"Take a Bath"

A fortnight ago Mrs. Bertrand Russell, author of The Right to be Happy, wife of the English philosopher, was refused the privilege of speaking before the "mixed" Student Forum at the University of Wisconsin on the subject:."Should Women Be Protected?" This subject involved companionate marriage, in which Mrs. Russell is a firm and earnest believer. President Glenn Frank of the University of Wisconsin had been consulted by the Student Forum and had approved of barring of Mrs. Russell (TIME, Feb. 27).

Last week both parties had some explanations and tart reminders.

President Frank: "Despite some picturesque and vigorous editorial comment to the contrary, neither the present existence nor the future guarantee of free speech for students and teachers at the University of Wisconsin is in any way involved in the Dora Russell episode.

". . . Discussion and advocacy of free sexual relations both before and after marriage is an enterprise that good taste and a sense of propriety suggest should be staged elsewhere than before a mixed audience in a co-educational institution. . . .

"I did not undertake to pass moral judgment upon Mrs. Russell's theories; I did not suggest that study and discussion of sex and the institution of marriage should be taboo. . . .

"A certain observance of good table manners is not an infringement of the freedom of eating; the practice of taking one's morning bath in the bathroom instead of in a glass tub before a mixed audience is not an infringement of the freedom of bathing; and my advice respecting the proposed lecture of Mrs. Russell no more affects the liberalism of the University of Wisconsin or its loyalty to free speech than the Hottentot alphabet--if there is one--affects the selling price of Wisconsin cheese.

"Since coming to the University of Wisconsin, I have done everything within my power to fortify the tradition of freedom. . . .

"No one whose liberalism goes beyond emotionalism and a hunger for headlines needs argument to prove the present existence and the future guarantee of free speech on the Wisconsin campus, I am sure of that. And no argument that I have yet seen convinces me that liberalism is inconsistent with at least a minimum sense of propriety."

Mrs. Russell: "I feel insulted that President Frank did not communicate courteously with me but caused the students to cancel the meeting. Dean Goodnight refused to allow the students to invite me to dinner. I was treated as an intellectual and social outcast. . . .

"Madison was in mild excitement, half the town accusing me of undermining the sanctity of family life. I, therefore, refused to approach delicate topics in an hysterical atmosphere unsuited to their discussion, but nonetheless stuck to my subject. The meeting was an enormous success.

"President Frank's self-defense was even worse than his first action. . . . He excused himself by saying the matter was one of decorum rather than free speech.

"This insult to my personal integrity is unpardonable, especially as Frank's references to taking his bath in public show that his own mind is tortured by a sense of impropriety where the human body is concerned. His whole statement breathes the suggestion that sex subjects are unclean. . . .

"For lack of advice from people who understand them and can give new ideals, young people treat sex like a nip of whiskey from a hip flask. . . . Love belongs with open spaces and real loving involves the whole personality.

"Frank's statement is more corrupting to a young mind than anything I ever wrote and shows how necessary is this battle to remove sex discussion from stupid sniggering embarrassment to the level of any other important topic involving human happiness."

The Press. The Chicago Tribune upheld President Frank. Heywood Broun, columnist of the New York World suggested: "By all means let Dora Russell give her lecture and let Glenn Frank go and take a bath."