![]()
The Charlotte News
Thursday, April 4, 1957
FOUR EDITORIALS
![]()
![]()
Site Ed. Note: The front page reports that more tornadoes had hit Tennessee, Kentucky and Mississippi the previous night, after the destructive tornado which had ripped through west Dallas, Tex., and hit other parts of Texas, Oklahoma and Arkansas on Tuesday into early Wednesday. At least one person had been killed in the most recent tornadoes, in the black community of Sylvarena, Miss., and scores of people had been injured, with dozens of buildings wrecked. Two communities in west Tennessee, Selmer and Chesterfield, had been hit early this date, and eight houses had been destroyed at Selmer and two at Chesterfield. The Tennessee Highway Patrol said that roads were covered by torrential rains, which had halted traffic and disrupted communications. Exactly one year earlier, a tornado had hit Lexington, Tenn., 50 miles from Selmer, killing five people. Three children and an adult had been injured the previous night by a tornado hitting a section of Nashville and suburban Belle Meade and trees had been uprooted and windows smashed. Heavy winds and rains had blown across Chattanooga and wrecked some power lines. A tornado had hit wide areas of western Kentucky in the Bowling Green area. The stormy weather had harassed broad areas in the Eastern half of the nation while snow was falling on the plains states, and sleet and freezing rain had hit Illinois and Indiana. Twenty-one persons had been killed earlier in the week in the first round of tornadoes.
In Jackson, Miss., it was reported that a tornado had struck the Mississippi State Sanatorium for Tuberculars early this date, injuring between 50 and 75 patients, with three in serious condition, affecting primarily the black infirmary, housing about 200 patients. A doctor said that about 40 of those patients had been children, that many had been hurt and were in pain, but he had never heard a cry or whimper. He said that they had to evacuate the top floor because rain had blown in and damaged the walls and ceiling. He had been treating injured patients from about 2:00 a.m. to 8:30, indicating that the twister had practically taken the roof off the service building for the white hospital and had damaged several cottages of employees. He estimated damage at around $250,000. The Pearl River at Jackson was five feet above flood stage and firemen, police and volunteers had worked to evacuate residents in stalled cars from inundated areas.
The Weather Bureau in South Carolina issued a tornado watch for the western part of the state during the afternoon, covering 19 counties, indicating that an area of active thundershowers had developed in northern Georgia and was headed eastward across the western part of the state.
General Curtis LeMay, head of the Strategic Air Command, this date was appointed by the President to become the vice-chief of staff of the Air Force, succeeding General Thomas White, who was being promoted to chief of staff. It was expected that General LeMay would take over his new position sometime after July 1, although no date had been mentioned in the announcement, also making no mention of his successor at SAC. The Defense Department also announced that General Lyman L. Lemnitzer, presently commander in chief of the U.N. forces in Korea, would become vice-chief of staff of the Army, effective July 1, to be succeeded in his U.N. forces capacity by General George Decker, presently deputy commander of U.S. forces in Europe. The Far East Command, which General Lemnitzer had also headed, was to be abolished, with its forces to come under the general direction of the commander in chief of the Pacific Fleet, presently Admiral Felix Stump. General Williston Palmer, presently the Army's vice-chief of staff, would become deputy commander of U.S. forces in Europe, succeeding General Decker. General Isaac White, presently commander of the 8th Army in the Far East, would become commander in chief of U.S. Army forces in the Pacific.
Dr. Siegfried Gerathewohl of the School of Aviation Medicine at Randolph Field, Tex., told the American Rocket Society in Washington about experiments testing reaction to the weightlessness of space, indicating that some would find it uncomfortable, even nauseating, while others would find space travel exhilarating. The piece compares the feeling to the sudden descent of an express elevator or going over the top in a roller coaster, no longer subject to the pull of earth's gravity. In a spaceship, unless the person were belted down or perhaps attached to the floor by magnetized shoes, the individual would float around inside the cabin, as would anything else not pinned down. Dr. Gerathewohl told of experiments in which 47 persons had been exposed to weightlessness under conditions duplicating for 10 to 40 seconds what would be faced by space travelers for days, weeks or perhaps years. He said that about half the subjects enjoyed the experience to the point of exhilaration and that 11 others had found the sensation "neither unduly pleasant nor exactly comfortable", while the remainder had a rough time, some suffering from extreme motion sickness, including vomiting, though a few of those subjects had been nervous before the start of the experiment. Some of the tests had been conducted in a jet plane at the moment it reached its apogee, when its acceleration was at zero, resulting in the combined pull of the plane and gravity being exactly balanced. Longer exposures to weightlessness had been achieved through a human centrifuge in which weightlessness could be induced by whirling a subject to the point where centrifugal force matched the pull of gravity. Other scientists reported to the press that the military services were using tests of both types to assess the physical and psychological effects of weightlessness and to obtain some gauge as to their duration, to establish standards for men best suited to cope with the condition and perhaps develop protective clothing and equipment to facilitate movement aboard a spaceship without floating around.
Julian Scheer of The News reports that 10th District Representative Charles Jonas had told the newspaper this date that he would oppose, both in committee and on the floor, any attempt to curtail current mail deliveries and the closure of post offices on Saturdays, that to assure continuation of services, he would be in favor of granting the Post Office Department's requests for supplemental funds, provided that a full investigation revealed that the money could not be cut from other parts of the service. He was commenting by telephone on statements made by Postmaster General Arthur Summerfield that cuts in service were contemplated, effective the following Saturday, were extra funds not granted until the end of the fiscal year. Mr. Summerfield had told a House Appropriations subcommittee that the necessary cuts would include discontinuance of city carrier delivery of all classes of mail on Saturdays, closing of post offices on Saturday and discontinuance of rural delivery of all classes of mail, discontinuance of money orders, reduction of deliveries to business districts to once per day, implementation of an embargo on the acceptance of third-class mail except for merchandise, suspension of employee leaves until after July 1, suspension of the purchase of uniforms until after that date and stoppage of purchases of sorting cases, conveyors, lightweight vehicles and other equipment and supply items.
In Charlotte, approximately 55 substitute workers at the Post Office might be laid off if drastic cuts were made by Postmaster General Summerfield. The local postmaster was on vacation and other officials at the Post Office had indicated they had received no information from Washington, but that it was an open secret that substitute workers would be those first to feel a funding cut. Most workers at the post office were employed as "substitutes" and work schedules varied until they received appointments and were assigned to regular hours. The president of the union local of the National Association of Letter Carriers said that it looked like it would cost a lot of money, while the president of the local of the Post Office Clerks said that it would affect about the third of their force who were substitutes. He said that the law would not allow the Post Office to lay off a regular employee. A postal worker in Charlotte defended Mr. Summerfield, saying that he could not spend what he did not have, but another said that he had spent money on equipment and expansions and that they had more equipment now in Charlotte than they needed. If the cuts were implemented by Mr. Summerfield, the Charlotte Post Office would operate on Saturdays based on a Sunday schedule, meaning that the building would be open for those who wished to mail letters or retrieve mail from post office boxes, but that the stamp, parcel post and other windows would not be open. Officials said that classified or branch post office stations would in all probability remain closed most of the day, opening for an hour or so to permit persons to take mail from their boxes. It sounds like it's calling for a Revolution.
Charles Kuralt of The News, in the third of a series of articles on parks in Mecklenburg County, reports that west side residents, who had been turned down again in their quest for a park, would likely be asking what had occurred to the park budget surplus, after they had been told the previous day by the Park & Recreation Commission that all the money had already been allocated or spent, despite the fact that a year earlier, the newspapers had front page stories about a $243,000 surplus which the Commission had been unaware it had. The people of the west side were only asking for $18,000 to have a site purchased by the City for a park. But the problem was the phenomenal growth of the community, such that $243,000 did not last long when about 250,000 people needed it. There were park projects throughout the community in need of attention and the Commission was once again short of funds. Mr. Kuralt suggests that it appeared unreasonable to ask the west side residents to purchase their own park land, even if the Commission was promising thereafter to develop the land into a park. But only twice in recent years had the Commission offered to purchase any land, having bought the Veterans Park site and preparing to purchase property at Bryant Park, which the Commission discovered a couple of years earlier it did not own. Otherwise, the purchase of the land was dependent on donations. The superintendent of parks said that there could be plenty of sites owned by the City, but then no money would be left to develop parks. Mr. Kuralt provides an itemization of where the $243,000 surplus had been spent, including $76,000 for operating expenses and retention of $37,000 as a reserve fund, as tax revenue came in sporadically, necessitating an emergency operating cushion. Other projects underway would use funding from the million dollar park bond issue, one such project being a park for black residents and another the 18-acre Veterans Park, which was being developed into a recreation spot and showplace second only to Freedom Park, according to the superintendent. Based on the last audit, the Commission had left $170,497.45, which would last until July, when a new operating budget of about $475,000 would begin. The report explains on an inside page how that new budget would be allocated. It is becoming increasingly evident as to why Mr. Kuralt decided to join CBS late in the year and eventually went "on the road", far away from his hometown of Charlotte.
In St. Petersburg, Fla., a French war hero, Maurice Chavigny, 44, of Paris, was charged with shooting to death the previous night retired Brig. General Wilbur McReynolds, 64, and his wife, 61, in their luxurious home. He had been shot five times and his wife, twice, in the living room in their home in an exclusive residential area. A detective lieutenant said that the shooting had followed an argument with the arrested suspect, who had been a guest of the couple since Thanksgiving. He was arrested driving the car belonging to the couple after a three-mile chase, in which two shots from police had hit the car. He verbally admitted to police the shooting, indicating that he wanted to leave and planned to purchase a bicycle and a gun, ride off and kill himself, that he had bought the gun and bicycle following an argument the previous day, returning to the McReynolds home, where he donned his U.N. Forces uniform and told Mrs. McReynolds that he was leaving, whereupon she argued with him and he then shot her, at which point General McReynolds had come after him and he then shot the General, got into the car and drove away. General McReynolds had developed the C and K rations used by the armed forces during World War II. He had been an artist and had majored in education at Ohio State University, before joining the Army in 1917 and serving in France during World War I with the 10th Division, thereafter being a machine-gun specialist for 17 years before transferring to the Quartermaster Corps in 1934, then becoming director of training for the Corps in 1940. The suspect had been orphaned during World War I and had served in various parts of Europe before and during World War II, receiving many decorations, including the French Croix de Guerre. After being discharged in France, he had volunteered to return to Korea, and en route, had met Mrs. McReynolds, who was on her way to join her husband in Saigon.
In Columbia, S.C., the South Carolina General Assembly heard a proposal this date for compulsory chivalry from male bus and train riders, with a representative of Union, John Hart, introducing a bill to require a male passenger to obtain permission from a female passenger on any public conveyance before he could occupy a seat next to her, with the sponsor of the bill indicating that it was aimed at preventing "violence that would certainly result" should the courts order integration on public carriers in the state. Under the bill, a black man could sit next to a white woman only if he had her permission, and if she objected, regardless of the race of the rider, he would have to remain standing. Mr. Hart was an outspoken segregationist, but pointed out that the bill made no reference to race, suggesting that if the Federal courts ruled such a law unconstitutional, "the next step would be for them to require men and women to use the same restrooms and eliminate segregation of all kinds." The penalty for violation of the proposed law would be a fine of up to $100 and/or 30 days in jail.
In New York, an 18-year old male was sentenced by a Brooklyn judge to up to five years in prison for mugging a Brooklyn woman. The defendant stated: "This kills my lifelong ambition to become a cop. I was taking a course in police science at Brooklyn College." Well, never give up. We feel confident that there are worse among New York's finest, and then there is always the suburbs. Remember that there are 8 million stories...
On the editorial page, "Assembly Dodge: New Styling, No Motor" finds that those in the General Assembly, as part of their latest delaying tactic on legislative reapportionment, had to be credited with a rare showing of ingenuity, having developed a new dodge with a "dreamcar design", proposing to remodel the General Assembly along the lines of the U.S. Congress, making one body representative of area alone and the other based on population alone.
Populous areas such as Mecklenburg County would obtain two additional State Senators in direct proportion to the population, while all counties would be limited to one member of the House. It finds the plan appearing to be ostensibly fair, when in fact it was the latest in a long line of stalls, as the House would obviously not approve an amendment to the State Constitution which would eliminate a sixth of its membership. And even if it were to do so, the people, upon voting on such an amendment, would defeat it in the more populous areas, as it was inconceivable that Mecklenburg, for example, would give up three of its four Representatives in exchange for two additional Senators.
Mecklenburg Senator J. Spencer Bell had pointed out that it made no difference what preponderance there was in one house, but rather what representation there was in both houses, indicating that the amendment had been offered to kill any "fair consideration for the Weathers Report", which was a commission on legislative representation, recommending a fair and practical compromise between the desires of rural and urban areas.
It agrees with Mr. Bell's assessment, indicating that while the Weathers Report would make both houses more representative of population, it would also guarantee that both houses would continue to be representative of area. The report had benefited from public hearings and a long, objective study, neither of which had taken place prior to the proposed substitute before the Legislature. The proposal by the Weathers commission had not excited the fears of the rural bloc or encouraged dreams of great power on the part of growing urban areas, but was "sane, safe and sensible, and should be passed."
"'Double, Double Toil and Trouble!'" finds that all of the stock goblins, stage spooks and things which went bump in the night had been brought out in the General Assembly during the week in an attempt to prevent the Federal Government from helping the state cure urban blight, finding it "perhaps the greatest display of verbal divination since the weird sisters did that bit in Macbeth."
The politicians had suggested that urban redevelopment was "socialistic", "departs from government under law", was an "invasion of state and local rights", represented "federal encroachment" and was likely some dark plot to encourage public housing.
But it finds the facts less melodramatic and more deserving of serious consideration, indicating that Charlotte needed an adequate urban redevelopment law to secure Federal funding for a neighborhood renewal program which had been planned four years earlier, that eastern North Carolina needed such a measure to help rebuild many hurricane-devastated coastal communities, and that the bill simply provided power of eminent domain to clear blighted areas for the purpose of redeveloping them. Federal law required that two-thirds of such areas be blighted, but a state law passed by the 1953 General Assembly required complete blight, rendering the statute virtually useless.
It indicates that the claim that the measure permitted an appointed board to "take perhaps the finest building in town and pay federal money to have it torn down" was an example of the oratorical excesses used by the overzealous opposition, when actually, the bill provided for a decision by an elective governing body of the city, which could then be appealed into the courts.
Reason had finally prevailed in the State House the previous day and the bill was passed, and it urges the Senate to do likewise, as it was a needed remedy for urban blight "rather than an imagined witches' brew of 'socialism.'"
"Talking Dogs" indicates that after watching grown men trying to coax two-syllable words from dogs on the Will Rogers, Jr., television show during the morning, it was convinced that dog's best friend was not his man, but rather his illiteracy.
"Texas: Enter Man, Exit Centaur" indicates that casual voters in the current week's Texas Senatorial election must have felt somewhat like a sweet little old lady who waited until Charlotte's last City Council primary to cast her first ballot, having confided afterward to a friend that she did not vote at all as there were so many fine people running, "such lovely men", that she had written at the bottom of the ballot, "God bless you all".
There had been 22 candidates in the
Texas primary for the vacancy in the Senate, left by Senator Price
Daniel's resignation from his seat after being elected Governor, and
some of them had not been so lovely, some not even serious, but at
least six were making major bids, five of them Democrats and one a
Republican. The primary had national significance because of the
closeness of the split in the Senate, such that a Republican victory
in the race could produce a 48-48 tie
It indicates that unlike most Texas politicians, he was refreshingly uncomplicated, not a so-called "Shiverscrat", that is a supporter of President Eisenhower, or a Republicrat or a snark. He had campaigned in both 1952 and 1956 for Adlai Stevenson, to the dismay of then-Governor Allan Shivers and then-Senator Daniel, both of whom supported the President. It suggests that the type of loyalty and dependability shown by Mr. Yarborough would not only help clear the political air in Texas but would also put the national party's house in order, returning a measure of stability to Democrats for the first time in quite awhile. "And any resemblance between senators and centaurs will be strictly mythological."
It was the need to heal the party division in Texas in advance of the 1964 campaign, between the liberal faction, represented by Senator Yarborough, and the conservative faction, represented by new Governor John Connally, who had been Secretary of the Navy during the first year of the Kennedy Administration before returning home to run for Governor in 1962, which had been the driving force behind the ill-fated visit of President Kennedy to Texas in November, 1963.
Louis Graves, writing in the Chapel Hill Weekly, in a piece titled "Instrument for He-Men", indicates that the British medical journal Lancet had stated that the walking stick was "the oldest, cheapest, simplest, and most effective surgical appliance yet invented." It was said to help posture, encouraged walking instead of letting muscles become flabby through lassitude from riding in automobiles. "People should regard the walking stick as a faithful friend, able to improve their physical well-being. It is anything but the badge of a sissy. In fact, if you see a hale and hearty man with a walking stick, he is likely to be a he-man red-blooded individual, flexing his muscles, stimulating the circulation of his blood and well prepared to deal with footpads and ill-tempered dogs."
Mr. Graves says that he had been walking with a cane for a long time, not because of the virtues ascribed to it by Lancet but just because he enjoyed swinging something to and fro and jabbing it in the ground, helping him to keep his balance, becoming increasingly more important the older he became.
In recent years, it had also become valuable protection against falling into ravines which rains had washed out along Chapel Hill's gravel sidewalks. He had once called them gullies but they were now so deep that ravines was a more accurate description, with there being an especially bad one on East Franklin Street at Captain Alex Patterson's gate, which he had to cross when he walked down Franklin past the UNC president's home, but was able to face it fearlessly because of his cane.
He indicates that he was now fortified with a stout cane, carved by Aztec Indians, brought to him by Felix Henderson when he had returned from a trip to Mexico, with the cane bearing some "mighty mean and ugly faces which would help to frighten off any dogs that might threaten me."
Drew Pearson indicates that things were simmering more silently in the Middle East since the Bermuda conference between the President and British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan, but were still simmering dangerously, as three developments indicated. First, the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem had warned the State Department that Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion of Israel was quite serious about going to war against Egypt should Premier Gamal Abdel Nasser show the first sign of starting border raids again. Prime Minister Ben-Gurion and his Cabinet were convinced that both President Eisenhower and Secretary of State Dulles had reneged on their promise that Egypt would not return to the Gaza Strip. The Secretary's statement the previous week that the right of passage through the Gulf of Aqaba ought be submitted to the World Court had further convinced the Israelis that they had been double-crossed. Israeli Minister Reuven Shiloah had gone to the State Department to remind the Secretary that he had previously said that Israel had every right to pass through the Gulf of Aqaba, and had discussed protection by U.S. naval vessels to secure that usage, whereas placing the issue before the World Court would take a year or more to resolve.
French Premier Guy Mollet had promised the Israelis protection by the French Air Force should they decide to attack Egypt again, as they had in late October. He was so upset over the double-cross by the U.S. of Israel that he had vowed never to trust any agreement again with the President as long as Secretary Dulles remained in his position. While visiting Washington the previous February, Premier Mollet had been largely responsible for persuading the Israelis to withdraw from the Gaza Strip, replaced by the U.N. Emergency Forces. At that time, the President had personally promised that the U.S. would get tough with Premier Nasser should he again start launching attacks from Gaza. Israeli Foreign Minister Golda Meir had delivered a speech to the U.N. outlining the terms of Israeli withdrawal, and both Secretary Dulles and Premier Mollet had read the message in advance of her delivery of it. The terms included "civil administrative control" of Gaza by the U.N.
Israel had the toughest, most determined Army in the Middle East, but lacked air power, and with French air power supporting it, U.S. diplomats were aware that no Arab army or combination of Arab armies could long withstand it, but were more afraid of what Russia might do in the event of war in the region.
At the Bermuda conference, Prime Minister Macmillan had urged the President to adopt a tough policy toward Egypt and the President had refused. At one point, Prime Minister Macmillan had asked how much more proof was needed that Premier Nasser was a power-mad fanatic, and the President had replied that more was needed than was at that time available.
Walter Lippmann indicates that at his press conference the previous day, the President had extricated himself from the untenable position he had taken earlier, that the budget he had proposed was too high and that he would like to see it reduced, but that since only Congress could do so, it was their responsibility and not his to revise it. The general belief had been that Secretary of the Treasury George Humphrey, who had been critical of the budget, had influenced that previous position. But now, the President was defending his budget.
Mr. Lippmann regards it as a sounder attitude, both legally and morally, than his earlier position. Under existing law, the President was obligated to present a budget he believed in and was prepared to justify and defend. According to 1 USC 31, "the President shall transmit … to Congress the budget which sets forth … estimated expenditures and proposed appropriations necessary in his judgment for the support of the government." On the prior March 13, the President had stated that they had worked many months on the budget and that each item had been developed "with the idea of performing to the very best of our ability the responsibilities laid on the Executive Department by Congress for carrying out its mandates." He said that Congress had ordered a number of "great programs" which cost money and that there could be no "great cuts in the budget" unless and until Congress voted for "the cutting out or the elimination or slowing up, at least, of some of these great programs."
Mr. Lippmann questions whether those "great programs" were all really initiated by Congress, finding that it was not the case, recalling that the President's messages to Congress, the platform on which he had run, and the campaign speeches which he had made regarding the record of his Administration all contradicted that notion. He thus concludes that the President's initial position on the budget had been untenable, as the reaction in Congress and in the country generally made evident. A large part of the country was startled by the size of the budget, but he suggests that it was only startling when measured by the campaign promises of 1952 to practice economy and cut out unnecessary waste. But measured by the promises of 1956, when the President had adopted the philosophy of the "new Republicanism", the budget was only carrying out conservatively what the voters had been promised.
Between 1952 and 1956, he ventures, the President had committed himself to the "great programs" which cost so much money, while at the same time being compelled by the state of the cold war to have a great program of military defense. In 1952, General Eisenhower felt able to offer big promises of reduced expenditures because of two assumptions, one being that he could end the war in Korea, as was accomplished in mid-1953, and that there would follow a peace which would permit important reductions in military spending, with the other assumption being that he could end the expansion of grants and subsidies of the welfare programs, and even reduce them considerably.
The basic difference between the orthodox Republicanism and the new Republicanism concerned those two basic assumptions, with the former group still believing in them while the President and the new Republicans did not. Those in the orthodox group believed that much money could be saved, especially from foreign aid by adopting an isolationist foreign policy, while the President believed in collective security, which relied on subsidies to foreign countries. The orthodox also believed that the welfare measures could be reduced and that a lot of money could thus be saved, while the President was convinced that the party could not win elections unless it was able to attract large numbers of voters who had formed an invincible coalition under FDR.
Mr. Lippmann concludes that the President's budget was not a series of great programs commanded by Congress, but was an exponent of new Republicanism in an era of unabated cold war, and had come about based on decisions by the President, with the Congress justified in insisting that he take the responsibility, whether defending his budget or whether advocating that it be reduced.
A letter writer from Morganton indicates that he had read several letters to the editor regarding the editorial which had opposed lowering of the voting age in the state from 21 to 18. This writer says that he would turn 18 the following August and was presently a junior at Morganton High School, where he associated with many young people between the ages of 18 and 21 or who would soon be that age, and believes they would not be capable of voting, as he was not either. He disagrees with the idea that a person old enough to be drafted was old enough to vote, indicating that a person who was 18 had been given 18 years of freedom with all the privileges and rights as anyone else in the country and had taken advantage of all of the modern advancements in medicine and in the industrial age, being treated fairly in all ways, having the ability to acquire all the knowledge wanted in almost any field, and so already owed the country something in return, even if he could not vote. He suggests that a person who behaved as most of the teenagers did at a rock 'n' roll show did not possess the mental ability to vote wisely. He indicates that in the March 29 edition of the newspaper, there was an article reporting that 13 girls had to be carried to a first-aid station at a rock 'n' roll show, and that one girl had even tried to overpower a law enforcement officer to get at one of the performers, swinging her purse at the officer, missing him and hitting an usher, who had to be taken to the hospital and treated for head injuries. He had heard of many fights at such shows and thus believes that such people were not mature enough to vote. He indicates that even at present, only 70 percent of the people old enough to vote took the time to do so and wonders what the percentage would be among those between ages 18 and 21. He finds that just because a person was married and had a house, as one previous writer had suggested was a qualification for mature voting, meant little, that if someone 18 decided to buy some land and it turned out the person was gypped, his father would likely sue on the ground that the son was not mentally mature enough to undertake such a transaction. (That depends on state law governing the age of majority for purposes of forming legal contracts.) He says that upon arguing with a school teacher on the subject, the teacher suggested that young people had to learn responsibility sometime, but he compares it to permitting a new student of surgery to operate without supervision from an experienced surgeon. He would be in favor of raising the voting age rather than lowering it. He indicates that he had faith in some teenagers, but had been referring to the majority of them who were not yet mature enough to exercise the franchise.
One could, on that logic, however, make an argument that we should change to a parliamentary form of government, or amend the Constitution to require the state legislatures to select presidential electors, regardless of the popular vote—which is actually an option, prior to the general election, under the existing Constitution, Article II, Section 1, provided a state's constitution allows it, the states being the sole arbiters of the manner of selection of electors for President and Vice-President, as long as the manner does not infringe other Constitutional rights, such as Equal Protection under the Fourteenth Amendment. But that would be moving toward a royal system, an autocracy with an aristocracy determining who rules, precisely that which the Founders wanted to avoid. Unfortunately, however, there have always been in the country a continuing lineage of royalists among the lunatic and uninformed fringe, becoming even more evident in recent years as the unhinged appear to have become more so during the pandemic of 2020-22.
It appears that the more leisure time the society acquires from various technological advancements and innovations, such as the personal computer, the more each generation is spoiled and thus wants everything in life to be the more perfect, replete with rubberized bathtubs, eliminating all manner of risk, leading to taking of increasing devil-may-care risks, as an apparent means of rebellion to the status quo, in the way they exercise their most precious right in a democracy, the right to vote, trying their best in some areas to elect the least qualified persons, those who are more fit selling used cars, running gambling houses or supervising cockfights than governance.
Life, itself, is full of peril, which is why man first built shelters, not only to protect against the elements, but also to ward off other, marauding tribes. There is no ideal minimum age for voting, as there are responsible people who are 40 and there are also those who are engaged in "youthful indiscretions" at that age—people who, just a handful of years subsequent, become President, even though only by dint of a biased, spare Supreme Court majority which stopped the recount of the narrow vote in Florida to deliver the candidate the electoral college victory despite losing the popular vote by 500,000. (Of course, at that point, we had seen nothing yet, compared to 2016 and since, thanks to the Trump-card, trumping all of democracy and the Constitution, which is apparently why the nuts who vote for it dig it so much—that it's, like, well, you know, like real cool to find ways to get around the old, stuck-up, stodgy ways of that flowery Constitution that no one understand no more anyways, and figure out how to deprive some people of their rights while permitting unrestrained license to others, especially the wealthy, who we see and like on the tv screen, those up there above us all in Royalty. Woh, wowy.)
We would like to ask the letter writer also why he knew so many people at his high school between the ages of 19 and 21, maybe explaining why he had so little confidence in the majority of his fellow students. What was it, a haven for flunkies?—with no aspersions meant to be cast on Morganton, home of Senator Sam J. Ervin.
A letter writer from Great Falls, S.C., indicates that U.N. Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjold and Secretary of State Dulles ought resign their posts immediately as each had proven themselves incapable of performing their duties as expected by the people. He finds that each had always reported great progress when returning from various missions, while, in reality, there had only been complete failure. "So shall the U.N. police be withdrawn at once as it has proved to be a farce from the very outset and more clearly so as time went on." He indicates that Mr. Hammarskjold had represented the U.N. in the Middle East problem several times and in each instance had proved incapable of achieving anything worthwhile, not having accomplished anything in the Hungarian revolt of 1956, not even being permitted to get there. He finds that in like manner, Secretary Dulles had been traveling the world, seeking those willing to accept aid from the U.S. in return for prestige, respect and friendship, and in each instance had failed, despite having delivered many billions of dollars in "handouts". Meanwhile, the U.S. had lost all prestige and friendship from both those to whom it had given the aid and its traditional allies, all having occurred since Mr. Dulles had been Secretary.
![]()
![]()
![]()