Coeducation (arguments against)

In a letter to president Morgan, Dickinson College Trustee Lemuel T. Appold expresses concern regarding the possibility of allowing women on the Alumni Council. Claiming that his opinon on the matter has noting to do with his negative stance on coeducation at Dickinson, Appold argued that this could have a negative affect on the organization. Moreover, few women were a part of the organization at this time.

In a letter dated August of 1923, President Morgan wrote to Bishop William F. McDowell an informed him that coeducation at Dickinson College was in danger. Morgan wrote that "A few of the trustees have not been friendly to coeducation for a good many years, and raised the question at commencement, having it to take the form of a purpose to limit very decidedly the attendance of women." According to Morgan, Boyd Lee Spahr, Mr. Appold, and Mr.

In a letter dated August 9, 1923, President Morgan wrote to Reverend John R. Edwards, warning him that three prominent Dickinsonians are attempting to abolish coeducation at Dickinson College. Morgan explained, "A few of the trustees have not been friendly to co-education for a good many years, and raised the question at commencement... Since commencement, however, it has developed that two or three, Boyd Lee Spahr, Esq., of Philadelphia, being their spokesman, Mr. Appold of Baltimore and Mr.

In a letter dated August 4, 1927, Dean Hoffman wrote to President Morgan requesting that Morgan consider the application of Mary K. Gross. Hoffman wrote, "Once again I find myself in the ridiculous position of writing you in behalf of the admission of a co-ed to Dickinson when as a matter of fact I am stolidly against coeducation at Dickinson." This illustrates the ways in which many Dickinsonians had doubts regarding coeducation well into the 20th century.

In a letter dated February 28, 1927, President Morgan wrote to the President Henry M. Wriston of Lawrence University in regard to a recent article Wriston published in the Educational News. In his article, Wriston advocated having separate campuses for men and women at coeducational institutions. Morgan explained that he was interested in this idea and wanted further information.

The introductory part of her report is entitled "Historical." In it she briefly accounts for the reasons women had not been admitted into Dickinson College up until 1884 and outlines the various developments that arose from that year on. Developments addressed include: additions to faculty and trends in enrollment.

Trustees deemed admission of women prior to 1884 inadvisable due to the saturation of recitation rooms, but co-education for Dickinson had been discussed for some time before housing conditions allowed women to
be admitted.

Joseph Alexander Bennett (Class of 1894), wrote his commencement oration on the subject of co-education. He argues that instead of helping society, coeducation degrades it.

The February 1886 Dickinsonian shows once again that the Freshmen are in a heated debate over co-education. Within the past few days both sides of the class, the co-ed and anti-co-ed, have had "several dreadful encounters."

The "Editorials" section on the front page of the November 1885 Dickinsonian includes an article titled, "A Divided Class," which are divided on co-education. Some members of the class are for "the co-eds" and others are "anti-co-eds." The Dickinsonian calls for the Freshman class to "come to terms" with co-education and to not make themselves a laughing stock of the school. The paper also claims that their fight against the women is ridiculous because "chicks are timid creatures and daren't hurt anybody."

The October 1885 Dickinsonian mentions in the "Locals" section that the Freshman class is torn over the question of co-education. It was stated that ten members of the class "refuse to join the class-organization if the co-eds. are allowed to join." The other half of the class insisted that an invitation be "extended to the fair causes of strife."