Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

I v si- page 2 THE MAROON TIGER February, 1954 The Maroon Tiger FOUNDED 1898 Published monthly during the school year by the students of More house College, Atlanta, Georgia. Entered in Post Office at Atlanta 3, Georgia, as second-class mail matter under the act of Congress, March 13 1879 Member of Associated College Press and Intercollegiate Press. Represented for national advertising "by National Advertising Ser vice Inc., 420 Madison Avenue, New York 17, New York. Advertising rates furnished by request. Subscription rates—One academic year 85 cents; by mail $1.00. Office—Room 113 Graves Hall. Phone—RA. 9420 EDITORIAL STAFF EDITOR-IN-CHIEF ASSOCIATE EDITOR- NEWS EDITOR FEATURE EDITOR-- SPORTS EDITOR. COPY READERS ARTISTS ...Ezra C. Davidson Ira Harrison .‘...James Goodman Richard Johns Patrick McClain EXCHANGE EDITOR . George Johnson, Marion Mar able ....Robert Cheeseboro, Archie Meyer ..Samuel Allen NEWS REPORTERS— Peter Chatard, John Covington, Donald Moore, Amos Cheese boro, Major Owens, James Crump, Leroy Aikens, Donal Jones, Allen Williams. SPORTS REPORTERS— Alfred Willie, Jackson Sheptall, Willie J. Davis. FEATURE WRITERS— Howard Moore, Lillie McKinney, Donald Hickman, Charles Jones, James Jordan, Eugene Austin, English H. Irving, David Hickman,-George Johnson. TYPISTS — Hassel Harris, Donald Hickman, David Hickman, Howard Westley, Samuel Allen, Robert K. Anderson. BUSINESS STAFF BUSINESS MANAGER.. . John W. Simmons ASSISTANT BUSINESS MANAGER Harry Smith ADVERTISING MANAGER ..Willie Brawner CIRCULATION Jefferson Mathis, Ronald Johnson FACULTY ADVISERS G. Lewis Chandler, A Russell Brooks THE EDITOR’S CORNER AND SO TO PRESS AGAIN We do not have the same excuse as the bears for' not showing our faces the last two months. We hibernated not because of the cold but because of our capital—a chilly fact we must admit. But the forecast is warmer, so says our weather- man —our Business Manager—and the Tiger is out to stay. While limbering our muscles by the way of a big yawn, awakening from our sleep, we recall the tremors in the news world like vaguely distinguishing the elements of last night’s dream. Since, shall we say, we “retired” last November many things have happened: The truce continued to lag in Korea; Santa made his usual secret invasion; amid the traditional gags and noises little Mr. ’54 had to face it too—like the rest of us. The constitution ality of wire tapping was argued; the Vietminh forces pushed back the French in Indochina; Cupid observed his annual day for official business—Valentine; Ike lightened up on his golf and went hunting; while editors of the Red and Black resigned at the University of Georgia and the first semester ended. The persistent Bricker upset the Senate; Republicans step ped on the toes of the Democrats—they squealed; Rockefellow gave up 5.5 millions; while Jimmy Roosevelt swore he was broke and Molotov toyed with the Berlin conference. Morehouse celebrated its 87th anniversary; tribute was paid to “Honest Abe”; McCarthy concerned himself with “Twenty years of Treason”; Washington’s birthday passed as the deadline for income tax reports approached. And of course, we got two hot dogs for supper in the college dining hall. We are wide awake now—those semester finals were since last November too! But of course we don’t publish those letters from home. Coming out of the daze now, we can look forward to the S. I. A. C. basketball tournament, some good collegiate debat ing, spring holidays and ... oh well, we might as well mention it—Graduation. But no matter what the occasion is, its good to sing, “And so to Press Again.” DOO-DOODLING by Ira Harrison THE LITTLE THINGS The little things . . . the thank you . . . please . . . and how are you . . . the pardon me . . . and welcome . . . even howdy do . . . the excuse me please . . . for give me please . . . and thank you just the same . . . the little things we fail to say . . . some times cause us much pain . . . much needless pain and woeful shame . . . and chances we have lost . . . When only these . . . the little things . . . could have paid the cost. THE WINDOW GLASS OF JUSTICE IS OPAQUE by DONALD HICKMAN (These are the attitudes and approaches of the author.) The editor of the Earlham College campus newspaper in Richmond, Indiana, was ousted from that position by the paper’s advisory board, because he okayed the publication of a front page article in that newspaper, urging the practice of interracial campus dating by non-staff members, despite regu lations of the college denouncing that practice. Also at the same educational institution, another student, Robert McAl- lest^r, was asked to vacate from the campus after he announced his engagement to Miss Grace Cunningham, a Negro coed. Is this what should happen in a college which should be a labora tory for life? Also William Shipp and Walter Lundy, the ex-editors of the campus newspaper of the University of Georgia in Athens,* expressed, liberal views on the problem of integration. They approached the question with a liberal and logical outlook. Some of the articles that contained their views were published, but of course such articles of that kind would upset the big conservatives, and the great non-integrationalists; therefore, the “big-wheels” of the institution began to roll. They in structed the editors that henceforth, every article of that kind had first to be read and approved by some member of the faculty beford the publication of that article. Naturally the articles read, would not be published. Then, as men, the editors maintained their stand and resigned from their posts. Did these two examples add strength to the principle of “Free dom of the Press?” No! This was direct infringement, an en croachment, a usurpation, and a downright violation of that freedom which democratic America is supposed to uphqld. You might conceive that after such a heroic stand, people would respect them for maintaining their liberal beliefs. But such was not the case. A newspaper publisher called these editors “sissy squirts”. These men, who had so valiantly, so splendidly upheld their ideas, and put their views on integra tion into operation by publishing were given these uncompli mentary epithets. These conservatives are to be pitied more than hated, be cause they live in air castles, put themselves on imaginary raised pedestals and extoll themselves by virtue of light pigmentation. Mainly they comprise the older generation who, because of their ignorance, accept segregation and discrimina tion, and also, because of their own selfish folkways and mores. They often forget that society has changed since their fesfered days. Also they often indoctrinate their offsprings with this false view and prejudice,-that when they develop into adults, they will be the fanatics of tomorrow, who will act upon emotion, and follow the actions of their ancestors of yesteryear, instead of reasoning with such situations with a liberal outlook. But fortunately, as you have seen above, this has not occurred in all instances, because the parents of the editors above or the editors themselves took time out to reason and cope with the situation with a liberal outlook, instead of acting on emotion. Therefore we, for whom they spoke, must help. We are not as illiterate as were the slaves before us. We can and will help the course of integration. For when we allow people to infringe upon the rights of others in America, no longer can we say that we are trying to promote the freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and other hallmarks, for which the American Way of life is praised. We will help by using the weapons of truth, democracy, fair judgment, and common logical reasoning. Qcrosrflae JAMES S. JORDAN A WORD ABOUT OUR WORDS Dear Editor: By virtue of conversing with some of my fellow students, as well as listening'to conversations between other students, I have noticed the widespread use of ob scene language on our college campus. This type of language, moreover, is being utilized as a means of communication by a goodly number of our men. I am sure, however, that these men did not come to college for the purpose of developing foul* methods of expression. I am equally certain that they have received no guidance toward that end here ati Morehouse. I feel, moreover, that one of their main objectives for attending college was to develop sound, wholesome speech habits. Let us look at the language em ployed by some of our men—the language that we term as being obscene, base and low. We find that its main characteristic is desecration, directed toward eit her God, a mother, or some other sacred being or symbol. In any case, those things which we re gard sacred, aesthetic, and pure as portrayed by this language in an irreverent, ugly, and distorted manner. The men who employ obscene language as a tool could not pos sibly be practicing the rule of “thinking before speaking.” Were such the case, I am sure they would find more suitable means of expressing themselves than by obscenity. These men might also consider the words of .Jesus: “By thy words thou shalt be condemn ed.” (Matthew 12:37), when they engage in conversation with their fellows. —John R. Parson, Minister’s Union. THE BRICKER DRAMA A historic battle was brought to a close temporarily at least in the Senate of the United States several days ago that left another mark in the history of the strug gle for power between the states and the federal government, be tween the president and the con gress. The issue was the propos ed Bricker Amendent. The three pertinent sections of the proposed Amendment are: (1> “A provision of a treaty which shall conflict with this Constitution shall not be of any force or effect;” (2) “A treaty shall become effective as internal law in the United States only through legislation which would be valid in the absence of a treaty;” (3) “Congress shall have power to regulate all executive and other agreements with any foreign power or international organization.” The measure was really proposed by those who be lieve in state rights and want to forestall the impending impact of the United Nation’s Declaration of Human Rights and the Geno cide Convention agreement. The Human Rights Document sets up certain ideals which include the rights to marriage, social security, equitable economic opportuni ties and participation in the pro cess of government. The Geno cide Agreement would outlaw warfare that tends to extermi nate masses and would subject the guilty party to trial by an international tribunal. These ideals are human enough for the masses of people but Brickerites contend that ratification of them would lead to “Mongreliza- tion” of the white race and a des titution of National sovereignty. The contention is certainly fal lacious because an international tribunal has no sovereignty that enables it to enforce a decision and of course there is no weight to such a thing as a “Mongreliza- tion” of a race of people. The supposed superiorty of the white race has been exposed for its myth and science has demon strated that racial inferiority is not a truth. The measure is- an illogical preversion of the pre sident’s power in an era where vast executive power is necessary to exert U. S. leadership in a world threatened by Russian at- temps to monopolize it in the strait jacket of Marxist dogma. President Eisenhower recognized this attempt to deform the ex ecutive, by delimitations, by a highly skeptical congress and states jealous of their power. It is a dangerous and foolish ven ture that would have impaired the peace of the world had the Brickerites been successful. It was only after president Eisen hower took an uncompromising attitude toward the measure that it was defeated. The proposal frankly represents a final stand for a dying ember, namely, isola tionism. There are some who understand and appreciate from the evidence of history and our ever accelerating cultural inter dependency that internationalism is an evolviug necessity. The idea of Nationalism is a menace and exposes humanity to all of the dire evils of international anarchy. The proponents of the Bricker Measure realize this also, but are blinded by a kind of pre judice that refuses them under standing of the changing order in a rational light. But national ism, like feudalism, will become obsolete.