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.

October 02, 1962 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1962-10-02

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

die Seventy-Third Year
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
, ... UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS
"Where Opinons Are Free STUDENT PUBLICATIONS BLDG., ANN ARBOR, MICH., PHONE NO 2-3241
Troth Will Prevail"

APPORTIONMENT APPEAL:
Senators Awati Supreme Court Ruling

t

By DAVID MARCUS

Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 2, 1962 NIGHT EDITOR: RONALD WILTON

Meredith's Vi tory:
A Chip in the Wall

THE ENROLLMENT of James Meredith in the
University of Mississippi has cracked the
segregation barrier in Mississippi. Unfortunate-
ly, this feat was accomplished with bloodshed
and the loss of two lives. Yet the admission of
the first Negro to the previously all-white
Mississippi institution has broken a psychologi-
cal block which slowly but surely will lead to
the betterment of race relations in the state.
The first breach in the wall of segregation
will have a long range psychological effect. No
longer will leading state institutions be all
white, but now one of them-the University of
Mississippi, one of the few things the state can
be proud of-is integrated. It will be harder to
maintain token integration in state institu-
tions.
For the Negroes, Meredith's success proves
that integration can be accomplished and that
federal power is behind their efforts. Although
there is still a great deal to fear, Negro inte-
grationists will be more courageous in their
voter registration drive.
However, Meredith's hold on the University
of Mississippi is tenuous. His life is in constant
danger as the violence of the last two days in-
dicates. Any day some unknown assailant, pas-
sionately committed to segregation, could blow
Meredith to bits with a shotgun or a rifle shot
could kill him while he sleeps. The National
Guard, federal troops and marshals cannot re-
main forever, but as long as Meredith attends
the University of Mississippi, his life is inse-
cure.
IF MEREDITH survives, he faces sev-
eral challenges. He could be expelled by a
student judiciary on some trumped up charge
of ''conduct unbecoming a student" or less like-
ly, he could be flunked out by his instructors.
Thus Meredith will have to live a careful life
while a student at the University of Mississippi.
His life in Mississippi will also be a lonely
one in view of the student violence and the fed-
eral force needed to put it down. Social and
political pressures will prevent white students
from bridging the bigotry gap to befriend this
lone Negro student.
It is unfortunate that integration has to be
accomplished with violence and shame for the
United States in the eyes of the world, but it is
in the pattern of Mississippi race relations.
Every attempt at integration has been met with
violence, terror and intimidation. Last year's
incidents during the McComb, Mis's. voter reg-
istration drive are . average reactions to at-
tempts of ending segregation. Former Daily
Editor Thomas Hayden, himself beaten at Mc-
Comb, points out that killings, beatings and
other forms of intimidation are the regular
fate of integrationists in Mississippi.
New Re

O IT WAS NOT surprising that mass violence
ensued, despite Gov. Ross Barnett's pleas for
public order. However, its source was unusual.
Former Maj. Gen. Edwin Walker who com-
manded the troops at Little Rock, enraged a
mob of students, local residents and outsiders
whom he exhorted to defend segregation at Ox-
ford. His demented attempts have proved futile
and costly. Walker is now in a federal mental
hospital in Missouri facing charges of impeding
marshals, inciting to riot, and conspiring to
oppose by force the execution of federal law.
The last charge alone carries a 20-year jail
sentence and $20,000 fine. Thus the checkered
career of Walker draws to a close.
Throughout the entire crisis, President John
F. Kennedy and his administration have acted
shrewdly and effectively. When it was clear that
Mississippi authorities were not going to bow
to federal troops, the attorney general's of-
fice, step-by-step, sought successfully to strip
the legal bands of authority down to their
source.
By first attacking university administrators
and then the college board, the administration
avoided making a martyr out of Barnett who
had sworn he would go to jail rather than per-
mit integration at Mississippi. When the col-
lege board capitulated under court threats and
the governor and lieutenant governor barred
Meredith, the Justice Department took them
into court and successfully had them convicted
of contempt, but gave them time to reverse
themselves or face heavy penalties.
Then, Kennedy performed the master stroke
-he nationalized the Mississippi National
Guard, stripping Barnett of a major portion
of his physical power. Barnett backtracked,
conceding temporary defeat. At this point, Ken-
nedy's timing went awry. Had he'given his firm,
but conciliatory speech at the originally sched-
uled time of 6:30 p.m. Sunday, he might have
averted the riots. Perhaps in hopes of reach-
ing a settlement with Barnett, Kennedy post-
poned his talk until 9 pm. when the riots were
already underway.
THUS KENNEDY'S EFFORTS to avoid a
bloody, bitter and embarrassing showdown
with the state government and the local mob
failed. The troops had to -be moved in to quell
the violence. The United States had another
black eye before the world.
Meredith's victory begins a new era in the
struggle against Mississippi segregation. The
white wall has been cracked. It is only a slight
chip. But it is enough of an opening to drive a
wedge in and shatter the wall.
PHIIP SUTIN
sources

HIDDEN behind the innocuous
title of "Scholle vs Hare" is a
court case that is giving rural
state legislators nightmares.
The case, now before the United
States Supreme Court, concerns
reapportionment of the state Sen-
ate.
The Supreme Court is being
asked to hear an appeal on a de-
cision rendered by the Michigan
Supreme Court that the present
Senate apportionment, established
by a Constitutional'amendment in
1952, is in violation of the 14th
amendment and denies equal pro-
tection of the law to residents of
the more populous areas of the
state.
« « «
AUGUST SCHOLLE, president
of the state AFL-CIO who initiat-
ed the proceedings, has asked that
the Senate reapportion along pop-
ulation lines.
The legal questions involved are
immense andscomplex. It is only
within the last year that the Su-
preme Court has seen fit to inter-
vene at all in apportionment cases.
The precedents and the proper
f o r m u 1 a s for reapportionment
within a state have not yet been
firmly established. And the case
of a state Senate - where area
as well as population are supposed
to be standards for districting -
has complicated the question all
the more.
s * *
MICHIGAN'S problem began
more than ten years ago. Rather
than face the difficult process \of
reapportionment after the 1950
census, the Senate chose to sub-
mit a constitutional amendment
to a vote of the people. This
amendment, instead of reappor-
tioning, simply added two districts
to the Senate. It also froze the
boundaries of the Senate into the
state constitution.
Naturally, this brought cries of
foul play from the big cities.
According to the 1950 census,
there were gross differences in
senatorial districts which ranged
in size from 61,000 to 396,000.
To complicate matters further,
since 1948 there has been a Demo-
cratic governor and a Republican
legislature. The Senate in particu-
lar hap been the source of irrita-
tion because conservative, rural
Republicans have dominated that
body.
* * *
THUS, CRITICS have asserted,
the Senate has been the burial
ground of many of the most im-
portant and necessary pieces of
legislation needed by the state.
Only last year, fiscal reform failed
in the Senate. Detroit voters feel
that the Legislature is not sensi-
tive to their needs. Those who
come from perdominately non-
industrial areas have failed to see
that the needs of industrial areas
have to be considered. The Sen-
ators are wrapped up in a ridicu-
lously ultra-conservative economy
minded viewpoint, bringing in-
Jury to the state.
But obviously, this is no ra-
t i o n a 1 e for reapportionment
though it is a stimulus to seek it.
One does not seek such a radical
approach to changing a democrat-
ically constituted body unless
there is real question of whether
it is democratically constituted.
The next hope for more equit-
able reapportionment came with
the state's constitutional conven-
tion. But Con-Con, whose dele-
gates were elected on the basis of
the present gerrymandered Sen-
ate and House districts, still re-
tained a combination area-popu-
lation formula in determining
Senate representation. Although
the new constitution definitely
gives more representation ot the
heavily populated urban and sub-
urban Detroit area, it still does not
satisfy the more vociferous critics
of the Senate.
* * *
BUT TWO years ago, Scholle
initiated a suit against the state
claiming that he was being de-

prived of equal protection of the
law since he lived in a district
(Oakland County) which was not
fairly represented in relation to
other areas. At the time, legisla-
tors did not take Scholle too seri-
ously. For one thing, they felt that
the courts would take a tradition-

"It's Your Move, I Believe"
-,-
x.
s~
a F'
---R

atorial districts. As a matter of
fact, while the old Michigan con-
stitution includes by amendment
the districts of the Senate, it does
not include any standard by
which apportionment is to be con-
ducted. Therefore, the question of
S e n a t e apportionment is not
whether the Senate should mimic
its big brother in Washington; in-
stead it should be how can the
Senate serve a useful function by
having members whose perspec-
tives and constituencies are
broader than the average repre-
sentatives. And this can be done
on a near population basis.
Another important aspect of
reapportionment is the new Con-
stitution. If passed, it would put
a new Senate apportionment into
effect that is certainly a step for-
ward although it is far from fully
adequate. The difficulty here is
that the new districting would
not go into effect until 1970 and
not unless the document is passed
in the April election. And, after
all,. there is no reason for.Michi-
gan voters to settle for anything
less than complete satisfaction on
apportionment.
* * *
EVEN IF Republican guberna-
torial candidate George Romney's
plan for a referendum that would
put the Con-Con formula into ef-
fect immediately were accepted,
this would not solve the problem.
There would still be a five to on
ratio between the largest and the
smallest districts.
Besides, in a referendum the
voter is faced with a take it or
leave it proposition. There are no
alternatives if the proposition
fails. And it would mean the aban-
donment of legislative responsibil-
ity.
Indeed, the Legislature has all
too often abandoned its respon-
sibility in these matters. Certainly
the people have a right to vote on
certain questions, including ap-
portionment. But the matter is
complex and ought not to be re-
duced to a single alternative for
which even the Legislature is
afraid to be blamed. This is what
happened in 1952. This is what
is happening now in the Congres-
sional election because the Legis-
lators refused to work toward an
honest solution of Michigan's
nineteenth Congressman.
If the Legislature fails to reach
an equitable solution to court-
ordered apportionment, there will
be mdre than ample justification
for a Senate at large.
The apportionment ought not
to be considered as a power grab
by the big cities. Urban voters
can equally reply that the present
situation has been used to gerry-
mander power into the hands of
rural areas. Both points are in-
valid. The real question is exactly
how far does equal protection of
the laws extend?

al legal view of the case, that ap-
portionment was a "political
thicket" which it is the duty of the
courts not to enter. Indeed, the,
Michigan Supreme Court refused
to rule on Scholle's suit at the
time.
But then the United States Su-
preme Court reversed itself. In the
suit of a group of Memphis resi-
dents asking that the Tennessee
legislature be forced to reappor-
tion, the court ruled that these
citizens were being deprived of
the equal protection of the law
and that the court certainly would
involve itself in questions of ap-
portionment. Then a torrent of
such cases came before the court.
The court overruled the Georgia
county unit system that for so
long had placed control of the
Democratic primary in the hands
of rural Georgia counties. Wiscon-
sin also had its legislative appor-
tionment overruled in federal
court. In all, at least 18 states
faced court action over apportion-
ment, including Michigan.
IN THE CASE of Michigan, the
court ordered the Michigan Su-
preme Court to rule in Scholle's
case. By a strict party-line vote,
the Michigan court last summer
ordered the Senate to reapportion
with no district being more than
twice as large as any other, or-
dered the cancellation of the Aug-
ust primary for the state Senate
and allowed the Legislature until
the beginning of September to re-
apportion the state or face an
election at large.
Clearly the Michigan Court's
ruling was ridiculous. A month
is hardly adequate time for an
issue so important and a task so
difficult. An election ofthe Sen-
ate at large would also be silly. It
would create a Senate at least as
unrepresentative as the present
one. And the delay of the Sena-
torial primary would cost the state
both unwarranted confusion and
money.
In response to the Michigan
court's decision, the Legislature
rushed madly into session, some
of its members screaming for the
impeachment of the supreme court
justices, and attempted to gerry-
mander the state into Senatorial
districts that would both satisfy
the court and maintain rural GOP
control.
* * *
GOV. JOHN B. Swainson called
for reapportionment strictly on

the basis of population and even
appointed a special commission to
work on the problem.
There was of course an appeal.
Because the Supreme Court was
not in session at the time, all that
could be done was to ask Justice
Potter Stewart to issue an order
delaying the implementation ,of
the decision until Oct. 1, when
the full court would meet again.
This Justice Stewart did.
The Legislators calmed down,
went into recess - which if the
United States court rules against
the present scheme will allow
them to reconvene without being
called by the governor - and re-
turned to the business of getting
re-elected.
THUS THE issue of reappor-
tionment is in limbo until & the
court gives a final decision some-
time this or next month. It is dif-
ficult to predict what that deci-
sion will be since the legal ques-
tions are extremely complex. But
there will be several questions fac-
ing the court.
One of the first of these is that
Michigan voters, in approving it
in the 1952 referendum, have
themselves accepted the present
system of Senate apportionment.
This of course is obviously true.
In the Tennessee case, which
serves as one of the few legal
precedents, the major question
was the Legislature's failure to ap-
portion as directed and it attacked
the apportionment of both houses
of the Legislature.
The difficulty of reconciling the
necessity of court action and the
approval of the people is the least
difficult. The referendum was ten
years ago. Population has shifted
and the difference in the size of
the districts has become even more
gross than the original ratio of
61,000 to 396,000. One cannot ac-
cept the judgment of ten years
ago as a final decision in a situa-
tion like apportionment where a
constant state of flux exists. Also,
it is questionable whether even
the people themselves have the
right to give up their'constitution-
al rights.
The second point, that the com-
plaint is only against one house
of the Legislature, raises an ex-
tremely difficult question: should
one house of the Legislature take
area into account as a factor in"
its representation? And, if not,
why have an upper house at all?

THE ASSUMPTION here is that
state government is patterned aft-
er the federal model. But this, is
not so. The state of Michigan is
not as diverse as the United
States. The Michigan Court's for-
mula of no district being more
than twice as large as any other'
certainly allows enough leeway so
that no Senator has a constituen-
cy so spread out that he cannot
possibly serve the electorate. It
more than allows for diversity of
interest to be represented. It is
in fact overly generous and a for-
mula of 80 per cent population to
20 per cent area would still be
generous. Senators could still be
useful by the fact that any one
district would be large and he
would have to take into account
a broader picture than any rep-
resentative.
As for area, even the most die-
hard outstate politician has ad-
mitted that area cannot be the
only standard for setting up Sen-

AT THE STATE
'Two Weeks':) Too Long

A COLLEGE or university is judged and rated
throughout the country on its academic
excellence. In the past, the University has been
given an excellent rating. But in order to
maintain its record of excellence something
must be done in order to obtain sufficient funds
for the University to support its programs. The
questions which students ought to ask them-
selves and attempt to solve are not when wom-
en must come into the dormitory or which sor-
orities file statements, but where to get and
how to spend money.
Begin with the question where does money
come from? One third of the University's money
comes from the state. Other money tomes from
grants, gifts and the interest which accumu-
lates from liquid assets of the University. In
addition there are student fees and money from
various bond issues which are passed, usually
for specific building projects.
But this does not tell the entire story. The
athletic department acquires monies from reve-
nue from football games and other sports and
the Michigan Union and the Michigan League
have hotel and snack bar business. These or-
ganizations show profits, additional money
within the University structure but not turned
over to the University to use as general funds.
Now look at how the money is spent. Uni-
versity funds go for capital outlay, faculty sal-
aries, non-academic staff salaries and the wide
term overhead. Overhead includes plant man-
agement, heat, light, water and general upkeep.
THE NEXT POINT is obvious, the University
needs more money. But the question of how
to get it and why is important. In the first
place, the University is an excellent university
due primarily to its faculty. But in the last few
years such men as Prof. Leo Goldberg, former-
ly of the astronomy department, have left the
University for lack of sufficient facilities, in-
sufficient salary or both. It is true that the
faculty recently got a raise due to the increase
in tuition but this is not enough nor is this the
way it should be done. Why raise tuition and
force some students to leave the University in
order to pay a professor who in the process just
lost a student?.
Why be forced continually to do this? In-
deed, if this is the way that the University is
going to pay for its faculty, before long tuition
will be so high that it will be impossible for
many brilliant potential students to come here.

example, where tuition is only $500 for out-of-
state students and free for in-staters as com-
pared to the $960 and $310 for the 'University.
IN ANSWER to these problems, administrators
and students cite the small appropriations
from the Legislature and the understandable
concern for the taxpayer in Michigan. But now
consider the profits spoken of in the beginning,
those of the Union, the League, the athletic
department and other similar organizations.
The athletic department puts its own profits
into other athletic events. And profitable en-
terprises like football support non-paying
sports. But there is still enough left over, or
has been in previous years, to build a press box
for some thousands of dollars and a new ath-
letic building.
We can argue for these expenditures on the
grounds that in order to have good teams one
must have good recruiting and in having good
recruiting one must impress the incoming stu-
dent. Again, this is true and there is no black
and white on this issue, but why couldn't the
athletic department contribute a portion of its
profits to the general fund-sponsor a profes-
sor each year so to speak since it could pay for
one professor's salary and certainly not go broke
or be forced to curtail athletic events.
The same thing can be said for the League
and the Union. If these organizations make a
profit, fine. But why don't they pledge a per-
centage to the University of whatever profit
they make?
THESE GROUPS are part of the University.
Students pay tuition and those groups which
are using ,University facilities in the simple
sense that the University supplies the students
to them ought to pay to keep the University as
it is now, not let it fall from its position of emi-
nence just because it does not have sufficient
funds. In a certain sense these inhuman or-
ganizations have a human's moral obligation to
"pay their own way" and help keep the Uni-
versity as it is.
It seems that with the increasing financial
mess in Lansing, there must be other ways
found to alleviate the University's position. It
cannot wait for the state to get on its feet
financially and get legislators who are willing
to appropriate more money; it cannot wait for
more alumni to realize that without money the

IT TOOK "Two Weeks in Anoth-
er Town" for Kirk Douglas to
learn what he should have known
all along, and what everyone in
the audience must have known
after ten minutes - the past is
past and the hell with it.
Douglas, a has-been movie
Adonis, is pulled out of the looney
house by a has-been director (Ed-
ward G. Robinson) to help with
some technical problems, in shoot-
ing a film in Rome.
Douglas meets his old love, and
immediately his cheek twitches
and his arm shakes. Then he looks
at his new love, and his cheek
stops twitching and his arm stops
shaking.
* * *
DOUGLAS has trouble convinc-
ing the new Adonis, George Ham-
ilton, his lines are important: Im-
mediately his cheek twitches and
his arm shakes. But, he receives'
a call from his new love and his
cheek stops twitching and his arm
stops shaking.
The director and cast would
have us believe Kirk had a rough
time during his years of stardom.
He did. He felt lonely. Besides, he
caught Edward G. Robinson in
bed with his chick.

So after an unoriginal auto
crash, andseveral years of twitch-
and shaking, he's on the recovery
road. Robinson conveniently has a
heart attack and Douglas finishes
the picture.
THE THEME is the attainment
of maturity despite the pitfalls of
fame and fickle women. Kirk
couldn't tell if he was the man-on-
the-screen or the face-in-the-
mirror. And that gave him a feel-
ing of insecurity from which he
ran. (He says it himself.)
When he stops running, he dis-
covers new strength, new life, and
the advisability of finding new
friends. But the movieviewer can
tell he'll forgive most of the old
ones.
The directing is-bad. Instead of
breaking up static. scenes with his
camera, Director Vincente Min-
nelli has the actors making theat-
rical gestures and movements.
This is all right on the stage, when
the audience is 50 or 100 feet
away, but not when the camera is
only a few feet aawy.
The acting, as a consequence, is
also bad. The only real relief is
Edward G. Robinson, who salvages
a few scenes.
-Tom Brien

FEIFFER

M4OM Mu{ A~K ME -
c"oWHA- t'o qOU WAZJT
7o Be W9J60 ) ou
6ROoA) UP, J0cq l(« t
AQPI SZAV A ' .
'cvwBOY.
a

50 OAvoq SAID TO MOMMt{ "WES
A UrTL.6OUt7 b BE:6t(, 50 W(
f{AV6 TO9 APPLfI26Hwr AWN~

AtN3i AFI
IIAS 16

FUM4 KIt' OF ECH 0. OM, oo
THATC-6 EM A WflMO Y . T-gC
o LXAM1"
50O ~A'TOOK1'i(6 HOME AOO' SAIt7TO l4OMi~u-.
O' 6T MM IQT EXETERA AW TF{ KrO T
H{ARVAW A012 THEE6&)HCAN.)TAKE' His 6PAQQA1Z
tO ltN) COWB)Oq 1AT 1ftU2 'STANFORP
Of- U.C4,.A. P006%'T V~AT MAKE uL-f j 3

MP- 17W r613 P-6 IM
5AP1' 1VD'IF -o BeA C,
trA A(4RTN6/' 1o 06
N17 16CCAR69 IN7A
AComyO&. of oR
1X o TAKE N
AG 66 t11lGA1 apJ

CH6 IMP-
Ear O'06,
'1wou
A

I

60o T~lf GAV6 KOKI6,A07'
AFR .iieE TT TH6 ocrc
5A(I? TO 92AV9Lq," T-fl{rrre
. from- a, ,.le'-Yl . e r -. .

AVP I 'SA!',
01 CUAM60 t?$
V 66 £ A O'T

I

Back to Top

© 2020 Regents of the University of Michigan