Chancellor orders inquiry
Shultz attacks Velvel
The Kansas Board of Regents has asked Chancellor E. Laurence Chalmers Jr. to give them a report on the speech made last Tuesday by Lawrence Velel, associate professor of law, to a group of 250 people gathered as part of a protest against the
Velvel
Chicago conspiracy trial.
The Chancellor asked Lawrence Blades, dean of the KU Law School, to make an inquiry into Velvel's talk in the wake of a call by Sen. Reynolds Shultz, R-Lawrence,
that Velvel be fired for participating in the protest.
The major parts of Velvel's speech were:
- An attack upon the courtroom process by Judge Julius Hoffman.
- The oppression of radicals in a historical context of judicial oppression of blacks, of labor, of persons caught in the Selective Service process and of business, by not granting awards for good will in eminent domain cases.
- An attack on the use of contempt citations by Judge Hoffman. Velvel contended that the judge evaded a six-month limit on contempt sentences, without a trial, by combining in a consecutive sentence many terms of less than six months.
- The attempt of the government to break down lawyers who defend radicals. Velvel used the contempt
sentences handed out in the Chicago trial, other sentences, threats and warnings to lawyers from bar groups as evidence which might support the contention.
Velvel said he had not broken any law, adding that he had presented his professional opinion and exercised his right of free speech before the group Tuesday.
In response to the attack from Shultz, Velvel said that he had become unpopular with Shultz as a result of his participation as defense counsel in disciplinary hearings last year for persons accused of disrupting the Chancellor's Review of ROTC and his lawsuit against the President attacking the constitutionality of the Vietnam war.
"I personally would welcome an open hearing with Shultz," Velvel said. "They have no case. I have
spoken from my professional and academic responsibility. My view is that they are trying to purge me because they don't agree with my views," Velvel said.
In response to Velvel, Shultz said, "I don't think a faculty member should encourage people to demonstrate. Not in an area where there is a possibility of trouble."
Shultz said he believed the instructor was entitled to voice his opinions in a classroom but not out in public under circumstances where a riot might develop.
In answer to Velvel's proposal of an open hearing, Shultz said, "I don't think I owe him anything. He owes a lot to the state of Kansas. If I debated everybody that disagreed with me, I wouldn't have time to do anything else."
80th Year, No. 84 The University of Kansas—Lawrence, Kansas Monday, Feb. 23, 1970
Regents approve new hall
Plans for the construction of Wescoe Hall were approved Friday by the Kansas Board of Regents in Topeka. The proposed construction of the $8 million humanities building was outlined earlier in the day by KU Chancellor E. Laurence Chalmers.
Other KU building projects were also discussed by Chalmers. They included the Kansas Geological Survey Building, Nune-maker College and several other renovation projects.
Chalmers outlined the funding arrangement decided in a vote of the KU Student Senate Wednesday night. In that decision, the Senators voted to tax students $7.50 a semester and $4 per summer session to finance the construction of the humanities building. The student fee increase would pay for $2.5 million of the
total amount needed to finance the structure.
Chalmers also informed the board of three stipulations which the student senate attached to the fee agreement. Those stipulations include;
- A request for student representation in the selection of architects for future KU buildings.
- One-third student representation on all future KU building constructions.
- Elimination of student fees as a source of financing the construction of academic buildings at KU in the future.
Regarding the stipulations, A. H. Cromb, regent from Mission Hills, said the present board could not bind future boards or the legislature to any elements of the stipulations.
Chalmers later said the first request for student voice in the choice of architects is not in the
Regents' jurisdiction. The State Architect has a list of qualified architects for a project and chooses from them. Any student voice in the selection would have to be approved by the Governor, he said.
Chalmers said the second and third requests can be met within the University. He said he was in support of student participation in building committees, and would try to see that this happens in the future.
The next and final step of the funding proposal is sending it to the legislature. If the proposal is approved there, final designs will be worked out an drawings will be created for the construction of the building.
Chalmers said the official name of the new building will be Wescoe Hall, which maintains a tradition of naming buildings after former chancellors.
UDK News Roundup
By United Press International
Humphrey urges refusal
WASHINGTON—Former Vice-President Hubert H. Humphrey says Judge G. Harrold Carswell should never have been nominated to the Supreme Court and urges the Senate refuse to confirm him.
"This is nothing personal," Humphrey said Sunday, "I just think that the court requires not only those who have an absence of conflict of financial matters, but also those who have an absence of conflict of interest on ideological, philosophical, or should I say racial matters."
Resumption of flights urged
JERUSALEM—Prime Minister Golda Meir asked the ambassadors of 16 nations today to help stop attacks against Israel-bound jetliners and to urge seven airlines to resume cargo flights to Tel Aviv.
The mysterious 47-death crash of one Israel-bound plane Saturday and the non-fatal bombing of another carrying mail for Tel Aviv prompted seven of the 12 airlines serving the Jewish state to suspend, temporarily or indefinitely, shipments of freight or mail to Israel.
(Continued to page 12)
Awbrey severs ISP ties
At a crucial Independent Student Party (ISP) platform meeting Sunday night in Wesley Foundation, Dave Awbrey, Hutchinson senior and student body president withdrew his support from the party.
The schism stemmed from Awbrey's dislike of the party's preliminary platform. "What is our identity?" he asked, "anybody could run on this platform."
Heated debate followed as Awbrey advocated a controversial, radical platform while Peter George, Tuck-ahoe, N.Y., law student and ISP student body presidential candidate contended the new platform to be "pragmatic and meeting the needs of KU."
In beginning the meeting, Buzz Fisher, Dodge City, junior and ISP campaign manager, asked for any reaction to the platform when Awbrey broke in, "I don't like it. It's
political rhetoric. Anyone could run on this platform. Why even run candidates if there are not any distinct issues?"
The original ISP strategy George stated, relied on releasing several briefly outlined points relating to relevant campus topics. This would be followed he said by "position papers," concisely explaining those and additional points. The explanation however did not suit Awbrey.
Awbrey said, "This platform isn't controversial like last years'. People will pick this up and throw it down saying blah! Our platform should be a statement of definite, idealogical emotional terms."
Fisher then countered saying ISP had to deal with the problems at KU.
"All right. All right!" Awbrey said, in reference to the platform, "What about education? You only
George said, "You don't want to put all your cards on the table the first day. You fill in the gaps later. You make the foundation first and then complete the structure. You have to show the people you have been thinking and developing your ideas all along."
"It's crap!" Awbrey said. "Look, I'll write a platform."
devote six lines in here to education. Academics is the most important issue we have!"
"Twenty people put this together," Fisher yelled, "and you're not going to tear it apart."
It was finally agreed that the platform needed revision but Fisher warned, "We're working against time.
Awbrey at this point felt he had not gotten his point across. "Look," he pleaded, "Politics isn't rational—it's emotional—no one in this election
is taking a stand on anything controversial. All I'm asking it let's take a stand! Let's tell them (the students) we're going to hit them where it hurts. Then they will get excited and concerned."
George agreed with Abbrey's reasoning but not his methodology. He said, "We need to start out at a certain level and then build up to something vibrant, something dynamic."
They'll be asleep by then, Peter," Awbrey said.
After the meeting, the question was asked of Awbrey if he would continue to support ISP.
"No I won't," he said, "I can't, I can't when one party will win over the other merely because of personalities. We have to come face to face with the issues. These parties are only for the purpose of electing a group of individuals, and are not concerned about issues."