to organization and election, to say nothing of representation, has been entirely mis'directed. Student Council functions smoothly, clears up the business before it in a business like manner, promotes the best interest of publications and campus groups, and promulgates its desire to see a better Carnegie Tech. Our proposed plans, presented by the various “outside” factions, blame the supposed corruption of Council on its method of election and representation. The fault lies not with Student Council and its methods, but rather with the commuter and small membership groups themselves. It is up to them to organize their groups; to get to the polls when election day comes around and not to be swayed by others and then complain about the way the situation is being handled. [20J

Page 23 text:

WEBSTER NEWTON JONES Director, College of Engineering Officers of Administration Robert Ernest Doherty, M.S., M.A., L.L.D., President Charles Watkins, Ph.D., Assistant to the President, Di-rector, Margaret Morrison Carnegie College Roscve Myrl Ihrig, Ph.D., Director of the Division of General Studies, Director of the Evening and Part-time Courses, Dean of Engineering Freshmen Webster Newton Jones, Ph.D., Director of the College of Engineering Glesdissikg Keeble, Chairman of the Faculty, College of Fine Arts Runt Muss, Aft, ELS., Director, Carnegie Li' tary School Lauranci Frederic Shaffer, Ph.D., Director of Summer Sewn Mary IVamn Green, M.A., Dan of Worn Arthur Wilson Farrell, A A, Dean of Men Alan Bright, A.A., Registrar Philip Stephan Barto, Ph.D,, Examiner Earl King Coluss, BA, Recorder John D, fern; BS, C£, Head, Bureau of Recomniendv lions m IHRI6 i! Cental Studia

Page 25 text:

With regard to the group representation plan, limit' ing the number of representatives on Council to the number of ballots cast and dividing the representa' don among the groups: fraternities, commuters, and dorms; there is not much that can be said either way. It is a recognized fact that the best men on the campus belong to the fraternity group. There are several exceptions but these are few and very scat' tered. To divide the representation equally between commuters and fraternity would be defeating the primary objective of democratic government, namely, to get the best man into office. The department plan is by far the most soundly founded proposal to date, but it too has disadvaiv tages. With national government and “silver states parlance, each group would be fighting for its own department rather than for Carnegie Tech in general. There is a sense of seniority that exists in council now that would vanish if the department plan were instituted. The superiority of members by reason of class, or rank, not only helps to temper the some' what rash ideas of the newcomers, but also gives the older and more experienced men the say.