ustxtxb_obs_1971_07_16_50_00015-00000_000.pdf

I C I I Call. K I # Ile 11111 IIII HI In 11111 IN IN IN NS ail I Before You Pack. I I FOR I II HOUSTON 1 1 I Enjoy real money-saving I I value, and relax at the I 1 1 1 pALBERT 1 e KI 1 1 MOTOR INN 1 1 3301 Southwest Freeway I at Buffalo Speedway I ALL AT MODERATE RATES RESERVATIONS: CALL TOLL FREE 1 1 American Express Space Bank 1 800-AE 8-5000 4. MI MI MN III III MO NM Color TV in every room Restaurant & Lounge Heated Pool Family Plan Free Parking Meeting and Convention Facilities for up to 375 3100 N. OCEAN BOULEVARD FORT LAUDERDALE, FLORIDA OPEN ALL YEAR On The ocean Private beach Swim-. ming Pool Palm studded lawns . Dancing Entertainment Games Air-Conditioned Heated Luxurious Room and Apts. . . . All with balconies Golf privileges. perhaps funded by LBJ Enterprises and/or RMN Enterprises and/or the White House and/or the U.S. Congress and/or the Pentagon. The objective of the proposed study would be to seek an answer to the following question: “How will it be possible to explain to the American public and the rest of the world, without embarrassment to past and present elected officials, the U.S. Armed Forces, et. al., a war which has killed approximately one million human beings, left millions of people permanently phygically and mentally disabled, resulted in many other forms of loss of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, wasted billions of dollars of other precious resources and so forth ad infinitum, when that war had military public-relations and no other apparent value?” The second suggestion would be that the American public demand that all future U.S. presidents be required to read and understand the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution. Stan Carlson, assistant chairman, Ad Hoc Committee to Discover the Differences, 2817 2nd St., Lubbock, Tex. 79415. Two abstained One point of elucidation as regards Griffin Smith’s article, “A handshake with the Tar Baby” \(Obs., was on the House local and consent calendar. The voice vote was indeed 144 in favor, none opposed; however, my colleague Dick Reed and t voted present and not voting. The reason I gave in the House Journal on page 4095 May 19 is as follows: “I wish to be shown as present and not voting as regards the approximately 90 bills considered on the consent calendar. In effect the House passed a bill or more a. minute. There was no way for me to cast responsible votes under such procedures.” Mr. Smith has been most effective in bringing this situation to the attention of your readers. Rep. F. T. Farenthold, District 45, Place 1, Corpus Christ, Tex. A political act H.B. 1649, increasing the penalty for reminds me of the “Boston Strangler” resolution passed earlier this year by the Texas Legislature. Both were passed by naive politicians who didn’t comprehend the effects of what they were voting upon. It is also obvious that the governor is equally naive. His signing H.B. 1649 into law was a political act, not a humanitarian one. I want to thank you for bringing up H.B. 1649 in your newsmagazine; as before this I have never heard of it. Gerald A. Kendrick, P.O. Box 1344, Austin, Tex. 78767. `Scurrilous attack’ Your records will reflect that for years I have been a financial supporter as well as a philosophical supporter of The Texas Observer. The scurrilous attack on Judge John Singleton in your last issue of The Observer cannot go unnoticed by me. It is unlike The Observer to print gossip without labeling it as such. Your facts are inaccurate to say the least. The case to which you refer in this article, “Go Judge Go,” was not before a jury. It was before the Judge only and he had to make the final decision on the money as well as the other facts of the case. He asked the attorneys involved to agree to a procedure which he outlined for them, and they agreed. Unknown to Judge Singleton, the figure offered by the defendant was the same figure Judge Singleton assessed as the damages in this case. It could have been more. It could have been less, but the fact are that the decision was the sole responsibility of the judge. The plaintiff was not deprived of a jury trial he was not entitled to one under the type of case it was. If someone had wronged a plaintiff, I know that you know from my reputation that I would be the first to scream. Your ill-considered remark about Judge Singleton’s qualifications being his friendship with Lyndon Johnson is absurd. He is considered by most