100%

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

Share

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.

May 12, 1965 - Image 2

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
Michigan Daily, 1965-05-12

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


Seventy-Fifth Year
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS

SPEAKER POLICY, EDITORIAL FREEDOM:
Last GaspC of Activist Renaissance

Where Opinions Are Free, 420 MAYNARD $T., ANN ARBOR, MICH.
'Truth Will Prevail

NEWS PHONE: 764-0552

Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.
WEDNESDAY, MAY 12, 1965 NIGHT EDITOR: BRUCE WASSERSTEIN

U.S. Must Find Answer
To Water Pollution

TWO BILLS which would provide stiffer
water pollution restrictions within the
United States are now pending before
Congress.
These bills will both transfer the over-
seeing of water pollution programs to the
Department of Health, Education and
Welfare as well as define, for legal pur-
poses, the term "pouted water."
Water pollution is 9n important social
issue which must be acted upon. The
Great Lakes provide an example of what
can happen if water pollution continues
at its present rate.
When the industrial revolution reached
Michigan, the lakes were not only a source
of water, but also provided a place to
throw the wastes from factories. But
technological methods have become more
sophisticated and factories have increased
in number.
IF SOMETHING IS NOT DONE soon the
U.S. could be faced with the problem
of whether it can retain the world's
greatest body of fresh water-the Great
Lakes-in a usable condition.
Representative John Dingell (D-Mich)
quite accurately summed up the situation
in Michigan at a hearing before the House
Public Works Committee recently.
He said, "when I testified before this
committee more than 14 months ago I
had a list of 90 serious cases of inter-
state pollution on which no federal en-
forcement action had been initiated ...
"Of the 90 rivers that appeared on the
list more than a year ago, 33 received fed-
eral attention during 1964, while 57 had
received none. In addition, 45 rivers on
which no federal action was taken have
become polluted seriously enough to de-
mand their inclusion on the present list.
"Thus, after yet another year with the
pollution program under the dead hand of
the Public Health Service, and $100 mil-
lion later, we have fallen twelve rivers
deeper on the debit side. Let no one ac-
cuse our pollution program of stagnating;
it is moving quite determinedly in the
wrong direction."
DINGELL, besides protesting the in-
crease in water pollution, was also pro-
testing the Public Health Service control
of water pollution programs.
the Public Health Service is not the
ideal government agency to handle the
water pollution problem. Close ties to the
state governments, in order to fight any
serious epidemics which may break out,
also lead to a hesitant enforcement of
these programs. The state does not want
them to be initiated because of their high
cost.
Also the state and local governments
are opposed to the programs because in-
dustries are not going to be attracted to
a state if it requires industries to install
expensive pollution prevention equip-
ment. In the same sense, a state does
not enjoy making its taxpayers foot the
expensive bill for this installation.
And the costs are high. In New York
City one pollution control project alone
has cost $87.5 million. In Omaha, Nebras-
ka, $21 million has been spent on a variety
of projects in nine years. The high cost,
coupled with a limited allowance of only
$100 million per year for pollution con-
trol programs, leads to expensive invest-
ments from state and local governments
if effective programs are to be carried out.
These seldom are available.
There are other issues involved, how-
ever, besides the high costs of the proj-
ects. One which David L. Chandler, direc-'
tor of the Great Lakes Research Division
at the University, pointed out recently
was the cost of not instituting pollution
control.

HIS POINT is essentially that the Great
Lakes are used for recreation, industry
and as a source of water. His question is
this: what would be the cost of replac-
ing these services if the Great Lakes were
seriously polluted.
Aready Lake Erie is a murkish, turbid
lake which has been highly polluted by
the Toledo and Detroit industrial areas.
The southern part of Lake Michigan is
also becoming more polluted.
If something is not done desalination
of ocean water might he necessary to

PROPOSALS have been made for redi-
recting water from the Great Lakes
through polluted rivers and streams. This
might eliminate pollution, but only for a
limited period of time. Because all the
water going back to the Great Lakes
would be polluted, the level of pollution
there would increase. Once they became
seriously contaminated the rivers and
streams could no longer be protected.
This is not to mention the difficulties
that the loss of the use of the Great Lakes
would cause.
It is possible that some water would be
decontaminated by seeping underground
and back to the lake. However the seep-
age creates underground passages which
will carry pollution back into the lakes.
There are solutions. The government
bill placing water pollution control under
the Department of Health, Education and
Welfare will eliminate the conflict of in-
terest which exists in the Public Health
Service. Also, a planning commission
could be formed to coordinate water pol-
lution control programs so that there is
no overlap and no waste in money.
PROBABLY THE BEST solution is to
place more stringent requirements on
industrial waste elimination. Prevention,
while costly, is still less expensive than
attempting to salvage water after it has
been polluted-and is also more effective.
-BARBARA SEYFRIED
VU'Get s
Short End
THE UNIVERSITY bears an unfair por-
tion of the expenditures to satisfy the
city's parking needs.
When a consumer buys a car, the re-
sponsibility of parking space is thrust
upon the community. The community
builds, maintains and polices parking
areas-on streets, in lots and in specially-
built parking structures.
Student, faculty and staff interact with
two communities-within themselves and
with the City of Ann Arbor.
BOTH COMMUNITIES share the re-
sponsibility to store automobiles. What
have they done?
The University has built four large
parking structures. Its plant department
maintains innumerable parking lots on
and near the campus. Access to these lots
is generally controlled by the issuance
of parking permits.
For most lots and the parking struc-
tures, the permits afford admission; oth-
ers are metered. Rates in lots vary-five
cents for one hour in some or five cents
for two hours in others. Money for "all-
day parking" can generally be deposited
at one time.
The University gives parking space
preference to faculty and staff. Consider-
ing the lack of space, this is understand-
able since faculty and staff do not gen-
erally live on campus. Even so, there are
special lots for students only.
THE UNIVERSITY uses revenue from
the meters on their lots and from the
price of parking permits to maintain and
build parking facilities. It does not re-
ceive any revenue from ticketing.
It does not, because it would be very
difficult for the University to maintain a
clerical and judicial system for the col-
lection of parking fines. Therefore, the
University hires the Ann Arbor Police

Department. The University pays the
wages of three policewomen and one po-
liiceman whose job it is to patrol the Uni-
versity-owned lots exclusively. The City of
Ann Arbor collects the fines.
The ironic fact is that the University
has to pay the costs of patrolling the lots
and structures, but the city gets the ex-
tra revenue. This revenue, which could
be used to alleviate parking problems, is
buried in town hall.
In fulfilling its responsibility to car
owners, the city does more than police
lots. Seeing the obvious opportunity for
more revnue it has nonteri narkine me-

EDITOR'S NOTE: In today's
article, the sixth in a series, Philip
Sutin, Grad, continues to trace the
path of student activism at the
University from 1960 to the present.
By PHILIP SUTIN
A COMBINATION of student
action on other campuses and
local administrative necessity in
the period 1960-62 brought
changes in the University's and
the state's outside speaker policy.
Under the old University policy,
no speaker advocating the violent
overthrow of the government or
attacking the prevailing moral
values could use University facili-
ties to speak.
Interest in the policy grew as
a. result of a series of incidents at
Wayne State University and else-
where. In 1960, WSU lifted its ban
on Communist speakers with the
result that several Communists
spoke there and a Detroit front
group sought to use its McGregor
Aud. - a community center - for
meetings. WSU vacillated, then re-
imposed the band under local and
legislative right-wing pressure,
suspending the campus political
clubs for good measure.
THE EVENTS at Wayne State
raised activist criticism of Univer-
sity policy, but did not engender
any pressure to change the regula-
tion. Daily Editor Thomas Hayden
wrote a long editorial condemning
the policy.
A feud inside the lecture com-
mittee over its listless and unprof-
itable lecture series led University
President Harlan Hatcher to can-
cel the more than 100-year-old
series and disband the committee.
In the summer of 1961, Prof.
Samuel Estep of the law school, a
member of the old committee, was
appointed to head a five faculty-
two student committee to revise
the old lecture bylaw. The group
brought a preliminary bylaw to
the Regents in the spring of 1962
and after stormy debate, the Re-
gents adopted it the following
October.
THE BYLAW banned speeches
that advocated the violent over-
throw of the government and the
violation of federal, state or Uni-
versity regulations. The sponsor-
ing group is responsible for en-
forcing the bylaw and must tell
the speaker of it. A student-fac-
ulty-administration Committee on
Public Discussion was created to
help bring controversial and ex-
pensive speakers to campus.
While the rule was being drawn
up, Frank Wilkenson and Carl
Braden, both attacked by HUAC
as Communist sympathizers, spoke

in May, 1962 on campus. They
had been previously banned at
WSU.
State Sen. John Smeekins de-
manded that President Hatcher
ban the speech, but the president
told him he could not under Uni-
versity regulations.
SEEING THE need for a united
statewide policy to withstand out-
side pressure, the Michigan higher
education co-ordinating council
established a committee-headed
by Estep with WSU and MSU offi-
cials on it-to draw up a statewide
one to be adopted by all state-
supported colleges and univer-
sities.
T h e committee recommended
one major change from the Uni-
versity rule-a change caused by
The Daily and the Rev. Martin
Luther King.
King spoke under auspicies of
the Union on Nov. 6, 1962. He
urged his audience to violate
through civil disobedience South-
ern segregation laws, if necessary.
The Daily pointed out that advo-
cating the violation of any state
law was against the bylaw.
Estep told this writer at the
time that The Daily was making
"a mountain out of a molehill.'
However, when the new statewide
rule was presented three weeks
later to the co-ordinating council,
"Michigan" replaced the word
"state."
THE UNION'S special projects
committee has been most instru-
mental in carrying out the bylaw's
policy of bringing controversial
speakers to campus.
By the spring of 1962, the stu-
dent activist movement was be-
ginning to wane. Daily reporter
Gerald Storch caught the spirit
of the times when he noted:
"The much-heralded Voice Po-
litical Party has disappeared from
sight. The Glick-Roberts motion
was decisively snuffed out by SGC
middle-of-the roaders and con-
servatives. The leading liberal on
campus, Robert Ross, was defeat-
ed for the SGC presidency; the
liberals couldn't even beat out the
eminently unqualified Dick G'sell
for executive vice-president. .,.
"Because it cannot succeed with
a rational appeal-most students
couldn't care less, and others re-
fuse to acquiesce to an intolerant
framework - the student move-
ment has to depend on inspiring
and charismatic leaders. But the
Haydens and the Seasonweins
have gone from the campus move-
ment, and the leaders left behind
possess a fraction of their inten-
sity."

Storch deftly pointed out some
of the activists' major problems.
He proved to be quite correct in
predicting "the student movement
is going to die a slow but natural
death."
THE FIRST major disaster for
the activist movement occurred
only three days after Storch wrote
those foreboding words. On April
19, 1962, the Board in Control of
Student Publications drastically
altered the appointments recom-
mendations of the outgoing senior
editors, setting off a crisis which
shook The Daily to its very foun-
dation and left it such a disspirit-
ed hulk that it has not regained
its old form even today.
The crisis had been building up
for some time. From the board's
point of view, Editors Tom Hay-
den and John Roberts had snub-
bed it and run the paper too in-
dependently.
The board is the legal publisher
of The Daily. By tradition, it
merely rubber-stamps the appoint-
ment of new editors by the old
ones, once-after reading peti-
tions and interviewing the candi-
dates-it is assured that the new
editors will be responsible.
IN THE last months of the
Roberts regime, the board was un-
happy with the senior editors.
There was some feeling among
faculty and administrators that
The Daily had a paranoid fixation
about the Office of Student Af-
fairs. The board itself censured
the senior editors for printing
"Lewis's Advise Device," a scath-
ing attack on Lewis by Michael
Olinick. The article was part of
"OSA in Transition," a series of
articles that often bitterly con-
demned the OSA. To board mem-
bers, this article implied that
Lewis was a liar and deceitful and
thus was libelous.
The outgoing Daily seniors did
not appreciate the threat building
against the paper, although they
sensed it. The understaff had no
inkling of the calamity that was
to befall them.
THE BOARD appointed two co-
editorial directors, Judith Oppen-
heim, a liberal in outlook and
Caroline Dow, a conservative. They
placed Fred Russell Kramer on
the city instead of the editorial
desk and failed to appoint Harry
Perlstadt instead of Judith Bleier.
This arrangement would have
moderated the editorial tone of
the paper (its open forum policy
permits all views to be printed if
signed, but the philosophy of the
editorial director can influence its

overall tone) and divided respon-
sibility. Kramer and Michael Har-
rah, the city-editor designate, had
a personality clash and the wrong
person had been dropped by the
board.
The editors saw the appoint-
ments juggling as a threat to their
o t h e r w i s e untouched editorial
freedom. It was also an unwork-
able arrangement.
The outgoing editors resigned.
The incoming ones-with the ex-
ception of Harrah-refused to take
their positions.
THE DAILY was on the verge
of collapse. The new seniors urged
the entire editorial stafftoresign
in protest. Harrah had agreed to
run a skeleton Daily with no local
editorials and little local news.
About a dozen staffers among a
staff of approximately 40 were un-
willing to resign.
A compromise was struck the
next night and the following day.
The juniors would take office as
a "junior task force" for a month
as recommended by the outgoing
editors. Those not accepting their
position would repetition the
board with petitioning open to the
entire campus.
THE DAILY'S usually vocifer-
ous enemies did not take the op-
portunity to subvert it in its mo-
ment of weakness. The task force
managed to deter several outsiders
who were interested in petitioning.
Through personal contacts and
wire service stories, word of The
Daily's plight reached former staff
members. With one or two excep-
tions, they responded with letters
defending the task force.
Preparations were made for
mailing a plea for support to all
Daily alumni. Envelopes w e r e
readied for a special mailing. To
this day, they have been retained
and expanded asasenior editors re-
tire, ready for use in a day of
crisis.
THE TASK force eventually
carried the day. Editors were fin-
ally appointed-with three minor
shifts-just about in the manner
that the old seniors wanted. There
was a single editorial director, the
personality conflict was not cre-
ated on the city desk and no one
was dropped. An elaborate new
appointments - discussion proced-
ure was developed to prevent fu-
ture breakdowns in communica-
tions.
The victory was in some ways
phyrrhic. The crisis jolted The
Daily's self-confidence. Its staff
members turned inward into the
institution, rather than outward

to the campus. The following year
was marked by dissension among
the seniors highlighted by the lib-
eral but ineffectual Olinick battl-
ing the arch-conservative Harrah.
The internal dissension, bicker-
ing and mediocrity 'of the editors'
created a depressing, unstimulat-
ing climate within the Student
Publications Bldg..More and more
good staff members resigned and
The Daily could not attract and
hold good people to replace them.
IN ADDITION to dulling The
Daily internally, the crisis cre-
ated a reaction against activist
adventures by The Daily. Editors
and staff members agreed that
The Daily had politicked too far
and had abandoned journalistic
values of fair news coverage for a
political role.
The new stress became aca-
demics. The Daily was too long a
parochial literary college paper;
it would now explain and serve
the entire University community.
The best structure for assigning
reporters was revamped to stress
academics and the paper's best
staffers were assigned to cover it.
The student activist movement
became less popular among staff
members. Its goals were decreas-
ingly represented on the editorial
page; its activities were not cov-
ered.
THUS THE Daily was removed
as a major force in campus acti-
vism. The days when The Daily
would stridently advocate reform
and attack wrongs in the admin-
istration were gone. Voice no
longer would get publicity out of
proportion to its campus impor-
tance.
Activism suffered an important
blow when its major publicity or-
gan and advocate was removed.
Its lines of communication and
appeal were weakened. Legitimacy,
conferred by publication, was lost.
During the coming summer and
fall of 1962, all the major elements
of the campus activist renaissance
-Voice Political Party, the Politi-
cal Issues (discussion) Committee,
Challenge, and the National Stu-
dent Association--ran into trou-
ble. Membership, leadership, or-
ganization and ideological troubles
sprung up in all areas of activity.
The unfolding of the already won
reforms in the OSA, a monument
to the more successful recent past,
was perhaps the sole event of the
coming months that would cause
any joy among activists.
TOMORROW: Student activism suf-
fers major setbacks-leadership prob-
lems in Voice, the demise of Chal-
lenge and violent criticism of the

4

*i

institution, rather than outward National Student Association.

DISGUISED IN PLATITUDES:

0e
Sifle Domin ican Revolt-U.S. Goal

-1

By STEPHEN BERKOWITZ
and JEFFREY GOODMAN
The second of three articles
IT SEEMS President Johnson was
just "sitting in (his) little of-
fice last week preserving democ-
racy and Western civilization
with Secretaries Rusk and Mc-
Namara and McGeorge Bundy
when a cable arrived from the
United States Ambassador in the
Dominican Republic, William Tap-
ley Bennett, Jr., which said that
only an immediate landing of the
Marines could maintain peace in
that country.
Originally 400-and eventually
30,000-troops waltzed ashore, in
full battle regalia, to "attack no
one" but protect all.
Of course, "not a single Ameri-
can civilian and the civilians of
any other nation, as a result of
this protection, lost their lives,"
as President Johnson maintained
on May 2.
It is strange, in light of this,
however, that the New York Times
reported on April 30 that U.S.
Marines killed "two snipers."
This leads inexorably to one of
several conclusions:
-The New York Times is falsi-
fying its reportage;
-The White House is giving out
half-truths;
-The snipers were members of
the counterrevolutionary regular
Dominican army;
-Some civilian are more equal
than others;
-Or, and this is the most
likely case, the United States (as
in Viet Nam for instance) con-
siders all the members of the
population of some countries to be
definitively its enemies.
THIS IS becoming increasingly
true. Whether it be ironic or dis-
gusting, the most poignant and
apparent characteristic of this in-
tervention in the Dominican Re-
public is that its root effect has
been to drive younger men-
especially those of Juan Bosch's
political stripe, who might do some
good in Latin America-to the
left: not to the tired old Com-

stifling of revolutionary move-
ments.
This is a goal which the John-
son administration did not con-
fess for several days after landing
its Marines-and then it attempt-
ed to disguise its purpose in the
holiest of platitudes. A reasoned
reading of the news, reports of ad-
ministration rationales and the
policy statements made last week-
end by Under Secretary of State
for Economic Affairs Thomas G.
Mann (formerly Assistant Secre-
tary for Latin American Affairs)
indicates that this has, indeed,
been the unverbalized goal of our
actions.
BEYOND the rather 'innocuous
aim of saving American lives, the
administration's justification for
the landing of Marines in Santo
Domingo has been to help preserve
for the Dominicans their right "to
choose their own government free
of outside intereference" by help-
ing to prevent what it viewed as
an effort by Cuban-Communist
agitators within the rebel move-
ment to establish Cuban hege-
mony over another Latin Ameri-
can republic.
The administration has claimed
that in following this twin goal it
did not want to support either
the forces of Brig Gen. Elias Wes-
sin y Wessin or those now led by
rebel Col. Francisco Caamano
Deno (named leader of the coun-
try May 3 by the constitutionally-
elected Congress which Wessin y
Wessin helped depose, along with
Bosch, in October, 1963).
Thus U.S. statements are filled
with references to "restoring sta-
bility" in Santo Domingo so that
free elections can be held "with-
out outside pressures."
Mann states that our interest
has always been to prevent dic-
tatorships "without regard to
whether the problem was one of
right-wing or left-wing totali-
tarianism."
But Mann's line a year ago-
when the U.S. was supporting Gen.
Humberto Castelo Branco's ouster
of Brazilian President Joao Gou-
lart-was that the U.S. would not
discriminate between dictatorships
and democratic governments and.

influences significantly bolstered
if, indeed, it did not cause, the
Communists' determination to at-
tach themselves to the pro-Bosch,
non-Communist rebels' bid for
power.
COMMUNIST PARTIES all over
Latin America have traditionally
allied themselves with established
governments-dictatorial or demo-
cratic, reformist or reactionary.
The apparent justification for
this has been that in this way the
Communists would further the
growth of an industrial-based
bourgeoisie and thus promote
eventual class conflict between
this "elite" and the burgeoning
urban proletariat and landless
rural peasantry.
The strength of the "elites" and
the threat of Yankee intervention
has always been enough to dis-
courage any true opposition to
these governments by the Com-
munists and to make this "back-
handed" kind of activity, in the
long run, both expedient and
beneficial to both groups,
Thus the reversal of the Com-
munists' tactics toward support.
of the rebel forces can be explain-
ed only in the context of the un-
precedented opportunity which the
initially-strong rebellion present-
ed for the assumption of power, an
opportunity the Communists
would not have been able to make
for themselves.
What is most likely is that the
Communists which the U.S. claims
have taken over the rebellion are
simply a weak minority of op-
portunistic hangers-on.
The only evidence of Communist
infiltration of the rebel forces
which the administration has been
able to produce has been the
names of 58 Communist and pro-
Communist leaders who have been
in the Dominican Republic for
some time. The rebels themselves,
according to New York Times
coorespondent Tad Szulc, "are
among the first to admit that
there are Communists in their
midst, but they insist that these
elements are a minority that can
be isolated and handled if the
United States supports the demo-

among the rebels by giving them,
in "anti-Yanquism," a potent
common cause with others not of
their particular political persua-
sion. It was this fear--and its
visible fulfillment-which seems
to have emboldened the Com-
munists, making the opportunity
for power afforded by the original
rebellion even more tantalizing.
Moreover, the turn of events
since the- first Marine landing has
so embittered Bosch that he is
now loathe to return to assume
his country's leadership: "I am
not well prepared to deal with the
thousands and thousands of young
Communists that American ac-
tions are creating."
This first consideration in the
evaluation of the administration's
policies leads, thus, to the con-
clusion that our actions at best
confused and at worst subverted
their avowed motivations. Had we
wanted to prevent a Communist
takeover, we would have been
much better advised to realize the
rebelswere quite capable of doing
just that on their own, Had we
wanted to see stability restored,
outside pressures reduced and the
prospering of a democratic, re-
formist government, again we
should have left the rebels alone
-or, better, supported them, a
far more effective method of en-
suring they would eventually be
able to rid themselves of Com-
munist hangers-on than smear-
ing the whole rebellion as Com-
munist and acting accordingly.
2) WHICH LEADS to the second
major consideration-just whether
or not the United States really
was interested in the success of
the kind of ideas and men rep-
resented by Juan Bosch.
Mann, in his May 8 statements,
offered "proof" of the U.S.'s in-
terest in not aligning itself with
either of the Dominican factions.
He noted that the administration
had not responded to a request for
intervention sent April 27 by the
three-mantcounterrevolutionary
military junta that had been set
up by Col. Pedro Benoit right
after the rebellion broke out.
But according to a five-nation

to provide adequate protection. I
therefore ask you for temporary
intervention and assistance in re-
storing order in this country."
THE TIMES continues:
"The administration was care-
ful, however, not to cite the
colonel's letter as the basis of
the ambassador's judgment or hig
suggestion that troops help him
in 'restoring order'."
"The State Department has said
that the ambassador's pbelief that
U.S. citizens were in danger was
based on the statements of police
officials, who have not been iden-
tified."
Perhaps this alone is not con-
clusive proof of the administra-
tion's desire to restore order by
restoring the Benoit-Wessin forces
to power, but it does indicate 1) at
least one instance of deliberate
falsification of news and 2) the
general propensity of the admin-
istration to equate order and hon-
esty with stable governments and
rightist elements in any nation
where there are "Communist"
movements.
CERTAINLY this conclusion is
supported by the fact that the
Marines in Santo Domingo were,
until the OAS cease-fire was es-
tablished, fighting alongside the
Benoit-Wessin forces.
Had our intention been truly to
restore order and ensure self-
determination, and had we still
thought it necessary, to send
troops, logically we would have
been fighting against both sides-
trying to get both to lay down
their arms.
Generally, a cease-fire is even
better for establishing some kind
of order, and our moves towards
an OAS-regulated truce -are per-
haps the only remotely wise thing
we have done in the whole situa-
tion.
It remains, however, that these
moves have been brutally under-
mined and called into serious
questionrby the rest of our ac-
tions, for in openly backing the
anti-democratic, anti-progressive
side in the conflict and in pro-
,lnmin ths n hny nl,.-,a

4

A

Back to Top

© 2020 Regents of the University of Michigan