TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 1955
PAGE TWO
THE DAILY TAR HEEL
Department Of Peace
Washington, D. C.
Representative Harley O. Staggers, a
Congressman from West Virginia, has intro
duced into the House a bill proposing that
the government establish a Department of
Peace, whose head would be in the President's
Cabinet.
A sound proposal if we ever heard one.
It is to be hoped the Congress will approve
the idea, which is imagihative'ahd far-re'ach-
The Secretary 'of Peace, as we conceive
the position, would be a xoUHterb.alance to
most of the rest of the 'Cabinet. After the
Secretary of State has reported bn mounting
tensions in Laos and Cambodia and the Se
cretary of Defense has 'exhibited the latest
atomic-spending index, the Secretary of Peace
will rise in the Cabinet Room and indicate
to the group a small response to Universal
Truths Education classes in Pitteburgh, but
an encouraging rise oh the Moral Objection
to War chart in the province of Travahcore
Anchel. The Secretary, who would be a wise and
good man, would probably have to be re
cruited from the National Education Asso
ciation or from the National Conference of
Christians and Jews instead of from General
Motors or Colgate-Palmolive in order that
he mi"ht have, as they say in Washington,
"the right orientation for the job."
I lis office would be staffed by an under
secretary in charge of Involvement in Man
kind and an undersecretary for Spiritual Af
fairs. The Department would aim massive re
taliation at the forces which make friend dis
trust friend, nation distrust nation. It's seal
would bear the motto, ".We Are Indeed Our
Brothers' Keepers."
However, Rep. Staggers' measure will
likely be defeated on the floor of the House.
It will be voted down overwhelmingly on
logical grounds that the size of military ex
penditures rule out any appropriations for a
new department.
Then the Speaker will call for the next
order of business.
Carolina Front,
Clothes Make
The Man, But
Not With Art
America's Revolutionary Role
r
m
Louis Kraar
Dr. Schweitzer
On Soul-Searching
Unlike Ernest Hemingway, who dislikes,
as he recently told a Time Magazine -writer,
to talk about abstract entities like the soul,
the government and its security force have
accepted the soul and asserted that it may
be searched.
"It has been demonstrated,", said a sen
tence in the Oppenheimer decision, "that
the government may search the soul of an in
dividual." Soul-searching, especially as advocated by
a free government, has an ugly sound. It is
good to find among Dr. Albert Jchweitzer's
8oth birthday quotations in the New York
Times Magazine a renunciation of the idea.
"To analyze others," Dr. Schweitzer has
said, "unless it be to help back to sound mind
someone who is in spiritual or intellectual
confusion is a rude commencement, for
there is a modesty of the soul which we must
recognize, just as we do that of the body."
Perhaps the idea of political soul-searching
is temporary and will subside like other
deplorable ideas. The wisdom of Dr. Sch
weitzer, Nobel Prize-winner, missionary,
medical expert, scholar of Bach and Goethe,
builder of organs, man of arts, and letters, is
the polished wisdom that transcends the mo
ment and its governmental inquiries into
the minds of men.
Efje ailp Car Heel
The official student publication of the Publi
cations Board of the University of North Carolina,
7,,, where it is published
f s daily except Monday.
ty"f examination and vaca
j " i ..r-l -i tion periods and sum-
- u mer terms- Entered as
i Chapel fjifl ' second class matter at
Notfihrwrr the PSt ffice in
, v ?- Chapel Hill, N. C, un-
I tmh f,rt il der the Act of March
opwtt-d . ! 8, 1879. Subscription
J? taT ) rates; mailed, $4 per
r - , , '' fear, $2.50 a semester;
i j, rpd delivered, $8 a year,
V "w- ? 5Q a gemester
Editor CHARLES KURALT
Managing Editor FRED POWLEDGE
Associate Editors LOUIS KRAAR, ED YODER
Business Manager TOM SHORES
Sports Editor FRED BABSON
News Editor ' Jackie Goodman
City Editor "Jerry Reece
Advertising Manager Dick Sirkin
Circulation Manager Jim Kiley
Subscription Manager , Jack Godley
Photographers Cornell Wright, R. B. Henley
Assistant Sports Editor Bernie Weiss
Assistant Business Manager Bill Bob Peel
Editorial Assistant Ruth Dalton
Society Editor . Eleanor Saunders
Feature Editor Babbie Dilorio
Victory Village Editor Dan Wallace
NEWS STAFF Neil Bass, Archer Neal, Richard
Thiele, Peggy Pallard, Barbara Willard, Mary Grady
Burnette, Charles Childs, Eddie Crutchfield.
Night Editor for this Issue Bob Dillard
" JUST WHEN I was " ready to
write the Woman's College liter
ary magazine
hassle off as
much ado ab
out nothing
the nothing
being what the
infamous male
sketch was
rearing), one
, Arf the WC. far-
tip and quit this weekend over
the controversy.
The faculty member, Assist
ant Professor Lettie Hamlett
Rogers of WC's English Depart
ment, quit "in protest of admin
strative action" censuring the
staff of "Coraddi',' the literary
magazine.
Mrs. Rogers' resignation fol
lows that of the entire student
staff of the magazine, which
quit after Chancellor E. K. Gra
ham said that an undraped
sketch of a nude male was out
of taste. Graham publicly cen
sured the magazine's staff.
It is unfortunate that Chancel
lor Graham's rather unnecessary
"censure' has now caused WC
to suffer one more blow that
could have been avoided. Mrs.
Rogers is the author of three
novels and a specialist in the
teaching of creative writing. She
is the type faculty member that
WC will find difficulty in re
placing. In announcing her resignation
Mrs. Rogers made clear that she
was quitting in protest of the
administrations censure of the
student magazine.
"I consider such action and
the stated reasons for that act
ion undemocratic in principle
and in precedent and contrary to
our traditions here of intellect
ual freedom,' she said.
Mrs. Rogers' resignation seems
to turn what was a rather rid
iculous controversy into a cause
celebre.
When Chancellor Ghaham cen
sured the "Coraddi" staff, the
student editor took the position
that any art worth creating mer
ited exhibition to the public. The
chancellor, on the other hand,
felt that other places on campus
were more appropriate for such
self-expression rather than in a
campus magazine'.
In short, Chancellor Graham
said that uninhibited self-expression
(like the nude in "Cor
addi") belonged in art galleries
and the like. The students said,
in effect, that if it's art, it should
be exhibited any place that an
audience can view it.
The fact that an important
faculty member felt that the
chancellor's censure was "unde
mocratic" and contrary to WC's
traditions of "intellectual free
dom" adds weight to the student
argument.
Meantime Chancellor Graham
is , silent and probably regrets
the censure now. And WC is
without a literary magazine staff
and a valuable faculty member.
A FRIEND sent over a "Bird
Watchers Guide" yesterday, and
one of the birds bears watching.
The bird in question is a "barrel-chested
gross-speaker," wh
ich is indentified as a "light
headed bird which is greatly
disturbed either by silence or by
others speaking." This species
of ornithological greatness "ap
pears content only when beak is
flapping, emitting innocuous but
impressive call," occording to
the guide.
The "barrel-chested gross-speaker"
is usually found "in vic
inity of microphone; male var
iety is more common, but female
more exasperating."
Call of this bird (uttered while
popping up and down) is "Mis
ter Chairman, Mister Chair
man." This species, you can see,
is strictly for the birds.
WEATHER HERE lately has
changed faster than a coed's
mind. On the way to buy an ice
cream cone yesterday, I found it
sleeting. Sunday was almost like
spring, and Saturday was almost
beach weather.
Today's prediction: Change.
Overcoming The Fires Of Discontent
Edgar. A. Mowrer
In The Saturday Re view
Back in the late Twenties,
when I was chief of the Berlin
Bureau of the Chicago Daily
News, I received a request for a
job' from, a certain Doctor Paul
"Joseph Gobbels. The Bureau had
no vacancy, but I suggested that
, the writer, call if he ever came
to Berlin. This he did. I met a
small, dark, embittered man who
walked with a limp and wrote
limping plays that nobody would
produce".
Later Goebbels's name became
only too familiar. When he came
, to Berlin as executive editor of
! the new Nazi ; newspaper there
I . had repeated talks with the
outspoken little .Nazi.
However much he failed as
playwright, he was incomparable
as propagandist. Therefore, on
one occasion when personally
unable to attend a monster rally
in the Sportpalast which Goeb
bels was slated to address, I vis
ited him and asked for a text.
, He was willing. "I am an
nouncing our Party's future pro
gram." "What are you going to say?"
"Just this: under National Soc
ialism everything will be differ
ent. "Oh, yeah?' I ironized. "Let's
get down" to details."
"No details. Lieber Herr Mow
rer, a good politician keeps his
promises as wide as the sky
and as empty. Any details are
bound to disappoint somebody.
But by promising a complete
change I shall nourish the secret
Perhaps Only Touch Is Left
The Reporter
The battle of technology with
instinct has seldom been more
sharply presented than in the
case of the German pigeons.
It seems that out of two thou
sand - homing pigeons sent out
from Munich last year, only six
found their way home; and qut
of" six thousand sent from Kar
lsruhe, 3,500 were lost. They
were lost, according to a heap
of evidence, because they got
into beams from a radar apara
tus. The electronic guide 'for
man became the destroyer of
direction for pigeons.
It is sad that delicate man
made devices should either
blunt or cancel the delicate in
struments of nature, but this
seems to be happening. Ampli
fication of sound has coarsened
the ear, artificial illumination
has dimmed the eye, and the
precipitations of industrial waste
in the air can certainly be doing
the nose and mouth no good.
Perhaps only touch is left in
its pure state, uncorrupted by
the machine. Touch, if not feeling.
hopes of every single listener
and let it go at that. On such a
platform we Nazis are sure to
win. Once in power we shall do
as we please. But doesn't it
sound wonderful: Es wird Alles
anders werden"?
To me a the time it sounded
silly and was I wrong! it drew
the Germans as a garbage can,
even empty, draws flies. It made
the prophet-charlatan Adolf Hit
ler absolute boss of the world's
best-educated people. It made
little Joe Goebbels Propaganda
Minister of the Third Reich.
Some will say that such empty .
stuff could draw only Germans.
Wrong. Today's Communists are
using as much .pf the same tech
nique as their doctrine (the Naz
is had none) will allow. They
too promise every discontented
outsider just what he wants if
only he'll support the Communist
Tarty and wait until the Red
Ship comes in!
What is wrong with Ameri
can propaganda? Essentially
this: Among the world's major
peoples Americans alone are sat
isfied with what is or think
they are. Not altogether alone.
There are satisfied groups bea
ti " posidentes everywhere. A
few smaller peoples the Swiss
and Scandinavians, the Thais,
the Uruguayans, etc. like us,
think more of keeping what they
have than of kicking over the
applecart.
But the vast majority of the
race is" dissatisfied to the point
of welcoming any change. They
'Can You Win Some Seats For. Us Too, Mister?'
are consumed by a fire of dis
content. Skillfully the Kremlin
stokes this fire. But it did not
create t. This flame was ignited
by modern technology with its
promise of more and better
things for everybody. Commun
ism fans the fire and moves in
behind it. America seems to
stand against it with a fire ex
tinguisher and continually gets
burned.
WThat can we do about it?
Two possibilities are plain.
First, we can go on just about
as now, taking rev'enge for our
failures abroad on our few dom
estic Commies, pinkos, and in
dependent radicals. It may work.
Maybe God will melt the hard
Communist hearts, or set them
to quarreling among themselves
or utterly destroy them. (We
have always been lucky.)
Second, we could recognize
the tremendous power of our
own historical experience and
then act upon it. In this case,
the President would start by
proclaiming as the American
goal the creation of a world
braver and newer than any seen
before, a world where every
thing (almost!) would be differ
ent. For a century and a half Am
ericans have been consciously
building a country unlike others.
This we proudly called the new
country. Yet recently, irritated
beyond measure by the spread
of the Red Blight, we have part
ly shifted emphasis from creat
ion to preservation of the "Am
erican way of life. "Our way of
life.'" Our way of life has great
value. Yet its unique quality has
been its hospitality to change.
We can not only truthfully, we
should logically admit publicly
that we intend to remain a dy
namic people.
Today the American people
alone possess the means and
ability to take the empty Goeb
belsian slogan and fill it with
substantial, peaceful content. No
amount of success here would
immediately exempt us from the
sacrifice of maintaining military
preponderance over the Com
munists until we have beaten
them elsewhere. But it would
make that sacrifice bearable.
And even which I do not ad
mit if we did not overtrump
Moscow by publicly acknowledg
ing our revolutionary role in the
world, we should not be without
all profit. We should doubtless
have modified some of our less
pleasant recent habits. We
should cease to fear, and rather
to welcome, contact with our
adversaries, relegating the pro
blem of our few domestic spies
and traitors from the political
to the criminal plane.
We might modify the McCar-ran-Walter
Act so far as it ap
plies to transients. Abroad we
might encourage our people to
seek out Commies and "neut
rals" whether at the diplomatic
or the "cultural" table. Have we
no faith in our bliefs?
I never yet met a Communist
to whom I could not stand up in
argument. Who is the more
afraid of whom? And we might
drop our childish suspicion of
the United Nations. With the
world's ultimate choice I say,
ultimate so clearly between en
forceable world law for every
body and wars ad infinitum
which do we prefer?
All in all, we might find Goe
bbels's slogan worth trying.
It r
J: '
$
DULLI.S
. . They're chuckling in Bangkok.
Rich Thailand Outposts
Still Vital-And Weak
Joseph Alsop
BANGKOK, Thailand In Bangkok, where tlu-y
like to laugh the current joke in the more literate
circles is the cover of an American news magazine,
showing a handsome portrait of Secretary of State
John Foster Dulles with the legend, "He strengthen
ed the outposts."
For Thailand is the richest prize in all the west,
rich southeast Asian area which is now the primary
target of world Communist infiltration and aggres
sion. And the outposts hereabouts have not been
noticeably strengthened.
Despite the contrary advice of Secretary Dulles,
one key outpost, northern Indo-China, has already
been surrendered. The enemy has been virtually
handed the keys to two more outposts, southern In-do-
China and the offshore islands of Formosa.
The sacrifice of the other Indo-China outposts
has placed the two weak but strategically vital bord
er states, Laos and Cambodia in most deadly dan
ger. If both Laos and Cambodia are allowed to
fall, on one in his senses here thinks this charming,
feckless, oddly governed country will be able to
withstood the resulting increase of Communist pres
sure. And so the chain reaction will proceed with
mounting force.
s
At home, perhaps, the prospect of this vast up
heaval in the world balance of power may still seem
comfortably remote. It does not seem so here, for
several different reasons.
The first is the simple reason of geography. Back
in the bad old imperialist days, when the French
seized Thailand's border provinces to form Laos and
enlarge Cambodia, they drew the new frontier with
the purpose of preparing their next planned move,
which was to have been a grab for Bangkok itself.
Thus any force concentrated at Sisophon on the
Cambodian border, looks right down the throat of
any government in Bangkok. It is only 168 miles,
and easy walking or driving distance all the way,
with no natural defense positions anywhere, be
tween Sisophon and this C'ty.
When the time of more acute danger may prob
ably begin, a couple of years from now, the army
of the Viet Minh will comprise somewhere between
fifteen and twenty tough regular divisions. The
present Thai forces, which are not likely to bo
effectively increased, comprise an army of about
50,000 combat troops and approximately 15,000 par
amilitary police. Hence the unbalance will be over
whelming. Consequently no allied SEATO or other force
could arrive in time to save Bangkok from a deter
mined Viet Minh attack from Sisophon. A relieving
force would only "liberate " Thailand after it had
been subjugated, piillaged and purged. This being
a prospect which few Thais enjoy, the more ap
pearance of an enemy force at Sisophon, the mere
threat to invade, might well bring Thailand down
as Joshua's trumpets brought down the Walls of
Jericho.
"Massive retaliation" will be complicated to em
ploy in these circumstances. It is much wiser to stop
talking about massive retaliation, and to face the
hard fact that if Cambodia falls, it is almost sure
to be fatal to Thailand, one way or another.
Needed: A New Darrow To Stand For Judicial Integrity
Ed Yoder
At this writing, Junius Scales, finally grap
pled by the long arm of the Smith Act,' has
not obtained a defense lawyer.
As former moeul of the Communist Party
in the Carolinas, he awaits arraignment on a
charge of conspiracy to "teach or advocate"
the overthrow by force of the U. S. govern
ment. Much time and law has passed since we
waved the Declaration of Independence in the
face of the British King, telling him in plain
English !that whenever, people become dissat
isfied by government they have the right to
destroy it and form a new one. The Smtih
Act has visited almost certain sentences on
Communist leaders in the past and there is
little reason to believe that Scales is not in
for the same fate. His is a flimsy case under
the strict terms of the Smith Act.
But his failure to gain a spokesman seems
to strike at the principle that any man ac
cused under law, bank robber, murderer, or
Communist, has the right to a defense equal
in potency to" the charge against him. The
potency of being charged with Communism
in these days is great. To cope with that
charge, a great lawyer is needed, a man of
loyalty, dignity and integrity that will" be
honored.
It casts a beam of irony on the Scales Case
that, come next July, the 30th anniversary of
the enlistment of Clarence Darrow, Arthur
Garfield Rays, and Dudley Field Malone
three of the top lawyers in the history of
American jurisprudence to defend John T
Scopes in Dayton, Tennessee, will pass.
Is this the tragedy of the Scales trial? Is
this the most meaningful single fact involved
in the case aside from the tragic inplications
of a man's desertion of his own native philos
ophy for an alien one?
What has happened since 1925 that makes
our great defense lawyers hesitant to take up
the fight for a defendant in matters nvolving
civil liberties?
The logical choice is this: Either there
were giants in the earth in those days or
there are all midgets now.
The Civil Liberties Union, which procured
the servicesof Darrow, Hays, and Malone for
the young Dayton biology teacher who'd been
indicted under the Tennessee "Monkey Law"
a law making it unlawful to teach biologi
cal theories assuming the descension of man
from lower animals will, no doubt, get law
yers in time. What will they be like?
None of the three men who defended
Scopes had the reputation of a radical. Hays,
recently dead, practiced law for a lifetime in
the corporation law firms of Wall Street. The
overpowering fact about Darrcw, Hays, and
Malone was that they were men of very stable
political and social views.
Somehow, a radical is not the man for the
defense of Scales. A great conservative name
would capture the imagination and confidence
of the rank and file as a radical may not. A
man of lofty and unimpeachable political
commitments is needed; on the other hand,
he like Darrow and Hays must be vitally con
cerned with First Amendment questions up
on which the Smith Act definitely touches.
Clearly, the situation differs from Dayton,
days. Under the Smith Act, Scales will be
charged with teaching the overthrow of the
government not with leaching the overthrow
of a ridiculous ignorance. The Smith Act is
national law. The law under which John T.
Snopes was tried was Tennessee state law;
yet it was only one of a cancerous chain of
similar laws stretching through at least a
dozen other states.
The Scales case, like Scopes', is hopeless.
In 1925, the Evolution Trial had promised a
final, lock-horns, set-to between the Moder
nists and the Fundamentalists. The jury was
picked with Fundamentalists. The judge
a Fundamentalist. And William Jennings
Bryan, the golden tongued mignon of the., pro
vincials, pled the case against the teacher.
Behind all of -these circumstances which
alter occasions, Scales, like Scopes, is a man
accused without a -capable advocate. The in
tegrity of American court practice needs c.n
advocate as much as Scales. It needs one who
will plead a vain case (just as vain ns
Scopes') and thus become symbolic of Amer
ican interest in civil liberties.
To defend a Communist in 1955 is danger
ous, just as it was dangerous for the senior
Kenneth Royal, a graduate of the University,
to defend the Nazi espionage agents in th--early
part of World War II.
It is to be believed, however, that if our
belief in the 'fair play" we are always talk
ing about still prevails, the reputation of the
lawyer who defends Scales will not be deni
grated in the process. Darrow's reputation.
Hay s reputation, Malone's reputation remain
ed free of suspicion-grew in stature even
after their defense of Scopes.
- Will the same fear that has made a ludi
crous spectacle of the Wolf Ladejinsky case
ma" 1st 0rrW1" ? Darrow rise out i
Scale? An. ?nUsion to the side of
Scales. And of American judicial integrity