CENSORSHIP

Before a group of students, Dr. Frederick Robinson, president of the City College of New York, recently defended his policies concerning the treatment of undergraduate dissenters. He defined liberalism as being the spirit of inquiry and denied that he had been a deterring influence to the freedom of liberals since the beginning of his term. While this type of liberalism does not seem objectionable to him, he refuses to tolerate the undergraduate who, dissatisfied with college, rulings, resorts to pseudo-revolutionary activity. Essentially, Dr. Robinson's idea is sound; yet, while claiming to be a liberal, he has the effrontery to approve of censorship in one of the college publications.

If truth, attained through this spirit of inquiry, he one of the objectives of President Robinson, curbing of ideas not in concordance with his own will be of no avail. Suppressing expression from college editors will lead frequently to a condition in which students heroically fight for a cause, resorting to demonstrations which remind one of communists on May Day. Reed Harris' case is an example of this.

In Lincoln Steffans' autobiography there is an excellent parallel. He had the belief that ignoring communists was more effective than preventing their outbursts of self-expression. His theory was tested one May Day when he presided over the New York police force in Union Square. The demonstration was a flasco. The communists had not found any protesting policemen; thus one of the duller May Days ended without casualties. This should give Dr. Robinson an idea of a way to punish recalcitrant editors.