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