ACADEMIC RIGHTS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXI, Issue 21932, 16 October 1934, Page 11

ACADEMIC RIGHTS

1 ME. DICKINSON'S SPEECHES CABLEGRAM FROM LEEDS VIEWS GREATLY DEPLORED 1 ' COLLEGE COUNCIL'S ATTITUDE Academic freedom of speech and the public utterances of Mr. H. D. Dickinson, exchange lecturer in economics from the University of Leeds, were again discussed at length by- the Auckland University College Council yesterday. The matters arose from a cablegram from the vice-chancellor at Leeds to the New Zealand University, deploring an anti-war speech by Mr. Dickinson, also from a letter from Mr. Dickinson explaining that he had made every endeavour to dissociate his university affiliations from his public utterances. The council eventually passed a motion pointing out what it considered to be a misinterpretation by Mr. Dickinson of . its last declaration upon freedom of speech. A letter was received from the registrar of the University of New Zealand, dated September 22, stating that the following cablegram had been received from the vice-chancellor of the University of Leeds, Sir James Baillie: — "Greatly deplore irresponsible statement by Dickinson reported to-day. Please convey to your council." Mr. Dickinson's Explanation The following letter from Mr. Dickin6on to the president, dated September 25, was also received: — "Tn view of the criticism which has been passed upon some speeches which I have made in New Zealand, and in particular upon my speech at the meeting convened by the Auckland AntiWar Council on August 5, I wish to make the following statement: —Whenever I have spoken in public on a controversial .subject 1 have requested the organisers and the chairman of the meeting not to advertise or announce the fact of my connection with Auckland University College or with the University of Leeds. With one excei>tion, which did not involve much publicity and was quickly corrected, this request of mine has been faithfully observed. "On no occasion have I claimed for mv views any special authority arising out of my ; academic status. 1 have put them forward to be accepted or rejected on their inherent reasonableness or unreasonableness. In reports of some of my speeches, published in the press, my connection with Auckland University College has been referred to, but in even' case this has been a matter of journalistic comment, based on facts known to the reporter otherwise than through me or through those responsible for the meeting. "I sincerely regret that, in spite of my endeavours to dissociate the college from my personal views, some misconception has prevailed among the public, and that any actions of mine should have involved the college in controversy and publicity of any undesirable kind. In any case, I trust that the declaration recently made by the council on the subject of academic freedom will make clear that the expression of views by a member of the college staff, whether temporary or permanent, docs not identify the college with those views." • Mr. H. Horton suggested that the vice-chancellor of Leeds University be thanked for his cablegram. The president, Mr. Kenneth Mackenzie, said it could be taken, for granted that a letter would follow. The best course would be to wait until it arrived. Personality and Office "This simply demonstrates that it is impossible for a man to separate his private personality from the office he holds," continued Mr. Mackenzie, referring to Mr. Dickinson's letter. "If Mr. Dickinson had been simply a visitor from Yorkshire he would not have attracted anything like so much public attention, nor would the public have given so .much weight to his remarks. I move that the letter be received." Mr. E. H. Northeroft sakl he thought the letter called for some comment. Ho was not concerned with the text of Mr. Dickinson's speeches, which he had not read, but with a paragraph in the letter which demonstrated what the council had had in mind when it called for a sense of responsibility in the public utterances of university teachers. It was impossible to dissociate the college from the speeches. Mr. Northeroft moved: —"That the letter of September 25 from Mr. H. D. Dickinson be received, and that it be pointed out to the writer (1) that the recent declaration of this council upon freedom of speech has not the effect of dissociating the college from publicutterances by members of its staff; that this declaration arose from the view of the council, as is now demonstrated by the letter under reply, that it is not possible to dissociate the college from the public utterances of memburs of its staff; and (3) that it is this impossibility of dissociating the college from such statements which calls for the exercise of a proper sense of responsibility, such as is referred to in the declaration of the council." The College and the Public The letter, Mr. Northeroft continued, showed that Mr. Dickinson misunderstood the effect of the declaration. It also showed that in spite of his efforts to dissociate his utterances from the college, he had failed. Mr. Horton seconded the motion. "I had hoped that the matter had been settled by the previous resolutions, but there seems to be some misapprehension," said Mr. W. H. Cocker. "I disagree with Mr. Dickinson's views, if they were reported correctly, but I would suggest that we let the matter rest as it is at present. To resurrect it will do no good." Professor A. B. Fitt: Unfavourable public opinion will only be exaggerated if we pursue it indefinitely. Mr. Mackenzie: if this leads to a misconception, it should not be left. The matter should be cleared up. Professor Fitt: The position is quite clear and Mr Northeroft is quite right,, but this reply would not clarify it, and might cause an unfavourable impression Mr. Northeroft: But Mr. Dickinson has written to us—why I don't know — and wo should reply. Mr. Horton: 1 do not think there will be any further discussion. The public will say that the eouneil has taken the right action * Mr. Cocker: The resolution might encourage' the public to take a wrong view. The public should be educated to understand that the private views of the staff are not the concern of the college and are not the opinion of the col lege Doubts of English Practice Mr. Mackenzie: But when views are expressed in public, do they not cease to be the private views of the member? When docs a private view become a public view? Mr. Cocker: That seems to me irrelevant. The point is that they may bo thought to be the views of the college. Mr. Mackenzie: Published views may have definite reactions upon the college. Mr. Cocker: What I suggest is that ■we make clear that published views of tliQ staff aro not views of the college.

Mr. Northeroft: The public will still associate the college with them. The public should be educated otherwise, .but the education has not progressed to such an extent that we can let Mr. Dickinson's interpretation pass without comment. Mr. Cocker: It seems to me that the college should stress the other side of the matter, that it is defending the right to freedom of speech. In the course of further discussion Mr. Cocker said that by "private" views he meant "individual" views. Oxford and Cambridge Universities were not found questioning the right of their teachers to express such views. Mr. Mackenzie: J have felt rather shaky about that type of statement lately. , Mr. Cocker: Possibly in one or two of the provincial universities there have been exceptions. A Member: After what appeared in the Manchester Guardian about tolerance in New Zealand — Mr. Cocker: A discussion on the point in the House of Commons caused Mr. J. M. Keynes to write a very strong letter of protest. Mr. Horton: The vice-chancellor of Leeds University lias found it necessary to send a cablegram dissociating the university from the utterances of Mr. Dickinson. Mr. Mackenzie: We have been told that no English university criticises its staff, but now it seems to bo otherwise. Mr. Cocker: Wo do not know on what evidence the criticism was based or what references are meant. Mr. Mackenzie: Wo only know that he has done it. Mr. Horton said he had no douht that Mr. Dickinson's public utterances had been correctly reported. Mr. S. I. Crookes: They aro reacting on the prestige of the college. Mr. Northeroft's motion was carried without audible dissent.