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