diff it. Dat Eily
Seventy-Thbird 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
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.
SATURDAY, OCTOBER 13, 1962 NIGHT EDITOR DAVID MARCUS

Catholic Church Endangers
Free Thought, Creativity'

IN ONE WEEK from now 2,600 bishops of the
Roman Catholic Church will convene in the
second Vatican Council, an event so rare that
only 20 others have been called in 20 centuries.
Its purpose, according to Pope John XXIII, is
"modernization" of the Church, a process which
will affect all Catholics.
The Catholic Church has long had in its keep
an institution called "The Index of Forbidden
Books." "The Index," a small volume covering
a span of approximately 300 years, contains no
twentieth century literature past approximately
1920; therefore, it seems reasonable the Coun-
cil will undertake to modernize it.
"The Index" is a form of censorship prac-
ticed by the Catholic Church. Like all censor-
ship, it is an attempt by the authorities to
place a clamp on men's minds, to stifle creative
thought and curiosity, and to decree there is
only one true way. In various forms, univer-
sities, local and federal governments practice
censorship; but the right to censor which the
Church has so long exercised over its subjects
is a far greater insult than these to man's
freedom of thought and action.
HE CHURCH bases its right to censor cer-
tain works of art on the tenet that it is
the Church's duty, decreed by God, to lead
men in living the good life,+free from sin, and
to teach the ideal. Therefore, censorship is
necessary to show men the right way and pro-
tect them from doubt, disobedience and de-
moralization.
In "The Index," the Church officially lists
books forbidden to Catholics. The list is not
especially spicy, as most of the volumes are
French and Latin works considered "heretical"
a few hundred years ago but dead and buried
now. Voltaire, Pascal, Henri Bergson, a twen-
tieth century philosopher, and Bishop George
Berkeley are included.
There is also an unofficial publication, writ-
ten by a clergyman but intended only as a
guide as to which books may lead to sin, called
the "Check List." This volume rates as "un-
suitable a large selection of contemporary
literature, especially of the best-seller variety
intended for mass consumption. While F. Scott
Fitzgerald, Ernest Hemingway, Joseph Conrad
and others are given clean bills of health-as
were Ellery Queen, Agatha Christie, and John
O'Hara--four works by Sartre, "The Grapes of
Wrath" by John Steinbeck, D. H. Lawrence's
"The Rainbow" and "Lady Chatterly's Lover"
are termed "unsuitable."
WIHAT IS THE philosophy behind the
Church's official and unofficial disap-
provals? The Roman Catholic Church believes,
in an age of automation, space travel, and

complete secularization, that the mere reading
of certain books is an "occasion of sin," which
could stimulate the reader physically or men-
tally to go against precepts of Catholicism,
therefore, the Church protects its adherents
from sin. However, the clergy reminds us, the
rules are flexible; one may obtain permission
to read a forbidden book if he is deemed cap-
able of understanding the book.
And here is the rub. The Church holds that
if the average man-on-the-street were to pick
up a copy of a book which attacked religion,
faith or morality, he might not be sufficiently
educated to understand the complexities of
it. Thus, he himself might plant seeds of doubt
in his mind; in effect, he would be led down
the garden path.
Is the Church protecting its subjects or is
it placing a vice on their minds so they will
not be able to question sufficiently to break
away? Isn't the Church, like many universities,'
preventing its adherents from hearing all sides
of the story on the pretense of guiding them?
Indeed, the problem is not that the masses,
who blindly follow Catholicism, will even want
to read these books; nor is it that the intel-
lectual Catholic will be prevented from reading
them. The problem is the audacity of an in-
stitution, which preaches that men were created
with free will, to hamper the practice of that
will, to create an atmosphere of constraint and
submission.
THE CATHOLIC VIEW of mark is indeed
dismal. It presupposes that most men suffer
vast limitations, that men will not be able to
raise themselves up to a higher level. Rather
than encourage a wide range of thought, it
displays-an appalling lack of faith in the con-
victions of its worshippers and keeps thent
tucked under its dogmatic wing.
Throughout the ages, the Roman Catholic
Church has been able to satisfy the needs of
the intellectual by founding the faith on a
strong philosophical basis. If the Church does
not "modernize" its concept of censorship, if
it continues assuming it has the right to nul-
lify its own basic tenet that God created man
with free will, then how is it to satisfy the,
needs of an increasingly sophisticated popu-
lace? As universities impose speaker bans and
governments attempt both in and out of the,
free world, to curtail basic freedoms, men in
all sectors of society must realize the great
danger to creativity, thought and freedom
which censorship imposes.
The Catholic Church must trust man just
enough to believe that, alone and- practicing,
his free will, he will find the "truth," too.
-MARJORIE BRAHMS

101
r-3' E '
/,,T
- 4.-f d C1f t¢ .Ty~
T HE SBLIN NoNS VT
SIDELINE ON SGC:
Brown's Moteon Inadequate

TODAY AND TOMORROW:
Facts and Figures
On War over Cuba

By WALTER LIPPMANN
ON THE QUESTION of going to
war over Cuba (by blockade
or invasion) we now have avail-
able a summary of the intelligence
findings on which the Adminis-
tration is acting. These facts ex-
plain the President's decision to
confine ahimself at this time to
measures which are short of war.
The facts were put on the record
Oct. 3 before the House Select
Committee on Export Control by
Mr. George Ball, the Under-
secretary of State.
This intelligence estimate is
based on an elaborate system of
surveillance by sea, by air, and by
land, and there is every reason to
think that its accuracy is very
high. For Cuba is an island easily
within reach of the Navy and
Air Force, and with modern ap-
paratus of electronic and photo-
graphic intelligence, little of mili-
tary interest can happen without
our knowing it.
We do not have to guess about
what is being landed at the Cuban
ports or about what is being con-
structed on Cuban territory. We
know. And anyone who chooses
to question the basis of our pres-
ent policy must begin by proving
that the intelligence estimates are
wrong.
*1* *
SO I SHALL quote in full Mr.
Ball's testimony on the crucial
question of the Cuban military
buildup. "Since July, when the
volume of Soviet military ship-
ments to Cuba suddenly vaulted
upward, 85 shiploads arrived, in
Cuba. ports. Many of them car-
ried military items, supplies, and
personnel. These shipments have
consisted, in part, cf types of
weapons previously delivered to
the Cuban armed forces, including
more tanks, self-propelled guns,
and other ground force equipment.
"The major tonnage in recent
shipments, however, has been de-
voted to SA-2, surface-to-air mis-
siles (SAMs)--together with all,
the related gear and equipment'
necessary for their installation and
operation. To date, 15 SAM sites
have been established in the is-
land. We estimate the total may
eventually reach 25. These are
anti-aircraft missiles having a
slant range of 20 to 25 miles.
"In addition, three and possibly
four missile sites of a different
type have been identified. These
sites are similar to known Soviet
1coastal defense missile sites that
are believed to accommodate anti-
shipping missiles with a range of
20-35 miles. Quite likely everal
more such sites will be installed.
"CUBA IS NOW estimated to
have 60 older-type MIG jet air-
craft. In addition, at least one
advanced jet-interceptor has re-
cently been received, and prob-
ably several more are in the pro-
cess of assembly. This type of
advanced jet-interceptor is us-
ually equipped with infrared air-
to-air missiles. We estimate that
the total of these advanced in-
terceptors in Cuba may eventually
reach 25 to 30.

"About 4,500 Soviet military spe-
cialists have arrived, including
'onstruction men and technicians."
* * *
THE MILITARY buildup, in
short, consists of weapons for the
army, anti-aircraft missiles, coas-
tal defense weapons, some short-
range patrol boats, a few fighter-
interceptors, and some 4,500 So-
viet specialists, technicians, and
construction men. What is t all
for? To attack the United States?
Obviously not. The United States,
using only conventional weapons,
could dispose of Cuba in a few
hours. Is the buildup to invade a
Latin American neighbor?
Conceivably, but only if Castro
were prepared for the enormous
punishment that would follow. It
is obvious, I submit, that Castro
is being armed against a re-run
of the raid on the Bay of Pigs in
April, 1961. Tanks, coastal de-
fenses, patrol boats, and anti-
aircraft equipment would be just
exactly what he would need to
repel another landing of Cuban
exiles.
The present Cuban military
buildup is not only not capable
of offensive action, but also it is
not capable of defensive action
against the United States.
* * *
WHAT THEN is Mr. Khrushchev
up to in Cuba? Secondarily, per-
haps, he is baiting a trap for us
which, if we fall into it, would
throw the whole Western alliance
into confusion and disorder just
at the time when a Berlin crisis
is developing.
But primarily, Mr. Khrushchev
is in Cuba because he has talked
so loudly about helping revolu-
tions. Castro has thrown himself
into Khrushchev's arms, and is
blackmailing him. The Castro re-
gime has made itself the prime
and public test of whether inter-
national communism is a real
force or a lot of words. Unless
Castro can be made to succeed in
Cuba, the revolutionary propa-
ganda among the backward coun-
tries in the rest of the world will
be greatly weakened.
So Mr. Khrushchev, despite what
was undoubtedly much reluctance,
is entangled in the fortunes of Fi-
del Castro. He must pour into
Cuba oil and machinery, raw ma-
terials And food, and technicians
and knowhow, and money in order
to demonstrate that communism
can do better and faster in Cuba
what the United Staates and Al-
liance for Progress are trying
slowly, but by peaceable means, to
do elsewhere in Latin America.
It follows that as long as there
is no direct military aggression by
Cuba, as long as we are limiting
ourselves to measures short of
war, one of the best responses is
to force the Soviet Union and the
Soviet bloc to carry the whole
burden of Cuban reconstruction.
That is the intent of the shipping
measures now being formulated.
They will not destroy the Castro
regime now. But they will make
it much more expensive" and in-
convenient for the Sovi'et Union
to make Castro succeed.

Integration, vs. Democracy

By RICHARD KRAUT
TOM BROWN'S MOTION con-
cerning the Committee on
Membership in Student Organiza-
tions was discussed for more than
two hours at Wednesday's Student
Government Council meeting.
Within those two hours, it was
amended once by substitution and
once by deletion and additiori.
Many distinctions were drawn, but
it seemed that few Council mem-
bers understood the important.
points. There was much confusoin
over the original intent of Brown's
motion and the effects of the
amendments introduced by Bob
Ross.
Several Council members com-
plained during a recess that they
did not really understand the full
significance of the changes being
made. In the hope that next week,
Council would be more able to
discuss and vote upon the issue,
Brown's motion was postponed.
EXACTLY HOW was Brown
trying to change the Committee
on Membership and how was Ross
trying to change Brown's motion?
Brown thought that the fol-
lowing functions of the Committee
on Membership should be changed:
1) The committee can "receive
and investigate charges of vio-
lation" of the regulation forbid-
ding discrimination in student
organizations; and
2) The committee can "ini-
tiate investigation and inquiry
of any group" that is accused of
discrimination.
Brown's motion would have de-
leted the two sentences cited above
and would have added the follow-
ing:
3) The committee can "inves-
tigate any written clauses which
are directly discriminatory;" and
4) The committee can "inves-
tigate any cases in which a writ-
ten and signed complaint about
one organization is deemed
worthy of investigation."

INTEGRATIONISTS use "democracy" as an
excuse for their campaign, as a banner for
their crusade. Yet the means to their desir-
able ends are a travesty of the word. Because,
they do not clearly recognize their ends, be-
cause they do not see the consequences of
their means, the integrationists have sacrificed
democracy in the name of equality.
According to the American College Diction-
ary, democracy means a "state of society char-
acterized by formal equality of rights and
privileges." However, democracy, in a strict
sense, is also defined as "a state in which the
supreme power is vested in the people and
exercised directly by them or by their freely
elected agents."
The Congress of Racial Equality usually pulls
the first definition from its files for its pam-
phlets. For the democratic tradition, for pre-
serving our democratic image in the eyes of
others, for making Mississippi more demo-
cratic, the progressive integrationist uses all
these cliches as his moral and legal justifica-
tions.
THE NEGRO does need a moral justification.
There are those who say the Negro is
fighting only for material objects. To anyone
who has fought long and hard for a cause,
this reason is ridiculous. It is impossible to
sustain an enormous campaign like.integration
if that campaign does not have a moral base.
The reason for the integration drive is the
desparate desire of the Negro to be accepted
as a human being with ithe same moral worth
as a white man. The upcoming Negro in-
tellectual thinks he has earned the respect
due an intellectual; the Negro worker feels
he is the equal of his white counter-part.
However, the supposed honesty which one
expects from an intellectual, and from the self-
righteous whites supporting him, is ridden in
a cloud of cliches about democracy.
Democracy, rule of the people by the people,
should be called rule of the individual by the
individual, because that is what it is sup-
posed to mean.
THE AMERICAN adaptation of- democracy
has been twisted as an excuse for unpopular
policies. But any honest man must remember
this: regardless of the elected nature of the

people who, no matter how primitive or im-
moral their ideas, rule themselves though they
can't afford the trip to Washington.
The sovereign (yes, the word is still in the
Constitution) state of Mississippi is composed
of people who, no matter how illiterate they
may be, have that inalienable (that word is
also still in the Constitution) right to govern
themselves. No one has any claim on the lives
of those people, not even our President.
THE PEOPLE of Mississippi have chosen
Barnett, Eastland, Stennis, and others to
represent them. One glance at the decibels of
applause accorded Barnett at the Ole Miss
Homecoming reveals that he has been loyal
to the neanderthal views of his people.
Igo the legislators of the other 49 states and
the federal judges have any right to intervene
in the problem? Is integration a national or
public trust, with the' President and Supreme
Court guardians of that trust? It is undemon-
strable that segregation in Mississippi has any
national effect.
Men have used the loss of uneducated Negro
brain potential as an excuse to make the
problem national. However, when has any
President been given the power to stimulate
gray matter at the most of freedom? Negro
workers migrate North and cause economic
problems, but is this a result of segregation
itself, or of the basic Southern premise that
the Negro worker is not as good as the white?
Because segregation in Mississippi is not a
national problem, it is not withn ithe dubious
power of the dubious guardian of the dubious
public trust to end it.
THE SUPREME COURT decision in 1954,
which made segregation a national problem
by playing Jotto with the Tenth Amendment,
is a debatable debacle.
If segregation in Mississippi is not a concern
of the federal government, then it is a prob-
lem of the state of Mississippi. If any one
forcibly solves Mississippi's problem, when that
problem does not concern the injunction holder
or bayonet holder, then democracy has been
betrayed.
Though the two definitions of democracy,
both desirable, might seem contradictory, they
are not. For, as was mentioned before, inte-

BROWN WANTED to substitute
(3) and (4) for (1) and (2) for
four reasons.
First, he thought that all com-
plaints made to the committee
should be signed. Second, he
thought that there should be a
formal statement of complaint for
every organization being inves-
tigated. Third, he wanted to clar-
ify certain ambiguities concerning
whether or not all complaints had
to be made in writing.
Although most would disagree,.
Brown thought that it might be
possible to interpret procedure in
such a way that complaints from
constituents of the committee
would not have to be written.
Fourth, Brown thought that it
was necessary to assure the fra-
ternities and sororities that the
committee would be somewhat
confined in its attempt to secure
information about possible viola-
tions. He said that he wanted to
stipulate "additional guarantee of
due process."
* * *
ANN McMILLAN and John
Meyerholtz as well as Brown seem
to have a great fear of the com-
mittee, stemming from the fact
that "investigate" is a very broad
term. In one sense, the committee
could work hand in hand with
fraternities and sororities. In an-
other sense, the committee could
be quite unfriendly, attempting to
obtain information not through
the fraternities and sororities
alone, but by any other means
possible.
The way in which Brown's mo-
tion would have attempted to con-
fine the committee to a more
friendly role was by the stipula-
tion, as cited above, that the com-
mittee could investigate only writ-
ten clauses.
The interpretation of Brown's
motion in this way-that the com-
mittee would be confined to in-
vestigating written clauses only-
is backed up by a statement by
Ann McMillan in which she said
that the committee's "purpose is
fulfilled when written discrimina-
tion is eliminated."
However, this seems to neglect
that every letter ever sent to a
fraternity or sorority asking them
for statements on membership
selection has asked for both writ-
ten and unwritten clauses. Are
Meyerholtz and McMillan suggest-
ing that Council ask for less in-
formation than most fraternities
and sororities have already .sub-
mitted?
* * *
BOB ROSS pointed this out
when he interpreted Brown's mo-
tion as denying the Committee on
Membership the right, for example,
to investigate the recommend sys-
tem. (Under this system, every
pledge for a sorority must obtain
a recommendation from an alum-
nus of that sorority.)
In addition, Ross charged that
Brown's motion was just as am-
biguous as the present statement
of the committee's functions.
Ross therefore offered a sub-
stitute amendment, to take the
place of Brown's second statement
nf finction nr (4) ahon. T said-

Council to strike out that part
in Brown's motion which called
for the deletion of statement (1)
above.
Ross then moved that statement
(1) be changed to say:
(6) The committee can "re-
ceive written and signed charges
of violation" of the regulation
forbidding discrimination in stu-
dent organizations.
In other words, if Brown's mo-
tion had been passed last Wednes-
day, with all of Ross' amendments,
the new functions of the commit-
tee would include statements (3),
(5) and (6), not, as Brown had
asked, statements (3) and (4).
THE ONLY real difference be-
tween what Brown suggested and
what Ross suggested is that Ross
would like the Committee on
Membership to be able to investi-
gate more than Brown would.
Some have suggested that the
new motion would hardly change
the present function of the com-
mittee, if adopted next week. This,
of course, -is not true, because the
new proposal, as hammered out
in last week's meeting, contains
three of the four reforms that Tom
Brown felt were necessary. And
the fourth reform is no reform
at all, but an about-face.
However, it is true that even
after two hours of discussion, SGC
has not hit upon the real prob-
lem that is dividing conservatives
from liberals-and that is the
meaning and scope of the word,
"investigation." If Council really
wants to clarify ambiguities, it
should formally specify exactly
what actions would constitute an
investigation of student organiza-
tions and which would be pro-
hibited. The onus is on the con-
servatives because, as -the functions
of the Committee on Membership
are now defined, the word "in-
vestigation" has a meaning broad-
er than what most conservatives
would like it to be.

I

CAMPUS DOUBLE FEATURE:
Hollywood Traditions

"pILLOW TALK" and "The
Apartment" are two examples
of Hollywood at its best, or per-
haps I should say Hollywood do-
ing what it is best at and has
had the most practice -at-bedroom
comedies. There is something ap-
propriate about putting these two
movies on a double bill. They form
an interesting contrast.
"Pillow Talk" is a work of ex-
tremely slick cliches loaded with
some fascinating gadgets. But this
is not an adverse criticism because
the movie makes absolutely no
pretension to being anything else.
Because of this lack of pretension,
watching this movie is like lis-
tening to a good story teller re-
creating for the thousandth time
"Cinderella" or "Peter and the

LETTERS
to the
EDITOR
To the Editor:
AT THE RISK of being accused
of reactionary sentiments, I
feel I must register my protest
to the latest example of so-called
"progress" about to be perpetrat-
ed on this campus. I refer, of
course, to the proposed "new look"
of the Michiganensian, announced
by its business manager.
I strongly oppose any attempt
to alter what I consider one of
the most hallowed institutions of
the University of Michigan. The
'Ensian staff's intention to re-
move "all posed group pictures is
the most heinous of the proposed
changes. It has been my feeling
that one of the 'Ensian's greatest
attractions in past years has been

AT CINEMA GUILD:
Reluctant Success

Wolf" or whatever your favorite
fairy tale is. Hollywood has been
making movies about nasty and
wolfy bachelors who try to seduce
nice clean cut ladies and then fall
in love with them since the days
of the nickelodeon. Examples are
also available any night of the
week on the Late Show.
As I said, this particular version
makes absolutely no pretensions
in the directions of originality or
realism. All the acting is -stylized
as any Greek play. Possibly not
as profound a style but still a
definite style. For instance, no
effort at motivated acting is made
at all, eyes are constantly rolling
around in the sockets, and the
eyebrows are as versatile and oft
used as asked.
FROM versatile eyebrows it is
a simple and obvious step to Jack
Lemmol and "The Apartment."
This movie is from a slightly older
tradition but still one that America
and Hollywood are well versed in,
the tragic, or if you wish pathetic,
comedy, or perhaps you'd prefer
to call it the comic tragedy.
It too has a definite style, in
this case one closely approximat-
ing a medieval morality play. You
know the ones, with characters
like Everyman, Fellowship, Char-
ity and Justice. The characters
in this movie include the loveable
klutz who becomes a lovable
mensch, the executive who is always
but never getting divorced, and
many others equally charming.
However, these universals are por-
trayed as real and interesting
people.
* * *
THIS MOVIE gives you the
choice of laughing at a tennis
racquet used to strain spaghetti,
or crying at Shirley MacLaie's
effort to commit suicide, or her
insistence on using a compact
with a cracked mirror "so she can
look like she feels."

THE SCENE: London, 1958.
The time: The Season-those
marvy three months when English.
matrons launch their 17-year-old
daughters, christen them with
champagne, and staff them with
the most attractive crew of eligi-
ble young men that British so-
ciety can offer.
The reluctant debutante, as in
the movie of the same name cur-
rently playing at the Cinema Guild,
finds the sea of English conven-
tion a bit rough sailing and the
deck of able bachelors tediously
over-staffed.
WHERE the novices fail, one
veteran socialite is bound to suc-
ceed, and thus it is that London
playboy John Saxon, obviously
destined to become first mate,
mans the wayward debutante, San-
dra Dee. much to the chagrin of

bill of fine Cinema Guild films,
but for the more creditable as-
pects of the production.
OF FIRST RANK in this cate-
gory are certainly the excellent
characterizations rendered by Har-
rison and Miss Kendall. Delight-
fuly frivolous in a monstrous stole
of oscillating plumes, Miss Kendall
portrays her role as the doting
stepmother with facility and grace
despite the comic, nearly slapstick
stunts required of her. Harrison,
with the savoir-faire made famous
in "My Lady Fair," conjures all
the tricks of 'Enry 'Iggins to bring
his role to its fullest.
It is understandable, but none
the less unfortunate that neither
Saxon nor Miss Dee could ap-
proach their characterizations with
the maturity and style displayed by