The Charlotte News

Monday, May 24, 1954


Site Ed. Note: The front page reports from Hanoi that Lt. Genevieve de Galard Terraube, the heroic nurse of the fallen fortress at Dien Bien Phu, had arrived by plane this date and informed that she was in good health. French Army headquarters announced that 422 of the wounded French Union forces had been evacuated thus far from the fortress, with 130, a record for one day, having arrived in Hanoi the previous night, all airlifted by light planes and helicopters, the only available means for doing so with the adjoining airstrip having been destroyed by the Vietminh during the battle for the fortress. The French command also reported that the Vietminh had agreed to release a total of 858 wounded, including all nationalities represented in the fortress, having previously agreed to release only 753. The Vietminh had also agreed to repair the airstrip to make it usable for transport planes, to speed up the process of evacuation. The French had demanded on May 17 that the repairs be made. The message, however, protested the French bombing of the main road leading from the fortress to the Red River Delta, along which the Vietminh had been moving troops and supplies from the fortress area to the area surrounding Hanoi and Haiphong. The Vietminh message rejected a French proposal that a mixed control commission be established to govern traffic on the road while the Vietminh were evacuating their wounded. French fighter and bomber planes had hit Vietminh convoys on the road the previous day, cutting the highway in two places.

In Geneva, British Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden had returned to the peace conference this date to undertake a final effort to break the East-West deadlock regarding Indo-China and Korea. Mr. Eden had returned to London for the weekend to consult with Prime Minister Churchill and other Cabinet officers, but declined to comment on his instructions. Western observers had stated that the ensuing few days ought to determine whether the Communists actually were willing to negotiate a settlement or were merely stalling to gain military advantage in the Indo-China war. Western delegates agreed that the chances for a settlement of either Korea or Indo-China appeared slim.

In the resumption of the hearings before the Senate Investigations subcommittee regarding the dispute between the Army and Senator McCarthy, the 19th day of the hearings after they had been in recess for a week, Secretary of the Army Robert Stevens assumed full responsibility for the Army's charges against Senator McCarthy regarding his and subcommittee chief counsel Roy Cohn's seeking favor for Private G. David Schine, a former unpaid aide of the subcommittee who had been drafted the previous October. He denied that there was any "cover-up" for higher officials in the Administration. There were repeated sharp exchanges between the Secretary and the Senator, as the latter sought to elicit testimony that the charges against Senator McCarthy had been instigated by White House aides. At one point, Senator McCarthy said that since Secretary Stevens had been able to have a long rest during the week, he should now be able "to tell the truth". Secretary Stevens had responded that he resented the remark, that he was telling the truth and that he did not believe the chairman of the subcommittee during the investigation, Senator Karl Mundt, should allow that kind of statement. Senator McCarthy contended that Secretary Stevens had given "completely contradictory" testimony about the origin of the charges regarding the solicited favoritism. The Secretary acknowledged that he had consulted with high Administration officials about the Army's difficulties with the Senator's Investigations subcommittee, but insisted that the Army was alone responsible for bringing the charges in its report to the subcommittee. Senator McCarthy claimed that the Secretary was trying to cover up for others, which the Secretary strongly denied. He also expressed resentment of the constant refrain of Senator McCarthy that the report had made "smear charges", indicating that the report had been the truth. The report had been sent to the subcommittee on March 10 and Secretary Stevens said that he had given the order to prepare the report sometime early in February.

In the afternoon session, after some preliminary discussion between Army special counsel Joseph Welch, James St. Clair, special co-counsel to the Army and future counsel to President Nixon during Watergate, and subcommittee special counsel Ray Jenkins, regarding the availability to the subcommittee of the transcripts of the Army's monitored phone calls regarding the dispute, Army general counsel John G. Adams would testify again regarding the January 21 meeting with Attorney General Herbert Brownell, Deputy Attorney General William Rogers, U.N. Ambassador Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr., and White House chief of staff Sherman Adams, at which the latter had suggested that the Army prepare a report on the dispute with Senator McCarthy and his staff, Senator John McClellan having begun subcommittee questioning by asking Mr. Adams whether he agreed with Secretary Stevens that the Army accepted full responsibility for the decision not to testify about the substance of that meeting in light of the President's order not to discuss the substance of private executive branch conversations with Congressional committees, Mr. Adams responding that he did so agree. Mr. Cohn also cross-examined Mr. Adams on the same topic. Secretary Stevens would also testify further during the afternoon.

Senator Stuart Symington of the subcommittee commented during the morning session that he felt like the fat lady when the circus tent fell down and she said she was "up to her neck in midgets": he was up to his neck in legal talk. (He would not make it as a summer replacement for Jack Benny.)

Foreign aid head Harold Stassen had, for the third time in less than a week, criticized a foreign policy speech of Senator McCarthy, saying the previous night in a radio and television interview that the Senator had advocated policies in a Senate speech the previous week which would "have America stand all alone … and a third world war would become more and more inevitable." He said he was speaking only for the Foreign Operations Administration and not generally the Administration. He was referring in particular to Senator McCarthy's statements recently advocating a halt to allied trade with Communist China by refusing to provide aid money to allies who were engaged in such trade.

In Tunis, eight persons had been killed and five wounded in new scattered outbreaks of violence between Tunisian nationalists and the French. The French announced that their troops had captured a nationalist stronghold near Bizerte following a two-day battle which had ended the previous day, in which five rebels had been killed and one wounded, with the French suffering two killed and three wounded. Two attacks on automobiles had accounted for the other death and injury.

The Supreme Court this date issued orders designed to admit blacks to publicly supported colleges, universities, theaters, golf courses and housing projects. The brief bulletin does not elaborate and the "orders", presumably, were in follow-up to the Brown v. Board of Education decision issued a week earlier, as there were only three opinions issued this date, none of which dealt with segregation. While on the point, incidentally, no mention thus far in the press had been made of the separate decision, regarding the desegregation of the District of Columbia schools, as held unconstitutional separately in Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497, issued the same day as Brown, necessitating the separate opinion because the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause rights, under which Brown was decided as to the cases out of the school districts in Kansas, South Carolina, Virginia and Delaware, did not apply to the Federal District, only to the several states, thus requiring separate analysis, had under the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause, applicable to situations arising strictly under Federal jurisdiction. Brown had not reached the due process argument under the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause as it was unnecessary in light of the decision under Equal Protection. The Court applied the "strict scrutiny" standard of analysis, in which "suspect classifications" involving classes with immutable characteristics such as those of race, triggers the necessity of the government to provide a "compelling" interest to withstand such scrutiny when discrimination, regarding deprivation of a fundamental right, occurs on the basis of the suspect classification, citing for the standard the Korematsu v. U.S. and Hirabayashi v. U.S. decisions of 1942 and 1943, respectively, upholding, in those instances, the suspect classification because of the Federal Government's compelling security interest involved in the emergency order of the President for the removal of persons of Japanese ancestry, including American citizens, from the Pacific Coast, and in Hirabayashi anent conviction for violating a curfew established for Japanese pursuant to Federal law, in the wake of the attack on Pearl Harbor, out of concern for espionage and sabotage arising from members of that population. In Bolling, the Court found that deprivation of due process, while not in every instance amounting to the equivalent importance of equal protection, did in the instance of discrimination based on a suspect classification, and that the compelling interest thus required had not been shown to justify such discrimination in the District's public schools. Thus, the same result occurred as in Brown, but on required different reasoning because of the segregation in question having arisen under Federal law rather than state law, important for future instances of segregation in public facilities in other settings—which was why the test cases included the D.C. schools, in addition to the other four state school districts, intentionally not limited only to the South, including "Kansas, Bloody Kansas" and Delaware—where we were not younger, but maybe you were.

In Atlanta, black leaders throughout the South would petition local boards of education to eliminate school segregation immediately, resultant of a conference between leaders of the NAACP from 18 states. They referred to it as the "Atlanta declaration", seeking integration at all school levels and urging black teacher assignments and Federal aid to education. The chief spokesmen at a news conference after the closed meetings were special counsel for the organization and future Solicitor General and Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, and NAACP executive secretary Walter White. Mr. Marshall had represented the NAACP during the Supreme Court arguments on Brown, and said that there was no "time for imaginary problems" in ending school segregation, not providing an estimate as to how long he believed it would take to do so. The NAACP would take up the subject of segregation in other fields when it met in Dallas the following month. Mr. White criticized Governor Herman Talmadge of Georgia, Governor James Byrnes of South Carolina, and Senator Richard Russell of Georgia, describing the two Governors as "the most pathetic figures in American life today … in their frustration and bitterness." Both Governors were leading efforts in their states to abolish the public school systems in an attempt to evade Brown. Mr. White also criticized Senator Russell for making one of the most "intemperate speeches of recent years" on the floor of the Senate, denouncing the Supreme Court, saying that he had done so out of fear of the possibility that Governor Talmadge might run against him for the Senate. Senator Russell had no comment in response. The NAACP officials, in their official statement, stated that there would be administrative problems in changing from a segregated to a nonsegregated system, but that they would resist any tactics contrived for the sole purpose of delay. Governor Talmadge reiterated his stand that there would be no mixed schools in Georgia as long as he was Governor, saying that he was "not interested in pleasing Communists at home or abroad." The Governor had stated the previous day on a CBS program that Georgia would not comply with the Brown decision.

Leander Perez, national director of the States Rights Committee, appeared on the Mutual Broadcasting network with Georgia's Lieutenant Governor Marvin Griffin, both indicating that the South would not accept the Brown decision passively, with Mr. Perez, of Baton Rouge, declaring that interracial marriage was the "ultimate objective" of the NAACP.

In Raleigh, interim Senator Alton Lennon, running for re-election against former Governor Kerr Scott, urged this date that the state should work out a solution or plan within the law which would permit North Carolina to continue its present segregated school system, claiming that both races would benefit in many ways by maintaining segregation. He said that a new newspaper in his hometown of Wilmington, the Wilmington Journal, had withdrawn its support of his candidacy because of his statements regarding segregation.

Governor Scott's campaign manager and future Governor, Terry Sanford, said that the former Governor was making arrangements to deliver a radio talk to comment on malicious charges made against him during the campaign, to be delivered on Tuesday or Wednesday night over a 60-station network. No mention was made of the segregation issue.

The U.S. Information Agency stated that the previously Soviet-executed L. P. Beria, former head of the Soviet secret police and former Vice-Premier to Premier Georgi Malenkov, was being removed from Russian history.

In Dallas, Tex., an Air Force C-46 bound from El Paso to San Antonio had disappeared the previous night with five persons aboard, and was presumed to have crashed. A score of search planes were searching the area around Kerrville, where the two-engine craft had been last reported.

In Chicago, firemen and policemen were assigned to stand guard at a hospital on the city's south side this date after fire officials said an arsonist had started four fires the previous night, causing disturbance to many of the 200 patients at the hospital. The fires had been minor, set in the basement, and were extinguished.

In Crossville, Tenn., a rural mail carrier had waited three days to tell anyone of watching a bull catch a two-pound bass, observed as he had been driving by a pond, noticing the big fish thrashing at the end of a line, walking over to congratulate the fisherman, when he saw that a bull was wading in the shallows with a line tangled on one of its feet, pulling the bass up onto dry land.

On the editorial page, "For Better Community Relations" indicates that Charlotte Mayor Philip Van Every had made a worthy proposal, which the newspaper had been on the verge of suggesting to him, the appointment of a special advisory committee to work for greater interracial harmony in the community. It suggests that it should have been done long ago, prior to the Brown decision of a week earlier. It also accepts a measure of the blame for that delay.

It finds a broad opportunity in the community for a human relations council, that the Supreme Court decision would likely be a forerunner of other things involving desegregation of public facilities, including buses, parks, playgrounds, stadiums, auditoriums and quasi-public enterprises such as motion picture theaters. It forecasts that no one could say presently how the great transition would occur during the ensuing decade or two and what readjustment would follow the issuance of the Court's implementing decision on desegregation of public schools, slated for oral argument in mid-October. It finds that the transition would take place more smoothly and with greater satisfaction for both races if at the head of community thought there was a special committee representing the best minds and broadest hearts among the populace, anticipating problems and solving them before they would become issues for the community.

It says that the Mayor proposed to discuss the plan with members of the City Council the following Wednesday and it expresses confidence that the Council would see the wisdom of the proposal and approve it.

"Guatemalan Threat Becomes Real" indicates that about ten days earlier, a Swedish ship from Polish-controlled Stettin had docked in a Guatemalan port with a hold of 2,000 tons of arms, prompting the Guatemalan defense minister to provide a cordon of soldiers around the pier while the cargo was being unloaded at night. The large shipment of arms to the only pro-Communist country in the Western Hemisphere spelled trouble. The State Department had forewarned Latin Americans of Guatemalan designs on them, but the warning had been taken lightly. At the 10th Inter-American Conference in Caracas during March, the Guatemalan foreign minister's tirade against the U.S. had been well received by other Latin Americans, not because they shared his ideology but because they believed the U.S. was crying "wolf", and because they had not quite forgotten the bygone days of Yankee imperialism. They had also not appreciated U.S. disregard of Latin America during recent years.

It posits that the arms shipment would serve only one good end, awakening some of the Latin American countries to the realization that there was a genuine threat from Guatemala. The break in diplomatic relations between Nicaragua and Guatemala was an indication that its neighbors might soon approve collective measures against it.

"Freedom To Travel Is Impaired" indicates that John Gould of the Christian Science Monitor had just returned from Europe and had found the immigration officers at the U.S. port of entry looking at passports, separating the sheep from the goats, causing him to reflect back to the times when he had landed in France, and again in Germany, when his passport had scarcely been opened and he had not even been asked to surrender his customs declaration, finding it harder to get into the U.S. than it was to obtain passage into another country.

It indicates that thousands of American travelers had undergone similar experiences, finding it easier to get into Communist Czechoslovakia than into the U.S. zone of Germany during the occupation days. They had been delayed in U.S. ports by officious men asking pointless questions because bureaucracy had been building up for a long time in the Immigration & Naturalization Service, and new laws designed to help keep out Communists had added to the duties of immigration officials. The value of those laws was questionable, in view of the fact that Communists could and reportedly did enter the U.S. via Mexico with ease. It finds it regrettable and surprising that an Administration dedicated to fundamental freedoms had not done more to increase the freedoms of Americans and foreigners to travel from and to the U.S.

"The Battle of the Species" says that the blue jay was a "big, bright, blustery bird, with the reputation of being both the neighborhood boss and a sneak thief", although sometimes getting its comeuppance. A baby brown thrush, the runt of a brood hatched in the nest fastened firmly in the crotch of the dogwood limb, far from the tree trunk and safe from the neighborhood cats, had remained in the nest when its siblings left, "a lumpy, miserable little fellow, with no tail feathers and few wing feathers." When he had toppled to the ground, a small boy in the family found him, cuddled him and put him in the swinging feeding station all morning long, his parents feeding him cracked seed and peanut hearts from the feeding station, occasionally darting away to capture a bug or worm for him.

But then came three blue jays, "gluttonous as only jaybirds can be", and started feeding from the station, whereupon a brown thrush came out of nowhere, speeding toward them, uttering a shrill cry, repeatedly jabbing the jays, and then the other parent thrush joined, "until the much bigger birds, thoroughly confused and probably humiliated, floundered off to the tall pine trees." At that point, the mother thrush continued feeding the little one, "and as night closed in, he was still swinging in the feeding station, forlorn, a little silly looking, but safe from the prowling cats and the hungry jays—a symbol of the protective instinct of parenthood that defies all logic and makes mockery of the odds in what otherwise would be the most uneven combat". It concludes: "Of such is nature."

Hopefully, incidentally, the little thrush was not "encrotching" on the dogwood's crotch, even as to the tenth limb from the right, or he might need a crutch to get to the sacrifice on Paradise down in the Bahamas.

A piece from the Franklin Press, titled "Who Is To Say?" finds that Victor Bryant of Durham, a member of the executive committee of the UNC Board of Trustees, in an academic speech in Raleigh, had said that a university should have on its faculty members representing as many "respectable viewpoints" as possible, vigorously upholding the necessity for the teacher to be free in research, thought and teaching. He added that intellectual stimulation, and thus progress, resulted from the clash of conflicting viewpoints rather than conformity of thinking. But he would confine those viewpoints to "respectable" ones, leaving unanswered his definition of "respectable" and who was to be the ultimate arbiter of what that was.

The piece believes those questions were important for everyone, not just those on college campuses, because many of the generally accepted ideas of the present had been anything but "respectable" when they had first been conceived and expressed.

Drew Pearson indicates that despite the headaches Senator McCarthy had caused Attorney General Herbert Brownell and despite the Senator's current demand that high-level talks within the Justice Department be made public, the Attorney General had worked out a careful alibi for the Senator regarding his strange finances. He indicates that when a taxpayer wrote to the Attorney General to ask what had happened to the Senate report on the financial operations of the Senator, a reply was sent which indicated that the Senate subcommittee report had been carefully reviewed and that the facts had failed to show any violation of existing Federal criminal statutes, that therefore the Justice Department did not contemplate further action. The responsive letter was signed by Warren Olney III, Assistant Attorney General for the criminal division, and by Ben Brooks, chief of the general crimes section. The text of the letter had been worked out in coordination with the Attorney General, and thousands of those letters had been mailed to persons who inquired about Senator McCarthy's finances.

Mr. Pearson therefore proceeds to relate more findings from the Senate subcommittee report on Senator McCarthy's finances, showing that the Senator's brother William, employed as a truck driver in Chicago, and his wife, had traded in commodities as a proxy for the Senator, admitting in June, 1952 to the Senate committee investigating the matter that he had established an account with the idea of concealing it in the event of an investigation of Senator McCarthy's affairs. Five months later, in November, 1952, William McCarthy was not so cooperative when the Senate committee wanted to investigate whether his brother had underpaid income tax.

Joseph & Stewart Alsop tell of the Atomic Energy Commission having been formed under President Truman as a nonpartisan body, designed to be above politics. President Truman had initially appointed four Republicans and only one Democrat in furtherance of that aim, so that it would be a collective body, with no individual commissioner having any more power than the other four, which would guard against abuse of its vast and secret powers.

But of late, that theory was being tossed aside in the Eisenhower Administration under AEC chairman Admiral Lewis Strauss, who had persuaded Representative Sterling Cole to give him the instruments of unchallengeable personal power, making Admiral Strauss essentially a dictator in the atomic field under the new Atomic Energy Act, sponsored by Mr. Cole and Senator Bourke Hickenlooper. The hearings on the new act had attracted no attention whatever and none had been invited, contrary to the hearings on the original Act sponsored by deceased former Senator Brien McMahon. There had been no discussion of this proposed radical change in principles.

Two provisions of the new act would give Admiral Strauss unparalleled powers, making the chairman the "principal officer" of the AEC, placing him above the other four commissioners, enabling him to act on his own judgment. Another provision would give the AEC and the chairman a power of absolute censorship, unlike anything else in the history of the nation. Anyone who received "restricted" data and published it would become liable to criminal prosecution and fine, regardless of motive or proof of criminal intent. Any newspaper, magazine or other publication which was suspected of being about to publish such restricted data could be enjoined from doing so by prior restraint. Thus, all discussion of any of the great issues involved in atomic development would be totally prohibited henceforth. The definition of "restricted" would be determined by the chairman.

Admiral Strauss, who had fought to prevent the President from being candid with the country about the national strategic situation, would be able to enforce a total silence on atomic energy. The Alsops view with alarm this unprecedented grab for dictatorial power in such an important field of national defense, wondering whether it would extend to abrogating freedom of the press and speech as it related to atomic energy. The AEC, where cooperation had been the watchword for seven fruitful years since 1946, was now torn with enmity and discord for precisely those reasons.

Doris Fleeson discusses the process of reaching the decision in Brown v. Board of Education, decided unanimously by the Supreme Court a week earlier, holding continued segregation in the public schools unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause. She indicates that at the initial conference on the case, one of the Justices had suggested that Chief Justice Earl Warren prepare a memorandum on the general lines of agreement, and he said that he would, the conference having lasted only about 20 minutes. That had been about two months earlier, and on May 3, the Chief Justice had distributed his memorandum among the other eight Justices. The final decision two weeks later had occurred with little substantive modification to that memorandum.

She indicates that civil rights had been adjudicated within the Federal courts for many years, gathering momentum after World War II, with blacks having achieved new economic prosperity, improved measurably by the New Deal and high war wages, leading blacks to press harder against their disadvantages.

The five test cases combined in Brown had first been argued before the Supreme Court in 1952, and had been scheduled for re-argument during the previous fall prior to the death the prior September of Chief Justice Fred Vinson, ultimately being heard the previous December, after the recess appointment in October of Governor Warren. As Chief Justice Vinson had been a Southerner from Kentucky, so were Justices Hugo Black, originally from Alabama, Stanley Reed, from Kentucky, and Tom Clark, from Texas. That fact and the generally restrained way in which the decision had been received in the South by newspapers and leaders had led many Northern liberals of both parties to feel a special obligation to address the practical difficulties the Southern states would face in implementing the decision. They planned to use their influence to restrain demagogues in the North, and the Senators in that group had suggested that Reconstruction days served as the lesson in what not to do.

During informal discussions, one proposal put forward was that Congress should pass special appropriations immediately for school construction in the South, which could be done with a pending bill before the Senate Labor and Public Welfare Committee, to provide Federal help to the states for construction of new school buildings. The Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, Oveta Culp Hobby, had requested the previous week, however, to postpone action on that bill until after projected state and White House conferences could be held to determine the resources of the localities regarding needed school construction, which would delay Federal aid until after 1956. She had conceded that the need was urgent, citing a Government survey which said that 340,000 more classrooms were needed the previous year and that enrollment figures showed that school construction was not keeping pace with increases in enrollment. The great majority of the new enrollees were the children of men and women who had fought and helped to win World War II. Secretary Hobby had written her letter to the Committee prior to the decision in Brown. As a Texan, she understood well the impact the decision would have on the South.

There was already a widespread feeling that children should not be asked to wait, as there had been discussion for some time regarding overcrowded classrooms and teacher shortages, leading to part-time classes. There would be some students who would be enrolled in private schools in the South, causing an even greater challenge to Congress to ensure universal free education as the backbone of democracy.

The process which Ms. Fleeson describes on the Court in rendering the opinion in Brown, somewhat atypical, was essentially correct, though not stating her source for the inside information, but it was more complicated than she makes it sound, at least by the account provided by Justice William O. Douglas in the second volume of his autobiography, The Court Years: 1939-1975, published posthumously in 1980.

A letter writer from Hickory responds to a letter writer who had urged Christians to wake up and lead in the area of integration, indicating reasons why this writer believed they were not doing so. He finds that only one out of every 100,000 persons in the South were true Christians, that it took guts to practice the spirit of Christ and that most "so-called modern 'Christians' are nothing more than effeminate, spineless jellyfish." He finds that especially true of the preachers, "so woefully afraid to preach and practice the truth because of the members" of their churches. He finds the teaching in the modern church to be "a lot of hogwash and poppycock", deviating so far from the teachings of Christ that it was hardly recognizable. He finds religion in the South to be only "a pious custom" and not a power, that a Southerner put on his "goody-goody look" on Sunday and attended church only to return home and "hate like hell through the week". He finds that industry, sports and amusements were leading in areas of change which should be made by the church. Meanwhile, the church was "sitting complacently by with folded arms looking down its pious nose with contempt at those" who were trying to be Christian.

A letter writer, who indicates that she is white, with no personal feelings against the "colored race", believes that they should have the same advantages had by the white race. But, she continues, that did not mean that small children should be placed together in integrated schools, that if they really loved their "God and Maker, both races would want to love and respect His works and the race He created us in. He never intended for us to undo the work He first of all did. If he had intended us all to be of the same race He would never have made us different colors."

But his only Son, the Jew, was the founder of the Christian religion, and he was also reputed to be Ethiopian. So how does that square with your little religion of blue-eyed Aryans doing their missionary service to the poor, little brown ones?

Moreover, the children are not going to school to have sex with one another, if that is your concern. Perhaps, that is part of the problem, a misunderstanding, accidentally or on purpose, and if it be from genuine confusion, confusion developed from the welter of misinformation and propaganda spewed by the various, self-interested organizations and individuals trying to extend arguments to their ultimate hypothetical extreme, thus through the old fallacy of post hoc, ergo propter hoc, derived from the antebellum days, to create some psychological wall of distaste to "integration" by suggesting it as inexorably leading on to the supposed irresistible fruit of the poisonous tree of knowledge in the Garden of earthly delights, for the sake of halting the reasonable interchange, coinciding with the intersection of ideas exchanged on an intellectual plane, such that the meaning of "integration" is taken to imply, in your school of thought, genetic integration as distinguished from social integration.

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.