suffer at the hands of the police day in and day out would like to see a publications run by whites acknowledge that cops are unjust in many of their dealings with Negroes. But even worse than the police problem in Houston, in my view, is the pervasive indifference among whites to the Negroes’ plight. This indifference extends into the liberal community, and is causing a growing disaffection among Negroes, the ones I talked to anyway, with regard to white liberals. I note, in sadness, that it was the San Antonio NAACP that bailed out the last three Negroes of those who were arrested that night at TSU; the bail was not posted by a committee organized by white liberals to demonstrate their concern about what happened. I expect there is more concern among liberals than Negroes perceive; but that’s the point, Negroes don’t believe the whites care very much not enough to be much of a factor in attacking the problems that discrimination has caused. I wonder if white liberals are not trusted, not looked to for assistance, by Negroes, because we feel we have passed a test of our times by simply believing that people are equal. Simply thinking right cuts no ice in the ghettoes, it doesn’t im\\prove living conditions, schools, job opportunities there; nor does it change the minds of whites who are mistaken in their racial views. If we are liberals on the patio but not elsewhere, what use are we? The white liberal’s situation in Texas society requires toughness if he is to have a meaningful rolehe is reviled by the radical right, he is challenged by the New Left, he is disdained by Negroes and Mexican-Americans, he is scorned by the Connallycrats. What to do? Retire to the patio and hold forth at cell meetingsor go into the Third Ward and work, contribute money to help improve conditions in the ghettoes, raise hell with city hall, demand that the police be even-handed as 16 The Texas Observer between the races in their dealings with the citizens of Houston, take exception to the hundreds of little acts of racism that occur in our lives daily? Houston’s leaders got by with the TSU riot. No political retaliation seems imminent; indeed it seems that what occurred added support to the administration Facile Objectivity Bill Helmer’s article on the TSU incident [Obs., June. 9-23] is very balanced and thorough. But I take exception with part of it. I was in Houston within hours after the shooting was over. I toured every room of Lanier Hall and the JuniorSenior Dorm and personally observed hundreds literally of smashed TV’s, radios, and other valuable personal possessions. Many students complained of missing wristwatches and other smaller items of monetary and sentimental value. Perhaps, as Helmer states, “the boys were whooping it up that night, and the rooms were less than orderly when the police went in.” But it is worse than shamelessly absurd to suggest, as the police had the gall to do, that the students destroyed that much of their personal property. Even if such preposterous “boys-willbe-boys” stuff is swallowed, what about the Lanier Hall housemother, Mrs. Mattie Harbert? She told how the police had smashed her office typewriter, television set, sewing machine, and coffee urn. Mrs. Harbert, age 49, asked the officers why they were destroying these appliances. They said they were looking ‘for bombs. Black Houston has every right, under all the circumstances, to regard the police as the troops of the enemy. The rather facile objectivity of the white liberal community is one more instance of our failure to relate to what is stirring in the ghettoes, one more link in the argument of the black separatists that when the chips are down the white liberals fink out. On the facts alone, there should be no hesitation from liberals to condemn the irresponsible and unfair behavior of the police at TSU if not in the name of our solidarity with the Negro freedom movement, in the name of simple fairness and our commitment to civil liberties. Jim Simons, 1405 Bentwood Road, Austin, Tex. Objective Treatment Your “Nightmare in Houston” is the most objective treatment of a difficult and sensitive situation that I have seen. It confirms many of my own , conclusions from much more limited but still personal observations. The Rev. John D. Craig, CentralPresbyterian Church, 3788 Richmond Ave., Houston, Tex. 77027. ‘of Mayor Louie Welch. Houston, with its 300,000 Negroes, 100,000 Mexican-Amer;. cans, and thousands of labor-liberal people should have a more liberal city government. The Welch administration and the aftermath of the TSU disorder stand as rebukes to the liberal movement in Houston. G.O. Good Quality Reporting Thank you for the effort. The June 9-23 issue of the Texas Observer was good quality reporting.H. C. Harris, M.D., 2903 Tanglewood, Commerce, Tex. Flashbulbs and the Rangers Why do flashbulbs bother the Rangers? We know that the sun shines bright in Texas. In fact, we know the Rangers have sunglasses to protect their eyes from the sun. So why all the fuss about flashbulbs on cameras? Is this really their reason for barring the television cameras and newspaper photographers? When are the state officials going to stop taking the people of Texas for a bunch of fools? Nell Herrin, 8119-B Hall, Del Rio, Tex. No Poets Allowed C. D. DiGiambattista must go! No poets [Obs., July 7] allowed in this fair state. Let him be hanged from the tallest relic derrick we can find.Emmit Tuggle, 404 E. Mulberry, San Antonio, Tex., 78212. The Wrong Hank I certainly enjoyed Robert N. Jones’ article [Obs., July 7] and, having lived in Henderson for a number of years, I must say he has done an excellent job of putting into words how it feels to live near the oil industry. However, I think he meant to attribute the song “Your Cheatin’ Heart” to Hank Williams rather than Andy Williams.Ron Engle, Dept. of Sociology, Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, Tex. 76101 Wartime Strategy Although your Observations [May 26, “Church and State] highlight a very definite problem currently burning within clerical circles, not only in San Antonio, but elsewhere, I feel I must comment for the sake of some clarification that the priests were not suspended or banished for speaking their minds on social problems in South Texas or in San Antonio. They were victims of these canonical censures for disobeying orders and for going to the press to air their gripes against their boss. . . . [It’s] the duty and responsibility of a commanding officer to issue orders in the midst of a bloody conflict, and that’s what an Archbishop and a Bishop did with regard to Rio Grande City. We all know it’s a war down there. It can be won if all of us, laymen and clergymen, allow some room for strategy and planning. . . . The Rev. Edward Quevedo, 3021 Frutas St., El Paso, Tex.