Seventy-Seven Years of Editorial Freedom
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS

AT-LARGE
The Style of the Times
i 1ly NEIL SHISTER

. , . -.

Where Opinions Are Free, 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ARBOR, MICH.
Truth Will Prevail

NEWS PHONE: 764-055Z

Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.

FRIDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1967

NIGHT EDITOR: NEAL BRUSS


The Hateher Years

N ALL LIKELIHOOD this edition of
The Daily should be a relief to Presi-
dent Harlan Hatcher. As the final
edition of this volume, it is the last
Hatcher will read as president.
It would be inaccurate to suggest that
1-ne Daiy an tne presioet nave seen
eye to eye unng tnepas& 1 years. In-
deed the paper has taken issue with
Hatcher on numerous issues ranging
from the House Un-American Activities
Committee to collective bargaining.,
But then the presidency of the Uni-
versity of Michigan has never been a
dull post. Since Henry Phillip Tappan
was named the .school's first official
president in 185; the job has been a
controversial one.
Tappar angered several churches
with hi decsion to appoint faculty
men on the basis of ability, not. the
church they belonged to. And prankish
students antagonized him by stealing
the chapel bible and throwing it in a
water closet.
Pressure from churchhgroups and
newspapers throughout the state who
resented Tappan's pomposity led to a
lameduck Regents' decision to force
his resignation in 1863. Bitter and dis-
appointed, Dr. Tappan (who is viewed
today as one of the great American
college presidents) left for Europe and
died in Switzerland in 1881.
TAPPAN'S SUCCESSOR, Erastus Otis
Haven, also had a stormy time as
president. He was under fire for reject-
ing a state Legislature demand for
setting up a school of homeopathy. And
he also had to change his stand against
admitting women to the school under
pressure from the Legislature.
Haven was an ordained Methodist
minister and undid himself by preach-
ing a sermon at a Detroit Unitarian
church. A storm of protest from clerics
and laymen forced his resignation in
June, 1869.
Probably the most successful presi-
dent of the University was James P.
Angell, who took the job in 1871 after
Henry S. Frieze acted as president for
two years. Angell served as president
for 38 years. He got along famously
with students and knew hundreds of
them by their first names.
Once he was asked about applying
military discipline against students. He
replied that he felt such measures
would be better for the faculty-who
bothered him more than the students.
Clarence Cook Little prompted con-
troversy just 20 days after he became
president in 1925. He antagonized cleri-
cal bodies by advocating sterilization
of criminals and offended students by
banning cars on campus and trying
to eliminate drinking in fraternities.
He resigned in January, 1929
IN THIS TRADITION of controversy,
Harlan Hatcher has also come under
fire for many of his stands. But this
does not obscure important achieve-
ments he made while serving as presi-
dent.
One is the establishment of North
Campus; a second is the development
of a first-rate library system with a
new Undergraduate Library and now
a Graduate Library addition.

The caliber of the faculty has been
improved and the University continues
to rank among the ten best schools in
the nation. The graduate departments
rate at the top. The medical and law
schools as well as such departments as
psychology, economics, anthropology,
history, and botany are on a par with
the best anywhere.
The caliber of the student body is
of the highest quality. During the past
16 years, the caliber of the students
has grown. "Our students are as good
as Harvard's or anybody," says one
history professor.
The research units of the school are
top-flight. The Institute for Social Re-
search, as a striking example, stands
in a class by itself.
Foreign students continue to flock to
the campus in large numbers. In addi-
tion, Hatcher has continued to fight
against the Legislature's moves to cur-
tail the enrollment of out-of-state stu-
dents.
BUT ALL THESE achievements aside,
perhaps the most significant single
accomplishment of his administration
is in the area of the campus student
movement.
This University has managed to make
more progress in this area with less
disruption than any major school in
the country. While other institutions
across the country continue to crack
up over the twin issues of student
power and the war in Vietnam, this
campus has been relatively peaceful.
And while the distasteful events of
the past few weeks cloud the air, it
must still be pointed out that there
have been no political suspensions of
students in the midst of great turmoil.
In scanning the entire Hatcher rec-
ord, perhaps his best single move was
a speech' before the Council on Finan-
cial Aid to Education at Chicago in
November, 1965.
What he said there is worthy of a
plaque on the administration building.
They form their own best conclusion to
a review ofHatcher's career:
"Some few are fearful that student
activism is so unpopular with the pub-
lie that support for higher education
may level off or even decline... I have
no precise measure for the popularity
... But I submit that popularity is not
the issue here.
"The question, rather, concerns the
rights of citizens. To prohibit expres-
sion of student opinion with which we
disagree, or because we dislike the
manner in which students choose to
express their opinion, would be a vio-
lation of the Constitutional freedoms
so precious to all of us.
"I do not believe that universities will
suffer in the long run, because they
guard the freedom of their faculties
and students. Free speech, right of
assembly, right of petition were not
created by universities in this country,
but were established in America by
those who wrote the Constitution and
the Bill of Rights. The universities have
the obligation . . to protect these
basic liberties. In good conscience, we
cannot do otherwise."
-ROGER RAPOPORT
Editor

MAYBE LEE MARVIN really is the ultimate symbol of
our culture. A big poster-picture of him glowers down
from the wall of a local restaurant, and after it has
disturbed your meal a few times you get to thinking
why it's there and how appropriate it is.
One feels a great sense of responsibility in doing the
last column of a year. It's as if you have to sum up
everything that has happened, bring it all together in a
neat little package that means something both to your
readers and yourself. So that everybody can file the
year away in a drawer and start the new one fresh.
Obviously that's not the way things work, though,
since if life is anything at all it is a process of continuity
rather than defined bounds. And just as men are al-
ways becoming and never finally become until they are
dead, so do their societies.
Which is why Lee Marvin may be the perfect icon
for our time.
LIFE-STYLE NOW has become extremely important
to America. Perhaps more so than ever before, but I
don't know enough history to be able to say this. In any
case, however, it seems now that public stance is more
valued than private character, and that to preserve
one's feeling of integrity it is absolutely critical that he
project a pul hic face.
We have attached tremendous importance to symbolic
poses, and what we are doing half-the-time is unimpor-
tant in its own right-except in that it seems to rein-
force the pose we have chosen. In other words, 'the
medium is the message'
Lee Marvin hangs on restaurant walls, then, not be-

cause he is a great actor or a historic figure (hanging
pictures of famous people on your wall is decidedly
passe), or especially beautiful, but because he has a
'style' which a lot of people think attractive. Same thing
with Belmondo and Paul Newman and even Bogie.
The style of life, less than the substance that the
style supposedly embodies, is what counts.
THIS SEEMS THE national hang-up. And, to answer
Norman Mailer's question, it is probably why we are in
Vietnam and will stay there. For it is an exercise in
style, the rough-tough cowboy taming Boot-Hill, so it's
a safe place for women and children to live, and if we
need a new frontier upon which to test our virility it
might as well be Southeast Asia.
There is very little new to say about the war. It is
a bad thing, yet tragically it appears that there are not
enough Americans who feel sufficiently opposed to it to
be able to work their will within the institutions of
power; and thus Johnson will be running against Nixon
in '68 with the only real choice being who will drop the
bigger bomb quicker.
Those supporting the war cannot do so convincingly
other than by invoking elements of fear into the minds
of the public, saying that if we don't "stop 'em here" it'll
have to be done on I-94 someday.
BUT THE WAR PERSISTS, is waged more intensely
with more deaths, and why? Because it isn't our style
to quit something once we've begun it, that's not the
American way, and so even if we have been sucked into
a situation which, were it not so costly and sowing such
rancor, would be ludicrous, we persevere.

The only way to close-up a year in America now is
to write about Vietnam, because it is pretty much the
thing that is making so many other things happen.
The major event on campus this semester was the
furor about classified research, What is beneath the
opposition so many of us feel towards secret research is
that it gets the University into a position where, despite
any moral qualms it might have, it is so much a part of
the military establishment that it cannot exert any kind
of restraining force, supposedly the function of the un-
restricted intellectual.
THE QUESTION FACING the country as a whole is,
of course, that of giving the Negro access to the re-
sources of the society so that he can enter its main-
stream as a full-fledged member. Yet the country re-
fuses to face up to the problem, buying time with words
and promises which now are largely disregarded by radi-
cals. If dramatic steps are not soon undertaken to rec-
tify the inequities in the system, there is soon to be a
day of horrible reckoning. But the huge burden of
financing the war takes money out of the country, con-
verting it into instruments of destruction, and there is
not enough around to pay for what must be done at
home.
But the super-patriots, too old themselves to swagger
like Lee Marvin but still in love with a romantic vision
of violence and power, don't seem to see what their
'style' is doing to the country they so loudly proclaim
they are loyal to.
We have become intoxicated with style, which isn't
bad where fashion is concerned, but not such a good way
to run the politics of a nation.

Letters:'Come Let Us Reason Together'

To the Editor:
FROM A PERSON with whom I
am not acquainted, Robert
Klivans, I find the suggestion
that I need "a refresher course
in the Reed and Knauss Reports"
a bit strong. Having participated
in the latter and having worked
for full implementation of the
former I study these reports with
some regularity. I want to take
this opportunity to express again
my willingness to discuss both of
these Reports with specifically
The Daily staff as well as other
interested parties.
Mr. Klivans and others con-
tine to assert that the Reed and
Knauss reports, and even later
the report of the Student Rela-
tions Committee, support the
principle that "students have the
right to determine their own be-
havior rules in the non-academic
sphere." This is extremely mis-
leading. I suggest that Mr. Kli-
vans re-read these three docu-
ments and cite to me direct
quotations that suport his posi-
tion similar to what I did in my
letter of Nov. 27. My office is,
specifically committed to opera
ting within the directions enum-
erated in theReed and Knauss
reports. We also support the re-
port of the SRC. Despite editorial
urgings and student protests we
have not seen fit to embrace a
philosophy foreign to those Re-
ports.
,..r am anxious to discuss phil-
osophical positions. In a letter
dated July 28, 1967 I sought to
engage Bruce Kahn in such dis-
cussions. I have never received an
acknowledgment from Mr. Kahn.
Let's begin to discuss the real
issues in a rational manner.
-John Feldkamp
Director of
University Housing
Clarification
To the Editor:
IN THE RECENT discussions
published in the Michigan Dai-
ly concerning classified research
at the University, and in particular
at Willow Run Labs, there have
been several facts which I believe
need some clarification. I would
like to speak from my own per-
sonal experiences to illustrate
these points.
During the 12 years I have been
on the research faculty at the
University of Michigan, I have
prepared or have helped prepare
some 53 or more technical reports,
presentations, and scientific jour-
nal articles on the results of re-
search in which I was engaged.
Of this number only three were

classified and one of these has
subsequently been declassified.
However, most of the contracts
were classified because of the nec-
essity to have access to classified
data.
As a case in point, the Geo-
physics Laboratory has been quite
active in the underground nuclear
test detection problem working
toward the goal of an effective,
test ban treaty. We have had seven
research contracts that have dealt
directly or indirectly with this
problem since 1957.
The classified information nec-
essary for the conduct of this re-
search concerned the scheduled
underground nuclear tests. These
data were necessary for the plan-
ning of field measurement pro-
grams. Yet there has not been any
classified report generated by this
work.
All of our investigations were
reported in unclassified technical
reports (43) to our sponsors, pre-
sentations at open scientific meet-
ings (42), and in numerous scien-
tific journal articles (37). The
sponsors, in fact, strongly encour-
age publication in the latter and
judge the performance of our re-
search to a great extent on the
quality of journal publications
thatsoriginate from these con-
tracts.
TO THESE PEOPLE who say
that the quality of research con-
ducted at Willow Run Labs is be-
low University standards and that
all classified research needs to be
scrutinized- by the researcher's
peers to determine whether or not
it is up to standard, I would like
to suggest that the review boards
for scientific journals are quite
thorough in their evaluation of
manuscripts submitted for publi-
cation.
The Defense Department also
has panels of specialists (mostly
consultants from universities and
industry) who review and quite
effectively cut out substandard
work.
Furthermore, concerning the
question of large funding for the
average classified contract, it
should be pointed out that exten-
sive field measurement programs
and expensive equipment are usu-
ally necessary for a program of
complex basic research and theo-
retical studies -
It would therefore, be unfair to'
equate the cost for this type of
program with that of a purely
theoretical approach where the
only major expense, other than the
salary of several people, is perhaps
some computer time.

Both theoretical and basic re-
search are necessary, and a well-
rounded research- program takes
both into consideration.
-David E. Willis, Head
Geophysics Laboratory
Parameters !
To the Editor:
T AM WRITING in regard to
your front page article of 7
Dec. which discussed the acquisi-
tion of new cla.ssified pojects in
the University. If this article is
indicative of the quality of Daily
reporting, I seriously question the
accuracy of your frequent claims
to journalistic excellence.
Information regarding the AF-
AADS study was obtained from
me through a hurried telephone
call from the reporter. This form
of "interviewing" has reculted in
superficial and misleading cover-
age of the subject and several
factual inaccuracies.
In the article it stated that I
. . "explained the methodology
will deal with missile and weapon
trajectories." Instead, ,I explained
to the reporter that the method-
ology will deal with missile and
system parameters. Professor Hi-
att, director of one of the pro-
jects cited, was also interviewed
by telephone, with similar mis-
information as the result. Both he
and Professor Brown (another
project director) are members of
the Electrical Engineering De-
partment, not Industrial Engin-
eering. Project AMPIRT funds
will be used to continue analyzing
AMPIRT data and not continue
obtaining data as inaccurately re-
ported.
I am highly in favor of re-
porting news of this nature to the
academic community. I do be-
lieve, however, that there is an
attendant responsibility to develop
b o t h professional journalistic
techniques and professional ob-
jectivity. I recognized the inac-
curacies of this article since I was
personally involved. Errors of this
kind cause me to question the
accuracy of previous articles on
this subject and others of con-
cern to the University commu-
nity.
-Seth Bonder
Con-Con
To the Editor:
1 COMMEND the SGC committee
on the Constitutional Con-
vention for meeting so promptly
after its formation, rather than
letting the committee be used as
a means of stalling on the im-
plementation of the mandate de-
livered by the students in the
recent election.
I suggest that aynone who
gathers one hundred fifty valid
student signatures without neutral-
izing more than that be declared
a delegate to the convention. Stu-
dents should not be allowed to
sign more than one petition.
The convention should not be
an open one; unlimited access to
the convention would allow an
articulate few who represent no
one but themselves to disrupt the
proceedings. The convention can
establish asprocess to gather the
views of non-delegates if it feels
representation is not wide enough.
I oppose any "ex-officio" dele-
gates from groups such as SGC
or GA. If these vested interests
deserve representation, let them
convince one hundred fifty of
their peers of it, just as those
who dissent from the present sys-
temn will have to

gates themselves can determine
their own procedure.
To allow concerned individuals
to begin work on procedural
drafts, petitioning should begin
immediately. The convention it-
self should begin, soon; Jan. 20,
1968, a Saturday, would be an
appropriate day. The referendum
said the con-con should take
place this academic year; that
meant to allow results during that
period, not to have it convene the
last day of classes.
SGC arguments to bargain with
Dr. Fleming without a convention
in the background are motivated
only by attempts at self-preserva-
tion. If Dr. Fleming wants to
avoid bargaining, he will anyway.
Bruce Kahn can bargain as to
functions and powers of a SGC
regardless of its structure. The

and sinister take-over of student
government by the suggesters,
then we ask if this is what they
call fair representation.
The goals of the College Re-
publican Club in campus activi-
ties this year have been clear
and open. They are to encourage
College Republicans 1) to be-
come involved in student govern-
ment and to vote in campus elec-
tions, and 2) to take an active
interest in the issue of a Con-
stitutional Convention in the hope
that perhaps a better form of
SOC may emerge.
Are the attackers of the College
Republicans saying that these
goals are somehow destructive to
student government? It seems to
us that goals of this type are
actually what SC has been try-
ing to encourage in all student

.z 4U.

0

AI

"... Now, the object is to hit the little ball
without hitting the big ball..."


The Flicks' Fiscal Fix

WITHOUT A TRIMMING of expenses,
Cinema Guild and Cinema II will be
forced into bankruptcy next semester.
Cinema II has accumulated $1000 in
unpaid bills and has lost money on vir-
tually every film presented this semester.
Its policy to attract recent feature films
has had great appeal to students but
the rental arrangements for such films
ask 50 per cent of the admission receipts.
Other expenses have already eliminated
salaries for the Cinema II board.
Cinema Guild brings in films which
have lower rentals, but their year-long
court defense of the film "Flaming Crea-
tures" has run up $3800 in legal fees.
T fti~t "1trtft ttdift

Moreover, when the Washtenaw County
circuit court finally rules on Monday
whether the film is obscene, it is almost
certain that the case will begin a costly
appeal process.
An aggressive campaign for donations
to a legal fund has brought in only
$2000, leaving $1800 uncovered.
MUCH OF THE debt problem has been
traced to a University billing regula-
tion which stipulates that the student
theatres must hire their projectionists
through the Plant Department. They are
charged $5.24 an hour plus overhead costs
for projectionists who actually receive
only $3.48 an hour. Plant department
officials refuse to explain where the other

r
i s
, ,l 'e yg3K
f "; IMF
,i AAS t t Syk j -
a
f
Y 1 771:,
4e '
w
r
r
.. Z J ! _ 4 I t

administration of such powers,
hopefully greater than at present,
should be a group established by
those affected by that administra-
tion-the students-not a group
formulated by an administrator's
effort to implement student par-
ticipation and its subsequent his-
torical evolution.
As a product of the present
SGC, this committee must guard
itself against giving SGC any ad-
vantage in the convention, but
take to heart their slogan "Let
the Students Decide."
-Don Racheter
YR's Reply
To the Editor:
WE FIND IT interesting that
two elected members of Stu-
dent Government Council feel
that it is necessary to attack con-
stituents especially on the grounds
that they are outwardly disgree-
ing with some of the actions of
the present SGC. We have long
been under the impression that
one of the great principles of a
democratic government is that
those living under it who have.
disagreements with it, have the
right, even the obligation, to
speak out in an attempt to im-
prove that government.
Members of SGC have been ar-
guing for months, perhaps justifi-
ably, that student government is
truly representative. Yet if the
elected members of Council treat
rational suggestions for change

organizations. Or are they saying
that the goals of the College Re-
publicans are in reality different
from those we have already
named? If so, we challenge them
to confront us, not The Daily,
with evidence to back up their
assumptions.
--Executive Board
College Republican Club
On Hammond's Sex
To the Editor:
THE RECENT outburst in The
Daily by the Rev. Craig Ham-
mond of Canterbury House casti-
gating Jon Braun and Campus
Crusade For Christ prompts me
to challenge Rev. Hammond to
come forward with his own reas-
onable alternative to Mr. Braun's
views.
Mr. Braun freely and publicly
shared his beliefs and ideals. So
far Rev. Hammond's contribution
has been confined to a negative,
emotional diatribe which carefully
avoided any real insight concern-
ing the underlying beliefs of the
author.
Bywhat standard, Rev. Ham-
mond, do you judge the merits
of Mr. Braun's position? If you
are right and Mr. Braun has
wantonly duped us with his "pre-
tentious, sophisticated, slick pre-
sentation,," do you not have a
responsibilitydhaving held your-
self out to the University com-
munity as one qualified to speak
r~nnn rni

I