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.

April 17, 1971 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1971-04-17

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

i

420 Mayna

[ 'w 33~i Pat
Eighty years of editorial freedom
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan

why then thCis restlessness?
Remembrances of things past

rd St., Ann Arbor, Mich

News Phone: 764-0552

Eitoridls printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.

SATURDAY, APRIL 17, 1971

NIGHT EDITOR: MARK DILLEN

The'U' judicial system

THE PASSAGE of the new University
judiciary system by the Regents yes-
terday should be greeted with cautious
optimism by the University community,
for, although, .the system is far from
perfect, it is a substantial step in the
right direction.
The judiciary, formulated by a com-
bination of faculty, student and admin-
istrative representatives, has many ad-
vantages over the present system of the
controversial Regents- interim . discipli-
nary rules. Perhaps the most basic dif-
ference is that the new system allows for
a jury of the defendants' peers, plus a
panel of three, judges-one lawyer, one
student, and one faculty member-to hear
the case.
HE INTERIM rules procedure allows
adjudication of cases solely by a hear-
ing officer appointed by the president of
the University, scarcely an impartial of-
ficial in cases brought by the University
against a student. In fact this "'impar-
tiality" proved, a pretense the first time
the interim rules were employed. For on
Wednesday John Eustis was declared
guilty of violating two of .the three rules
invoked against him, in blatant conflict
with the evidence presented.
"" ,'or example, Russell Downing, the Uni-
versity s e c u r i t y officer who brought
charges against Eustis based his com-
plaint on an incident in which Downing
accused E'stis of..grabbing his (Down-
ing's) hat and hitting him with it. But
five witnesses .called by Eustis' attorney
Denny Hayes testified that they were
standing near Eustis at the time of the
alleged incident and did not see Eustis
grab the hat.
In his ruling, though, former state Su-
preme Court Justice Theodore Souris, who
was :hearing the case, rejected the testi-
inony of' these witnesses as "contradic-
'tory," precisely as Peter Forsythe, the
University lawyer for Downing, had asked
in his closing statement.
And the disturbing thing about this
choice of whose testimony would be ac-
oepted and whose would be rejected was
that it appeared to be made on the basis
of the poitics of the witness. The testi-
mony of radicals was uniformly called
contradictory, while that of University
officials was, strangely enough, accepted
as stated.
.Perhaps a jury of Eustis'. peers would
have 'judged differently. But this basic
right to trial by jury of peers is clearly
defied by the rules-while, on the other
hand, the new judicial system guarantees
this right.
indeed, the further definition of "peers"
to nean a jury of randomly selected stu-
dents, if the defendant is a student, and
randomly-selected faculty members, if
the defendant is a faculty member, adds
to the fairness of the new system.
ANOTHER IMPORTANT facet of the
new judiciary is that is establishes a
University Court of' Appeals which will
be composed of six students and six fac-
ulty members Under the present sys-
tem, the only appeal to the interim rules
is to the Regents.
Appealing of the Regents a conviction
of violating rules which the Regents
themselves set up seems by definition a
hopeless case. In a case in which the
University challenges a student, appeal-
ing the case to the University's govern-
ing body is a contradiction in itself. The
new Court of Appeals, by its even stu-
dent-faculty split, will be a far more rep-
resentative, and, hopefully, unbiased body
for appeal.

Still another important aspect of the
new judiciary system is that it will apply
not only to students, but to faculty and
administration as well, as opposed to the
interimr ules; which can be invoked only
against students.
The new systeri,.therefore, provides for
a more uniform application of University
rules, ani 'ess possibility .of using them
as poiltical weapons against students.
THE JUDICIARY functions in conjunc-
tion with the Rules for the University'
Community, which are being slowly but
surely finalized by University Council, a
student - faculty - administration commit-
tee.
The University Council rules and the
University jud cary, once finalized, will

it has jurisdiction. Hopefully, the Regents
will then approve the system on a per-
manent basis. However, before that time
comes, there are many facets of the new
system that will have to be dealt with.
FIRST OF ALL, until the University
Council rules are finalized and ap-
proved, the new judiciary system will be
technically used to enforce the interim
disciplinary rules still in effect.
These rules forbid the "use of force or
violence against any member or guest of
the University community; interference
by force, threat or duress, with the free-
dom of movement of any member or guest
of the University; disruption or unauth-
orized interruption of a class; disruption
or interruption of a duly authorized Uni-
versity activity; . . . continued occupa-
tion of a University facility after being
ordered to leave by the President or his
agent; and defacement, damage to or
theft of University property."
Sanctions stipulated in the interim
rules range from warning to expulsion.
The interim rules, even 'when admin-
istered under the new judiciary system,
are unacceptable, especially when con-
trasted to drafts'of the University Coun-
cil rules. Such drafts include more spe-
cific descriptions of prohibited acts,
rather than leaving the power of sanc-
tion totally to the judiciary, as the in-
terim rules do.
For example, one of the most contro-
versial of the interim rules is the rule
which forbids occupation of a building
after a president's warning, thereby au-
thorizing the president as sole judge of
whether occupation is legal or not. One
of the drafts of the University Council
rules, in contrast, specified that the oc-
cupation must "create a substantial risk
of interference with a significant Uni-
versity function . . . " although this clause
is still being debated.
In the interim rules, building occupa-
tion can be punished with anything from
'warning to expulsion, whereby in the
present. University Council rules draft,
sanctions are specified at warning, cen-
sure, fine not to exceed $50.00 and work
assignment.
THE UNIVERSITY Council rules hope-
fully will be finalized within the next
few months, completing the improved ju-
dicial system, and replacing the interim
rules, at least for a year.
However, even when the representative
judiciary system is completed, several
problems in its structure remain. This
judiciary was a compromise, with the Re-
gents having the final sy, and as such,
it still has unsatisfactory areas.
According to the new system, jury trials
will be presided over by a lawyer from
outside the University community along
with one student and one faculty asso-
ciate judge.
The plan the Regents approved allows
for the presiding judge alone to decide
questions of law, with only rulings of
decorum to be made by a majority vote of
the three judges. This is in contrast to
the student-faculty-administration com-
mittee's proposal, which would have the
panel decide all such rulings by a major-
ity vote.
The acceptance of the regental deci-
sion on this aspect of the judiciary is
disappointing, for it gives too much po-
tential power to the outside judge in what
s h o u 1 d be a predominantly internal
system.
ANOTHER FLAW in the s y s t e m
is the regental plan for selec-
tion of officers for the judiciary, which
was approved, again, instead of the com-

mittee's plan.
The Regents' plan, basically, calls for
officers of the system to be selected by
the Regents after prior approval of a
slate of double the number of vacancies
by Student Government Council and Sen-
ate Assembly.
The committee's plan suggested that
interviewing boards propose a slate equal
to the number of vacancies and the slate
would then be approved or rejected by
SGC, Senate Assembly, and the Regents.
The committee's plan is obviously less
cumbersome, and gives a more equal say
in the choice of officers than does the
regental plan.

OUR YEARS ago, there were
three rooms to the cafeteria
in the basement of the Union. And
for a wandering freshman search-
ing for the keys to the magical
"university life" he had read about
in magazines, the three rooms of-
fered a glimpse at the spectrum
of alternative styles waiting for
him, as well as the only ten cent
scoop of ice-cream on campus.
For behind the hallway with its
cluttered bulletin board and the
soft Muzak coming from the ceil-
ing, the three rooms of the MUG
were a temporary respite from the
confusion outside. And while the
MUG could be seen as a whole,
each room had its own character.
THE FIRST ROOM, near the
side door, was dimly lit and filled
with orange imitation - leather
booths. It oozed with privacy and
served as a congregating place for
the few blacks and freaks at the
University then.
The second, much brighter and
decorated in the fashion of an of-
fice cafeteria was usually filled
with students reading newspapers
or homework assignments as they
munched and sipped their meals.
It was a place to talk politics, of
the classroom or the nation-an
informal extension of Mason Hall.
And the third room was more or
less a spillover for the first two.
Of course there were some who im-
mediately gravitated to the third
room. Its immense round wcgden
tables were ideal for a professor
who felt stifled by the drabness of
a classroom. And its walls, paneled
with varnishedroak,tprovided a
quiet recluse from the bustle of
the University campus.
SO IF you came to the MUG at
the height of lunch hour, bought
your food in the cafeteria of the
first room but couldn't find a cushy
booth or a trim table, the only re-
course was to carry your tray to
the third room and find a seat
among the relics of the Univer-
sity's past.
For the walls and tables are in-
deed relics. Carefully preserved
under coats of varnish, their sur-
faces bear the marks of an earlier
era. The boards proudly display the

carvings of fraternities and clubs
of an older generation. Occasional-
ly the "scores" of a victorious foot-
ball season would be skillfully
etched into the wood, saving the
glory of old moments for posterity.
The tables are also covered with
carving, though generally less ela-
borate than the walls. In a mo-
ment of inspiration, a student'
would boldly chisel his initials and
class year on the surface. For in-
stance, H.B. '41 lies near the edge
of one table.
Sitting in the third room of the
MUG at my favorite old table, I
have often wondered who H.B. '41
was. The letters on the table of-
fered no clue, they were hardly
different than a hundred other
initials close by.
I could only speculate on H.B.'s
identity. What name those letters
stood for and what kind of a per-
son actually was are still a mys-
tery to me. In any event, unlike
some students who have passed
through the University in the past
thirty years-to become statistics
on alumni files-H.B. can rest as-
sured his mark will probably re-
main, at least as long as there is
a cafeteria in the Union.
which is more than most of us
can ever say.

FOR IT IS much easier to stay
anonymous at the University than
to leave your unique mark. Most
of us come to the University, spernd
four formative years here and
walk out with a lot of memories,
a degree, and if we are lucky, a
few cherished friendships.
On the other hand, the University
takes from us its identity. Like a
huge, impersonal bus lumbering
down a highway of time the Univer-
sity is a vehicle which responds
to the touch of its drivers and the
emotions of its passengers without
actually fusing with any of its
fellow travelers.
Since its soul is always chang-
ing, the University is in a sense a
reflection of ourselves, its image
corresponding to the collective
identity of its "passengers."
But in another sense, the Uni-
versity maintains a presence and
a continuity which extend beyond
any individual or group which
make up its community at any
given moment. Like the bus on its
trip, the University shelters a
complex set of social interreactions
within its walls though to those on
the outside it appears as a unified
whole.
Somehow the University as an
institution has a life of its own

and a posture which rests on tra-
ditions more deeply entrenched
than the moods of the moment.
And those of us who agree to come
on board fall under the influence
of this presence, our actions be-
coming filtered through an insti-
tutional lens outside of ourselves
before they reach our own con-
sciousness.
And even as we change, and in
turn seek to change the nature of
the institution, perhaps the scope
of our thinking lies within the
realm of the style of life we en-
counter as we arrive in Ann Arbor.
For in coming to Ann Arbor, we
accept many assumptions which
are implicit in the concept of a
"university community." We ac-
cept the concept of an academic
community dedicated to certain
social goals: we accept the idea of
a university community as the
proper environment for "educa-
tion" and learning to take place. So
if we rebel, it is not against these
underlying assumptions but rather
because of our dissatisfaction with
how they are being carried out.
Certainly, however, qualitative
changes have come about and the
University as an institution and a
community is tremendously dif-

ferent from what existed here four
years ago. From the ivy-covered
school considered the best frater-
nity campus in the nation in 1968,
to our current image as a counter-
cultural island awash in a sea of
provincialism, we have ridden the
waves of change to a shore few
could predict or even imagine a
short time ago.
WHEN I ARRIVED at the'Uni-
versity in 1967 it was lily-white in
every sense of the word. There
were dress codes in the dorms,
women had a twelve o'clock cur-
few and Harlan Hatcher's idea of
meeting students was to let them
visit his house three times a year
for tea.
Looking back, it is difficult to
comprehend the scope of what has
happened during such a short
period of time. The multitudes of
issues brought before our eyes
boggles the imagination. And two
of them-the War in Vietnami and
the Black Action Movement-have
been responsible for such incredi-
ble changes in consciousness that
their full effects have not yet be-
gun to be felt.
It would be easy for an observer
to believe that a political and cul-
tural revolution had taken place
were it not for the deep ties which
bind this University to its past. For
though two of the rooms in the
MUG are no longer around, the
styles of life they represented stil
flourish. Moreover, most students
still enjoy the anonymity of ;living
in a large university community.
Perhaps it is appropriate that the
surviving room in the MUG is the
one most steeped in tradition and
most tied to the past. For.tle para-
dox of all that has occurred is that
we, the changers, are the tran-
sients in Ann Arbor. When our trip
is finished we step off the bus,
perhaps leaving it transformed And
perhaps transforming it as we
leave, but assuredly departing as
contributors to an old institution
rather than creators of a new one.
SO WHILE our "mark" on the
University may seem unrelated to
H.B.'s scratches on the table, I
wonder how we will be remember-
ed in another thirty years.

i

Letters to The. Daly

The virtues of

wr

LSA faculty
To The Daily:
AT THE RECENT governing
faculty meeting of the literary col-
lege, the faculty displayed be-
havior that was completely anti-
thetical to the pursuit of an open,
free, and enquiring intellectual
community. The Governance
Committee of students, after
working for almost a year in end-
less hours of debate and discus-
sion of major questions facing the
college, finally decided that they
could not come to one committee
position, but that they had a
responsibility to present the dif-
ferent ideas and models that they
had formulated as a result of their
work for consideration by t h e
Governing Faculty.
The faculty at least owed the
members of this committee t h e
respect and consideration to dis-
cuss at length the major issues
brought to light by those propos-
als. But this is not what happen-
ed. These men, "experts on higher
education devoted to the better-
ment of their professional goals,"
could not see fit to sit still for
more than two hours to discuss a
major issue that has been around
in the form of mailings and dis-
cussions among colleagues for
eight months.,
The attempts by certain faculty
to railroad through a substitute
proposal from the very beginning
of the open discussion were nega-
tive in approach and spirit, and
completely lacking in courtesy to
the members of the Governance
Committee only two of whom were
allowed to speak in discussion af-
ter the opening presentation. The
fact that there was bare a quor-
um for this important meeting,
and that many of the professors
did not have copies of the pro-
posals (available at the door and
mailed to them several times) in-
dicates the nature of responsibil-
ity in the traditional unrepresen-
tative faculty meeting.
The Ad Bd.'s recently-disclosed
decision to refuse registration to
100 students for next fall is ano-
ther' poignant example of t h i s
brand of vacuum decision-mak-
ing. Early last semester under the
pressure of increasing numbers of
applicants and closed courses and
the dubious argument that I e s s
ninth semester students would al-
leviate these problems significant-
ly. the members of the Ad. Board
adopted this policy in a rather
haphazard fashion.
They never got final approval
by the Executive Committee which

til the sudden announcement to
the students concerned.
Certainly there are other meas-
sures, as Prof. Mendel's r e c e n t
letter indicated, that would be far
more fair to those already in the
collegeaand which would face
more honestly the larger questions
of the need to use the resources
of the college more efficiently.
What can be done to improve
this ghastly situation of inepti-
tude and neglect of the basic wel-
fare of students and the academic
community as a whole that exists
as a result of this decision-mak-
ing structure? In the specific
problem of Governance, we re-
commend that, at the currently
scheduled special meeting of the
Governing Faculty, on Tuesday,
the professors entrusted with the
running of this college exercise
their responsibility and consider
again the two proposals on their
merits. allow a full dialogue be-
tween the members of the Gov-
ernance Committee and t h e m -
selves (as occurred at the o p e n
hearings), and that they take the
time and energy to consider and
think before they rule. It would be
difficult at best to work with any
proposal decided upon by the fa-
culty in such an undiplomatic and
negative fashion as occurred at the
last meeting. We would further
urge that if Proposal I is still too
great a change for the Faculty
to accept (although we feel that
it is the best one by far), that Pro-
posal II be accepted without
amendment. This is important be-
cause its size is necesary to pre-
vent its recommendations f r o m
receiving the same ill-considered
treatment that the Governance
Committee is now receiving.
In the specific situation of the
8 term limit we strongly urge

that this decision be revoked by
the Executive Committee, b o t h
because of its doubtful substan-
tive contributions to the real prob-
lems of resource allocation, and
the underhanded and undemo-
cratic manner in which it was
established and sprung on those
unsuspecting students.
-The members of the LSA
Student Government
Selective service
To The Daily:
WE ARE THE parents of a
member of the freshman class and
we are writing in reference to the
revision of the Selective S e r v i c e
Act.
We are opposed to the provision
just approved by the House of Re-
presentatives, and now under con-
sideration by the Senate, which
permits the President to abolish
student deferments . . . retroac-
tively to April 23, 1970. The stu-
dents who are now college fresh-
men will be the first students since
World War II to have their edu-
cation interrupted. In the present
situation this seems unwarranted
. . . for it comes at a time when
the draft is being phased out and
the administration's goal is zero
draft by 1973. The terrible irony
is that the students who are now
college freshmen will be the only
class to be affected.
To abolish any student defer-
ments is punitive, but to abolish
them retroactively is reprehensi-
ble. No other deferments have
ever been abolished retroactively.
Bombard President Nixon with
letters and telegrams. We must
eliminate the retroactive aspect of
the new Selective Service Act.
-Mr. & Mrs. Herbert Gross
April 5

protests revitewed
The following article represents the position of the Ann Arbor Student
Mobilization Committee.
FOR SOME TIME now the strategy of mass mobilization has been dis-
missed as, at best, outdated and at worst hopelessly ineffective. This
view is especially prevalent on college campuses across the nation where
the Student Mobilization Committee has been given scornful glances by
many radicals and pleasantly cynical shrugs by veteran marchers. Yet,
we feel this view to be mistaken.
The antiwar movement is not dead. A recent Harris poll indicates
that a majority of the American people think the war is morally wrong
and that 61 per cent want all the troops out by the end of 1971 or before.
This sentiment can and will be mobilized in coming months through a
variety of antiwar actions.
PERHAPS IN 1967, at the time of the March on the Pentagon, we
really did feel that we could take the screws out of the war machine with
one massive outpouring of antiwar sentiment. So we rallied, marched
and surrounded the head of the monster.

But the Pentagon did not fall apart, much less-for those who were
looking-the entire oppressive government apparatus. Some of us got
gassed, many of us had fun. But none of us could truthfully say'that the
war machine had been dismantled.
But we kept on marching. And we kept on feeling more and more
helpless and more and more engaged in a futile action. Until finally, in
1969, in the largest demonstration that the capital had ever seen, they
told us 'that Nixon was watching the football game while gas floated
down Pennsylvania Ave.

0 1

ago ~

THE POINT can =be belabored. Nonetheless, it raises important
questions.
First of all, it has been naive and presumptuous of us to think that
a few demonstrations each involving several hundred thousand people
were going to end the war. It is an affront to the millions of people in
Southeast Asia who have died in what is at least a 20 year struggle for
liberation.
Secondly, at this point mass marches are 'not going to end the war.
But we never should have operated on that assumption. It was the ac-
ceptance of that premise which led to subsequent disillusionment. The
war is going to end literally when Mr. Nixon, or any other man speaking
for vicious and powerful economic and political interests is forced to
withdraw by what may amount to overwhelming military pressure ex-
erted on this country's and South Vietnam's fighting forces by Southeast
Asian liberation forces; and when the broad sectors of the American peo- w
ple refuses to support the war and its debilitating economic effects'.
All this does not, however, mean demonstrations do not have an
immediate effect.
MASSIVE SHOWS of opposition to the war are appreciated by Indo-
chinese liberation forces. Nixon's military options are limited to an
intensive bombing of the North, a massive invasion of that area or the 4
use of tactical nuclear weapons to create a radioactive barrier across
the Demilitarized Zone. It is in great part due to the visible antiwar
sentiment that mass demonstrations have embodied that he has not
made use of these options. We must once again make sure they are not
used.
Massive demonstrations also show Americans that there is opposi-
tion to the war. For the unaware, the marches confront them with the t
reality of moral dissent to this country's foreign policies. For the waver-
ing it gives them more conviction. And for the committed, it not only
proves that this nation is not morally bankrupt but it justifies their
further efforts to build a just society.

Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan