APPOINTMENT OF OBJECTORS TO STAFF

Chronicle (Levin), 26 March 1946, Page 3

APPOINTMENT OF OBJECTORS TO STAFF

-Press Association

COLLEGE COUNCIL RESCINDS RESOLUTION

By Telegraph-

CHRISTCHURCH, March 25. A resolution passed in August, 1942, granting leave of absence without pay for the duration of the war to any person employed by Canterhury University College Council refusing military service on conscientious grounds was rescinded at the council 's meeting today. The mption to rescind led to a few strong comments, though it was supported "by a clear majority. In moving the resclssion, Professor A. H. Tocker said that the resolution on conscientious objectors was passed m 1942, when the roll number at the coilege was about 800, when the Japanese menace was real and near, and when practically all fit students over 18 years of age had heen taken. Now in 1940 the war was in eft'ect over. The roli number was 2100, the college was hadly in need of additional staff, and in at least one case the resolution had tiea the council 's hands. Rescinding of the motion would place Canterbury in the same position with staff appointments as other colleges. Mr. W. C. Colee, who seconded Professor Tocker's motion, said that the war had heen over quite a time and it no longer seemed necessary to carry on with the resolution. Colonel G. J. Smith said he could not understand the anxiety displayed towards so-called conscientious objectors. There were returned men whose studies had heen interrupted and who had gone away to fight while others had stayed at home. Many had died in service. He doubted if returned men would want to he taught by men who had stayed at home rather than fight for their country. He respected the objector wno had performed non-combatant service, but not one who just stayed at home because he did not believe in war, which all men hated. In his opinion, to appoint an objector to the staff would be to create trouble. It would not he in the best interests of the college. To question by Sir Joseph Ward, the chairman (Mr. J. H. E. Schroder) saia that certain staff positions had heen advertised and applications receivea. What was decided by the present meeting would unquestionably affect one position and possihly two. ATTITUDE OF RETURNED JMLEN. To a question hy Sir Joseph Ward, the Professor Tocker said that, from his knowledge of returned men, he did not think they would he interested whether their tutor was a returned man or not. A voice: I disagree. Mr. D. J. M. Glover said that the council of a university of free people did not need to wait for a lead from the Government. He was not interested in conscientious objectors any more than in vegetarians, the Plymouth Brethren or any other minor sect, but the council' s business was simply to make the best person available to the university irrc°pcctivo of his private heliefs, reiigious or poiitical. For the council to set itself up as a sort of inquisition to inquire whether the staff thought the same as the council did, was ridiculous. Supporting Professor Tocker's motion, Professor R. S. Allan said the matter was one not of expediency but of principle. The council should be the guardian and trustee of the best in university life, and that involved freedom of thought and of speech. Some of the people, said Mr. Clyde Carr, M.P., had been away fighting 1'or the very thing the council was discussing — freedom of conscience. If the council thought it was sticking up for them by condemning that very freedom and tolerance, then it had reached the height of contradiction. Professor Tocker's motion was carried hy 13 votes to five.