NEWNHAM DIVIDED

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2468, 22 May 1915, Page 11

NEWNHAM DIVIDED

A POINT AT ISSUE. Some short time back the Principal of Newnham College, Cambridge,- sent to the mother or other guardian of each student in residence a printed form to inquire whether the recipient was in favour of the abolition of the rule which forbids smoking. On the results of this referendum the Principal intonds to decide, states the Cambridge correspondent of the "Manchester Guardian."

Newnham has beon much agitated this term by the "smoking question." It is well known amongst tho woman undergraduates that some of their dons indulge in the weed, for the "smell in ono of the balls is enough to knock you down," as one lady said. If the dons smoke, smoking cannot be wrong for women—ergo, tho rule against smoking must be cancelled. So think the "pro-smokers." About a month ago the agitation against the non-smoking .rule reached a climax. Two members of tho Students' Representative Committee, who are strong pro-smokers, took the matter in hand and canvassed the opinions of all undergraduates in residence at Newnham bv means of a referendum. The question put was whether Miss Stevens, the Principal, should be asked to abolish the rule forbidding smoking. The referendum resulted, in an overwhelming majority in favour of petitioning the Principal. Apparently the Principal did not like the responsibility of abolishing the rule, and took the device of getting the views of the mothers or other guardians of Newnham. A Foregone Conclusion. ,

There does not seem to be much doubt about the result. The mothers belong to an earlier generation and are too near the mid-Victorian sSmdards of conduct to vote in favour of women smoking. Some will, doubtless; but the majority will be opposed, and these will llmost certainly be supported _by a najority of those at present in Xewnlam. For, in spite of the referendum .mongst the students themselves, I am ssured that the number of those who ant to smoke is relatively small, and hat many who voted in favour of petiioning the Principal did so only bemuse they thought it was "not sport-

rag" to oppose the petition; this teems to mo to be the reason why tie petition* was carried by such a large majority. One undergraduate, who is strongly opposed to the abolition of the non-smok-uig rule, says that her friends were intensely amused when she voted for the petition, and she adds that most of her friends "loathe the thought of Newnham turning into a smokeroom; I am sure it will if we are allowed to smoke. No more cocoas! There will be smoking parties instead, and_ the best smokes will have to be provided. Horrid expense 1" Another letter gives a mother's reply to tho Principal's referendum. This was emphatically "No! It is injurious to health'and a vulgar habit for girls."

It is only fair to the smokers to cay that I have not heard their views. I know that for some time they have considered themselves hardly dealt with by the college rule, but from what I have heard I feci sure that if they want tho weed and must have it they will have to indulge their fancies outside college.