'PAGE M THE MICHIGAN DAILY FRynAF_ !RRPTVMRTR_ 9A tosa ?At~ ~1X THE MICHIGAN DAILY ~1fl AV ~ WPm'1Lw'DI~'D GA I A~ 5 r *Au ..AjI3Z't"1 . tL AVAJLK .4, 1959 A Special Faculty Committee Reports on Nic kerson (Continued from Page 1) the Communist Party and has been vague concerning the me- thod and extent of his with- drawal. "This Committee wishes that Dr. Nickerson had been able to demonstrate in his testimony that at some finite date before he came to this University he had made a clean break with the Commun- ist Party and had henceforth shown no interest in it. This would have clarified the issues greatly. The fact is that he not only still- holds many of the same views he held' as a Party member but that he finds it difficult to name any specific date on which he ceased to be a Party member. . He cannot admit that there was anything wrong with the Com- munist Party, "as he knew it," al- though it is significant that he is willing to make rather objec- tive criticismsof the Soviet Union and some of its postwar policies . ..The Committee does not feel that too much importance should be attached to discrepan- cies in dates which may have oc- curred in the testimony. It rec- ognizes that under the pressure of the hearings, errors may have oc- curred through confusion or lap- ses in memory. We feel that it would be unfortunate if the Uni- versity permitted its decision re- garding Dr. Nickerson to rest on such relatively minor aspects of the total problem as occasional failures to report dates with con- sistency. - "We feel that our evaluation of the genuineness of Dr. Nickerson's alleged withdrawal from the Com- munist Party should depend not so much on the gradual or abrupt character of this withdrawal as on the presence or absence of posi- tive evidence indicating contin- ued active partiipation in Party activities after the date when the withdrawal had presumably been completed. "5.) Dr. Nickerson has invok- ed the Fifth Amendment when asked by a duly constituted leg- islative committee to testify concerning his Communist Par- ty activities, despite the advice of officials of the University that he should testify freely. "We regard the behavior des- cribed in this charge as reprehen- sible conduct. Believing that the facts show that he is not now and has not been for some time a mem- ber of the Party, and believing that there is no evidence that he engaged in illegal conduct during his membership, it is our opinion that he could have denied his pre- sent membership and explained his past membership without un- favorable consequences to himself. It would appear therefore, that he needlessly, (in our opinion) has brought embarrassment upon the University. His invoking of the constitutional guarantee against self-incrimination, howevez, aS carried out with advice of coun- sel, and so far as we know, was not invoked improperly from a legal standpoint. The Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure of the Association of American Law Schools, in its report to the Association in 1953, indicates that the Fifth Amendment may be pro- perly invoked by the innocent un- der certain circumstances We subscribe to this policy. ". . .While we agree with the majority of the Special Advisory Committee to the President that censure for needlessly causing em- barrassment to the University would be in order, we do not be- lieve that the fact of refusal to testify before the Clary Commit- tee is sufficient grounds to justify dismissal. "6.) Dr. Nickerson, at the time he accepted employment in the University, signed the oath and failed to disclose his past Com- munist Party activities, "On December 25, 1950, Dr. Nick- erson signed the oath which is re- quired of all employees of the University of Michigan. It states that the signer does not belong to "any organization which advocates the overthrow of our constitution-I al form of government." Dr. Nick- erson states that it occurred to him at the time he signed the oath that the organizations probably in- cluded the Communist Party. However, because (according to his report) his own membership in the Communist Party had lapsed some two or three years before, and because the Communist Par- ty as he knew it at that time was not dedicated to the "overthrow of our constitutional form of gov- ernment" and had not been so defined by the courts of the land, he felt that he could legally sign the oath. This Committee does not believe there is any question as to the legality of this act. "This Committee does believe, however, that Dr. Nickerson was ill advised in not revealing his past political associations to the Univesity at the time he was of- fered a position here. Although we must rem ember that the national atmosphere was not so intensely anti-Communist in 1950r as it is today, it still should have been ap- parent to Dr. Nickerson at that time that the likelihood of his ex- posui'e was great, and that such exposure would inevitably bring public embarrassment to the Uni- versity. "... Our conclusion on the mat- ter of the oath is as follows: Dr. Nickerson should have made his political history known to the Uni- versity before he accepted his po- sition here. His failure to do so tions, he appears to have behaved as a person of integrity would have behaved. Burroughs-Wellcome Case "The Burroughs-Wellcome case is more revealing. In this situation he was again offered a very at- tractive position. As discussions went aalong it became apparent that classified research would play an important part in the com- pany's activities. According to the company president, Dr. Nickerson demonstrates bad judgment but it was "extremely honorable" does not necessarily prove bad throughout their discussions, mak- faith. We feel that this failure ing it clear to them that his clear- exposes Dr. Nickerson to just cri- ance status was questionable and ticism but does not impugn his in- giving them a full opportunity to tegrity so seriously as to justify assess the probable difficulties in- his dismissal. volved in his associations with the "7.) Dr. Nickerson failed to company. disclose his past Communist Par- "One may imagine that the ty affiliations to his Depart- temptation to accept this position, ment Head, even though classi- and let the facts come out later, fied projects were under way in must have been substantial. The the Department. Committee finds Dr. Nickerson's ".. . In our evaluation of the behavior in this case consistent significance of Dr. Nickerson's en- with that of a man of integrity. tering the Pharmacology Depart- We are also impressed by the fact ment, the following two facts have that his report to us of his nego- impressed us. It should be noted, tiations with the Burroughs-Well- first that the Department of Phar- come Company coincides in every macology at Michigan did not detail with that we have received have a major development in clas- from the Company president. sified research at the time Dr. "8.) Even though the forego- Nickerson was brought into it and ing items do not in themselves it has not had since. Secondly, furnish grounds for dismissal, there seems to be no evidence that taken in the aggregate they in- Dr. Nickerson has made any, at- dicate a lack of integrity. tempt to inform himself about the "... The major departure from classified research that was in full integrity which we find in Dr. progress. The evidence is that he Nickerson's conduct during the was completely isolated from it. past three years lies in his failure In other words, Dr. Nickerson had to inform the University regard- relatively little reason to believe ing his previous political history. that his presence would seriously We feel that he should have done jeopardize the future of the De- this and that his failure to do so partment because of his question- reflects on his integrity. At the able security status. His observa- same time we recognize that there tion of security during his three is some ambiguity even in this years in the Department appears charge, and we have reviewed the to have been exemplary. arguments which might be adduc- "In this connection the Com- ed to support the contention that mittee has given a good deal of no failure of integrity is neces- attention to the negotiations sarily implied in his failure toI which Dr. Nickerson carried on communicate his past record to with UCLA and the Burroughs- the University. Wellcome Company. In the form- "In any case, his major fault, so er case it is clear from his cor- far as integrity is concerned, respondence with the Department seems to be one of ommission. We of Pharmacology at UCLA that he do not take his invocation of the received an attractive offer which Fifth Amendment as an evidence he turned down. His explanation of lack of integrity, mistaken as is that he did not feel that, with we believe it was. We find no evi- his political history, he should en- dence of wilful or malicious dis- ter a department so heavily de- honesty during his period at Mich- pendent on classified research. igan. There is evidence of subter- One -may surmise that he did not fuge and questionable tactics dur- think he would last long in such ing his period in the Communist a situation. We do not know his Party although nothing specifi- entire motivation, but within the cally illegal has been discovered. limits of his disinclination volun- On the other hand, he has im- tarily to reveal his past associa- pressed both the Special Advis- t 4 i 1 C ory Committee and this Commit- tee with his candor in answering questions. In his hearing with this Committee he impressed us as a man trying to be scrupulously honest while laboring under the burden of a rather shameful past. "9.) The retention of Dr. Nick- ersson on the Medical School faculty would not be in the best interests of the Medical School or of the University. ,in evaluating the opinion on the basis of the facts alleged by the Medical School, or adduced in other parts of the hearings, we re- spectfully submit that the facts do not, in our opinion, justify the recommendation made. (The Medical School Executive Committee recommended unani- mously that Dr. Nickerson be dis- missed immediately.) 4. "We would invite attention to the fact that there is no allega- tion that Dr. Nickerson is incom- petent in his field bf teaching, and we believe that the whole consid- eration of the case has proceeded on that basis. There is affirmative testimony that he is competent as a scientist and as a teacher and that he has cooperated in taking Medical School and depart- mental assignments. There is no evidence that he was ever insub- ordinate in refusing to comply with departmental orders. There is testimony that he has been a "troublemaker," "arrogant," and has a "desire to get ahead which means tromping on everybody else in the department and elsewhere." While these characteristics are not those which engender affection, his Department Chairman (Prof. Maurice Seevers) has testified, that the troublemaking didn't bother him and that the assump- tion of "privileges that other peo- ple do not assume" did not relate to the particular problem., Employment Opportunities "Discussions relating to the em- ployment opportunities presented to Dr. Nickerson: Dr. Seevers tes- tified that Dr. Nickerson was un- der consideration for a job with UCLA, that "he was dropped just like that;" that "the reason he was dropped is because of the neces- sity for high security clearance," and that "when they looked into his security background, they dropped him." Dr. Seevers further testified that Dr. Nickerson in- formed him that he didn't want the job and dropped it. "There is an implication in this testimony that UCLA was the prime mover in severing the po- tential employment. Wenbelieve the facts to be that Nickerson was of- fered the job, and that he did in fact turn it down. We have a let- ter dated Jan. 12, 1953, from the Dean of the Medical School at UCLA to Dr. Nickerson which seems clearly to reflect those facts. We have questioned Dr. Nickerson concerning the matter and he as- serts that he turned the job down for tyo reasons: (1) because the department depended for its sup- port on classified federal grants,# and he did not like that kind of research as well as the unrestrict- ed research; and (2) that he fully appreciated that employment un- der such circumstances would necessitate security clearance, and that he did not want to ask for security clearance. The first reason is clearly un- derstandable, and reflects not at all upon the motives or character of Dr. Nickerson. It is a choice of opportunities at the respective schools. We fully appreciate that one possible interpretation of his second reason is that he did not want to ask for security clearance because he knew he could not get it and therefore declined the job to avoid disclosure of his past Communist affiliations. In our judgment, such a motive is con- sistent with integrity. We would consider that an individual, naw ambitious to succeed as a pharma- cologist, but having a past record of affiliation with the Communist Party, which is. in today's climate; of opinion, capable of misinterpre- tation, could reasonably, and with1 integrity, prefer to refrain from classified governmental research.' Indeed, there is inherent here an erement of intergity, and full rec- ognition of the government's right and duty to maintain rigid secur- ity on classified projects which is implicit in such action. We ser- iously question that "security clearance" should be made a con- dition precedent to employment in the University except for those who are to be engaged specifically in classified projects. It should be borne in mind that in many cases inability to get security clearance carries no implication of subver- sion or failure of loyalty. "With- reference- to -the -Bur- roughs-Wellcome opportunity, as stated earlier, we called the Presi- dent of the company to ascertain the facts of the negotiations. He corroborated the testimony of Dr. Nickerson in all essential aspects, indicating that they had ap- proached Dr. Nickerson; that the discussions had proceeded to a point where Dr. Nickerson might well have concluded that the job had been offered to him; that Dr. Nickerson voluntarily disclosed the fact that his past political activi- ties might give rise to some trouble in connection with the interna- tional nature of the job and the fact that he would be director of a research program which would embrace, in part, classified pro- jects; that the Company president came to Ann Arbor even after the disclosure and talked with Dr. Nickerson and was about ready to go ahead; and that subsequently, because of the potential difficul- ties which would be involved in cimpartmentalizing their research among classified and unclassified projects, they had decided against the appointment. He stated that he wanted to emphasize that Dr. Nickerson was very open, candid, and acted in a very honorable way throughout the negotiations, and that they appreciated his openness. He added that Dr. Nick- erson had raised the question of security clearance at the very be- ginning of the negotiations. Medical School Decision "We now return to the recom- mendation of the Medical School Executive Committee that Dr. Nickerson be dismissed, and its significance in this particular pro- ceeding. We must repeat that we believe there are not facts other than those involving the Com- munist Party affiliation of Dr. Nickerson, his refusal to testify before the Clardy Committee, his failure to disclose his past activi- ties, etc:, which would support this recommendation. Were this dis- missal based upon incompetence, insubordination, failure to coop- erate in the departmental duties, or the like, then we would be deal- ing with matters which were with- in the peculiar competence of the School or Department. Were we dealing with a question of the mis- use of his position as a teacher for indoctrinational purposes, the judgment of the particular col- lege or department would be of great weight. "But this case involves matters of University-wide policy with ref- erence to a subject which trans- cends departmental and college lines. It involves questions of the freedom to hold unpopular ideas. It involves questions concerning the relations between the faculty and legislative bodies. It involves the meaning of tenure and the ob- ligations of candor to the Univer- sity. These are matters in which no department, no school, no col- lege, as such has any peculiar competence. There, it seems to us, are matters 'which must properly be considered at the University level. We believe this was recog- nized when this action was begun under Section 5.101 of the By- laws, through the action of the President, rather than being in- itiated at the departmental level. Conclusion: ... "We believe that it would be in keeping with the traditions of academic freedom, as they have long been practiced in this Uni- versity, to reinstate Dr. Nicker, son." The 30-page report by this Com- mittee was submitted to the-Presi- dent when completed. Following his receipt of the document, Pres- ident Hatcher recomminded Prof. Nickerson's dismissal to the Re- gents. (Tomorrow's article will include information on the Regents' de- cision and Prof. Nickerson's pub- lie statement after the dismissal was announced.) ,'i ,1 For ALL of your Photographic Needs - "Purchase from Purchase" Everything Photographic L ~'1 I, You'll alWayS be glad you bought a.Chevrolet Ann Arbor's Complete Camera Shop . You'll stay proud of Chevrolet's lasting good looks You won't find another low-priced car with the look of quality you see in Chevrolet. And if you like Chev- rolet'slooks now, you'll like its looks always. You'll enjoy exclusive features for finer motoring ' Body by Fisher--the highest-com- pression power of any leading low- priced car-the biggest brakes, the only full-length box-girder frame (and now's a great time to buy one!) and the only Unitized Knee-Action- ride in the low-price field. They're all yours in Chevrolet! You save when you buy and when you trade Even so, Chevrolet is priced below all other lines of cars. And at trade- in time, you'll be-ahead again from Chevrolet's traditionally higher re- sale value. You'll get a special deal right now Right now, we're in a position to give you the deal of the year on a ~riwf- new Chevrolet. Come in and let us show you how much you'll gain by buying now! Now's the time to buy! Get our big deal! Enjoy a new ... CheVrolet YEAR AFTER YEAR, MORE PEOPLE BUY CHEVROLETS THAN ANY OTHER CART AUTHORIZED DEALER For Most Nationally Advertised Merchandise Including: ANSCO ARGUS BESELER CANON DU PONT EASTMAN KODAC EXAKTA GRAFLEX HEILAND KEYSTONE PENTACON LA BELLE POLAROID PRAKTIFLEX REVERE ROLLEIFLEX STEREO REALIST VIEW-MASTER (See nor Chevrolet fDealer) ins I!