Newspapers / Daily Tar Heel (Chapel … / Oct. 17, 1952, edition 1 / Page 2
Part of Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
Pago Two The Daily Tar Heel Wat ISatfo ftar Heel The official student publication of the Publications Board of the University of North Carolina. Chapel Hill, where It is published daily, except Monday, examination and vacation periods, and during the official summer terms. Entered as second class matter at the post office in Chapel Hill. N. C. under the act of March 3. 1879. Subscription rates mailed $4 per year, $1.50 per quarter; delivered. $8 and $255 per quarter. !ditor Managing Editor Business Manager Sports Editor Assoc. Ed. Assoc. Ed. Sub. Mer Ass't. Sub. Mgr. Natl. Adv. Mgr Bev Baylor -Sue Burr ess .Carolyn Reichard . Delaine Bradsher Wallace Fridgen Night Editor for this issue: Rolfe Neill Ban Bowl Games? President Gordon Gray made clear his position on post season football games when he told newsmen Wednesday afternoon that he favored an "institutional conscience" meth od of regulation rather than a blanket ruling against the participation of Southern Conference members in bowl games. Gray indicated that, although he remained in opposition to post-season grid events, he would not fight the lifting of the Southern Conference ban at the December meeting if such were the minority view of the institutions and their presidents. We stand opposed to any code or ruling which would pro hibit a member of the Southern Conference from accepting a bid to play in one of the New Year's Day bowl classics, with conference suspension and boycott being the automatic penalty for violation. We interpret the banning of post-season games as a sin cere move on the part of the conference officials to harness and de-emphasize the monster known as "big-time athletics." The ineffectiveness of this suppressive legislation was vividly demonstrated last season when both Maryland and Clemson resigned themselves to the bad graces of the Southern Con ference rather than forego the glittering invitations to take the field against -outstanding college elevens on January 1. The restriction on bowl games is a valiant but misoriented approach to the inter-collegiate athletics problem. We can see no evil in big time athletics per se. We have no objection to the fervent nation-wide football enthusiasm and we harbor no malice against those schools whose teams consistently manage to pummel their opposition in the colorful Saturday spectacles and wind up primping their feathers in one of the major bowl games. We are concerned only with the evils tangent to big-time athletics and not the deflation of the program itself. The elimination by executive ruling of post-season, participation is a futile and unrealistic solution to the basic problems of bribery, over-subsidizing of athletes, academic manipulation in favor of halfbacks, and the other imperfections in Ameri can inter-collegiate athletics which proponents of the de emphasis hope to correct. The calculated obliteration of big-time athletics in order to wipe out the evils is tantamount to chopping off an arm to cure arthritis. Although an excess of public attention may warp a player's perspective and increase the opportunities for corruption, the clean-up crusade should be applied to the individual level. If there are no bribe givers or bribe takers, there will be no bribery. If a college administration rigidly adheres to a policy of academic non-favoritism, the specter of automatic passing grades on, football players' transcripts will vanish. What's wrong with a dynamic grid program, provided the players live up to common standards of hdnesty, the pro fessors insist upon diligent work on the part of the athletes, the alumni refrain from exerting undue pressure, and the entire football program remains in its proper proportion with in the university community? What's wrong with bowl games, provided the players themselves are genuinely willing to forfeit a Christmas vacation? True, these observations reek with an uninhibited ideal ism, but we are still unconvinced that a legislative ban on bowl participation is unlikely realize the noble result which its perpetrators desire. g sg J - 21 2Z 7Z7Z 23 2A IWW 27 28 2? 777, SO 51 IZ 53 ZZcmZi 58 s? 40 yyy A2 rzzzzizzzzii 45 4-6 47 48 49 53 4 55 """"" HORIZONTAL 1. white poplar 6. explosive sound 9. astern 12. part of coat 13. reverential fear 14. pooh! 15. first part 16. go back over IS. capital of Delaware 20. black snake 21. earlier 23. charge with ga9 24. hollow 25. cuddle 27. fish sauce 29. club 30. unfashioned 34. charm 37. nothing 38. condition 41. recoiled 43. mark of omission 44. mere trifle 45. work 47. conserve of grapes 50. indulged 51. liquid pitch 52. finch 53. prior to 54. gnome 55. tend VERTICAL. ' 1. high mountain 2. except Answer to Saturday's puzzle. AIRIA TH U n "nU T Ji S T EPPj niiip A V E. I D. P ASSO A 2. E AN S AT S TJE JT MA A AJlJL T AM MM R. A R X J. R Z AGs. ZA AAA DYE Average time of solution: 27 minutes. JH.-Uributed by King Features Syndicate Friday, October 17, 1952 BARRY FARBER ROLFE WEILL JIM SCHENCK . BIFF ROBERTS News Ed. Circ. Mgr. Jodv Levey ..Donald Hogg Soc. Ed. Deenie Schoeppe Tom Peacock Ned Beeker Asst. Snts. Ed. Adv. Mgr ' -l5 3. yellowish green mineral 4. citrus fruit 5. number of mountain ranges in India 6. young salmon 7. be obligated 8. sea bird 9. Manila hemp 10. culet 11. soothing exclamation 17. scarcer 19. place of nether darkness 21. town in Belgium 22. anoint 23. certify 26. salt 28. purvey 31. not alert 32: clamor 33. wapiti 35. deviate from type 36. push 38. extent 39. a candle 40. sharp moun tain spur 42. wild talker 44. slave 46. dancer's cymbals 48. stannum 49. outcome , ; SPAT I A2! JL LAU.N E L A TIE S LL l a ifs LAr AA fc s T Ttw AX A A A a x!JL-i-rfr o n I, Ie ras' i-s Express Yourself United Front Editor: In regard to Harry Snook's article concerning this new "cure all" called gromwell, I have a question. Has Mr. Snook ever heard of morals? Does he think a woman is chaste only because of a fear she will be-r come pregnant? What a sorry world this would be if that were the case! Obviously the words high morals" and "standards" are 'not ones Mr. Snook has in cluded in his gigantic vocabu lary. Free love may be accepted in some circles and societies but I think most of the women in the U. S. are just slightly op posed to it! Just how many re strict sexual activities because they fear bringing a "bastard", into the world? Maybe somef but an awful lot more fortu nately have a sense of values and decency. I believe most of the other women on this campus and other campuses will back me up in this feeling of indigna tion concerning the sex activi ties of the female and our so called "release..! A Co-Ed Through Rose-Tinted ' Glasses Editor: Hallelujah! Awake ye people! Joyous times are here! We have it on the authority of no lesser one than our own venerable Harry Snook, bicycle repairman turned philosopher, that all of the world's Freudian frustra tions will be ended, thanks to a new wonder drug, gromwell, which will enable men to revert to apes. According to this erstwhile sorcerer of things to come, we will no longer have to hold to our outmoded convention of monogamous possession of a mate. Instead we can now safe ly adopt the good old Eskimo doctrine of "pass the old lady around boys, there's plenty for all." Whfn we get tired of our spouse we can simply trade her to our next door neighbor for his. The time consuming and un healthy emotion of love would pass out of the picture. There will be many more ad vantage which come from the changes in our lives that grom well will bring about hints our versatile sage. Much time that is now wasted chasing women will be saved. For instance, a boy in the lower quad will only have to walk over to one of the coed dorms, and say, "Girls, who wants to be the lucky one tonight?" The young lady of his choice will then get a pill from a gromwell vendor which will be conveniently placed in the dorm. Now the couple will stroll down to the arboretum, check out a blanket from a University operated check out booth i. the entrance, and pro ceed to seek primitive pleasure in modern freedom, without fear of ostracism or progeny. The University of Virginia and her Marguerita's will have nothing on us then. Of course, as is the case with all things, the good is tempered with evil. The streets will be crowded with unemployed pros titutes. Since marriages will be contracted only by the season (much as rabbits, birds, and seals) expensive wedding rings will become impractical; hence the jewelers will go broke. Preachers will be deprived of an extra source of income and psychiatrists of the fees of their frustrated clientile. But these will have to be overlooked. We cannot hold up the progress of the masses for the benefit of the few. Yes, happy days are coming. Do" not despair at their slow ness for verily, verily, I say unto ye, my fellow students, mighty Snook has thrown his inestimable weight behind the wheels of progress, and with his help the bars of prudism and morality will be broken down, thereby enabling us to enter into a glorious existence the like of which the world has never before known. Jim Aiiey Gauntlet Editor: ' You are right that Commu nism is not a palid, insipid po litical party but a malicious growth out to bring the down fall' of democracy. I too like to think I am a Liberal; but I don't think Communism should be' outlawed. As we are citizens of the "Sic'Im, Checkers" mm r-cs. f.W .NkViXv f "0 Drew Pearson The Washington Merry-Go-Round WASHINGTON. General Eisenhower has nothing to wor ry about in the way of political reaction when it comes to the tax exemption which the Treas ury granted him on his house, 12 servants and living expenses at Columbia. The General wrote a letter to the treasury about this on. June 17, 1948, explain ing that he wouldn't need so many servants if he were not President of Columbia and ask ed that the house, servants, etc., not be treated as income. The capital-gains-tax ruling given. him on his book, "Cru sade in Europe," is likely to have less favorable public reac tion. In this case the General called personally on his friend, A. Lee M. Wiggins, then Under secretary of the Treasury, fol lowing which the ruling was given highest priority. One letter from the treasury to Ike was even rushed to him by special courier. Ordinarily, rulings of this kind drag on for weeks or months. And after a preliminary draft opinion favorable to Ike was written in the treasury, Under secretary Wiggins took the un usual step of sending it to In ternal Revenue Commissioner Schoeneman with a note at tached reading; "This agree ment should be approved." Eisenhower's first letter to the treasury was dated Dec. 20, 1947, and the treasury replied on Dec. 22 with almost unheard-of United States we are guaran teed the four freedoms (on the assumption that good will tri umph?). This means that it is up to the individual to de cide for himself what he shall believe, not dictated to from above as to his beliefs. If the individual isn't strong enough (or democracy doesn't have as strong an attraction) to choose democracy over Com munism I don't think any law will stop Communism. It must come from the individual, not bureaucratic authority. If we aren't strong enough to cham pion over Communism without outlawing it and don't sincerely and completely believe in de mocracy I don't see how legal action will do any good. Susan Fink THfM &AT$ Win- A&KZe ercEStt's pooz open & j CUtiHTHKU A WINP0VVLi v AS 16 MY WONT. HOW YO&O HAt? CSPUAH GAL m A MltHONAlKP ssmgasia Wu, mums VtoHiSffl I tUMsxsmA V KTOMfc'.rilll Jl!lli,wii.Mi' ' 1 mmmmm -rozxip Trie warp op ah'mpjcm ?P X MY MAGIC Al -2 TH V " A ALLI6ATOZ SY A'AiTT ife3 . .SWttX, speed. Since then, Congress has passed what has been dubbed "The Eisenhower Amendment" making it impossible for others writing only one book to get the reduced capital gains tax. The General's letter, request ing that his house at Columbia and upkeep not be considered as taxable income, was address ed to Commissioner Schoene man. It stated, in part: "In my capacity as President of Columbia University the trus tees provide an expense allow ance to cover the cost of the upkeep of the. large house in which Mrs. Eisenhower and I must live by reason of uni versity tradition, the desires of the authorities, and by the daily requirements of the position. A staff of 12 servants is necessary to maintain this residence. Their salaries as well as all upkeep costs are paid from the expense allowance provided by the Uni versity. "All my work and activities are devoted to the duties of this position. These expense accounts do not have any application to the personal living costs of my family and myself. Food, cloth ing, automobiles, medical care, and ordinary expense of living are paid out of private re sources." Several other unimportant letters were sent to the treas ury, and in November, 1948, In ternal Revenue gave Ike a fa vorable ruling. Two years later, Nov. 3, 1950, after a long wrangle, the treas ury permitted a somewhat simi lar ruling regarding hotel man agers who were forced to live in their hotels. The free use of rooms, meals were not to be considered as taxable income, the treasury finally decided. This was similar to the ruling that the upkeep of Eisenhower's house was not taxable income. It took the treasury months of additional wrangling to give a similar ruling to nurses who are required to live in hospitals. This ruling did not come down until Aug. 2, 1951, three years after Ike got his ruling, and even then it was not as clear cut as Eisenhower's. The treasury also has ruled that the head janitor of a build- rWCiATTV Li III m v - - Sl ill 1 WITH THAT FlNWPPf& TO UIPP US,M5 CAN Sgf5 TO KPPCUpP'. KUN OPPA9 A 774TMUt& I 60TTA Pl$&Ul$Z A WHAT FDGO Yb MY MAHOUT J PON'T UNNERSTAN' . Tommy V I T During the campaign preced ing the Campus Elections last fall one party failed to comply with the duly established pro visions of the General Elections Law. Specifically, they failed to meet the deadline establish ed for the filing of candidates. The Elections Board ruled that the candidates of that par ty were disqualified; however, after this ruling had been made the Chairman of the party con cerned appeared and persuaded the Board that its first decision should be reversed. This was done despite the fact that the law was clear and that the former decision was correct. The illegality of this was recognized by a member of the Board and a fellow stu dent who appealed the decision to the Student Council. After four hours of hearings and debate closed to the stu dent body of courses the Coun cil handed down a very interest ing ruling. As a matter of fact, it is doubtful if even the streamer headline in the next morning's Daily Tar Heel made an impression on the student body which was commensurate with the weight of the decision. I" have .the original copy of the official ruling of the Coun cil at hand, but in it I find only a disregard of the law passed by the Legislature. There is no question of the fact that the law was violated. There is no question of the constitutionality of the law. There is only the question of political expediency. John Sanders- YoUng Democrats The world of "might have been" has come into prominence since the current presidential campaign has hotted up to its present incandescent condition. Th. Jefferson, the first saint of the Democratic Party, has been clasped to the bosom of a variety of political god-mothers. In 1948, the Dixiecrats claimed him, because Jefferson, in his time, was the apostle of a de centralized government, or, to hear the latter-day communi cants tell it, he was the first "states' Tighter." Saint Thomas ing who has to live in it shall not be taxed for the value of his apartment, but the same does not apply to assistant jani tors. Hotel waiters who get free meals while serving at hotels and restaurants also got a none-too-lenient ruling. If they eat a free meal while at work, it is not taxable income. But if they eat the meal as they finish work, it is taxable income. In Florida both Senators Spes sard Holland and George Sma thers have been sitting on their hands. They have made no speeches for Stevenson, lifted no finger for him, leaving it to ex-Senator Claude Pepper to or ganize the state. At Tampa, Senator Smathers was invited to introduce Stev enson, but set the impossible condition that he be allowed to state during his introduction the reasons why he differed with the Governor. In brief, Smathers wanted to make a speech against Stevenson before Stevenson spoke. This was refused. VJB we Hf ne&D pown PIT VVHlUg m PUTTIN'ON A PlCKSY lU'TJIIW'TUCMAKr; sr- F. OtPING MUMNV1 WeAP TUG TAW IVifv?-, CAN TV Sumner R.I O L It is certainly true that both parties wished the election to proceed without interference, and, so far as this particular instance is concerned, the course of action chosen by the Council was the most popular alterna tive open to them. If that were all there were to it the matter would be deader than the pro verbial doornail. The difficulty lies in the precedent which this decision has set for the Campus judiciary- The precedent is this: There is a law on the books which is unquestionably constitutional; although admittedly it is some times inconvenient. The law has been violated and the highest Campus Court has condoned the violation. In denial of the tradition in which the law of this and other lands is based that a law is in force until repealed or declared void by competent authority, this law is being officially ig nored when it suits the purpose of the politicians. A similar situation has arisen this year. The Legislature has passed a bill to change the elec tions districts, but by law this cannot take effect for forty five days. It is suggested that the law again be ignored and that this legislation be put into effect. Student Government is said to be a training ground for de mocracy, but this is training for anarchy. Are we digging a grave for j ustice? is reputed to have said that "that government is best which governs least." Therefore, the Dixiecrats of 1948 and the "Eisenhower Demo crats" of 1952 argue that they, and not the Stevenson-Spark-jian forces, have true-blue demo cracy on their side. In short, "if Jefferson were alive today, he would make Monticello quiver as he wrote impassioned declarations for Ike." So say those who would dwell in the world of "might have been." The preposterous nature of such an argument is characteris tic of all similar attempts to prove a point in the world of today by snatching an isolated fact from the past and applying it, completely out of its "bourne of time," to the solution of problems peculiar to our own era. To appreciate the error in volved, it is only necessary to mention some additional views held by Mr. Jefferson. He was an agrarian. Therefore, if his be lief in a decentralized govern ment makes him a Republican, then his agrarianism makes him a Populist. (So they said in 1896.) He also looked fondly upon having a revolution every twenty or thirty years. This makes him a Communist. He founded a state university. That makes him a Socialist. He bought Louisiana without auth ority. That makes him a dicta tor. He owned slaves. That makes him a Confederate. By the same "logic", Mr. Eisenhower, had he lived at the right time, could have been a Pisistratus, a Sulla, a Grant, or a Big Brother. Or is he? CDULD UAkT( rv-uAu OfiATS AN &IFT into ry( AN OUST ( CUT TH an-on A CAN- S that will p f
Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Oct. 17, 1952, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75