It is reported that an editor of the University of California newspaper has been forced to resign by the student governing body because of his editorials accusing Southern California of using professionals on its football team. Cambridge is too far away from such controversies to know whether there is any justification for the statements of the California editor, but the question as to the desirability of a body to control the policies of all student organizations is one which occurs at every college.
Such consorship of policies really transfers the functions of the editorial board to those who control all extra curricula activity and these in turn are often under the thumb of the college faculty. The hierarchy which is thus formed is an efficient method for political control and administration, but it completely destroys the independence of a college paper and much of its usefulness as an organ of student opinion. If editors are forced to fear the wrath of a higher authority, their editorials are bound to hedge on all controversial subjects and tend to be reduced below the level of unopinionated explanations.
*Paternalism in a university is least excusable when it tries to prevent the expression of undergraduate ideas and opinions. Such control from above is most powerful at certain state universities in the west such as California, where, in the present case, the student editor was unfortunate enough to express opinions differing from those of his superiors.