FREEDOM OF SPEECH
Sir, —Your correspondent "8.A." complains that when the professorial hoard produced its resolution on academic freedom and was attacked in certain quarters, it promptly split up and confronted the public as a heterogeneous collection of individuals in undignified disunity. 1 submit that if the professors had adopted the attitude recommended by "8.A." and "confronted the public as a corporate body," their action would have been worthless and would have amounted to a conspiracy to deceive the public. What is the use of any body of persons simulating a unity that does not exist? One might as well say that the Court of Appeal is "undignified" when one of its Judges delivers a dissenting judgment. G. M. Ci.kghorn.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19340725.2.177.7
Bibliographic details
New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXI, Issue 21861, 25 July 1934, Page 15
Word Count
120FREEDOM OF SPEECH New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXI, Issue 21861, 25 July 1934, Page 15
Using This Item
NZME is the copyright owner for the New Zealand Herald. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons New Zealand BY-NC-SA licence . This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of NZME. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Acknowledgements
This newspaper was digitised in partnership with Auckland Libraries and NZME.