Historical Newspapers of South Carolina

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

PAGE TWO THE NEWBERRY SUN, NEWBERRY, SOUTH CAROLINA THURSDAY, MARCH 4, 1965 1218 College St., Newberry, S. C. 29108 PUBLISHED EVERY THURSDAY O. F. Armfield. Jr., Owner Second-Class Postage Paid at Newberry, Soutti Carolina. SUBSCRIPTION RATES: $2.00 per year in ad vance :Six Months $1.25. THE “SPECTATOR , S ,, COLUMN After all the vexations, trials, tribulations and vicissitudes of life I find this card, mailed in Effingham, Florence county, It renewed my spirit and I pass it along hoping it may also cheer my Radio brethren in Florence, Sumter, Charleston, and Columbia because they, too, forge ahead without the praise they deserve: “Dear Mr. Breedin: Its good to have a man of your calibre and d^ep interest in our National welfare to speak out so plainly in these days of confusion, distortion and insatiable ambitions politically. But please keep up the good work.” Yours in Christ.” An old retired, but not tired, Minister! I thank you f,riend for your words of commendation. I include my brethren of the radio stations for they deserve our hearty thanks. The citizen who knows most of the early days of Santee- Cooper is our respected and cherished leader, James F. Byrnes. Although Mr. Byrnes deserves strong recognition for the gift of SanteeC-ooper I have never read or heard a word from him. How much did the State of South Carolina invest in the Santee-Cooper proj ect ? ? In the annual purchase of land and the costs of engineering services and the machinery etc how much did this State spend? Regardless of the expenditure did the State receive payment for any outlay? Today the Santee-Cooper seems to operate as a great steam plant, instead of as a great water power operation. In addition to the general or usual costs how much was invested in land not necessary for ope ration? As I live just a few miles from the Santee river and Lake Marion I feel quite an interest in it, but I have no investment there and no personal interest. Quite a lot is being said about the great contribution of the Democrats to Charleston in the establishment of the Naval Station. Perhaps I have lived too long, but now and then something comes up that brings to my mind my early fellowship with Methusaleh. Now what’s what about the Charleston Navy Yard? The Democrats at that time were just poor kin; the Republicans were in full power: those were the days of Mark Hanna, the man who made McKinley President and defeated William Jennings Bryan. As a matter of sober historical truth there was one Democrat who played a big part. Who was he, now? Senator Benjamin Ryan Tillman, at that time the Senior Senator from South Carolina. Senator Tillman was a member of the not an enthusiastic supporter of Senator Tillman, nof of established a naval station at Port Royal, Beaufort County, South Carolina. Port Royal had one of the finest harbors on all the Atlantic coast, but Port Royal itself is a very small town; at that time it was just a village. If a ship entered the dry dock at Port Royal and gave leave to five hundred men where would they go? P^ive hundred men at that time w r ould have crowded and choked all the recreational of Port Royal, Beaufort, Yemassee and Coosa- hatchie. The Navy department decided to close the Port Royal Station and locate one somewhere else, possibly at Savannah; I don’t remember. Senator Tillmen did not like Charleston; he thought the Charleston people were stuck up: at any rate Charleston was not an enthusiastic supporter of Senator Tillman, nof or Governor Tillman, as Tillman previously was. Senator Tillman fought for the Naval Station to be near Charleston because there was no other suitable site in South Carolina and, after all, he wanted the Station for South Car olina. Unless it can be proved that the Charleston Navy Yard was established by Grover Cleveland, a Democrat, it must be credited to William McKinley, a Republican, or Theodore Roosevelt, also a Republican, and later a Bull Moose. So you see. After all, it was assumed that the Charleston location was determined by the considerations of national defense. I know nothing more disgusting than the use of the Fed eral power to coerce people into supporting someone for pub- defense, not the plaything of small calibre politicians. Cushing offered to arrange a private audience between Graham and Pope Paul VI should the evangelist ever get to Rome. But Graham said he was heading for Hawaii because ‘that’s where the sinners go in February . . . and I’m after the sinners’.” In Lima, Peru, the Archbishop at that time, Monsenor Lisson, always referred to us Protestants as “Hermanos en Christo,” (His brothers in Christo.) Looking A bead ...by Ur. George S. Benion PRESIDENT—NATIONAL EDUCATION .PROGRAM Seercy, Arkensei I was agreeably surprised at reading Cardinal Cushing’s commendation of Billy Graham’s evangelistic work. I quote the account in Newsweek: “The Protestant evangelist had only wanted to pay his respects to the Roman Catholic cardinal. But when the Rev. Billy Graham stepped into the ornate Boston study of Rich ard Cardinal Cushing last week, he found 35 newsmen and banks of cameras and klieg lights. Obviously, the unpredict able cardinal had something to say, and he wanted the whole world to hear. T have never known of a religious crusade that was more effective than Dr. Graham’s’, Cushing said, suddenly turning from his guest to address the newsmen. T have never heard the slightest criticism of anything he has ever said from any Catholic source’ the 69-year-old spiritual leader of Boston’s 1.7 million Catholics continued. ‘No Catholic can do anything but become a better Catholic from hearing him. I’m 100 per cent for Dr. Graham.’ Many observers were surprised by the mutual esteem shown by the grandfatherly archbishop from South Boston and the crowd-pleasing preacher from Charlotte, N. C. But Cushing in fact has been writing admiring articles about Dr. Graham for over 14 years, and last week he admitted to list ening to his crusade broadcasts ‘many times.’ in turn, the wavy-haired Baptist acknowledged that he feels ‘much closer to Roman Catholic traditions than to some of the more liberal Protestants.’ Yet closer still is their common concern for simple Christian morality—and their uncommon ability to promote it. Sure there's a difference between the luxury ’65 Chevrolet and expensive cars Mm can put most of it in your savings account You’ll quickly find the big difference between this smart Jet-smooth ’65 Chevrolet and costly cars. It’s mostly price. There’s more foot, head, leg and shoulder room than in most expensive cars. The handsome instrument panel is easy to see and reach. Tasteful interiors with foam seats and deep-twist carpeting are features of even the low-cost Bel Airs and Biscaynes. Engines go from the economical, peppy 140-hp Turbo-Thrift Six on up. That famous Jet-smooth ride is even better, with new Full Coil suspension, wider tread, and over 700 sound and shock absorbers. You can customize this car to your taste nearly 200 different ways. And your present car with low monthly payments will have you in one nearly as fast as you’ve read this! discover the difference Newsweek is all-out for Johnson, but it also carries each week a page by Raymond Moley, a fair-minded critic of pub lic men. As I’ve written several times, Dr. Moley was a right- hand assistant of Governor, later President Roosevelt. Says Dr. Moley: “At this stage of the campaign, when the critics of Sena tor Goldwater have long passed the limits of reason, it seems that anything the Republican candidates say is twisted to an argument that they should not only be defeated but also crushed. If Goldwater says that black is black and white is white, they cry out that he has not considered gray. But whoever has made a serious study of the significance of the Presidency knows that the man who holds that office can be a tremendous moral influence. Before he was Presi dent, Woodrow Wilson wrote that the President’s office is whatever ‘he has the sagacity and force to make it.’ He can, if he chooses, make himself the conscience of the nation ‘not only to lead it but to form it to his own views.’ Wilson in 1908 no doubt had in mind Presidents who had served in his lifetime. Grover Cleveland came to office first in a national revolt against what had become public, busi ness, and official immorality. And he taught and impressed upon the country the paramount need for personal and offi cial reform. McKinley, the whipping boy of modern liberal ism, promised sound money and made good his promise. The odore Roosevelt lectured and guided Americans on almost every aspect of life, from personal hygiene to the sanctity of international agreements. And Wilson himself during his Presidency made the ‘preaching’ function of his office most important. In a new and profoundly throughful book ‘The Foundations of Morality’ by Henry Hazlitt, he discusses what he calls a ‘moral aristocracy.’ From the beginning, Goldwater has drawn the moral ques tion into three sharp issues which distinguish him from his opponent. He says that the President must be the moral master and censor of his official household. He has also made clear that the President’s vast influence can build more responsibility and efficiency into local and state law enforce ment. Lyndon Johnson may not be aware of the term, but his whole attitude toward social improvement is in line with the sociological concept called environmentalism. People are bad because they are ill-fed, ill-housed, and ill-clothed. Give them material things with money exacted from others or obliga tions passed on to future generations, and goodness will pre vail. A Johnson Administration can create these vast material works in a rich country. But unless individual fieedom is assured, there wil certainly be moral decay.” • •••♦••••I Dean Manion THE MANION FORUM Luxurious Chevrolet Impala Sport Sedan. gw#®® Drive something really new—discover the difference at your Chevrolet dealer's Chevrolet • CheveUe • Chevy II* Cormir-Corvette mm* 89 6088 KEMPER CHEVROLET COMPANY 1515-1517 MAIN STREET NEWBERRY, SOUTH CAROLINA An alternative to the controversial Medicare Bill has been offered by Congressmen Herlong and Curtis . It is called the Eldercare Bill, and is said to provide more and better benefits for people over age 65 than any other legislation yet intro duced in Congress. Medicare, as presently proposed, would provide only limit ed hospitalization and nursing home care. The Eldercare Bill, which has been endorsed by the medical profession, provides for hospitalization, nursing home care, private doc tor’s fees, surgical expenses, and drug costs. While it is popularly believed that the medical profession opposes Medicare and other government sponsored bills to provide medical care for the elderly, actually the medical profession has opposed these measures largely because they profess to provide care that the bills have not contained. Doctors know that the limited help offered by Medicare is not enough. Older people in need of medical care need a wide range of health care protection. Eldercare would use private health insurance companies to provide protection insurance. All that would be required, of the elderly people would be a simple statement of income. Those whose income is below the limits set by their State would obtain a policy without charge, which will give them broad medical care benefits. Those whose income is between a State fixed maximum and minimum would have a part of the medical care policy paid for. The Eldercare program would eliminate the need for a burdensome payroll tax increase on workers and employers. It would be financed through existing Federal-State Match ing programs. Eldercare would be administered at the local level and net from Washington, as Medicare would have to be. It has been claimed that the President has a mandate on Medicare, but actually, as everyone remembers, Medicare was not debated at any length during the presidential campaign. Medicare is much misunderstood by the average person. A large part of the public believes that Medicare will provide complete medical care for aged people. If everyone under stands that it provides only limited hospital and nursing home care, and the Eldercare would provide complete care, and at much less cost to the taxpayer, certainly Congress would choose the better plan for complete care rather than the Medicare Bill which leaves the cost of doctors, drugs, surgical fees and other lesser bills to the individual aged person. Any U. S. citizen of voting age who cares will be able easily to make the observation that never in any period of his experience has the trend toward federal power and cen tralized authority been more accelerated than it has in the past few years. Resisting this trend has seldom been a mat ter of concern to recent administrations. Congress, at least in terms of its majorities, has offered little resistance to the proliferating federal wonderland. But it has been the U. S. Supreme Court that has overreached them all in forcing rad ical changes upon the body politic. The bombshell of greatest proportions was that of June 15, 1964, when a 6-3 decision upset 250 years of political develop ment. In this decision, the Court ordered reapportionment of State legislatures according to its own interpretations. Not satisfied just to recommend what it thought was a principle, which it could not do without serious contradictions, the Court has imposed remedy through its own judicial arm, the federal courts. The Court thus not only intruded into areas reserved to the states, it declared it could amend the federal Constitution as well as those of the 50 states. ... Presumably in the various states, as occurred in Arkansas in late January, the federal courts will order compliance with the ruling at a very early date. In retaining jurisdiction over the case, the court expects to force compliance before., an aroused congress or the states themselves can organize any constitutional resistance. However, Congress in the present session should become immediately concerned with taking the matter away from the courts and giving it back to the people, through Constitutional amendment. Senator Dirksen (111.) and Represmt'itive McCulloch (Ohio) believe they are introducing an Amendment early • enough to wear down any filibusters that are likely to be attempted by big-city congressmen. Both houses must pass amendment legislation by two-thirds majority in order to send it to the states, where three-fourths of the states must ratify it before it becomes law. Senate passage, particularly, is likely to require heavy response from constituents, despite the fact that the U. S. Senate would be next to go if the Court’s notion prevails. Another method is available in this battle to take the de cision away from the Court and back to the people. Under the U. S. Constitution, the Congress is obliged to call a Cons titutional Convention if two-thirds of the states aok it. A movement is underway among state legislatures to pass a uniform resolution that would bring this about. Perhaps the time has come for a Constitutional Conversion that would review the whole problem of Supreme Court'performance, with the idea of imposing some well-defined restrictions upon this arm of the judiciary. It is quite likely that some of the states will want appor tionment in their bi-cameral legislatures based on popula tion only and some will not. But it is a political matter en tirely, and it should be left to the people of the various states —not to a few judges—to decide. In Arkansas the state leg islature had taken some steps toward reapportionment. But the district court by its action made both houses of the pres ent legislature invalid as of next June 15 unless each legis lator is made to represent the same number of people. In Colorado in 1962 the state by referendum rejected a proposal to base both houses of its legislature on population only. Two years later they approved a Senate representation that gave some emphasis to diversity on a geographical basis. This was all ri ght, even with the voters of every county including the county in which Denver is located. However, the people in Colorado are not being allowed to decide in what manner their state government is to be set up. The whole basic root of the question is whether the people in our states are to have a choice, whatever that choice may be. Some look upon it as a city-country fight. It is to some extent a showdown between urban populations and rural areas. If so, that still makes it a political dispute and no bu siness of the Supreme court. The founding fathers thought each state might design its legislature to suit its own needs. In this day of central power, the high court would federalize every decision—with nothing left to do except shut up and knuckle under. • •r • «', Just be sure it's VCX...you betl Everyone should study the wording of the two bills now before Congress, choose the one that is best, and then be sure to tell their Congressman and Senators of their choice.