Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue


Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

April 22, 1959 - Image 4

Resource type:
The Michigan Daily, 1959-04-22

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

' t Bat. E~i
Sixty-Ninth Year
Truth Will Prevail"n
Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.

"Tell You What - Let's Offer To Guarantee As Much
Democracy As They Have In The Capital of The U.S."

w +i C

E '.

1.1~/ i;i
w~s'r ~
- . EASr
- ~E~tII4 -
4 1
V -
-~ . .,
- I
:1 -

Men Still March

_z :
=:.s -
,' c ' ^A


While -YoYo's' Play


i ' Y2 q
, ,
s t
. ,
, .
u ' t i

D OSES OF student apathy and awareness, in
chaotic spurts, have smitten colleges and
universities recently with results that range
from the shocking to the worthwhile.
Traditionally,*a certain degree of license is
allowed for springtime activities. The 1959 sea-
son launched students on an anti-claustro-
phobia kick as crowds of humanity tried means
to get closer and closer together.
Filling phone booths with.grunting fraternity
men, expanding the passenger capacity of small
foreign cars and inducing a mass of high school
boys into a cramped men's room, exuberant
"education seekers" received the type of pub-
licity often reserved for affairs of state.
AND WHILE the University of Michigan, tra-
ditional center of conservatism, abstained'
from the more common forms of ostentation,
"yo-yo stringers" and bicycle racers occupied
seemingly a very important place in Ann Arbor.
Their position of esteem evidently outranked a
March for Integration which drew an estimated
26,000 to 30,000 participants in last Saturday's
Attending what has been described as the
"biggest youth rally in Washington ever" were
17 from the University. This small group
brought 1,500 signatures on integration peti-
tions from an educational institution which

takes a great deal of pride in the ability, mental
awareness and overall responsibility of a highly
select intellectual community.
Over 50 students had wanted to make the
trip to Washington but were hindered by lack
of financial support from the student body and
members of the administration who declined to
lend the University's name to such a project.
A majority of the other groups did receive
support from their student bodies and in some
cases transportation from the school.
BUT BEFORE concluding that this absence
of funds represents the failure of the entire
project, it should be remembered that last year,
half the current number, signed petitions and
during the McCarthy reign of terror, very few
would have even looked at the literature on
Persuading 1,500 to announce their views on
this controversial subject does mark a great
step forward. But 1,500 names represents only
a fraction of the total campus population and
17 enthusiastic workers, an even smaller core
of interest.
Meanwhile the great majority concentrates
on other mental activity, preparing for an
upcoming yo-yo contest that will be held in
conjunction with a bicycle race on Palmer.
Athletic Field.

:, +

7m m J

'I NtRIC Als"
L./ t2 N
I), 0qLES

Barriers Remai
As Crisis Grows
(EDITOR'S NOTE: This is the second of a series of four uncensored
articles writen by Harold K. Milks after nearly, three years' service as Asso-
ciated Press Chief of Bureau In Moscow.)
Associated Press Staff Writer
WHAT IS IT LIKE to live in the Soviet Union on the eve of the battle
for West Berlin? I found it little, if any, different from living there
at any time since 1956. The Soviet people are still just as friendly,
individually, and just as hostile collectively, to an American as they
have been since that time.
Soviet officials have perhaps tightened their controls, become even
more non-cooperative and harassing than before. But in day to day
living-aside from professional difficulties involving the "tough" policy
of Soviet officialdom-there has been little change.
During nearly three years in the Soviet Union I never received the
slightest insult nor felt the danger of physical attack-aside from the
two times Russian crowds staged well-organized and directed "spon-
taneous attacks" on the American Embassy.
But at no time during that period was there much break in the
invisible barrier which separates non-Communist foreigners from the
Soviet people.-
I have had many Russian friends abroad, in China, and in India
or elsewhere where I worked as foreign. correspondent. Some of them
were in Moscow when I was there. But aside from occasional meetings
at formal and official affairs they no longer were friends.
SOON AFTER my arrival I met and invited to dinner a Soviet
journalist. He accepted. and showed up with his English-speaking wife.
But they never came back, and I learned later this his job was 10 per
cent journalism and 90 per cent working for the secret police.
Aside from that invisible barrier--reinforced by the official warning
to foreigners that too much contact with Soviet citizens can mean


" \

~fl959 r'flite WPS4M.Lt6O#4 posy o.

'Home Rule' for Washington


Cultural or Propaganda Exchange?

ONE OF THE FIRST fruits of the Soviet-
American cultural agreement, the Ameri-
can National Exhibition, looks like it's being
rotted to the core when it hasn't even been
planted yet.
And this fruit disease has been attributed to
an infectious worm-the official Soviet news
agency known as Tass.
The agreement involves the July exhibition
(to be opened by Vice-President Richard M.
Nixon) of a typical U. S. home in Moscow's
Sokolniki Park. It will be built for $13,000 and
furnished by Macy's department store for
What about all this "propaganda"? Tass
snorts the Russian equivalent of "baloney" in a,
dispatch distributed for publication by Soviet
newspapers. Macy's, according to Tass's indig-
nant report, is in the propaganda business.
"Actually, there is no more truth in showing
this as the typical home of the American work-

er," Tass reported, "than say, in showing the
Taj Mahal as the typical home of a BombayJ
textile worker, or Buckingham Palace as the
typical home of an English miner."
The dispatch continued with a sneer at the
$5,000 furnishings: ". . even if one supposed
for a moment that an American worker could
enter Macy's with $5,000 in his pocket, he
could hardly succeed even for this sum in buy-
ing such furniture as is shown by Macy's with
the aim of propaganda," it stated.
Russian officials want this exchange. They
must have nodded a great big "Da" when ques-
tioned or there wouldn't be an exhibition.
But before the project's started, there's an
attempt to rot the fruits of world understand-
ing to the core.'If the Soviet people don't bite
this line first, the quasi-rotted fruit might fall
off the tree of international understanding and
bump Soviet officials right on top of their big,
bald heads.

Associated Press Newsfeatures Writer
W ASHINGTON - Elsewhere
the natives grow restive, and
demand a voice in their govern-
But here in Washington, where
for 85 years no citizen has had
the right to select so much as his
own dogcatcher, the situation can
be summed up like this:
No storming the White House
. . no angry march on Congress
. no pitched battle with the
ruling classes . . . but a mildly
hopeful attitude that, with Alaska
and Hawaii in the union, can the
Nation's capital be far behind?
The plight of the 802,178 vote-
less residents of the District of
Columbia is curious, to say the
Sen. Joseph S. Clark (D-Pa.)
told the Senate:
"America no longer is a colonial
power so far as Hawaii and Alas-
ka are concerned, but we still
have this one little colony here in
the District of Columbia, which
we do not permit to enjoy the
same right of home rule which
the British Empire grants to
areas in darkest Africa.

And Sen. J. Glenn Beall (R-
Md.), said:
"It does seem to me ironical
and unfair. In the District of Co-
lumbia there are as many citizens-
as there are in Hawaii and Alaska
combined. Yet Congress declines
to give residents of our nation's
capital full citizenship rights."
* * * '
"I deem it my duty to again call
your attention to the condition
of the District . . . Is it not just
to allow them at least a delegate
in Congress?"
The speaker: President Andrew
Jackson. The occasion: his an-
nual message to Congress, in 1831.
Well, things don't get done ter-
ribly fast around here.
But for a while District resi-
dents did elect their own officials.
Then, in 1874, Congress took on
the chores of acting as a sort of
City Council for Washington, with
the administrative work handled
by three commissioners appointed
by the President, and that's the
way it has been ever since.
HOW COME nothing has hap-
Several reasons are advanced.
For one thing, not everyone is

eager to get his hands on a ballot.
For another, since government is
its main industry, the District has
curious and complex tax prob-
Then, too, the Negro popula-
tion in Washington-it now has
reached 50 per cent and is grow-,
ing - undoubtedly has caused
some congressmen to balk.
But those who work for the
Washington Home Rule Commit-
tee said today they hope some-
thing will give at long last in this
Congress, that local business will:
be returned to local voters.
. . .
dent won't be able to. vote for
President until the Constitution is
amended, which, of course, would
take much longer.)
One compelling factor in this
reasoning: In a world bursting
into outer space, Congressmen no
longer have the time, or the pa-
tience, to fool with District affairs.
An example of their problem:
During the Suez crisis, when war
seemed imminent, the House put
in a busy two hours discussing
how high is high enough for over-
head electric wires in the nation's

expulsion-life in Moscow differed
little from life in other capitals
In recent monthsdating back
roughly to the time Khrushchev
challenged the West to "free" West
Berlin-official contacts in Moscow
tightened. Representatives of the
Foreign Office Press Department,
who control all correspondents in
the Soviet Union, became more
chillingly correct.
There were fewer smiles and
more long-winded lectures on ob-
jectivity in every meeting with
such officials. Most connected chill
with Khrushchev's obvious cam-
paign to keep the West off balance
any way he could.
BUT THERE never was in my
experience any personal threat or
mistreatment by either official or
non official Russians.
It appeared after a time that
despite the public praise for such
cooperation as the cultural ex
change programs and the swap-
ping of performing ice shows for
the Bolshoi Ballet, Soviet officials
were less friendly, less cooperative..
Promises of arranging appoint-
ments and interviews with Soviet
leaders in various fields were less
frequently fulfilled.
It's all part of the cold war,
Soviet version.
Western correspondents, as the
only non-diplomatic foreigners in
Moscow, felt it heavily.
I watched several colleagues fly
away after varying times of serv-
ice in the Soviet capital. Their
reaction to stepping past the last
police and customs barrier and
boarding an airplane for "outside"
was unvaryingly one of happy r'e-
I was no exception when I left
Moscow this month after service
there dating back to 1956. As the
plane started to roll and we were
at last on our way "out" it felt
as though a heavy weight had
been lifted from the back of my

Associated Press Staff Writer
CAIRO-For the last 12 months
there have been growing signs that
Washington is learning to live with
President Gamal Abdel Nasser.
It is almost a year since Nasser
accepted a Suez canal compensa-
tion agreement which opened the,
door to a U.S.-Egyptian reconcilia-
Since then there has been no
dramatic alignment .of Egypt with
the United.States. And no major
commitments have come from the
United States to Egypt. But' over
the months there has been a quiet
but steady improvement in rela-
There still is a long way to go,
but if the present trend continues
relations appear headed toward
Architect of this policy is the
discreet, self-effacing U.S. Am-
bassador to Cairo, Raymond Hare.
A non-panicking diplomat who
steers a steady course between
excesses and optimism or ,pessi-
mism, Hare is ideally equipped for
his job here in these two respects:
he is a veteran diplomat and he is
an Arabic-speaking Middle East-
ern specialist with a remarkable
knack for feeling the Arab pulse.
HERE ARE some instances of
U.S.-Egyptian cooperation over the
last 12 months:
1) The United States released
$400,000 worth of communications
equipment originally earmarked
for Egypt but blocked during the
Suez crisis of 1956.
2) U.S. aid to a land reclama-
tion project near Alexandria has
been resumed and an American
technician arrived to assist.
3) The private relief organiza-
tion CARE resumed its activities
in Egypt with a wide program' of
free school lunches.
\4) The huge U.S. Army dredger
Essayons was leased to the Egyp-
tian Suez Canal authority for six
5) The export-import bank
granted a loan of five million.
dollars to an Egyptian chemical
6) The United, States agreed to
sell 25 million dollars worth of
wheat to Egypt for Egyptian
7) 'Essential negotiations were
completed for a treaty avoiding
double taxation for nationals of
the two countries.

To Correct Past M itakes,


AST WEEK the German Embassy in Wash-
J ington published an address delivered by
he German Ambassador in which he replied
a series of articles which I wrote recently on
ae Two Germanys and Berlin. Wilhelm Grewe
rgues his case fairly and in good temper. But
ae sum and substance of his plea is that all
roposals for negotiation thus far are bad, and
iat any change from the status quo would be
change for the worse.
In my view it is a dismal and defeatist atti-
ide to insist that it is not possible to improve,
at it is possible only to worsen, the present
tuation. Moreover, even if this were true, -it is
counsel of despair. For it is sheer fantasy to
tppose that the present situation can be main-
,ined as it is for the indefinite future.
Grewe, who besides being Ambassador, is a
'incipal legal advisor to his government, goes
far as to declare that "every new treaty
rangement on Berlin can only worsen the
"Every" is a big word. Why does he use it?
ecause, he says, "if you negotiate a new treaty
,sis with the Soviets for Western presence in
d Western access to Berlin, you concede, first
all, that it is within the power of the Soviet
pion to grant such rights to the West." This is
strange argument. Why does a new statute or
eaty about Berlin have to make any such
eposterous concession to the Soviet Union?
by cannot the new statute or treaty recog-
ze and reaffirm the right of the Western
lies to be present in Berlin? To argue that
very new treaty arrangement" can only sur-
ider our rights in Berlin, that no new treaty
rangement can fortify our rights, is not a
al or political proposition. It is a political
urosis engendered by profound self-distrust.
. IS, MOREOVER, a diplomatic blunder. For
it ignores'the fact of the great change in the
viet position between November of last year
:i March of this year. In the Soviet note of
v. 27, 1958, the USSR asserted that the Four
wer Occupation Agreement of 1944 and 1945
d become "null and void." On March 19, just
few weeks back, Khrushchev declared that
Western governments "have lawful rights
the deployment of troops as occupiers."
rely, it would be a mistake not to propose
t this be put in writing.
t would not do us anything but good to have

annexation of Germany declaration regarding
the defeat of Germany, June 5, 1945)." Con-
sidering all this, there is good reason, it seems
to me, for taking advantage of Khrushchev's
admission to tidy up our legal position.
BUT THAT is by no means the only or the
most important r'eason for negotiating a
new statute, A very substantial reason is that
it would afford the chance to correct our past
mistakes, to make precise the exceedingly loose
and vague documents under which we, the
allies, and also the West German civilians deal
with West Berlin. In my view, the Western
powers will be very unwise indeed if they do not
consolidate the legal position in West Berlin
before the Soviet government makes a peace
treaty with the East German state.
A clarification of the right of access to West
Berlin, based on the- recognition of our lawful
right to be in Berlin, would be an infringement
on, not a worsening of, the status quo. What
we must no' forget is that although the nerves
of the West Berliners are good, they are not
super-humanly good, and they must not be
counted upon for an indefinite future in whichj
there is no hope of getting out of the strategic
The State Department lawyers have been talk-
ing about our being in Berlin by "right of con-
trap in which they have to live, for a future in
which their daily life depends on imprecise and
fragile agreements.
In my view, if the Western nations mean to
defend the freedom of West Berlin, they must
obtain for West Berlin a constitution which
rests not only on the military power of the West
but also upon the assent and approval of the
whole society of nations.
IT IS FOR THIS reason that I think we should
take the new statute of Berlin to the General
Assembly of the United Nations. There are
many, I know, who do not like the United Na-
tions, and believe that it has become an insti-
tution which works against the Western coun-
tries with overseas interests. But there are, I
believe, special reasons for taking the Berlin
statute-after the four powers have agreed on
it-to the UN.
One of the reasons is, of course, to make the
enforcement and observance of the new statute
more visible to the world in general. The
strongest reason is that it nrnvilesan onnor-

Education Extends Beyond Catalogue, Reader Says

To the Editor:
IN A RECENT letter to The
Daily, Mr. John E. Ohlson ex-
pressed a great fear that the Uni-
versity of Michigan was turning
into a hot-bed of Radicalism.
Perhaps Mr. Ohlson is right, we
really don't know. His fears, how-
ever, '(if a reaction displaying
such a low threshold and such
great vehemence can indeed be
called a simple fear) seem to be
based upon a signal lack of evi-
dence and formulated with rather
garbled logic.
To begin with, Mr. Ohlson sug-
gests that, since Mr. Torre Bissell
spends a great deal of time pilot-
ing "radical", groups about the
country, he is not spending as
much time on his studies and is
therefore not deriving the maxi-
mum benefit of Michigan's "Edu-
c a t i o n a 1 Opportunities." Of
course, Mr. Ohlson's logic is com-
pletely dependent upon a rather
crippling definition of the phrase
"Educational Opportunity." If ed-
ucation at Michigan can be de-
rived only in connection with the
study of courses listed in the Uni-
versity Catalog, then Mr. Ohlson
is right - but both sense and ex-
perience however, teach that this
is not the case. We're sure it
would prove much more valid, and
much more valuable, to view the
University as an intellectual com-
munity capable of stimulating in-
terest and growth, than to view it
as a string of cinder-block class-
Mr. Ohlson's argument falls
short at another point when he
infers that extra-curricular acti-
vities (in this case, "Radical" ac-
tivities) necessarily involve a con-
sequent drop in strictly scholastic

of the classroom. General compe-
tence has a way of carrying over.
One is forced to conclude that-
the letter's interest lies, not so
much in educational benefits at
the University of Michigan or in
Mr. Bissel's extra-curricular acti-
vities, but in the type of activity
in which Mr. Bissell is engaged,
i.e.; "Radical" activity. Even on
this point, Mr. Ohlson's fear could
be legitimate, until one remem-
bers that Mr. Bissell was attacked
for his stand on Negro Integra-
tion. Is it possible that Mr. Ohl-
son considers the legal equality of
human beings to be a "Radical"
concept? If so, then the class-
room, which he so admires, hasn't
done him much good (which, in-
cidentally, destroys his definition
of the source of all educational
oportunity) or else he hasn't lis-
tened too closely while in the
classroom-- or out of it. In either
event, one can only wonder just
who, in this case, is really avoid-

ing their educational opportuni-
ties !
-Robert J. Shecter
-Simon E. Katzenellenbogen
-Albert G. Envols
Reform . . .
To the Editor:
WE SINCERELY hope that the
opinion expressed by Mr.
John E. Ohlson, Jr., (about cer-
tain reform movements instigated
by Mr. Torre Bissel), is not repre-
sentative of general student opin-
ion on this campus.
Mr. Ohlson appears to imagine
that the citizen should be denied
the right to agitate for reform. In
a democratic society it is the duty
of every citizen to do his utmost
to change any situation which he
believes is detrimental to the gen-
eral good. If the inquiring mind
is to be suppressed and blind ac-
ceptance of the status quo advo-
cated even in the universities, the
country is well on the road to

The terms in which Mr. Ohlson
refers to Mr. Bissel, and the as-
sumptions he makes about the
latter's university work are both
irrelevant and impertinent. More-
over, the fact that Mr. Bissel is a
student at all, rather than in any
other walk of life, has no connec-'
tion with the matter whatsoever.
In the role he has chosen. to
adopt, Mr. Bissel is a citizen -
no more, no less.
If Mr. Ohlson had restricted his
remarks to criticism of the re-
forms which Mr. Bissel is promot-
ing, he would have shown himself
worthy of a place in society and
may even have exposed the faults
which we hope he- believes he
recognizes in Mr. Bissel's pro-
posed reforms.
-M. L. Burrows, Grad.
-D. B. Lippmann, '60
Fiction . ,.
To the Editor:
OF course Mr. Ohlson's letter
concerning campus radicals is
pure fiction. There couldn't really
be a Mr. Ohlson. Our respect for
the Michigan students compels us
to believe that there never will be.
-Leona Huberman, '59
-Anna Wood, '59
Pading ...
To the Editor:
UNLESS Dr. Pauling's remarks'
of Friday evening differed
greatly fro~m his remarks, of Fri-
day afternoon,it seems to me that
Lane Vanderslice in his Tuesday
editorial has missed the whole
point of Pauling's talk regarding
a nuclear ban.
Dr:'Pauling's main point was
not that the T S.n rest a-

-Appropriate Action'

* * .*
A NUMBER of similar develop-
ments are in the works. None alone
is spectacular. But they appear to
represent a trend.
It may be coincidence, but in
the political field things have been
smooth between the two countries
for months. There was a bad per-
iod when U.S. troops landed in
Lebanon last summer over the
vehement protests of Nasser. The
troops left without essentially
damaging Nasser's position, how-
ever, and since then there has been
no serious friction.
Veteran observers here are sure
the United States will again get its
hard knocks from the Cairo propa-
ganda machine in due time. There
still is a mutual lack of confidence
between Washington and Cairo.
But there are grounds for hope
that relations won't again be as
bad as they were in the. past.



Back to Top

© 2017 Regents of the University of Michigan