The Daily Tar Heel from Chapel Hill, North Carolina • Page 2

a Pge 2 Friday, March 19, 1965 'Damn, Joe, If It Isn't One Mess, It's Another' Editor I Page A Weekend Lover Reflects On Selina 8 5T 'hc'cA -'('- Opinions of the Daily Tar Heel are expressed in its editorials. Letters' and columns, covering a wide range of views', reflect the personal opinions of their authors. The Davidsonian And Away We Go! however, fs that only three of the nine senators from Forsyth, Mecklenburg, Guilford and Wake counties agreed to back repeal. If these Piedmont counties are indeed the bulwarks of modernism which they claim to be, their representatives should do better than that. As for Rep.

Horton's billr it appears to have been merely an attempt to sharpen the tack a bit. As written, the Speaker Ban law is so poorly written that it fails to provide penalties for its violation. Rep. Horton's intent was to provide those penalties and thus provide an1 oven in which to roast a potential violator, a tactic guaranteed not to scare anyone already willing, to test the statute. where two near naked, r-chins played with another turtle shell.

Sammy was crazy. ths dancer you will wear your dark green silk dress, and you hair will be long. We will move slowly to the music muted by a thousand intimate voices. Your shoulders are white, your ear cold against my cheek. 'You look up with wet, happy eyes and pass your lips iquietly, softly across my chin.

For a fleeting second we are alone in the crowd, and I am filled with wonder and with love. The newspapers are filled "with evidences of cur guilt. Eir-tmingham. Bull Conner Co. pride themselves on keeping or-'der with fire-hoses and cattle prodders.

Negroes are beaten, and the Klan cheers. And still they come. "Keep jour eyes on the prize; hold on." The three workers lie rotten in a shallow grave-Victims of fear and godless hatred. They will not be tried for "murder, not Rainy and Price. "Life" runs a full-page photo of smiling Sheriff Rainy, his mouth full of "Red Man" chew-Ing tobacco.

Little Rock seems so far away a long, bloody way away. "Ain't no black s. o. b. gonna stink up my children's school:" "Kill 'em! Kill 'em!" A single Negro looks into the mad crowd of white faces, they are ugly with fear and hatrrd.

"NIGGER," they scream. His head bows. "NIGGER! NIG- i If ever a legislative body 1 has fieen quiet abouHaw issue it, has beeh the present General Assembly regarding the Speaker Ban. Wednesday the silence was broken, but the news constituted a small poof instead of a large bang. There were two pieces of information: One was a report that Sen.

Jennings King of Scotland County had "conceded defeat in his quiet campaign to win Senate support for an effort to repeal the speaker ban law." The other report indicated that a bill designed put more teeth in the law" had been dropped5 from consideration by its sponsor, Rep. Joseph Horton of Greene County. Apparently, we have had two false starts. But the waters run deeper than that, and both starts are significant. Sen.

King announced that he had lined up 23 senators who would vote for outright repeal. As only 26 are needed, it would seem hardly political for Sen. King to "concede" at this early date, with victory so near at hand. A disturbing aspect of his statement, One week he is reluctantly feted in Atlanta as the winner of the Nobel Prize for Peace, and the next week he sits in a jail cell in Selma, Ala. Martin- Luther King Jr.

tried to register to vote tried to lead a group of those who at least enjoy the right to vote. And, in the true Southern tradition, he and hundreds of others were not only denied this basic right of citizenship, but the right to a peaceable assembly as welL The thought that such blatant injustice and wide eyed defiance of all that is human could take place in this country really grieves me. Perhaps ths occasion of Mid-Winters, complete with buxom and smoky Julie, is not the time to put forth a plea for decency. Maybe one should not be so naive as to disturb the ritualistic joy of after dance outbursts and after drinking be-fuddlement by introducing a matter so academic as Civil Rights. After all, you say we have pondered and crammed for months now.

We have burned the oil; we have been sterile and scholarly according to the college catalogue. Now we deserve our period of forgetfulness and un concern. The time is right for a momentary stay against the pressures of formulae and these, tracts and cycles. We need to drown the god of academia. Now is the time you say, to lay our minds on a dusty shelf, amid the clutter of ominous books and used Brightliners.

The mouth the eyes the feet the pelvis the fingertips these will rule the weekend. It will never work, College Man. If Rep. Horton's wish is to clarify the existing ambiguities in the law, we suggest another way namely, repeal it. And we urge Sen.

King to press on and try to corral three additional, senators. Certainly, there should be better pickings in the "progressive" counties, and we wish him well. The first shots, dim though they may be, have been fired. Let us hope they won't be the last. Letters To The Editor Hell ScUXI Remove Silent The Spectre of oors Politics They lay very still on the blanket.

In the distance they could hear the gaity and laughter of a party. The moon's hazy brilliance cast a pale blue light through the thick pines, interrupted only by an occasional strand of silken cloud. "It was wonderful." "Yes." whether they be arranged in stripes or bars, I can understand Ribak's concern over having a Southern flag flying above a Southern capitol. I would suggest, however, that if Ribak is seriously disturbed by this to the point of mental distraction that he write, not the editors of this paper, but rather: Governor George Wallace Office of the Executive Montgomery, Alabama. No wonder that Sam keeps his rifle handy as he faces Franklin St.

He knows where his real enemies are. Ray Lanier Phi Kappa Sigma are you thinking "What about?" I see you when you arrive for the weekend you are already tired from your trip, but you are lovely. You kiss me matter of factly, but there is a promise in your eyes, and a smile that longs to be smiled alone. A the dorm, Janie French will take your three dollars and let us know that she remembers that you have been here with me before. She smiles on lovers.

The Young Americans for Freedom take their conservatism straight; hey stand at the political bar somewhere to the right of William F. Buckley, slug-, ging down generous (we almost said shots of Cynicism on the Rocks undiluted by common sense. As a result, rthey are often inebriated with pseudo patriotism, a circumstance that can (and does) lead to some gigantic delusions. Consider this month's issue of "The New Guard," the YAF magazine, which includes a lengthy review entitled James Bond Conservative Agent?" The answer, according to the author, is an emphatic "yes," an Agent 007,. emerges from his typewriter as a sort of Fulton Lewis, Jr.

with a pistol, yet. Among the choice tidbits gleaned from this inspiring diatribe: he (Bond) is easily recognizable in the popular mind as a conservative figure, for with his rather uncomplicated philosophy of life, his pronounced loyalty to his country, and his excessive interest in fine machinery, he coincides Civil War Based On Economic Rift Editors, the Tar Heel: This letter was provoked by Al Ribak's letter in the Wednesday (March 16) edition oi the DTH. In my opinion, his reasons for the removal of "SILENT SAM" are poorly foi-nd-ed. The traditions that Ribak speaks of are not of the nature that "SILENT A stands for. That monument is a memorial to those people who gave their lives for a way of life that the South depended upon in order to exist.

The North suceeded in destroying this. The War Between the States was a direct result of economic reasons. It was NOT a result of "southern racists to keep the Negro peoples in a position of debased subservience." That monument was dedicated to those who fought for their homes and what they believed in. I can see no shame in that! How this ties in with the shameful events in Alabama is far from me. Everyone I know agrees that the brutality against Negroes in Alabama and their denial of the vote because of "Nothing." "Tell me." "Nothing." "Are you thinking about love." "Yes." She turned slowly toward him.

Her soft hair fell across his forehead. They were silent. "Why are you crying?" she said. sense, they are plausible enough on closer view to be convincing." "James Bond is an individualist who prefers to work alone, and the fact that alone he achieves results far greater than the great offices of bureaucrats makes the books, without reference to his methods, a kind of testament of individualism." Now, point stretching can be a noble art, but the author of this piece must have an imagination made of elastic. To state flatly that "James Bond is a secret conservative requires a bending-over backward of the brain akin to saying that Silent Sam is a front man for the White Citizens Council.

Frankly, we've always felt that 007 was something of a libertarian especially regarding such matters as booze and broads. And if most of his heroism is directed against "international communism," we have no doubt that he would deal no less harshly, with the English version of the right-wing bitter enders, if they posed a sufficient threat. In short, we've never worried too much about the fictional Mr. Bond's fictional politics. To us, he's just a cool guy, and we doubt that he could, in all sincerity, be regarded as a rightist agent on that basis alone.

I' Ribak Has Solved Historical Debate Editors, The Tar Heel: As a senior in this University, and as a history major with his concentration in Southern history. I could not help but be amazed at the perspicacity demonstrated by Al Ribak in his letter to the editors of March 17. How wonderful it is that, after 100 years of heated historical debate (which, even in this, the centennial year of appomat-tox, shows no symptoms of abating), Ribak has been able cut the Gordon's knot of conflicting historical opinion and announce the decision for which we have all been waiting, lo these many yeasrs: The War for Southern Independence, that "disgraceful episode," that "darkest blot on American history," was, in Ribak's theory, one large race riot. With all due respect to this bright new star on the intellectual horizon, could Ribak please consider enlarging his thesis just a little to include room for the minor issues of the War, such as the states' rights controversy, the tariff dispute, the agrarian roots of the South as opposed to the growing commitment of the North to industry, After all, these things have been the source of some scruple to historians of lesser rank than our Frederick Jackson Turner of Franklin St. About the "gaudy Confederate Flag" which" is flying above the Alabama state capitol: While I personally have always felt a deep attraction to the red -white-blue combination of flags, It I will show you to my room, and I am secretly proud when you tell me that it looks nice.

You will leave Chanel on the pillow, and I will be sad on Sunday. I carried him home on my tie boy named Sammy. lie was a Negro. He would not speak, except when he pulled on my sleeve and said, "Got a nickel?" His eyes were always half-blank, half-questioning. I re-'member first meeting him fighting with another child.

I pulled LETTERS i SSft The Dally Tar neel solicits Retraction A column in the DTH, March 16, by Timothy Ray, contained a statement implying that Ernie Mc-Crary, candidate for DTH editor, or one of his supporters, removed a banner supporting Norwood Pratt for editor from the YMCA building. This is, in fact, false. According to the head of the Buildings and Grounds Committee, all candidates' banners hung on University buildings more than two weeks before the election were removed; Pratt's banner was one of these, although Pratt was unaware of this regulation. with the current conception of the conservative-mystique." despite the efforts of liberal reviewers to discredit the whole series by terming the plots fantastic, or nervy non- letters to the editors at any time and on any subject. All letters must be typed DOUBLE SPACED and must be free of libel.

The editors reserve the right to edit for length. Letters should be submitted at least two days prior to date of publication. i him away and picked him up. 'All he did was open his mouth fas wide as he could and utter 'a silent scream I carried him horn on my back, and he peed in his pants. On the front porch of his house, his mother sat with her legs spread and cleaned the meat out of the shell of a huge turtle.

The blood dripped off of porch onto the dusty yard I The editors apologize for their race is disgraceful. Ribak is trying to shame my ancestors for fighting for what they believed in, and as far as I ani concerned, he can try to perfect himself before he tries to shame those were killed for their beliefs. Ray Catlette 220 Alexander Extra-Legal Measures Are In Order having unintentionally allowed this false statement to be published. Ray also was unaware of these facts. From The Chapel Hill Weekly With the present public concern about preserving the character of Chapel business district, several dilemmas- have become painfully apparent, and one of them is clearly illustrated by the Hardee hamburger drive-in on West Frank- Law StopoFting Gag Otis Rep In a letter to The Weekly, the operator of the Hardee outlet here pointed out that he admired the colonial architecture in Chapel Hill and would have had a special building designed to conform with quired it But, since regulations permitted construction of the standard building of the Hardee's Food Systems, he, as franchisee, had no alternative.

Unfortunately; the Town cannot specify $ha architectural design of any buildings can do, though, to excite control if not actually to exercise it. For one thing, the Town might require that owners of all future downtown buildings furnish detailed perspectives for public display. This would not amount to architectural control, but it would give the public a chance to see what is coming. Townspeople could at least cry foul before the damage is done. Such advance notice would give public pressure time to come to bear, while there was still a chance that it might be effective.

It is folly to think that public pressure will work changes in buildings already completed, but the reaction of the Bell's hamburger walk in chain to public opinion is ample proof that it can provoke some long second thoughts. Another friendly restraint on future downtown buildings might be a word of advice from the Town Board of Aldermen. The Aldermen could frame a statement or resolution explaining in general terms the type of business architecture that is desirable and welcomed here. Copies of the statement then could be handed to anyone applying for a building permit for new construction or renovation. A builder could not be forced to accept this word of advice, but then he might just follow it anyway, and in either case he could not plead ignorance of public sentiment.

Perhaps these are extra-legal measures for the Town to take, but they are not illegal. Anything short of hog-tying uncaring or unwitting desecrators is eminently deserving of consideration. Editors, The Tar Heel: To reply coherently even to selected portions of 46 column inches of criticism (DTH, March 5) presents a formidable venture. Nevertheless, both Mr. Ray and Dr.

Arndt raised challenging questions in their respective dissensions from my previous defense of the Speaker Ban, and their arguments merit further discussion. In his final paragraphs, Mr. Ray states that I believe, and that I encourage the "lamentable belief, that to oppose the Ban is to be in favor of Communism." To the contrary: a portion of my previous letter attempted to dispell this very misconception I stated then and I shall repeat, that any enlightened person summarily dismisses the nonsense that is equating opposition to the Ban to assent to Communism. Mr. Ray continues in mistaken outrage, claiming that "Mr Otis is calling some of us Communists but he won't sav who." I have reviewed my Dre-vious letter at length and am unable to find a single passaS wluclrany segment of opn? sition to the Speaker Ban is fit (Amu) i 1 re- our own is and has been evident." This may be Mr.

Ray's definition of a Communist; it is not mine. However, Mr. Ray's discussion was not wholly directed toward ferreting out imaginary similarities between the late Sen. McCarthy and myself; a portion of his energies were devoted to the construction of engaging, if somewhat imprecise, arguments for. repeal of the Speaker Ban.

Mr. Ray asks, "If a Czech or Polish scientist makes a discovery, why deprive American scientists from knowing about ltr This inquiry presupposses: 1) that the presumptive Eastern European scientist isor has been a member of the Communist Party; and 2) granting the verity of the first assumption, that if the gentleman is denied the opportunity to personally proclaim his discovery on a state-owiied campus CaroUna, it will be lost to American science. While the first assumption may have merit, I submit the second is somewhat pur-btod id parochial. Hordes of Eastern European and the Scientists have found it wiOun themselves to forgo a journey at universities, state-sponsored or private, to make known their Third, there exists, to my knowledge, no legal prohibition in this or any other state forbidding the use of private facilities to Communists or others for elaboration on scientific topics. Finally, the findings of current science are printed in numerous publications and journals which are available on this campus.

Mr. Ray continues his argument for repeal, contending that, "as American citizens, we have certain rights and freedoms guaranteed to us over and above what this state has the power to add or detract." The implication is that the Speaker Ban is in violation of these guarantees. To understand why this is not so, one need only realize that to forbid the enlistment and use of facilities maintained by the state to Communist speakers, is not to forbid freedom of speech to Communists. The ban is not a proscription of individual liberty; it is instead a regulation governing the use of state-owned property. One other implication in Mr.

Ray's column is worthy of note. It is that. advocates of the Ban fear a "confrontation of minds" with the apostles of Marx, and thus "show a lack of faith in Not so; no rational argument make itself clearly understood." shields, or ought to shield, the student from a confrontation for the Ban holds that the law with seductive propoganda or Communist depreciations of Western democracy. Obviously it cannot, and dispassionate persons can perceive that this is neither the intent nor the function of the law, despite the claims of vociferous opponents and fervent defenders of the Ban. Dr.

Arndt's more sophisticated arguments involve a difficult and intriguing conflict: the freedom of inquiry ideally basic to a university vs. the authority of the state to regulate as it deems wisest those institutions under its sponsorship. Dr. Arndt states that these alternatives are mutually exclusive, that only one can prevail. Certainly, a complete reconciliation of these alternatives is most challenging.

I submit, however, that the law has not reduced our University to the ignoble status of Dr. Arndt's "Parochial and fear-ridden state teaching institutions which proclaim and inculcate certain values and axioms they hold dear and furtive curiosity about other values a axioms that they detest WTe have escaped this sorry condition simply because the ef- fective restriction of free inquiry resulting from the Ban is, for various reasons, nil. Foremost among these reasons is the fact that Communist pronouncements both political and scientific, are readily available in published form, on this campus as elsewhere. Furthermore, those acutely interested may acquire private facilities from which persons barred from the use of a campus forum may elucidate their beliefs. Last, those prohibited by the law have, in my opinion," consistently sought to confuse and distort the truth, and thus their absence hardly constitutes a grievous academic loss.

In conclusion, two assertions must be made. First is that the Speaker Ban derives its basic worth from the ethical assumption that no citizen should -be legally coerced into contributing toward the maintainanee of a public platform for those who advocate the violent subversion of our present form of government. Second is that it is patently absurd to suggest the state legislature appropriate public funds to support the University, and then be denied the authority to regulate the use of University facilities as they, not we, see fit. William Graham Otis 223 Joyner here other than the Town's. The Town can control construction as far as health aild safety are concerned, but neither Chapel Hill nor any other, town in North "Carolina can legally impose its idea of beauty, as such, on private enterprise.

There are other things that the Town 72 Years of Editorial Freedom Secccd Class postage paid at the post office fa Chapel 1511. N. Subscription rates: $1.53 per semester; $3 per year. Printed by the Chapel Is entitled exclusively to the use for republic a-, nil! Publishing Inc. The Associated Press tion of all local news prirted in this newspaper as well as all AP news dispatches.

cing communist I stated then and ciTT1 re- to our Uniyersiw yr peat my conviction that enumerate the resux 'ISond, scientists are by no mf compelled to congregate mV the Ban "whose- disposition toward a form of government other than -J.