Northwest Arkansas Times from Fayetteville, Arkansas on July 30, 1974 · Page 4
Get access to this page with a Free Trial
Click to view larger version
July 30, 1974

Northwest Arkansas Times from Fayetteville, Arkansas · Page 4

Publication:
Location:
Fayetteville, Arkansas
Issue Date:
Tuesday, July 30, 1974
Page:
Page 4
Cancel
Start Free Trial

Page 4 article text (OCR)

Editorial-Opinion Page Tfte Public Merest Is Tfie Firsf Concern Of nit Netwpaper 4 « TUESDAY, JULY 30, 1974 The Greek Picture Could Be Worse W/iy Not? £'. We notice with interest the formation of ^'Community Development Committee -,made up of 83 interested citizens -- in the jFort Smith area. The committee is divided jnto six task forces covering various aspects kf community concern ranging from taxes ·-TO transportation. The Fort Smith organization is similar, in spirit at least, to the "Goals" committees ,pf the greater Little:Rock area, seeking to 'identify areas for community improvement, and ways and means ot doing so. «·:·'- Although business leadership is taking the lead in both instances, committee memberships are large enough to provide for '""wide cross-sections of viewpoint, and one of the inherent values seen in the work such groups can do is the sifting of prejudices and the compromising of views necessary for consensus among those of various political and economic persuasions. It is to be noted, too -- necessity being the mother of invention -- that rapid growth in both Fort Smith and Little Rock areas is the stimulus for municipalities looking for advice and counsel from interested segments of their constituencies. These'Citizen committees have no status, except in an advisory nature. But thoughtfully constituted, their recommendations can and will carry considerable persuasive power at City Hall, as .well as with fellow residents, in general. A thought, in this light, is hard to avoid. Might not Fayetteville benefit by a "Goals For The Seventies (or Eighties)" program? We are aware of Chamber of Commerce efforts in this regard, but we rather imagine a more productive impetus might come from city government rather than the Chamber. Membership, of course, should include remnants of the city's Citizens Advisory Group, as well as those from sometimes even more neglected points of view. A variety of decisions are presently in the offing for Fayetteville, including airport, highway location, county courthouse, waste disposal, sewage treatment, and water distribution. It is one thing to adopt a position for or against a city project (the airport, for instance) -- and quite another to seek a community consensus on how best to pro-- ceed toward a carefully chosen goal. The city Housing Authority says it is sorry the public didn't explain a year or so ago how anxious it is over the preservation of the old Post Office building when it could more easily-have been worked into Urban Renewal planning. Perhaps a Goals for Fayetteville task force on downtown renewal might well have come up with a firmer citizen consensus on the proposition, had there been such an organization at the outset of the Seventies. Too late for that now, of course, but how about the landfill problem? Or the courthouse? Or even that civic center we keep talking about? What Others Say DAVID AND GOLIATH What started out as one of the dullest, no-contest election campaigns ever in Arkansas could be a real contest afterall --' reminiscent of Dale Bumpers' landslide victory over Senator Fulbright. We speak, of course, of Mrs. Judy Petty, a Republican challenging the-re-election 'bid of Democrat Wilbur Mills in Arkansas' 2nd Congressional District. . Talk about a David and Goliath matchl It has always been assumed that Mills, chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, was unbeatable -- by anyone. From Our Files; How Time Flies 10 YEARS AGO The Springdale School Board, in regular session last night, okayed the 1964-65 budget, and took a look at and approved .plans for a new elementary ' ^school. The budget totaled ^ '.'$1,176,861. · V T h e Washington County · Democratic Central Committee t will meet Friday at 2 p.m. in J the Circuit Courtroom to can\ so YEARS AGO: £ Suit asking a restraining '?, order to prevent the operation ; of a new ice plant of the Crystal ·j Ice Co. now building an $80,000 ^ plant here, brought this mor- «. ning In circuit court by the Ar- j kansas Ice and Cold Storage =· Company, also of this place, ·I was temporarily withdrawn this a f t e r n o o n . The Arkansas \ Company, of which J. II. ; Mcllroy is president had ? c l a i m e d that a ' contract 1 prohibiting the late Jay Ful; bright from the retail ice busi- "i 100 YEARS AGO i The Clarksvilic slage is now ; making splendid time, arriving ; here generally about noon. · Through the enterprise and ; goahcaditivenoss of the gentle', manly contractors, Messrs. | Kernes and Woolem, we are : placed within less than thirty I hours travel. The stage arrives I here Tuesday's. Thursday's and ' Saturday's and leaves h e r e vass the return and certify results of the Democratic preferential primary. Lloyd K. Wilson had hot dogs yesterday afternoon. Firemen were called at 2:30 p.m. to ·extinguish a blaze in a small "house, occupied by Wilson's dogs." iFremen-said the canines had been safely removed when they arrived. ness is binding on the Fulbright heirs, who are alleged to be members of the Crystal.Ice Co. Fayetteville is to have a modern apartment house oE three stories and about 40 rooms, modern in all respects, to be ready for ocupancy Sept, 18th. The building, to cost about $25.000, is being erected by Mrs. Elliott Wilkins. on the site of her former ipartment house that was destroyed by fire . -earlier this year. Monday's, Wednesday's a n d Friday's, making close connection with the Little Rock and Fort Smith railroad at Clarksville. At the residence of the bride's father. July 19, 1874, by Rev. Dr. Williams. Mr. John Davidson to Miss Margaret Taswell and at the same time Mr. A. Williams to Miss Sarah Taswell, all of this county. They'll Do It Every Time TRASH TOSS ECS: 260 POUMPS-TOSETrlER-" But Mrs. Petty is apparently unawed by the reputation, and despite'the political drawbacks of being a woman and a Republican, has stepped out to do battle with the Giant of Kensett. Her courage is admirable, and so far she has hammered away at the most embarrassing facet of Mills' 30-year-plus tenure in Congress -- financing of.. his abortive campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1972. So far. Congress Mills has let Mrs. Petty's questions go unanswered. Whether he continues to do so -- possibly at his own peril -- remains to be seen. Mrs. Petty has spoken out on the corporate milk funds Mills received, brought to light by the Watergate Investigations. She estimates Chairman Mills' contributions ran into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. "I believe the people need lo . know who might have made big contributions in hopes of getting favored lax treatment," she said. The Ways and Means Committee writes all the major tax legislation In Congress. Mrs. Petty is now asking how much the Mills campaign raised through James Riddcll. described by Mrs. Petty as a tax lobbyist. She said Mr. Riddell is "a man whose profession is ' to secure tax benefits which my opponent is in a position to grant to special interest lobbies or to big campaign contributors." The Republican candidate rejects out of hand the contention that Mills knew nothing personally about the sources of contributions to his campaign. "That story was not sufficient for Richard Nixon and it is not sufficient for Wilbur Mills," she said. "If he's not responsible enough to know, then he's not responsible enough to ask you to send him back for his 37th and 38th year in Congress." Some of Mills' recent t a x proposals have not set well with people generally: removal of tax breaks for interest on home mortgages. Of course everyone knows, including Mrs. Petty, that she has an uphill fight against a well-organized and well-financed campaign. But we predict the outcome will not be as lopsided as most of us supposed a few months ago. --Southwest Times Record KISSES AND GUM Not long ago in a neighboring slate, a certain lady was shopping in a major discount store. She took her purchases to the cashier, whose cash register computed a total of $8.53. Our shopper proffered S9. "Do you have the three pennies?" asked (he clerk. Our shopper lacked the three and the cashier lacked the two. .So, in keeping with the store's policy of coping with the penny shortage, our shopper was given 45 cents and two pieces of hard candy in change. The next day, the same shopper visited the same store and made a $3.22 purchase. She offered the clerk $3.20 and -you guessed it -- two piece of hard candy. The store manager, nonplussed, accepted. He had to. Money -- to be money -- has to be as good in one direction as in the other. So candy has become money because money has become scarce. You can eat it, or you can spend it. And once you've spent, it, it isn't really candy any mere. --Jackson (Tenn.) Sun By JACK ANDERSON . WASHINGTON -- We predicted on May 27 that "the military jutila now in power in Greece will be toppled before the end of June." We m i s s e d the date by only 23 days. O u r prognostication w a s based upon the observations of experts inside the State Depart- m e n t , .Central Intelligence Agency and Pentagon. A confi- dential'May 1974 report lo the North Atlantic Assembly, for example, reviewed the Greek situation and offered this conslusion: "Many observers predict that the m o s t affected classes, supported toy senior military officers shocked by the junta's primitive terror tactics,' may move into open revolt soon." In our May column, we warned that a Greek revolt might bring to power hostile forces who could deny the United States the u s e of its military and intelligence installations in Greece. As the dust settles in Athens, however, the situation appears less drastic. The new premier, Constantine Karamanlis, has been a friend of the United States. Still, he isn't likely to forget his years in exile in Paris, struggling to obtain the ear of Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. Karamanlis and other exiled Greek leaders pleaded in vain for U.S. help in restoring democracy in their homeland. But the Nixon Administration pre- The Washington Merry-Go-Round ferred to do business with the military junta. Up until the day before Karamanlis was called to Athens, our sources say, high-level State Department officials snickered at the idea he might return to power. Karamanlis' relations with the United Slates, therefore, probably will toe restrained and businesslike. If Washington wants to maintain bases there, our sources say, "they will have to pay for the privilege." Analysts are still wondering how much power the new civilian government in Greece really has. Some predict that {he military will keep a wary eye on events to see that they don't get out of hand. According to our sources, h o w e v e r , t h e Karamanlis government won't be hbbled by the military. On the contrary, these sources say that a special court will be convened to try the deposed strongman, Gen. Dimilrios lonnides, and his band of political primitives. One of those 'who will feel tlie ax, our sources predict, will be the Greek ambassador to Washington, Constantino Pana- yotakos. Unfortunately, K i s s i n g e r ignored appeals to end U.S. cooperation with the Greek junta. At least one confidential document predicted months ago that such action would bring down the military dictatorship, with the United States getting the credit. ,, ,, If NATO would withhold Its cooperation, suggested the document, "not only will the alliance gain enormously in prestige, but from that lime the days of the dictatorial regime will be numbered." But no one in Washington was listening. Now the United Stales . is blamed by many Greek people for keeping the dictatorship in power. . . Footnote: There was rejoicing in Washington as well as Athens upon Constantine Karamanlis return from exile. For years, a small ! but determined bank of antijunta Greeks has lobbied day and night for the restoration of democracy in their homeland. They include journalist Eli as Demetracopoulos, Profs. Ted Couloumbis and John Nicolopoulos, parliamentarian John Zighdis and Gen. Orestes Vidalis. TRANSPORTATION TROUBLES: T h e t a x p a y e r s spend $8.2 billion a year for a Transportation Department that is fragmented, wasteful and often misguided. This is the confidential conclusion of a consulting firm, McKinsey Co., which has just produced a detailed report for Transportation S e c r e t a r y Claude Brinegar. The study cost the taxpayers State Of Affairs A Not-So-Great Mouthpiece By CLAYTON FRITCHEY WASHINGTON -- In the process of puncturing the mtyh of absolute presidential "executive privilege," the Supreme Court also deflated the myth that James St. Clair, Mr. Nixon's Watergate counsel, is a master defense lawyer and a notable authority on the Constitution. The press has always been partial to lega] virtuosi; it lias made celebrities of countless defense lawyers, ranging from Clarence Darrow to William Kimsller. St. Clair is not flamboyant, but he knows how to milk the media: It's almost impossible to turn on the tube without seeing him in the act of selling the President's innocence. The media's awe of Mr. St. Glair's performance was well expressed by an often perceptive fellow columnist, William Buckley, who said, "He is the advocate par excellence. He has succeeded in dividing the Judiciary Committee of the House, and in getting courts and judges and defense attorneys working at feverish levels and for cross- purposes . . . ." That, of course, was before the court and the judges and the House committee unloaded on Mr. St. Glair's famous client. Yet Mr. Buckley was by no means alone in his reporting that the White House attorney's strategy, legal approach and exposition of I h e Constitution had divided and confused the opposition and was carrying the day in general. IN THE LIGHT of what has been transpiring in the last few days in both the Supreme Court and the Judiciary Committee, the assessment was, to say the least, wide of the mark. Not even the Nixon members on the high court were impresscrl by the St. Clair version of the Constitution and not even some of the most partisan Republicans on the impeachment committee bought his arguments either. It is a failure of monumental proportions for a lawyer of St. Glair's standing, whose ability has been widely respected in his own profession. For what happened? It could be argued that he took on a thankless task. It is said that he was calling all the shots behind the scenes. Also, it appears that Mr. St. Clair had access only to such tats, documents and other evidence as the President saw fit to lot him see. In short, Mr. St. Clair is supposed to have found himself in the dubious position of t h e other lawyers Mr. Nixon has called in from time to time to help in his defense. With the exception of J. Fred Buzhardt, whose heart faltered under the strain, they have come and gone, usually with loss of face. A notable example was Prof. Charles Alan Wright, the University of Texas legal scholar, who with great fanfare was called to the While House last fall at a time when the President was preparing to apeal to the Supreme Court an order by U.S. DIst. Judge J. Sirica to turn over a batch of White House tapes to the special prosecutor. Prof. Wright marshaled what he tought was an impressive argument and was all set for his greatest day In court when he learned indirectly through the press that his client had suddenly decided to d r o p the appeal. It was hardly a ringing testimonial to the case Wright had developed. The professor went back to Texas, a chastened by wiser man. Any American, humble or great, Is of course entitled to counsel. Lawyers like Wrjght and St. Clair have every right to take on the defense of the President, but are they duty bound to continue as counsel if their client fails to level with them or insists on tactics, claims and arguments which are questionable and which could denigrate their professional reputations? SINCE MR. ST. CLAIR has not chosen to withdraw counsel, he can hardly complain If some of the crilicism of the President's defense falls on him. It was obvious, for instance, that Mr. St. Clair was embarrassed when, under presidential orders, he introduced at the end of the impeachment hearings a fragment of Nixon-serving dialogue from a tape which the Chief Executive had denied to the House Judiciary Committee He was even more embarrassed when he could not explain how the President happened to be commenting on a development that did not occur until 24 hours after the tape was recorded. There are other unanswered questions about St. Clair. Did h e seriously believe the Supreme Court would rule that the President -- any President -- is above and beyond the law? Since Mr. Nixon said in this first test over tapes that he would obey a "definitive" decision by the Supreme Court, how could St. Clair insist a year later that it would be "inappropriate" for his client to state his position on compliance? Finally, how could St. Clair at the impeachment hearings be foolish enough to concentrate his fire on John Dean, the former White House counsel, who, whatever his own derelictions, long ago proved that he is one of the most dangerous witnesses in the world to cross-examine. He toyed with St. Clair. When Mr. Nixon's lawyer first came to town, it was said he would make Washington forget its own famed trial lawyer, Edward B e n n e t t Williams. P.S.: Williams can relax. (C) 1974, Los Angeles Times $365,000, but the money wll! b« well spent it Brinegar implements the hundreds of recommendations. _ The Transportation ' Department was created seven year* ago from federal agencies handling highways, airways, railways, subways and their social, environmental and cultural impact. Thus, the department touches part of every American's life. . . . The McKinsey report, though couched in careful enough language to ensure it wont ba blackballed for outspokenness, makes clear that the department needs major reform. "The principal need (it) to improve the way in which the department is managed overall," the report states. Tha problems extend from Brine- ear's office throughout hi3 Sprawling, forawling, bureaucratic empire. · For instance, the department has wasted millions on impractical projects such as a personal kittycar transport system in Morgantown, W. Va., an air- cushioned passenger tram and a superbus that runs on a magnetic rail. But it has failed to provide a proper mix between air, auto, bus and rail service. The report attributes this failure to lack of "clear-cut rationale" at the top, '.There was no sufficiently disciplined process," slates the report, "to enable., .the Office of tha Secretary...to evaluate the pro- crams and decide on further action. There is a growing sense of groups working at cross-purposes." In its dozens of pages of recommendations, the report lays out a primer for writing memos, coordinating programs, monitoring the activities ot tha farflung agencies and extricating clear decisions from tha present mass of red tape. Another Instance Of Impeachment WASHINGTON (ERR) -- Hiw torians searching for parallels to the impeachment proceedings against President Nixon have examined the impeachment and trial of President Andrew Johnson in exhaustiva detail. In so doing, they have overlooked a case of almost equal interest, It involved William Sulzer, the 42nd governor of New York, who was impeached and removed from office on Oct. 17, 1913 -- less than a year after his election. Several of the charges leveled against Sulzer have a.familiar ring today. He was accused of grossly abusing the executive office and of illegally diverting campaign donations to his personal use. The governor, in turn, claimed that the move to impeach him was a "conspiracy" directed by his political enemies. He invoked what amounted to executive privilege in refusing to hand over, documents sought by the legislative impeachment committee. Sulzer is scarecely remembered now, but in 1913 he was a major political figure simply by virtue of being governor of New York. The Empire Stata was then the most populous in the Union by a wide margin, and its chief executives wcro usually regarded as potential presidential timber. Thus, Sulzer's fall created a great -. though not lasting -- sensation. "PLAIN BILL" Sulzer spent almost all of his active life In politics, much of it in the service of Tammany Hall, tha then-powerful New York City D e m o c r a t i c machine. His relations with Tammany were often ambiguous. At ona moment he would comport hirn- self as an archetypal organization man, and then strike an independent pose in an effort to win the allegiance of non- Tammany Democrats. In tha end he lost the support of both factions. Although politically popular, Sulzer the man struck some observers ns shallow and unnrin- cipled. "He has always been a friend iv 111' people," the inl- milable Mr. Doolcy remarked. "He has lavished his sobs on thim an' has ast nawlhin' in return but their votes." Norman HapRood, edilor of Harper's Weekly, said Sulzer "never had any morality except to seek' cheap success at any price." After winning election as governor in 1912 Sulzer set out to forge a new political image, and almost immediately landed in hot water. Loudly proclaiming his independence from Tammany, he set in motion a scries of investigations that uncovered graft in the s t a t e government. He alienated the powerful railroad interests by pushing through a law mandating minimum work crews. The governor's biggest mls- talte. however, was in championing a law providing for direct primary elections for s t a t e offices. "Neither the crossing of a 't' or the dotting of an 'I' nor the changing of the simplest language in the bill will be tolerated," he declared. "My bill or nothing. That is the slogan." THE LEGISLATURE refuser! to be intimidated despite -- and because of -- strong-arm tactics on Sulzer's part. It defeated his bill by a wide margin during Its regular session, and again in special session. Even then, Sulzcr refused to capitulate. "I said there would be no compromise with the bosses," he asserted. "I stand by that statement."- The bosses decided to counterattack. A Tammany-oriented legislative committee launched an invesllgalion Into Sulzer's conduct in office. Before long, it uncovered the evidence that led lo the governor's Impeachment,

Get full access with a Free Trial

Start Free Trial

What members have found on this page