Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Eugene register-guard. (Eugene, Or.) 1930-1983 | View Entire Issue (Jan. 17, 1963)
Echo '63 UNI Wlfifft MtM HrM AN INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER ALTON F. BAKER, Publisher, 1927-1961 ALTON F. BAKER JR. Editor and Publisher EDWIN M. BAKER General Manager RICHARD A. BAKER Managing Editor ROBERT B. FRAZIER Associate Editor A. H. CURREY Associate Editor The Register-Guard's policy is the complete and impartial publication in it news pages of all news and statements on news. On this page, the editors of the Register-Guard offer their opinions on events of the day and matters of importance to the community, endeavoring to be candid but fair and helpful in the development of construc tive community policy. A newspaper if a CITIZEN OF ITS COMMUNITY. Published every evening and Sunday morning by the Guard Publishing Co. 10A EUGENE, OREGON, THURSDAY, JANUARY 17, 1963 Leadership Efforts Fit the Pattern The mayors of Eugene and Spring field "laid it on the line" this week as they presented annual reports to the peo ple of their cities. Speaking at the first city council session of the new year, Eugene's Mayor Ed Cone made it clear that this city must improve downtown parking arrangements and either repeal or substantially revise its restrictions on the construction of limited access traf ficways. At a similar session in Spring field, Mayor B. J. Rogers called for mu nicipal acquisition of remaining Pacific Power & Light Co. facilities in that city and urged a number of expensive, but necessary,' civic improvement projects. Thus, in our opinion, both mayors lived up to what is one of the greatest responsibilities of the elected execu tive in our democratic form of gov ernment. At every' level of government, it is important that heads of government pinpoint problems they deem of press ing consequence. President Kennedy did this Monday in his annual state of the union message; Gov. Mark Hatfield did it in addressing the opening session of the 52nd Oregon Legislature. Mayors Cone and Rogers made the pattern com plete in commendable fashion. To be sure, it is prudent and proper that executive counsel to the people and their elected lawmakers be recognized as only the expression of a point of view. Such counsel has no, binding force,' nor should it ever have such force. It is also true that prudence usually calls for the sandwiching of executive counsel be tween toppings of praise and crusts o expressed satisfaction with certain things as they are and are developing. Yet, the meaty portions of such ex ecutive pronouncements must be chal lenges for progressive action. Especially in these times, when the nation, the states and local communities are all be sot with problems demanding immediate attention, it is incumbent upon the ex ecutive to prod. He is .not fulfilling his ft ft . ft Sic 'em, Wayne Wayne Morse is 100 per cent right in his campaign to restrict somewhat the drinking practices of his colleagues in the Capitol Bldg. He isn't trying to dry up the Capitol or to say that a congress man can't pour a friendly drink for a constituent. But he does want -an end to wild parties of the kind Sen. Vance Hartke, the Indiana Democrat, threw in the Capitol the other evening. Reports are that Senator Hartke's party could be heard 100 yards away. He used a police whistle to quiet the .mob long enough for the introduction of dis tinguished guests. It was said to be the loudest, wildest, wettest brawl ever thrown in that venerable structure. To many Americans, even those who have never visited Washington, the Capitol Bldg. is something like a ca thedral. It is in bad taste, to say the least, to use it like the public rooms of a hotel. Also, it shows bad judgment, considering the number of visitors who come there every day. It's degrading. Congressmen and senators, of course, are jealous of their privileges. They don't like to be pushed around. Only somebody like Wayne Morse has the crust to irritate his fellow dignitaries, many of whom, in this instance, are sorely in need of irritating. Give and Take Something unique in this state, Sat urday noon forum luncheons at which Lane County legislators report to and confer with interested constituents, will be resumed this week. Heretofore, these sessions at the Eu gene Hotel have been sponsored by the Eugene Chamber of Commerce. This fifth scries of legislative report forums will, however, be jointly sponsored by the Springfield Chamber of Commerce. The affairs, where everyone is wel come providing he pays for his own lunch, are conducted on a strictly non partisan basis. And all current Lane County legislators have agreed to par- obligation if a president, governor or mayor seeks simply to appease andor assuage his listeners. ' Mayor Cone's direction of Eugene's attention to its parking and trafficways problems will serve the city well, re-; gardless of the particulars of "eventual solutions of these problems. As Eugene continues to grow at the rate of 9 per sons per day, obviously these problems are going to get worse before they can be even effectively attacked. But the mayor has put it plainly that these prob lems won't solve themselves. Action by the people of Eugene and their council representatives will be necessary. .Mayor Rogers' leadership, like that of Mayor Cone, will require the backing of council members and voting citizens. The history of the "Springfield power fight" makes it impossible to predict how closely his lead will be followed in this particular, but the important thing is that he has put a vital public issue back in the spotlight where it should remain until it has been settled in the best long range interest of that city. Similarly, his suggestions for drainage improve ments, expansion of the Springfield City Hall, construction of a second fire de partment substation and studies of traf fic, water supply and sewer construction programs will lend important impetus to the overall progress of Lane-'s second largest city. 1 Whether they agree or do not agree with their mayors' opinions about local problems, residents of Eugene and Springfield should at least appreciate what it is these men are attempting to insure. It is a vital thing: the continuity . of communal progress through the stim ulation of community awareness to prob lems which, however politically thorny they may be, must be dealt with before they are made more difficult to solve, ; financially, politically, or, perhaps, merely because of by-passed oppor tunities. ft ' ft "' ft ticipate as much and as often as their, schedules permit. As the 52nd Legislature proceeds with its work, its deliberations and de cisions will be shaped, a little here and a little there, as the result of these weekly meetings between the Lane County delegation and their local back ers andor opponents. And final results of the session, certainly, will be much better understood by Lane voters who attend these weekly luncheon conferences. Shorter Campaigns A bill in Legislature would shorten Oregon's lengthy political campaigns. Rep. J. E. Bennett, Portland Democrat, suggests moving the primary election day from the third Friday in May to the second Tuesday in September. This will be welcomed by politicians who now spend at least eight months in their campaigns, and by citizens who must listen twice once in the spring and again, after a quiet summer, in the fall. But it has a large drawback. Oregon chooses its delegates to the political conventions by popular vote and at the May primary election. Con vention now meet in July. If we were to continue the popular election of dele gates, we'd have to pick them at a spe cial election. Some have advocated that we do away with popular election of delegates. They point to the long lists of names that must be sifted through. Other states, they note, do very well by selecting dele gates through a convention system. Ore gon voters one day might relinquish selecting delegates. But it is doubtful if they would give up their preference primary, the vote In which the people themselves instruct their delegations how to vote on early ballots. Is a special election worth-while? Here again, as in so many legislative matters, we do not have a situation in which the whites are all white, the blacks all black. This measure, like so many others, is really a shade of grey. In the Editor s Madbag f; r Bidding Practices EUGENE (To the Editor) If Mr. Thornton wants to save Oregon money, as he recently ate under identical conditions, i.e., with identical purchasing: powers, identical marketing .costs. The reason, Mr. Thornton, is that if A should bid lower than B. oresumably A would declared in his gubernatorial soon go bankrupt, leaving is to campaign, he might begin not charge what it pleased in the with a state conducted investi- future. gation of private firms' bidding But this would at least save practices, but with a Thornton- us the cost of one kind of in conducted investigation of a few vestigation in that rosy future, standard economics texts of any wouldn't it? vintage from Adam Smith's to lard Keynes's. He might even investigate a couple of Marxist Leninist approved texts (I would permit it) and still, I wager, not find any authority to support his implied conten tion that for a specific commod ity and specific services to be delivered and performed in a particular place at a particular time there ought to be more than one market price. Mr. Thornton's concern over similar or identical bids would be legitimate if it were directed toward a single instance of identical bids for dissimilar or sDecial-order products or serv ices. Instances of this would be identical bids for Pap Dentifrice (a toothpaste) versus Kazam Dental Enamel Polisher (a tooth powder) to be delivered to state hospitals, or identical bids for 1,835 specially fabricated anchor bolts required to meet certain engineering tests but not required to be of a specified design nor to be made of speci fied materials. Then he would have reason to suspect behind-the-scenes, pre-bid, consulta tions. As it is, he wonders why Firm A should not bid less than Firm B when both are to oper- DAVID IBBOTSON 2525 Emerald St David Lawrence U.S. Needs South Viet Nam Explanation Lawrence WASHINGTON For what cause have 53 Americans given their lives in South Vict Nam? What is the government here telling the unfortuna'e parents and relatives? , It would seem that not only is a persuasive ex planation due the families of the men killed, but it is due the American peo ple as well,. For other Ameri cans in uniform about 1,000, 000 of them now are sta tioned in 41 different lands and may any day be asked to make similar sacrifices. An official explanation as to why the United States is risk-' ing the lives of its youth in South Viet Nam has not been forthcoming. Yet Congress alone,' under the Constitution, has the right to declare war. A president who finds our nation al safety threatened need not wait for Congress, but may in an emergency order our armed services into action because there isn't time to consult Con gress. At the earliest practica ble moment, nevertheless, a president is morally obligated to ask for a resolution of both Houses of Congress to author ize the continued uso of Ameri can troops. There has been plenty of time for Congress to tackle the problem of supply- Doris Fleeson ing military aid to South Viet nam. When President Wilson sud denly ordered Marines to land in Veracruz in 1914, to inter cept a shipment of arms from Germany, a request for a joint resolution of authorization was made only a few days later. The request was promptly granted. In 1950, when President Tru man overnight ordered our armed forces to help the Unit ed Nations to repel the invas ion of South Korea, he called it . a "police action," though it turned into a major war. Con gress never authorized it ex plicitly but later gave the mili tary operation validity by pass ing the necessary appropria tions. There have been a few cases in which Marines have been landed for brief periods in for eign countries by the United States to protect American lives and property and no resolutions have been sought from Con gress. But in no case have such forces been used to carry on any operations involving mili tary action against another country. Today American troops and equipment at a cost to Ameri can taxpayers of $1,000,000 a day are in South Vict Nam, and the official word is that all this is solely to help in defensive operations at the request of the local government. Lately it ap pears that the local command ers don't want to fight the Communist-led forces and arc ig noring the advice of American Praise for Senator Russell A Well -Deserved Honor Fleeson WASHINGTON The Senate paid tribute last week to one of its truly distinguished members. Sen. Richard B. Russell of Georgia, on- the occasion of his 30th anni versary of serv ice there. The historic c h a ru ber is accus tomed to eulogy. Rarely is it so well deserved. Senator Rus- sell is acknowl edged to be one of the best brains in Con gress. A whole body of legisla tion, particularly that affecting agriculture, appropriations and the military, is the better for his skills and understanding. In his long service he has had no colleague who is not in his debt for help and for a personal consideration embellished by an exquisite courtesy. Because his native state has run athwart the stream of Amer ican destiny in some vital issues of modern times notably civil rights the Russell services to the nation have been obscured and his national promotion pre vented. The Senator chose to stand by Georgia, and he has many times paid tho debt he ap parently felt he owed his peo ple. It seems he will go on pay ing it in the rules fight coming up again. The applause for him rang sweetly in the ears of his friends. But philosophic considerations intruded. What would be really interesting is what so ahle a man. now a vigorous 66, thinks of the changes he has seen since he came to the Senate the same year Franklin Roosevelt was in augurated for hit first term. What he foresees about the role of Congress and the Executive would be possibly even more valuable. He is unlikely to tell. Russell is neither austere nor unap proachable; on the contrary, he is the best of company. But his personal reserve is illustrated by his biography in the Congres sional Directory which consists of one line: Richard Brevard Russell of Winder, Georgia. He is not hiding his age, for he is not yet a patriarch like his only senior in the Senate, Sen. Carl Hayden of Arizona, 85. Russell was in fact a wonder boy of his time, with this dif ference from some of today's crop: When he came to the Sen ate at 3ti, he had served in the state legislature 10 years, had been Speaker of the State As sembly and Governor. Certainly he knows that he is surrounded by change, even at home. Atlanta is integrated in theory and beginning to be so in fact: it has just elected a Negro councilman. The only in transigent states left in the South which seek to maintain a defiant segregationism as state policy are Alabama and Missis sippi. Russell's fellow - Southerners not only let him lead the civil rights fight here, increasingly they lurk in the wings. His jun ior colleague, Herman Talmadge, son of "01' Gene" and just be ginning his second term, has hardly snapped a callus at the rare issue in six years. Senator Russell permits him self no bitterness, at least pub licly, about the changes which confine the use of his talents, but serves with dignity in a Senate which must be very dif ferent from that which he en tered to hopefully 30 years ago. military officers, one of whom was killed as he pleaded with the native army commanders to fight. American troops usually do not engage in any foreign war without the authorization of the people's representatives the Congress of the United States. It is recognized, of course, that a president may take measures of instant retaliation if an at tack is made against this coun try, but it is assumed Congress would even then be asked to authorize any continued war fare. Under the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the United States is pledged to regard an attack on any of the member states as being just the same as an attack on the United States. But after the initial steps have been taken, the Congress is supposed to furnish the neces sary authority to carry on the war. Just why the administration has not presented the facts about the situation in South Vict Nam to the American peo ple is a mystery. Informal and confidential talks with mem bers of the foreign relations committees of Congress have been held by the Department of State, but these are by no means a substitute for the re quirements of the Constitution. American boys have already been killed in action in South Viet Nam, and many more of them may be sacrificed in The Congo or other parts of the world to quell local disturb ances. The United States govern ment today has taken the posi tion that, under the assumed authority of the United Nations, American advisers and equip ment can be used in The Congo to settle by force an internal war in a state which covers a considerable area in Central Africa. Great Britain and France and other U.N. members disap prove of such intervention, which, though carried on osten sibly by the U.N., is really sup ported, encouraged and financed largely by the United Slates. Not a single step has been taken, by Congress to authorize Amer ican military support of the U.N. in the Congo. President Eisenhower found himself in a tough spot in the Far East when an attack on Quemoy and Matsu, the islands off the shore of Red China, was threatened in 1954 and 1955. He asked Congress for authority to resist such an attack and to use American armed forces. The is sue was fully debated, and a joint resolution authorizing mil itary action in certain contin gencies was overwhelmingly adopted. This was a policy of candor and of fairness to the American people and their representatives. It ought to be repeated. When ever the Congress, moreover, does debate the issues and the use of troops is sanctioned, then the psychological effect of such a step is without question felt abroad. It helps to dispel any notion that the executive branch of the government here is en gaged in a venturesome game that it might not perhaps play to the finish. In risking the lives of soldiers, there is every reason to follow the procedure prescribed by the Constitution. (Copyrisht, 1962, New York Herald Tribune, Inc.) James Marlow Jeannace ( EUGENE (To the Editor) '. Congratulations on your splen-"' did editorial urging clemency . for Jeannace Freeman. The fearless journalistic tradition you have thus maintained is bolstered by the fact that this is the first time you have ap-; pealed to a governor to use his commutation powers and that it was for a despised, friendless waif such as she when you did. The phrase you coined to de-, scribe capital punishment ; "cyanide roulette" should burn itself into the minds of the populace, for quick recall when the people of this and other capital-punishment states next have the opportunity to strike this barbarian practice from the statute books. Your constant emphasis of the fact that Miss Freeman is indeed yet a girl instead of a mature woman brings into focus perhaps the most pitiful aspect . of her tragedy-bent young life: besides the fact that she was never allowed to "grow up," she was the victim of savage and, to her, inexplicable forces be yond her control the victim of circumstances, as you put it. If her execution is allowed to take place, we will in truth be strap ping a child into the gas-chamber chair. After dismissing each of the arguments, singularly, for com mutation of her sentence, your combination of them all to make a valid caje for the ex ercise of executive clemency is most effective. Indeed, these events in her formative years led her into the company of Mrs. Nunez to begin with. That, the mother was the only one to support the charge of pre-.' meditation which sent Miss. Freeman to Death Row is not generally realized. But as you point out, Mrs. Nunez actually was the only witness against Miss Freeman. No one can deny that equal justice is not to be found here. It is now only through the gov ernor's intervention that the perpetration of an infinitely1 greater injustice can be pre- . vented. GEORGE F. NEAVOLL 241 E. Broadway, Apt. 2. Three Messages Show How Kennedy Mood Has Varied Carmichael p,Y REM-tf CLEARS ir6 HEM? OUT fwa. m tsm im WASHINGTON W In two years President Kennedy's mood about things at home and abroad has changed from that of dark worry and gritty crisis to one of much confidence and a feeling the tide is running right. i The change shows in the three State of the Union messages he has delivered to Congress: the first in 1961, right after he took office; the second in 1962; the third Monday. Kennedy's first message sounded like a call for the am bulance. The one last year con sidered the American paUcnt much improved. The one this week said the patient was do ing fine but could still stand some vitamins. Less Rhetoric Monday's message had less rhetoric than the one in 1961, But that wasn't the reason it sounded flat by comparison. It was just less urgent. It men tioned fewer needs, suggested fewer remedies. In the past few weeks in one unusual way or another on television or in conferences with newsmen he pretty generally laid down not only his view of the world at this time but what programs he would propose to Congress. The three messages side by side tell the story. The first group is on problems at home: 1961 "I speak today in an . hour of national peril . . . The outcome is by no means certain . . . The American economy is in trouble." 1962 " . . . We completed 1961 on the high road to recov ery and growth." Now he was thinking no longer almost en tirely in terms of recovery but in terms of controlling inflation MMmiiaraiBmnH'iina MEMBER OF THE ASSOCIATED PRESS The Associated Pres Is entitled exclusively to the use for republi cation of all the local news printed In this newspaper. MEMBER OF THE AUDIT BUREAU ' OF CIRCULATIONS Services United Press International WILLIAM WASMANN. Nm Editor DONN L. BONHAM. City Editor ROSS O. JOHNSON, Advertising Director JARL FUOLE ClrculaUon Manager ROBERT K. BERTSCH Promotion W. B, JOHNSTON JR. Auditor AR.VS STROMMTR Production so the recovery already taking place wouldn't be hurt. 1963 "I can report to you that the state of this old but youthful Union, in the 175th year of its life, is good . . . The recession is behind us . . . Both at home and abroad there may now be a temptation to relax . . . But we cannot be satisfied to rest here." Foreign Problems Here are the same three mes sages, side by side, on foreign problems: 1961 " ... All our domestic problems pale when placed be side those which confront us around the world . . . Each day the crises multiply. Each day their solutions grow more diffi cult. ' "Each day we draw nearer the hour of maximum danger, as weapons spread and hostile forces grow stronger ... the tide of events has been running . Hit and time has not been our friend ..." 1962 It was not so much what he said in 1962 as what he left unsaid that showed Ken nedy felt more confident about dilemmas overseas. He no longer dwelt on the hour of peril or the approach of danger. Instead, he gave a brief lecture on the difference be tween the West and communism the difference between free choice and coercion. Lecture Repeated It was a lecture he was to re peat almost in the same words in his 1963 message. Still, he turned on the amber light. He warned that "every apparent blessing contains the seed of danger." 1963 "In the world beyond our borders steady progress has been made in building a world of order . . . Only a few years ago . . . communism sought to cpnvey the image of a unified, confident and expanding em pire, closing in on. a sluggish America. "In these past months we have reaffirmed the scientific and military superiority of free dom . . . We have every reason to believe our tide is running strong." While the world looked brighter to Kennedy in 1963 he did again what he did in 1962: He took out a little insurance against too much optimism by warning about "the storms be yond the horizon."
