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.

January 09, 1963 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1963-01-09

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

Seventy-Third Year
EDrrED 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.
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 9, 1963 NIGHT EDITOR: ELLEN SILVERMAN
Outlook Seems Bright
For Liberals in Congress
WHEN CONGRESS convenes today, the lation to what is produced and that much of
formation of the House Rules Committee the committee's avowed work actually belongs
will be high on the agenda. The question at to other House groups and consequently is a
hand is whether to maintain the present 15 waste of money to the taxpayer.
member committee or reduce membership to 12,
the same number who comprised it prior to CONGRESSMEN probably will not vote
changes made by liberals with the support of against the committee because such an
the administration in the last spssion. action could be taken as voting against the
Not as high on the list by political standards investigation of the internal Communist threat.
but also vitally important to liberals is the Any elected representative would probably
question of the abolition or change in status of destroy his political career if he were to go
the House Committee on Un-American Ac- on record seemingly in denial of the American
tivities. people's right to protect themselves through
Liberal groups are advocating abolition of investigation. This type of action could be
the committee which they claim is not only a taken by critics and used as a political charge
waste of public time, but an organization whose of being "soft on Communism", a catch phrase
methods are contrary to the democratic philo- which easily costs those accused elections in
sophy. If this cannot be accomplished the this country.
liberals hope to change the independent status As an alternative, many of the Congressmen
of the committee and put it under the auspices who are interested in the committee's prac-
of the House Judiciary Committee. tices and fear them, as do the liberal groups
outside Congress, will try to vote to place the
MAINTAINING the Rules Committee seems committee under the House Judiciary Commit-
assured. The liberals, according to Uni- tee auspices so that the latter group could act
versity professors, have an advantage in fight- as a curb to the actions of the former.
ing for the status quo and not against it as There are chances that the liberals will not
they did two years ago. In addition, the sup- even have the chance to put the changes to a
port of the administration, although not vote. Political sources have reported that House
enough to insure' automatically an affirma- Speaker John McCormack will not let the anti-
tive vote is still substantial. HUAC forces speak or present the motions to
Then, too, Republicans who are interested the floor today. Although technically a House
in getting certain legislation through the House can change its rules any time in a session, this
this year will be voting for the retention of the would in fact be the fatal blow for the move
15 member group as they did two years ago until the next session.
in order to have bills that they want at least
brought to the floor. BOTH OF the issues are vital to the liberal
/I'he essential question behind the change is cause; in fighting for both the liberals
whether or not the committee will return to stand to gain much in terms of legislation and
a more conservative outlook which would mean civil rights. It would be far easier for them
hard traveling for bills such as aid to educa- to pass legislation with a 15 member Rules
tion, mass transit, Medicare or urban develop- Committee than without one, and it would be
ment. With a liberal (15 member) committee in line with their basic philosophy if HUAC
these bills will at least come to a vote and could be abolished or curbed.
there the administration can push for passage More than that, the country would gain by
by the more subtle uses of pressures it has at both moves. In the first place legislation such
its command: patronage, influence in govern- as Medicare or aid to education could become
mental contracts and favors owed for past bottled up or never be released by the Rules
actions done to aid one state or its Congress- Committee simply because one or two con-
man. servative Southern Congressmen are against
the bills in question. Congress owes it to the
TIHE SECOND aim of the liberals, and here public to let its elected representatives vote
the term is more confined, since people fa- on the issue; congressional expression should
voring this move are considered more to the not be thwarted by a few men.
"left" than those for the rules change, seems
doomed to failure as the first seems fated to IN THE SECOND place, the HUAC issue is
success. now more than just a liberal battlecry or
Although such prestige organizations as the rallying cause. In its recent investigations of
American Civil Liberties Union, the United Women's .Strike for Peace groups throughout
Auto Workers of the AFL-CIO, the Union of the country HUAC members showed how in-
Hebrew Congregations, the World Fellowship adequately informed they were and why the
and Students for a Democratic Society have investigations were a waste of time and money.
gone on record opposing the committee, Con- The entire affair was a ridiculous show and
gressmen haven't seemed to take much of the nothing was accomplished.
criticism to heart. When a committee declares its intentions
The liberals charge that HUAC "threatens to investigate an organization which is essen-
national security by dividing the nation, setting tially an unorganized group of women who are
neighbor against neighbor, depriving the nation attempting to show their concern for peace,
of the benefits of free discussion, diverting at- the public has the right and duty to complain
tention and energy from the critical world sit- about such activities - especially when it paid
uation to the minuscule domestic Communist $331,000 for HUAC carryings on in one year.
movement, and creating doubt among the Liberals will probably win the first and lose
peoples of the world who look to us for a living the second battle. But the future looks bright-
example of the values of freedom." er for the possible changes in HUAC in the
In addition, the liberals point out that the following sessions.
work which HUAC does is very expensive in re- -ELLEN SILVERMAN
British Accusation Unfair

UNEQUAL APPORTIONMENT
State Democrats Enjoy
Undeserved Advantage

"Just Between You And Me And
The Saturday Evening Post"

EI'

,U'
a3,.
',
I>c

if

Ii,'

e
1
f

*11

Nl

°' ,~

1 11

P-,.

'A c

I

-1wi-
,.

.,'

7

.
R

6~
/

I r

SI

A_ _v is w&aa6 '9o cc t i

a c s

-}

UNIVERSITY SPEAKER POLICY:
'Clear and Present Danger'

By ROBERT SELWA
THE UNIVERSITY devised it,
the Michigan Coordinating
Council on Higher Education en-
dorsed it, and now the state's uni-
versities are adopting it, with its
restrictions on free speech. This
"it" is the new speaker policy, and
before further action is taken, the
policy's relation to the "clear and
present danger" test for free
speech ought to be considered.
Bearing a resemblance to the
Smith Act of 1940, upon which the
Supreme Court has applied the
"clear and present danger" test,
the speaker policy prohibits a vis-
itor from urging an audience to
take action prohibited by the rules
of the University or illegal under
federal or Michigan law. The pol-
icy specifically prohibits the ad-
vocacy or urging of the modifica-
tion of the government of the
United States or of the state of
Michigan by violence or sabotage.
This is similar to but not as re-
strictive as the Smith Act of 1940.
The Smith Act makes it unlawful
to advocate, advise or teach the
duty, necessity, desirability or pro-
priety of overthrowing or destroy-
ing any government in the United
States by force or violence or by
the assassination of any officer of
any such government.
* * *
THE "clear and present danger"
test for free speech was formulat-
ed by Justice Oliver Wendell
Holmes in 1919 in the case of
Schenck vs. United States. Speak-
ing for the Court, Holmes said
that the character of every act of
speech depends upon the circum-
stances in which it is done. He
said "the question in every case is
whether the words used are used
in such circumstances and are of
such nature as to create a clear
and present danger that they will
bring about the substantive evils
that Congress has a right to pre-
vent."
This test has been a corner-
stone. But no sooner had Holmes
formulated the test, than he began
dissenting from its application.
Later that year (1919), in the
Abrams vs. United States case,
Holmes said that the distribution
of leaflets opposing American in-
tervention in Russia did not con-
stitute a threat to the United
States government.
"It is only the present danger
of immediate evil or an intent to
bring it about that warrants Con-
gress in setting a limit to the ex-
pression of opinion where private
rights are concerned," Holmes
wrote. "I think that we should be
eternally vigilant against attempts
to check the expression of opinions
that we loathe and believe to be
fraught with death, unless they
so imminently threaten immediate
interference with the lawful and
pressing purposes of the law that
an immediate check is required to
save the country.
* * *
"ONLY THE emergency that
makes it immediately dangerous
to leave the correction of evil
counsels to time warrants making
any exception to the sweeping
command, 'Congress shall make
no law ... abridging the freedom
of sneh , "

California. Writing for the Court,
Justice Hugo Black said that
"what finally emerges from the
'clear and present danger' cases
is a working principle that the
substantive evil must be extreme-
ly serious and the degree of im-
minence extremely high before ut-
terances can be punished."
* * *
YET THE University's new
speaker policy could be used to
punish student organizations in
the absence of an extremely seri-
ous substantive evil of extremely
great imminence.
In 1950 nine Communist party
leaders were found guilty of vio-
lating the Smith Act. They ap-
pealed to the court of Judge
Learned Hand. He upheld their
convictions under a test that he
formulated: the gravity of the
evil, discounted by its improba-
bility.
This test was upheld by the
Supreme Court in the Dennis et al
vs. United States case of 1951.
Writing for the 6-2 majority,
Chief Justice Fred Vinson formu-
lated the "clear and probable dan-
ger" test. Justice William O.
Douglas dissented, drawing a dis-
tinction between advocacy and
action.
* * *
SIX YEARS later the Court
took up this distinction and af-
firmed it in the case of Yates et al
vs. United States. The 6-1 major-
ity called for the distinction to
be made "between advocacy of
forcible overthrow as an abstract
doctrine and advocacy of action
to that end." Writing for the
Court, Justice John Marshall Har-
lan said:
"The essential distinction is that
those to whom the advocacy is
addressed must be urged to do
something, now or in the future,
rather than merely to believe in
something."
In this way the "clear and pres-
ent danger" test was restored. It
stands today as the Supreme
Court's test for free speech. And
it bears a marked similarity to the
University's new speaker policy.
LUTTERS
to the
EDITOR ....
To the Editor:
A RECENT news item was head-
ed, "Gang's Guns Rip Home of
Meredith." Such an outrage would
appear to qualify as uncivilized as
well as un-American.
It also appears that some south-
ern law enforcement bodies are
singularly inept when it comes to
apprehending criminals guilty of
such acts of violence against law
and order - such actual subver-
sives. Under these circumstances,
one would expect FBI Director
Hoover to be bursting with patri-
otic enthusiasm toward leading
some of his crack crime-busters
into Mississippi.
But possibly Mr. Hoover is so
obsessed with the dangers of po-
tential suhversion that he cannot

Both would permit discussion
of overthrow of the government as
an "abstract doctrine" (the Court's
words) but both would ban advo-
cacy of overthrow of the govern-'
ment as a concrete act. But are
the members of a university com-
munity so susceptible as to be in-
clined to take up arms against the
government when urged to do so
by a visitor?
* * *
DO EMOTION and response -
or logic and reason - govern the
behavior of students and faculty
attending a lecture sponsored by
a student organization? If the
former, then the University is not
the center of reason it is made out
to be, and society might as well
give up trying to produce educated
and reasonable men.
But if the latter is the case, if
logic and reason do govern stu-
dents and faculty, then the new
speaker policy is a disgrace and"
an insult.
It may or may not hold up to
the Court's latest analysis of the
"clear and present danger" test,
but it does not hold up to the
meaning of its author. For Holmes
presented this test not to minimize
free speech, but to maximize it.
* * *
NOR DOES the policy hold up
to the libertarian tradition begun
by Holmes in 1919. Justice Louis
Brandeis was writing in that tra-
dition with the concurrence of
Holmes in the Whitney vs. Cali-
fornia case to provide one of the
best explanations of the "clear
and present danger" test:
"It is the function of speech to
free men from the bondage of ir-
rational fears. To justify suppres-
sion of free speech there must be
reasonable ground to fear that
serious evil will result if free
speech is practiced (and) to be-
lieve that the danger apprehended
is imminent ...
"But even advocacy of violation,
however reprehensible morally, is
not a justification for denying free
speech where the advocacy falls
short of incitement and there is
nothing to indicate that the ad-
vocacy would be immediately act-
ed on. The wide difference be-
tween advocacy and incitement,
between preparation and attempt,
between assembling and conspir-
acy, must be borne in mind. In or-
der to support a finding of a clear
and present danger it must be
shown either that immediate ser-
ious violence was to be expected
or was advocated, or that past
conduct furnished reason to be-
lieve that such advocacy was then
contemplated."
JUDGING by this or any other
intelligent interpretation of the
clear and present danger test, it
cannot be said that the restric-
tions in the speaker policy are
justified. For it cannot be imag-
ined that the students and faculty
of the University are so unsteady
that there is a clear and present
danger that they will try to over-
throw the government, upon be-
ing urged to do so by a visitor
invited by a student organization.
And if this could ever be the
situation in the future, there are
civil authorities to handle urob-

By MICHAEL HARRAH
City Editor
THE OFT-REPEATED claim
that the Legislature is set up to
favor the "farmers and tree
stumps" has gone far enough. It
just isn't so.
And what's more, the charge
that the Republicans are blocking
reapportionment of the State of
Michigan because they would lose
seats is even more ridiculous.
It's high time the Democratic
Wayne County whispering cam-
paign against the Legislature was
stopped. So it must be emphatical-
ly said here and now: Inequality
of apportionment does indeed ex-
ist in the Legislature; Wayne
County has too many representa-
tives.
And what's more the Democrats
in Wayne County have gerryman-
dered the county so that the GOP
holds only two seats, instead of
the six it rightfully deserves.
WHAT'S MORE, this Democrat-
ic Wayne County monopoly,
brought about by shifting popula-
tion, denies seats to other areas
that deserve them: Oakland Coun-
ty, Macomb County, Genesee
County - where new seats would
fall to the Republicans.
This relates directly to the
House of Representatives, where
apportionment is supposed to re-
flect population, yet clearly does
not. The Constitution provides
that each House district as nearly
as possible shall comprise an equal
number of residents. It also pro-
vides for a moiety clause, which
allows fractional areas to have a
single representative. It was ap-
proved by referendum in 1952.
Thus, according to the Consti-
tution, each district should have
roughly 78,000 constituents. Let's
look at the realities:
* * *
IN WAYNE County, such Dem-
ocratic strongholds as the City of
Hamtramck gets one representa-
tive for only 34,137 people; the
16th wardnhas three representa-
tives - each serving only 51,093
people; the City of Highland Park
gets one representative for 38,063
people, the combined 3rd and 5th
wards have two representatives
serving 37,695.
These totals are considerably
below the median.
On the other hand, in areas of
Wayne County where the GOP has
shown strength, each representa-
tive has a fantastic number of
constituents: The 21st district,
which comprises the outlying
townships, has one representative
for 188,478 people (a Republican
holds this seat), the 2nd ward
has 346,989 people and only four
representatives - one for every
80,000 people granted, but the
ward is carefully gerrymandered
to preclude any GOP victories
from cropping up.
What's more Wayne County it-
self presently enjoys the services
of 38 representatives, while ac-
cording to the Constitution it de-
serves only 34. And the Cities of
Detroit, Hamtramck, and High-
land Park have 32 of the 38 rep-
resentatives, each representing an
average constituency of 54,446
people, considerably below the
median. It is more than a coinci-
dence too that the over-represent-
ed Cities of Detroit, Hamtramck,
and Highland Park are solidly
Democratic, while the vastly un-
der-represented outlying cities
and townships in Wayne County
tend to be marginal or lean to the
Republicans.
In addition this four too many
seats in Wayne County causes
even more severe under-represen-
tation in the surrounding counties.
* * *
IN NEIGHBORING Oakland
County, for instance, there are
six representatives each with an
average constituency of 115,097
people. In Macomb County, three
representatives have an average
constituency of 135,268 people.
Oakland deserves three more reps
resentatives, Macomb two, And
once again it is more than a coin-

cidence that the new representa-
tives would probably be Republi-
cans.
Analysis destroys the myth that
the outstate districts are over-
represented. The average outstate
constituency has 71,635 people, a
figure close to the median. Most of
the actual figures hover close to
this average. The only deviation
comes in the Upper, Peninsula:
Gogebic District: 34,954 people;
Houghton District, 38,071 people;
Iron District: 42,538 people; Me-
nominee District: 48,634 people.

And once again we must note that
these seats are held, not by the
GOP. but by the Democrats.
In fact, were the House of Rep-
resentatives apportioned properly,
the Democrats would stand to lose
seven to 10 seats they presently
hold to the Republicans.
IN TRUTH, however, these fig-
ures seem to contradict what we
know about Michigan. The elec-
torate consistently elects Demo-
crats to state-wide offices, a fact
which has led political observers
to claim that the Legislature,
elected on a district basis, was
poorly apportioned. However, this
reasoning does not reckon with
the provincial nature of outstate
Michigan. In the outlying coun-
ties, long considered Republican
strongholds, the GOP is exper-
iencing a stubborn rebellion on the
part of the local electorate.
The Republican State Central
Committee, effectivel:- dominated
by Wayne-Oakland-Washtenaw
coalition, has long ignored the
outstate counties. The outstate
electorate, fed up with having to
vote for Wayne County-picked
candidates, rebelled, simply refus-
ing to vote for them. But being
good Republicans they couldn't
vote for the Democratic state tick-
et. The result was simply that they
didn't vote for state candidates.
The election statistics don't lie.
In Berrien County, one of the
strongest GOP bastions in the
state, George Romney trailed the
local and legislative candidates.
He ran thousands of votes behind
Sheriff Henry Griese, Sen. Harry
Litowich (R-Benton Harbor) and
Rep. Gail Handy (R-Eau Claire).
True, he still carried Berrien
County, but then it takes a lot of
Democratic votes to even come
close to beating a Republican in
Berrien County.
YET, WHEN you spread this
refusal to vote for state candidates
across the 78 outstate counties, it
just usually amounts to enough
votes (or lack of them) to defeat
the GOP slate, since Democrats
instate do not withhold their votes
from the Democratic state slate in
this manner.
Thus, at last, the picture be-
comes clear. Michigan is in fact
still a Republican state, as is dem-
onstrated by its voting in the local
elections. But a peculiar internal
battle within the ranks of the
state GO has sufficiently split
the party for 14 years to allow
the Democrats victory.
If state Republicans can ever
heal this rift, and prospects of
such are quite dim at this point,
Michigan would quickly return to
the Republican fold.
In the meantime, however, the
Legislature is the only true pic-
ture of Michigan's political sen-
timents. Unfortunately, it is bad-
ly gerrymandered, as we have
seen, to favor the Democrats in
areas which have been steadily
losing population, and to discrim-
inate against the Republicans in
areas which have been gaining
population.
The Democrats are blocking re-
apportionment in Michigan; their
effectiveness as a political force
in Michigan depends on it. They
don't dare let go.
All at Once
"WE SE OUR Western Chris-
tian culture reduced almost
to the point of utter idiocy, as
paintings made by the tails of
donkeys, or by gorillas or by naked
women crawling over canvasses
coated with warm chocolate win
art prizes, as pornography and un-
speakable language win literary
prizes, as homosexuality becomes
so 'normal' the queers now have a
regular lobby, "The Matachine"
society in Washington pushing to
popularize sodomy, music has be-
come the orgiastic thumping of
jungle cannibals, our youth be-

come utterly disgusted with hy-
pocrisy and lack of leadership of
the Judeo-democratic Marxist
world that they go about with/
knives and clubs physically and
senselessly attacking people for
'kicks' - and all the rest of the
nightmarish picture of what has
happened to the world which once
boasted Pax Britannia, Shakes-
peare (sic), Bach, Benjamin
Franklin, Washington and a very
real CULTURE.
Commander,
-George Lincoln Rockwell
American Nazi Party

THE UNITED States is sitting with another
crisis in its lap, this time through no fault
of its own.
The United Nations action in the Congo,
which has been the subject of much contro-
versy since its instigation, is being blamed al-
most entirely on the United States. The British
newspapers of late have criticized the United
States for "sanctioning" the action in the
Congo taken by the United Nations as a body.
Recently, one of the British newspapers de-
nounced the "Kennedy-UN action regarding
the province of Katanga", stating that it was
that paper's belief that the entire situation in
the Congo wvould be a lot better off if Ken-
nedy and the United Nations would behave
differently.
Now, the British newspapers are certainly
entitled to their opinions about the current
crises as are all other newspapers, magazines
and news sources in the world. But, when a
newspaper blames on one nation the action
for which an entire body of more than 100

members is responsible, it is time someone
called it to the attention of these sources.
THE BRITISH newspapers, although they
are not alone in their unjustified criticism
of Kennedy in the Congo crisis, are hollering
the loudest, longest, and most inanely. Other
European news sources have criticized Kennedy
for not taking some sort of action to keep the
peace in the Congo, if any peace has existed
since it received its independence. But none has
been so vehement in denouncing Kennedy for
his action; it has been his inaction that the
other newspapers have been concerned with.
While the British government has made no
such official accusations, neither has it made
any attempt to correct any possible miscon-
ception which may have arisen as a result of
the press attack.
Britain, as is usually the case, has its own
personal national interests in mind when it
makes such severe criticisms. Britain did not
sanction, either in the United Nations or else-
where, the current military action in the Congo,
and yet it is forced to pay for the maintenance
of the troops in that trouble spot. It feels that
its toes have been stepped on.
In some ways Britain may have a valid argu-
ment. It has often been suggested by many
countries in the United Nations that only those
countries who vote for engaging in such mili-
tary action as the current situation in the Con-
go represents should be assessed for the execu-
tion of that decision. Britain has always been
in the forefront when it came to arguing for
this point of view.
But, whether or not Britain and its asso-
ciates in advocating this change have a valid
point or not, they are definitely going about
rectifying any injustice that could conceivably

FRENCH BARITONE:
Souzay%, Charms A udience

5

Editorial Staff

MICHAEL OLINICK, Editor
JUDITH OPPENHEIM MICHAEL HARRAH
Editorial Director City Editor
CAROLINE DOW................. Personnel Director
JUDITH BLEIER...............Associate City Editor
FRED RUSSELL KRAMER .. Assoc. Editorial Director
CYNTHIA NEU................... Co-Magazine Editor
HARRY PERLSTADT ............. Co-Magazine Editor
TOM WEBBER..... .................. .. Sports Editor
DAVE ANDREWS .............Associate Sports Editor
JAN WINKLEMAN ............ Associate Sports Editor
BusinessStd#

PERFORMING in Ann Arbor for
the first but hopefully not the
last time, French baritone
Souzay last night entertained a
warmly appreciative Hill Aud.
audience. Accompanied by pianist
Dalton Baldwin, Souzay sang airs
and ballads of Lully, Schubert,
Debussy and Richard Strauss.
Unfortunately, Souzay started
off -the evening nervously, often
sloppily sliding into notes instead
of hitting them on the mark and
competing with a Diano that was

Souzay's high point in the first
part of the program came with
Schubert's "Du bist die Ruh," a
very simple, moody and, there-
fore, easily overdone song. With
the help of a stronger vibrato on
the higher notes-and Souzay
hardly used much vibrato any-
where else in his singing-the bar-
itone beautifully performed this
difficult selection.
HOWEVER, Souzay excelled wth
nehnsv _Beca he i het at

Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan