C1 4r, 3ir4lgawu itg
Seventy-Third Year
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNivExSrrY OF MICHIGAN
a Y' UNDER AUTHORiTY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS
"Where Opnione 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. Thts must be noted in all reprints.
SUNDAY, DECEMBER 16, 1962 NIGHT EDITOR: DAVID MARCUS

"I Came In Late. Which Was It That Was
Un-American--Women or Peace?"

UNDERSCORE:
Three-Fold Threat
Faces Macmillan


Non-Committal Antagonists
Cast Doubt in Shapiro Case

T iERE IS CONFUSION and bewilderment
in the wake of Prof. Samuel Shapiro's dis-
missal from Michigan State University-
Oakland. By reason, this confusion and be-
wilderment should not exist. It has come
about because neither of the two main figures
in the case have taken it upon themselves to
articulate a lucid and concrete explanation
of the reasons for the dismissal. Neither Prof.
Shapiro nor Assistant Dean George Matthews
have been willing to comment upon the situa-
tion and by their silence they have aggravated
the state of affairs to a point where it has
become distorted almost beyond recognition.
What seems to emerge from a study of the
situation is that the Shapiro case became an
issue involving academic freedom by accident.
Matthews' remark, that he "would have had
a better chance" of being retained if he had
written and said less about Latin-American
affairs, was uttered mistakenly and when
printed in the newspapers was taken widely out
of context. Without any further examination
of the factors involved in MSU-O's decision
to drop Prof. Shapiro, individuals and groups
began at once to cry "violation of academic
freedom."
There is nothing wrong with hastening to
the defense of civil liberties, but it is a little
embarrassing if, after the picketing is over,
it suddenly turns out that there really was
no violation. Legally and traditionally univer-
sities do not make public the reasons for which
they decide to drop a professor or fail to
recommend him for tenure. As a matter of
fact in most cases a university has an ob-
ligation to the faculty to refrain from making
the opinions voiced in closed meetings known.
The faculty feel free in these meetings to
discuss candidly the qualifications they may
feel a professor either lacks or possesses.
' THE FACULTY at MSU-O, therefore, were
in no way required to explain the reason
for their decision to drop Prof. Shapiro. If
anything, their commitment was to precisely
the opposite of this. If it had not been for the
insistant reporter who finally succeeded in
getting Matthews to say something he did
not mean to say and which was not presented
as he said it anyway, very probably nothing
would have resulted from the dismissal. This
does not mean Matthews said something he
was planning to keep to himself. He did not
slip and' give away the big secret-that Prof.
Shapiro was dropped because he was too con-
troversial. Mathews was merely caught in an
extremely unfortunate situation and in at-
tempting to clarify something, he was later
quoted out of context.
In regard to what Matthews did say, even
considering only the remarks appearing in the
papers, there seems to have been a great deal
of jumping to conclusions. Facts are facts and
it happens to be a fact that of a listing of all
Prof. Shapiro's published works in 1961, 44 out
of 54 deal with Latin America.
The point of controversy is not what Prof.
Shapiro said in these 44 books, but the fact
that he said things about Latin America in
them rather than about United States history,
the subject he teaches.
MSU-O has not said there is anything wrong
with the fact that Shapiro has spent a good
deal of energy and concern on Latin American
affairs. What it has said is that it wonders
if he is able to fulfill his commitments to his
history course in view of these books. This is
a limited view to take of the kind of faculty
MSU-O seek, but it certainly is not a viola-
tion of academic freedom. It is merely one

university's narrow criterion for selecting its
faculty.
MANY STUDENTS and faculty at Oakland
feel that personality conflicts between
members of the teaching staff are in a large
part responsible for the dismissal. Awarding
a professor tenure is not something to be
taken lightly. Once he has been given tenure
a teacher is in effect "married" to the school
until he decides to leave. In considering people
for positions, therefore, most schools feel
they have a justifiable reason to allow per-
sonality considerations to enter into their
decisions. If this is the case here, and there
seems to be a strong indication that personality
clashes did have more than a little to do with
the decision, it is not a question of academic
freedom. Unless one wants to begin question-
ing whether or not the personal differences
were caused by deep-seated prejudices one
cannot say in all honesty that a decision by
the faculty partially based on personality con-
siderations is to be considered an abridgement
of civil liberties. It is possible to question'
whether a university is being wise in using
this method even to the smallest degree, but
that is a problem MSU-O must evaluate on
its own.
The situation at MSU-O is neither clear
cut nor pleasant. There is an air of secrecy
about that no one is either willing or able to
dispell. It seems strange that if Prof. Shapiro
is as convinced that his rights are being violat-
ed as everyone seems to be saying he is, he
has not so far found it expedient to release
any kind of a statement to the press. He has
received letters from professors all over the
country and his cause has been defended on
many local campuses. Why then has he re-
fused to make any kind of a statement?
PERHAPS Prof. Shapiro really does not be-
lieve his rights were violated. He seems to
have been caught so unawares by the dismissal
that he failed to stop the snowballing academic
freedomers at the outset. Now he has let
things go a little too far to be able to intervene
and tell his defenders that they really have
no cause for which 'to defend him.
On the other hand, he may be genuinely
convinced that he was discriminated against
and be too stunned at the injustice and the
disillusionment of the whole affair to be able
to pull himself together.
Whatever the case is, Shapiro has a respon-
sibility to clarify the issue. If he should allow
all the ruckus to continue if he knows his
position is not an honest one then he will be
endangering the academic freedom of which
he claims to be deprived. It is difficult to
believe that he really knew what was hap-
pening at the beginning of the whole affair,
but now that he has had time to evaluate the
situation, he owes it to himself and those who
have come to 'his aid to make an honest
and clear statement of his position.
MATTHEWS, too, has a responsibility to
erase the impression his remarks created.
He has cast doubts on Shapiro's integrity as
a scholar which are completely unfounded. It
is not easy to tell which side is justified in a
case where the issues are clouded and deliber-
ately distorted by people who may or may not
know what they are talking about. The general
result of the situation as it now stands is to
make people all over the nation believe that
professors are being silenced for their beliefs.
This a dangerous impression to create under
any circumstances, but doubly so if it is a
false impression.
-JEAN TENANDER

;s,:t
f..
t

@1?/ii {a\jA jn[ c.£ , ";c- :s.,


By MALINDA BERRY
B RITAIN may be headed in the
direction of relative isolation
from the European Economic Com-
munity and the United States.
The announcement that the
United States may cancel the Sky-
bolt missile program for Britain
has aroused much ill-feeling in the
United Kingdom, directed at the
U.S. The 1,000-mile, airborne Sky-
bolt missile, scheduled to come off
the production lines in 1964, is
needed by Britain's Royal Air
Force to keep its V-bomber force
in the air for another few years.
Britain was also planning on
using the Skybolt as the basis for
the development of an "indepen-
dent" nuclear striking force. Actu-
ally, after 1964 Skybolt would con-
stitute the full extent of the strik-
ing force.
WITHOUT THIS independent
source of nuclear power Britain
is dependent upon the United
States for retaliation in case of an
attack from Russia. And one
British official said, "Can we be
certain America would be willing
to launch a nuclear strike if, for
example, Russia attacked only Eu-
rope with nuclear weapons?"
"By doing so," he continued,
"the U.S. would risk her own
devastation; we feel a good deal
easier knowing we can act inde-
pendently if the need arises."
Britain is agitated to the point
where they could retaliate by can-
celing U.S. use of Holy Loch, Scot-
land, as a base for Polaris sub-
marines.
, * * *
THE U.S., as an act of reconcili-
ation, has offered to turn over to
Britain, free of charge, the whole
Skybolt program. The administra-
tion probably realizes that the
Macmillan government cannot
stand too many more blows to its
prestige. And with the ferment
brewing over Britain's entrance
into the Common Market, the
Conservatives could very likely be
ousted by the Labour Party in the
elections in 1964.
Macmillan's party suffered losses
in the recent by-election. This
coupled with the impasse which
has been reached in the entry ne-
gotiations adds up to trouble in
1964.
Labour leader Hugh Gaitskell has
said there is no overriding neces-
sity for Britain's entry into the
Common Market. He has taken
the stand that Britain should not
surrender any of her independence
or sovereignty. In British eyes, Eu-
rope's assumption that the country
will come in at any costs is being
augmented by the trouble in its
negotiations with the six-nation
European Common Market.
THE BIGGEST single obstacle

now is the Community's insistence
that Britain must immediately
raise most food and farm prices
to the higher Common Market
level if it is admitted in 1964. Lead
by France, the ministers have
shown little sign of budging on
this key issue.
Another example of possible
British isolation comes from the
officials who have beenmuttering
about pulling a large part of
Britain's 51,000-man NATO con-
tingent out of West Germany if
the Common Market talks fail.
If Gaitskell's party should win
in '64, which is becoming more
and more of a possibility with
each new crisis encountered by
Macmillan, it is likely that the
neutralist voices in the govern-
ment will be heard more strongly.
There are those who are strongly
opposing U.S. policies in Europe
who would be ranking officials in
the government.
GAITSKELL is essentially op-
posed to British entrance into the
Common Market and hostile to
the whole concept of a United
States of Europe, all of which are
basic American aims.
This leaning towards neutralism
would change Britain from a co-
operative ally to a potential trou-
ble-maker for the Western alli-
ance.
Therefore, it is much in the
interests of the United States to
settle the Skybolt problem as soon
as possible with as much power
given to the Macmillan govern-
ment. Because Macmillan is hav-
ing troubles enough with the Com-
mon Market negotiations, which
are getting more and more dis-
tasteful to the British people, and
the Labour Party is capitalizing on
it.
Coupled with all his other prob-
lems, Macmillan has been in office
long enough to bring out the
standard political complaint-too
many familiar faces.
* * *
THE BOREDOM of the elector-
ate is a wickedly difficult situa-
tion for any politician to over-
come-there's nothing he can do
about the problem of the "same
old face." Macmillan's party has
been in power for 11 years, with
him at its head for six.
In an attempt to put in some
new outlooks last July, Macmillan
fired 16 ministers, and to their
posts he elected a number of
younger, more progressively-ori-
ented politicians.
Thus, Macmillan must cope with
a triple-offense threat -boredom,
difficulties with the United States
concerning Skybolt, and the ever
lasting problem of Charles , de
Gaulle's intrepid guarding of the
Common Market from British en-
try.

I

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:
Socialist Club Misunderstood

To the Editor:
I BELIEVE a great deal of mis-
understanding and unnecessary
hostility has been aroused amongst
many people because of some re-
cent statements in a recent Daily
article, which stated that the for-
mer Democratic Socialists Club
had dropped the word "Democrat-
ic," and were, in addition, taking
a "turn to the left." Some of the
furor has arisen from inaccuracy
on the part of The Daily editing
staff, but much also arises from
the nature of the act itself.
The Socialist Club dropped the
word "Democratic" to broaden its
base of support. While we had the
name "Democratic Socialists." we
were being confused with the So-
cial Democratic Party (SP-SDF)
of Norman Thomas. Because of
this many non-Norman-Thomas-
type socialists simply would not
join our organization. We are not
opposed to the SP-SDF, in fact
several of its members belong to
the Socialist Club.
Moreover, the Democratic So-
cialist, George Rawick, from De-
troit is presenting a discussion se-
ries which will be an integral part
of our program. We are an unaffil-
iated socialist group. All this is
merely part of the new Socialist
Club policy of expansion to in-
clude all types of socialists, so that
internal dialogue may take place
on differences existing between so-
cialists, while the group as a whole
can take action on issues in which
there is agreement. Therefore, we
welcome all those who are inter-
ested in self-education-in the
history, philosophy, present situ-
ation, and future \development of
socialism.
THE SECOND major area of
confusion concerns our turning
"even more to the left." If this
means, that because we will in-
clude people of more radical or
more "left" ideas, then the state-
ment is true. But this can only
effect internal dialogue and self-
educating discussions. As anyone
acquainted with left-wiug politics
knows, any move to create a well-
defined club policy on such mat-
ters as labor, social change and
revolution-even the nature of
capitalism-on the basis of one
faction's views, would cause an
immediate split. What the state-
ment was really intended to show
was that the Socialist Club will
now attempt to put some of its
ideas into action. Action was not
a feature of the old Democratic
Socialists, and insofar as the very
acts of taking stands and writing,
picketing and petitioning for them
is more radical; that is, if action
is more radical than inaction, then
we are, again, going to be more
radical.
This trend, however, has been
going on for some time this semes-
ter. We have been the Socialist
Club, unofficially, since Septem-
ber and our members have, as in-
dividuals, taken a highly active
role in protesting United States
policy during the Cuban crisis,
supporting the present Student
Non-Violent Coordinating Com-
mittee food drive, and, now pro-
testing the firing of Prof. Samuel

THE DAILY article stated that
the Socialist Club had undergone
a "long period of inactivity." This
is not true. The former Democrat-
ic Socialists Club presented such
major events on the University
political scene as "Operation
Correction," and Frank Wilkinson
and Carl Braden (which disturbed
speaker ban equilibrium). In ad-
dition, a discussion series with
George Rawick was quite success-
ful. This was not "inactivity"; it
was a different kind of activity.
A final point to clear the air is
that the Socialist Club is not a
"party." It is the Socialist Club.
The Daily headline boomed out the
word "party."
In conclusion, I hope this letter
clears up much of the existing
'confusion, and will rest at ease
the souls of those good Democrats
who envisioned some kind of to-
talitarian coup taking place.
-Michael Brown, '63
President, Socialist Club
Ethics .
To the Editor:
MICHAEL OLINICK'S editorial
on student participation in the
direction of University affairs
could not have been worse-timed.
If he had read his own newspaper
(does anyone in the Student Per-
iodical building ever read what
appears in The Daily?) he would
have understood just why so many
faculty members refuse to take
seriously any such proposals as he
advances.
As one of those "middle-aged,
published academicians" he de-
scribes with such obvious com-
ment (ah, to be young, unpublish-
ed, unacademic and innocent
again!), I should like to say that
it would take a considerable ef-
fort of will on my part to sit down
at the conference table with Mr.
Steven Stockmeyer or nearly any
other of the members of the Stu-
dent Council to discuss University
policy. If what The Daily says of
the ethics of Mr. Stockmeyer is
true, I would be afraid that before
any such conference he might have
made a deal with one of his friends
to take over the whole show and
report directly to the governor.
* * *
SERIOUSLY, though, how can
Mr. Olinick ask us to participate
with students in any such impor-
tant matter as establishing any
part of University policy when the
officers of the chief body of stu-
dent representatives display such

a crude lack of ethics, such a fun-
damental contempt for the basic
processes of human relationship?
If Mr. Olinick wants this faculty
member, for one, to agree to any
such participation, he might be-
gin a c'ampaign to have Mr. Stock-
meyer and his fellow-conspirators
impeached and removed from of-
fice. As long as things remain
where they are, I cling to my idea
that students are best seen in the
classroom and there alone.
-Prof. Robert J. Niess
Prejudice.. .
To the Editor:
MICHAEL HARRAH's latest two
contributions to the editorial
page have been appalling, reflect-
ing prejudice, and if one may be
so bold-stupidity.
In Thursday's article, "NAACP
and School Books," Mr. Harrah
comes forth with the statement,
"How much better it would be for
the NAACP to spend its efforts
improving the Negro race so that
laudatory reference to its mem-
bers would be unavoidable." Notice
first the phrase, "improving the
Negro Race," not improving the
opportunities for advancement of
the Negro Race.
Secondly the phrase "so that
laudatory reference to its mem-
bers would be unavoidable," leaves
the distinct impression that any
derogatory comments made in
textbooks, or indeed anywhere are
deserved and justified. How noble,
Mr. Harrah, with your white face
and easy access to all the goodies
of society, how damnably noble.
FRIDAY'S editorial "No Junket"
is a eulogy to Sen. Allen J. El-
lender of Louisiana, or rather a
defense of his segregationist views
which he propagated in Africa.
Mr. Harrah proudly points out
that the Senator used personal
funds to finance the trip, and he
prepares "detailed reports, often
running into thousands of pages
and taking many hours to pre-
pare." He concludes in the last
paragraph, "Somehow, regardless
of the Senator's views or alleged
remarks . . . He is attempting to
do a good job for his constituents."
I submit that some of his con-
stituents may be the only proud,
admiring bigots, except of course
for Mr. Harrah, who believe that
promoting. world peace depends
upon deprecating people because
of the color of their skin.
-Doris Walsey, '65

SIDELINE ON STUDENT GOVERNMENT:
Council Needs Reform

Eley Exit Hurts Council

THE ANNOUNCEMENT Friday that Demo-
cratic Councilman Lynn W. Eley will not
seek a second term on the Ann Arbor City
Council is a blow to the quality of government
in Ann Arbor. For the last two years, Eley
has been a prod to action and a spokesman
for human need for an otherwise lethargic
council.
One of the only two Democratic council
members, he has sponsored programs that
would move city government out of the limited
role of property-protecting and into the area
of maintaining the welfare of Ann Arbor resi-
dents. Unfortunately, the goals of this ar-
ticulate crusader have been blunted by a
Republican opposition with a limited view of
Council's purpose.
E LEY'SMOST noteworthy fight has con-
cerned fair housing legislation, long needed
by Ann Arbor's discriminated-against Negro
community. He has taken a lead in the efforts
to, get the council to adopt such legislation
by submitting a model ordinance. His persist-
ance, coupled with continued outside pressure,
has brought the ordinance very close to adop-
tion. The proposed legislation has now survived
Mayor Cecil O. Creal's intransigent opposition
and will return to council soon for possible
action. Eley's articulate defense and prodding

Councilman Wendel Hulcher the measure was
revived and passed. When completed, this
survey will help Ann Arbor provide jobs as
its industrial base changes.
Property owners too would have received
help had the City Council passed Eley's pro-
posed city income tax. The measure would have
substituted a small income tax on residents
and non-residents working in Ann Arbor for
a cut in property tax. This far-sighted plan
would have allowed city services to expand
once the property tax base could no longer
support city government.
Very recently, Eley demonstrated his con-
cern for civil liberties by protesting City
Council's temporary approval of an amend-
ment to the disorderly conduct chapter of
the City Code. He submitted the case to the
Washtenaw County chapter of the American
Civil Liberties Union, who will report on the
wisdom and constitutionality of the proposal
tomorrow.
ELEY HAS LEFT City Council to take a 10-
month internship in academic administra-
tion at the University of California. Aside
from being a professor in the political science
department, Eley has served as an admin-
istrator of the TTniversity's Extension Service.

By RICHARD KELLER SIMON
IF STUDENT Government Coun-
cil does not reform itself soon,
some rather important heads may
be rolling along the superheated
corridors of the SAB.
SGC is already worrying. Its
never perfect image did not sur-
vive the recent officer election
debacle very well. At last Wednes-
day's meeting, Council set up a
Public Relations Board "to pro-
mote and enhance understanding
of and interest in" SGC.
Patching up its image will not
be easy. It' might even be easier
for SGC to reform its foundations,
instead of playing around with a
Madison Ave. front. It would also
be much healthier for all con-
cerned.
THE NEED for such reform is
beginning to permeate the minds
of various Council members. If
no internal reform is forthcom-
ing, there will be no external re-
form. And the latter would not
be very gentle.
Graduate Student Council has
already taken the initiative and is
studying possible methods of re-
organizing student government.
The latest officer election politick-
ing is likely to consolidate more
opposition to SGC. At last week's
meeting, a constituent stood up
and warned Council that it was
playing with fire.
The message to Council mem-
bers is quite clear-do something
before the axe falls.
* * *
SOME SGC members are at-
tempting to reform the organiza-
tion. Last week Fred Batlle and
Ken Miller introduced a motion
that would have cleared the way
for a change in Council structure
by removing voting privileges from
ex-officio members.
The reasons for this step are:
-Ex-officios are not democrat-
ically elected.
-They do not necessarily have
a wide knowledge of campus af-
fairs.
-They do not have sufficient
time for Council.
-Their presence tends to limit
nfn n i ,' .,.'.milr 'a .i .p~

WHAT SGC did do with the no-
tion was haggle over it in a com-
mittee - of - the - whole discussion,
with conservatives opposing the
liberal-favored proposal.
The' conservatives have an un-
derstandable reason for opposing
such a change in ex-officio status.
In the past there have always been
more conservative ex-officios than
liberal ones.
Of the seven ex-officios, there
are, currently three liberals and
four conservatives. And this too is
an exceptional year. Usually there
are not as many liberals. From
all appearances, the Michigan Un-
ion, Interquadrangle Council and
Interfraternity Council will be, for
now and forever, conservative. The
Daily, similarly, will be liberal. The
others-the Women's League, Pan-
hellenic Association and Assembly
Association-vaccilate.
The conservatives could very
possibly lose their narrow control
of Council if ex-officio support dis-
appeared. The liberals have every-
thing to gain.
S* s
THE LIBERAL argument for the
ex-officio change is not complete-
ly airtight. Indeed, at some times
the ex-officios participate more
than the elected members. Coun-
cil President Steven Stockmeyer
was quick to point this out.
Hopefully once Council hears
the report from the Committee on
Student Concerns it will begin to
tike action. Action here does not
mean the typical SGC moves of
returning reports to committees
again and again, and postponing
consideration again and again, un-
til the cows come home and it is
95 degrees in the shade.
This current proposal does not
go as far as SGC reform should
go. A group of non-voting ex-of-
'ficios will probably increase the
dead weight on Council, of which
we have more than enough al-
ready.
* * *
BUT IT IS a start, something
which was a long time in coming
The conservatives are afraid of a
completely elected Council, and
this alone hinders any reform in
SGC. They do not want to take

SPORTING CAREER:
Commissioner Nixon

By PETER DiLORENZI
TWO surprising events shocked
the sports world recently, both
involving the "Sporting News,"
known to many readers as "the
baseball paper of the world."
The first, and certainly the more
humorous, if not the more surpris-
ing of the two events, was a front-
page banner headline on the Dec.
15 issue of the Sporting News ask-
ing the American public "Will Dick

stature. He should have sufficient
means so that he doesn't need the
job. This will increase his inde-
pendence."
Richard Nixon, long known for
his honest, sincere, judicial mind
and even more for his faith in and
ability to cooperate with the Amer-
ican press, was mentioned as a
possible contender for the position.
THE SECOND event, apparently