Page lvThe GrinllellScarlet and Black, Friday, Sept. Ill, 1974

Ford errs in
amnesty grant

to Nixon

Hundreds of draft dodgers, crouched on the borders of the US,
watched in amazement as President Gerald Ford granted Richard M.
Nixon unconditional amnesty for crimes far more serious and
detrimental than evasion of military service. Early hopes that Ford
would officially recognize the plight of conscientious objectors and
soon grant the long-awaited amnesty were scuttled when the president
postponed his announcement. Instead, Ford chose to pardon a
technically-innocent Nixon and consider granting blanket amnesty to
all of the corconspiritors involved in the Watergate scandal,

Ford’s actions have reduced the concept or justice to a process of
arbitrary decision. The citizen who committed the moral crime of
drait dodging must suffer years oi estrangement aiter iollowing his
conscience. Ford's conscience told him that Nixon ”had suffered
enough“ and deserved postrWatergate peace, despite definite imr
plications that the eX-president committed high crimes while in office.
However, the
two amnesty
situations
hardly rate a
comparison in
t e r m s o f
deciding which
s i t u a t i o n
covers up and '
which one
resolves an '
old, admitted
mistake. if the
granting of
amnesty rests
on who has
suffered more,
then surely
those Am -
ericans forced
to live abroad
due to draft _
evasion have L
earned the
right to return
home Without
retribution.

An editor’s note

to the readers

The Scarlet and Black actively

encourages comment, criticism
and communication from the
campus community, ior it is only
through open expression that We
can receive the feedback
necessary to continue to be a
responsive and aware medium. In
order to alleviate any coniusion
over the status of contributed
articles, we oiier the ioliowing
guidelines ior publication.

Letters to the editor must con-
form to certain rules, Due 5 pm.
Wednesday ior Friday publication,
they must be typewritcn, double
spaced and signed An author‘s
name will certainly be withheld
upon request. Due to the possibility
oi legal repercussions, letters
which are libelous, slanderous and
or obscene will be returned to the
writer. Although a letter may be
written on any subject, generally
lhey should be a specific reaction,

either to a campus event or a
Scarlet and Black article.

An article which does not fit the
above description might be more
appropriate under another
category, A news analysis is an
evaluation of a national, state or
local issue relevant to the Grinnell
community. It is a valid forum for
opinion, however, it should be
presented locally and supported by
facts or expertise.

“Personal Perspective" is the
term used to designate an article
written about an interesting in-
dividual experience or activity, A
story of this nature should have
some value, whether it be
educational or humorous.

The final option, open to all
responsible members of the
campus community, is
“Viewpoint." It is an open space
tor the iree expression at opinions
on any issue, be they political,
social or philosophical.

The Grinnell Scarlet and Black

Till- Emmi-ll SLAIlL‘l and Blatk is
publislwti wot-Riv except during
rl'cchw periods by me Grinneli
College Commmee on srudenr
Publications and Radio Editorial
nvlnlons expresscd herein do not
necessarily represent the views or
me scuucnts. vacuity. sialr. or ad-
minisrrsiion of Grlnncfl college
Views expressed in signed columns
are those or inc auinor, and not
necessarily inosc of ”ii: sidii or
managemcnr or the Grlnncll Scarlet
and Black,

All rights resent-u Reproduciion
or any mutcrlal uuhour advance
ii-riircn pcl’rnistiion is prohibited,

Subvcr’lpilou roles: ssso L‘r year
Wlthill Powcsmek County, 50 pcr
car elsewherc in the United Slates,
orcicn ratrh upon rcoiicsi.

oriice. Forum in, Grinncll Col-
lege. Grinnell, la 50l12.'fl;le honos.
m5: 23mm or (515i io-slsi
extension 349. cities hours: l to 5
v in. daily, in a in. lo noon saturday.

POSTMASTER' Change or addrcss
(form 3579) should be senr lo Clrr
culaiion Dcoarimcnr. the Grlnncil
Scarlet and black. Grinneli College.
Grinnell. la, 50112.

Second class posiacu paid, Grin-
nell. la, some,

EDiTOR Kylc Schaub
Mahxrilwo EDITOR Celia Goldwaii
anrgnlcs EorToR Douglas Halsey
Afn'lsRTfSlNG MANAGER
John Lom
buslslsss MANAGER Ruth Risiloii
sroxrs EDITOR nave Calvcii
sroRTs REPORTER: Rien Arnold,
T Elalnc cdrcy. John Lom,
Jcan Milligan. Max obcrmiilcr,
Dave Schzchtcr
CIRCULATION MANAGER

Chris Sodom.
(ZARTOQNISTS

Carln ocpree
coLuMNloTs

Grog To 11
John Wylie,
Davc Schccicr, Ellcn Wright

POLleCAL REPORTER Mair Cohen
son REPORTER Laiiro Miilcr
FACULTY REPORTER Bob Handltr
LAYOUT EDITORS sicvc Krisiel
Lucy Rudolph
., Terr Wolr,
nous cnulu.
Elaine cart-y.
Toni Arenbcr
Helle Luk.

cospcr.
Max e Lowy,
Mark Mbycr.
Anne Domino”.
Frank srolcr
PHOTOGRAPHERS. c w Hobbs.
David Nordsirdni. Rob Tow
PROFESSIONAL

ADVISOR William Deminoii

cartoon by Greg Tobin

Pet policy
goes to
S P 8 R

in a move questioned by some
members oi SGA, the Social
policies and Regulations Com-
mittee (srsm voted to reduce the
largest fine accumulated by a dog
owner last year, and consequently
enable the student to register ior
courses this semester,

Joe Feldman’s fine was lowered
from $135 to $40, the difference
being $5 a day imposed for reiusai
to re—register his dog second
semester last year, The committee
stipulated that he pay all fines
which resulted irom speciiic
complaints against his pet.

Though Feldman contested both
the Pet Board's impartiality and
his own ability to pay the original
fine, as head oi the Pet Owners
Association last year, he was a
major contributor to the problems
created under the policy allowing
dogs on campus

Leniency prevailed in the SPMK
vote due to the size and nature or
the fine. Because Feldman was the
only student to be charged with a
cumulative iine, it is not likely that
rebates will be issued to other
students who have already paid

However, some members of SGA
feel that the SPiSrR action has
compromised Joint Boards eiiorts
to promote a stringent policy
toward dog owners. A rash of
complaints concerning pets last
spring made this policy necessary,

SGA has been a center or con»
lroversy due to its stand on the per
issue. Student opposition finally
culminated in an all»campus
referendum held last week.

The results of the referendum
were as follows:
Nodogs 155)
Dogsonlcash 149
Dogsrunningfree 331

The tally now will be handed
over to SPﬂtR for action. This
committee will make the final
decision on an issue which has
occupied the great majority of SGA
meetings since new represen-
tatives were elected last spring. it
is time for SGA to move on to more

pressing issues:

elites

“ ’Let the iury consider lheir vcrditl.l the King
said, tor about the twentieth lime that day.

" 'No, rlol‘ said the queen. ’Sentenco llrsl—
verdiet allerwardsl

ll l5lull and nonsense!’ said Alice loudly. ‘The
idea or having me senlence tirslll

" ‘0” with her head!‘ the Queen shouted at the
lop or her voice,

" ’Who cares ior you?’ said Alice (she had
grown lo her lull sile by lnis lime). lvoii‘re
nothing bul a pack or cardst’ ,.

l

B Lewis Carroll
Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland

 

Ford has a
worse idea

by Joseph F. Wall

it was Sunday morning, September a, 19747Evel Knieval Day. On
this day, the much ballyhooed motorcyclist was to try to rocket
himseii over the Snake River Canyon in the greatest act oi public
hokum since Pj'f‘. Barnum had posted his sign, “This way to the
egress" to lure the crowds, eager to see the egress, out of his tent so
that more people could pay admission to get in. But on that morning,
the headlines were to be stolen from Knieval by an even more specV
tacular piece of public folly. President Ford granted “a full, free and
absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United
States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have com-
mitted or taken part in during the period from Jan. 20, 1969 through
Aug. 9, 1974." This President Ford did after having said in his con-
firmation hearings that “I don’t think the public would stand for” a
succeeding President’s granting a pardon in order to quash judicial
proceedings against his immediate predecessor. This President Ford
did only two weeks after stating in a press conference that until the
legal process relating to Nixon was underway, it would be “unwise and
untimely for me" to consider a pardon, in so doing, Mr. Ford caught
the nation and most of his own staii by surprise.

Watergate was once again very much with us, We had wandered
back with malice into a crazy wonderland \vhere pardons come before
sentencing, even beiore indictments.

Although there has been some talk of trying to test the cons
stitutionality of Nixon’s pardon, I doubt that this would have much
chance of success in the courts. The act has been done and it is
irrevocable. Even if the President should have second thoughts about
his rash action, he could not Withdraw this full and unconditional
pardon withour raising the irrefutable objection of double jeopardy.
Mr. Nixon is home free, as far as the Federal Courts are concerned. In
this big national game oi Monopoly, he picked the right square to land
on. He did not go directly to jail, and he collected considerably more
than $200 as he passed GO.

President Ford in his official statement correctly observed that
“there are no historic or legal precedents to which I can turn in this
matter.” Happily. Mr, Nixon’s case is unprecedented in the history oi
the American Presidency, But what Ford has apparently failed to
appreciate is that lie has by his act created precedent with which it
will be difficult to live.

If one cannotquestion his constitutional right to pardon, one can and
must question the wisdom of Ford’s action, Assuming office under the
most difficultof circumstances, the first nonrelected Vice President in
our history to become President, Ford’s most immediate task, more
pressing even than inﬂation, recession or the Middle East crisis, was
to endeavor to restore confidence in the office which his predecessor
had leit in shambles, By this one precipitous act, Ford has undone all
that he had achieved in the previous month, Ugly stories are again
rampant about a President of the United Stan-3540f deals made at the
time of his nomination between him and Nixon, of justice deliberately
thwarted to protect the guilty and oi coverrups clumsily designed. The
public, so eager ior a long honeymoon, iound itseli locked out oi the
Oval Room once again, and was righteously outraged.

The reasons given by the President for his action are as foolish as
the act ltself: to dispel the nightmare of Watergate once and for all
(instead, the stain has now spread to his administration); to protect
the honor of the office of the President (instead, it has been further
compromised by this acti; alid to save a iormer President from
further agony after having suffered greatly (by his act, Ford has in
eiiect declared Nixon guilty, without beneiit of hearing or trial).
Above all, President Ford has torn the blindfold from Justice, and we
can all pl 'nly see that she is winking.

In his in ial relief at not facing indictment along with most of his
administration, Nixon may not realize what he has lost by this pardon
He has lost any claim to the Fifth Amendment’s protection against
seli-incrimination in any Federal trials involving Watergate by this
blanket immunity. Moreover, he is still subject to state legal action
and civil suits where the Presidential pardon cannot apply and which
an angry public may new demand. Ford has ill effect put the brand of
guilt more visibly on Nixon's back. All this was done to help a man for
whose health Ford was concerned. The ailing Mr. Nixon issued a
statement through his aide saying that he was exhilarated and filled
with thanksgiving, and then went out to play goli with Walter An»
nenberg,

It was a bad Sunday. Eyel didn’t make it over the Snake, and neither
did Ford,

 

