TUESDAY, MAY 15, 1945
1 1
PAGE TWO
THE TAB HEEL
i
.8-
v.
i
i !
IT -flflne ; STCUJUDERnT DSEDIT,
. . . i&omm sllne ESEMIHOO
THE STUDENT BODY BECOMES THE
STUDENT LEGISLATURE WEDNESDAY
Democracy is working this week at Carolina! Over five hun
dred students have petitioned the President of the Student Body
to call a special election to over-ride a decision of the Student
Legislature.
The Constitution of the Student Legislature, gives the stu
dent body the right to make and recall laws. Here are the sec
tions of the constitution concerning this provision :
Article III. Powers and Limitations
"All legislative powers of the student body shall be vested in
the Student Legislature and shall be unlimited except to the
extent that: ,
"Section (1) The student body shall have the power of ini
tiative whereby laws may be enacted and constitutional amend
ments adopted by the student independently of the legislature.
This power, may be invoked by petition wherein the proposed
measure shall be set forth at length. If the petition be for the
enactment of a law, it shall be signed by ten percent of the stu
dent body; and if the petition be for the amendment of the con
stitution, the petition therefor shall be signed by sixteen per cent
of the students. The petitions thus signed shall be filed with the
student body president, who shall in turn submit the measure
thus proposed to the student body for their consideration not later
than fifteen days after the date of filing. A favorable majority,
with at least twenty-five percent of the student body voting, shall
be necessary for the passage of such petitions. The same measure,
in form or in essential substance, shall not be submitted to the
students by initiative petition, either affirmatively or negatively,
oftener than twice in one school year. Constitutional limitations
as to the scope and. subject matter of measures enacted by the
legislature shall apply to those enacted by the initiative.
"Section (2) The student body shall also have the power of
referendum which may be invoked, by petition, against any act
or part of any act of the legislature. Petitions invoking the refer
endum shall be signed by not less than ten per cent of the stu
dent body and filed with the student body president. Such peti
tions shall set out the title of the act against which the referen
dum is invoked, and in addition thereto, the act or section there
of involved. When the referendum is thus invoked, the presi
dent of the student body shall refer the same to the students for
approval orrejection not later than fifteen days after the filing.
A favorable majority, with at least twenty-five percent of the
student body voting shall be necessary for approval."
Here is democracy in its purest form. Here is proof that the
students are interested in their government. President Mc
Kenzie has announced that the polls will be open Wednesday
when every student, will become a maker of the law. ,
The issue at stake is an important one, involving principles
which will be important in shaping the course of student govern
ment on this campus. - An important right will be exercised.
The right of the people to initiate laws puts so much power in
their hands that even the framers of the Constitution of the
United States did not feel that the masses were capable of prop
erly exercising such power. Many states have provisions for
initiative, referendum, and recall and often it has been demon
strated that the voters were unqualified to hold such direct
power. . . . .
At any rate, we firmly believe that these rights which are
guaranteed by our student constitution are well entrusted in a
student body which by popular vote can express wise decisions.
You have been given a democratic right which in many govern
ments is denied use it wisely!
THE CATAPULT WAS GOOD!
A number of NROTC students have brought to our attention
the fact that the editorial of May 8 which praised the Catapult
was misunderstood by some of the men in Old East and Old West.
In a letter to the Editor we were asked among other things to
name the publications on the campus which can be classed as
"extraordinary." The letter was signed by Herman W. Ashlaw,
F. X. Gallagher, Joseph D. McMahori, George B. Stadter, George
Brening, C. Wayne Canterbury, T. Robert Dungey, Philip J.
Moskowitz, John A. Lord, and F. Earle Crawford, Jr. The
answer is obvious : none of our publications are "extraordinary."
For authoritative evidence of this statement, the reader is asked
to consult the ratings 'given our publications by organizations
like the Associated dollegiate Press.
We believe that the last issue of the Catapult made a good
impression. The Catapult seems to have more enthusiastic back
ers than does any other campus publication. As all campus pub
lications now stand (that is, none of them are called "extra
ordinary" by national critics), the Catapult and its able editor
are certainly to be commended.
ATT: COMMANDING OFFICER
The commanding officer of the V-12 and ROTC units here has
ordered that no V-12 sailor will be allowed to play in Freddy
Johnson's campus orchestra.
This order came simultaneous with the refusal of the legisla
ture to lift dance expenditure restrictions that would permit the
hiring of expensive name dance bands to play for our dances.
There are six V-12 musicians and ROTC's, that form an in
tegral part of Freddy's outfit. Unless this order is lifted, there
will be little chance for saving the band. During Freddy's 10
years as a campus bandleader, he has-been of valuable service
to the school. Many times he. has lost money on dances and
walked away with his usual congenial smile.
The navy men playing with the band average higher grades
than the V-12 unit as a whole. It couldn't be that the dance band,
working four hours a week, has interfered with their studies.
We ask that the commanding officer reconsider this decision
and allow the boys to return to Freddy's fold so that week-end
entertainment" will not disappear entirely from the campus.
OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER OF THE PUBLICATIONS UNION
SERVING CIVILIAN AND MILITARY STUDENTS AT THE
UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL
ROBERT MORRISON
BARRON MILLS
BILL HIGHT
BANKS MEBANE, CHARLES WICKENBERG..
DAVE KOONCE .:
REPORTERS:
W. H. Hipps, Jr., Pat Kelly, Marianne Brojroe, Dave Koonce, Dave LUienthal, Fred Flagler,
Marjorie Jordon, Mildred Kresnik, Gertrude Walton, J. C. Lackey, Hoy Thompson, Elaine
Pearlstine, Angela Hardy, Betty Edwards, Ruth Whitson, Marjorie EzzeUe, Lois Clarke,
Olive Aan Barns, Catherine Sloan, Peggy Case, Sara Spratt, Jim Dillard, Laura Parker,
Ann Thornton, Mary Hill Gaston, Bill Crisp
CARROLL POPLIN
Irwin Smallwood
LINDA NOBLES
SPORTS
SOCIETY ASSISTANTS:
Bobbie Wyatt Harry Bates
BETTIE GAITHER
OFFICE STAFF:
Billy SeJig
SALES STAFF:
Lois Clarke Mary Pierce Johnson Alma Young
Martha Faison Jane Fairiey Ginny Freeman
HARRISON TENNEY ...
CIRCULATION STAFF;
Bill Jernigan
Published Tuesday and Saturday except
Deadlines Thursday and Sunday. Entered as
HilL N, C, under the act of March 8, 1879.
Witch-hunting
Charge Hit By
Douglass Hunt
To the Editor of the Tar Heel.
Dear Bob:
When you once break over the
traces and write a letter to a paper
you seem to become the victim of
some sort of disease that forces you
to keep on and on. Nonetheless, the
issue se ems sufficiently important;
and, since the campus ought to have
all the available information before
it makes up its mind, I thought I
ought to contribute what I have
been able to find out by careful
investigation about the Friederich
case.
I was invited to the meeting of
Chapel Hill citizens who protested
Dr. Friederich's appointment by
the OWI, but was unable to at
tended. Since all the furore has been
created on the campus I have care
fully accumulated all the informa
tion I could about the case by talk
ing to the people on both sides most
intimately concerned. I have read
Dr. Friederich's pamphlet written ,
in 1938 the one which contributed !
so many quotations taken "at ran
dom and out of context" to both
sides. My impression was that it
very definitely attempted to make
a case for Hitler and Mussolini. I
do not base that impression on any.
miscellaneous quotations, but on a
careful reading of the entire
pamphlet. Admitted that the
pamphlet was written in 1938, ad
mitted that others, more sympa
thetic, might have received a dif
ferent impression, I submit that N
anyone who - believed that the
pamphlet bespoke those views had
an obligation to act. Numerous per
sons in. Chapel Hill did act.
, As early as April 2, Prof. W. A.
Olsen wrote to the OWI. On April
10, according to a letter written by
Dr. Friederich to Paul Green, the
OWI had decided, on the basis of
protests registered by two Chapel
Hill professors, to reopen his case.
Who the other professor was who
wrote before April 10, I do not ,
know. So far as I know and I have
talked to a large number of the
persons who signed the citizens'
petition to Dr. E. E. Ericson,
Prof. W. A. Olsen, Dr. Raymond
Adams, Mr. William Daniel, Dr. E.
J. Woodhouse, Mr. W. T. Couch,
Mr. Paul Green, and members of
the Tar Heel staff most intimately
acquainted with the case the name
of the other professor is not gen
erallv known. Nonetheless, the
charge is made that Dr. E. E. Eric
son is the "witch-hunter" behind
the whole plot. It is known and
it was a matter of record in time
for Mr. Couch to have withdrawn
his letter to the Tar Heel that Dr.
Ericson's letter to the OWI was
dated April 19, and mailed April
20, ten days after the OWI had -
reopened the case. It is also a mat
ter of record that neither Dr. Eric
son nor Prof. Olsen knew that the
other had acted until the night of
April 24, when the group of citi
zens met at Graham Memorial to
discuss the affair. And, more than
that, Prof. Olsen did not know that
Dr. Ericson had written a letter of
his own until last Thursday morn
ing the -day the investigation of
the Tar Heel's first story took
place.
Certain of our "witch-hunters"
have also neglected to mention the
fact that neither Ericson nor Olsen
knew the contents of the letter
written by Mr. Daniel of the Psy-
...Editor
Managing Editor
Associate Editor
Editorial Advisers
Desk Editor
Sports Editor
REPORTERS:
Johnny May
Society Editor
Carolyn Kich
.Business Manager
Arthur Budlong
Mary Louise Martin
. Juanita Anderson
..Circulation Manager
Julia Moody
during vacations, examinations and holidays.
second class matter at the post office at Chapel
Member of ASC and Natl Adv. Service, Inc.
chology Department, who was not
in any way connected with the
group which met at Graham Me
morial. Nor did they know of the
action taken by Dr. L. O. Kattsoff
, of the Philosophy Department be
fore the April 24 meeting. And
these persons had not known of
Dr. Raymond Adams' personal let-
ter to the OWI.
Furthermore, in all the witch-
hunting which has resulted from the
furore over Friederich, very few
people have known that the meet
ing of the group of Chapel Hill
citizens, took place on the night of
April 24, and that the OWI had, to
use the words of its assistant Di
rector, Mr. Edward Klauber, "with
drawn the tender of appointment"
earlier that same day.
What is the conclusion ? It is
t simply a fact that the requests to
the OWI that Dr. Friederich's case
be reopened and that is all any
of the letters I have seen asked
for: none of ' them 'branded Dr.
Friederich a Nazi it is I repeat,
a matter of record that no one in
stigated any plot to smear Dr.
Friederich. The protests arose spon
taneously from persons who had
read Dr. Friederich's pamphlet and
who felt that the OWI should con
sider again before sending him on
the very delicate mission' to Ger
many for which he had been picked.
None of these persons whom I have
mentioned branded Dr. Friederich
a Nazi; none of them demanded
that he not be given a job in this
country; none of them demanded
that he be ousted from the Uni
versity. As a matter of fact most
of those to whom I have talked
have themselves suggested that he
should resume his place here on the
faculty. And Chancellor House has
stated that there is no reason why
he should not be able to come back
at once. He has not lost his job.
He is merely on leave of absence.
Neither the individuals nor the
group which protested felt them
selves to be judge and jury for Dr.
Friederich's case, and in no wise
did they act in that capacity. The
very first amendment to the Con
stitution of the United States guar
antees their right to do precisely
what they did: "petition the gov
ernment for redress of griev- '
ances." Whether they had a case
which is the real issue each person
on the campus must decide for him
self. And the OWI, which had hired
Dr. Friederich, had to decide in its
own case. That is what the citizens
requested it to do. And that is what
it did. Mr. Klauber, in a letter to
one of the persons who protested,
declared that although Dr. Fried
erich displayed convincing evi
dence that he had recanted his
previous views the OWI "must de
; cline to appoint him" to .the very
. delicate position in Germany for
which he had been chosen.
I do not know enough about the
OWI to defend or condemn its ac
tions in this case. But I do know
that the record displays convincing
evidence that much of this contro-
versy need never have happened.
And it disproves enough of the
weird assertions made in Dr. Fried
erich's behalf to show that those
who defend him need to make their
defense on the issues: 1) Do citi
zens have a right to protest to
their government? 2) Is the OWI
right in not sending to Germany a
man who has held strong Pro
Hitler views, however long ago he
held them, for the delicate job of
re-educating the German people to
decency and honor? 3) Has a gov
ernment agency a right to correct
its mistakes?
Sincerely, .
Douglass Hunt.
TAR
and
By Charles Frank Benbow, Jr.
For the first time in a" long time
legislators voted as individuals.
Those who love democracy would
have thrilled at the spectacle pre
sented last Thursday night. The
Dance Bill was discussed pro and
con most eloquently. Party pacts,
friendship ties, fraternity bonds,
and sorority seams were discarded
as the representatives voted the
dictates of their own conscience.
The subject matter of the argu
ments ranged from the casualty
list of Okinawa through juvenile
delinquency to the story of Cinder
ella. Those legislators voting against
the bill were: Alexander, Barwick,
Chapman, Davis, Edwards, Ficklen,
Fulton, Kelly, Lilienthal, Mann,
Robinson, Saunders, Traynham,
Wallace, Walton, Warren, and
Dawson.
Those legislators who voted to
lift the limitations on dance ex
penditures were: Adams, Burke,
Brinkley, Dupes, Jaffe, Koontz,
Pannill, Pully, Prince, Smith, Stone
braker, Thompson, Tuthill, Walker,
Wolfe, and Hunt.
The comments on the legislature's
action have been varied. Many stu
dents feel that (with all due re
spects" to the consciences of their
duly elected representatives) the
majority of students were in favor
of Clive Thompson's bill. Some feel
that the nature of the bill demands
' the expression of all students. They
' are going to exercise their right of
initiative and referendum which is
given them in Article III, sections
1 and 2 of the Constitution of the
Student Legislature.
Since ten per cent of the student
body has signed a petition to have
the issue put to a popular vote,
there is opposition to the action
taken Thursday night. : The issue is
before the student body. Every stu
dent is now a legislator and is duty
bound to vote Wednesday (i.e., TO
MORROW). A year ago this columnist spoke
before the legislature in order to
help defeat a bill to lift the limi
tations on dance expenditures.
Since then he has observed the
hypocritical situation which now
exists. We students have limited
ourselves on what we shall spend
Veterans Ask
For Rights
May 13, 1945
Dear Editor,
We as veterans of World War II
ask no pity or special consideration ;
we ask only the rights given to any
CAROLINA man, among which is
an equal voice in campus affairs.
In exercising such a right we
should like to take a definite stand
on the question of limiting dance
expenditures on dances given for and
by the students.
We want the limitations' lifted.
We have followed our country as
servicemen, and we can follow it
equally as well as civilians. Our
government recently lifted the cur
few on night-clubs and the ban on
race tracks.
If the people who oppose this ac
tion claim it will affect the morale of
our fighting men overseas, then let
tnem hrst consult the servicemen
and discharged veterans on this
campus who wholeheartedly approve
any measure to return this campus
to normalcy. By this we would re
alize our constant; dream to return
to what we left.
Sincerely,
Robert P. Osborne, L. B. John
son, Jr., Allan Pannill, James R.
Todd, Jr., H. S. Anderson, Fred
H. Chamberlain, Whit Osgood,
Art Adams, Jenks Tripp, J. W.
- Hedrick, Marriotte JStewart,
Reeves Hawkins, Oharles W.
Creech, William L. Smith.
Dorm Men Disapprove
Source Of Fragrance
Dear Editor:
Chum, we have a bitch coming.
Now, mind you, we're as much in
favor of beautifying the campus
as the next guys, but, ye gods, is
it sine quo non to dump last year's
bumper crop of fertilizer1 under
neath our window? Why not just
let the grass grow by itself like
most grass does?
Signed: Jack Youngerman, Bill
Thomas, Art Lamb, Tom Gorman,
Jim Regan, Kent Roberts, Herb
Long, Pete Lilly, Randy Thomp
son, John T. Gregory, and all of
South Bay, Old West.
P. S.: Phewweeeinr
FEATt
disre
for one dance, uuv -earded
total expenditures. Not
only that, but we have been .enter
tained by Clyde Lucas and Don
Redmon. (The limitations are
hypocritically lackadaisical.) lne
student body's total expenditures
on wartime beer week-ends cram
med full of sloppy dances are higher
than the total expenditures of an
average peace year. Thursday night
this columnist spoke before the
legislature in order to help get a
bill passed which would lift dance
limitations.
The students know that the
present situation is hypocritical,
and the students know that the
situation can be remedied by lifting
the limitations.
Schartle Wants
Issues Brought
Into The Open
May 12, 1945.
The Editor
Tar Heel
Chapel Hill, N. C.
Dear Bob: '
It is regrettable that Mr. W. T.
Couch in his letter to the editor of
May 8, consumed considerable val
uable space in singling out victims
for his personal animosity, rather
than presenting evidence in defense
of Dr. Friederich as ably as did Dr.
Jente and Dr. Lane.
The Tar Heel had every right to
present a legitimate news story on
the Friederich affair, but in all
fairness to Friederich, it is equally
essential that both sides of the is
sue be represented. No one wants
Dr. Friederich to suffer an injus
tice, and few- object to his return
ing to the University in a teaching
capacity; however, if there is any
question as to Friederich's pro-nationalist
leanings in the past, he
could be placed in a more advanta
geous position than the reeducation
of nationalists to democracy. Per
haps Mr. Couch would be willing to
give former pro-Nazis or Lindbergh
isolationists "a chance" to reeducate
the Germans, but others of us are not
in an experimenting mood.
I am puzzled by the admission of
Couch that Friederich in 1938 was
"Pro-Hitler" as opposed to Jente's
statement that Friederich never "ex
pressed or implied the least sympa
thy with Nazi ideology and meth
ods" . . . which of the defenders has
the facts?
There was no necessity for an at
tack on Dr. Ericson, who was not
the sender of the first letter to the
OWI, and who has every right as
an; American citizen to protest an
appointment ' which he feels unjust.
No one, I feel sure, foresaw the so
called "smear" in the Tar Heel or
the subsequent local fiasco; on the
contrary, it was a matter of indivi
dual concern over the placement of
Friederich in a strategic position
outside of the U. S.
It seems to me that the issues
should no longer remain hidden away
on either side but be brought into
the open without petty, inconsequen
tial attacks so that the public may
have the opportunity of drawing its
own just conclusion.
Sincerely,
Pat Schartle.
Exchanges
By Beverly Eisenberg
V-12's are bound to be pretty
much the same all over so this in
THE DAILY CALIFORNIAN is
provoking: "The perfect sailor:
doesn't borrow money, doesn't
drink, doesn't give girls a line,
doesn't exist." Certainly we at
Carolina can claim to know a little
of this species and from what we've
noticed we must disagree. From
direct observation even on the first
Wednesday of the month in front
of Swain Hall, there's no one to
borrow from after deductions, dona
tions, and Danziger's. The drink
ing is out too . . . it's too expen
sive and anyhow it isn't healthy and
as to giving the coeds a line . . .
an authority from Pettigrew says
such is superfluous in Chapel Hill.
10 get in a rut u in THE
OBERLIN; REVIEW this question
is conspicuous: "Have you said a
kindly word to one of our paddle
feet lately?" Seems it's "Be Kind
to Sailors Week" at Oberlin.