Annotations of the South Texas College of Law (Houston, Tex.), February, 1969 Page: 4 of 8
8 pages : page 11 x 8.5 in. Digitized from 35 mm. microfilm.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
STUDENT POLL: THE MERGER
For the past several months there
has been much controversy surrounding
the proposed merger of South Texas
College of Law into the Texas A&S Uni-
versity System. In response to this
controversy, several South Texas stu-
dents decided to test the opinion of
the one group who was to be affected
most by the decision of the state ju-
dicators-the student body of South
Texas. These students designed a set
of questions which were intended to
educe student response to the desira-
bility of becoming part of a state-
supported law school, as well as to
indicate student feeling toward a mer-
ger into the A&S System. It was hoped
that a far larger number of students
would respond to the questionnaire
than actually did (two hundred and
seventy-two students turned in re-
plies), in order to draft a letter to
each of the legislators to be used at
a future date to explicate the favor-
able and argumentative process of the
night law student in Texas. Such a
letter may still be written, and then
presented to the student body for
their written endorsement (if the pro-
posed merger does go to tF? legisla-
ture).
Of the two hundred and seventy-two
students who replied to the poll, 37%
had twenty-two hours or less, 47% were
mid-year law students (twenty-three to
sixty-five hours), and only 16% had
completed more than sixty-five hours.
These percentages were expected be-
cause they approximate the percentage
of membership of each of the classes.
It is Interesting to note that 77% of
the students responding were married,
and of this group, 60% had one or more
children. Many, in fact, indicated
they had five or six children to sup-
port while educating themselves. These
figures obviate the basic constituency
of the night law school: the working
married student.
The fact that the replies to the
questionnaire indicate that our stu-
dents come from all sections of the
nation (although by far the greatest
number come from Texas), coupled with
the fact that our students have re-
ceived their undergraduate degree from
colleges throughout the nation, appear
to substantiate the fact that South
Texas is the only recogni zed full-time
night law school iri the nation.
In conjunction with this line of
thought, the other basic reason for
the existence of the "night law stu-
dent" is the financial inability of
this student to attend a full-time day
school. 70% of the students respond-
ing to the poll stated that they would
be financially unable to attend a day
school, if, for any reason they were
unable to attend a night law school.
On the other hand, 69% of the students
admitted that they would prefer to at-
tend a day law school if possible.
While it must be admitted that night
law students are naturally biased to-
ward believing the state should sup-
port such an institution, it must also
be recognized that this bias evolves
from a socio-economic situation which
is peculiar to these students. It is
for this reason that they qualify as
the best judges. In accord, 97% of
those replying felt that the state
should support a legal institution for
those students who are unable to ob-
tain this education during the day.
In fact, 92% felt that there was a ne-
cessity for another law school in the
Southeast Texas area.
The major question of the polT
asked whether or not the students fa-
vored the proposed merger of our law
school into the Texas A&S System. 95%
of the respondents answered in the af-
firmative. Only one question requests
a written opinion and it mentioned no-
thing about the opposing or contro-
verting proposition of the University
of Houston. Nevertheless, most of the
students indicated in their opinion
that they would be opposed to any sort
of merger with the University of Hous-
ton (the reasons for which will be
discussed below).
The responses to the question which
inquired whether or not the students
felt there was a necessity for another
state supported law school in the
Southeast Texas area resulted in in-
terestingly sound arguments. The pri-
mary argument of those students who
felt that there was no such need cen-
tered around the futility of dupli-
cation of facilities at the expense of
the taxpayers. The basis of this ar-
gument appears to be that while it is
true that the state of Texas owes a
duty to educate its citizens, this
duty is merely a "reasonable" one, and
not absolute in its dictates. Obvi-
ously, since this was the rationale
for most of the arguments of the op-
position, it followed that these com-
ments indicated also a distaste for
the proposed merger unless a merger
with the U of H could be attained, for
this merger would eliminate any dupli-
cation. Some believed that it was de-
manding too much from the taxpayer to
support the education of one who was
merely educating himself on a part
time basis. They expressed the idea
that the proposed A&M merger would
result in a competition between state
administrative agencies, which would
result, once
state funds.
again
a waste of
On the other hand, the majority of
the students favored both the neces-
sity for another state supported law
school in this area and the proposed
merger with Texas A&M. The foremost
argument rests upon the obvious mas-
sive growth of not only Houston and
Harris County, but also of the entire
Gulf Coast area. A general response
received is that it is absurd to ex-
pect one state supported legal insti-
tution to meet the need of so many
citizens. While it certainly may be
argued that the University of Houston
plans to have facilities for approxi-
mately 2,000 students in the "near"
future (?), it appears futile to have
one massive educational edifice at-
tempting to meet these requirements.
It is from such a situation as exists
under this posture that the dictation
of education replaces the presentation
4
of education. Certainly such a plan
does not foster the aged maxim, "com-
petition breeds excellence;" if, in-
deed, it could be guaranteed that one
legal educational system could even
meet the needs of the public (which is
undoubtedly more valuable than words
can express.
Paralleling the above stated theory
is the fact that throughout the nation
exists cities which are larger than,
as large as, and smaller than Houston
that support more than one school of
graduate studies. For example, New
Orleans, with a population of approxi-
mately 700,000 people, supports two
night law schools (part-time evening
divisions of full-time day schools),
three schools offering a night masters
degree program, and other standard ed-
ucational institutions.
The other basic argument in favor of
another state supported law school in
this area rests upon the premise that
whenever and wherever there is a pre-
dominant desire of the people of a tax
paying society to become educated,
this education must not be denied by
the lack of cooperation of the govern-
mental establishment nor by the com-
paratively small resulting burden upon
tax funds. It is ridiculous for one to
assume that a daytime, non-working
student is any more entitled to as-
sistance from the taxpayer than is the
part-time or full-time working student
who, through no fault whatsoever, is
forced to educate himself at night
rather than by day. Certainly, the
achievements of attorneys, judges and
legislators who have graduated from
South Texas College of Law elucidate
the fact that the educated working
man, as a professional leader, is a
gift to the society in which he lives.
How naive it is even to attempt to as-
sert the illogical proposition that,
by its nature, a night school of any
type necessarily recruits a "second
class" student. To the contrary, it
appears from the record that night law
students, throughout the nation, tend
to excel as citizens and as competent
members of their professions. As one
student phrased it, "...the working
student has long been a reality in
growing urban areas, including Hou-
ston...." The recent trend toward the
extinction of night educational insti-
tutions "appears to be a kind of 'aca-
demic vanity' wherein certain admini-
strations have become blind as to the
real necessities of the community and
have escaped into an unrealistic world
of academic isolation-one which looks
down on the working student as second-
rate and dreams of becoming Harvard of
the South. This is hardly a view cal-
culated to fulfill the necessary role
of an educational system geared to the
needs of our community."
Also, primary on the list of conten-
tions in favor of a second legal in-
stitution, is the stark realization
that the only state supported law
school in this area has specifically
designed its future to exclude the
working student who must attend night
classes. Regardless of the reasoning
behind this move, it cannot be per-
suasively argued that such an institu-
Cont. on Paee 7
*
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Seabolt, James M. Annotations of the South Texas College of Law (Houston, Tex.), February, 1969, newspaper, February 1969; Houston, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth144324/m1/4/: accessed May 20, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting South Texas College of Law.