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.

March 13, 1962 - Image 4

Resource type:
The Michigan Daily, 1962-03-13

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

Ghe t t ian Bath
Seventy-second Year
There Opinions Are Free STUDENT PUBLICATIONS BLDG. 0 ANN ARBOR, MICH. * Phone NO 2-3241
Truth Will Prevail"
Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.

MARCH 13,1962


The Powers Case

" s ®"

Con . .

IS UNFORTUNATE for Francis G. Powers
that he was released from prison almost
ncidentally with the flight of Astronaut
hn Glenn.
nstead of coming kiome to a good rest and
oblivion he deserves and probably longs
, Powers returned to America to find half
countrymen fervently wishing he were dead.
alenn, having orbited the earth three times,
i .returned to rainbows of ticker-tape and
ifetti. Powers had returned to the opprobrium
Ich threatens to make his name synonymous
;h Benedict Arnold's.
Iad'Powers blown his plane to bits or killed
nself instantaneously when he realized he
s about' to fall into the hands of the
ssians, he would have been a hero of no
aner stature than Glenn. Dead he would
ve won immortality. Alive he has become a
itor and a coward.
HE MORAL ISSUE of the Powers question
is usually seen in terms of whether or not
nan should under all circumstances die for
country. A more important issue is the
istion, does a country have the right to
nand that a citizen die for it, and if so,
der what conditions?
Powers was hired to fly his U-2 over Soviet
ritory and take photographs. He was hired
a after and he regarded himself as such.
was not a master spy and he did not
ye in his possession any information which
uld have benefitted the Russians in the
#t, had they tried to extract it from him.
Those who feel it was immoral of Powers
live, argue that since he had poison with
ni, it must have been stipulated in his
;tract that he would take it in the event
capture. The Central Intelligence Agency
s repeatedly denied that Powers was under
y.such orders.
THERE was no mutual understanding that
Powers would commit suicide, the country
s no justification for demanding that he
so. If the CIA did order Powers to com-
t suicide rather than submit to capture, why
they reluctant to admit it? If the CIA
re such orders .and is now denying them,
must realize that they would look too
artless to be palatable in print. Can an
oanization and a country demand of a man
action it is ashamed even to acknowledge?
Few people will deny that there are in-
nces when the national welfare and safety
nands the sacrifice of individual lives. This
true in war time and it is probably also
'e in peace time when top intelligence
icers are in possession of information which
id prove disastrous if it fell into enemy
3ut this was not the case with Powers. If
had died he would not have saved the
ited States from a potential nuclear attack.
would not have prevented the outbreak
a war. He would not have kept the Soviets
an finding out any information of value
anyone. He would have done nothing but
'e the United States a great deal of em-
rassing publicity.
IT FAIR to ask someone to die for the
sake of his country's reputation? Un-
lbtedly the publicity hurt the United States,
aing as close to a scheduled Summit con-
ence as it did. It gave the Russians an op-
tunity to scuttle the conference and point
accusing finger at the United States for
3ut the whole notion of sending a spy
ht over Soviet territory was folly to begin
;h, and Powers was not responsible for that
ision. The men who planned the mission
ew there was a possibility-as there always
-that Powers would be caught. They ought
have been smart enough to understand the
isequences of being caught at such a time
: held off flights at least until the summit
eting was over. They and not Powers are
'POWERS had decided to kill himself for
the sake of the American image it would
ye been a heroic and noble if wasted gesture.
ere is no way now of determining what
,de him decide as he did. Maybe he did
t realise what was happening until too late

act. Maybe he considered the consequences
I decided there was no benefit to be gained
his death. Maybe he just froze.
Whatever his reaction was, it was human
I although his deed may not be admirable,
ther is it admirable to call a man a coward
d traitor for not killing himself. No one
s a right to evaluate such , situation until
has been in it himself, and even then he
ist admit that 'no two people can ever be,
tain to react in the same way under extreme
Powers is not a national hero and there is
need to make him one. But neither is he
traitor. He has gone through an ordeal which
ght to satisfy anyone who holds animosity

Powers was released.

Francis Gary

The United States humanely redeemed one
of its citizens from a Russian jail. This is
good. But it is unfortunate that the United
States finds it necessary to redeem the man
in the eyes of the American people in the
Francis Gary Powers is being made into a
hero by the Central Intelligence Agency and
the American press in what appears to be
an attempt to save the face of the CIA. While
the newspaper headlines report that "Powers
Reveals Fight for Life in Sky," "CIA Clears
Powers," "Powers Returns to Work for the CIA,"
the CIA tells the Senate that Powers' was
following orders when he started an inter-
national incident.
MAKING POWERS into a hero is injuring
the image of America in the eyes of the'
world, and shaking the confidence of the
American people in their government.
The administration, by rescuing Powers,
saved a man but created a problem: what do
you do with a returned spy. It had many
choices. It looks like they chose the wrong one.
It could have returned him to private life
with no comment. It could try him as a traitor.
Or it could whitewash him and try to save
a little of the CIA's reputation by saying that
it didn't really bungle. They could say that
Powers, for some secret reason, was obeying
orders when he precipitated the crisis.
If Powers could have returned to private life
with no comment, he would have been spared
public consideration of his character. The
United States would have been no worse off.
It would have been difficult to try Powers
as a traitor. For one thing, he was not in uni-
form and there are difficult legal questions on,
the power of government over a private citizen.
Second, American public opinion would prob-
ably not stand for a public trial of a man for
his wish to live. It would be extremely hard
to try a man for not committing suicide.
ministration, to whitewash Powers and the
CIA in the bargain, may have seemed a solu-
tion to the problem. It was not. This "com-
promise solution," if it was made, also com-
promised the values of the American people.
It is likely that Powers made a bargain
with the CIA to make spy flights, for a high
salary. In that bargain he made all the tra-
ditional military agreements,; such as destroy-
ing his plane and himself to avoid an "in-
cident" if there was any trouble. Powers, faced
with such a decision, reneged on his bargain,
and chose to live.
In doing so, he forced his country into several
difficult situations. He caused diplomatic tm-
barrassment to the United States. This is not
a major problem except as it left the Russians
"one-up" on the United States.
He destroyed the chances of a Summit Con-
ference and thus lessened, by at least one
year, the chances of reaching a lasting peace.
He also dramatized to the American people
that their government was engaged in intel-
ligence work, and that the government was
not telling everything to ,the Amerian people.
Powers' refusal to suicide before he be-
came an object of propaganda may have
added to the political sophistication of the
American people in more ways than one.
LET US put aside the question of whether
any social group can morally make a bar-
gain concerning a man's life. What should be
considered is the consequences of a decision
of the administration to whitewash a man to
save their own face, if such a decision was
The American people can see that hero
Powers is returning to work for the CIA after
he swore, under oath at his Russian trial,
that he would have nothing more to do with
the CIA again.
That decision could impair the morale o
hundreds of other men engaged in his line
of work. If one man can break such a bargain
and become a hero, why cannot they?
Some American people, reading the news
stories, will see Powers as "the man who wanted
to live" not "the hero who risks his life for

the United States." Others will only see the
hero. This is the real shame of such a decision.
The action does not really 'save face for the
CIA. Instead of covering their tracks, they are
making more, leading right up to the con-
clusion that they not only permit bad spying,
but that the CIA and the administration are
willing to make Powers into a hero for their
own questionable ends.

4 -
-- * .
New Road for Rilod

Daily Staff Writer
AMERICA NEEDS better rail-
The nation is entitled to a safe
and efficient rail-transport sys-
tem. Management should be ac-
corded reasonable opportunity to
install technological improve-
ments. Employees should be en-
titled to. work under a sound and
equitable pay structure. And em-
ployers should observe the welfare
of the workers.
These are the ideals and should
be the realities.
'These would become the realities
of a vastly improved American
railroad system if the 567-page
report of the Presidential Railroad
Commission were adopted.
THE REPORT reveals and makes
recommendations and such gross
inequities as these:
neA freight train traveling from
Chicago to the West Coast uses
20 separate crews whose workday
is only three hours and 23 min-
* An engineer who drives 100
miles in 12 hours gets $43.70 in
pay, but if he travels 160 miles
in the same time, his pay drops
to $39.95;
" Local freight men work a
70-hour week in many cases, while
crews on through freight trains
work four hours a day for the
same or more money;
*nEmployeesmreceive the same
pay whether they run 160 miles in
4 hours or in 12 hours and 48
* An engineer receives more for
running 80 miles in 13 hours than
for 170 miles in 13 hours;
* Because full crew laws differ
from state to state, some brake-
men board trains at state lines, do
no work; and get off at the next
state border.
railroad working situations as
these for 15 months, through pub-
lic hearings, staff research, ob-
servation trips and private dis-
cussions. Its 15 members, five each
from labor, from the public (in-
cluding Associate Dean of the Law

School Russell A. Smith) and from
management, are outstanding per-
sons well-qualified to do the study.
What they came up with is the
most extensive and intensive ex-
ploration of railroad labor con-
ditions in the history of the United.
States. The recommendations of
the public members of the. Com-
mission include:
1) Earlier Retirements: Retire-
ment age should be annually re-
duced so that by 1967 all em-
ployees will retire at age 65.
2) Shorter hours of work: The
permissible maximum hours on
duty should be reduced from 16 to
14 and eventually to 12, together
with weekly and monthly limits.
3) Overtime changes: The an-
achronistic "speed basis" of over-
time should be eliminated.
4) A modernized pay structure:
Pay should be geared to both time
and miles so that pay will be for
time plus miles. The vast dif-
ferences in compensation should,
be compressed.
5) Yard work: Road -crews
should be permitted to do switch-/
ing and station work where yard
crews are not on duty.
6) Interdivisional runs: Rules
should be made uniform to elim-
inate unneeded crews.
7) Seniority: Seniority districtsf
should be broadened to provide
greater protection for long-service
8) Crew changes: firemen with
less than 10 years' seniority should
be separated or furloughed. Man-
agement should give them com-,
pensation and pay for their re-
9) Technological change: man-
agement should have an unlimited
right to introduce technological
change. But it should, at its own
expense, compensate workers put
out of their jobs as a result of
such change, and pay for their re-
THESE WERE the recommen-
dations of the public members, in-
cludin Prof. Smith. They would
benefi both management and la-
bor. But many laborers and labor
leaders are objecting violently to

Personnel Central
To OSA Controversy

The privileged 25 per cent of_
the workers who receive good pay
for little work make objections
like these: "The report does not
take into consideration the wel-
fare of the man who works for.
a living." (The opposite is true.)
"These recommendations would
set us back to sweatshop condi-
tions." (This is also untrue. The
recommendations make the privi-
leged 25 per cent do a full day's
tions from workers and labor
leaders who fear the loss of jobs
that the recommendations would
entail. According to the report,
there were 781,000 workers in the.
industry in 1960, and the recom-
mendations would eliminate an
estimated 30,000 to 40,000 firemen
on locomotives. But while the
number to be cut back is im-
pressive, the percentage-3 or 4
per cent-is not.-
Once again, it will be a minority
-and a minute minority-who
would be adversely affected by
the recommendations.
What is obscured by the rant-
ings of labor leaders and the fears
of propagandized workers is that
most railroad workers would bene-
They would benefit in equalized
pay, more uniform working hours,
and fringe benefits. And the rail-
roads would benefit because the
resources of labor will be better
used. Both management and labor
would benefit because working
conditions would be better. And
customers would benefit from a
more efficient system.
* * .-,
long needed sweeping improve-
ments. The Presidential Railroad
Commission has clearly defined
the means to achieve these im-
provements. The opportunity is
here for the enactment of these
means since collective bargaining
begins later this month.
If labor joins with management
in acting upon the recommenda-'
tions in the report, America's rail-
road working conditions will be-
come sound at last.

To the Editor:
M ICHAEL OLINICK cracked the
nut at the center of recent
discussions of changes for the
Office of Student Affairs in his
Wednesday article "Lewis' Advice
If an organization is to function
effectively, it needs a structure
which mitigates the effects of
having personnel of varied qual-
ity. Such structure is no sub-
stitute for good personnel, but if
you admit that not every person
in every post can be excellent,
then it is vital. The lack of such
mechanisms in the student affairs
office structure allowed the many
abuses which both campus rumor
and student-faculty-collected evi-
dence can attest to.
No proposal for change advan-
ed so far lays out a concrete struc-
ture which necessarily would aid
less qualified personnel.
* * *
MR. OLINICK reduced the prob-
lem to pragmatic considerations:
Will proposed structures work?
His criteria were more practical
than deeply philosophical. In par-
The Daily official Bulletin is an
official publication of The Univer-
sity of Michigan for which The
Michigan Daily assumes no editorial
responsibility. Notices should be
sent in TYPEWRITTENs form to
Room 3564 Administration Building
before 2 p.m., two days preceding
General Notices
Applications for the Selective Service
college qualification test are now being
distributed at the Ann Arbor selective
Service Board. 103 East Liberty. App-
cations must be In by March 27, 1962.
French and German Screening Exami-
nations: The screening examinations in
French and German for doctoral can-
didates will be administered on Tues.,
March 20, from 3 to 5 p.m. in Aud
C, Angell Hall.
Doctoral candidates must pass this
screening gxamination before taking the
written test in French or German.
Staff Paid Parking Notice: In order
to make room for construction of the
Thompson Street parking structure, it
is necessary to vacate the parking lots
on the west side of the 500. block of
Thompson Street by March 12, 1962.
Ample staff paid parking space is
available at the Thayer Street parking
The University of Michigan Blood
Bank Association, in cooperation with
the American Red Cross, will have its
regular Blood Bank Clinic on March
28, 1962. The Clinic hours are 10:00
a~m. to 11:30 am. and from 1:00 to 3:30.
p.m. Any full-time or part-time reg-
ularly employed staff member of the
University Interested in becoming' a
member or renewing his membership
should contact the Personnel Office,
1028 Administration Bldg., ExtensIon
Attention: current Sopomore and
Junior Women. Informational meetings
for Undergraduate Assistants for 1962-
63 in Women's Residence Halls will b
held on March 15, at 6:30 p.m. at Mary
Markley, "Mosher, Vaughan and New-
All Students who intend to take
Ph.D. preliminary examinations in
Linguistics this semester should contact
Prof. H. H. Paper, 2031 Angell Hall in
writing, specifying the examination
they plan to take. -
Women Students:There will be an
organizational meeting tonight at 7:00
p.m. at the women's Athletic Bldg. for
those students Interested in reacti-
vating the Fencing Club.
Women-Physical Education: Wonen
students taking required physical edu-
cation who were medically deferred for
the first half of this semester should
report to Office 15, Barbour Gym, to
sign for their spring activity. Registra-
tion'will be held from 8 a.m. to noon
and 1-5 p.m., Mon.-Wed., March 12-14.
Upperclass students who wish to elect
physical education classes may doso
on Thurs. and Fri. mornings, March
29 and 30, Main Floor, Barbour Gym.
Residence Hall Scholarship Women
students wishing to apply for aRes-
dence Hall Scholarship for the academic
year 1962-63 for Helen Newberry Resi-
dence may do so through the Office of

thie en of Women. Applications must
be returned complete by March 31. Stu-
dents already living in this residence
hall and those wishing to live there
next fall may apply. Qualifications will
be considered on the basis of academic
standing (minimum 2.5 cumulative
average), need, and contribution to
group living.
(Continued on Page 8)

ticular, his evaluation rested on an
assumption shared by most ex-
perts who try to find out how
large organizations can function
best. We need not even go to
democatic or educational philos-
ophers to be told that the most
ones where persons subject to
authority take part in working out
that authority's policies.
I join Mr. Olinick in warning
that the same structural defect
which mars the OSA study com-
mittee plan inhibits a change In
current policy. Namely, advisory
boards are a tool of the person
advised, for him to agree with
or disagree with at will.
I URGE everyone to re-read Mr.
Olinick's description of Vice-
President Lewis' use of advisory
boards. Being also familiar with'
the details, I vouch for his ac-
curacy. Mr. Olinick's sarcasm is N
regrettable-but most regrettable
because it so often occurs when
persons familiar with the present
student affairs structure discuss
what can occur under it.
In lieu of sound structure,
abuses are attended to when mal-
function and dissatisfaction are
so great that even administrators,
faculty and students who are not .
concerned with day-to-day affairs
administration cry out in alarm.
Keep on shouting, people who
are concerned, so that in the fu-
.ture there will be a structure to
replace your shouts. The road to
effective student affairs admin-
istration does not run through ad-
visory committees.
--Nan Markel,'61
To the Editor:
MAY I EXPRESS my regret at
a recent notice in your paper
calling attention to the coming
conference on the University. In
particular, the notice announced
openings for qualified applicants,
at this time, who were affiliated
with specific campus organiza-
tions. I should like to comment
on this method of selecting can-
First, it is implied in this an-
nouncement that primary con-
sideration is being given to those
individuals who are at present
associated with specific campus
interests. I contend that there are
better qualified and more interest-
ed individuals on this campus who
are not associated with a specific
interest group, but that these stu-
dents must wait their turn In
order that the interest groups may
be seated in "proper" and due
Second, it is likewise infered
that SGC will do the selecting
and placing of the studentson the
Conference of the University. If
such be the case, the Conference
is both biased and doomed from
the beginning.
THE RECORD speaks poorly for
past efforts of SOC to care for
its own responsibilities, and even
less in the ability of SGC to tend
to matters outside of it's given
jurisdiction. Further, SGC in the
past has been most reluctant .to
acknowledge the capabilities of
those individuals who have, with
due intelligence, remained outside
of the nice registered campus or-
ganizations. In part, it is just this
failure that has made SGC an in-
effective spokesman for the stu-
dent body at large.
In concluding, I would like to
suggest that the authority for
selection of the students who are
to be seated at the Conference of
the University be given to a more
mature and objective body of in-
dividuals - perhaps the faculty
group if it has already been
chosen. While it is most meritor-
ious of SGC to support this worthy

endeavor, it would be even more
vallient of SOC to remain apairt
from this coming Conference.
-Roger Wolthuis, '62
(Letters to the Editor should be
typewritten, doublespaced and lim-
ited to 300 words, Only signed let-
ters will lbe printed. The Daily
reserves the'right to edit or with-
hold any letter.)

-- '1


cl001' Mc 2NtNS,
Goof) AMfJNtJ
600P EV6MW?6P

SIR? " a - A5

SigNGq SUPPORT -oef .N, WI wr, 1



16N4, 1SR,
5VMMN& up,
5Aq 401UR

MO5 OR L-s-


ON4 -"H6

Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan