FOUR
THE MICHIGAN DAILY
FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 29, 1952
m
I 1
FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 29, 1952
God & Man at Michigan
rAT incomparable wit, Christopher Mor-
ley said it-"If you can make people
think they think, then they'll love you- but
if you actually make them think, they'll
hate you."
After a reading of William F. Buckley's
"God and Man at Yale," it's rather diffi-
cult to take a liking to the author, pre-
cisely:x presume, because he does make
one t. nk. But the rebel Eli's. violently
controversial book deserves the attention
of everyone concerned with American
higher education.
Without claiming to do justice to Mr.
Buckley's viewpoint, the following summar-
izes his astonishing case:
In his book, Mr. Buckley censures the
state of education at Yale, avows that it is
failing to inculcate the values of Christi-
anity, individualism, and free enterprise,
and decries the teaching of socialism, Key-
nesian economics, collectivism, atheism and
agnosticism.
Arguing that Yale's faculty is channel-
ing its instruction toward more and more
reliance on the state, Mr. Buckley deplores
the "shield of academic freedom" behind
which Yale professors take their sharp
digs at Religion and Individualism .,.
and then scurry for protection. He points
to the "insidious paradox" in which Yale
alumni send their children to the univer-
sity only to receive them back indoctrinat-
ed with ideas which run counter to the
beliefs of their fathers.
Mr. Buckley's solution-force the faculty
to conform to the beliefs of the alumni. If
they refuse, get rid of them!
Aside from the casuistry exhibited in Mr.
Buckley's polemics (his book has brought
a torrent of criticism from liberals and con-
servatives alike), there is evidence of gross
exaggeration and preconceived malice in
"God and Man at Yale." These have been
dealt with extensively by his critics and need
no further elaboration.
* * *
THE significant point, however, is that
Mr. Buckley claims that the anti-
individualist, anti-religious sentiment exists
to a far greater extent at "other universi-
ties."
No one will deny that such a sentiment
-in some degree-exists at the University
of Michigan. To be sure, it exists in vary-
ing degrees on any campus in the country,
in any community, indeed, even in the
higher echelons of some Chambers of
Commerce.
At any rate, it seems that such "non-
conformity" is an expression of the virility
of democracy as it appears here at the Uni-
versity. It would indeed be difficult to stamp
out.
Again, the implication that this Univer-
sity, among others, is involved in a cal-
culated conspiracy to wipe out Christianity
and Individualism and to champion the
cause of socialism and atheism is a reduc-
tion to absurdity.
True, the student comes in contact with
a wide variety of courses directly and in-
directly. He is exposed to a variety of think-
ers: 'Plato, Lucretius, Descartes, Epicurus,
Kant, Hegel, Jefferson, Paine, Madison,
Nietzche, Adam Smith, James, Marx, Dewey,
Russell, Shaw, Schweitzer, Fosdick, the New
Dealers, the Free Enterprisers, and num-
erous others representing views varying in
shades from Alcibiades to Einstein.
He may come across the crude Freud-
ian theory of the origin of religion, in
which case the Oedipus Complex plays the
determinant role. He may be introduced
to the dialectic materialism of Marx and
Engels. He may stand horrified at the
thought that "morality is the chain that
binds the strong to the weak."
But through it all, he is constantly re-
minded of the values of the culture sur-
rounding him-that is, religion, democracy,
and individualism. Though shaken by the
intellectual friction of the University, by
the time he graduates, the student is well
aware of the values of his own society, and
is more thoroughly equipped to defend these
values, or, depending on the individual,
imbued with a zeal to improve on the status
quo as he sees it. Either attitude is healthy
enough.
* * *
AND it is quite apparent that the subjects
confronted by the students are, by and
large, being taught with an optimum of
objectivity and impartiality. In my two
years at the' University, I personally have
never encountered the humiliating experi-
ence of having an instructor jack-hammer
his own personal bias through the collec-
tive class noggin. And even if he had tried,
it most assuredly would have backfired and
some indignant would have risen to the
occasion of rebuttal.
. Students can think for themselves, and
popular opinion to the contrary, are not
prone to swallow the "world's latest fairy
tales." (Buckley neglects this point
throughout his book.)
When I think of myself entering the
University as a confirmed Baptist, a pro-
fessed 'liberal', and a convinced 'democrat'
and about to graduate with the same basic
philosophy, the "Great Conspiracy" seems to
evaporate into a crackpot myth. Otherwise,
I presume I would now be howling to the
skyscrapers from a sequestered nook in
Union Square. Perhaps I owe an apology
to someone for still believing in God.
The University does not confine its faculty
within narrow intellectual limits; it doesj
not make them conform to arbitrary be-
liefs; it does not attempt to mold Billy
Grahams and mercantilists out of its faculty.
members. The result is-academic freedom,
free discussion, and the fertile interplay of
ideas.
Any attempt to impose conformity would
be ridiculous, unhealthy, undemocratic, and
unnecessary. As a point of fact, there doesn't
seem to be any ulcers forming as yet.
To dispense with Buckley, his concern
over the increase of state power is valid,
but it should be pointed out that con-
formity imposed arbitrarily from the bot-
tom is as deadly to democracy as con-
formity imposed from the top by a totali-.
tarian state.
It is as, a safeguard against both kinds
of conformity that the modern university
stands. As long as the arteries of the univer-
sity continue to circulate a variety of ideas,
Americans can look forward optimistically
to the future.
-Cal Samra
MATTER OF FACT
By JOSFH and STEWART ALSOP
WASHINGTON-A test of the sincerity of
those in the Congress who have been
bellowing most self-righteously about gov-
ernment corruptiop should soon be provided.
For Newbold Morris, President Truman's
new corruption investigator, whom nobody
has taken very seriously as yet, is about
ready to come up with a program for deal-
ing with corruption as serious, far-reaching,
and politically explosive as could well be
imagined. Morris has, moreover, the full
backing of Truman. And it will be instruc-
tive, and perhaps even rather amusing, to
see the reaction in Congress to the Morris
program.
A lot of people, both in the Congress
and in the Executive branch, have hoped
that Morris would quietly ensconce him-
self in a suite at the Justice Department;
read such reports as were made available
to hin; write an innocuous essay on cor-
ruption; and then quietly fade away. Mor-
ris has now made it abundantly clear that
he means to do nothing of the sort.
In the first place, Morris has signified his
desire to be taken out from under the pro-
tective wing of Attorney General McGrath
so that he can operate entirely independent-
ly, reporting directly to President Truman.
On these points, Truman has given Morris
complete support. Morris has been promised
plenty of office space outside the Justice
Department, and a staff of 150 or so, and
more than half a million dollars from the
Presidential funds, to get on with the job.
And he will report straight to Truman.
SECOND, as Morris testified in closed ses
sidn on Capitol Hill last week, he has
asked that he be given absolute priority and
support in an extraordinary project which
Morris believes will lay the groundwork for
attacking government corruption at its
source. Morris intends to circulate a detailed
questionnaire throughout the entire Execu-
tive branch of the government, excepting
only routine office and manual workers and
the President himself.
This questionnaire will require all offi-
cials to list precisely all sources of in-
come other than government pay, what
they did for the money, and how many
hours they worked to earn it. Answering
this questionnaire-the answers will of
course be kept secret unless they lead to
prosecution-will confront any influence-
selling official with thechoice between re-
vealing all or committing perjury.
For this plan to work, two things are re-
quired. In the first place, any official re-
fusing to answer must face automatic dis-
missal. On this point, Morris again has as-
surances of Presidential support. Truman
has stated flatly that he will fire anyone
Morris catches off base, even within the in-
ner White House circle itself.
But this is not all that is required. For
Morris must also have subpoena powers in
order to investigate any official who is dis-
missed for refusing to answer the question-
naire, or who resigns rather than answer it.
Without this Morris might as well pack up
and go home. This is the main reason why
the subpoena powers which Truman has
asked Congress to grant Morris, and which
only Congress can grant, are so all import-
ant.
* * *
THE PART Truman has played in this sit-
uation is interesting. His eagerness to
back Morris apparently amounts almost to
overeagerness. Truman himself, for ex-
ample, has publicly taken responsibility for
asking Congress to give Morris the power to
grant immunity to witnesses, which is some-
thing Morris never asked for. This eager-
ness to go the whole hog suggests that Tru-
man is rather belatedly thoroughly fed up
with the wy officials in his Administration
have been selling him down the river.
(Copyright, 1952, New York Herald Tribune, Inc.)
~cJ!1NIE1MAj
At Hill Auditorium . .
THE BEACHCOMBER4 starring Charles
Laughton and Elsa Lancaster.
THE ADVENTURES of Ginger Ted, "A
lost soul if ever I've seen one," wander
in and out of the clutches of Maughamian
missionaries and island diplomats. The al-
coholic, rapidly deteriorating the native
morals, clashes with the teetotaler, slowly
instilling the concept of a hell on earth and.
a heaven up above.
When the lady preacher realizes that
there is some good in the Aerelict's soul
and determines to save him, circumstance
and persistance prove too much for Gin-
ger. The climax is reached in the steam-
ing depths of a native infested jungle;
concept smashes concept, and the truth
of their past histories and of their hidden
desires is revealed.
To the Maugham reader and to the Laugh-
ton admirer there will be a constant, plea-
sant sensation of gentle satisfaction as one
contorts character and the other contorts
his own face. To others the times will vary.
One might sum up by saying that this pic-
ture is a masculine and comic variation on
the Sadie Thompson theme.
.oCLe11eri to the 6litop
New Subversive...
To the Editor:
WHILE the House Committee of
Un-American Activities is
busy hunting so called "subver-
sives" a number of right-wing
"front" organizations are flourish-
ing. With the searchlight of pub-
lic attention turned on commun-
ism, these pseudo patriotic groups
escape attention. They operate
largely by coming forth with "no-
ble" programs. They want to re-
store /our Constitutional Rights
and drive the Reds out of our
public schools; they want to elim-
inate "collectivism from our gov-
ernment which is attempting to
dominate the lives of our people."
By vigorous waving the American
flag they deceive many misin-
formed or uniformed people who
subscribe to this propaganda.
The National Committee for the
Defense of Demdcracy, a group of
educators, lists such organizations
as, The Guardians of American
Education Inc., National Council
for American Education, Employ-
er's Association of Chicago. Their
slogans are "Keep our American
Schools American," devoted to the
stimulation of sound eradication
of Marxism and Collectivism from
our schools and national life, "to
protect public schools education
against current inroads of propa-
ganda designed to discredit pa-
triotic Americans and bring about
radical changes in our form of
society." To condemn freedom of
inquiry per se as Un-American or
to link it up with socialism, col-
lectivism, statism, or communism,
is tantamount to saying that no
progress shall be made through
group action. Are we to say that
no change whatsoever may take
place in our social institutions?
These panicky citizens whose
fears for the preservation of the
"American way of life" are based
on insufficient information, in-
ability to analyze propaganda, and
unthinking gullibility, are helping
to support groups that serve as
"fronts" for interests that are not
educational.
-Shelly Estrin
* * *
YD Reaction ...
To the Editor:
ONCE MORE it becomes the
pleasant duty of the Young
Democrats of replacing facts for
fiction. I speak now in regard to
Floyd Thomas'letter to the editor
criticising Herb Cohen's forthright
editorial of a few days ago.
Mr. Thomas implies that there
is no split in the Y.R.'s as with
respect to candidates. We would
have to be naive indeed to swal-
low such a remark. There was a
split on McCarthyism this fall.
there was a split on Taft and
Warren a few weeks later, and
there is a split on Eisenhower and
Taft, now. Let's face it. There is
disunity, and that is the cause
for most of the Y.R. publicity!
The President of the Y.R.'s also
asserted that no challenge to a
debate had been received by the:
Y.R.'s. That is odd indeed. For
two days ago I received a phone
call from Mr. Thomas asking
what I thought of debating Com-
pulsory Health Insurance. Surely
if no challenge had been made
we would not be discussing what
the topic should be. The fact is
that there is most definitely going
to be a debate.
Mr. Thomas also denied know-
ing anything about the proposed
Mock Convention. Over three
weeks ago I spoke to the Y.R.
chieftan personally and asked him
what he thought of the idea. He
agreed that it was a good one.
We agreed that each of us would
set up committees to handle the
details. The Young Democrats
are ready and willing to go ahead.
Where are the Republicans???
As for the Y.R.'s, Mr. Thomas
stated that they are planning to
take similar steps to those taken
by the Y.D.'s as regards the
Speaker's Ban, a membership
drive, and invitations to other
speakers. We answer this by say-I
ing only that it has been a prac-
tise of the Republican party for
many years now to wait and see
what the Democrats are, going to
do and then come out with a
statement like, "Oh, we're going to
do the same things, only we can
do them better."
Apparently the Y.R.'s operate
under the motto: "Confuse the
public and we shall rule." The
Democrats believe only in seeing
that the people get the facts
straight-and if the people have
the truth as it stands in the light
of day, then they will make an
intelligent choice between the two
parties.
That is just what is going to
happen in 1952! And the Repub-
licans had better learn that les-
son soon!
-Gene Mossner
RL Fire Trap ...
To the Editor-
"TeII, I Don't Like Him!"
- \
Y1 , -
11
r
, fr ; '
-' ,
" ER$ iC.
d tlSL TIliG tv41t T tea.
ON THE
WashingtonMerry-Go-Round
WITH DREW PEARSON
--- 4j {
surplus furniture has been correc-
ted. The Plant Department has
been requested to take immediate
steps to clear the north' fire es-
cape. Efforts are being made to
have proper escapes installed in
place of the obsolete ladders.
Other steps are being taken to
minimize the immediate hazards.
The most tangible improvement
depends on the studefits who use
the building. One carelessly dis-
carded match or cigarette can
cause disaster. Hundreds of stubs
are dropped on those dried wooden
floors daily.
The Department of Romance
Languages invites the Daily, the
student language clubs, and stu-
dents generally to join it in a
campaign to eradicate uncon-
trolled smoking in the Romantic
Fire Trap.
Meanwhile, let us take some
slight comfort from the following
facts:
1. The average time required
to empty the building-even in the
face of incoming classes and chat-
ting groups-is about five min-
utes.
2. Most of the partitions are of
cinder block, not wood.
3. The floors are laid over a
sort of rubble cement which would
slightly (only slightly, to be sure)
retard combustion.
4. It is not likely that a fire
would gain much headway before
discovery in a crowded building.
Not likely-but altogether too
possible.
Will all potential victims help
us reduce the risk-and smoke
their cigarettes somewhere else?
-Charles N. Stabach
Marriage Series.. ..
To the Editor:
A MISTAKEN impression of
Marriage Lecture Series fi-
nances was presented at a recent
Board of Representatives meeting
due to misinformation on the part
of representatives.
The Marriage Lecture Series is
not in debt. It now has a cash
balance of $267.62 with which to
begin the year. This means that
if the League agrees to give fi-
nancial backing to the project, it
will be responsible only for any
debt which may result from fu-
ture operations.
Because of the Marriage Lecture
Committee's present attempts to
cut the costs of the series, it is ex-
tremely doubtful that any finan-
cial aid will be necessary.
-Leah Marks
Manon . .
To the Editor:
IF I MAY be permitted to supple-
ment Mr. E. Heckett's remark-
ably unconvincing r e v i e w of
Manon.
I believe (with only a hershey
bar handy) the principle objection
was to the unevenness of treat-
ment, i.e. half frivolous and half
geared toward tragedy. It is pre-
cisely this duplex arrangement,
however, which sustains Manon.
One senses while the lover is be-
ing satirically ruined a layer of
sterner stuff underneath the light
side of the affair.
The film is deliberately done in
part as flashback and what we
get are two perfectly different
views. Everything after Manon's
decision to marry the American
major is in treatment a thing
apart from what precedes, yet a
logical supplement with dramatic
power. The transition is abrupt
but one is not totally unprepared
fnr- it if ne frnllnmto + +-io-
death presumably-the desert be-
coming a kind of earthly purga-
tory-with her entire (defiled)
body save the face, for Robert,
covered by sand.
One feels that the critic has
missed a sweet subtlety of concep-
tion.
-Conrad Brenner
Zander's Slander .. .
To the Editor;
[N THE same issue which severe-
ly criticizes Detroit newspaper
coverage of the House Un-Ameri-
can Committee hearings, t h e
Daily has been guilty of publish-
ing an article which in part is as
misleading and slanted as any of
the more sensational from Detroit.
I refer to Zander Hollander's re-
port, on page, one, bt mainly to
the first two paragraphs. These
are the so-called "lead" para-
graphs, so dear to the cult of
journalists everywhere. In these
paragraphs Mr. Hollander estab-
lishes a tone which governs the
interpretation of his article and
gives us a partial clue to his own
thinking.
I wish to quote closely from
these paragraphs. "The parade of
tight-lipped witnesses at House
Un-American Activities Sub-Cm-
mittee hearings wound on yester-
day steadily intoning the magic
words w h i c h have virtually
wrecked the inquiries so far: ...
I consider the phrase" .. . stead-
ily intoning the magic words ..."
in reference to the Fifth Amend-
ment unwise and unjust. It is a
pejorative phrase. It suggests rit-
ual rather than reason. It suggests
a mockery of the real value of the
constitutional guarantee, and that
its invocation by witnesses before
a legally established investigating
body is implicitly wrong and a
circumvention of justice. Coupled
with the clause which follows
"... which have virtually wrecked
the inquiries so far . . ." it gives
only the impression that the use
of the Fifth Amendment has
unfortunately and alas! brought
the hearings to naught so far.
Now I do not wish to take sides
in the question of the legality and
procedure of the Committee or its
witnesses. That is a matter for
the properly constituted legal
authorities and institutions. But
neither do I wish my morning
report to take sides, however subt-
ly.
One more quote is in order:
"This reply (the witnesses' invo-
cation of the Fifth Amendment)
with variations has been heard
literally hundreds of times in the
course of the hearings and ap-
peared last night as a cloak strong
en'ough to protect hostile witnesses
from contempt citations . . ." I
resent the wording of this pass-
age, as I think every citizen ought
to. I resent it becausfI am afraid
of what is implied therein, that
the time is upon us when we re-
gret the protection of the Fifth
Amendment as a valid instrument
of legal guarantee, or better, that
we ought to regret that protec-
tion. I further take issue with
the 'words cloak, strong enough,
and hostile. They seem to be de-
preciatory words in the context of
a passage, which, with the first
paragraph is unworthy of objec-
tive reporting.
-Louis L. Orlin
* * .
China Policy ...
To the Editor:
'WHILE I agreed with Crawford
V/ r - co .lai nriF a nltT _
ers were operating as early as No-
vember, 1950, but from Manchur-
ian bases where, because of their
short range, they were largely in-
effective. Now, with North Korean
bases, built within the last year.
they are in a much better position
to damage our ground forces. At
the present time, the Reds are
twice as strong as they were a
year ago. Thirty divisions have
been added to Red ground forces,
plus nine hundred planes.
Moreover, there is no logical
reason to suppose that risk of war
with Russia, which Mr. Young
himself states is always present,
is any less at this present time.
Therefore, the policy of bomb-
ing Manchuria now is obviously
more dangerous than when Gen-
eral MacArthur proposed it. What
really is needed in State Depart-
ment planning are not ineffectual
johnnies-come-late with a disas-
trous program of momentary ex-
pendiency, but men who have the
intelligence and courage to ini-
tiate, when the opportunity is
present, realistic action that will
have a positive effect against the
enemy.
-William G. Halby
* *
Stockwell List,,.
To the Editor:
AM VERY glad to hear that ac-
tion is finally going to be taken
on the Stockwell Lounge Problem.
I am familiar with the type of
women living at StockwellhHall
and sympathize with the house
mother in this demanding situa-
tion.
I would like to commend the
idea of listing the offenders of
Stockwell Hall who "pet and lie
on the couches." If this is going
to be carried out I recommend
that you post the list where I may
find it.
-John Hodge
America' ..
To the Editor:
AT EIGHT o'clock Tuesday night
a friend came to see me at my
house (508 Hill street). The land-
lord's wife answered the door and
told him to "wait outside while I
go up and see if Norman is in."
The woman came down shortly
and snapped "he's out," slamming
the door in my friend's ,face. I met
Lemeh (Nuabueze Lemeh, a stu-
dent from Nigeria) coming down
the steps of the house. Together
we entered the front door, and
were greeted by the glowering eyes
of my landlady. "I don't wnt any
of this in here again," she said
loudly and emphatically. By "this"
As meant Lemeh in particular, and
Negroes in general. My landlord,
you see, demands that I respect
his "rights" and "keep n----s the
hell out of here."
My friend was deeply hurt, and
when we had climbed the stairs
and entered the room he said,
"This has been an experience-at
the same time, both painful and
sweet. Sweet that it, in the sense
that I have learned an important
lesson." We were going to study
the cultures of other peoples to-
gether, but quite accidentally Le-
meh had learnt an "important les-
son" about our American culture.
This was the first time that Le-
meh had encountered RACISM
since he has come to this country.
This is the picture which he will
carry back to his people. And this
is the picture which colored people
the world over carry in their minds
about the United States of Amer-
ica.
-A. Norman Klein
I~i.
y
,
t
r
f
r~
f
BEAUMONT, iTexas-In this, the largest
oil-refining city in the world, tidelands
oil is almost a fighting word. The average
Texan is so sore about it that he talks as
if Texas were about to secede from the
Union.
Native Texan Tom Clark, who as U.S.
Attorney General brought the tidelands
oil suit, and native Texan Mastin White,
solicitor of the Interior Department, who
helped, are excoriated almost as if they
were top members of theKremlin.
To people of the other 47 states, tidelands
oil may mean nothing more than the oil
wells drilled under water off the coast of
the United States. But to Texans, it has
become almost as symbolic as the Alamo.
Most of this is due to Texas pride, which
runs strong in the Lone Star state; but
part also to the fact that three of the
wealthiest oilmen of the southwest-H. L.
Hunt, Clint Murchison and Roy Cullen--
see the Tidelands-Oil issue as an effective
stick with which to beat Washington over
the head.
Vigorously anti-Truman, Hunt and
Murchison both siphoned money up to
Senator McCarthy to help defeat 'Sen.
Millard Tydings in Maryland, while Roy
Cullen paid a million dollars for part
interest in the Liberty Radio Network in
order to put liberal commentator Bill
Shirer off the air and substitute for him
rabid anti-Acheson propaganda.
These three are among the leaders of the
battle against elder statesman Tom Con-
nally, which is why Texas Attorney General
Price Daniel. who knows little about foreign
affairs, has suddenly become an expert on
foreign affairs. Daniel has struck a gold
mine of campaign contributions, and talks
learnedly about Formosa just as if he
really knew where Formosa was and who
lives there.
The more the young Attorney General
talks about foreign affairs, the more he
worked up over something that so far does-
n't seem to exist. What few Texans seem
to know is that not one dollar of tidelandsj
oil royalty has yet been received on the
wells drilled off the Texas coast in the Gulf
of Mexico. In fact, the wells drilled so far
have been duds.
Only one tidelands oil well, according
to the records of the geological survey,
has struck anything. This well is in block
245 and produced 49 barrels in a day,
after which it was plugged as not being
worth the running of a pipeline. Of about
five other wells near Beaumont, drilled
close to the shore line some time ago, one
is bringing in a small return.
In contrast, 15 or 20 wells have been
drilled in water several miles off the Texas
coast at a loss of more than a million dol-
lars each.
Louisiana, on the other hand, has brought
in some lush tidelands wells. But Texas,
where the tidelands oil is almost a fighting
word, hasn't been so fortunate. Maybe Tex-
ans are getting all steamed up over nothing.
* * *
- CALIFORNIA TIDELANDS -
N California, also, there's been so much
oratory about tidelands oil' that few
people are aware of some certain highly
interesting facts.
This is the failure of companies operat-
ing on behalf of the City of Long Beach
to put meters on their wells. Without
meters, it is obviously impossible to meas-
ure accurately the flow of oil, and accord-
ingly fix the amount of royalty accruing
to the people of Long Beach or the Fed-
eral government.
This is important for several reasons. In
the first place, revenue from tidelands oil
off Long Beach was supposed to be held
in trust for the people of Long Beach; or,
under the subsequent U.S. Supreme Court
ruling, for the federal government.
Second, California claims that it can ad-
minister tidelands oil more efficiently than
Sixty-Second Year
Edited and managed by students of
the University of Michigan under the
authority of the Board of Control of
Student Publications.
Editorial Staff
Chuck Elliott ........Managing Editor
Bob Keith...............City Editor
Leonard Greenbaum, Editorial Director
Vern Emerson ..........Feature Editor
Ron Watts .............Associate Editor
Bob vaughn ...........Associate Editor,
Ted Papes.......... ..Sports Editor
George Flint ....Associate Sports Editor
Jim Parker ...Associate Sports Editor"
Jan James............Women's Editor
Jo Ketelhut, Associate Women's Editor
Business Staff
Bob Miller ...........Business Manager
Gene Kuthy, Assoc. Business Manager
Charles Cuson ....Advertising Manager
Milt Goetz......Circulation Manager
l