Bishop Buddy Scrapbook 1941-1945

property would revert to the granters. All these restrictions at that time were agreeable. Asinine Method The regulations governing the Planning Commission are asinine to wit: To get a recommenda- tion from the Planning Commis- sion requires a favorable vote from six of the nine members. On the day set for the hearing before the Planning Commission three members of that body were home ill and they were not permitted to vote by proxy nor by mail. The Planning Commission, with six members present, heard the petition and then voted four to two to grant the rezoning. The chairman of the board, who recommended the restric- The petition was then sent to the Council without recommendation. The hearing before the Council on Febru- ary 1 resulted in a travesty. The Hon- orable Mayor presided and it was evi- dent from the first that he employed the old steam roller tactics. To begin with, the Honorable Mayor made use of a fallacy known as ''begging the question" by assuming, before the hearing began, as certain what in fact was the very point to be proven. Namely, the Mayor ruled that no one but those residing in Loma Portal could be heard at this meeting. He, therefore, assumed that the mat- ter of a San Diego College for Women concerned only a comparatively small neighborhood in Loma Portal. The petitioners, including the official rep- resentative of Union Labor, contended that the proposed College concerned all the people in San Diego and all others who wanted to take advantage of its facilities. From the start of the hearing, it was made a neighborhood proposition and wound up the same way-whether or not the people of Loma Portal wanted this College. In fact, the Mayor asked for a vote from the 15 0 people present. tions voted negatiyely. Begging The Question

Steam Roller Tactics There was another glaring incon- sistency in the Mayor's ruling. He permitted the right of assembly, but did not permit those assembled to be heard. One Councilman who voted against the petition questioned the statement that there was not another building and accompanying eight acres in the city. He merely questioned it, but offered no proofs. The three Coun- cilmen, Boud, Simpson, and Dale, who voted favorably to permit the San Diego College for Women to start on the Bridges Estate were evidently vot- ing on the merits of the case. Those who voted "No" took into considera- tion the wish of people living in Loma Portal, although 7 0 % of the property owners within three hundred feet of the Bridges Estate signified in writing their approval of granting the change of zone. Guarantee Unfounded One claim made by the objectors to rezoning that appeared to carry weight with the Councilmen voting unfavor- ably was the assertion that those buy- ing property in Loma Portal were guar- anteed the restriction of Zone 1. This claim, however, had already been re- futed by Mr. Morrison, Attorney for the Bishop in his opening statement of the case. One important item mentioned at the hearing and which fell on deaf drs is significant, namely, that the time has come to extend to the masses of the people the better things. Only nine percent of our citizens can afford to send their daughters away to a resident college. The San Diego CoUege for Women would have brought the same advantages to the very doors of thou- sands of San Diego people. One pro- tester expressed resentment that the Bridges Estate was to be used as a de- tention home for juvenile delinquents -and that type of crass ignorance won the day.

-

Bishop's State;,,ent When Lord Lang, former Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury recently wrote in the "London Times" that the Allies will not be justified in bombing either the Eternal City or the Vatican, the local secular Press asked our Most Reverend Bishop for an official state- ment on the matter. His Excellency responded by giving the following re- lease to the Press: "It is intrinsically wrong directly to cause or intend the death of the inno• cent or non-participants in war. There- fore, in the light of reason and re- spect for right order the indiscriminate bombing of cities cannot be justified by either, moral or international law, because even a good end can never justify a bad means. "It is permitted, however, in a just war, such as this is recognized to be, to bomb military objectives even though indirectly innocent non-participants may per accident suffer death or in- jury thereby. "Mere military expediency cannot justify the violation of the natural law. The generaUy accepted moral principle states that it is lawful to repel force with force; that is, the same kind of force employed by an unjust aggres- sor. Hence it is lawful to kill the enemy and to destroy his operations, but in• nocent non-combatants certainly can- not be included in this category. We must not descend to the barbarous tac- tics of our enemies. We can defeat them honorably and thus maintain our American traditions of fair play."

•