Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (May 4, 1956)
Pcf:3 2 THE NEBRASKAN Friday, May 4, 1 956 ?'cbrc:!:an Editorials: ff Hi a Proposition: Either Or Saturday morning, the Board of Regents will wlscuss the recent demotion of C. Clyde Mitchell as chairman of the department of agricultural conomict. Usual procedure is that -such an administra tive action is officially approved with little or do discussion and no questions asked. However, the consideration of Mitchell's re placement should be another matter. First of all, the eventual announcement of his demotion was one of the most shamefully mis handled "administrative matters" in sometime. After deftly playing off reporters for tw6 weeks with a variety of half-truths and manicured press . releases, the administration finally an nouncedto the surprise of no one that they were "seeking a replacement for Mitchell." Secondly, Mitchell's reputation and perform ance as a professor and as an administrator has been top rate as attested to in letterips by his own colleagues Kris Kristianson, Eruie Feder and Clayton Libeau; physics professor Herbert Jehle, and such men as Lauren Soth, editorial page editor of the Des Moines Register; Leon Keyserling, former chairman of President Tru man's Council of Economic Advisers, and Don Murphy, associate editor of the widely read "Wallace's Farmer." Moreover, Mitchell is a nationally recognized authority on agricultural economics, having written in nationally circulated publications, tes tified before several Congressional committees on farm policy and related subjects and now lecturing to a select group of agricultural ex perts in a United Nations program in Rome, Italy. Certainly, Mitchell can return as a professor, but the effect of his demotion is an official dis couragement of his actions and his views and will in turn encourage him as it will other fine professors of his caliber to look for a job else where. Further, it adds to the ever-growing argument that the University is weakening to the pressures of conservative political elements in the state. In the interests of the students, faculty and people who support this institution, in the inter ests of academic freedom, fair play and com mon decency, in the interests of responsible University administration, the Board of Regents cannot overlook the student petition which has been submitted to them in the cause of Mitchell. B. B. An All-Student Decision The all-student election Monday will decide the possible future of a student tribunal and an honor system at this University. Mo matter bow much research went into the endorsement of the tribunal by the Student Council, nor bow many editorials have been run on the subject in The Nebraskan, the final de cision has been put into the hands of the student body. A tribunal andor an honor system would most directly affect the students; thus they are given the right to decide if anything further should b done. Only two possible results can come out of the election Monday either the student body votes in favor of a tribunal, thus giving the Council the right to draw up a plan to be offered to the Ad ministration, or the whole idea will be voted down and dropped. For the last three weeks The Nebraskan has run a series of editorials explaining the tribunal system, and the honor system. These editorials include the functions, purpose and administra tion of such systems, according to information received from other schools. Essentially this information boiled down to a student tribunal authorized by the school to try cases of encroachment of school regulations by students. All decisions of punishment can be appealed to the school administration. The main purposes of tribunal systems, and honor systems, are to give students a bigger hand in their own affairs, and a greater sense of pride in their school and its rules. For these reasons, The Nebraskan would like to see next year's Council have the opportunity to draw up plans for a student tribunal for this University. It would mean an expansion of student government, and a healthy one. When students have more of a hand in their affairs, they are less likely to object to how they are governed. This election would not definitely establish a tribunal on the campus, it would only allow further steps to be taken toward what looks to be a good thing. F.T.D. first Time For Everything The University embarks today on its first "A3 University" weekend Spring Day. and Ivy Day. Although Ivy Day has been a tradition on the campus for more than half a century, this year is the first time its scope has been widened to the point where every member of the University community can be involved, if he wishes. The coming of the carnival to the Union parking lot Thursday was the first tangible evi dence to students that there would be a Spring Day. With a ferris wheel and other points of interest rising above the campus landscape, then could hardly be any student that didn't knew what was happening. The bleachers have already been erected on fh hallowed Ivy Day grounds, and men's and women's choruses are in the last stages of prac ticing their songs. Ivy Day is pending. As a sign in the Crib says, "It's later than you think. The athletic events have been organized by the N Club and the championship trophies have been on display in the Union lobby all week. Campus organizations footed the bill on the trophies and ribbons, thus saving the Student Council money. The Union has scheduled its annual Birthday Party Dance, and prices will be lowered in the Crib. A barbeque will be held on the Mall at noon. The stage is set. The props are all in place. The only thing remaining to make the weekend successful is the cast the University. The Uni versity, in this case, is the student body F.TJ). 'Administrative Suppression' swrtsr Umam By ESUCK BRUGMANN EelUr Edmund Burke once said that be was confronted with a situation "upon which it was difScult to speak and impos sible to remain silent." Suck isthesitHationin which many "University de partment chairmen, former department chairmen and pro fessors find themselves. In talking with close to M professors representing a earess-sectSoo of IS depart Bsents at the University The Nebraskan has learned that fee MitcbeU ease is not an Isolated instance but part of a definite pattern which seems to diacaarage tint liberal, inde peoduA professors, especially &sm vbo bold adrokistrative pmMom, from discussing is ays of a controversial nature. Tbese faculty members Jsavs told us &at: (1) the morale of the Arts and Sci ence) College has never been fewer) W) the spirit of ace teak kitdom and the right t free ezpressksi has been grsTt'y esiangmd ia many e$sm; CS) ft professional t&sxtmlmc ef mtsy flue pro fessors L&s tea purposely stadared; () many excellent fetnsctors have left aad will be letting toe University for more freedom; (S) Nebraska is rapidly gaining the reputa tion in professional circles as a conservative institution which not only fails to en courage its more liberal pro fessors but does not stand be hind them when tkeir views or positions are under attack. These are serious accusa tions, but they are all the more serious when they come from so mux directions, when they can be applied to so many individual cases, when they are attested to by nearly 50 individual faculty members all of whom point to specific cases where ten ureprivileges have been manipulated, where certain salaries have failed to in crease, where departmental appropriations have been cut back, where impossible work loads have been assessed, where qualified candidates have been denied admittance to the graduate faculty, where speeches and articles have been specially edited, where certain professor is called "difficult; bard to get along with; radical," etc. The problem which remains before us is: "What can be done!" The answer is simple. When Dr. David Riesman visited the campus, he told me that this kind of situation had devel oped in many other universi ties, which he had visited. "There's only one way to beat it," he said. "Wben a chancellor is faced on one side by outstate pres sures and on the other by mass retaliation of the fa culty, there is but one wsy be can turn. And he's right. The strength of a University lies in its fa culty; and if it cannot be kept strong, alert and active the lifeblood of its curriculum slowly ebbs away. One faculty member told me recently that even though be had several job offers from other schools at twice the pay be had stayed at Ne braska because he thought be would have freedom. "Now that that's gone," he ssid, "there's nothing left here for me." This chilling remark typifies the toughest challenge with which the faculty at the Uni versity has been faced in re cent years. The future and integrity of the University of Nebraska depends on bow it is met. Tho Nebraska! JlTTT-nTS TZAZX CU Caiwai m mmI m mat urn m teaAers AfutUu J 02&t Frew " m . . uu, Witt rrr-te Press ESfTOllAJL STAFF -- IL.J,J ASverUs&g Smfce, " i .rtut mm.ah rt mm mt tmt . . t -i ... a kun n ..................... . . ... Ii.lt ft E f tor M knttwM ivy - 3 st Nebraska 3Ew; "' " .i, V. ' r'-a e r wnnwe Mwtt w -,. ( pw.f 4 v, WM SB cto lw Miio .Mar Hltmr ' ' 1 . . , , " - !f rV' '. M.rtMHM.'ThrWM., OMTf "' " " " Mart: km. Itick - JmUm ttmM ' - -y " fcw- KiTirrvrcc erarv " ' ' ""'ft Z T'-Tl "',M" m trt M4 ',', '. i" r .Sum'i mmm ajm nn, mtu mvn. , t i , . i," tv.. . . ' e fcy 4 SbkT VmtAt Karj, turn Iweh e jfcWfcftNl iBtft LITTLE MAN ON CAMPUS by Dick Bibler m& 'mJ ' ' " 'ill! J m "J pi X. J ' s-ll ! 1AI? tlien omim wins J War With Council LWtSH ME COULD K UKf- ODCS KOK AV 4UST LAUGH AT THt tMOWfi ANSWf R2 I've been walking under the sha dow of the gibbet all week since my last column "sniping at the big boys." I have worked up a public statement saying it was all "ridiculous"; it's a lie; I never said nothin'; the paper put me up to it. Then I found out that I didn't need those things, since everybody I've talked to the downtrodden My Bootless Cries students in the sewers has agreed that the Administration deserves it- I have been doing a lot of re search since last week, as I al ways do for these columns, and it has come to my attention that the Student Council was recently geld ed by some faculty organization. The "older boys" decided that there was no sense in encourag- Vestal Endorses Fusionist Party Monday is the day. Monday is Student Council Election Day. On Monday you will go to the polls (I hope) and vote for one, two or three persons to represent your college on the Council. In years past it has been done this way: If you belong to a Greek organization you will vote or be fined if you do not. If you are independent you will not vote and then complain all year that you are being persecuted, discrim inated against, etc. Will it be done that way this year? It is up to you. The usual independent excuse has always been: "My vote won't make any difference since the independent vote is hopelessly split." You cannot use that one any more. With the coming of the Fu sionist party there is now a se lected group of candidates which represents the best persons re gardless of affiliation. The Fusionist party is not an in dependent party; nor ia it a Greek party. It was founded by a group of independent leaders who feel that Council members should be elected on personal qualifications and issues instead of IFC backing. For several years the IFC has presented a slate, assumedly made up from the best that Greek dom has to offer. The Fusionist party feels thst Greekdom's best is not good enough for the Uni versity. The Fusionists do not say that all IFC candidates are bad choices; if they felt this way they would not have endorsed two men already on the IFC slate. But a good slate Is not enough. The best slate is worthless without enthusiastic voters to support it. That's where you come in. Wheth er you are Greek, organized inde pendent or "independent independ ent," it is your duty to vote for the best candidate. If you are tired of a "do-nothing" Council, the Fusionist party invites you to give it a try; the results may much better. In case you have forgotten, here Japan Examp! U.S. Foreign Policy Shows Paradoxes By JOHN HEECKT Without a great deal of know ledge of Foreign Affairs, one may, after a bit of investigation, come up with some glaring paradoxes and contradictions in American Foreign Policy. These seem to be the outgrowth of the American system of leav ing the formulation of this policy primarily in the hands of those who have little or no experience or knowledge in thir most import ant phase of modern government. It is general procedure in For eign Affairs to seek the so called "national interest" first, and the United States is no exception to this procedure. However, there seems to be a great deal of confusion in our policies as to just what the national interest is. To cite a very apparent example of both the contradiction and the confusion, we need only turn to the case of Jspan. Shortly after WW II it became painfully apparent to the United States that to reduce Japan's in dustrial might In the face of the The Portfolio Communist threat would be not only fool-hardy but disastrous. Japan stood as a lone guardian of our western frontier in the Pa cific against any encroachment from the Asian mainland. It became necessary for the Unit ed States not only to allow Japan to keep her industrial system as we found it but for us to aid in improving it as much as possible as a potential force for the West. It also became a necessity for us to turn to the Japanese peoples as friends and allies instead of a con quered race. Now, how did the United States approach this problem? As Japan is almost entirely an industrial country sucb as Brit ain and depends on imports and exports of first raw materials and then finished manufactured articles in order to supply a living to her millions, it was esential that she be given trade an adequate amount, not only to keep her peo ple at the subsistsnce leve.1 but to give them a degree of prosperity. The United States answered the call first by inducing the neighbors of Japan, who naturally enough had tremendous war grievances against her, to buy from the US when it would have been far more in our interest to make them buy from Japan. By comparison, Japan's prices are far more compatible to the Far Eastern purse than those of the US, except for our fabulous give swsy items. veo when we requested coun tries to trade with Japan we did not enforce it, as Korea's refusal to trade cheaply with Japan rather than expensively with us will indi cate. More , important, however, was the bit of policy which we are still to this day following with Japan. In affect this policy says: We want you to be strong; we realize you must do this by trade; we don't want you to trade with Com munist nations; you can't trade with us; and we will not relin quish our small Asian markets to you. But lets be friends. This contradictory policy certain ly has not made Japan a friend. They dislike us for what they may rightly consider a stab in the back and distrust us for our grandiose words and ineffectual actions. Now, is it in the national inter est to alienate a country by one policy as you court it with anoth er? Is it in our interest to refuse trade to Japan trade that can save her from economic chaos because of the bickering of a few American businessmen who are afraid to meet competition, par ticularly when the ' loss of this country to the East could be a stepping stone to our own defeat. Such a defeat which is never Impossible would be the end of these same businessmen. It would appear that the makers of policy in the United States are more interested in the petty de sires of internal pressure groups than they are in the overall na tional interest or the salvation of a potentially powerful- ally. Per haps these men take the Japanese for granted. They are in error if they do. Japan does not favor being a military agent of the United States, and the presence of our service men does not make them love us more. The Japanese have been atomic bombed and beaten in war; they quite naturally don't ap preciate that. Furthermore, they are war weary and will probably remain so for some time to come, evil in Russian trade that we do The Japanese can't see the same and will take it as a last retort. Also, there are very strong so cialist and communist groups in Ja pan and each move, major or mi nor, that we make against her in terests drives more into these groups. They can, if dissatisfac tion grows, gain the predominance. In general, the contradiction is In desidng strength for Japan and her friendship for us and at the same time following policies that serve to alienate her from us. The confusion in the national inter est is apparent in the lsck of abil ity to discern or correct the error. I is the complete slate of candidates endorsed by the party every one was interviewed and every one agreed that the Fusionist party is a long-needed addition to the campus. Vote for them! Agriculture: Robert Dannert, Benton House, and Norma Wolf, Women's Residence Halls. Arts and Sciences: Larry Smal ley, Boucher House; Janice Krause, W o m e n 's Residence Halls, and Anne Pickett, Kappa Alpha Theta. Business Administration: Wayne Cole, Gustavson II House, and Don Stokes, independent. Engineering and Architecture: Bob Young, Burnett House, and Gordon Warner, Delta Upsilon. Teachers: Garry Beery, Gustav son II House; Sally Laase, Alpha Xi Delta, and Helen Gourlay, Del ta Gamma. ing high standards in scholarship it would be unseemly around this school so they denied the Stu dent Council the right to demand a 5.7 average for activity officers. Since that is practically all the Council bas done this year, it leaves them about as helpless as a jellyfish on a basketball court. This is, my many spies tell me, an important victory for Ellen Smith Hall. They having been worming against the Council au thority for several weeks now, tilt ing gallantly by insulting several girls and generally proving that chivalry had died of an excess of bile. It seems a little odd to me that the IFC is interested in putting themselves directly under a fac ulty committee which has been notoriously hostile to fraternities. It may be advisable to avert stu dent politicking by avoiding the Student Council, but it's a step into the fire to put the IFC under faculty politicians. Further, I imagine that the Uni versity will have to be nicer to the Council now, since any campus without a Student Council looks like one in which there Is no effective student government. And that, of course, is not at all the case here. I think. It Happened At NU The editor of the Lincoln Journal devoted his column Thursday to refuting a Nebraska letterlp writ ten by a former University agri cultural extension economist. However, he talked about a poul try specialist who left the Univer sity because he was told . . the University didn't have funds enough to have one man in agri cultural economics exclusively on poultry." The editor refers here not to Dr. Clayton Libeau, former associate extension specialist In marketing organization and author of the let ter, but to Dr. Paul Clayton, as sistant extension economist and poultry specialist, who left the University at the same time. Obviously, the poultry specialist Paul Clayton "made none of the accusations he makes new. He didnt write the letter. Nebraskan Letterip Challenging Point Of View To the Editor: I was surprised to learn that Dr. C. Clyde Mitchell is being re placed as head of the department of agricultural economics at the University of Nebraska. You have asked for my opinion of Dr. Mitchell's professional sta ture. I consider Dr. Mitchell ex ceptionally well qualified profes sionally. I have known him and his work for a number of years and have a great deal of respect for his ability, integrity and un derstanding of his fields. I htink Dr. Mitchell has brought a challenging and stimulating point of view to the field of agricul tural economics in the Midwest. Though I do not agree with Dr. Mitchell on many issues of eco nomic policy, I respect his point of view and the scfaolas' bae& for bis position. You also asked me fo comment on the effect of the University administration bowing to outside pressure in this case. I know aotb ing of that and so am not com petent to comment. I know nothing of the reasons which the university administra tion may have had for removing Dr. Mitchell from the chairman, ship of the department of agri cultural economics. However, if this action should result in Dr. Mitchell leaving the University, I think it would be a serious loss to the University and to the state of Nebraska. Lauren Soth Editor of the editorial pages Des Moines Register. No Qualified Comment To the editor: I have been closely associated with Professor Clyde Mitchell for a number of years in the agriculture committee of the National Plan ning Association. In that group, Mitchell has been notable for his stimulating ideas and for the remarkable volume of work he has turned out in his par ticular field. It bas seemed to me that Ne braska has been fortunate in hav ing a man like Mitchell to keep farmers and college people aware of new problems and of the need of new methods to deal with these problems. In economics, a man who has new ideas is always bound to get into trouble. Unless an economist is careful to lag behind the aver age attitudes of his state, there will be some who will be offended by suggestions which may be or thodox and respectable in 10 years time but are not so now. Some groups are always likely to say: "This man doesn't agree with us. Therefore, he should be de moted or fired." My own feeling is that there will always be an oversupply of con servative economists. We need to cherish the independent spirits who look for new ideas and who aren't afraid to go against the current. Incidentally, the bitter joke in this situation ia that probably Clyde has more support out in the country for his ideas now than in any time since be came to Ne braska. Donald R. Murphy, Associate Editor f Wallace's Farmer To the Editor: I have received your letter of April 23rd. While I have the very highest regard for Clyde Mitchell, both as an economist and as a per son, and while I would not like to see him removed from the splen did contribution that he is making as a teacher to the better under standing of agricultural economics, I do not feel that I am in a posi tion where I can participate in the discussion of whether or not he should be chairman of a particular department at a particular univer sity. I note from the materials which Independent Spirit you have sent me, If they are cor rect, that the current issue does not involve Dr. Mitchell's tenure as a member of the faculty or his inde pendence as a teacher. Personally, as a friend and ad mirer of Clyde Mitchell, I hope that he is retained as chairman of the department, but X would not feel qualified to participate in a controversy on this particular issue. Leea Keyserling Farmer Chairman ef President Truman's Council ef Ecenemie Advisers To. the Editor: Although Wednesday's Rag made no mention of the fact, the me chanical engineering students won the overall Engineers' Week com petition last Friday. Months of effort in several fields, Including the building of a down town window display, sales of ban quet tickets, E-Week ribbons and athletic competition contributed to wards the winning of this plaque. The ME's earned the most prized award of Engineers' Week and they deserve recognition for it in our campus news sheet. The winners of fellowships and ME's Win E-Week scholarships which were an nounced in the same story had no' connection with Engineer's Week or the Engineering College. It was not fair either to the scbolarstiio winners or to the E-Week partici pants for these two stories to be combined into one. However, The Nebraskan seems so preoccupied with the fate of a convicted murderer and a demoted professor that it is no longer able to resrt campus news accurately or thoroughly. Crusades are a fine thing, but how about squeezing some news space in between them. A Disgruntled Engineering Student I ) . 7 r b