CALTECH STUDENT HISTORY NOTES
HAZING
The May 1917 student annual, called ``The Throop Tech'', contains the first mention of hazing at the school. Specifically it states that ``Hazing has not been indulged in at Throop beyond an occasional outbreak, and then only in the form of a compulsory shower.'' Clearly, then, showering is an ancient tradition at the school.
THE VAN ETTEN CASE
Albert Henry Van Etten came from Pasadena (766 Center Street) and entered the Throop College of Technology as a freshman in 1917. From the beginning he had difficulties adjusting to College life and getting along with his fellow students. Among other things he objected to the language of his fellow students which, no doubt, tended to get richer when Albert's objections became recognized. Albert reported these events to his mother who sought an audience with the Executive Committee of the College (the president was absent) to whom she made her complaints clear. Needless to say the other freshmen took particular exception to this turn of events and determined to teach Albert a lesson.
So it was that about noon on June 25, 1918, a group of freshmen who included Beman, Henson, Craig, Spear, Herkner, Forgy, W.P. Davis, Kingsley, McClure, Mintie, Johnson, Drake, Pearson, Porter, Rose and Wade kidnapped Albert Van Etten and loaded him into an automobile which, along with other vehicles filled with students, drove some ten miles east of campus to Monrovia Canyon. There Van Etten was stripped naked. The word ``moral'' was painted on his back and a mustache added to his upper lip with a solution of nitrate of silver. Some methylene pills were also forced down his throat. The last was a fairly common prank in those days; the methylene pills caused the urine to turn blue. Finally a spanking was administered to Van Etten and he was left in the Canyon dressed in his underwear. The students left him a bicycle with one pedal removed.
Apparently Van Etten borrowed a pair of overalls and made his way back to campus on his own. A few days later warrants were served on the aforementioned freshmen in which they were charged with disturbing the peace, with hazing and with assault and battery. Later that summer after some plea bargaining eleven of the freshmen pleaded guilty to assault and battery and were fined $35 each. A few of the other freshmen received different treatment. Beman was tried alone and was acquitted. The case against Henson was dismissed because he was married. The cases against Porter, Rose and Wade were handled by the juvenile authorities.
In pronouncing the sentence in the case Judge McDonald made the following statement. ``Hazing is wrong in principle and in theory. It is often done in a malicious spirit. Hazing is first cousin to mob rule. It absolutely must stop in Pasadena. If necessary, the most extreme penalty will be provided to make it stop. The day is past when hazing was considered allowable. It is un-American, and quite the contrary of manly. At West Point it is forbidden, and colleges and universities all over the country have taken a stand against it.''
In the present era it would be hard to find any reasonable person who would defend these freshmen and their total disregard for the individual rights of Albert Van Etten. So it surprising for us to read some of the excuses put forward not only by the students but also by other components of the Pasadena community. For example, the Pasadena Press of August 24, 1918, reported as follows: ``Eleven boys were fined $35 apiece for assault and battery when in reality no assault and battery had been committed, although the boys pleaded guilty to the charge. The reason for prosecuting the boys as stated by the mother of the complainant was to bring sullied publicity to the professor, according to her own statement, who had taught these boys and whose methods did not suit the mother of the boy. What a way to get revenge. It is just such work as this that makes people disgusted with women who are butting in here and there and every where trying to regulate the world by whatever flight of fancy that happens to strike them. In this case the Throop students will always remember the young man and his mother. The complainant in the action will have gained nothing and the professor will be retained just as he should be and those who have made temporary for the boys will suffer for it in the long run.'' One is tempted to suggest that both the writer and the freshmen could have benefitted from a course on the basic individual rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
The graduation number of the College annual, ``The Throop Tech'', for the class of Sept. 1918, contains accounts of the incident which are not only self-serving and self-justifying but even contain threats directed at the unfortunate Albert Van Etten. Specifically one account states that, since it is summer time, there are in Pasadena students from colleges all over the west and from some eastern colleges as well. The writer goes on:
``Should the cause of the trouble ever attempt to enter any college in the west, or in fact any college in the country, he will find there someone who has heard of his past record. This someone will spread the news among the school with a result which we leave to your imagination. Again throughout life wherever his name may go, there will the boy find enemies as a result of the enmity gained from this affair.''
Other passages in these accounts attempt to justify the actions of the freshmen as necessary for the good of the ``spirit'' of the college and deplore the fact that they lost valuable time from their studies which are characterized as ``essential government work''. In the history of the Institute, the Van Etten affair was not the first time that perceived ``greater good'' was used as an excuse for the violation of the rights of an individual and it was not the last. Though the circumstances and the accepted mores may change from one era to the next, the lesson is the same. Namely that the struggle for those individual rights requires constant vigilance and critical self-examination of the institutions and traditions within our community.
RODEO
It is clear that some undesirable activities identified as hazing must have occurred during the Rodeo for ASCIT was moved to enact some bylaws to prevent a recurrence of such activities. Quoting from Article XII in the 1941-42 Little T: ``In view of the serious accidents arising from hazing and activities centering around the rodeo, the following policies are adopted: (1) The Board of Control shall adopt a drastic policy of punishing hazing and kidnapping between the Freshmen and Sophomore classes and make this policy known to the Student Body by means of the Frosh Camp, Assemblies, class meetings, ``Little T'', etc. (2) The Freshmen shall be educated concerning the Rodeo situation, and impressed with the rules and regulations under which the Rodeo will be held in future years. (3) Rodeo rules and regulations shall be planned in time for complete exposition at the Freshman Camp.''
Last updated 4/10/04.
Christopher E. Brennen