The Pantagraph from Bloomington, Illinois • Page 4

Three Cheers! Opinion a Likes Cambodia For Aid Action "1 it (311) gailr IJaufajgr'api) Founded January 14, 1837 by Jets W. fell Publiriei CWinwousty Since LORING MERVVIN, President and Publisher DAVIS U. MERWIN, Associate Publisher H. CLAY TATE, Editor CHARLES J. DRIVER, Managing Editor Bloomington, Elinoi, Friday, November 22, 13 Our Hearts Are Stilled President Kennedy Is dead, victim of an assassin's bullet.

Prayers of the nation went unanswered as the life of the young President ebbed away in a Dallas, hospital. The death is a national tragedy, an event which twists and jams the heart and soul of every American. That death should come to President Kennedy Is one of the mysteries equal to the mystery of life itself. In him, the United States was reflected to the world. In him, as In Presidents before him, was entrusted our lives, our honor and our national purpose.

President Kennedy was a vigorous and personable man; a man whom people could take to their hearts. The shock of his death is mixed with unreasoning anger toward the twisted mind which brought it about. May a just God give him peace and arm his successor with strength and courage. countries that refuse American military or economic aid the better. For on the one hand, a government that does not wish to support the United States and the really free world, at least in political matters, has no claim on our aid and demeans itself by accepting it.

AND ON THE other hand, the American people are under no obligation to help any people that opposes our aims. Charity is one thing and individual matter. Handing out the public funds can be justified only as a matter of national policy. President Kennedy, to his honor be it said, recopizes this. In a recent plea for bigger foreign aid funds, he became downright emotional.

Foreign aid as he sees it, is not only part of our foreign policy, it is the heart of our foreign policy. For by it we are gradually raising living standards and thus weaning the undeveloped nations away from Communist would-be seducers. I CAN FIND no evidence that aid given to any non-aliped country has contributed to our winning the cold war or to the "transformation" of the Communist regimes. Slowly but surely, Congress is coming around to the same view. The examples of Burma, Cambodia, and the Somali Republic should hasten the end of Uncle Sam as Sugar Daddy and his re-emergence as the champion of freedom, cherished by its allies, feared by its enemies, respected by all.

By EDGAR ANSEL MOWRER Three cheers for Premier Norodom Sihanouk of Cambodia! For the prince has just declared that he wants no more 'American aid. Here is a trend that might accomplish what the Congress of the United States has so far been unwilling or unable to do: Reduce American aid to those countries that do not wish to cooperate militarily and politically with the United States. Prince Sihanouk wants no such cooperation. He believes that the triumph of communism in Southeast Asia is certain and sees no reason to hasten it by "provoking" Red China. I THINK THAT the Cambodia premier is unduly pessimistic.

But in refusing our aid he is manifesting a national dignity increasingly rare in what has become a world of mendicancy. For accepting aid and giving nothing in return it's beggary, no matter what both sides choose to call it. Moreover, Cambodia is not the first country whose government has refused American aid. Little Burma, helpless against a possible invasion by Red China, some years ago substituted borrowing from international institutions for American aid. The Somali Republic, impatient of an American injunction against invading Kenya or Ethiopia, has just refused American arms.

I say, hallelujah! The more By the Pantograph Marxists on Defensive As U.S. Pressure Rises JUST IN TlfAE FOR CHRISTMAS No Direct Line Jest, Fellows 'On-Off Path Toward Freedom New Pattern in East Europe GOP Needs Good Charge of Humor don't change anything. They simply remind us that the cold war is still very much with us. The differences that separate the Soviets, the Red Chinese and the free world have not been resolved. Power is still the most potent diplomatic weapon.

The picture is not entirely bleak. Many experts believe that the Russians are falling farther behind year by year in their efforts to overtake and bury us. The Red Chinese are acting the bully largely out of weakness and ignorance of the awful effects of a nuclear war. Mao thinks, as Stalin thought, that the capitalists will be destroyed in war but the Communists will inherit the earth. Khrushchev as the head of a nuclear-powered nation, knows better.

In this respect communism Is failing. It doesn't fit the nuclear age. Even the satellite countries and the newer developing countries are realizing this. But the Communists don't admit failure. From weakness they may become even more dangerous.

With less to lose they can take more risks. Mr. Kennedy and Mr. McNamara seek to point up these risks. While the danger of nuclear war may be receding, continued strife and turmoil is the lot of man in this era.

Nuclear power still spells the difference between war and peace. Weak courage or feeble purpose could spell disaster. If there is a lessening of the fear of nuclear war it is precisely because this country has both the nuclear power and the will to use it in defense of freedom. Belligerence of the Communists In the Berlin sector, the new Red Chinese blast at Khrushchev and strong warning statements of President Kennedy and Secretary of Defense Mc-Namara add up to a renewal of brinkmanship in world affairs. The fight between Mao Tse-Tung and Khrushchev apparently isn't going to end until either Mao or Khrushchev is destroyed.

This forces Khrushchev to appear belligerent In his relations with the United States. Harrassment of American troops to and from West Berlin is an example. So was the arrest of Yale Pro-fessor Frederick C. Barghoorn in Moscow. Khrushchev has repeatedly warned that any armed attack of the U.S.

against Cuba would bring Soviet retaliation. The Kennedy Administration has no choice but to demonstrate equal firmness. Russia yielded in the latest Berlin skirmish. Mr. Kennedy warned that there could be no negotiations toward continuance 'of the U.S.-Soviet cultural exchange as long as Barghoorn was being held.

Russia yielded again and the professor was released. Mr. Kennedy then proclaimed U.S. readiness to the defense of any country requesting our help in fighting Communist take-over. This was designed to slow up Red attacks in Latin America.

Mr. McNamara flexed our nuclear muscles In Europe, warning of the millions of tons of such force on the ready in Europe. These threats and power demonstrations haunted by the continual threat of division and disunion, by the threat of a breakdown of morale and discipline, if there is too much liberty too soon in a country which has known only authoritarian rule throughout its history. It takes a very strong constitution and long habit to use unlimited liberty. THERE IS NO USE, therefore, to expect Khrushchev to move forward (as we understand the word) in a straight line.

He is bound to zig and to zag, to back and to fill, in the effort to conserve his authority while he inches on in the direction he knows he must go. The European Communist countries, including Russia, are no longer absolute dictatorships which can impose the kind of sacrifice that Stalin imposed. Men like Khrushchev, Kadar and Gomulka are not despots; they are enormously powerful political bosses. They too have their Gallup polls, though they do not publish them. They know that they have to allow enough freedom and provide enough private consumable wealth to give to their masses and a sense of improvement and enough relief from poverty and regimentation to keep discontent from boiling over.

Yet they have also to avoid providing so much freedom that parties can be formed and factions can come into the open and the central authority can be destroyed. (To Bt Continued.) without destroying the authority which is needed to govern them. Or in reverse, the problem is how they can have governments with authority to govern them well and still enjoy and expand their personal freedom. Poland had, I believe, achieved more freedom of speech and of ideas than was compatible with the kind of governing authority which a Communist planned economy requires. When you open up the windows of a closed society, the drafts bring in not only fresh air, but also infections of various kinds.

THE PROBLEM IS not confined to the Communist world. It is, I venture to think, a central problem in the movement of renewal and reform and modernization which was initiated by Pope John XXIII. It is likewise, I imagine, the underlying problem in our own public controversy about "conservatism" and "liberalism." In the Communist states which are totalitarian in their original essence, the problem is now acute. On the one hand, human flesh will no longer endure absolute authority and the sacrifices it demands; on the other hand, with unlimited freedom, the fabric of authority which is needed to govern may become unraveled and be pulled apart. I have no doubt that, for example, Mr.

Khrushchev's personal inclination is toward liberalization and the opening of doors and of peace. But lie is Erhard Tries His Magic mastery of that sense of incongruity which lies at the heart of everything comic. Not without reason, the electorate tends to trust a humorous man's heart, whatever they may think of his head. For the humorous leader as distinguished from the witty leader hardly can be an ideologue, a fanatic he would laugh at fanatical intensity and narrowness in himself. And quick humoras distinguished, again, from acerbic wit or biting sarcasmis generally the mark of a good-natured and generous being.

How Time Flies By Withers Library Stiff 25 Years Ago Nov. 22, 1938 In a peaceful routine meeting, six members of the town board Monday night elected Harry W. Talley supervisor of the city of Bloomington township. He will fill the term of Walter Nierstheimer who resigned to take office as McLean County sheriff. 50 Years Ago Nov.

22, 1913 The many friends of Miss Andrus will be pleased to learn that she will sing at the Elks Minstrels on Monday and Tuesday evenings. She is the daughter of Mrs. Anna Andrus formerly of this city and Is a soprano singer of much ability. She has been singing this season in Chicago in the opera "Hansel and Gret-el." 75 Years Ago Nov. 22, 1888 Work on the new electric light building goes merrily on and yesterday Superintendent Hill dropped Into the city to see how it was progressing.

The smoke stack is to be 120 feet high and Is already up 50 feet. 100 Years Ago Nov. 22, 1863 The fine residence of Elisha Wakefield on Washington street was nearly destroyed by fire last evening. The engines were very promptly on the spot but scarcity of water made them almost By RUSSELL KIRK As fivescore journalists already have observed, a principal reason for the soaring popularity of Sen. Barry Goldwater is his ready and genuine humor.

As even those who came to dispraise him conclude by writing, "Who can dislike or distrust a man as humorous as that?" Recently the senator Arizona, asked if he planned to move into the White House, replied promptly: "Jacqueline is getting it ready for me she's redecorating it in eighteenth-century style." Such a rejoinder, though impromptu, does two things to the man who receives it: first, he becomes aware that the senator is not pompous, and does not view his chances with desperate intensity; second, the senator is not worried by the sober-sided and sometimes fanatical critics who, with remarkable inaccuracy, argue that the jet-pilot gentleman from Arizona lives in the eighteenth century. CERTAINLY THE Republicans need a considerable infusion of humor, a major asset in democratic politics or, for that matter, in aristocratic politics. They have known little of it since the days of Theodore Roosevelt. Though President Hoover, Senator Taft, and Vice-President Nixon may have preserved a sense of humor in private life, they studiously repressed any levity in public. President Franklin Roosevelt, on the other hand, though sometimes merely facetious, did impress the public with his wit.

President Truman, possessed of a comic sense, won innumerable votes by his jokes and asides. Mr. Adlai Stevenson has said some funny things; and President Kennedy tries, though with obvious efforL TO BE CONVINCINGLY humorous in politics, the leader needs several qualities: he must have plenty of assurance; he must know that much of life, even with its great decisions, is an immense jest; he must take himself with a grain of salt, proud though he may be; and he must have an instinctive The rotund German chancellor comes fresh from his talks in France to confer with President Kennedy in Washington. He has said that "Europe is unthinkable without good relations between France and Germany." He also has declared time and again that West Germany is dependent upon the United States for security against the Communists. All Germany quakes every time this country transfers a few soldiers for fear we will leave the country exposed.

Thus Erhard has set out In one weekend to mend fences in France and in the United States, knowing that any concession he makes to France will antagonize the other Common Market members and the United States. He knows also that any concession he makes to the U.S. will further offend De Gaulle, who already has strained relations with Washington. Erhard may prove to be naive as Adenauer charges, but he shows no lack of courage. Chancellor Ludwig Erhard of West Germany, whom Konrad Adenauer considers naive in diplomacy, has arrived in France where he said he hoped "to achieve an area of agreement as broad as possible" with President de Gaulle.

Erhard seeks both to motivate "a new impulse toward unification of Europe" and to break the farm deadlock between the two countries in their relationships with the Common Market. This is no assignment for an amateur. De Gaulle seeks to establish French hegemony in Europe and to make France the breadbasket of the entire area. This conflicts both with West Germany's political and agricultural purposes. De Gaulle, who rocked the Common Market by vetoing Britain's entry, will not hesitate to wreck the organization entirely if it suits his purpose of empire.

Erhard has given himself the toughest possible task in his first major diplomatic effort. U.S. Choice By WALTER LIPPMANN Yesterday, speaking of communism in Eastern Europe, I said that as the tensions have become relaxed because the fear of nuclear war is subsiding, the discipline which holds together the eastern alliance has also become relaxed. It is necessary, however, to be cautious about drawing conclusions from this fact. The easiest mistake to make is to suppose that a tendency in one direction, say toward more individual freedom, will develop in a straight line until countries like Poland and Hungary, for example, have as much and the same kind of freedom which exists in this country.

In actual fact, the line of development is not straight, but zigzag, and while, on the whole, the direction is away from the absolute totalitarian police state, this main trend has many forward and backward movements, rather like the booms and recessions of the business cycle. I BECAME VERY much aware of this when I arrived in Poland after I had been in Hungary. Qdite obviously, these-two neighboring Communist countries are in strikingly different phases of their development. Hungary is buoyant with the exhilaration that comes from the opening up of a closed society. The apparatus of the police state and the apparatus of the Communist party are still there, and it is not thought to be safe to speak too frankly, except when walking in the open air.

But the frontiers have been opened to tourists going both ways, and there has been, except in the case of Cardinal Mindszenty, a political amnesty. A fair amount of fresh air from the outside world is making the Hungarians feel better. Coming into Warsaw after Rudapest, one realizes quickly that, after the opening up, there is likely to be a pause. Since World War II, I have been twice before to Warsaw, most recently in 1958. Poland was then in the aftermath of a successful defense of Polish autonomy against imperial and centralizing demands from Moscow.

At that time the atmosphere in Warsaw was buoyant as it is today in Budapest. It is now no longer so buoyant, and there is something that might be described as a fog of depression. POLAND IS NOT going back to Stalinism. But, as one Communist dignitary admitted when I asked him about what had gone wrong, there is a pause. The windows are not being opened wider.

Indeed, they are being closed somewhat. For, said the Communist dignitary, the Poles "made such a big jump ahead in the late 1950s that now we must wait until the others catch up." The man who said that Is a leading theoretician of the Communist party. I do not think that what he said is the true explanation of the contrast to day between Hungary and Poland. I think, rather, that we are confronted here with a problem which is universal problem of authority and libertythe problem of how much freedom a people can enjoy France, Britain Goal of Tourists By the Public Urges No Apportion Deal By GEORGE GALLUP PRINCETON, N.J.-If Americans were faced with the happy prospect of a free, expenses-paid trip to any country in the world, they would choose France or Great Britain as the country they would most like to visit. But, proving almost as attractive to persons in the U.S.

for a trip abroad, are two other countriesItaly and Germany. Since the current findings are based on a survey of the general public the greai majority of whom are not International travelersthe results do not necessarily coincide with known travel statistics. However, to determine which countries would have the greatest appeal to persons in all walks of life were they able to take such trips the following question was asked in a Gallup survey: "If all your expenses wart paid, which country, outside the U.S., would you like most to visit?" Here, in order, are the 10 most, frequently mentioned countries: FAVORITE COUNTRIES TO VISIT? 1. France 2. Great Britain 3.

Italy 4. Germany 5. Switzerland 6. Canada 7. Japan 8.

Israel, Holy Land 9. Scandinavia 10. South Africa Also popular are: Mexico, Australia, Russia, the Netherlands, India and Bermuda. Eight years ago in a 1955 Gallup Poll the public's top 10 choices closely paralleled today's. Then, as now, France and Great Britain were number one and two, respectively.

The 1955 rankings: FAVORITE COUNTRIES TO VISIT? (195S Survey) 1. France 2. Great Britain 3. Hawaii 4. Canada 5.

Italy 6. Germany 7. South Africa 8. Switzerland 9. Mexico 10.

Ireland (NOTE: Hawaii had not become the forty-ninth state at the time this survey was conducted.) A comparison of the current top five choices of men and women shows France having an almost equal appeal to persons of both sexes. Germany, however, ranks higher on the men's list than with women. Italy is in second place with women, but is fourth with men. Editor, Tli Pantaaraph: As chairman of the successful non-partisan civic campaign for the Blue Ballot Reapportionment Amendment in WA, I have expressed my conviction that the election of the Illinois House of Representatives on an nt-large basis would be disastrous. Such a chaotic election would be required if the Legislative Redisricting Commission remains deadlocked.

A much as I abhor the idea of an election-et large, I am more gravely concerned by the elforts of Democratic members of the Commission and others to condition the public to believe that the number of House seats to be apportioned to Chicago is a "negotiable" In the long vie the acceptance of this dangerously unsound contention could be even more damaging to the state than an election at-large in 1KG4. THAT THE PROPER NUMBER of House for Chicago is 21 is readily demonstrable. Article IV, Section 7, as amended by the Reapportionment Amendment, provides for apportionment of House seats in three geographical areas, (a) Chicago, (b) Cook County outside of the City of Chicago, and (c) the remainder of the state. It was abundantly clear to the voting public when the Amendment was submitted, as the Constitution itself is clear, that the percentage which Chicago's population would bear in 19fi0 to that of the state as a whole would determine to the nearest even li'ure the number of House seats to be apportioned to Chicago. Under the lOfiO census figures, Illinois' popu-luion was 10.081.158 and Chicago's 3.530.404.

Thus Chicago became entitled by constitution al mandate to 20.77BG2 districts. Obviously, the nearest full number is 21, not 22 nor 23 as demanded by the Democratic members of the Commission. A compromise giving Chicago 22 or 23 districts and denying the suburbs constitutional representation would throw a cloud on the validity of the 14 elections of House members from Chicago. It would also cloud all legislation adopted by the General Assembly under such a misnpportionmcnt. Moreover, attempting such a "de facto'' amendment of the Illinois constitution in direct violation of Article XIV, Section 2.

the amending procedure, could turn the clock back a decade in dealing with many of our major problems of Illinois government. STUDENTS OF GOVERNMENT have long recognized that the solution of these problems has been delayed by uncertainty concerning legislative representation. It was thought that uncertainty had ended in 1954 with the adoption of the Reapportionment Amendment. If a "negotiated settlement'' as recommended by the Democrats on the Commission were to be voted, great uncertainty would prevail for years to come concerning the standards of legislative representation. Let there be no compromise on the Initial apportionment of the 21 seats to the City of Chicago since (he commission has no authority to compromise the constitutional rights of the people of Illinois.

Let the commission faithfully uphold constitutional principle, and get on with the job before time runs out. SAMUEL W. WITWER Chicago, Vf. OFF THE RECORD "I just heard that Santa Claus Is really my father so who the heck are you?".