Newspaper Page Text
THE MAROON TIGER
91
J
c <5he c Ooice of the Students
What Are We Qoing To Do About Smoking?
“Students are not permitted to indulge in the use,
in any form, of alcoholic drinks or tobacco, while con
nected with Morehouse College.”
This clause in the regulation of student conduct, or,
one with similar wording and the same meaning, is a
precedent which has been recognized since Morehouse
College was founded. The time has now come when
conditions concerning the latter-named narcotic neces
sitate a change in the law 7 .
Tobacco and alcoholic drinks are the narcotics named
in the clause but I shall discuss tobacco only as they
are different in nature and should be treated separately
in a discussion or as a law.
Society today accepts and respects the use of to
bacco in the form of cigarettes or cigars, and since this
body of men at Morehouse College forms a part of that
society, it is obvious that they are more or less going
to accept these principles and put them into action.
The result is that about 85 per cent of the student body
and 50 per cent of the faculty use tobacco in one of
the forms named. Still the law remains unchanged.
There are two objections that are seemingly prevalent
among the student body, with the conditions as they ex
ist today. First, it jeopardizes one’s integrity to feel
it necessary to extinguish a cigarette when an instructor
is seen, and knowdng that the very instructor or some of
his immediate contemporaries are likewise smokers of
cigarettes. Secondly, since the law does not permit any
kind of an outlet, the dormitories are resorted to, endan
gering the property of the college, our personal prop
erty and, most of all, our lives.
Would it not be better, since smoking is going to ex
ist, to restrict it from the property of the college and
permit the men, if they choose, to smoke elsewhere and
be men while they are doing it? Or shall we continue
as we are going, knowing the law is not and can not be
enforced? Are we going to wait until one night when
we shall find ourselves engulfed in a blaze and after
wards stand on the brinks of the ruins and think what
w r e could have done to avert it?
Let’s think the conditions over and crystalize our
thoughts into action while it is yet daylight.
—Adrian Pertee.
Smoking in the buildings as it is being done at pres
ent upon the Morehouse campus is extremely hazardous.
It jeopardizes the life and property of every student
living in the halls. These buildings, made possible by
the hands and brains of men and women who have been
willing to give out of their little towmrd the erection of
them, and for the creation of which no student here now
has contributed one dollar, are made liable to total de
struction by fire. This is peculiarly true since the social
attitude of the average smoker is usually unfavorable
towards the rights of others. He smokes whenever,
wherever, and however he chooses, and cares nothing
about consequences outside of himself.
If the college prohibits smoking upon the campus, the
present situation should not be winked at. The rule
concerning it should be rigidly enforced. If the college
is going to permit smoking upon the campus, provision
should be made for smoking quarters.
—0. J. Baker.
An ancient prejudice has not been removed yet. There
was a time when hardly any teachers smoked, and few
studepts. If a student smoked he would sneak away
from the campus nine or ten blocks in order to enjoy
the morning smoke. Now it is different in this respect.
The majority of the students and a great number of the
faculty, smoke on or off the campus. The teacher,
though, has the advantage of the student, in that he
may smoke in the student’s presence, but on the other
hand, when the smoking student sees the instructor, he
must extinguish the fire and act like a whipped cur.
Therefore we have a lot of smoking behind thumb-bolted
doors in the dormitories. There is a solution, and it will
come when the faculty open their eyes to the fact that a
man will be an habitual smoker in college if he were one
before he came to college.
—B. 0. Bealyear.
At sometime in every college there has been a revolt
of the students in order to obtain some desired and cher
ished privilege denied. Of course, the subject under
discussion is not occasioned by any such revolutionary
demonstrations.
There are mainly two groups who think of smoking
in college life; first, the smokers, who consider the re
striction an infringement and will not be subjugated,
hence his attitude is negative and his actions are just as
he desires; second, the disciplinarians, who under obli
gation must uphold the college laws, hence the harassing
of smokers.
A third and passive group might be considered. The
group, from an impersonal position is usually an ally
of the smokers for reasons we all know.
There are some questions that might be asked which
when answered might settle the question. They are: Is
the restriction of student smoking fundamental to the
welfare and ideals of colleges? Does this restriction
tend to better such things as health, scholarship, char
acter, sanitation and safety? There is argument pro
and con for each, and I solicit your unbiassed medita
tion. Then, unless revisions are made in the laws, con
clude just what the student should do.
—Robert F. Jones.
Smoking by college men has become a problem for a
few colleges. Men desire to smoke, therefore they smoke.
Rules are very good to have and they must be made
for some people, but we cannot say that this or that
thing is good unless we give some logical reason for it.
My opinion concerning men smoking is that they should
if they want to. I would not advocate smoking on the
campus because it would end up in property loss due
to carelessness of the smokers, but if men wish to smoke
they should be at liberty to do so under certain condi
tions. We have a rule which states that men should
not smoke. These men have smoked, they are smoking