Brown and White Vol. 82 no. 17

              brown and white vol 82 no 17 bethlehem pa tuesday november 17 1970 866-0331 kent state controversy rages on by don suss tl-'ditor's note this is the first of two articles concerning the reports of the special ohio state grand ury and the [•'. h i on the shootings at kenl state and the conflicting conclusions thev reached the controversy surrounding the disturbances and shootings at kent state university has been raging since last may 4 when four students were killed and nine wounded by a barrage of shots fired by ohio national guardsmen it appears however that the mvstery about just what did happen at kent state may never be resolved within the last month two official reports have been issued arriving at some almost totally dissimilar conclusions on oct 16 a special ohio state grand jury exonerated the national guard of any wrongdoing in the shootings and indicted 25 people in connection with the disturbances none of whom were guardsmen among those indicted by the grand jury included student leaders and faculty members charges ranged from inciting to riot and rioting to assault and interferring with a fireman's duty the reason given by the grand jury in their report for not indicting any members of the national guard was that they found that those members of the national guard who were present . . . fired their weapons ln the honest and sincere belief and under circumstances which would have logically caused them to believe that they would have suffered serious bodily injury had they not done so they are not therefore subject to criminal prosecution under the laws of this state for any death or injury resulting therefrom although the jury did state that it should be made clear that we do not condone all ofthe activities ofthe national guard on the kent state unlversltv campus no explicit criticism of the guard's actions was enumerated see related editorial page 2 two weeks after the special ohio state grand jury report the justice department issued a summary of an inquiry by the federal bureau of investigation which differed sharply from the conclusions reached by the ohio grand jury on oct 30 the f.8.1 report was released and it contradicted the main premise of the ohio grand jury that the guardsmen had fired in the honest belief that they were in physical danger the f.8.1 report stated that most of the guardsmen who did fire do not specifically claim that they fired because their lives were in danger rather they gener ally simply state that they fired alter they beard others fire or because after the shooting began they assumed an order to fire ln the air had been given as a result of their investigation the f.8.1 concluded ln pert that we have some reason to believe thet the claim by the guard that their lives were endangered by the students was fabricated subsequent to the event the apparent volunteering by some guardsmen of the fact that their lives were not ln danger gives rise to some suspicions the f.8.1 report concurs with the report issued on sept 26 by the president's commission on campus unrest scranton report that found the actions of the guard ln shooting the students unjustified and inex cusable taking into account the joint findings of the scranton and f.8.1 reports raises the question as to the validity of the ohio grand jury conclusions and just how the grand jury could arrive at such a dissimilar finding the justice department stated that the f.8.1 inquiry was a general background summary written for use ln the department and for local state and congressional authorities the grand jury admitted that it had access frosh seminars again prove very popular by rick whiffen freshman seminars are progressing quite well is the consensus from the professors and students involved in this semester's five seminars for the class of 1974 this is the program's second year of existence prof thomas haynes of the philosophy department head of the freshman seminar program said that he has heard that all five seminars are going well this semester he then commented on the six seminars for the next semester and on the overall program which is going into its fourth semester he stated that all the professors teach ing freshman seminars are senior members of the faculty and these men all participate in the program as an overload on top of their regular duties all of the professors ln the program are very enthusiastic an example of this enthusiasm is prof environment group fights new highway the basic elements an environmental group needs to stop interstate 78 in the saucon valley or any other highway construction are persistence and good sound legal advice this and a number of possibilities for litigation within the federal highway systems statutes to stop road construction or relocate it were basic points of a lecture presented to the lehigh valley environmental federation and the public thursday night speaking on federal highway policy atty oscar s gray of washington d.c said that there has been a revolution ln highway building in the united states since 1 966 the major aspect of this revolution has been a federalization of concern for road building in the interstate system an area which had been almost totally administered by state highway depart ments and a change ln general attitude toward the environment the results of these changes are several important baw photo by camana the big move into the new maginnes hail of liberal arts has already begun here prof joseph maurer chairman ofthe classics department settle into his new offices headquarters for the college of arts and sciences has been moved to the new structure from the linderman library utilities are expensive by george j bancroft editor's note this is the lost in a series of articles concerning the university's purchosz of land in the saucon valley for graduate housing and the ramification of lehigh's withdrawal from the monocacy creek housing project among the reasons cited for lehighuniversity»sdecid lng to build in the saucon valley are " the i mportant economies that could be made in the cost of supervision and administration if residences are concentrated in one area in the sept 29 1970 monocacy creek withdrawal letter from lehigh to the bethlehem redevelopment authority bra lehigh said the original 148 units planned for the monocacy creek area prepared for building by the bra will be built on the southeast corner of the saucon valley property although the duh property just purchased by lehigh is in the southeast area of the saucon valley tract lehigh says that does not mean the graduate housing will be built on those 82 acres the sept 29 letter said with the arquisition of this land the duh property it became increasingly clear that the saucon valley campus could well meet the future requirements for both undergraduate and graduate hous ing what economies there is a question of what possible economies will be made even with a grant from the department of housing and urban development to cover interest costs if the units are built in the southeast corner of the saucon valley tract utilities installation costs will run very high according to bethlehem's department of public works the only existing utility in the saucon valley water ls designed to cover the needs of lehigh's present athletic facilities and drinking water demands it is a six-inch water line and cannot be branched off to meet fire safety demands or living needs for the number of residents lehigh is projecting for the area the solution according to the public works depart ment ls to install a 12 to 15-inch water line the depart ment gave a cost estimate for such a project of from 600,000 to 1 million subject to final plans this cost would have to be met by lehigh to a great extent sanitary sewer installation will be another cost lehigh will have to meet they could tie-in to the bethlehem gravity line that runs behind bethlehem steel corp's research laboratory on south mountain however a pumping substation would have to be built to move the waste over the mountain the most logical choice for a sewer system tie-in if the project is built on the southeast portion of the see related editorial page 2 tract would be with the hellertown sewer line accord ing to the department that line was planned to meet hellertown s needs while the deportment said the cost of a sewer tie-in would be very high they refused to give an estimate paul franz lehigh s vice president for development estimates the utilities installation costs are offset by demolition costs that would have been incurred ln build ing on the south side according to the bra all utilities are installed to the curb in the monocacy creek area on bethlehem's north side the future of the monocacy creek urban renewal area see students page 4 see land page 3 see fbi page 4 see destruction page 4