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.

March 01, 1952 - Image 2

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1952-03-01

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

THE MICHIGAN DAILY

SATURDAY, MARCH1,

_______________________________________________________________________________________________ I I

Against the Speaker's Bureau

MATTER OF FACT
By JOSEPH-and STEWART ALSOP

{ 1

ONE NEED go no 'arther than the Mich-
igan campus to undrstand the confused
stah in which the 20th century liberal has
placed himself. On this campus, two groups
who claim to represent liberalism, the Civil
Liberties Committee and the Young Demo-
crats, are now engaged in a campaign to
place a referendum on the spring election
ballot; wherein students might express ap-
proval or disapproval of the University Lee-
ture Committee. Yet, in all their enthusiasm,
they fail to realize that the very liberty they
seek to preserve-freedom of speech-is be-
ing further dangered by their own actions.
To achieve a better understanding of
why this movement is actually a con-
spiracy against, rather than an aid to civil
liberties, it would be well to examine the
events which brought the plan to its
present state. -
About a week ago, the executive commit-
tee of the Civil Liberties Committee proposed
to its club that a referendum be held this
spring. Seeing that the CLC was controlled
by a majority clique who could pass any-
thing it so desired, it was little use in argu-
ing against the proposal. When the matter
ame before the Young Democrats, no real
debate on the question was permitted on the
excuse that Professor Eastman had come
to speak and that his time was limited. In
much the same manner as the Civil Liberties
Committee, the Young Democrats gave its
support to the referendum.
After railroading the referendum
through these two groups, its proponents
have been writing extensively in The
Daily as a means of further increasing
support. In a Daily editorial, Alice Bog-
donoff stated that students may sign the
petitions now being circulated without
committing themselves to be either in fa-
vor of or against the Lecture. Committee.
However, she did not discuss the merits of
holding a referendum. This question, as
to whether the referendum itself should
or should not be held, is much more sig-
nificant than the results of that referen-
dum.
From what has occurred until now, it
would be well for all students and faculty
members to recognize that the supporters
of this plan are not to be cast aside with
indifference. The CLC is trying with all
the powers at its command to secure a vote
against the Lecture Committee, and unless
the opposition to the referendum organizes,
there is the tragic possibility that the lecture
committee will be censured at the polls. To
further exemplify the gravity attached to
this plan by its supporters, one member of
the executive committee of the CLC, Leonard
Sandweiss, said at its last meeting that if
the group does not secure approval of their
position by the students on the campus, the
CLC might just as well be preparedto dis-
band.
NOW, JUST WHAT reason is there to op-
pose the referendum which is a means
by which students can express their own
sentiments at the polls?
To answer this question, it is necessary to
ask a counter-question which hits at the
crux of the matter. Just when has the
word "democratic" come to mean "will of
the people?" In the Constitution itself,
our forefathers clearly stated that demo-
cracy means "consent of the governed."
Only recently has an attempt been made
to change this traditional definition.,
It was because our forefathers saw the in-

herent dangers of -a referendum and fully
knew that the legislative body should have
the se authority to decide legislation, that
they refused to place the referendum in the
constitution. Instead, they had both the laws
passed, and the amendments to the consti-
tution proposed and ratified- by the legis-
lators; not the people.
Those who now support legislation.by bal-
lot advance the argument that their's is the
only manner to clearly understand the "will
of the majority." But the "will of the ma-
jority" is the will of what the majority reads
and hears. Considering this point, alone,
would it be fair to ask the opinion of the
students on the merits of the Lecture Com-
mittee when, as yet, there has not been one
editorial in favor of it in The Daily? Hw
can the students vote any other way than
against the Lecture Committee when they
have read only the side against it? The
referendum will be, in reality, nothing more
than a farce, for it will only again prove that
if the public is open to only one side of a
question; it will, then, vote on that side.
Besides misrepresenting any intelligent
understanding of the question, the refer-
endum will also subvert the authority of
the Student Legislature. The referendum,
in effect, admits either that SL does not
have enough respect by university officials
to make a stand on the Lecture Committee,
a significant one; or that it does not truly
represent the sentiments of the students.
Either admission would be a serious blow
to the efforts of SL.
More important than the arguments just
advanced is the fact that at any referendum,
the voters must clearly choose between either
adopting the proposal as is, or not at all.
There is no compromise to be had at the
polls. Yet, compromise is an essential thing
if the people are to live in harmony.
* * *
IN ADDITION, the following arguments
may be raised against the referendum.
While the majority may have voted in
favor of the proposal with indifference;
those against the bill may have voted so
after considering the matter very seriously.
The legislator, when he considers a bill,
judges it in terms of the whole interest as
well as in terms of those whom he represents;
while the voter, when he considers a pro-
posal, examines it only in view of his own
interests and desires.
The legislator can be held responsible in
the future for what he votes for, so he must
consider the effect of the bill; the voters are
not responsible to anyone but themselves.
Recognizing these arguments against
direct rule, governments were established
long ago. The referendum, on the other
hand, is a step backwards, for it puts the
power of policy-making in the hands of
the people who have neither time nor in-
terest in most of the issues facing the
nation.
Regardless of the merits of the Lecture
Committee, it is urged that all students re-
fuse to sign the petitions for the referen-
dum or to vote on the referendum. Tradi-
tionally and correctly, we have always be-
lieved in the separation of duty between the
voter and the elected official; wherein it is
the, duty of the voter to approve the best
man, and the official to approve the best
legislation. This separation of duty must
continue in the future, if there is to be ef-
fective and responsible government on this
campus.
--Bernard Backhaut

WASHINGTON - A gigantic disaster to
American foreign policy has been most
narrowly averted in the last two or three
weeks. And instead of disaster, a notable
success has instead been scored by Dean G.
Acheson, Dwight D. Eisenhower, and W.
Averell Harriman at the just-concluded Lis-
bon meeting. Not one American in a hundred
is aware of this sequence of events, which
suggests the way in which great issues of
national security are becoming clouded and
obscured in this election year.
When Acheson flew to the Lisbon con-
ference before the Lisbon meeting, to talk
with British Foreign Secretary Anthony
Eden, French Foreign Secretary Robert
Schuman, and German Chancellor Konrad
Adenauer, disaster loomed very close in-
deed. What seemed in prospect was a
complete collapse of Allied policy on the
issue of German rearmament. This in turn
would have made nonsense of all Gen.
Eisenhower's plans for an integrated de-
fense of Western Europe, and thus knocked
the underpinnings out from under Ameri-
can foreign policy.
There were all sorts of contributing fac-
tors to this infinitely dangerous, almost un-
noticed crisis, like the silly and provocative
French gesture of sending an "ambassador"
to the Saar, which the Germans regard as
an integral part of Germany. But essentially
what happened was that a great surge of
traditional French and German nationalism
threatened not only the shaky regimes in
Paris and Bonn, but the whole structure of
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
** *
THUS THE German Bundestag attached
conditions to German rearmament, in-
cluding an absolutely unconditionl grant of
German sovereignty, which the French (let
alone the British) simply could not accept.
And the French Assembly promptly respond-
ed by attaching conditions to French partici-
pation in the European Army which the
Germans could never accept. In such cir-
cumstances, it seemed impossible that any-
thing at all could be accomplished at Lis-
bon.
Yet Acheson and Harriman have now
returned from Lisbon in triumph. The
European Army concept has been unani-
mously approved, at least in principle. Gen.
Eisenhower's plan for a fifty-division NA-
TO army by the end of this year, based on
the brilliantly realistic appraisal of the
"Three Wise Men" headed by Averell
Harriman, has also been unanimously ac-
cepted. And such lesser but very difficult
issues as the size of Germany's defense
contribution and each country's propor-
tionate share of constructing and main-
taining NATO bases, have finally been
dealt with.
Some of the credit for thus snatching suc-
cess from the jaws of disaster belongs to
Acheson and Harriman. Acheson is at his
best in this sort of difficult, largely private
negotiation; one French diplomat, asked why
the Lisbon meeting succeeded, answered
simply "Acheson's obstinacy." There was al-
so a certain fellow-feeling among the four
principals, Acheson, Eden, Schuman and
Adenauer, since all four have been bitterly
attacked at home. But the real reasons went
deeper than Acheson's doggedness or this
companionship in misery.
THE DISASTER was averted essentially
because the French and the Germans,
having moved up to the precipice, had a good
look over the edge and did not like what
they saw. Both had their own special angle
of vision, as they peered into the abyss. Th
Germans saw the indefinite continuation of
the occupation. The French, by contrast, saw
a rearmed, independent German army, which
would dominate Western Europe. Yet the
great central danger which both French

and Germans saw at the bottom of the pre-
cipice was the same-that the United States
would simply withdraw in disgusted frus-
tration, leaving Europe to its fate.
The fright which this glance into the
abyss induced actually made possible more
real progress at Lisbon than ever before.
Yet the precipice is still there. The blue-
print for a solidly defended, solidly uni-
ted Western community now exists; but it
is only a blueprint. Any single one of a
number of events could cause the blue-
print to be torn to shreds-a Communist
triumph in the forthcoming Italian elec-
tions; the victory of the deGaulle or Schu-
macher nationalists in France or Germ-
any; the fall of the Churchill government.
Each of these events could mean the col-
lapse of the Western alliance, which has been
so narrowly averted in the last few weeks.
And one or more of these events is abso-
lutely sure to occur if American leadership
of the Western alliance is undermined by the
desire in Congress to make an "economy rec-
ord" in this election year. This is a year of
decision, just as much abroad as at home.
For if the United States provides wise, firm
leadership, there is now a rational 'prospect
for building on the Lisbon blueprint a West-

"Well, It Was Nice To Have Seen You Again, Anyhow"
PARUIMW
~ ~- .
S
. -j
ON THE
Washigton Merry-Go-Round
with DREW PEARSON

XietteA TO THE EDITOR
The Daily welcomes communications from its readers on matters of
general interest, and will publish all letters which are signed by the writer
and in good taste. Letters exceeding 300 words in length, defamatory or
libelous letters, and letters which for any reason are not in good taste will
be condensed, edited or withheld from publication at the discretion of the
editors.

A
J
i
j
R
i
7J
1
y
1
1
i
I
l
J
j
1
i
i

Campus B loodDrive

ALTHOUGH THE drive being conducted
now to obtain pledges for blood dona-
tionq may lack the all out "rah-rah" spirit
of a previous campaign at the University
of Texas, it is still worthy of student inter-
est and participation.
Pledges have been coming in slowly but
steadily since the drive was.-initiated sev-
eral weeks ago, but at the present rate it
seems doubtful that the 3,000 pledge goal
will be reached.
Students' reasons for not contributing
blood center around two main points.
First the question of whether or not giv-
ing blood might be physically harmful. As
has been stated in numerous articles, any-
one who is healthy enough to be leading the
life required of a college student is healthy
enough to donate.
Exceptions are those who have now or
have had a cold recently, the few other
people who have had a serious illness
such as yellow jaundice, malaria and oth-
ers, or who weigh under 90 pounds.
All prospective donors are given a thor-
ough examination before being allowed to
give blood, both for the protection of the
donor and the person who will eventually
receive it.
The second major excuse offered by those
against donating is that this blood "isn't
really going to be used by the armed forces."
Claims have been made that the blood will

WASHINGTON-Secretary of Defense Lovett did some neat double-,
talking recently 'when he promised senators to abolish lie detec-
tors.
What happened was that Sen. Wayne Morse, Oregon Repub-
lican, called Lovett on the carpet before the Senate Armed Ser-9
ices Committee after discovering military investigators were using
lie detectors on loyalty suspects. Morse objected that lie detectors
are frowned upon by American courts, following which Lovett;
promised to stop using them,
In contrast; here is the actual order sent out by Lovett: "I desire
that all use of the polygraph (lie detector) for pre-employment and
security clearance purposes within the immediate office of the Secre-
tary of Defense be discontinued."
A DefenseDepartment spokesman admitted to this column that
the Secretary's "immediate office" includes only nine civilians and 11
military personnel. In other words, the lie detector cannot be used on
the 20 people in Lovett's "immediate office," but is permissable any-1
where else in the Defense Department.
Result is that lie detectors are still in use as much as ever,
though Lovett publicly gave the impression they would be outlawed.
Senator Morse is now toying with the idea of suggesting that a1
lie detector be used on the Secretary of Defense to make sure he
doesn't give evasive answers.
, * , *,
--INSIDE THE IRON CURTAIN-
A GROUP OF realistic peace crusaders, many of them Iron Curtain
refugees, listened to some plain talk last week on how we can win
the cold war against Russia and restore world peace by using a wea-
pon Stalin fears more than the atom bomb-the resistance of people
he has enslaved behind the Iron Curtain.
Sparked by three forthright congressmen-O. K. Armstrong
of Missouri, Republican; Brooks Hay of Arkansas, Democrat; and
Charles Kersten of Wisconsin, Republican-the meeting was called
the Conference on Psychological Strategy. However, it all added
up to people-to-people diplomacy of the type being practiced by
thousands of American school children right now in writing mes-
sages to Russian school children to be broadcast over the Voice
of America.
All speakers agreed that too little was being done to gain the good
will of the common people behind the iron curtain, and that a good
first step would be for the State Department and the Pentagon to
quit stalling on the $100,000,000 program approved by Congress last
year to provide aid for Iron Curtain refugees and strengthen under-
ground resistance in satellite countries.
The State Department was criticized chiefly for its so-called
"policy of containment" toward Russia.
"Communism cannot be appeased," keynoted GOP Con-
gressman Armstrong. "It cannont be contained. So long as this
world-wide conspiracy exists, it will seek to destroy human liber-
ties. There remains only one conclusion: Conmunism must be de-
feated. It must be destroyed. Its virus must be eradicated."
In liberating the captive peoples of Communism, Armstrong warn-
ed, however, that the United States "must move boldly with ideas, not
guns. Our first task will be to give assurances of hope to these hope-
less millions that we intend to work unceasingly for their liberation.
Our next and continuing task will be to employ the best methods of
strengthening resistance among the victims of Soviet enslavement."
Edward O'Connor of the Displaced Persons Commission also
advocated a cental psychological strategy agency, with "bold and
daring leadership," to develop a "hard-hitting campaign of truth"
behind the Iron Curtain.
NOTE-State Department officials have enthusiastically coopera-
ted with many people-to-people projects such as having the Youth of
America broadcast over the Voice of America and such as the rubber
friendship balls now being sent by AMVETS to the children of Italy
and other countries. However, the over-all policy of the State Depart-
ment has been to confine Russia, not penetrate Russia.
* , * ,
-GOP FIRES ON MILITARY AID-
OP POLICYMAKERS are quietly loading Republican senators with
ammunition in order to open fire on the military aid program.
The GOP theme has been set in a confidential memo to every Repub-
lican senator from the senate minority policy committee, headed by
Senator Taft.
"Within four years the Truman administration has directly
committed the United States to the defense of forty-one countries,"
the GOP memo declares. "With a total population of 155 million
people, the United States, is bound by treaty or by military occu-
pation to defend a foreign population of over 560 millions. Ameri-
can armed forces must not only plan for the defense of the United
States and its territorial possessions, but also for the defense
of more than 45 per cent of the inhabited area of the world outside
of the United States.
The United States has also been involved indirectly, through
military missions, military bases or the extension of military aid in the
defense of nine additional countries with a population of over 170
million," the memo adds. "Military technicians are scattered through-
out the world in 24 countries including five nations not yet included in
formal treaty arrangements: Iran, Indonesia, Indo-China, Thailand

Stacy Appeals,...
To the Editor:
A T the time of my trial there
apperedin the Daily two edi-
torials somewhat critical of the
conviction in my case, and the
conduct of the trial in general. I
understand that a later article
mentioned reasons for the delay in
filing the appeal to the Michigan
Supreme Court. Since then my
state-appointed attorney filed the
appeal, and it was denied-that is,
leave to appeal only was denied,
but the trial itself was not re-
viewed. As you know, the Supreme
Court does not have to give rea-
sons for denial of leave to appeal,
but it is difficult to understand
why the case was not accepted.
In the brief that was filed, six-
teen errors were listed, the most
important of which was the fact
that my false confession was it-
self used to establish that a crime
had been committed and a "cor-
pus delecti', a procedure which is
directly in opposition to statute
law, and would still be, even had
my confession been true. In fact,
there is absolutely not one shred
of evidence, other than the "con-
fession," that the Haven Hall fire
was arson in the first place. An-
other point was that my attorney
was denied a six-day extension of
time in which to examine wit-
nesses.
As you also know, the back-
ground to why I said what I did
and why I did not take the stand
is very complicated and involves
a severe emotional disturbance of
several years' duration. Very few
people know the full story; how-
ever, a former psychologist at this
institution, after reading a full
account which I wrote for him,
said he believed me innocent of
the crime.
I did not commit the crime, and
I want the opportunity of appeal-
ing to a federal court. I believe
the trial in Ann Arbor was preju-
diced and unfair. A piece in your
paper discussed the attempt of
the police to fix the guilt of the
Montgomery Ward fire on me
through witnesses who were ready
to swear that I was a disgruntled
job-seeker or customer. In that
instance, I fortunately remem-
bered two fellow-students who
were witnesses that I could not
have committed that act. As re-
gards the Haven Hall fire, I was
in the second floor mens' lounge
of the Rackham Building at the
time, reading a copy of Horace,
but unfortunately, at a laterdate,
I could not remember distinctly
any persons who were also there,
nor, evidently, did any remember
me.
You may also recall that the
Fire Chief, who, at the time of
the Haven Hall fire, publicly stat-
ed that he did not believe the fire
to be arson, was replaced at the
last minute by the Assistant Fire

I

New Books
at the Library

Bates, Marston-Where Winter
Never Comes. New York, Chas.
Scribner's and Sons, 1951.
CdVin, Ian-Master, Spy. New
York, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc.,
1951.
Frison-Roche, R. - The Grand
Crevasse. New York, Prentice-Hall,
1951.
Griffith, Maxwell-Port of Call.
New York, J. B. Lippincott Com-
pany, 1952.
Lee, Clark and Henschel, Rich-
ard-Douglas McArthur. New York
Henry Holt and Company, 1952.
Neider, Charles - Great Ship-
wtecks and Castaways. New York,
Harper & Bros., 1952.

i

'{

[ DAILtY OFFICIAL BULLETIN

Chief. This witness stated that I
had been present, for instance, at
the previous Haven Hall, fire,
which was false; he also stated
that the person he had seen at
various fires did not wear glasses,
whereas everyoneson the campus
who knew me also knew that I
always wore them. He said this,
I believe, because he saw me for
the first time in the newspaper
pictures or at the trial, when my
glasses had been taken from me.
I realize that, had I taken the
stand, other witnesses could have
refuted this and other points. I
think you are acquainted also with
the discrepancies between the
statements made by other wit-
nesses, and the statements in my
"confession." Seemingly neither
the Court nor the jury considered
these. Fortunately they are still
on the record.
Shortly after the denial by the
Supreme Court my attorney
dropped my case, although he still
believes that I am innocent. I am
completely without funds, and if
I am to bring the case to a higher
court, I will either have to start
from scratch and take the chance
of preparing the necessary papers
myself in an amateurish and inef-
fectual way, or ask aid from other
sources. I cannot appeal freely to
people from prison, so I am writ-
ing this letter to the Daily in the
hope that someone or some or-
ganization might be interested
enough to provide legal counsel
At tllis time I do not even know
the proper procedure I am to fol-
low.
Robert H. Stacy
Front Door. .
To the Editor:
AT present, there have been no
changes made in the Michi-
gan Union's front door policy.
-Harvey A. Howard
Executive Council
Michigan Union

A

r

i

be sold by the Red Cross or given to private
hospitals.
These statements have been officially
proven false by people who should know--
officials conducting the drive, which is a
small segment of the national defense de-
partment's demand for blood.
Considering the life-giving qualities which
a pint of blood contains, there is no point in
quibbling as to the precise location where
the blood will be used. It will be used, and it
may save a life.
Great quantities of blood are needed even
in peacetime. During the Korean conflict
the reserve supply for civilian use becomes
severely limited. This is in addition to the
tremendous demand for blood needed im-
mediately, as fast as it can be supplied, in
Korea.
Numerous drives are being conducted
throughout the country both for civilian
and armed forces use. The campus drive
is for the latter. With the National De-
fense Blood Program quota set at 300,000
pints per month, it can easily be deter-
mined how much a small but significant
part is being played in the campus cam-
paign.
The war is in Korea and as yet its rami-
fications in this country have been small,
except on those called upon to fight and to
die. We at home have been asked to give
one pint of blood. There is no real reason
why we shouldn't. --Marge Shepherd

The Daily Official Bulletin is an
official publication of the University
of Michigan for which the Michigan
Daily assumes no editorial responsi-
bility. Publication in it is construc-
tive notice to all members of the
University. Notices should be sent in
TYPEWRITTEN form to Room 2552
Administration Building before 3 p.m.
the day preceding publication (11
a.m. on Saturday).
SATURDAY, MARCH 1, 1952
VOL. LXII, No. 102
Notices

Room, Rackham Building. Subject to
be discussed by a graduate student:
"Who Pays the Taxes?"
Hiawatha Club, Meeting, Mon., March
3, 8 p.m., League. Plans for reception
for Deans will be made.
Hillel Open Council Meeting: Sun.,
March 2, 10:30 a.m., Lane Hall. Peti-
tions for the coming Hillel Council
elections will be available. All people
who intend to run for Hillel Council
and everyone else interested is invited.

i*

'ti

Personnel Requests:
University Speech Improvement Camp
has openings for general counselors,
college men age 21 and over, for sum-
mer only. Also openings for cook's
helpers (college men). Camp on Grand
Traverse Bay near Traverse City.
For appointments contact Mr. Clancy,
Speech Clinic, 1007 East Huron St.,
Ext. 2285.
AcademicINotices
Game Theory Seminar: Mon., March
3, 7:30 p.m., 3001 Angell Hall. Mr. R.
Davis will be the speaker.
Probability Seminar: Mon., March 3,
4 p.m., 3001 Angell Hall. Mr. Howard
Raiffa will be the speaker.
Exhibitions
Museum of Art, Alumni Memorial
Hall. Advancing French Art; Peiping
(LIFE photographs). Weekdays 9 to 5,
Sundays 2 to 5. The public is invited.
Events Today
Canterbury Club: Evening Prayer in
St. Michael's Chapel at 5:15 p.m.
Saturday Luncheon Discussion Group.
Lane Hall, 12:15 p.m. Speaker, Rev. John
Bathgate on "Is a Concept of God Es-
sential to Religious Belief?"
Inter-Arts Union. Meeting, 2:30 p.m.,
League.
School of Music Assembly: Student
Council, Business meeting, 1 p.m. 406
BMT. Members and alternates of both

I.

DORIS FLEESON:
southern Aspirations

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

rc

W ASHINGTON-For the first time since
Virginia-born and Louisiana-residing
Zachary Taylor was elected President of the
United States in 1848, southern Democrats
have a fighting chance to put a Southerner
in the White House.

to put one and maybe two Southern Demo-
crats in his cabinet and has said any Re-
publican president should do the same.
Presumably these lucky characters
would be drawn from the bitterly anti-
Truman conservatives and Dixiecrats, led

i

I

i

Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan