Seventy-Second Year
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS
"Where Opinions Are Free STUDENT PUBLICATIONS BLDG. " ANN ARBOR, MICH. " Phone NO 2-3241
Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.
TUESDAY, MAY 29, 1962 ACTING NIGHT EDITOR: ELLEN SILVERMAN
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:
I
Honors
Progra m
Discussion
Must Examine
Society's Goals
By JOHN ROBERTS
Editor, 1961-62
ANYONE who has ever sought change in the
University is astonished at the resistance
to it. An even greater frustration for the dis-
satisfied student is his inability to make the
world understand vhat it is in the University
that he wants to change.
Some months ago I was interviewed by the
Detroit Free Press in connection with the cur-
rent debate over the stduent's role in the Uni-
versity. The reporter, a no-nonsense journalist,
sat down opposite me and said without pream-
ble, "All right-what are some of the rules
you want to see changed?"
That question missed the point, and I said
so. I tried to explain that students like myself
were not pre-occupied with specific grievances,
but rther sought to alter an attitude, a tone,
which permeated every aspect of the Univer-
sity's policy toward students but was difficult
to describe concretely. This answer did not sat-
isfy the reporter, who preferred the hard, tan-
gible nuggets of contention.
A while later I had a similar experience, this
time with a dean of the University instead of
a hard-nosed journalist. Dean Roger Heyns was
one of fifteen faculty members invited to a
meeting at Prof. Kenneth Boulding's home to
"communicate" with students who were dissat-
isfied with the University's conception of it-
self. While students groped for generalities to
express the malaise-indeed the genuine alarm
-that they felt, Dean Heyns called for specific
complaints, which he proceeded to shoot down
one by one.
BOTH DEAN HEYNS and the reporter, it
would appear, chose to disparage the un-
rest they discovered because it was not set
forth neatly and explicitly. In so doing, they
lost their chance to understand it, and as a
result badly underestimated its significance.
The "active" student is in protest, and how-
ever vaguely his indictment is expressed it is
of great importance-if for no other reason
than that a good many intelligent students
think it is. The protest will- not be put off by
"refutations" which miss the point, or admoni-
tions against "sounding shrill." There is a per-
sistent and ill-defined murmur of discontent.
and the wisest course for our leaders would
be to listen to it and try to comprehend it. No
student can win a debate with the Vice-Presi-
dent for Academic Affairs on the particulars of
the University. But many students, defeated
in such a debate, will still feel uneasy and dis-
turbed at the unanswered questions that lurk
behind the particulars.
rME DISSATISFACTION I and others like me
feel is not cleancut or-in the main-partic-
ularized. It is very much larger and more fun-
damental than most people realize. It is really
rooted- in world conditions. In a way, we are
rendering a judgment against the whole 'hu-
man order, which has led us down a blind al-
ley and now shows little interest in getting us
out. Every intelligent adult is familiar with
the problems of the world. Yet I doubt that
many view them with the same compelling urg-
ency, the same dread, as we who are about to
inherit them. Every new generation has come
into a world more complicated and threatening
than the last. But there is a qualitative differ-
ence this time, and we are gripped by a grim
assurance that, in our lifetime, civilization will
either turn a corner or cease to exist. We want
to discover, before everything goes to pieces,
the changes that offer hope: changes in the
structure of values and life goals, in the con-
cept of useful and important activity, in the
very bases of human relations. And we want
to begin with the University itself.
It has become very clear to me that the gulf
between today's student and the adult commu-
nity is much deeper than is generally recog-
nized. The problems that bother and perplex
the student exist in a context so different that
no matter how skillfully he articulates them,
there must always be a failure of complete com-
prehension. I do not believe I use words in the
same way that my teachers do. I have real
doubts of my ability to reach a person older than
myself and communicate to him my precise
concern, my sense of urgency, and my sure con-
viction that a revolution in human affairs is
absolutely necessary.
SMALL WONDER, then, that a reporter or an
administrator has trouble understanding us
dissatisfied students when we speak of univer-
sity reform. They think we are "agitating" for
the abolition of women's hours or the creation
of courses on current events, when in fact we
are seeking changes in the whole nature and
purposes of a university-as a first step toward
changes in the whole structure of society.
Students like myself concentrate our criti-
cism on the University for reasons more im-
portant than the mere fact of our residence
here. Of all human institutions, universities
offer the greatest promise of becoming nuclei
for large-scale social revolution. The methods
and ethics of scholarship, the emphasis on
progress, and the concentration of intellectual
resources at universities give them a potential
influence on human affairs that is scarcely
ditions of the world. On all sides we hear the
call for "moderate thinking." "Moderate think-
ing," as I understand it, bases its plans for the
future on the assumptions of today-no matter
how irrational or contradictory they are-and
advances "realistic" proposals that are nothing
more than projections and minor alterations of
current idiocies. If men are ever to find their
way out of the present insanity and put civilized
human life on a meaningful and rational basis,
they must purge the calcium from their men-
tal structures and take a radical look at the
whole society. The universities appear to offer
the best hope for such progress, and so the dis-
satisfied student focuses his criticism on uni-
versities that they might fulfill that hope.
WHATEVER its latent promise, the Univer-
sity of Michigan gives little manifest indi-
cation that it may someday be the nucleus of a
human revolution. The University is a micro-
cosm of society; its faults are society's faults.
It seems to have so much difficulty living up to
the traditional standards of educational excel-
lence that it is hard to see how it can forge
ahead to new ones. The simplest notions of
courage and intellectual integrity seem to get
short shrift. A popular housemother is fired
with no explanation. The University uses 8,000
out-of-state students as pawns in a cruel little
game with the Legislature. Courage is so scarce
that grateful hosannas go up when President
Hatcher refuses to bar two speakers accused
of being Communists-even though he con-
tinues to suppress the recommendations of the
Lecture Committee for changes in Bylaw 8.11.
And bureaucracy becomes so callous that the
Board in Control of Student Publications can
rearrange the lives of 20 people and say it is
merely exercising its "normal and lawful au-
thority."
ONE NEED NOT BE so specific in criticism.
The University is failing on a grander scale.
It is failing to concentrate its resources on the
most important problems of the day, and it is
failing to train students to cope with the com-
plexities of life.
It seems very clear that any civilization is in
grave danger when its best intellects are con-
sistently uninvolved or unconcerned with the
central questions of that civilization-the ques-
tions of life-and-death importance. This seems
to be happening today. The most basic ques-
tions of ethics and values are confronting this
country, not as academic exercises in a philos-
ophy class, but as warp and woof of "ordinary"
public debates over politics, administration, eco-
nomics and military policy. Yet at this time the
best minds in the society are burrowing deeper
in musty library stacks, increasingly preoccu-
pied with specialized research of the most triv-
ial and picayune kind. The faculty man or
student who spends time on public affairs is
likely to be regarded as a "bad scholar."
CRITICIZING the Pursuit of Knowledge, in
University circles, is like going to class naked,
and so I must explain myself. I am enough of
an astronomy major to know the enormous im-
portance' of the "minor" discovery, and I will
even admit the possible value of a haggle be-
tween English scholars over some obscure work
written by a second-rate author two hundred
years ago. I think it is marvelous that more and
more men are laboring at the frontiers of hu-
man knowledge. It is not the scholarship that I
disparage, but the scholar. Where is his sense
of proportion? Scholars and professionals are
failing to survey the whole range of problems
in society, to assign priorities, and to take ac-
count of these priorities when they dedicate
their lives to research. If there are not enough
brains to cope with all problems, is it not bet-
ter to concentrate on those which are most im-
portant?
DO NOT THINK the University is relating
creatively and realistically to society. More-
over, it is passing along its attitudes to students.
So often the University seems to feel it has
succeeded if only the graduating senior is pas-
sionately "interested" in some scholarly subject
and is ready to devote himself single-mindedly
to it. And so often the individual teacher feels
he has succeeded only when he has "won over"
his brightest student to following in his foot-
steps. I feel other questions must be asked, for
after all people can get "interested" in the most
incredible things. How much thought and com-
parison goes into a student's decision to com-
mit himself to a career? How rational is that
commitment in a world that confronts each
person with new and unusual challenges? Has
the student made a realistic adjustment to the
demands of this complex age, or has he simply
buried his head in the sand?
Yet, for all its failings, this University and
like institutions across the country are the car-
riers of all my hope for the future. The Uni-
versity obviously has a long way to go before it
becomes a revolutionary nucleus. But I feel
strongly that the potential exists, and that the
action called for by dissatisfied students would
be forthcoming if the will were but there.
HAVE ONE concrete proposal which would
set us well on the road. It could be adopted
with little difficulty, and it would further goals
which the University already embraces. I would
To the Editor:
WOULD like to correct a mis-
interpretation of remarks I
made at the Conference on the
University. I did not, as your re-
porter wrote, claim that "the sys-
tematic downgrading of the 'nor-
mal' undergraduate education was
not worth the superior education
given the Honor's students."
I did argue that the Honor's
Program had to be justified on
grounds other than that the su-
perior student deserves special at-
tention just because he is superior.
In particular, I argued that, to
the extent that diversion of re-
sources to the Honor's Program
reinforced the general tendency to
downgrade normal undergraduate
education, it must be a source of
concern to anyone who views the
quality of such education as a
main test of the quality of any
college or university.
* * *
FRANKLY, I am not clear in
my own mind as to whether the
Honor's Proram is justified. I find
compelling Prof. LeVeque's con-
tention that the diversion of re-
sources is so slight that were the
Honor's Program to be eliminated
the result could not appreciably
upgrade the quality of normal un-
dergraduate education. On the
other hand, I think we at this Uni-
versity have all been too compla-
cent about the steady erosion of
that part of the educational pro-
cess in favor of faculty research,
graduate education, and Honor's
education.
I suspect that there is much
that we could do to slow or re-
verse this process which we are
not attempting to do because of
the often unreflective endorsement
of a dubious system of priorities.
I have no panaceas to offer. I
meant only to try to disturb the
complacent acceptance of a pro-
gram which seems to me to require
justification simply because it in-
volves a departure from equal
treatment; and, in so doing, to fo-
cus upon the way it contributes to
a downgrading of the educational
experience provided the typical
undergraduate.
-Prof. Arnold S. Kaufman
Extension . .
To the Editor:
ALPHA CHI OMEGA sorority is
sincerely interested in comply-
ing with Regents' Bylaw 2.14 re-
garding membership selection. Ef-
forts have been made throughout
the past months to submit the
most inclusive statement possible
since our original statement was
deemed inadequate. Alpha Chi
Omega had prepared a revised
statement by the time its revision
was due.
However an extension of 45 aca-
demic days (until approximately
October 1, 1962) was requested on
the basis that during this time
"the local chapter decided to seek
legal advise to #ascertain the le-
gality of our statement. We are
asking for an extension until the
fall semester so that we may have
chapter approval of the complet-
ed statement after it has been
reviewed by our lawyer. We were
granted an extension of 7 days
with the due date falling May 25,
1962.
ON MAY 23, a further extension
was requested in view of the fact
that there was a discrepency on
the national level as to who has
the power to endorse the local
statement. It was discovered that
the National Council, consisting
of ten members, has this power.
These members are to convene at
a National Convention this sum-
mer, and it was strongly suggested
(though we were not bound) that
the local chapter await National
Council's endorsement. It was de-
cided that we would request this
extension which SGC rejected.
ON MAY 25, 1962, Theta Chap-
ter of Alpha Chi Omega, having
secured a degree of legal advice,
has submitted " its statement re-
garding the upholding of Regents'
Bylaw 2.14. However, this state-
ment is submitted under protest.
As in any legal process, this term
signifies a compliancedwith speci-
fied requirements and a reten-
tion of the right to raise question
at a later date.
In this case, we have met the
deadline, even though we question
the legal power of SGC to function
in thisacapacity, and we reserve
the right to further question this
matter.
-Theta Chapter,
Alpha Chi Omega
Misunderstanding.. ..
To the Editor:
MR. HERSTEIN'S editorial of
Friday profoundly misunder-
stands the role and position of
Voice as a political party, the
Voice forum as a mode of expres-
sion, and the Voice symposium as
an educational function.
First: Voice is not neutral in its
concern about the arms race; we
are against the political and ethi-
cal results of this means of mas-
sacre. We do not believe that all
approaches to the problems of de-
fense are equally valid. At any
time, and at any place, it is the
legitimate function of a political
group which does not purport to
be neutral to take a position on a
topic of concern.
Second: The -Voice, forum is
open to any who would care to use
it. We will encourage our friends
to set up speaking engagements on
the Diag, but invite our enemies
to speak under our banner. This
is the open forum, the free plat-
form. William Livant expressed a
desire to speak on methods and
manners of thinking about Her-
man Kahn. We assented because
we believe that anyone should be
able to speak oi the Diag and be-
cause we thought Mr. Livant's talk
would be timely.
Third: The Voice symposium on
the Arms Race was meant to add
to the substance of debate on that
issue at our campus. It was meant
to stimulate and to educate; it was
not conceived of as a sterile exer-
cise in windblowing. Our commit-
ment to the educational function
of the symosium did not, and will
not, exclude making clear that
certain ideas are not equal in mer-
it to other ideas.
NOW, IT IS true that we did not
put together a panel to challenge
the other three speakers in our
series. As a political party we felt
it necessary to make clear both
that Mr. Kahn was not represent-
ing the Voice position, and to have
someone to comment on, and make
clear some of the objections to Mr.
Kahn's position.
We gave Mr. Kahn a platform.
We did not put him in a position
in which he could not reply, nor
in one which was unfair. Further-
more, because we did not do this
with the others does not mean in
any way that we violated any prin-
ciple of free speech. We took care
to subject Kahn's ideas to scrutiny
of a public nature. We are not so
detached as to maintain that it
makes no difference whether or
not Kahn's ideas are accepted. We
are not neutral.
Finally, that we did not trust
to the innate good sense of people
to judge him themselves is anoth-
er misunderstanding of the debate
form. We feel that if people can
examine a position in the light of
challenge it will be better under-
stood than if unchallenged. Our
judgment of Kahn's work led us to
ensure, as best we could, this scru-
tiny. That we did not do the same
with the other speakers attests not
to our violation of free speech, but
to the fact that we take sides and
are proud of it.
* * *.
ALL MR. Herstein's editorial
can see is a conception of neutral-
ity with no commitment to judge-
ment. In this it shares a failing
with Herman Kahn: that failing
is the reluctance to distinguish be-
tween the realistic and the brutal,
the humanly important from the
unimportant.
Voice will never relinquish its
prerogative to make judgements.
And in doing this, we maintain
that we need not relinquish our
ability to educate and interest
students in the vital issues of our
era. We reject a conception of
sterile spetatorship.
We stand with C. Wright Mills,
who wrote: "Throughout I have
tried to be objective but I do not
claim to be detached."
-Robert Ross, '63
Chairman
-Nanci Hollander, '65
-John Roberts, '64
-Dick Magidoff, '63
for the Voice Executive Committee
Disarmament . .
To the Editor:
IN THEIR letter to The Daily at-
tacking Herman Kahn, William
Livant and Anatol Rapaport pre-
sented an oversimplified and
childish approach to the current
controversy over disarmament.
They still seem to accept the tra-
ditional belief that a decrease in
arms must of necessity lead to
greater stability in the world.
Kahn's more sophisticated and re-
alistic argument is not the object
of their attack, but rather his
ethics. They refuse to come to
grips with Kahn's principal con-
tention that the building of a
massive second-strike potential
will increase the chances of sta-
bility by making it less likely for
either side to attack. In addition,
they misunderstand Kahn in as-
suming that he advocates a large-
scale civil defense p r o g r a m
Kahn's position is closest to the
idea that civil defense shelters are
a destabilizing influence; but, that
a small-scale program would
merely be a safety measure against
complete annihilation.
Peace movements must study
the implications of this analysis
and recognize that opposition to
such programs as the Polaris and
Minute Man should be reconsid-
ered in light of Kahn's framework
of logic. Instead of criticizing sec-
ond-strike stabilizing weapons,
they should concentrate their op-
position against any trend which
might make it appear that the
United States was about to launch
an attack on the Soviet Union.
This would include giving our Al-
lies missiles such as the Titan and
the Atlas.
Livant and Rapoport should re-
alize that in a post-World War II
society, pre-World War II solu-
tions are no longer valid.
-Bruce Vanderporten, '63
-Robert Westman, '63
Refutation ...
To the Editor:
IT WOULD BE presumptuous to
refute the word of a Daily re-
porter, to assert that the fire drills
at Markley were really being held
as a result of false alarms being
set off on the corridors. It would
be equally presumptuous to assert
that Denise Wacker in her re-
cent editorial is completely incor-
rect in her conjectured vagaries.
And yet, when all the facts are
compiled, there is a strong case
in favor of these accusations.
In the editorial printed two days
previous to Miss Wacker's clever
and subtle masterwork, Barbara
Lazarus presented the facts con-
cerning the recent drills with logi-
cal and just editorial comment.
Miss Lazarus had discussed the
case thoroughly with the coordi-
nating director of Markley Hall,
and upon learning that the gen-
eral alarm was sounded as a de-
terrent to future false alarms, she
reasoned that the responsibility for
the unscheduled fire drills rested
with the immature individuals who
initially set off the false alarm
which rang in the house directors'
offices. As one of the persons who
was awakened at such an ungodly
hour and who stumbled down sev-
eral flights of stairs, protesting all
the way, I find Miss Lazarus's
view logical and tenable-her facts
are correct, her reasoning is clear.
BUT WHERE does Miss Wacker
get her facts? It seems she got
"fire drill" from the involved staff
members and "bed check" from her
own prolific imagination. Invest-
ing her bed-check idea with a
proper to editorial comment-it is
rather a difference in factual con-
tent.
If Miss Wacker is not able to
ascertain and present the facts
with the honesty and clarity that
Miss Lazarus has, then she is fail-
ing to fulfill a major part of the
obligations of reporting end edi-
torializing.
* * *
IF SHE IS, in fact, aware of the
true cause of the fire drills - the
earlier false alarms turned in that
night-and is using her bed-check
theory as an excuse for a two-
column long, defamatory and vin-
dictive bit of demagoguery, then
there is notable absence of re-
sponsibility, honesty, and integrity
in her editorial.
Only one good thing seems to
result from Denise Wacker's in-
correct and illogical editorial: her
childish hysteria over something
as slight and as relatively incon-
sequential as a 2:30 a.m. fire drill
serves as an excellent contrast to
the maturity and understanding
with which most Markley residents
accepted the alarm, once the ac-
tual case was made known.
-Patricia Cannon, '62
Romney,...
To the Editor:
g EORGE Romney is not a "Mes-
siah". George Romney did not
write the new Constitution. George
Romney is an intelligent, hard-
working man, dedicated to solving
Michigan's problems. G e o r g e
Romney is going to be elected gov-
ernor. With these words, I wish
to refute David Marcus' editorial
"Romney will lose Guberna-
torial Race." Once again, Mr.
Marcus has had a faulty political
analysis clutter up the pages of
The Daily.
For the past 12 years, the State
of Michigan has been in a legis-
lative deadlock. George Romney
will be able to work well with the
Legislature. He will have the un-
animous support of the ever-in-
creasing moderate wing of the Re-
publican Party, will be supported
by non-UAW Democrats, and aft-
er several weeks will have majority
support.
* * *
THE REPUBLICAN Party will
not revolt against its next Gover-
nor. 1962 is the year for Republi-
cans to get control in Lansing, and
even our outstate Republicans will
not let this go by, for it is not only
a chance for good government, but
an opportunity for party workers
to secure state jobs. In a recent
Detroit News poll, a larger per-
centage of Republicans supported
Romney than Democrats support-
ed Swainson. Perhaps Democrats
are tired of irresponsible, ineffec-
tive state leadership. Perhaps they
realize that Swainson was not
qualified for the job in 1960, and
has proven himself inept at fol-
lowing the whims of his master,
let alone running theState. Out-
state Republicans may not love
Romney, but they hate the UAW.
Republicans will elect Romney!
As for Detroit, Romney will get
a large percentage of the vote. Mr.
only 41,000 votes and Romney is
Bagwell lost the 1960 election, by
a man of far greater appeal. But
aside from appeal, Romney is the
man for the job. He understands
the problems of our state, he has
no boss, he will bring needed jobs
to Michigan. The Democrats have
built up -Mr. Romney's image as a
"Messiah" in order to tear him
down. I repeat, Mr. Romney is no
Messiah, nor does he claim to be.
He is a proven leader who offers
the Michigan electorate a chance
for good government. If they turn
him down, they don't deserve him.
As for Mr. Marcus, I suggest he
salt and pepper his issue of The
Daily so that it will taste better in
November.
Students for Romney
Chairman,
-Mark Hauser, '64
Differentials...
To the Editor:
T HE DECISION of the University
to increase the differentials in
its tuition fee structure -is unfor-
tunate for a number of reasons.
Two of these reasons are that it
perpetuates both an invalid dis-
tinction, that of residency, and an
invalid focus, that of the unit of
fiscal obligation. The perpetua-
tion of these propositions has led,
perhaps, to a failure to exploit a
reasonable and legitimate area of
resources.
Consider first the matter of resi-
dence differential. It is obvious
that it costs no more to educate
an out of state resident than it
does to educate an in-state resi-
dent at any given level. This being
the case the assumption behind the
differential appears to be that a
state has a legal responsibility to
educate those legally defined as
residents of that state, but a dis-
tinctly lesser responsibility to edu-
cate the residents of other states,
and that this differential respon-
sibility is expressible in money
terms.
This assumption is a valid one,
but in choosing to focus on the
student as the unit of fiscal re-
sponsibility, the state and the Uni-
versity obfiscate the issue.
For if it is true that the state
has the responsibility to pass on
to its residents the substantive
matter of other times and places,
to educate them, and the Michi-
gan system of higher education at-
tests to a dedication to this re-
sponsibility, then it follows that
all states have this same respon-
sibility. The question then is:
should the individual be held fis-
cally responsible for his state's
unwillingness or inability to ful-
fill this responsibility? Should a
student be made to pay for the ac-
cident of his state of residence?
The answer is clearly no. On the
other hand there is no reason why
the state of Michigan should un-
derwrite the educational irrespon-
sibility of the non-Michigan stu-
dent's state. Rather it would seem
that if a student from any state
seeks education outside his state
of residence, then that state has
the responsibility of assuming a
portion of the expenses incurred
by the unit of the state that does
educate him.
THIS LEADS to the following
two positions: (1) inasmuch as
there is no reasonable accounting
cost differential involved in edu-
cating the out of state student as
opposed to the in-state student,
then the residency tuition differ-
entials should be abolished; (2)
inasmuch as all states have an
educational responsibility to those
legally defined as residents of
those states then the various states
should contribute to the payment
of the fees of those residents which
are educated outside that state.
The policy implications of
these positions are: (1) that a
fee structure which does not ex-
hibit residency differentials should
be established; and (2) the state
and the University should enter
into negotiations with the various
states with an intention toward
defining the fiscal responsibilities
involved in importing and export-
ing students for educational pur-
poses.
It is possible that a forceful pur-
suit of this intention may result
in the exploitation of a valuable
and substantial area of resources.
-Edward Silva, '62
Protest .. .
To the Editor:
WISH to protest against the re-
lease of Hinsdale House Alice
Lloyd's House Director, Mrs. Up-
gren. As a resident of Hinsdale
House and as a member of Alice
Lloyd Council I am aware of the
confusion surrounding her dismis-
sal. I would like to hear, in full,
the official reasons for the dis-
missal for there has been no state-
ment from the Dean's Office as to
why this occurred to either Mrs.
Upgren or to the residents of
Hinsdale House.
It is apparent to the residents
of the House that there Is no jus-
tification for this action, and that
the conditions of her release
should be made public (at the re-
quest of Mrs. Upgren) to restore
any confidence that may have
been lost in the wisdom and judi-
ciousness of the Dean.
If for some reason Dean Daven-
port rescinds her previous deci-
sion, I think that a full apology
to Mrs. Upgren and Hinsdale
House should be made publicly,
plus the evidence which led to her
dismissal and that which may
have lead to such a change of
mind.
-Katherine Castle, '63A&D
DAILY OFFICIAL BULLETIN
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 TYPEWRITTEN form to
Room 3564 Administration Building
before 2 p.m., two days preceding
publication.
TUESDAY, MAY 29
General Notices
PLANS FOR COMMENCEMENT
COMMENCEMENT-Sat., June 16, :30 p
COMMENCEMENT
Sat., June 16, 5:30 p.m.
WEATHER FAIR
TIME OF ASSEMBLY-4:30 p.m. (ex-
cept noted).
PLACES OF ASSEMBLY
Members of the Faculties at 4:15 p.m.
in the Lobby, first floor, Admin. Bldg.,
where they may robe. (Transportation
to Stadium or Yost Field House will
be provided.
Regents, Ex-Regents, Regents Elect,
Members of Deans' Conferenece and
other Administrative Officials at 4:15
p.m. in Admin. Bldg., Room 2549, where
they may robe. (Transportation to Sta-
dium or Yost Field House will be pro-
vided.)
Students of the various Schools and
Colleges on Daved roadway and grassy
field, East of East Gate (Gate 1-Tun-
nel) to Stadium in four columns of
twos in the following order:
SECTION A-North sideof pavement
-Literature, Science and the Arts.
SECTION B-South side of pavement
PharmacyMedicine (in front), Law (be-
hind Medicine), Dentistry (behind Law),
Pharmacy (behind Dentistry)', Engineer-
ing (behind Pharmacy). Music (behind
Engineering
MARCH INTO STADIUM-5:00 p.m.
WEATHER RAINY
In case of rainy weather, the Univer-
sity fire siren Will be blown between
4:00 and 4:15 p.m. indicating the ex-
ercises in the Stadium will be aband-
oned. Members of the Faculties, Re-
gents, Deans, etc., will assemble at
the same places as for the fair weather
program. Graduates will go direct to
Yost Field House at 5:00 p.m. and
enter by the South door.
Recommendations for Departmental
Honors: Teaching departments wishing
to recommend tentative June graduates
from the College of Literature, Science,
and the Arts, for honors or high hon-
ors should recommend such students
by forwarding a letter (in two copies:
one copy for Honors Council, one copy
for the Office of Registration and Rec-
ords) to the Director, Honors Council,
1210 Angell Hall, by 4:00 p.m., Fri.,
June 8.
Teaching departments in the School
of Education should forward letters di-
rectly to the Office of Registration and
Records, 1513 Admin. Bldg., by 8:30
a.m., Mon., June 11,
Attention June Graduates: College of
Literature, Science, and the Arts,
School of Education, School of Music,
School of Public Helath, and School of
Business Administration: Students are
advised hot to request grades of I or X
in June, When such grades are abso-
lutely imperative, the work must be
made upminetime to allow your instruc-
tor to report the make-up grade not
later than noon, Mon., June 11.
ROOM ASSIGNMENTS FOR
FINAL EXAMINATIONS
Fri., June 1, 9:00-12:00
English 123
GLORIA SWANSON:
'The Inkwell"
INDEFATIGABLE Gloria Swanson cavorts and prances, sings and
dances in a variety vehicle incongruously titled "The Inkwell."
When entwined in the portentous humor of Harold Kennedy, she
carries the show to heights of merriment.
Unfortunately there is also a plot on the melancholy theme of
growing old-alone. Miss Swanson portrays Lila Lawrence, a famous
actress who has divorced three husbands and is now fearfully entering