FREE EXPRESSION

Evening Star, Issue 21706, 28 April 1934, Page 14

FREE EXPRESSION

A UNIVERSITY IDEAL SUPPRESSION POLICY UNSAFE CHRISTCHURCH, April 28. Freedom of thought and expression could do no harm in a university, was the opinion expressed by Professor F. Sinclaire, when he acted as chairman of a debate held at Canterbury College on a motion “ That complete academic freedom of thought and expression should be allowed in the university.” “ I can’t see anything for it but complete freedom,” he added. “ I have a feeling that the alternative to free expression on the platform is machine gun fire. If the tilings said are false, then it is better to say them to make patent their falsity. I do not think that, in the long run, a policy of suppression is a safe one. Commenting on the poor attendance at the debate (40 students out of 800), Professor Sinclaire said: I cannot say I have seen among the students any enthusiasm for ideas. I should not say the under-graduates of this college are infants; I should say they are senile. The teaching staff may not be particularly advanced, but, compared with the under-graduates, they tare hot headed. ' STAFF MUST NOT BE MENTAL . SLAVES. . , Professor Sinclaire added that it’ seemed - to him a matter of utmost importance that the ' members of the teaching staff of a university should have complete liberty to express their views oil matters of vital importance in public life. He considered a university was not worth the name that made mental slaves of its staff, members. He, for one, would have no wish to belong to such an institution. Most of the speakers had stressed _ the importance of the ban on religion, sex, and seditious matter for student discussion. It was the speaker’s opinion that, if each student were given five minutes in , which to say the worst ,he thought concerning sex, he would then be satisfied to occupy his time with more immediately profitable matters.