b

,.K.

271 1 Aiclp gan &ii
Sixty-Sixth Year
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS
STUDENT PUBLICATIONS BLDG. * ANN ARBOR, MiCH. * Phone NO 2-3241

And We Promise You That, If Not Convicted, We
Will Carry Forward Our Great Program..."

"When Opinions Are Free
Truth Will Prevail"

Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual, opinions of staff writers or
the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.
SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 1956 NIGHT EDITOR: JAMES ELSMAN

_ /
Fl -

DON'T GO NEAR THE WATER:
Unique Comic Satire
On Pacific Isle
Don't Go Near the Water
by William Brinkley
Random House
$3.75 373 pp.
WILLIAM BRINKLEY'S first novel has been optimistically touted as
the navy version of No Time For Sergeants, the latter being the
laugh sensation that tickled the top of the best-seller lists for so
many months.
Don't Go Near the Water is admittedly aimed at the funnybone,


Stevenson Not Qualified
To Replace Eisenhower

As practically everyone in Ann Arbor is un-
doubtedly aware, former New York Gov.
Thomas E. Dewey made a speech here this
week-a speech which warmed the hearts of
Republicans and fevered the brows of Demo-
crats and Democratic sympathizers.
In his speech, Dewey skillfully and meth-
odically discredited the Democrats' major and
most overworked arguments against the Re-
publican administration and pointed out some
of the more obvious weak points in President
Eisenhower's Democratic opponent and his pub-
lic declarations.
To the charge that the Republican Party
is the party of Big Business, Dewey pointed out
that Big Business is not, as one is led to be-
lieve, better off, and the working people worse
off as a result of four years of Republican ad-
ministration. Big Business is now getting, after
taxes, a smaller share of the national income
than it did four years ago. The workers of the
nation, on the other hand, are getting a larger
share of the national income than at any time
in our history.
In addition, he' said, the American people
got the largest tax cut in history under his ad-
ministration. Sixty-two per cent of this reduc-
tion went to individual taxpayers, not to the
mammoth corporations of which the Republi-
cans are supposed to be so fond.
Similarly, Dewey attacked the Democratic
contention that President Eisenhower is
fumbling the quest for world peace and Adlai
Stevenson's empty statements about abolish-
ing the draft and ending U.S. tests of nuclear
weapons. Letting down our guard by such
moves is one way of securing peace-the kind
of "peace" enjoyed by one-time nations now
under the Soviet hammer and sickle.
Talk of repealing the draft and ceasing
our attempts to retain armed supremacy, in
the hope that our enemies will be shamed into
following suit is nothing more than wishful
thinking. To drop our defenses at a time when
the enemy is building up his armed might at
a record-breaking pace is simply to invite dis-
aster and possible annhilation.
It has been pointed out that Stevenson did
not promise to repeal the draft or end nuclear
tests-he merely suggested it as a goal toward
which to work. It is doubtful that there is any-
thing for which President Eisenhowed has
worked harder than he has worked to negotiate
an end to the arms race. He has made re-
peated offers to the Kremlin to cease our
military buildup if they would do likewise.
Each offer has met with refusal or evasion.
It is hardly likely that Russia would make
an about-face, merely because the United
States takes the initiative in such a conciliatory

move. I is far more likely that she would step
up the pace, the better to take advantage of
such idealistic foolishness.
stevenson, a man with very little executive ex-
perience and absolutely no background in
world affairs, is certainly one of the least quali-
fied of current public figures to advise and cri-
ticize the President on his conduct of those af-
fairds, especially in view of the fact that his
approach to world problems has been so suc-
cessful.
Eisenhower, regardless of how he went
about it, did bring an end to the Korean War.
He has consistently managed to handle suc-
cessfully situations which could easily have
flared into open war involving the United
States, as in-Formosa, Indochina and the Mid-
dle East.
' As Dewey declared in his speech, the
Democrats do hold one thing in common with
the Republicans-party harmony. As least on
the surface. The trouble is, it's only on the sur-
face. Chip away the whitewash, and we expose
some of the bitterest intra-party feuds in the
history of the Democratic party.
At the convention in Chicago, "elder states-
man" Harry Truman was as violently opposed
to Stevenson as any Republican, calling him,
and correctly so, inexperienced, weak, and like-
ly to face a dangerous period of trial and error
if elected. Stevenson was nominated, never-
theless. Truman, trying to salvage the rem-
nants of his political face, then made a com-
plete about-face and endorsed Adlai as the
best candidate after all, a courageous fighter
for justice, and the man to beat Eisenhower in
November.
No man of any conviction changes his
stand so radically and so rapidly with any sin-
cerity.
A SIMIMAR situation arose here in Michigan.
Gov. Williams was outspokenly anti-
Stevenson -- until Stevenson was nominated.
Then all apparently became sweetness and
light and harmony between the former antag-
onists. So the splits in the party were repaired,
but about as strongly and permanently as a
broken sword would be repaired with Scotch
tape. Party Unity? A fable.
Stevenson, with no record to run on, no
significant accomplishments in public life, vir-
tually no administrative experience and noth-
ing to recommend him but a deluge of empty
words, is certainly not the man to replace
President Eisenhower, with his outstanding
record, his executive and administrative ex-
perience and his unchallengable personal in-
tegrity in the White House.
-EDWARD GERULDSEN

r
4::

j\Y7r

I

WASHINGTON MERRY-GO-ROUND:
Warren ins Indian Friends1
By DREW PEARSON

for the laughs it generates are found
However, as a work of humorous
fiction it has several character-
istics which discourage its being
compared very closely to anything
American audiences.have read be-
fore.
Brinkley's book is not actually
a novel! it is episodic. The prin-
cipal figure of Ensign Max Siegel
is the general connecting element
between what . could liberally be
classed as a group of short stories.
THERE IS a love story - a.
rather premeditated and uncon-
vincing one-interlaced throughout
the book, too. But the meager
amount of grace and charm that
it manages scarcely seems to jus-
tify its presence in the book.
Coming down to facts, the story
is about a group of commissioned
naval officers stationed on a
Pacific isle. The delightful (and
comically promising) characteris-
tic which author Brinkley bestows
on these earnest young ex-busi-
nessmen is that most of them, like
their chief, Lt. Commander Clin-
ton T. Nash, were commissioned
"without the corrupting effect of
any intervening naval training."
ENSIGN Max Siegel and his fel-
lows are essentially still civilians,
and in their enviable position as
members of a navy public relations
outfit on a remote Pacific isle un-
usually well stocked with women
and whisky they are able to pursue
essentially civilian ambitions.
Where the navy regulations in-
trude on their daily lives is where
most of the book's drama and
comedy are generated. For this
reason, any veteran of the service
may expect to find a full measure
of laughs here.
For others, this might .be said:
Don't Go Near the Water is an
interesting and rather unique com-
ical satire. It suggests From Here
to Eternity, but the nasty words
are lined out; it approaches with
a few deft strokes the lushness
of setting of Michener's full can-
vas in Tales of the South Pamific;
and it has much of the basic com-
edy of No Time for Sergeants, lbrt
from a commissioned officer's
point of view with the humor
more subtly conceived and the
gross exaggerations replaced by
"writing."
--Donald A. Yates
New Books at Library
Carrington, Richard-The Story
of our Earth; N. Y., Harper, 1956.
Clarke, Arthur C.-The Coast of
Coral; N. Y., Harper, 1956.
Cronin, A. J.-A Thing of Beau-
ty; Boston, Little, Brown, 1956.
Daiches, David - Critical Ap-
proaches to Literature; Engle-
wood Cliffs, N. J., Prentice Hall,
1956.

to be the sole rewards of its reading.
LETTERS
to the
EDITOR
No Bitter Feud.. .
To the Editor:
MANY readers of Wednesday's
Daily have the impression that
the Young Republicans are en-
gaged in a bitter feud with the
Lecture Committee over a denied
request for television rights for
Governor Dewey's speech. The
headlines were certainly sensa-
tionalized and unfair both to Prof.
Brandt and to us.
We'did want television for Gov-
ernor Dewey's speech. Prof. Brandt
said "no" on the ground that it
would violate the Regents' bylaws.
Individual members of the Board
of Regents backed this ruling and
we accepted their decision.
The Regents' interpretation of
the bylaw is that these regulations
"are designed to serve the educa-
tional interests of the academic
community rather than the politi-
cal interests of any party or can-
didate" (italics added). The Lec-
ture Committee in 1951 issued a
statement of policy: "We under-
stand that under the Regents' by-
laws and interpretation we . .
may permit political speeches
which serve the educational inter-
ests of the academic community,
with regard to a proper balance
.nong th, various parties and can-
didates."
Thus it is the interpretation of
the Regents that restricts the edu-
cational benefits of a political.,
speech to the "academic commun-
ity." These facts were somehow
omitted in. Mr. Elsman's editorial,
on Thursday.
We would still have liked televi-
sion privileges. But the fault does
not lie with Prof. Brandt or the
Lecture Committee. It is the Re-
gents' interpretation. of their by-
laws which is unnecessarily strin-
gent.
-Lewis Engman, '57
President,
Young Republicans

i

1'

HE WAS NOT billed as a good-
will ambassador, but Chief Jus-
tice Earl Warren did a terrific job
of winning friends on his recent
trip to India.
He went to India not at the sug-
gestion of the State Department
or the White House but at the
invitation of the Indian govern-
ment.
It so happened that his visit
came soon after Bulganin and
Khrushchev had marched through
India with wreaths literally drip-
ping from their necks; following
which American ambassadors in
that area begged the State Depart-
ment to send some top-level Amer-
ican to counteract the two Rus-
sians. Some ambassadors suggested
that Herber Hoover and Harry
Truman, the two living ex-Presi-
dents, be drafted as special envoys
of good will,
*.* *
HOWEVER, Hoover is not robust
enough to make a long trip, while
Eisenhower flatly turned thumbs
down on Truman. The President
has developed such an acute dis-
like of his predecessor that White
House aides are careful to keep
Truman's remarks about Eisen-
hower away from the Presidentail

desk. They send up Ike's blood
pressure.
So John Foster Dulles went to
India instead. His trip was riot a
success. In Pakistan he talked
about the disputed province of
Kashmir, which rubbed India the
wrong way, and his previous sup-
port of Portugal in regard to
Portugese Goa made him not ex-
actly the man to spread sweetness
and light in india.
CHIEF JUSTICE Warren, how-
ever, undid much of this ill will-
not byany special diplomatic ef-
fort, but just by being his usual
direct and unassuming self.
The chief justice didn't discuss
politics, the race issue, civil rights,
or Russia. He did discuss legal
procedures and the law of the
United States and India, both of
which happen to be based on the
common law of England
In Bombay, Madras and Calcutta
he was invited to sit with Indian
judges on the high court of those
states. And in New Delhi he was
invited to don a robe and sit on
the highest court of India.
* * *
JUDICIAL Proceedings in India
are held in English, and most of

the Indian judges took their law
degrees at Oxford or Cambridge,
though in recent years more In-
dian lawers are being educated in
Indian universities.
In Calcutta, the chief justice
noted that Indian lawyers cited 15
or more decisions of the U.S.
Supreme Court in arguing one case
before the court. He found that
U.S. court decisions were cited per-
haps more than British court deci-
sions, largely because India, with
14 states, is more like the United
States than England. He also
found that Indian lawyers were
familiarhwith the personalities of
the U.S. Supreme Court and quot-
ed their dissents and opinions as
if they were personally acquainted
with Hugo Black, William 0.
Douglas, or Felix Frankfurter.
The chief justice and Mrs. War-
ren came home by way of the
Pacific, having made a complete
trip around the world. He is not
reporting to the White House or
the State Department because he
went on his own, and because the
judiciary keeps aloof from the
Executive. However, the State De-
partment happens to be delighted
wtih the results of his mission.
(Copyright 1956, by Bell Syndicate, Inc.)

Statesmanship and Red Chinese

SEVERAL articles have appeared on this page
during the past week calling attention to
the same fact -- that the United States, while
holding the line against Communism and Chi-
nese expansion in eastern and southeastern
Asia, is living a hand-to-mouth, day-to-day,
reaction-to-given-stimulus existence.
The partition and truce in Korea and in
Indochina have held up without the recurrence
of a shooting war. Under the protection of the
Seventh Fleet, the Chaing Kai-Shek regime in
Taiwan limps along.
But no American statesman has come for-
ward with any hint of a suggestion as to how
to arrive at a more permanent and realistic
solution.
The hard truth stands that sooner or later,
the United States is going to have to face up
to the fact that China is a vast nation of six
hundred million people, governed by a strong
central government giving every indication that
it is here to stay for quite some time, one that
will not quietly slip away in the night while we
all are safe asleep in bed.
China and Chinese Communism is going to
have to be lived with for a long, long time,
whether we as Americans like it or not. We
cannot ignore the existence of this regime like
petulant little boys, hoping that by hiding
from it, it will go away.
IN ONE sense, the government of China is
none of our business, though there is a school
of thought very much in opposition to this
theory. Neither the United States nor any
other sovereign state can dictate the form of
government in another nation. This is a funda-
mental principle of self-determination.
What is of concern to American citizens is
how that government affects the lives and for-
tunes of Americans today and tomorrow. And
in the American political system, the responsi-
bility for recognizing and administering to that
concern lies with our elected officials and their
appointees.
These officials have failed to discharge their
obligations to the American people by not ex-

hibiting imaginative, forceful diplomacy in
meeting the problems of international power
politics.
In the specific case at hand, no well-con-
sidered plan has been formulated to advance
the interests of the United States vis a vis
China. The current policy of wait and see
leaves the nation possibly not sitting on a pow-
der keg but close enough to it to get badly
burned when it explodes.
VHISfailure in diplomacy cannot be blamed
on one party or the other. This is neither a
Republican, a Democratic nor an Independent
failure. It is a multi-party failure of America
to realize what the problem is, to see the situa-
tion in its proper perspective. The failure is
shared equally by all of our elected representa-
tives, a failure to look and think ahead and
come up with answers before being presented
with a fait accompli.
One of these days, the American people are
going to be presented with a solution to the
problem which they may well have had no
hand in making. Ignoring the constantly in-
creasing strength of China in Asia and the
world, slamming the door on every proposal
made, being amenable to no compromise, al-
lowing the nation to remain static in a dynam-
ic crisis would seem to constitute miserable
failure on the part of American politicians
whose responsibility it is to lead the American
people.
Several courses toward some settlement of
outstanding questions with Communist China
are open, some acceptable, others not.
Even if there were no solutions readily avail-
able, it would be up to the President, his ap-
pointed ministers, and the Congress to make
one. That, to use the wry expression, is what
they get paid for.
Unquestionably, such settlement is going to
call for some compromise. Only the most fool-
hardy and vote-anxious politician will fail to
see this. Some compromises can be swallowed,
others cannot. It is up to the statesmen to
find those which both the American people and
the Chinese government will buy.
Certainly the armistice and partition reached
in Korea and later in Indochina were far from
clear cut decisions for the Western nations.


TODAY AND TOMORROW:
The New Generation

A QUANDARY:
The Independent Voter.

By WALTER LIPPMANN
AS COMPARED with early Aug-
ust, before the two national
conventions, there is something
quite different and new in the
political situation. Then, it would
have been a surprise to find a
seasoned correspondent or a pro-
fessional politician in either party
who did not think that Eisenhcwer
was, unless another illness over-
took him, unbeatable. Now, there
are few who doubt that the elec-
tion is a contest in which the
Democrats stand to make im-
portant gains in Congress. and
have a fighting chance for the
Presidency.
The main cause of this change
of mood is, I believe, the increas-
ing evidence that the Democratic
Party is unexpectedly strong --
that it is in one of its periods of
revival, as in the early days of
Wilson and again of Roosevelt.
The Democratic victories in the
mid-term election of 1954 regis-
tered the beginning of that revival.
They showed that the Democrats
who had voted for Eisenhower in
1952 were still Democrats; they
showed also that in the new politi-
cal generation which is taking
over, the Democrats have by far
the best of it. At the Chicago con-
vention last month, the control of
the Democratic party passed, after
Truman's rear-guard action, into
the hands of Stevenson and the
new political generation. It is this
rejuvenated party which is show-
ing so much bounce and buoyancy.
* * *
THE ARRIVAL of the new gen-
eration accounts also, I believe, for

speaks for it. That is why he can
go into a Southern state, can take
an unequivocal stand on the school
problem, and yet not precipitate an
irreconcileable quarrel.
The vigor and unity of the
Democratic party came from the
influx of young and vigorous men
who have been working in their
communities on the problems of
the present and the future. They
do not know and they do not care
about the quarrels between Tru-
man and his enemies.
THERE IS little evidence of a
corresponding revival, due to the
rise of a new generation, within
the Republican party. That is the
real reason I believe for the curious
listlessness of the Republican
party. In his acceptance speech
at the San Francisco convention,
the President spoke sincerely and
eloquently in the hope that he
might be the leader of such a re-
vival. He called upon the new
generation to form behind him in
making over the party. There is
no evidence of such a rally. If his
hope was being realized, it is evi-
dent that the prime exponent of
the new Republicanism would be
Nixon, who is a young man and
Eisenhower's heir apparent. But
nobody supposes that Nixon would
or could or that he wished to re-
make the old Republican party
into Eisenhower's new Republican
party.
The Republican party lacks vigor
because the new political genera-
tion has not yet obtained control
of the party. The party is in the
control of men who are not vigor-

By BRENDAN LIDDELL
his does not purport to be a
partisan approval of any one
political party. It merely attempts
a discussion of the questionable
differences of political platform,
and some (perhaps fallacious)
conclusions concerning the voters'
plight.
Consider the registered voter. He
has done all required by law, cus-
tom, quirk and inclination to put
his "X" on an official ballot. The
obvious difficulty, where to put the
Viewing the two major parties
and their platform, and this, being
a practicaly discussion, cannot be
concerned with Socialists, Labor-
ites Vegetarians, Whigs, Tories,
etc.) one is confounded at the
same time by their similarity and
paradoxically, unevenness. For ex-
ample, on questions of desegrega-
tion and civil rights, foreign policy,
budgetary matters and natural re-
sources, the differences are pri-
marily semantic.
** *
OR CONSIDER the near-simi-
larities, the 90-100% farm price
parity versus the "flexible price
supports;" the abolition versus the
reorganization of the Taft-Hartley
Act. It boils down that to read the
party platforms (a task in itself!)
leads only to the question: "What's
the major difference?" (Which
could further lead to, "Why have

four-square, grass roots, etc., for
the "mistreated" farmer.
* * . ,
SO FAR, so good. The labor
man votes Democrat. But then he
gets more government (and we are
led to believe bureaucracy, social-
ism, etc., flow as a result). The
anti-farm laborite votes Democrat,
and is invested with 100% farm
parity. The anti-labor Southerner
votes Republican and is hit by a
desegregationist administration.
Other quandries: are we really
losing the foreign policy race? Can
a Democratic president do better?
Let's try. But will a Democratic
president force the issue of segre-
gation in a South that helped elect
him? So vote Republican! But
what of the high prices of food,
clothing, etc., which have come up
even in the proberbial milennium.
called "election year?" Vote Demo-
crat! But labor, traditionally
Democratic, held a steel strike this
summer, which helped raise prices.
ote Republican! But are we to be
stuck with an ailing president?
Vote Democrat! But are we to be
stuck with an "ailing" vice-presi-
dent?
* * *
IF EVER we had "good times"
when political parties opposed each
other because each hated every-
thing the others stood for, now is
needed, some believe, a resurgence
of those times. The timid, vote-
seeking appeal to non-opinionated
Mr. John Q. Middleclass leaves a

DAILY
OFFICIAL
BULLETIN
The Daily Official Bulletin is an of-
ficial publication of the University of
Michigan for which the Michigan Daily
assumes no editorial responsibility. No-
tices should be sent in TYPEWRITTEN
form to Room 3553 Administration
Building before 2 p.m. the day preced-
ing publication.
SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 1956
VOL. LXVII, NO. 11
General Notices
Meeting of the University Staff. Gen-
eral staff meeting at 4:15 p.m., Mon,,
Oct. 22, in Rackham Lecture Hall.
President Hatcher will discuss the state
of the University. All members of the
University staff, academic and non-
academic, are invited.
Veterans who expect education and
training allowance under Public Law
550 but have not yet made application
to the Veterans Administration for
benefits mustrreport to Office of Veter-
ans' Affairs. 555 Administration Build-
ing, before 3:00 p.m. Tues., Oct. 2.
University choral Union - first re-
hearsal Tues. Oct. 2, at 7:00 p.m. sharp.
in Aud. A, Angell Hall. All members are
requested to arrive early enough to be
seated on time.
Moving in date for Northwood Apart-
ment tenants: The following apartments
will be ready for occupancy Oct. 2:
1800-1815, inclusve. 1831-1842, inclusive.
1849-1856, inclusive.
Pleasereport directly to the manager
of Northwood Apartments for your
apartment keys.
Fencing instruction for men will be
offered in the Intramural Building
Boxing Room this semester on Mondays
and Tuesdays at 4:30 p.m. Training be-
gins Mon. and Tues., Oct. 1 and 2. Wea-
pons and protective equipment will be
provided. Participation in various indi-
vidual and team competitions will be
possible later in the year for men suf-
ficiently advanced in technique by that
time. Plans are also being made for
weekly coeducational fencing.
Experienced fencers may call NO
2-2400 for schedule of advanced fencing.
Academic Notices
The Extensipn Service announces the
following class to be held in Ann Arfbor
beginning Thurs., Oct. 4.
Presidential Politics, 1956, 7:30 p.m.
131 School of Business Administration.

A

C

A

e

4

4

r