Seventy-Sixth Year
EnITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICMrGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS

' kx4'i t~A\ } ...v +R! .., ..9X'rti ,f~:' tka .., . .....a ... .. .. . . .V. . . . . .. ... ...... x'.. .. ,,, ...mf..w . .,4 ~ r A. .. ...w . _ge .sv .. 4 ...... . .. , .. .. . :
POWER4ThenReents: Crisis of omprehenasion
1POETRY by MARK R. KILLINGS WORT H :.:.*.S....~..~.
.f.Y}.

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

NEws PHONE: 764-0552

Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily ex press the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This mus t be noted in all reprints.'

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 1966

NIGHT EDITOR: MEREDITH EIKER

R

The 'Student Power' Fight:
Moderates May Win

THERE IS ANOTHER student side to the
present University crisis, and it ought
to be recognized. A number of students,
an undetermined number, are re-affirm-
ing their faith in the student advice phi-
losophy of "sharing in administration."
Speaking with a minority volume, these
students represent what to the present
revolutionaries of student power is defeat.
But, for the present crisis, it could wind
up being the solution-the gaining of an
effective voice in affairs through advisory
boards,
THIS GROUP HAS several contentions,
though like everyone else they are
probably divided on most of them. Here
are their major points:
-SGC does not represent the majority
of students;
--students must show themselves to be
responsible before the administration will
listen to them; '
-the administration will lisen to stu-
dents only "if they want to;"
-the administration has been nice to'
put up with as much as it has;
-attempts to force the University to
do anything are useless "because no stu-
dent or group of students can force the
University to do anything;"
-student advisory boards can work.
SOME OF THESE arguments, which
basically represent the administra-
tion's public relations line, have some
validity. The decision to sit-in was ram-
med through an assembly of 4,000 stu-
dents, which, though large, was a definite
minority of the student body. However, as
elected representatives, the members of
SGC have a strong case for claiming to
represent students, and tle different
opinions of SGC members may well re-
flect the feelings of all students.
The old line that students must show
themselves to be responsible has, since the
bookstore incident, been overshadowed by
charges that the administration was not

being responsible to students. This is ob-
viously a two-way proposition.
AS FAR AS being nice and permitting
dissent, the administration knows
these are the only things that kept stu-
dents fairly quiet-until the sit-in ban.
Perhaps individual students do not
have any power. But united students are
trying to show that they are the Univer-
sity, and they can force the administra-
tion to do something. Time will tell.
Advisory boards of some type, believe
it or not, could become an effective means
of giving students and faculty a great
deal of say in the way the University is
run. But at the present rate they will
never gain a thing for either of these
groups. As everyone seems to admit, there
seems to be no reason for the administra-
tion to listen to anyone.
IT WILL TAKE demonstrations, sit-ins
or some type of exertion of power to
force the administration to listen. There
is. no reason for the administration to act,
and they won't unless forced.
And as it is up to the students to pro-
vide that force, it is also their responsi-
bility to provide a solution to the prob-
lems they have brought to light. Perhaps
in the final solution, those moderates who
seek a mere advisory capacity for stu-
dents will take the lead.
Perhaps once the revolution has begun
to result in concessions, those who insist
on student-faculty supremacy will find
their ranks dwindling as the majority
seek peace and harmony.
It will take action to bring about any
results, but the results are likely to be
those favored by students who would not
take action. There is a bit of disillusion-
ment for everyone in a revolution. But
there is always a bit of hope, too.
FOR THE MOMENT, therefore, support
your campus revolutionaries.
-MICHAEL HEFFER

THE STUDENT affairs crisis may
have changed course as a re-
sult of President Hatcher's state-
ment to the faculty senate yes-
terday. But it has exposed anoth-
er crisis-a crisis among the Re-
gents.
What the Regents have done-
or failed to do-so far in the
current crisis indicates that they
have failed to meet their respon-
sibilities to a great university.
One says it with a sense of
sadness and a wish that it were
not so. Yet it is so, and three
examples indicate the appalling
degree of the Regents' failure to
understand or meet the crisis:
" ONE REGENT, a staunch
member of one of the University's
honorary societies, is known to
have felt that the best contribu-
tion the current student mem-
bers of his honorary could make
in the crisis is to help remove sit-
in demonstrators from the Admin-
istration Bldg.
" Regent William Cudlip de-
clared recently that the develop-
ments here are part of a "nation-
al pattern," and added that "an
exact prototype of what we are
now seeing in Ann Arbor took
place at the City College of New
York last week. We have an SDS
handbook out here, and it is
loaded with phrases like 'complete
student power'."
" The Regents met privately
with SGC members last week and,

after hearing an extensive descrip-
tion of the breakdown in commu-
nications with the Office of Stu-
dent Affairs, could only suggest
that SGC talk with the OSA
again-"that's what we set it up
for."
IN LIGHT of the foregoing it
is not hard to see why even Neill
Hollenshead, an SGC moderate,
could only tell the Regents at the
end of their half-hour "meet-
ing" with SGC, "You just simply
don't understand how serious this
is."
But the Regents' inability to
understand the gravity - indeed,
the very nature-of the situation
did not begin with their gather-
ing with SGC or Cudlip's non-
sensical remarks.
Indeed, the Regents to a large
extent brought the crisis on them-
selves. For they virtually ordered
Vice-President for Student Af-
fairs Richard L. Cutler to enact
the sit-in ban, and they made it
clear that they wanted no con-
sultation with students or facul-
ty before the regulation was pro-
mulgated.
Not only does this order - and
Cutler's supine fulfillment of it-
make a mockery of the oft-pro-
nounced University policy of full
consultation before decisions are
made; it also violates what the
Regents themselves claim to want.
IN THEIR GRANT of power to

Cutler, the Regents specifically
stated that Cutler should review
and establish regulations "with a
view to involving all concerned
segments of the University com-
munity, specifically including the
faculties of the several schools and
colleges, interested and responsi-
ble student representatives, and
members of the administration."
Yet in promulgating the sit-in
ban Cutler never bothered even to
inform SGC of the new rule, let
alone ask their views on it. And
Vice-President for Academic Af-
fairs Allan F. Smith's faculty ad-
visory committee explicitly told
Smith well before Cutler's rule was
issued that such a ban on sit-ins
would be ill-advised.
Hence the Regents' actions in
November exude the hypocrisy of
a group of men who have forgot-
ten-or never believed in - what
they endorsed in October.
AND THEIR ACTIONS since
the crisis began indicate they have
failed to understand what is the
root of the problem.
The advisability of a sit-in ban
is not at. issue. Almost all ele-
ments of the University commu-
nity-including the vast majority
of the student body and all the
members of SGC-believe in an
orderly University. Their actions
bear out that belief far more than
the Regents' actions bear out
theirs.
And the advisability of submit-

ting class ranks, strange to say,
is also not at issue. Many of
those students who are insisting
that the University in some way
take account of the draft refer-
endum voted to retain its policy
of submitting ranks.
For the issue is, simply, wheth-
er the Regents and the adminis-
tration are sincese when they
claim to be interested and con-
siderate of student opinion.
THE REGENTS and the admin-
istration failed to meet their lofty
pledges of continuing consultation
with students and faculty. (Presi-
dent Hatcher yesterday conceded
that Cutler's sit-in ban "had not
received adequate discussion.")
Their decisions until yesterday
have been made in the main with
blithe disregard for whatever those
views might be-from the book-
store decision to the decision to
submit political group member-
ship lists to the House Un-Ameri-
can Activities Committee to the
sit-in ban promulgation.
Viewed in this light, the cur-
rent protest is not part of a "na-
tional pattern." Edward Robinson
is not Robespierre, nor is the cur-
rent writer John Peter Zenger (or
Piotr Kropotkin, for that matter).
It is not a premeditated con-
spiracy to overthrow the admin-
istration and gablish student pow-
er. It is the anguished reaction to
the broken promises of the Re-
gents and the administration. It

is an attempt to see that in the
future the Regents and the ad-
ministration will do what they
promised to do-and did not do--
in the past.
SOME MEMBERS of SDS have
always been remarkable in their
fixed belief in the conspiracy
theory of government. The Re-
gents, too, have apparently join-
ed that little band of the be-
mused who subscribe to that fool-
ish interpretation of human
events.
Nor is President Hatcher's state-
ment to the faculty senate yester-
day the product of Regental wis-
don. It is almostdexclusively the
result of the sound-and presum-
ably chastened-Judgment of the
deans, the faculty and administra-
tors. The Regents' position
throughout the period preceding
Hatcher's statement can be sum-
med up as simply, "Noconces-
sions."
IF THE REGENTS fail to pre-
ceive the nature of the situation,
however-and if they fail to feal-
ize that what they have done or
failed to do in fact created the
crisis-then they will eventually
know, the the University disinte-
grates, the bitter words of the
sage:
"We have left undone what we
ought to have done, and we have
not done what we ought to have
done, and there is no health for
us."

Letters: A Plan for Student Government

To the Editor:
An Open Letter to SGC:
I FEEL that this far, the stu-
dent movement looks really
good. But it should not die if
and when the administration gives
us satisfactory answers on the
sit-in rule and ranking. There are
much largerissues involvedand
they must not be forgotten or
overlooked. We must develop long
range answers to questions on stu-
dent power and on the whole
structure of the University. These
decisions should be made in as
democratic a manner as possible.
I OFFER the following sug-
gestions for deciding on such long
range plans.
1) Call for individuals and
groups to submit long range pro-
posals. This call should go out as
soon as possible.
2) Widely publicize all such pro-
posals (through leaflets, The Daily,
etc.).
3) Hold workshops to discuss
the various proposals. Each work-
shop should center around one
proposal and have the submitter
of the proposal attending it.
4) Hold these workshops as soon
as possible, definitely well before
exams.
5) Continue exploring the pro-
posals (and any new ones that
develop) next semester in as many
ways as possible: workshops, town

meetings, informal discussions, etc.
Every effort should be made to
keep the large number of students
now interested deeply involved in
the movement.
6) Sometime next semester hold
a referendum to decide the best
plan for restructuring the student
role in the University.
AS FUNCTIONAL leader of the
movement, you, SGC, have an ob-
ligation to help students consider
and decide the long range aims
of the movement.
-Susan Gordon, '67
All-American
ro the Editor:
IN RESPONSE to your editorial
("Looking at Ann Arbor," Nov.
) regarding Ann Arbor and the
All America Cities contest - this
national award is made for mu-
nicipal and civic progress as a
direct result of citizen action-
not for perfection in government,
which does not exist anyhow. It
is made to cities that do better
in relation to their problems be-
cause of the initiative and lead-
ership of their people.
In recent years Ann Arbor has
had a tremendous outpouring of
activity by citizens on a number
of fronts but particularly in the
field of civil rights. Citizens mo-
bilized to get the first fair hous-

Elitism and the Honors College

IT HAS BEEN argued that the existence
of an Honors program such as ours
promotes an inequality which is unneces-
sary and should not be tolerated.
Here is a system, its critics contend, in
which certain students must withstand
inferior conditions including teaching
fellows and large sections while others
must not; where some are graded on a C
curve and others on a B curve; where the
limitation in size, of classes and number
of sections make provisions for, enroll- f
ment of non-honors students negligible.
But there are significant reasons which
justify the existence of the Honors Col-
lege within the academic community.
IT PRESENTS AN opportunity for the
superior student to escape some of the
flaws of mass education and to feel a part
of the intellectual elite to which every
university student used to belong.
Today 5/2 million students are enrolled
in universities. They are neither the 'elite
nor the elect.' Sociologist Martin Meyer-
son, former Chancellor of Berkeley, wrote
that much of, student tension and dis-
satisfaction, represented by a high drop-
out level, 40 per cent on a national basis,
is due to the all-enveloping concept of
'majority education.'
If the University wishes to win good
instructors away from the other great
educational centers, it must offer them
conditions, and most importantly, stu-
dents, with whom they will be willing to
work. Besides increasing the value of the
Honors College, -this acts to raise the
level of other academic programs and
thus helps all.
BEING IN COLLEGE can no longer in
itself be considered any great accom-
plishment. The Honors curriculum makes
an elite from a majority and restores
some of the natural self-respect and
equilibrium that used to be a part of the
college experience.
Business Staff
SUSAN PERLSTADT, Business Manager
JEFFREY TD .... Assnt ata Businaa Manager

If, in fact, one must consider the Hon-
ors college an example of an elite, then
as dissent is necessary to the proper
functioning of a democracy, elitism is
necessary to mass education.
-CYNTHIA MILLS
The Perfect
Candidate
J KNOW THE perfect candidate for Cali-
fornia Democrats striving to turn the
political tide in that state. Paul Newman.
He is younger, handsomer, and infinet-
ly more virile than Ronald Reagan is. I
know of no woman over the age of 25
who does not immediately reach a state
of orgaistic joy upon the sight of New-
man.
PAUL NEWMAN is also a fairly good ac-
tor. (When Ronald Reagan is called
an actor the word is being used in the
sense as when one calls monkeys who
fingerpaint in the Cincinnatti Zoo, art-
ists.) Another valuable political asset
Paul Newman possesses is a beautiful
wife, oJanne Woodward. (Although I do
know one middle age man that is not
turned on by Miss Woodward.)
Newman is also a liberal and an intel-
ligent thinker, although these qualities
seem to be more harmful than helpful to
political candidates in California these
days.
JUST TO INSURE a smashing victory,
by soundly securing the state's large
ethnic vote, I would suggest a man who
has been a life long symbol and champion
of minority groups.
Tonto.
-WARREN ZUCKER
No Comment
D ep mmartment
94 1 , t-,' TY cr' TTL nT ~F ?++.i-- t-,n..J. ...

ing law in the state and then to
have it amended ,to be one of the
strongest in the nation. Citizens
put up a remarkable battle to
achieve a plus referendum at the
polls for a Housing Commission.
These are All America City-type
achievements. -
YOU CAN question appoint-
ments to the commission if you
wish; the fact of the matter is
that the commission has approv-
ed a program of 40 temporary and
200 permanent low rent housing
units, has secured an advance
planning grant of $35,000 and has
appointed as director, Mrs. Joseph
Mhoon, assistant administrator of
the Inkster Housing Commission,
and a long time public housing ad-
ministrator.
You can say if you choose that
Ann Arbor still has ghetto con-
ditions-but civil rights and mi-
nority leaders will quarrel with
you if you try to gainsay the
efficacy of the city's fair hous-
ing law and the fact that the
federal government, most state
governments and 99 per cent of
the cities of the country haven't
risen to the rough political task
of enacting such a law as Ann Ar-
bor has.
IF YOU HAD read Ann Arbor's
presentation, you would have real-
ized that the city while claiming
All America Cities' recognition,
considers current progress way-
stops to the real goals ahead.
It is difficult for Ann Arbor
with 29,000 student critics to be
Number 1, but at least give us
credit for thying hard to be bet-
ter than Number 2.
-Guy C. Larcom, Jr.
City Administrator
Ranking
To the Editor:
I AGREE with the many partici-
pants who spoke at the teach-
in Monday night in favor of stu-
dent involvement in decisions
which will affect their lives. All
students (and many others) should
vote on the necessity of selective
service. However, only those stu-
dents subject to the draft should
vote on the mechanisms for en-
forcing the draft as they are the
only ones directly affected by such
mechanisms.
That part of the referendum on
class ranking which is hailed as
a "strong mandate" for student
action was a vote on the use of a
mechanism and not a vote on an
issue. I do not believe that there
exists a strong mandate from those
directly affected by the use of

this particular mechanism for two
reasons.
FIRST, the vote on the draft
referendum was not a vote sole-
ly by those directly affected by it.
Certainly females should not vote,
on the use of this mechanism. Let
us assume that the males who
voted on the referendum were a
representative sample of those af-
fected by the decision.
In this case, only 55 per cent
of the males favored withholding
grades; 45 per cent favored using
them. The difference between the
two isclearly notd-a "strong man-
date," if any mandate at all.
Second, I wonder if the 'male
vote was representative of those
most significantly affected. by the
decision. Over 6000 students have
requested that grades be sent to
their draft boards. This number
is equal to the number of males
who voted for and against with-
holding grades. Moreover, it is
double the number of males vot-
ing to withhold grades. I know
that these 6000 students are di-
rectly involved in the issue; I do
not know the qualifications of the
3300.
I URGE those favoring student
action on the basis of the rank-
ing vote to reconsider their strong
mandate. I am classified 1-A by
my "committee of friends and
neighbors" and personally voted
for withholding grades. However,
I have a sneaking suspicion that
ny opinion is a minority opinion.

Rather, I urge those favoring
action to consider significant the
total vote itself as a justification
for action. The number of votes
on the referendum is double the
number of votes in the usual stu-
dent election. This rare turnout
could be seen as a mandate from
students demanding an end to ar-
bitrary administrative decisions
concerning their lives.
--Skip Luken, Grad
To the Courts
To the Editor:
STUDENT Government Council
stands before two divergent
roads. One is the well known road
of sit-ins and demonstrations. It
will lead to Berkeley. One is the
unknown road of court injunc-
tions. No one knows where it will
lead.
SGC should go into court next
Tuesday and obtain an injunction
prohibiting the University from
implementing its sit-in rule and
compiling class ranks until such
time as the Regents grant to SOC
the power which is implicit in
the November, 1959 statement on
student government, and which
SGC needs to become a responsi-
ble and constructive member of
the University community.
IF I WERE able to make the
choice, I would take the road less
travelled by. It should make all
the difference.
-Harry Perlstadt, $3

#i

.

Policy Statement
IT HAS BEEN informally reported to us that some members of
the faculty have been told that The Daily has refused both
to print the full texts of administrative announcements and to
allow the administration to buy advertising space in which to
print those texts. This information was evidently drawn from
conversations with members of the administration.
Neither of these allegations is true. Administrators who were
originally concerned about these rumors have been assured of
this. We have been informed that they are satisfied that our
efforts have been fair in every case.
It is the policy of The Daily to print in full, insofar as tech-
iical considerations permit, the texts of statements dealing with
significant issues affecting the University. It is also our policy to
accept advertising from any person or group requesting it, so
long as the identity of that person or group is made clear in the
advertising.
THIS HAS BEEN the policy of our staff of editors since we
entered office last February. It still is and will remain our policy.
-CLARENCE FANTO
Managing Editor

#I

I

*I

R

IF r'v

The Assassins

.." : . h . : .. ..i2> n , ... .... ..'.. . .. ;.. . . . .....x.4:.v.M.: . :.. .. ,...... . .. . : ;.,.. . . . . .. . . . . . .. . .. . e :1y .4: l
". r. . .': .,. x'.,n: ....:.n.,,r. s. . .r,;:. ..:. ....:..:._. ......'.....
Iu 4l--inThe AtlanticDra Ends i Germany

A FEW DAYS after Chancellor
Ludwig Erhard returned from
his visit to the President I hap-
pened to find myself in Bonn.
The roof had fallen in.
Even then, in early October and
some weeks before the coalition
cracked up, it was evident that
nothing would ever be the same
again. The Federal Republic had
come abruptly face to face with
a radical change in German-
American relations. The Wash-
ington-Bonn axis, which has been
the mainspring of U.S. policy in
Europe, was broken.

pended on offsetting their cost in
foreign exchange.
This amounted to saying that
the present level of NATO forces
was not vital to the peace of
Europe. He was told, too, that
the idea of nuclear sharing was
now subordinated to an effort
to induce the Soviet Union to play
a mare active role in Asia.
These two American decisions
gutted the postwar idea that West
Germany is the principal partner
of the United States in Europe.
When Dr. Erhard returned from
Washington it had become brutal-
ly apparent, to all but those who
diid not want toe hlie it. that


Today
and
Tomorrow
By WALTER LIPPMANN

Washington-Bonn, but could come
only as a result of a reconcilia-
tion with the East and a thaw
in the cold war.
WHAT HAPPENED in Bonn
really originated in Washington.
In the President's exceptionally
mature speech of Oct. 7 to the
editorial writers we see the new
official point of view and the first
public statement of the new poli-
cy. Better late than never. Never-
theless, the damage done by years
of stubborn adherence to decay-
ing ideas is very great.
o rthe nrmo+inn ,of +h e n-

THE DAMAGE inside Germany
is severe. For the Germans, hav-
ing depended so long on American
corsets and American crutches,
have been denied the experience
of reality which is essential to
their independence. Now that the
postwar illusions are swept away,
the Germans find themselves with
very few public men who are fit-
ted for the new times to come.
The former Nazis, even the com-
paratively innocent ones, do not
find acceptance; with few excep-
tions the anti-Nazis lack experi-
ence in governing. The German
economy has recomrvre fnm +he

Germany was the nucleus of in-
dustrial excellence and military
power around which a new Euro-
pean great state would be con-
structed; that France, Britain and
Italy would follow the American-
German lead: that the overwhelm-

01