The sun. [volume] (Newberry, S.C.) 1937-1972, January 19, 1956, Image 2
PAGE TWO
THE NEWBERRY SUN
THURSDAY, JANUARY 19, 1956
1218 College Street
NEWBERRY. S. C.
PUBLISHED EVERY THURSDAY
0. F. Armfield. Jr., Owner
. Entered as second-class matter December 6. 1937
^at the Postoffice at Newberry, South Carolina, under
the Act of Congress of March 3, 1879.
SUBSCRIPTION RATES: $2.00 per year in ad
vance; six months, $1.25.
COMMENTS ON MEN AND THINGS
We Americans have become meddlers; we are so sure of
ouf own rectitude that we just dabble in the affairs of
others, and needlessly and foolishly, too.
I jpfow that this is the greatest country in the world
and I greatly rejoice in the good fortune of being an Am
erican ; but must we Americans ram our ideas down the
throats of other people?
We do not trust the Russians: why, then, do we have
diplomatic relations with Russia? Why should we meddle
with the affairs of Russia.
I think there are some men—and women—who either
have interests in Russia; or, else, are so anxious to Amer
icanize the world that they must always be stirring up
something.
As I see it today, we have certain fundamental interests
in Great Britain, Holland, Sweden, Denmark and West
Germany; and we can more or less depend on Mexico, and
South America; but why waste American money all over
the world?
Very deeply I feel that oyr foreign policy is a wasteful,
foolish, meddlesome and mischievous perversion of real
American interest.
If we want the respect of other nations let us make
America strong at home and honorable and square abroad.
Let’s stop sending American billions and American globe
trotters all over the world.
Up to this time we have squandered billions of dollars
throughout the world and we have blundered and failed
miserably, notwithstanding all our noble purpose.
Isn’t it enough for the Government of the United States
to use its energy and ability strengthening the United
States, conservings its power, while developing its mighty
potential, both economic and military?
Why should we become foster father to all the world
and incur hatred and resentment?
This issue of interposing, meaning, really, to declare our
selves willing to accept or be bound by an Act of Congress,
or a decision of the Federal Supreme Court, raises num
erous questions, but the point is worth making; we must
compel the Supreme Court to abide by the Constitution,
strictly construed; Discussion should be helpful; in fact
nothing so clarifies an issue as intelligent, informed dis
cussion. This nation has a vital interest in the matter of
States Rights because we have 48 States, 48 Legislatures,
48 State Supreme Courts; so what is the law?
Even when the State courts may base decisions on the
decisions of other State Courts, that by itself presents
sufficient perplexity as to what the law really is, but when
the Supreme court deliberately disregards established pre
cedents of the Supreme Court itself and bases a decision
on Sociological theories it means that the nine justices
assume and assert the power and prerogative of tyrants
or despots, in a land of free people.
j “Americans are a highly inventive people, as the lengthy
list of new patents published every week in Washington
shows. It is not, perhaps, generally realized that both the
nature of our inventions and the circumstances under which
they are made have undergone profound changes in recent
years.
Mechanical devices, of which some epochal examples were
the sewing machine, typewriter, harvester, Linotype and
phonograph, formerly predominated, and, typically, each
came from the workshop of a solitary inventor. Now, a
growing share of the new patents are issued for inventions
based on a complex intermingling of several of the sciences
^intricate developments in chemistry and physics, for ex
ample. At the same time, the scene of much American in
venting has shifted to organized and well-equipped labora
tories operated by industry, the government, or the uni
versities.
All inventive persons, whether they work for themselves
or as members of a group, seem to have in them an urge
to create. Successful inventors have in common other
characteristics: an appetite for hard work, persistence,
and the gift of foresight well beyond the ability of the
average person.
Crude oil, indeed, is proving to be an ever-richer store
house. Scientists have reason to believe that, so far as
wresting secrets from petroleum is concerned, they are
only barely on the threshold of discovery. Before World
War II, for example, investigators were able to analyze
the detailed structure of only about 30 petroleum chemicals.
Now, this number has risen to nearly 2000 and petroleum
contains millions of different compounds remaining to be
analyzed.
Today industrial research laboratories, large and small,
spend about four billion dollars a year, employ some 400,-
000 people and are still expanding. By 1975, it has been
estimated, these laboratories will be spending 16 billion
dollars a year and employing, both directly and indirectly
more than a million people. Industrial research may well
become an important factor in enabling the gross national
LONG PATH TO SHOVEL
product in that year to reach the predicted level of $800
billion.
A natural outgrowth of this great expansion is a rise
in the proportion of American inventions made in indus
trial laboratories. In the early 1920s, according to a chart
prepared by the Patent office, only about one third of U.
S. patents were assigned by their inventors to corporations.
Now the share of corporately owned patents is almost two
thirds of those issued each year.
New' products and processes, as revolutionary as any
of those invented in the past, may be expected to appear
in the years ahead. Important among the stimuli which will
bring them into being are the driving force of competition,
expressing itself through more intensive industrial re
search, and the continuing bulwark of the patent system,
with its incentives of recognition to creative minds and
its wise provision for public disclosure. It is worth recalling
that *to patent’ means ‘to publish,’ In the words of Abra
ham Lincoln, holder of patent No. 6469 for a means of float
ing vessels over shoals, the patent system has ‘added the
fuel of interest to the fire of genius.’
The total of patents applied for has now become so large
that the patent procedure takes a long time. Over three
years, on the average, elapse between the filing of an ap
plication and the issuance of a patent. The Patent office
has a considerable backlog of work, as the nation’s volume
of patent applications is rising sharply. Some 75,000 appli
cations were made last year, 20 per cent more than in the
previous year and the largest number in 25 years.
For a long time American inventing was a rather soli
tary business and the picture of the lone inventor fired
the public imagination. He was Samuel Morse, tapping out
‘What Hath God Wrought’; or Edison, the Wizard of Elec
tricity; or Charles Goodyear, poverty-stricken but persis
tent in his efforts to vulcanize rubber, discovering the sec
ret by the accident of spilling his compound on a hot kitch
en stove. He still exists today, in fact as well as in legend.
Self-employed inventors continue to make important scien
tific discoveries, frequently selling to others the right to
use their inventions. Thousands of patents are issued to
them yearly for useful contributions to progress in industry
and in the home. In addition, the continuing fecundity of
the inventive imagination is demonstrated by patents grant
ed on such oddities as the raincoat built for two, the alarm
clock for striking reactant risers, or the brace and bit
for making dimples.
Yet many men and women who want to make a career of
invention or research seem inclined to enter the organized
laboratories rather than w»ork independently. True, the in
ventor in the industrial laboratory does not have the vis
ion of great wealth to lure him on that may motivate the
lone inventor. On the other hand, he does not experience
the latter’s frequent poverty and uncertainty. He has se
curity, the prospect of steadily rising in his profession,
and, what seems more important, the chance to exercise his
From the Mason County News,
New Haren, West Virginia: “Oh.
yes, that is right I know, and Fm
for It . . . but . . . Fm afraid It
will hurt my business'* la all too
often heard from people favoring
something but not standing for
the thing they favor!
However, a person is not very
strongly for any move, principle
or his understood right unless he
is Willing to sacrifice for it!
And the fellow who puts business
above principles . . . well, yon
have the answer right there: he
doesn’t have a very strong sense
of principles in the first instance!
The same thing is true, we main
tain, in the instance of a person’s
covering up for someone or for
some organisation. If you don't
agree, then why not say so and
take a position? It is the thousands
of positionless people who allow
things to happen which they know
are wrong, pretend to ignore them
or to accept them which cost so
dreadfully in principles lost to
the Individual!
The enforcement of law would
be easy if only the average citixen
would stand up and be counted for
right regardless of the effect on
his business. Whet should give di
rection to one’s life, anyway, eag
erness for profit or a conviction
for right?
People with principle respect
die seme In others. They can’t
avoid it.
So the nest time that someone
avoids an Issue on the grounds of
business Inlarests you may know
whore hie Sfe'a purpose is cen
tered.
• * * <
From the South Pasadena Re
view, South Pasadena, California:
There was a time when it seemed
that the days of the newspaper
might be numbered. What with
radio and television cutting into
the available advertising dollars
it was feared that newspapers*
share might be reduced to the point
where the dailies and weeklies
might have to give up.
National newspaper advertising
linage hit a new all-time high for
the first nine months of 1856, show
ing a whopping Jump of M.5 per
cent in automobile advertising in
September over the correspond
ing month lest year. By January
1, total newspaper advertising rev
enue for the year should aacoaad
$S billion, the greatest sum, by
fur, ever Invested In any advertis
ing medium.
Electoral College Amendment
Many Americans who value their right to vote have been
disturbed for years over the present method of voting in
the electoral college, w r hich determines the outcome of our
presidential elections. Under the present system, the votes
of millions of Americans do not count in our presidential
elections because of the “winner take all’’ provisions reg
ulating the voting in the electoral college.
During the past week I introduced’ legislation in the
Senate which will accurately reflect the will of the people
in electoral college voting. My proposed Constitutional
amendment would apportion the electoral vote of every
State among the three leading presidential candidates ac
cording to the popular vote received by the candidate’s
electors.
I can best outline the principal points contained in my
plan by first explaining how the electoral college operates
at present.
Present Procedure
The people now vote for a slate of party candidates for
election to the national electoral college. The winning slate
of elector candidates is given the pow;er to vote the State’s
entire electoral vote in the electoral college. Each elector,
however, retains the right to vote for the candidate of his
own choosing.
Thus, under this system the 45 electoral votes of New
York could go to one presidential candidate by a one-vote
margin of the popular votes. If a half-million voters sup
ported the candidate who lost bygone vote, then their votes
would not be reflected in the electoral college voting. This
clearly does not give effect to the will of'the people. In addi
tion, it discourages many citizens from voting when they
know it is probable their votes will not count.
Plan Retains Electoral College
My plan has seven principal points. First, it would retain
the present electoral college without any change in its
mechanics. By doing this, it would protect the rights of
States, as the Constitution now does, in choosing electors
by a method determined by the individual States.
My plan would allow each successful candidate for elec
tor to cast a vote in the electoral college in proportion to the
total number of votes cast by the people for all successful
candidates for elector. Under the system followed by the
political parties in placing slates of candidates for elector
on the ticket, this would mean, generally, that electoral
votes would be limited to the top three slates.
S. C. Has Eight Votes
In South Carolina, which has eight electoral votes, it
would be possible for 24 electors from three different slates
to cast fractional votes. The fractional vote for an elector
would be computed by determining what percentage the
vote received was of the total vote cast in a State for all
successful electors, and then applying that percentage to
the total electoral vote allotted the State.
If the successful elector received 800,00 votes altogether
and one elector won 80,000 of those votes, he would thus
be entitled to vote one-tenth of the State’s eight electoral
votes. Thus, he would cast eight-tenths^of a full vote. The
other electors also would vote in proportion to the total
number of votes cast for them.
As under the present system, my plan would also pre
serve the independence of the individual elector. Other
good points in the present system would be retained. These
include provisions for throwing the election into the House
in the event no candidate receives a majority of electoral
votes. A selection in the House would be made from among
the top three candidates, with each State having one vote.
Other Plans Pending
Other plans pending before Congress would limit the
selection in Congress to the tw T o leading candidates, and
wou^d give more weight to the larger States by giving each
member of Congress (House and Senate) one vote each.
One plan would let Congress make the decision if no candi
date receives more than 40 per cent of the electoral votes.
The objection here is that this wjould make it possible for
a candidate to be elected President by a plurality instead
of a majority vote.
None of the other pending plans would accurately re
flect the will of the people and at the same time maintain
the rights of the states to manage their own elections. It
is important that the electoral college be retained. It serves
as a buffer between the States and the Federal government,
preventing Federal interference in State election procedures.
That is why I object to the proposal for abolishing the elec-
creative urge in a favorable environment. He has available
valuable and expensive equipment; the opportunity for ex
change of ideas with seasoned scientists in his own and
related fields; and storehouses of knowledge in the form of
technical libraries. The modern laboratory functions thru
teamwork in the once separate, now interrelated^ fields
of science. Yet the inventions are still made by individuals.
Perhaps there are no rules for inventing, but there are
common criteria for inventive people. At a recent confer
ence Dr. Arthur H. Compton, a noted physicist, described
creative scientists as he saw them. They have, he said, the
usual desires for an adequate living, for prestige, for sue*
cess in competition, but they are notably lacking—compared
with administrative people, for example in desire for power.
And with all other creative persons they share ‘a perma
nent thorn in the flesh’—a dissatisfaction with things as
they are.”
LAFF OF THE WEEK
250th Franklin Anniversary
Commemorated in Fainting
O NE of America’s great citi
zens, Benjamin Franklin, who
wrote in his will that he wished
to be known to history merely as
“a printer,” is shown in his Phila
delphia printing shop in this
original painting by Dean Corn-
well. The painting, commissioned
by the New York Life Insurance
Company, commemorates the
250th anniversary of the birth ot
Franklin, on January 17, 1706
Scientist, inventor, author am
publisher, Franklin became a
printing apprentice at 12 and at
24 became sole owner and ed
of the Pennsylvania Gazette.
Philadelphia's first bookseller and
the founder of America’s first cir
culating library, Franklin gained
lasting fame through his annual
publication of Poor Rkhard’a Al
manack. At the age of 32, he turn
ed to science, and subsequently
proved the identity of lightning
and electricity with his famous
kite experiment. As a diplomat
and statesman, Franklin contrib
uted toward his country’s victory
in the Revolutionary War as well
as to the adoption of the proposed
Constitution.
toral college and placing the election on a popular vote basis.
Another feature of my plan is that it vtould discourage
numerous splinter parties, such as exist in France today,
causing such a weak and unstable government.
ROOM FOR ONE MORE
By Fran Pachteri
R ANDY and Jo Lawrence en
joyed a happily married life,
enjoyed all the more because
their union had been blessed with
five boys. Both having been or
phans, their wildest dreams had
been realized getting a home and
a family. Jo had kept well hid
den, her disappointment over
there not being a little girl among
her brood. It was not until her
club visited the orphanage that
the idea struck her.
In her direct way, she broke
the news at dinner. “How would
you fellows like a sister?**
Six heads lifted and gaping
mouths greeted her announce
ment.
Randy gave her an incredulous
stare and blurted out “Jo, it’s not
true!**
“Not the way you think, I want
to adopt a child.'* Jo laughed.
Jim. spok^ for the boys. “You’re
kidding. We're crowded now, be-
sides, wftao’d want a girl?" A
chorus of approval from his broth
ers agreed with him.
Dinner over and the boys in
their rooms doing homework, Jo
gnd Randy settled themselves in
the living room.,
Jo hoped Randy would say
something. He questioned. “Jo,
this means a lot to you, doesn’t
it?”
Jo nodded, “It hit me out of the
blue. You should see those kids, I
wanted to take them all.”
Randy’s expression told her that
he too remembered. The parade
of people looking them over, each
child hoping for a homo and fami
ly. Randy and Jo had never been
chosen, each had stayed there till
grown. It had been their shared
need for each other that nourished
love through childhood into mar
riage.
Jo spoke, “Don’t you see, we
know that life. I feel it’s our duty
to take one of them. It would wash
away those bitter years.”
“The boys art against It and we
don't have too much room.” Ran
dy was running true to form, but
Jo had met up with solid male
opposition before.
"Let’s get permission for them
to visit It might change their at
titude. Let’s face it, kids all have
a selfishness about sharing. It
might do them good to see those
orphans.”
Randy, knowing Jo’s die-hard
policy, said, "Set It up and we’ll
see how they react*'
Jo encountered no opposition as
her presidency with the woman’s
club carried enough weight and
consent was readily given. The
kids were pessimistic but Jo over
rode their objections and they
found themselves at the orphanage.
Turning them loose among the
children, the Lawrences paused
in the matron's office, explaining
their desires to overcome the
boys objections.
Jo looked up to see Jim had
returned with his brothers lined
up behind him. Stevie, ten ran to
his mother, bursting Into tears,
saying, “Mommy, they make me
fed! bad. We’ve got so much and
they ain't got nothing.”
Jo felt a pang of remorse, see
ing her carefree boys, sober with
their awakening to a world, they’d
never knew existed.
Jim, endeavoring to bo nonchal
ant said. “It’ll be hard picking.
They are all nice kids.”
Jo and Randy entered the line
up room. It hadn’t changed, or
was it that all orphans had the
same look? Two children stood
out from tho rest, twins, a boy
and girl, conspicuous in their de
sire not to be separated. Time
flew backward for the Lawrences.
Jo knelt at eye level before the
frightened children. “Would you
like to come and live with us?"
The little girl stared hard at Jo,
disbelief on her face. “De you
mean both of us?”
Jo nodded and her arms en
circled the two. T .poking up, she
saw tears in the eyes of a men
and five blushing boys.