North Carolina Newspapers

Page 2 Thursday, February 18, 1965 1 DTH Editorial Page H u. --: Opinions of the Daily Tar Heel are expressed in its editorials. Letters andU columns, covering a wide range of v iews, reflect the personal opinions of their authors. II Cloud Easily Seeded The Forum; NOT Guilty By means of a NAACP "flyer" dis tributed in UNC residence halls early this week, and through public pronounce ments of James Gardner, some local in tegrationist groups have cast a large. ; clou4 of doubt over the integrity of the Carolina Forum. Like many charges voiced by such ! groups, however, these recent accusations create a cloud which can be seeded easily, and when the truth precipitates the only effect is a minor drizzle. Gardner and his pals claim the Forum invited James Farmer, executive secre tary of the Congress of Racial Equality, to speak at UNC and then withdrew the offer for reasons which the flyer calls "somewhat hazy." The flyer also hints Bill Schwartz, chairman of the Forum, was motivated by. his racist Southern background in making the decision. At the same time, the NAACP questions the effectiveness of the Forum saying, "Quick now, can you name any speaker sponsored by the Carolina Forum this year?" , Tnariswer the t last DOint iirstj; the " Forum sponsored both Averell Harriman and Herbert : Philbrick. thislyear,- and pro- vided . a i public : reception ; for Governor Terry I Sanford to ' talk informally: with , stuuentsS All three eri -were !welilr-f ceived by large audiences; h received the letter, he was, needless to say, somewhat angry. After all, no in vitation had been extended to Farmer and no date had been discussed. Also, legal restrictions prevent groups such as the Forum from making contributions to special interest groups of any kind. Furthermore, Farmer was just one of the possible speakers for the spring. Many invitations had been offered earlier, and several had been accepted. In this category are John Kenneth Galbraith (to speak April 8) and Hugh Hefner (May 10.) Tentative dates had been set for James Reston (early March), Supreme Court jTustice William O. Douglas (mid April) and Ralph McGill. Taking all these factors into account, Schwartz decided that further action on Farmer was not called for at that time, so the matter was dropped without a reply to CORE. It is on this slight error in judgment (i.e., the lack of a reply to CORE) that the local groups have based their violent accusations. When the local CORE group inquired again about the situation, Schwartz; pa tiently explained the. matter and consid ered the matter dropped. ' ' - 'fl Thus, no invitation ;wast ever goffered to Farmer, nor; did the Forum, approach fHCORE as to his availability. Once again o; fv,o WAAfP it appears that a simple situation.; has Foruin 5 and the enlightenment ? of k the campus, f present ,$e Farmer tase as it actually happenedUUplus a few added points to insure you get your money's a group angry without real reason worth. ''The call ffomthilqcal ORK 'repre sentative was the last that Schwartz lifeard of the matter until he was attacked ivici- : . . ously by the : midnight flyers. -v&ni t t- Just before fail semester exams, a young lady approached . the Carolina Forum and said she could get James Farmer to come to UNC. Would the Forum co-sponsor the speech? Certainly, said the Forum, but it's near examinations now and we are having trouble with our grades and can't we wait and discuss it when we all have some time on our hands? All right, said the girl, but what about expense money? Well, said the Forum, we will be happy to pay Mr. Farmer's expenses plus a $100 honorarium. Thus everyone parted friends. Shortly after second semester began, the Forum received a letter from CORE'S national office extending proper thanks for the invitation to Mr. Farmer, and adding that CORE understood that the Forum would make a $100 contribution to CORE. When Forum co-chairman Bill Schwartz The facts seem to prove that "CORE has no case. ; If the basis for their com plaint is the Forum's failure to invite Farmer, then the argument should be " extended to include anyone who has not appeared on campus this year that is, almost everyone. :. I 1 m l! Il 11 72 Years of Editorial Freedom The Daily Tar Heel is the official news publi cation of the University of North Carolina and is published by students daily except Mondays, examination periods and vacations. Fred Seely, Hugh Stevens, co-editors; Mike Yopp, Ernie McCrary, managing editors; Pete Wales, associate editor; Larry Tarle ton, sporfs editor; Fred Thomas, night editor; Mary Ellison Strother, wire edi tor; John Greenbacker, Kerry Sipe, Alan Banev, staff writers; Pete Gammons, asst. sports editor, Perry McCarty, Pete Cross, Sill Lee, Tom Hahey, sports writers; Jock Lauterer, photographer, Chip Barnard, cartoonist; Jack Harrington, bus. mgr.; Betsy Gray, asst. bus. mgr.; Woody Sobel, ad. mgr.; Jim Peddicord, asst. ad. mgr.; Tom Clark, subscription mgr.; John Evans, circulation mgr.; Dick Baddour, Stuart i i i If i I ft i I il 1 r Il Ficklen, Jim Potter t salesmen. 1 P Second Class postage paid at the post office in Chapel Hill, N. C. Subscription rates: $4.50 per semester; $8 per year. Printed by the Chapel Ilill Publishing Co., Inc. The Associated Press is entitled exclusively to the use for republica tion of all local news printed in this newspaper as welj as all AP news dispatches. P 1 1 It i g9('o''N"nf1'v1vlwrr': 1r r1...1v.rr.,irf1 , As to the charge that Schwartz "drop ped" Farmer because his Southern back ground prejudices him against Negro speakers, some facts speak for them selves: Schwartz is one of the most outspok en liberals on campus and has never giv en anyone cause to doubt his sincerity on civil rights issues. Schwartz's family has done a great deal of work in the field of racial harm ony. His father organized the recent din ner for Martin Luther King in Atlanta, and is a trustee of a Negro college. Schwartz attempted throughout last year to obtain Farmer for a campus speech, only to have Farmer refuse even though he visited Chapel Hill. Schwartz has worked diligently to obtain the services of Dr. King as a cam pus speaker this year, but he has been unavailable. Thus, to call Schwartz or Nicky Nichol son (who shares the Forum chairman ship) racists, or even to infer such, is as ridiculous as calling George Lincoln Rock well an integrationist. Charges loosely based and even more carelessly tossed about are not difficult to uncover as distortions. This is the case with just about everything the Free Speech Movement and the integrationist groups have produced in the past few days, and is the reason why practically everyone in the student body, the faculty and the administration holds them in ri dicule. iUtL. It has been a case of too much accu sation in too big a load, but the cloud has not been so thick as to obscure the truth that there just aren't the facts to back the whole thing up. i - : - i 1 I , ' t ' r ' ' , ' t - - - - " ' Y" - ' ' ' N - .' I ' ' ' ' I - ri' -' '- ' - " J ' - -vc;trrjj x I r ' '''' ' ' 'V'rr'' - V Y - ill s y': ' j Honor Off enaers Must Be ReBortec Bri tish Plan Suggested Admi s8ion Policie s Outda ted (From The Smithfield Herald) ; - ; institutions v of higher learning have increased from two mil lion to five million. By 1980, more than 10 million students will be enrolled 60 per cent of the college age group. , . In an article in the New York Times, Fred M. Hechinger says One of the pressing problems ; confronting young people and their parents today is the diffi culty of "getting in" college. On the other side of the coin, there, is the problem faced by colleg-' es and universities, in, selecting "these large numbers of stud- students for admission to their ents are being checked through classrooms and campus life, rtbe college gates by virtually the The problem on both? sides of f same academic . customs proce- the .coin seems to be growing , dures that existed when only j a worse. ...... .... . privileged . iew. , sousni aanus- - HP - ; fi! It !4 tl.' '." A . m "J T Statistics - shojv , the , enormity ntir the problem. " Recently,' 635,- ' Mr. Crossland urges colleges and universities to work out co operative plans to reduce wast ed, time and energy in process ing student applications for ad mission. The New York Times article cites a new system in Britain as a guide. .Students seeking entry : into a: British .uni versity may submit " one appli cation, listing six institutions in the order of' personal choice. What is' known as "the Universi- 000 high school students all ov er the United States, including Johnston County students, took College Board aptitude tests. The total number taking these tests this year will reach 1,173, 000. Twenty years ago, only 29, 000 students were given these examinations. Two generations ago, from four to five per cent of the college age group enter ed college. Virtually every stud ent who applied for admission was accepted. Today nearly half of the college age group seeks ad mission. The colleges and uni versities do not have room for all who apply. Many institutions reject more applicants than they admit. This remains true despite expansion of college fa cilities. In the past 13 years full-time enrollments in U. S. ties Central Council on Admis pnv ieged , iew. sought aanus- r6i6hs"serves as' cleaing' house ?Sotes Fred-Crpss- nd traffic- control 'center." ; A idu, lonner ueau 01 auiinssion student still has freedom to at JNew x o r k univensty ana now an executive ,of the . Ford Foundation,' e as - saying, ; "We.' have come close to making ac cess to our colleges and uni versities a shambles." Mr. Crossland deplores inef ficiency in the college admis sion system. He says that mil lions of dollars are wasted on application fees; that millions of man-hours in h'gh schools are wasted on the snuffling , of papers of "ghost" applicants who will not show up, if accept ed; that millions of student -hours are wasted on repeated testing and form-filing. All this because high school seniors must apply for admission at a number of colleges to strength en their chances of "getting in." choose.. A university - remains free 'to accept' or reject. The New York Times article notes that "after, rejection- by the school of the candidate's first choice, institution number two gets a crack at the same form, and so on down the line." The British system or some variation of it would be wel come in the United States. It apparently would save a great deal of. time for students, high school administrators, and col lege admission officers. Such a co-operative plan would not, of course, solve all the prob lems of "getting in," nor would it relieve all the pressures felt by parents as well as by stud ents. But it would help restore order to a situation that seems to be getting out of hand. Editors, The Tar Heel: ' P This is a difficult letter to vrite because it attempts to do t a difficult thing: to persuade students who think otherwise that it is honorable to turn in ! academic cheats. Th'"s is written because of in dications in the DTH that many students do not understand this. The most recent indication was a letter by George Carson (Feb. 10) who thinks the only true honor system is that which puts each student on his own honor. If any responsble answer has been made to such statements I have not seen jit. It is important to remember that the honor system is a part of student government. Here at UNC, unlike the Air Force Aca demy, there is no attempt to combine a completely authori tarian system with an honor code imposed from above. The administration here genuinely wants student government (in cluding the honor system) to work. It would be ideal if it were possible to make it as simple as Mr. Carson implies and sim ply put every person on his own honor. It would be ideal in- lo cal, state, national, and inter national areas if we could put every person or nation on his honor to abide by the golden rule. Then we could abolish ar mies and police forces and ?11 live in sweet harmony. But it is precisely because of rule - and lawbreaking that the law abid ing majority must coerce those who will not conform to just and reasonable standards. As St. Paul put it, "The law is not made for the righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient . . . ." The honor system must somehow deal with those who have no honor. In fact, this is the most im portant thing it must do. The person who is already honorable does not need any kind of honor code to make him behave honorably. The honor code here does try to put ev eryone on his own honor, and no doubt the emphasis does stif fen some weak moral backbon es and" the effect is salutary. But, again, the true test of the honor system is how well it con trols (he cheat, the liar, and the thief." J ' 1 i We do, indeed, teach our chil dren not to "snitch": or tattle. But there is a reason for ' this. - Usually, tattling by a child is ' an appeal: to overwhelming par cental) authority for purely sel Vfish motives. Moreover, the -child does not understand the difference between what is triv ial and what is important. Among adults the immature, the fearful, or the criminal does mot want to "squeal" or "rat" on his fellows. Mature persons realize that it is most import ant to cooperate with our (self) governmental agencies in all matters which seriously affect the whole community. What kind of adult would fail to turn into police the infor mation that a burglar was brea king into the house across the street? What sort of human be ing stands silent while the knif er or the rapist does his work? Students are not children and at some point they have to make the adjustment in the di rection of mature behavior. (I am convinced most of them have, by the time they arrive here on campus.) I seem to remember a great hullaballoo in the DTI I last year on the question ot whether the University stands in loco paren tis to the student. The DTH thought not. I also think not if students' demonstrate they can govern themselves. Once again, that means if they are willing to handle fair ly and decisively their own un ethical members. Here at UNC it is both possible and neces sary to develop mature, respon sible behavior. In short: (1) no system of rules (or law, Mr. Carson!) has long worked by putting each member of the group cn h i s own good behavior, even though a great majority da actuallv keep their honor intact; (2) the chief criterion for evaluating such a system is by its effec tiveness in controlling (by fair and just procedures) recalcitr ant members; and therefore (3) it is honorable to turn in liars and cheats and it is dishonor able not to do so. If the attitude that one shouU not turn in cheaters shou!d spread to a majority of the stu ent body, as I see it, the Uni versity would have no alterna tive but to impose some more authoritarian system, for stud ent government would have failed and students will have demonstrated that they are not ready for the adult world. I am confident, however, that this will not happen. Henry C. Borcn SAE Incident Is Overdone Editors, The Tar Heel: At the risk of being termed an "ugly American," allow rne to invite Wilmot P. K. Hage to grow tip at his earliest possi ble convenience." Like the vast 'majority of r o dents at this University, I re gret the insults which Mr. Hare suffered from a fringe group of dim-witted Carolina rednecks. Eut, as a potential government leader, this might be a propi tious time . for our Liberian , guest to learn that national sen timents-are not necessarily tjis jeovered at . fraternity houses, that such incidents do not .war rant police riot squads and that lack of a patronizing attitude on the part of University offi cials does not consitute "seen. ing indifference." To this inchoate student of political science I recommend Henry Adams: . Perhaps some day . . . thcyt might be allowed to return' together for a holiday, to see the mistakes of thoir own lives made clear in the light of the mistakes of their successors; and perhaps . then, for the first time since man began his educa tion among the carnivores, they would find a world that sensitive and timid natures could regard without a shudder. Don Bruce Ardell 2 Vance OP olkiioii9 Press Relations Failin By DAVID ROTHMAN President Johnson's relations with the press are deteriorat ing. - This is the impression given by a number of articles appear ing in Newsweek,, the Washing ton Post and other publication. In a one and one-half page account of the President's dif ficulties, the Feb. 15 Newsweek bitterly commented: "Perhaps the most remarkable thing about President Johnson's hon eymoon with the White House press corps is that it lasted as long as it did." The Post, which is controll ed by Newsweek's publishers, was equally disturbed. In fact, its front-page article covering a recent press conference read like an editorial. "Yesterday's press confer ence," wrote Staff Writer Chalmers Roberts, "called with some 40 minutes notice, was held in the small White House movie theater in the East wing. Some 147 newsmen of whom 31 had chairs jammed the room, some of them standing behind TV and movie cameras." According to Roberts, the newsmen had to resort to tran sistor radios to hear the Pres ident's remarks. The conference was held shortly after Churchill's funer al. Roberts reDorted that John tice to go and not asking the Vice President. I will bear in mind in connection with any fu ture funerals your very strong feelings in the matter ..." Ordinarily, the view of Rob erts and his publisher would not be so significant but the Post in recent years has been a strong supporter of the Admin istration. (The Post, for example was not as outspOKen as the other Washington papers in sizing up Kennedy's controversial inform ation policy during the Cuban missile crisis.) Moreover, many political col umnists shape the Post's pres ent displeasure. One of these columnists, AP News Analyst James Marlow, reported last week that an un usual form of speculation was making the rounds: "That (Presidential Press Secretary) Reedy's office is bugged meaning it is equip ped with a listening device that enables Johnson to sit in his of fice and hear what goes on in Reedy's briefings." Marlow, however, prudently wTote: 'There is no evidence to support this kind of specu lation." Nevertheless, the rumor indi cates a growing distrust invol ving President and press alike. Humphrey s failure to attend son had snoken to the imirna- Churchill's funeral is not the on- lists in "tones of acid irony" ly provocative topic. Another when asked to explain Vice - source of bitter antagonism is President Humphrey's absence the Vietnamese question, on at the ceremonies. which Mr. Johnson has not been The President's remarks - very informative, seem to confirm Robert's ob- After last week's stepped - up servations. Obviously perturbed, Viet Cong attacks, Johnson had Mr. Johnson snapped: ' only one immediate comment to "I may have made a mis- make. He made it through take by asking the Chief Jus- Press Secretary Reedy: the sit uation in Viet Nam was "re ceiving the closest attention." This is not information. Ra ther it is bureaucratic gobble dy gook, the language usually used by administrators incom petent to deal with curious newsmen. The Vietnamese question in volves national security, and in order to protect military se crets, Mr. Johnson certainly had a right to say so. Why he did not remains to be answ ered. This approach would have been more honest than his eva sive tactics. A briefing held by Reedy last Thursday was just as sketchy as the previuos one. Twx raids had been made aeainst North Viet Nam. The President had justified the first .raid by saying it had been made in response to a specific Viet Cong attack. He had justified the second raid with the statement that an entire series of Communist ac tions had forced U. S. retalia tion. Thus, an obvious inconsisten cy was present: one which sug gested a vacillating foreign po licy. All Reedy would say, how ever, was that he would let the earlier statements "speak for themselves." 'They don't though," replied his questioner. The nervous Reedy then went on to say there would be no TV reports, as well as no Pres idential press conferences. Needless to say, the reporters were not impressed. They also were not impress ed when Reedy would not give details regarding the sending of additional American troops to Viet Nam to guard against a large - scale Communist inva sion. "On operational matters," the press secretary said, "I will re fer you to the Defense Depart ment." Reedy, however, was more forthright while discussing an other situation. He merely said: "I am not going to comment on that matter," and that was that. No explanation needed. . Likewise, Reedy did not- want to discuss Johnson's reaction to statements from abroad, . inclu ding the Pope's plea for a peaceful settlement. If Reedy's information seem ed sparse, it may have been be cause he himself was poorly in formed. Reedy, for example, had to check with the Presi dent before the could "d i s -close" that Johnson and Hum phrey had signed a disability agreement. Reported Newsweek: "Four days later, Reedy said a pact had indeed been concluded be fore the Inauguration." Newsweek also reported that newsmen had been given mis leading facts regarding White House staff changes. In fact, the magazine quot ed New York rierald Tribune correspondent Douglas Kiker as saying that the President "grandly mixes truth, half truth, and non-truth and dares you to attempt to isolate them." The "bugging rumor" is not the only one particularly dam aging to the Administration's prestige. There is even talk that Reedy will be replaced. Of course, considering bis lack of information, one cannot imme diately confirm the rumor's ve rity by asking the press secre tary. But give him four days, and he'll know for sure. Certainly, the complaints of the fourth estate are quite con vincing. However, the White House has its own arguments. One argument is that by ask ing embarrassing questions, the papers are trying to assert their independence. They generally supported Johnson during the 1964 election. Another White House opinion is that many reporters, anxi ous to spotlight their individual importance, are "just showing Off." The adage that one knows on ly what one reads in the news papers also applies here. Ex cept when speaking on televis ion, the President rarely com municates directly with people. Even his press conference transcripts are often "edited." Likewise, the press at times has indulged in its own version of news , management. David Brinkly made this point clear when he spoke last year at UNC. Yet the fact remains that President Johnson, as proved at the polls, has the mandate of the American people. The 19G4 campaign was given much pub licity, and undoubtedly, most Americans knew the President's views before they voted. Therefore, Mr. Johnson (at least for the moment) should not fear that an honest repre sentation of these views v. i 1 1 lead to iroublei '63. President Johnson has ability. He has a solid legislative pro gram. He has a friendly Con gress. The only real problem is poor . communication.