WAGE TWO THE MICHIGAN DAILV -- - SUJNDAYa, AL 2, 1962 I Clarence Cook Little Outline Controversy Between Board, Daily Editors (Continued from Page 1) and catalogues,-an arrangement much like that which exists to- dat. Dean Effinger put up quite a fight, but he was_ battling a plan -that was widely accepted -t the time, even though the University didn't subscribe to it. President Little took 'his case to the Regents and' asked for a vote of confidence. The lit-. erary and engineering facul- ties made it clear they wouldn't go down without a fight. The -Regents squirmed a bit, caught between two powerful, forces. There wasn't anything really wrong with . President Little's plan, but there was no convinchig the faculty. So the Board decided to form a com- mittee to study the idea, hop- ing that. the committee would dawdle around and lose it. * * * PRESIDENT LITTLE was really annoyed by that maneu-; ver, and the' paper snowstorm that showered forth from thel committee demanding every- thing but action only annoyed him further. .He protested to the Regents that he was being inundated with the paperwork,1 and the Board rose to the oc- casion, creating the post of ad- ministrative dean and installing Prof. Edmund E. Day with spe- mific instructions to make an extensive a nd comrehensive study of the presidency. Prof. Day did not like his task and was so insistent on' being relieved that. the Regents replaced hi n with Prof. Alex- ander Grant. Ruthven, chair- man of the zoology department, who wasn't any more excited1 about the job than Prof. Day had been. But the Regents wereI firm and told him to stay there. So stay he did, waiting andI watching patiently as President3 Little tangled, quarreled andI wrangled with most everyoneI that came along. The president4 would blow up at the drop ofI a hat. The various faculty, members capitalized on this,l meeting his outbursts of tem-l per with maddening indiffer-1 ences.4 (University biographer Kent Sagandorph relates a by-play between the engineering facul- ty and President Little, who was still trying to sell them on his plan for a University Col- lege. ("You engineers are a smug lot," President Little shouted at length. (The red-faced faculty grit- ted their teeth in silence. En- gineering's Dean Mortimer H. Cooley said quietly: "Thank -you, Mr. President. That's just the word I needed to finish my crossword puzzle.". (President Little slammed out in a huff.) * * * DEAN RUTHVEN understood that the president was denied even a chance at getting his way by- his temperament. Per- haps the ,University College wasn't a bad idea, but Presi- dent Little's attitude defeated it at the outset. . Matters drifted on in this state for some years. The pub- lic, the Legislature and the press grumbled about the om- nipresent bickering which was no longer a private matter. One day a reporter asked President Little how he thought the modern generation could best be whipped into line. "I don't know," he retorted. "Birth control, I guess." And with that, all hell broke loose. In their inimicable fash- ion, the newspapers got things twisted around and had Presi- dent Little actually -advocating birth control. The .public was up in arms. That was apparently the straw which broke the camel's back, for, a bit later that year, 1929, President Little threw in the towel. In an abrupt and disgusted note to the Regents, President Little made it clear he felt biological research needed him far more than the University did, and he packed himself back off to Maine. But this time the Regents had shown some foresight. They had absolutely no trouble set- tling upon a satisfactory suc- cessor. (Continued from Page 1) 4 < After a few more preliminary remarks, Prof. Browder read off the appointments The Board had made. After a few moments of questioning, the juniors asked Prof. Browder to give them a few minutes to meet alone. The initial reaction of the jun- iors was to resign from the staff, for approximately the same rea- sons as the seniors had outlined in their editorial. At this point, they did not know what plans the sen- iors had made. Harrah Dissents After a 15-20 minute meeting, seven of the eight juniors said they would resign. The eighth, Harrah, protested The Board's ap- pointment, but felt that his per- sonal philosophy could not con- done strikes, that ifhe quit The Daily it would be with the inten- tion of never returning under any conditions and that he was un- able to make that decision at the time. The juniors called Prof. Brow- der back to talk With them. They told .him their decision to quit, and he tried to convince them not to do so. It was during this hour- long - meeting that the juniors learned what the seniors' recom- mendations had been. The juniors tried to present rea- sons why they thought The Board's appointments would not work well and why the seniors' rec- ommendations would lead to a bet- ter staff. The also made some ini- tial progress in learning the rea- sons behind- The Board's creation of co-editorial directorship and why Miss Dow was named to one of these posts. Prof. Browder spoke of achieving "a better balance" on the editorial page through this ap- pointment. Miss Dow Tells At the end of this session, Miss Dow told Prof. Browder that, while her interest and desires were aimed at the editoiial page, she believed her talents made her bet- ter suited for the city desk. She expressed feeling that the board had obtained a wrong im- pression from her interview. While only she ha mentioned the chang- es that The Board felt were need- ed in The Daily, the entire staff was agreed about. these changes. Since all the juniors-would imple- ment these changes, she saw no need to put her where she would not be technically suited. She asked Prof. Browder if she could urge "The Board to recon- sider thjeir decision in light of these factors. Prof. Browder con- sented, and Miss Dow went down to talk with The Board. Juniors Meet The juniors met with the sen--. iors for a few minutes while The Board listened to Miss Dow. The seniors told them what they were doing, but they suggested no course of action for the juniors. When Miss Dow returned, she explained that The Board had heard her out but would not change its decision. The juniors, Prof. Browder and Witecki, a stu- dent member of The Board, met again for a long and sometimes angry meeting. During the meeting the juniors gained the impression that The Board had been motivated by a desire to alter the tone of The Daily's editorial page by shuffling the appointments recommenda- tions of the seniors. Juniors Believe The juniors believed-and fur- ther contact with members of The Board since that Friday night strengthened the feeling - that members of The Board felt The Daily was losing contact with many groups on campus, that its editorials were following a trend towards negativism and "politi- cal pamphleteering," that criti- cisms of policies were degenerating into criticisms of personalities and that the did not have a proper concern with the libel laws nor fear of breaking them. The Board, they claim, was at- tempting to create a balance of in- terest and a wider breadth of sub- ject matter than the seniors pro- vided for in their recommenda- tions. Board members indicated they had few specific ideas on how Miss Dow's appointment would yield this result, but they based their decision on a "vague notion" that it would improve the news- paper. In her petition, Miss Dow wrote that "if there is no one on the staff to express a view held by many on the campus, I would strive to obtain a guest editorial of that opinion." ("This does not mean that there should be a pro- con editorial on every controversial issue," she said.) Browder Leaves After Prof. Browder left The Daily at 4:30 a.m., the juniors dis- cussed what action they would take. Seven decided to resign be- cause they felt that the Board's using appointments to influence editorial policy was unjustifiable, though legal, use of the board's authority. They asserted that accepting the positions for a month, one of Prof. Browder's suggestions, would only have proved whether or not the means The Board selected to alter the editorial tone was a good one. The juniors protested the end: us- ing appointments to change the image of the editorial page. They felt that accepting The Board's appointments would have a subtle, but powerful effect on curbing the writings of understaff personnel,"who couldn't help but fear that their editorial opinions would have an effect on what ap- pointments they received as sen- iors. Juniors Announce The juniors announced their de- cision to resign at an all staff meeting at 5:30 a.m. They said they would publish one edition of The Daily in which they would ex- plain why they could not accept the appointments. The juniors reconvened at 10 a.m. to continue discussions and plan for the Sunday edition. Dur- ing the- day, Witecki -came to talk to -the juniors - several times and asked them not to quit the paper, arguing that their resignations could mean the death of a quality newspaper and open the way for enemies of The Daily to join the staff and curb any critical apprai- sals of the University. The juniors offered several com- promise staffs to Prof. Browder and tried to secure a meeting of The Board for Saturday or Sun- day. Unable to arrange for the meeting or to gain a receptive re- action to their proposals, the jun- iors reiterated their intent to re- sign. and continue working on The Daily in their capacities as junior night editors. They constituted themselves as a "task force" and planned to publish The Daily us- ing the seniors' recommendations (but providing for two people on the magazine instead of one) as a 'de facto' staff, while they tried to negotiate an agreement with The Board for permanent appoint- ments. Harrah did not go along with the juniors' decision, choosing in- stead to accept his appointment as acting city editor under protest. He signed the editorial and agreed to work with the juniors on the 'task force.' In taking their action, the jun- iors believed they would not com- promise their principle that The Board should not directly inter- fere with editorial policy. At the same time, they could publish the paper under a free editorial policy and insure the quality of the pro- duction by the experience they had gained on the staff. Board Resorts They also hoped to use the time between the April and May meet- ings of The Board to reach an agreement with The Board. The juniors believe The Board resorted to using appointments to improve the paper, because the breakdown in communication between the senior editors, and The Board made less severe action seem in- effectual. They hope to convince The Board that communication is possible and desirable and to pro- pose means to formalize better means of communication. The juniors also admit that much of The Board's criticism of the Daily - reflected in the appoint- ments-is valid, that the juniors realized these weaknesses and that they stand-ready to propose ways of correcting them. The Board met in a special ses- sion Sunday afternoon to consider the events of the ,weekend. It ac- cepted the resignations of the sen- ior editors and acknowledged the decision of seven of the eight jun- ior editors to reject the positions to which they were appointed. Line Established "In order to establish a line of communication with The Daily staff," The Board resolved that Harrah, who had accepted the po- sition of city editor, be "senior edi- tor in charge of The Daily until such time as the position of editor is filled." The Board asked the coopera- tion of every member of the staff in the interim period and opened up petitioning for the vacant sen- ior positions. May 15. was set as the deadline for petitioning -In setting qualifications for pe- titioners, The Board waived pre- vious regulations which stated that "no student shall be eligible for appointment unless he has completed an authorized try-out and training program in a satis- factory manner or presents evi- dence of other training or expe- rience which is its substantial equivalent." Board Decides The Board decided to let all stu- dents who are of junior rank or above and scholastically eligible petition for senior staff offices. The Board had no assurance that the juniors would re-petition or would accept new appointments from The Board, Prof. Browder ex- plained. After the Sunday meeting, Prof. Browder released a statement adopted by The Board defending its power to make staff appoint- ments. "According to the senior editors of The Daily, it has now become scandalous for the student publications board to exercise its normal and lawful authority. The issue is not whether The Board has acted responsibly or lawfully, but whether The Board's tradi- tional powers and duties are sub- ject to being altered or abolished upon the authority of The Daily. "The Board cannot voluntarily forfeit its own authority. It is al- ways ready on the other hand to adjust differences between it and The Daily editors with respect to the operation of the newspaper or The Board. The Daily is probably the freest student newspaper in the country. The freedom is of as much concern to The Board as it is to the editors. The Board intends to preserve it in any case." Juniors Proceed The juniors believe that the senior staff recommended by the seniors, with addition of Miss Bleier on the magazine, is one of the best possible arrangements of the eight petitioners within the' traditional senior staff structure. Staff Tests This staff will be tested for a month before The Board meets again. One week's operation gives an initial indication that it will function harmoniously, the juniors say, but a full 30 days could prove otherwise. The chances of having this staff approved by The Board are com- plicated by the belief on the part of many that such an approval carries with it the implication that The Board has admitted it does not have the right to make appointments, that it must always follow the seniors' recommenda- tions. The juniors will contend that no such implication is indeed present; and that the staff rec- ommended by the seniors is a bet- ter one than the one named by The Board. If there is to be a Daily pub- lished next semester by the pres- ent staffs, some compromise may be necessitated. At this point, how- ever, no such compromise has been offered which would be acceptable to both parties. ' I f I it- r I . .$:. MUMMON" The ANN ARBOR DRAMA SEASON takes extreme pride in announcing its 1962 SEASON 4 BIG HITS AND A SMASH MUSICAL 1. MAY 14-19 GEORGE MONTGOMERY in TOYS IN THE ATTIC LILLIAN HELLMAN'S DISTINGUISHED NEW YORK DRAMA CRITICS' AWARD PLAY 2. MAY 21-26 CHARLES HOHMAN in NO TIME FOR SERGEANTS by fra Levin EXPLOSIVE STAGE AND FILM SENSATION IS HERE ... i 3. MAY 28-JUNE 2 GLORIA SWANSON in THE INKWELL a new comedy by Harold Kennedy 5. JUNE 11-16 GLORIA GRAHAME ACADEMY AWARD WINNER THE COUNTRY GIRL by Clifford Odets Z i i STARTS TODAY DIAL NO 2-6264 p>519 \\\\V ITALY-THE PLACE WHERE THEY'VE MADE AN ART OF EVERYTHING . ESPECIALLY LOVE . I f. 4. JUNE 4-9 MARION MERCER as LITTLE MARY SUNSHINE by Rick Besoyon direct from its triumphant 2-year New York run among-his finest plays SEASON TICKETS NOW ON SALE EVGS. (EXC. SUN.) 8:30 ORCH. $19.00, $17.00, $15.00. BALC. $17.00, $15.00, $13.00 * MAT. (THURS. & SAT. ) 2:30 ORCH,$12.00.. BALC. $12.00, $7.00 OFFICE OPEN 10-12 A.M. - 1-5 P.M. NO 3-2794 unu m m mnm n m unm m in um un mmian m maiu m mi nmi The picture that asks the tantalizing question: WHERE SHOULD A GIRL STOP IN ROME? 0% and I. i