The Charlotte News

Monday, June 14, 1954


Site Ed. Note: The front page reports that at Geneva, the peace conference appeared near its end this date following a series of high-level diplomatic talks. Soviet Foreign Minister V. M. Molotov and British Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden had met for nearly an hour, agreeing that the Indo-China portion of the conference would meet during the afternoon, with the Korean portion to meet the following day, the former being a secret session. Some of the diplomats believed that the Korean meeting would be the last of the conference, seeking to break the deadlock on free elections, considered hopeless by the Western diplomats. They expected a few more sessions, however, regarding the war in Indo-China, but the Western delegations believed that the conference in that regard had failed and also had no hope of success. Mr. Eden, speaking for the Western delegations, was understood to have told Mr. Molotov that there was no point in continuing the conference unless the Communists were ready to change from their intransigent position. Britain and the U.S. were reported hesitant to break off the talks on Indo-China until a new government in France were in place, following the no-confidence vote of the National Assembly the previous Saturday, and the subsequent resignation of Premier Joseph Laniel and his Cabinet. Thus any decision regarding the Indo-China portion of the conference would await the outcome in Paris. There was also an indication from informed sources that discussions between the French and Vietminh military high commands had reached an accommodation insofar as exchanging concrete proposals for cease-fire lines, and the result of those proposals could determine whether the conference would continue.

In Paris, Pierre Mendes-France, who wanted to negotiate with Ho Chi Minh to end the war in Indo-China, had agreed this date to try to form the 20th postwar Cabinet, but many political figures in the country doubted whether he could obtain a majority in the divided Assembly to match his policy, which called for cutting down expenditures on the war in Indo-China and slowing down France's military build-up in Europe. He had been nominated the previous night by President Rene Coty to succeed Premier Laniel. M. Mendes-France was a leader of the Assembly's Radical Socialist bloc, which was moderate, and had been credited with bringing down the Laniel Government, which had been in place only one year. He believed that France needed a healthy economy before it could make its full contribution to Western defense, and promised to support the European Defense Community treaty providing for a unified Western European army between France, West Germany, Italy and the Benelux countries.

In Washington, Admiral Robert Carney, Naval Operations chief, indicated this date, in an interview with U.S. News & World Report, support for establishing a line beyond which the free world would not tolerate further Communist aggression. He saw the alternatives to such a line to be the possible defeat, to an extent, of the West. He made the comments in response to a question whether such a line should be drawn, finding that it would not be "warmongering or a bellicose statement or anything like that", that it was merely a statement of fact in support of what would occur if the "accretions of power" by the Communists continued, that if it did, the position of the U.S. would become so inferior that its existence, if not per se, at least as a major influence in the world, would be in grave jeopardy. He indicated that a naval blockade in Southeast Asia, especially with regard to China, could become an "important part" of the overall effort in that region of the world, but that such a blockade would just be engaged in "closing up ratholes". He also said that Russia's initial postwar emphasis on building submarines had given way to a trend toward a balance of seagoing naval forces rounded out with cruisers and destroyers, but not aircraft carriers, and that the Communists had no atomic submarines of which he was aware. He stated that there was no question about the practicality of using atomic power to drive many kinds of naval vessels.

In Bonn, West Germany, it was reported by the U.S. High Commission this date that six tons of Swiss anti-aircraft ammunition being shipped to Guatemala, had been held up in Hamburg by the West German Government at the request of the U.S. Commission. U.S. authorities around the world had been ordered to stop the flow of arms to the Central American country following the delivery in May of a ten million dollar shipment from Poland aboard a Swedish ship. Guatemala was leaning toward Communism and so the shipment had posed grave alarm to the U.S. and Latin America.

In the 33rd day of the hearings before the Senate Investigations subcommittee regarding the dispute between the Army and Senator McCarthy, subcommittee staff supervisor Warren Carr testified this date that Secretary of the Army Robert Stevens had discussed the previous October 2 the prospective use of Private G. David Schine, officially inducted at the beginning of November, as his personal observer at Army intelligence schools, reporting directly to the Secretary. He said that the Secretary had also said that Mr. Schine would not receive an officer's commission within the Army. He indicated that he and Roy Cohn, usual subcommittee chief counsel, were present at the meeting with the Secretary when he made the statements. Mr. Carr generally supported earlier statements made by both the Senator and Mr. Cohn, stating that on at least three occasions, Army officials had made combined efforts to sidetrack the investigation of the subcommittee into Communists in the Army, by making promises of special treatment for Private Schine, that Secretary Stevens had suggested that the subcommittee "take the heat off" the Army by looking into security risks within defense plants, the Air Force and the Navy, a claim which Secretary Stevens had denied, and that Army general counsel John G. Adams, after failing in his repeated attempts to get the subcommittee to drop its investigation of the Army, had claimed that he was taking "some control" over Army assignments for Private Schine. Mr. Carr cited several occasions on which, he contended, Mr. Stevens and Mr. Adams had sought to persuade Senator McCarthy to drop the investigation of alleged subversion at the secret radar facility at Fort Monmouth in New Jersey and to allow the Army to take over that inquiry. He said that on one such occasion, he and Mr. Cohn had dinner at Mr. Cohn's New York City home on October 21 and then went to a prizefight, accompanied by Mr. Adams. (The contenders and their class are not provided, and no mention is made of whether the fight might have been rigged by rackets interests and whether, if so, they may have been influenced by subversives.) Mr. Carr's testimony interrupted that of Senator McCarthy, who was resting after a strenuous speech-making trip during the weekend—probably actually because he had tied one on and was not available.

There is no transcript of this date's proceedings available online and there is no further commentary in the newspaper, as reported Saturday, regarding the heated exchange occurring after the afternoon session on Friday between Mr. Cohn and subcommittee minority counsel for the three Democrats, Robert F. Kennedy, regarding the stated desire of Mr. Cohn to ask questions of Senator Henry Jackson of the subcommittee regarding his pointed questions of Senator McCarthy anent Private Schine's activities, accompanied by a threat from Mr. Cohn, according to Mr. Kennedy, to bring forth some issue of alleged Communism in relation to Senator Jackson, which had resulted in a public statement on Saturday by subcommittee temporary chairman, Senator Karl Mundt of South Dakota, that he would not tolerate any further such acrimony, which he said had been ongoing for some period of time between Mr. Cohn and Mr. Kennedy, that he did not know the source of the dispute but that it had no place within the context of the hearings. If Senator Jackson, later, by the 1960's, considered a conservative Democrat, especially with regard to the Vietnam War, was in sympathy with Communists, then every Democrat would be subject to the charge.

This date, a test of the civil defense warning system had occurred across the U.S. and Canada, with wailing air raid sirens hearkening the beginning of the international exercise. People in the 54 participating cities sought shelter from the mock pending attack, with early reports indicating brief participation by the public of no more than ten minutes duration in most cases, and that the exercise had been successful. Occasionally, the sirens had not operated and so there was some confusion in the Pentagon as to whether the test had begun. (That is very comforting, reminding of our experience once in high school at the end of a fire drill, after the all-clear bell rang and all of the students accordingly were filing back into the school, whereupon we happened to pass the two guidance counselors talking, oblivious to the students returning, one saying suddenly to the other, "Oh, I guess we can go back in, now," about as comforting as our experience, circa 1961, when the air-raid siren up the street from where we lived, a reputed high-ranking hot spot on the map for nuclear attack for the fact of assemblage in a nearby plant of the guidance systems for the missiles, suddenly began ringing its ear-piercing scream during "The Naked City", whereupon all of the adults exited their homes and began looking up to the night sky in dead, dread silence, and about as comforting as the same skyward watch by many street bystanders at the point immediately following the San Francisco earthquake downtown in 1989, where we happened to be at the moment.) The President had led the effort toward obtaining shelter, with the entire White House staff accompanying him to basement refuge areas. While the public's role was limited to seeking shelter, the exercise continued for hours and would continue for days following, among the thousands of civil defense workers, who assumed that millions had perished in an atomic attack, while hundreds of thousands were injured and in need of help. It was assumed in the exercise that New York City had suffered three atomic bombs, one having hit the heart of midtown Manhattan, one hitting downtown Brooklyn and the third in the Bronx. Each was supposed to have been eight times more powerful than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945. The presumed death toll in New York was 2.175 million. The exercise had begun with a "Yellow", "Lemon Juice", signal giving civil defense personnel 30 minutes notice of impending disaster, followed by the "Red", "Apple Jack", alert, signaling the need for cover 30 minutes later, followed by the "White", "Snowman", all-clear signal ten minutes after that, after which there was little accomplished in New York—as everyone was dead. (Apparently, by 1963, assuming complete authencity in the film, they had added a "B", between "Y" and "R", presumably for "Blue", perhaps in keeping with the nicknamed alerts, "Blueberry", meaning thrills aplenty in store any minute upon the Hill, run away.) Radio and television stations continued normal broadcasting but reminded listeners that a drill was in progress. Trading on the New York Stock Exchange had temporarily halted and vehicular traffic also stopped—all sounding a bit like that 1951 movie, starring Gort. Perhaps this was the reason Senator McCarthy did not show up at the hearings, that no one had bothered to inform him that it was not the real deal.

In Guatemala, a three-week old strike by 3,000 Communist-led banana workers had come to an end this date after the signing of a Government-negotiated wage contract between representatives of the workers and the United Fruit Co.

In Phoenix, Ariz., the man identified from a five-man lineup—presumably who had no counsel at that time, despite his request for same—, by the kidnap victim who had been released after 29 hours upon payment of a $75,000 ransom, remained charged, after having stumbled into a farmhouse about five miles from the ransom drop site, shirtless and disoriented from a lack of water, claiming he had been gold prospecting in the Superstition Mountains, a former gold prospecting area. Officers continued to search for the missing ransom money, the man, at the time of his arrest, having only a few cents in his pocket. Police believed that he had secreted the marked ransom money somewhere in the mountains. They were leaving no stone unturned in their search. Don't pick up the wrong stone or you are liable to be grabbed by a gila monster, and they don't let go. Police said they were also hunting for a rifle, pistol and a pair of binoculars which the kidnap victim said that the man who kidnaped her had used. (Look in the Lost Dutchman mine, a good hidey-hole—in which, no doubt, you will also find all of those lost votes, 66.66 million, and that's a fact.) The victim also said that she had overheard a second man after being locked in the trunk of her own car, and the second man had discussed with the man whom she identified the possibility of killing her, but that when she arrived at the hideout in the mountains, there was only one masked man there with her, the man whom she had selected from the live lineup. (Were the other four wearing masks? Otherwise, it would have to be challenged for not being properly representative of the conditions under which she saw her kidnaper, if not unduly suggestive.) The defendant's present defense attorney, who was a former Maricopa County prosecutor, sharply criticized the methods utilized by the police, saying that the live lineup identification had practically been "no identification at all". He said that the first description given by the victim to the officers had described the kidnaper as having bright green eyes and curly hair, whereas the arrested man was nearly bald and had brown eyes. He said that they had an answer for everything and would provide it at the proper time and place. Just like one of them tricky criminal attorneys, ain't it? You know he done it or the police wouldn't never had arrested him on it. It was all on the "Dragnet" or one of them shows.

In Asheville, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals this date affirmed a decision of the Federal District Court regarding the sentencing of Keith Beaty of Charlotte to two years in prison plus fines, following his conviction for three counts of tax evasion.

In Calypso, N.C., a town of which we have never heard, a young man and woman had held up the town branch of the Bank of Mount Olive this date, getting away with less than $5,000, the man of the couple having walked into the bank at around noon and drawn a gun on the manager, saying, "Give me the money," to which the manager replied that they should come around and get it, as the door was open, at which point the man went to the teller's cage and asked her to put the money in the bag, which she did, the couple then fleeing to the north in a 1950 black Plymouth sedan, reported stolen from Mount Olive, about three miles to the north. Both had worn dark glasses. They had asked the bank manager whether there was any money in the safe, and she had told them that it was locked. Given that they were wearing sunglasses and fleeing north, it was probably a couple of Yankees, or cattle rustlers.

In Asheville, a Highway Patrolman began filling out a citation for drunk driving, by indicating that the make of vehicle was a horse, the type of vehicle was a plow, and the model was three years old, finally concluding to charge the driver with public drunkenness, rather than drunk driving, and the defendant pleaded guilty and paid court costs.

On the editorial page, "Is Voluntary Segregation a Possibility?" indicates that two South Carolina newspapers, in "thoughtful editorials" regarding Brown v. Board of Education, decided four weeks earlier, had suggested "voluntary segregation" as the best solution for the South's "school problems".

It quotes from one of the editorials, from the Charleston News & Courier, which favored "voluntary selection of schools by patrons according to their own race" which it regarded as a practical approach except in "a relatively few cases in which extremists and agitators" might create trouble.

The Greenville Piedmont editorial quoted from a letter to Governor Herman Talmadge of Georgia, authored by a Southern novelist, Edison Marshall, that black citizens and white citizens alike did not wish integration in the public schools, and that if given half a chance, would continue to conform with "our ancient custom of segregation." (We don't think we will be reading any novels by Mr. Marshall, as he sounds about as progressive as Thomas Dixon did. Let's all languish down heya wid oua mint ju-leps and enjawy life togetha, but in oua propa places apawt, as Gawd intended.) That editorial believed that the NAACP would apply pressure to officials and "their own people" in an effort to force integration as rapidly as they could, that it remained to be seen how far they could drive the people "they claim to represent", that they might find that the overwhelming majority of black citizens of the South were interested in educational and economic opportunity, "with a minimum of societal conflict—rather than in a goal that is impossible to achieve by all the laws and court decrees the self-seekers can dream up."

The piece indicates that until the voluntary system was tried, it doubts that anyone could say whether or not it would work, as no one knew how many Southern black persons really wanted to send their children to integrated schools and how many preferred to have their children taught by black teachers in separate schools. It suggests that the best way to test public opinion was through a public referendum. It believes that it would be reasonable to assume that the majority preferred that the last vestiges of enforced segregation should be removed, but that it was also conceivable that once those barriers were gone and the principle of full equality established, a majority of Southern blacks would prefer to maintain separate school systems.

It concludes that the Charleston and Greenville editorials had believed that voluntary segregation would be the natural result, regardless of the Supreme Court's implementing decision of its next term, that they might be guilty of wishful thinking, but if they were proved by events to be correct, the problem growing from the decision in Brown would be far more manageable than it appeared at the moment.

You seem to be completely oblivious to the notion that integration of the public schools is fundamental to integration of the society and eliminating of your little "problem" with racial prejudice and bias, that integration will take time to effect with full societal acceptance, but that a start, sooner or later, has to be made in your quaint little South and elsewhere, or it will never take place at all, with a society condemned otherwise to live under the weight of a completely hypocritical system, contrary to the Founders' original conception, stated plainly within the Constitution's Preamble, should you ever bother to read it and take it fully to heart, while skipping your stupid little "Dixie", played before or at halftime of nearly every sporting event in your beloved "Southland". When you travel in the North, you don't see signs, typically, which say, "I'm a Yankee and damn proud of it!" or Yankee Civil War battle flags. It is 1954 and it is time to grow up and stop playing Civil War children's games of "what if".

Sure, people will like to stick to their tried and true practices, but tried and true practices which are ultimately destructive of unity in the society, sooner or later, have to be recognized and abandoned as being counter-productive to the welfare of everyone in the society, not just one race or another, or one group or another, but to everyone who counts themselves as a citizen of that society. The motto of our society is "e pluribus unum". Learn it and appreciate it. Or get out and go somewhere else.

"'Yancey Compromise' Makes Sense" indicates that City Manager Henry Yancey had suggested a compromise city limits extension plan which was fair and reasonable, and which appeared workable. It explains.

"Small Stockholders Can Be Powerful" discusses the effort of Robert Young to take control of the New York Central Railroad, the second largest in the country, which had been finally settled by the stockholders in his favor against the challenge by the existing controlling interest of William White.

In most instances, the larger corporations, while paying lip-service to its smaller stockholders, had maintained their distance from them by asking them to sign proxies, to send them in on time and cash their dividend checks promptly. They were not, however, encouraged to shape corporate policy or select officers. But the fight regarding control of the New York Central had changed that status, with both Mr. Young and Mr. White having realized that small stockholders would be the key to control, and so the small stockholders made their way to New York to vote in the fight for control, wined and dined along the way. One such female stockholder arose at the meeting and demanded a vote on her resolution to place a woman on the board of directors.

It urges that if small stockholders realized their power through combined voting, they could make their influence on corporations felt, and that active participation in the free enterprise system would impress on stockholders the values of "the American way" more than clipping of coupons ever would.

"Landmark" indicates that with the closing of the Rozzelle home at the old ferry site on the Catawba River, one of the last testing grounds for the true trencherman had faded into the past, as home-cooked meals had greeted patrons of the unique dining room, a "sheer delight for gourmet and gourmand—about the only genteel place left where a man was expected and encouraged to make a pig of himself." The family home had been in the family for a century, but had gone on the auction block the prior Saturday. It indicates that it would always stir nostalgia for many thousands of people who would stop there for the kind of meal which their grandmothers had once cooked.

And we don't need no spindly-legged Britisher telling us not to make pigs of ourselves when we want, even if all that stuff will probably kill us by comprising an overly cholesterol-saturated diet or at least make us age before our time. But other things do as well, and so if you're going to choose your poisons and commit slow suicide, it might as well be by loads and loads of ham and red gravy and the sidings, we suppose. But it is, after all, all of the same piece, succumbing to the temptation of gluttony.

A piece from the Christian Science Monitor, titled "Horrors Old and New", indicates that the town "Watch Committee" of Stockport, England, had banned, according to a Reuters dispatch, unaccompanied children from a revival showing of the Walt Disney film "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs" because it had "horrific" scenes for "tender young minds". It questions whether that committee was behind the times or ahead of them, indicates that they were not behind the times for the scenes in question showed the forest trees grabbing at Snow White and the wicked queen instructing the assassin, highly graphic representations, it finds, of passages commonplace in the folklore and fairy tales of the previous 500 years or so.

The wolf had eaten Little Red Riding Hood's grandma, the giant was going to grind the bones of Jack to make his bread, and Hansel and Gretel had determined in combination to tip the old witch into a pot and boil her. Some gruesomeness had been added to such tales in the 19th century, as anyone could attest who had been exposed to the illustrated "Struwelpeter". Those illustrations, it ventures, offered no justification, however, for the present-day "horror comics", that it may have been those comic books which had motivated the censors in Stockport to be especially sensitive to a few lurid scenes in an otherwise beautiful and tender drama.

It suggests that the younger set might draw inspiration from Eugene Field's invitation, represented in cartoons and film, to fly "To that land across the sea/ Where the Dinky-Bird is singing/ In the amfalula tree!" Or from Edward Lear's challenge to sail "to the hills of the Chankly Bore" with the "Jumblies, even if "Their heads are green, and their hands are blue,/ And they went to sea in a sieve." It concludes that many children had appreciated such fare even before movies.

Don't you condescend to us, you old goat. You been listenin' to those long-haired Britishers, drug addicts. Never heard of no Atherback Wrycher. Don't need him tellin' the chil'ren what to do around heyere, fillin' their darlin' li'l green heads full of that Commonism and Negro music.

Drew Pearson indicates that IRS commissioner T. Coleman Andrews had admitted publicly that Senator McCarthy's income taxes were presently under investigation and that the probe would soon be terminated. Mr. Pearson finds that the particular agent assigned to the case was not so brilliant, had only moderate experience and mediocre ability, with indications from within the IRS that he had determined that he could make no case against the Senator and that an official recommendation to that effect was soon expected. The Senator had an edge which most taxpayers under investigation by the IRS did not, in that a rumor had developed that he was probing the IRS for potential subversion. He had the power within the purview of the Government Operations Committee which he chaired to conduct such an inquiry, as well as in his role as chairman of an Appropriations subcommittee on the Treasury, with power to restrict IRS funding. Also, the Senator was a social friend of commissioner Andrews, and so Mr. Pearson concludes that it was unlikely he would have any tax issue.

He indicates that it was understandable, given that Senator McCarthy had refused to testify before the subcommittee which had investigated his finances in 1952, why Senator Stuart Symington had been so persistent in demanding that Senator McCarthy agree to answer questions about the questionable finances. He provides a chronology of the various invitations to the Senator to testify before the subcommittee and the refusals of Senator McCarthy to do so, with one exception in July, 1952, when he testified briefly in reply only to charges made by former Senator William Benton of Connecticut but not regarding his finances, the final invitation having been issued on November 21, 1952, when Senator Thomas Hennings of Missouri, taking over from Senator Guy Gillette, who had resigned his chairmanship of the subcommittee in disgust, had invited Senator McCarthy to testify on certain important points regarding his finances any time between November 22 and 25, the answer to which from the Senator's office having been that he "was in the woods hunting."

Joseph & Stewart Alsop indicate that the Indochinese crisis was vindicating the judgment of General MacArthur, that in Korea, there should have been no artificial limits restricting the extension of the war against the Communist Chinese airbases and supply bases, as imposed on him by the Truman Administration.

They find that he was correct in three different ways and on three different levels, that, first, he was right in proclaiming that there was no substitute for victory. Joint Chiefs chairman Admiral Arthur Radford was now being attacked for taking the same stance regarding Indo-China, but, they venture, the only substitute for that position was that of V. M. Molotov, ultimate defeat to the West by the Communists.

Second, they find General MacArthur's view correct that the Korean War had been a crucial test of the willingness of the West to defend against Communism, that therefore victory had to be achieved at all costs and risk. They find that Indo-China was the proof of the validity of his position in that regard. The truce in Korea had enabled the Communist Chinese to transfer their military focus and aid to Indo-China. Because the West had not achieved a victory in the first test in Korea, it seemed about to lose the second test, and, inevitably, many others after that.

Third, General MacArthur had been correct, they assert, in believing that the time of the Chinese intervention in Korea had been correct for a showdown in the struggle between Communism and the free world. For at that point, the U.S. still possessed decisive air-atomic strength versus that of the Soviets, which was virtually nonexistent during the period of 1950-51. Again, they find, Indo-China was the proof that the General had been correct.

Now, for the first time, Soviet air-atomic striking power had begun to influence U.S. policy in the present Indochinese crisis. The Joint Chiefs had not been influenced by the crisis, but they would likely begin to concur within a year or two. By that point, the Soviet build-up, they predict, would have increased to the point that the peril to the U.S. would be total, not yet the case. Others were heavily influenced by the Soviet threat and those believed that if the U.S. did intervene in Indo-China, it could not be a limited intervention, for the danger that the Communists might enter the war, and if the Soviets entered, it could lead to use of the atomic bomb. The question persisted whether the U.S. would risk an atomic war for the sake of the Indochinese crisis in Asia.

But the countervailing questions were whether the U.S. and the West would surrender everywhere when, after a humiliating defeat in Indo-China, the Soviet air-atomic striking power would have grown significantly in its danger to the U.S. in the ensuing couple of years.

They find those facts and questions also to have proved correct Dr. J. Robert Oppenheimer, who in 1951-52, took the lead in advocating an adequate air defense for the U.S., rejected by the Air Force generals who advocated building the offensive striking power, but were unconcerned about air defense, contending that Dr. Oppenheimer's motive in advocating that position was disloyal hostility to the Strategic Air Command, commanded by General Curtis LeMay. The Alsops find this to be behind the "shameful" report of the Presidential committee chaired by UNC president Gordon Gray, which had recently reported regarding its investigation of the loyalty of Dr. Oppenheimer, finding that he was loyal, but should not continue to have a security clearance within the Atomic Energy Commission. They find that Dr. Oppenheimer's real motive had been that with a strong offense and no defense, the country was akin to a fighter with a glass jaw, predicting that despite the power of SAC, U.S. policy would be progressively paralyzed as the danger of the Soviet air-atomic capability increased. Without prejudice to SAC, he had urged an adequate air defense as the only prophylactic measure against paralysis.

They indicate, however, that air defense had been "criminally neglected", and the questions by U.S. planners regarding the prospect of usage of Soviet atomic bombs, should there be intervention of the U.S. in Indo-China, showed the paralysis of the policy which Dr. Oppenheimer had foreseen.

They conclude that while General MacArthur and Dr. Oppenheimer were odd bedfellows in this regard, both deserved a public apology from all of those who had opposed them, or, perhaps, their highly placed opponents should be classified as security risks because of their "lack of enthusiasm"—the phrase used by the Gray committee in justifying a recommendation of denial to Dr. Oppenheimer continued security clearance—where the opponents' errors had done much more damage than the latter's "lack of enthusiasm" for the hydrogen bomb.

A letter writer indicates that the numbers-drawing contests at the Charlotte supermarkets had proved unlucky for her, as she had "yet to put in a num(ber) and pull out a plum". She preferred the mental-type contests, finding them instructive and offering both cash and fun at the same time. In those, she says, she had won a few small prizes, wishes that the supermarkets would occasionally sponsor a sloganeering-type contest, and give her and others like her a chance to win.

But then they would be discriminating in favor of those with some level of creativity versus the half-wits. You cannot do that now.

In any event, you can try your luck with our "Cash register" under the American Mercury section of the website on the buttons above, and perhaps pull out a plum or two.

A letter writer finds that the people who were writing the newspaper fighting one another over segregation, on both sides, to be right and wrong, wonders how many of the people were Christians, that if both white and black people were Christians, there could be a solution to the problem, but until that point, there would be "hatred, race riots, killings and all manner of evil." In the fall, he hoped to attend school to study for the ministry, and promises to work as hard as he could to save souls of both whites and blacks equally. He does not believe, however, that God intended intermarriage between the races and colors, "for he made both male and female of all races and colors that they might replenish the earth with their own kind." He concludes that one could not love God and not love people regardless of race, creed or color.

We are not certain where you get your feelings about intermarriage, but it seems clearly to derive from a basic prejudice which you are not facing. Additionally, if you suggest that a person could not love God without loving all people, some, especially younger people, will decide, therefore, that since they cannot love all people, they do not love God, and will therefore turn against religion, to accommodate their personal biases. While well-intended, your focus is too much on God-language and not enough on humanity.

A letter writer, who had written previously in support of integration of society, indicates, as Brown had unanimously determined, that racial discrimination in attendance of particular public schools violated the supreme law of the land, the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution. He finds that the decision reflected democratic responsibility, that there would be no lawful means to evade the Constitution, that students of segregated private schools could receive no financial help from the state under this new conception of the Fourteenth Amendment regarding publicly-supported schools. He indicates that any attempt to evade the law would do nothing other than delay "what informed people know is inevitable". He finds that for the first time in U.S. history, equal rights could be attained by all persons and that democracy could evolve to promote the general welfare, with equality of opportunity which was real and substantial rather than illusory.

He has it exactly right. It is too bad that some Southern school districts and states did not heed that which he was saying. A lot of time and wasted energy, and a great number of tragedies to the country would have been avoided. But, it is part of the human condition that some people will advance faster than others on an individual basis, and that when the lesser lights combine, their terror can be bestial and inhuman, responding completely to suppressed emotion without any rational thought to inhibit, by human conscience, the full, ferocious power of the id. A society once took that form en masse in modern times, in Germany.

A letter writer thinks that those "that want to mix are already mixed and want others as you are", with regard to "mixing" of the races, says that he is a white man and does not want any "Negro blood in my family, and won't have, as long as I can do anything about it." "Speaking of the 'Yankees,' 'black-brothers,' 'Negro lovers,' and so on—if you want to mix up, you are free to go North where you can mix without any trouble. Why don't you go?"

Another letter writer had written, indicating that he would be regarded as a "nigger lover" for visiting black people and sharing meals in their homes, presumably the writer to whom this honky responds, providing the perfect example of the type of person who, while using the term "Negro lover", will not have anything to do with black people, who objects across the board to any form of printing out the word "nigger", as opposed to the euphemistic "n_____", which firmly plants the word in the mind, lending it power of which it is otherwise deprived by simply quoting it when it has been used by someone else derisively or, as had the other writer, in a purely ironic context, guessing what others might consider him to be by virtue of his acceptance of social equality, or, as presently has become the trend, one who insists on capitalizing the word "Black" while representing "white" in lowercase letters. Such people are just as racist, narrow-minded and lacking in perspective as anyone who uses "nigger" in a derisive context. And that includes every single writer, in whatever context, who adopts this silly new convention, started a year ago, of capitalizing the word "black" when referring to black people. It is a throwback to the time of patronizing or cynical usage of the word "Negro", as this letter writer uses it, having fallen into disuse and regarded for the last 45 years or so as racist or at least condescending, even though quite acceptable through the 1960's. Use of "Black" is incorrect English, lends itself, in certain stories, wherein is involved the surname "Black", especially in pre-2020 contexts, to great ambiguity, conveys, when juxtaposed to a lower-case "white", the notion of Black Supremacy or pat-on-the-head condescension—"See, heya, boy, I am not racist faw I capitalize yawa race and will give y'all kind the time of day any day of the week, just don't y'all try to follow me home now to dinna or I'll be fawced to take action"—and is wholly inappropriate to a society that regards itself as promoting equal opportunity for all. This new convention is divisive, not unifying.

It matters not a whit what terminology you apply to people, but rather what you say in substance about them and how you behave toward them, whether as fellow human beings or of some lower class or caste. Just as "Karen" is a reprehensibly racist stereotype, "Black", except in the context of novel writing or discussing the term itself, has no place in the United States, that is unless you want people to start inevitably referring to black women who call the police to some white person as "Aunt Yemamah".

A letter writer from Rockingham, N.C., indicates that in the June 9 edition, he had seen "one of the most insulting letters" he had ever read, that white people favoring continued segregation did not want black people to find out how dumb the little white kids were. It made his blood run "red hot" to read such an insulting letter. He finds that such wisecracks from both races only agitated trouble, and that he did not approve of integration, that it hurt him "to think that nine narrow-minded men passed on something this big."

The previous letter writer was referring to people exactly like you.

A letter from the office manager of the Celanese Corp. of America thanks the newspaper for its support in its sponsoring a community open house, which had been a success.

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.