13.07.2015 Views

1905-06 Volume 30 No 1–5 - Phi Delta Theta Scroll Archive

1905-06 Volume 30 No 1–5 - Phi Delta Theta Scroll Archive

1905-06 Volume 30 No 1–5 - Phi Delta Theta Scroll Archive

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

148 THE SCROLL.the wide acquaintance with highly educated men, which thelarger fraternities afford, is very instructive and of greatbenefit. Among the alumni of the various chapters are manyeminent scholars and other distinguished men. The writertestifies that the bond which unites the members is very strong,and he shows the advantage of belonging to a national, insteadof a sectional, fraternity, an advantage which is felt by alumnieven more than by the active members. A chapter of a collegefraternity, he says, performs a valuable office in keepingits alumni interested in their alma mater.ON one or two points regarding the efforts to suppress fraternitiesthe writer is in error. The legislature of Californianever prohibited fraternities at the state university, and thequestion never came before the courts of that state. Theregents of the university, in 1879, prohibited fraternities there,but rescinded their action within a year. The legislature ofArkansas, in 1901, passed a law to prohibit fraternities, whichhas proved to be ineffective, and its terms are such that it cannotbe enforced. But we believe the writer is mistaken insaying that the anti-fraternity movement in Arkansas resultedin the formation of a league to crush fraternities which extendedto many colleges in the south, both state and denominational.There was subsequently an anti-fraternity movement in Mississippi,but, so far as we are informed, in no other southernstate; and we have no information which would lead us toconclude that the opponents of fraternities in Arkansas andMississippi had formed an inter-state league. The writerdoes not mention the law prohibiting fraternities in state institutionsenacted by the South Carolina legislature, but thatwas in 1897. This statute, unlike the enactment in Arkansas,was really effective. The legislature of Mississippi neverpassed a bill to suppress fraternities in state institutions, butin December, 1901, the trustees of the University of Mississippiprohibited fraternities from initiating men during theremainder of igoi-02 and the following college year. In 1902

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!