The Charlotte News

Saturday, May 22, 1954


Site Ed. Note: The front page reports that in Geneva, South Korea had finally agreed this date to elections throughout the country, but had proposed conditions which the Communists were sure to reject. South Korea proposed, through its Foreign Minister Pyun Yung-tai, a 14-point plan for unification of Korea, but stipulated that any elections would have to be supervised by the U.N. and then the results also certified by the U.N., the Communists having already ruled out any U.N. role in Korean peace plans. The South Korean proposal also provided that Chinese Communist troops would have to be withdrawn from North Korea at least a month before the elections, while some U.N. forces would remain in Korea until a unified government achieved effective control over the entire peninsula, another condition which the Communists were sure to reject. Another provision proposed that representation in the all-Korean legislature would be in direct proportion to the population of all of Korea, ensuring control by the South, which at present had about 20 million people, whereas the North had only four million. The proposal rejected that of North Korean Foreign Minister Nam Il, which called for Communist-type elections to be carried out by an all-Korean commission on which North and South Korea would have equal representation. The South also rejected the North's proposal for it not having named a particular date for the elections, only calling for withdrawal of all foreign forces from Korea.

From Hanoi, it was reported that French fighter aircraft and bombers this date had heavily pounded Vietminh bases in the vital Red River Delta, following the fall of one of three French defense outposts. The French planes, both from land and carrier bases, attacked the Vietminh's main highway communications leading to the delta and Hanoi, while fighter planes blasted truck convoys. A French high command spokesman said that he could not estimate how heavy the Vietminh movements were from the fallen French fortress at Dien Bien Phu into the delta area, which protected Hanoi and Haiphong. The spokesman said that the Vietminh were not marching on Hanoi. The fallen outpost which had been taken by the Vietminh the previous day had held out for nearly three weeks. Two other outposts were encircled and still holding out in the southeastern part of the delta, on the fringes of the strategic rice bowl area where Communist activity had been increased since the fall of Dien Bien Phu.

General Curtis LeMay, chief of the Air Force Strategic Air Command, in an address to the Armed Forces Chemical Association in Washington, said the previous day that "the readiness of our strategic bombers to strike back on a global scale is a considerable factor … in discouraging the spread of a limited war." He said that SAC planes could take off in any type of weather and fly directly to within a few hundred feet above any designated target on the globe, hitting the target when they got there. He said that the Administration's military policy was based on the concept of "massive retaliatory power", as a deterrent to Soviet aggression, and that his command had the mission of "swift and certain retaliation", that in the event of a total war, his strategic bombers would have the task of striking at enemy airbases and atomic installations, destroying the enemy's striking power at its source, as well as wrecking the enemy's industrial capacity and seeking to prevent the advance of enemy ground forces. In another speech before the same group, Civil Defense director Val Peterson said that 22 million Americans could be killed or wounded by an all-out Russian atomic, chemical and germ weapons attack, and that between 40 and 100 of the country's major cities could be struck at the outset of such an attack. He said that the American people could "dig, die or get out of their cities" in the event of such an attack, and he urged civil defense drills, such as those conducted in Indianapolis and Columbus, O.

Senator McCarthy said this date that he would not criticize the President for "pulling down the Iron Curtain" over Administration discussions affecting his dispute with the Army, referring to an executive order to all executive branch personnel not to provide Congressional committees with statements regarding private executive department conversations and related documentation. The Senator was set to deliver a major address at Fort Atkinson in Wisconsin this night. He said that if the Senate hearings continued, he would like to have five newsmen subpoenaed, Homer Bigart of the New York Herald-Tribune, columnist Joseph Alsop, Phil Potter of the Baltimore Sun, and Murrey Marder and Al Friendly of the Washington Post, on the basis that testimony before the subcommittee had revealed that Army general counsel John G. Adams had discussed with those journalists Army announcements released in connection with the dispute between the Senator and the Army. He said that he would review the course of the dispute in his address before a Chamber of Commerce dinner, at which time he would announce whether he would continue with the hearings despite the President's order, the hearings set to resume on Monday after a week-long recess. He said that he would testify in the matter but that the appearance of his assistants, usual chief counsel for the subcommittee, Roy Cohn, and staff assistant Francis Carr, would be up to each of them, in view of the Army's "stacked deck", as he described the situation in the wake of the President's order. In Chicago the previous day, the Senator had said that the Republican Party was "committing slow and painful suicide before the television cameras". He said that the demand of Senator Stuart Symington, one of three Democrats on the Investigations subcommittee, that the transcripts of conversations relating to the case monitored by the Army should be made public, represented a change in the subcommittee rules on which the Democrats had agreed prior to the start of the hearings, under which, he said, none of those transcripts would be made public until they had been submitted to subcommittee counsel and opposing counsel and the Attorney General had reviewed them and removed irrelevant material. The Senator found it to be a test of the good faith of the Democrats on the subcommittee.

The President's request to lower the voting age from 21 to 18 was doomed by 24 Democratic Senators this date, most of whom were from the South. Supporters of the measure in the Senate were only able to muster 34 votes, when a two-thirds super-majority was required for the constitutional amendment to be passed in each house before being submitted to the states for ratification by three-fourths of them. The measure was still pending in the House, but it was believed futile for the body to consider the amendment, given the Senate outcome. No Republican voted against the measure in the Senate, though Senators Hugh Butler of Nebraska and George Malone of Nevada were paired against it. Only seven of 47 Democrats in the Senate had voted in favor of it, while seven others were paired in favor. The opponents were led by Senator Richard Russell of Georgia, who found it "an implied insult" to the governors and legislatures of all of the states. Georgia was the only state in the union at the time which allowed 18-year olds to vote. Senator Russell said that he was not against extending the voting age to 18, but believed it should be left to each state to make the decision.

Atlanta black political leader Austin Walden, in a press interview in advance of a two-day closed strategy session by NAACP national and regional leaders, advised black leaders to move slowly, but firmly, in planning a program of action in response to the Brown v. Board of Education decision of the Supreme Court, holding continued public school segregation unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause. He advised not bringing to a sudden end segregation but waiting until the Court would hear from the states impacted by the decision regarding their plans for implementing the decision, oral arguments having been scheduled on the matter for mid-October. He advised state NAACP leaders to discourage immediate lawsuits to force admission of black students to public schools, colleges and universities, at least until the fall. He said that they did not wish to add to the emotional instability of those supporting segregation, but also did not want to have to apologize for the Court's decision.

Meanwhile, Attorney General Eugene Cook of Georgia, who had stated earlier in the week that the decision was demoralizing and contrary to legal precedent and social customs, had called for a meeting of state attorneys general to study courses of action, stating that the meeting would not stress defiance of the Court's decision. Governor Thomas Stanley of Virginia had invited other governors to meet in Richmond during the first week of June for an exchange of information on the decision.

In Frankfurt, Germany, the chief U.S. prosecutor abruptly halted further action in a prosecution involving the January 7, 1946 ax and arson murders of three U.S. Army officers, pending full study of the case, after a deputy prosecutor had filed murder charges the previous day against a former Army captain, indicating that he was forwarding extradition papers to the U.S. High Commission in Bonn.

Near Fayetteville, N.C., two Fort Bragg soldiers had been killed this date when their automobile collided with a tractor-trailer truck, with one of the soldiers, a corporal, having been the driver of the automobile, while his passenger was a private. The truck driver was not seriously injured.

In Jacksonville, N.C., the severely lacerated wife of the Marine captain stationed at Camp Lejeune, who had gone berserk the previous day and killed his three children and assaulted his wife with a hatchet before stabbing himself to death in the throat with a butcher knife, had regained consciousness and was showing some improvement, though remaining in serious condition. Police had not been able to establish a motive for the captain slaying the children and stabbing his wife.

In London, evangelist Billy Graham would conclude this night his evangelical crusade in Britain, with two venues, White City Stadium, holding 60,000 people, and Wembley Stadium, holding 100,000, reserved for his final appearances. It was impossible to find a ticket for either meeting, and the BBC had promised to broadcast the evening sermon at Wembley for those who were unable to attend. Railways would run "Billy Graham special trains" and the London Transport had set up expanded service, usually reserved for cup final matches at the climax of each year's soccer season. A disused subway station at White City Stadium was being opened for the day, and extra buses would be placed on five lines. The crusade's services had begun on March 1 at Harringay Arena, attracting considerable skepticism from local churchmen and citizens who wondered whether London was too sophisticated for evangelism. The previous day, however, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Geoffrey Fisher, published a statement saying he regarded the campaign of Dr. Graham to have been, on the whole, "a very humble, sincere and fruitful work of evangelism", noting with approval that he had avoided all "unwise exploitation of the emotions" and had sent people touched by him to their regular Christian life and fellowship in their churches.

In Emeryville, Calif., a female impersonator, replete with makeup and fancy underclothes, played the role of a decoy for a pair of robbers the previous day. The man dressed as a female entered a liquor store and ordered an expensive bottle of scotch, and while the owner was filling the order, two men entered the store and told the owner that it was a stick-up. The owner grabbed the man dressed as a woman and held him as a shield, as he reached for a revolver, whereupon the two robbers fled, at which point the female impersonator broke away and likewise fled. Police officers apprehended the three suspects a few blocks away, and they offered no resistance. You can't blame them. They had gotten their idea from watching "Dragnet".

From New York, Associated Press reporter Roy Kohn—not to be confused with the Investigations subcommittee chief counsel Roy Cohn—, tells of the latest regarding animals in the news, that soft-hearted zoo-men were going for hard-shelled armadillos, that sore-armed dancers picked pythons over pumas, and that duck-billed Cecil was re-wooing Penelope the platypus, in various spots in New York State, Baltimore and Toronto. He provides detail of the happening.

On the editorial page, "The South Respects the Law" indicates that the South's reaction to the Brown decision the previous Monday, holding continued segregation in public schools unconstitutional, had been an admixture of disappointment, surprise, maturity and seriousness. Some shrill voices had been raised, but calmness had characterized the response of most of the press, political leaders and the public. The ruling was being respected, rather than mocked.

It finds that attitude apparent in the state Democratic convention in Raleigh two days earlier, where the keynote address of Winston-Salem attorney Irving Carlyle had drawn applause when he said that, as good citizens, the state had no other course than to obey the law as laid down by the Court, that to do otherwise would cost the state its respect for law and order. The delegates had acted similarly by tabling a resolution which criticized the decision, instead condemning "without reservation, every effort of men, singly or in organized groups, to set themselves above the law."

It finds that the responsible attitude of Southerners deserved the notice of authorities who would eventually be charged with enforcement of the Court's order for desegregation. It finds unnecessary the convening of any special session of the General Assembly by Governor William B. Umstead to consider the school segregation problem, that after the Council of State, the State Board of Education and the State Department of Public Education had studied the problem, and after the Supreme Court's further hearing of the matter to determine the method of implementing the decision, oral arguments on which were to take place in mid-October, legislative action would then be necessary, but not before the regular session of the 1955 General Assembly convening in January.

It indicates that the legislators elected the following Saturday would probably bear a heavy responsibility for working out an orderly integration of the schools and that the obligation should be maintained in mind by voters when they cast their ballots.

"Other Senators Should Support Gillette" indicates that Senator Guy Gillette the previous day had blamed Senator McCarthy's excesses on the U.S. Senate, itself, noting that the Constitution provided that no person should be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, charging that Senator McCarthy had violated constitutional liberties of citizens.

The Senate could curtail the power of Senator McCarthy by taking away authority delegated to his Government Operations Committee and its Investigations subcommittee, could prescribe rules under which the committees operated and could withhold their funding and change their personnel. But thus far, the Senate had been reluctant to curb any power enjoyed by Senator McCarthy. Only one Senator, J. William Fulbright of Arkansas, had voted against providing funds for the Government Operations Committee. Senator Gillette's speech had indicated that one more Senator had decided that the Senate should take stronger action against Senator McCarthy. Senator Ralph Flanders of Vermont, in a speech two months earlier, had strongly denounced Senator McCarthy, suggesting that a move presently against him from within the Senate would garner support from both parties. It urges other Senators to step forward and finally "cut down to size the dangerous, reckless man who has degraded the Senate."

By the end of the year, that would occur, with Senator McCarthy's censure, the beginning of the end of his waning power, though still continuing to hold some sway over the foolish and stupid of the country who enjoyed hearing from demagogues, somehow fancying that the outspoken demagogue is telling them the "truth" simply by the fact of being loud, brash, divisive and willing to say any damn thing which comes to mind as politically expedient of the moment, no matter how false, demeaning and repugnant to civility it is—a malady from which a large part of the country still obviously suffers.

"Two Industries' Effect on N.C. Wages" indicates that Duke University professor Dr. B. U. Ratchford, in an address before editorial writers recently in Chapel Hill, had urged that the state, to expand its industrial employment and increase its average industrial wages, had to attract more complex industries which demanded higher skills and required larger capital investment while paying higher wages.

It points out that in 1939, there had been three electrical and electronics equipment plants in the state, employing 66 persons, that by 1947, there were 11 such plants employing 5,023 persons, and now there were 40, employing 22,000 persons. During the previous seven years, those plants had invested 42 million dollars in new construction and plant modernization, demanding considerable skill in their workforce and paying fairly high wages, averaging $71.55 weekly, compared to between $41.29 and $56.55 paid to the North Carolina hosiery and textile workers, and between $36.87 and $62.08 paid to the tobacco workers, textiles and tobacco accounting for two-thirds of the state's manufacturing jobs.

Garment manufacturers were moving south to get away from the rackets, while also paying lower wages, with garment workers in New York averaging about $60 per week, against the national average ranging from $43 to $59 in 1952, depending on the type of garment. The previous November, the average pay in the industry in North Carolina ranged from $34.27 to $37.47, with the average Southern wage in that industry being $24.

It concludes that the state needed the kind of high-paying industry typified by the electrical and electronics equipment manufacturers and that the garment industry should receive no particular welcome as long as it was paying only around half to two-thirds that paid New York workers. It indicates that it was yet another example of an intrastate industry which should be covered by a state minimum wage law, similar to the Federal minimum wage law.

"Vote Next Saturday" indicates that civilians could cast absentee ballots in the general election in the fall, but that only service personnel and hospitalized veterans could cast absentee ballots in the upcoming May 29 primary, thus urges people to get out and vote, providing the polling hours and counseling that if one did not vote, that person could hardly put the blame for the kind of officeholders elected on anyone but themselves and others like them.

A piece from the Sanford Herald, titled "On Doodle-Bug Fishing", quotes a writer for the Greensboro Daily News, that it had been the first time in 60 years that no one had invited the writer or prompted him to go fishing on Easter Monday, but that there was grass high enough in the backyard to land a doodle-bug.

The piece proceeds to explain how to go doodlebug fishing, including a chant, "Doodle-bug, doodle-bug, house on fire." It explains that there had been a simpleminded individual in the writer's community who was quite a doodlebug catcher, who chanted, "Doodle-bug, doodle-bug, have some pie."

We think somebody may have been nipping at the brandy.

Drew Pearson indicates that the President had become almost grumpy about the subject of Alaskan statehood, that recently a member of the Alaskan Senate had called at the White House to remind the President that the Republican platform had called for statehood for both Hawaii and Alaska, and that the Alaskan people wanted action, not promises. The President had retorted sharply that he fully appreciated that interest, but that statehood for Alaska was not a one-sided question, that there were other considerations which had to be taken into account, though not elaborating. It was reported that one of the considerations was security, but some observers had pointed out that the White House had not been concerned about security until after the Senate had voted 57 to 28 to approve statehood for both Alaska and Hawaii, and that the President's primary concern was that Alaska would send two Democratic Senators to Washington, whereas Hawaii would likely send two Republicans. Meanwhile, a backstage deal had been worked out between Senator Lyndon Johnson and Senator William Knowland, the respective Senate leaders, whereby Senator Johnson would appoint "weak" Democratic Senators to the House-Senate conference committee set to reconcile the bills, and that those Senators would agree with the Republicans to eliminate Alaskan statehood and approve only Hawaiian statehood.

Representative Daniel Reed, chairman of the House Ways & Means Committee, was trying to formulate a deal with the White House to kill reciprocal trade agreements, having secretly offered to help pass the President's Social Security program provided the President would abandon his campaign to liberalize the reciprocal trade agreements. A lot of business firms objected to reciprocal trade, claiming that tariffs were already too low. Mr. Reed had been dragging out the hearings on the Social Security program expansion, awaiting White House response to his proposal, which had not yet come. The President was receiving pressure from his Wall Street backers who wanted to ease trade barriers. But the President's political advisers felt differently, pointing out that the Social Security program was worth several million votes. It was extremely doubtful, they argued, that President Eisenhower could pass both the Social Security and reciprocal trade over the formidable opposition of Mr. Reed.

Mr. Pearson indicates that Robert E. Lee, a friend of Senator McCarthy, appointed to the Federal Communications Commission by the President, and confirmed after vigorous Senate debate and criticism from Mr. Pearson's column on the ground that he had an unsavory role in the 1950 Maryland Senatorial race, leading to the defeat of Senator Millard Tydings after Senator McCarthy had poured in money derived from Texas oilmen and the Chicago Tribune, and had distributed a composite photograph of Senator Tydings supposedly appearing beside former American Communist Party leader Earl Browder. Mr. Lee had confided to a friend that he hoped to be like Justice Hugo Black, who, shortly after his appointment by FDR in 1937 to the Supreme Court, had come under fire for having briefly been a member of the Klan in the 1920's but having become a great Justice and recognized defender of civil rights. Mr. Lee indicated that he hoped in his small way to do likewise on the FCC. Mr. Pearson indicates that Mr. Lee appeared to be trying hard to achieve that goal, that speaking before the Industrial Communications Association recently, he had told them that the Government could not set aside certain wavelengths for factory communications, comparing it to allocating public roads for the exclusive use of individual trucking and transportation companies. He advised them to use Western Union, Bell Telephone and normal business channels instead. Mr. Lee had also started a quiet campaign against wiretapping, pointing out that a recording of a tapped telephone conversation could be changed, edited and distorted, just as the cropped photo of Secretary of the Army Robert Stevens and Private G. David Schine, eliminating two other men from the picture, making it appear initially that only the two were present. Mr. Lee believed that Attorney General Herbert Brownell had not taken account of that possibility when he proposed legalization of wiretapping in cases involving national security, at the discretion of the Attorney General.

Joseph & Stewart Alsop indicate that the partnership between Britain and the U.S., which had been the basis for free world strength through the previous eight postwar years, was now nearer the breaking point than most people supposed. Extreme mutual bitterness prevailed in the highest and most responsible quarters of both Governments, unlike anything which had preceded since the Anglo-American alliance had been formed during World War I. The reason for it was the crisis in Indo-China and whether the free world could afford a Munich-type peace in the Far East.

They find that the first fault had been that the Eisenhower Administration had waited too long to face the facts in Indo-China, and that when the facts finally had to be faced, Secretary of State Dulles had gone to the European capitals to try to muster support for a Far Eastern alliance, catching them by surprise in asking for "united action" to save Indo-China from Communism. The result was resentment on the part of the British, but regardless, prospects were still not bad on April 10 when Secretary Dulles had gone to London to discuss his plan for united action. Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden had argued that the final decision had to be put off until the Communists could be given a chance to offer an acceptable Asian settlement at the Geneva peace conference, which was to start on April 26. Mr. Eden made two important commitments, however, which gave great satisfaction to Secretary Dulles, first that the British agreed in principle to united action to save Indo-China, provided an acceptable settlement could be obtained at Geneva, and second, promising that Britain would join in immediate discussion of the ways and means to bring about that united action, to show to the Communists that the West meant business.

But then Mr. Eden abandoned his second commitment to Secretary Dulles, having agreed that joint talks would begin on April 19, just before Mr. Dulles would depart for Geneva, with representatives from France, the Anzus countries and the interested Asian nations about to begin those conversations when word came from the British Embassy in Washington that British Ambassador Sir Roger Makins had been instructed not to join the discussion. The problem was covered up temporarily by converting the conference into one on Korea, but the sudden change by Britain left the West without any hand to play at Geneva.

The problem in Britain appeared to have been in British politics, with the Conservative Government fearing public opinion at a time when a general election was likely impending. Word was officially passed in London that Mr. Dulles had been bluffing and that Congress would never go along with united action or any other kind of action to save Indo-China, displeasing to the U.S. policymakers who were in complete earnest about the matter. Also troubling to U.S. policymakers was the British veto which prevented American airstrikes to relieve the French Union troops defending Dien Bien Phu. Then came quickly the fall of the fortress and the complete intransigence of the Communist negotiators at Geneva, causing Anglo-American relations to reach a nadir.

Now there were separate Franco-American discussions of the conditions for U.S. intervention in Indo-China, with U.S. Ambassador to France Douglas Dillon and French Prime Minister Joseph Laniel leading those discussions, begun at the request of the French. The discussions had led to an American policy decision, which had been revealed in the President's Wednesday press conference, that if necessary, the U.S. would intervene to save Indo-China, even if the British did not join in that intervention.

They conclude that the independence of recent U.S. actions, the danger that they might lead to a Far Eastern war, had alarmed and outraged Britain, while in Washington, there was equal outrage and alarm over Britain's apparent willingness to accept a Far Eastern peace reminiscent of Munich, which U.S. policymakers believed would set off a chain reaction of catastrophe for the free world.

Marquis Childs, in Geneva, indicates that it would likely be the last conference between the West and the Communists for a very long time, as failure appeared evident in seeking to resolve the outstanding differences over Korea and Indo-China.

Under the containment policy of the Truman Administration, when Dean Acheson had been Secretary of State, both the President and the Secretary had resisted efforts to have an East-West meeting of heads of state, on the ground that failure of such a meeting would strengthen the position of those arguing that the only resort was to have a preventive war. Mr. Childs regards the drift toward such an impasse not out of the question in the wake of Geneva.

Outwardly, the U.S. position would be to continue to try to effect reconciliation of the position of the Communists at one extreme for a simple cease-fire in Indo-China and the position of the French for a controlled armistice at the other extreme. It was likely, just as the West viewed the Communist position as intransigent, that the Communists, both the Russians and Chinese, viewed the American position likewise. There was some ground for that latter view, as there had been no progress in the effort to persuade South Korean President Syngman Rhee to concede, for bargaining purposes, that supervised elections should be held in both North and South Korea, supervised by the U.N. Since the Communists resisted U.N. supervision, President Rhee could safely agree to such a concession, on the belief that the Communists would not accede. (As the front page reports this date, the South Koreans had finally so agreed.) Furthermore, the U.S. position had not been easy to sustain, with wavering and doubtful allies on the one hand and the wall of Communist inflexibility on the other. There had been seemingly contradictory statements from various U.S. sources, and the French had given out so many conflicting statements about the Communist proposals on Indo-China that it was no wonder that the U.S. could not formulate a clear plan.

U.S. officials had developed a great sensitivity to press reaction, reminiscent of the latter phase of the Truman foreign policy, when Secretary Acheson had felt that the press was unduly critical of him, such that he could do nothing right. In Geneva, one heard bitter complaints about the press and the failure of U.S. newspapers to support the American position, adding to the propaganda issuing from the Communists.

Even the consistently pro-American and influential magazine, The London Economist, in an editorial titled "Alliance in Danger", listed successive bluffs by Secretary Dulles which had been called, with the result of frightening U.S. allies much more than impressing the Communists.

Mr. Childs concludes that U.S. diplomats in Geneva had at least to go through the motions of a conference, despite little hope of any constructive outcome. It was unlikely, however, that Mr. Dulles and his colleagues would again place themselves in such a difficult position across the conference table from the Communists.

A letter writer, 80 years old, complains that downtown Charlotte did not offer the shopper or stranger anything worthwhile, no benches or restrooms. He noticed that older people wandered around with no place to sit down to chat with old friends, that older people did not wish to stay in their houses or their rooms all day, and that if a person stopped on the sidewalk to discuss the weather, the police would tell them to move on. He wants Charlotte to move out of the "hick stage" and set aside a place downtown where the weary shopper, the stranger, the crippled, and the elderly could get some comfort. He finds it comparable to much smaller towns.

A letter writer from Marion indicates that he had been a carrier-salesman of the newspaper for two years and had received the annual "Trip to Charlotte" award, and while there had seen the newspaper in action and the efficiency of the circulation department. The newspaper had been received in his home for 12 years and he had always found it efficient in its reporting and editorialization, but in a recent edition, had found five full-page ads among 26 total pages, and 12 ads taking up between one-third and one-fourth of a page, a ratio generally maintained, he found, during the previous six months, prompting him to wonder whether the newspaper could not cut down on the ads. He compliments the editorial page.

A letter from the director of music education in the Charlotte City Schools thanks the newspaper for its help in promoting their recent Music Festival, expressing the belief that sometimes what appeared in print was more important than actually attending the performances, which the majority of people did not do.

A letter writer from Maxton responds to a letter writer of the previous Saturday who had objected to the entertainment menu on tap for President Eisenhower during his visit in Charlotte on May 18, indicating his belief that the President, after the daily hearings transpiring in Washington in the Army-McCarthy dispute, probably welcomed the change, with a group of amateurs performing for him, as the President had campaigned in 1952 on it being a time for a change in Washington.

Framed Edition
[Return to Links
Page by Subject] [Return to Links-Page by Date] [Return to News<i><i><i>—</i></i></i>Framed Edition]
Links-Date Links-Subj.