Indianapolis Times, Volume 45, Number 8, Indianapolis, Marion County, 20 May 1933 Edition 02 — Page 4

PAGE 4

The Indianapolis Times ( a Rrßtrpn.noward newspapfr ROT W HOWARD . . . Pr^llmt TALCOTT POWELL r.dUot CARL D BAKER ...... Bnslnesi Manager Phone—Riley 5531

Member of United Pres*. R' rippg • Howard Newspaper Alliance, Newspaper Enterpri'j Association, Newspaper Information Service and Audit Bureau of Circulations. Owned and published daily (except Sunday) by The Indianapolis Times Publishing Cos.. 214-220 West Maryland street. Indianapolis, lnd. Price tn Marion county. 2 cents a copy; elsewhere. 3 cents—delivered by carrier. 12 cents a week. Mail subscription rates in Indiana. (3 a year; outside of Indiana. 66 cents n month.

•ra. pp t u o'*

Give LOiht and the People Will Fin' l Their Own Ray

_ SATURDAY, MAY 20. 1933. THE SHOALS INQUIRY TIYORE impressive than the denials of the power companies and the army engineer officers is the demand for prompt investigation of the charges 0 f misuse of government equipment at Muscle Shoals. The public will not be disposed to prejudge the facts. Nevertheless, it i? easy to understand the general concern over these charges Senator George W. Norris, Secretary of the Interior Harold L. lakes and Louis R Glavis, who made the preliminary investigation for the government, are names that carry weight. When they fear something is seriously wrong, it is time to act. That apparently is the attitude of President Roosevelt. He has assigned Huston Thompson, former federal trade commissioner and government counsel in the New River power case, to continue the probe. Washington is even more concerned over the possibility that this military property may have been damaged than over the loss of federal money through alleged improper use of plant facilities by the Alabama Power Company. The notoriously unfriendly attitude of the Hooover administration and certain army engineer .officers to government operation of Muscle Shoals has fed ugly reports in Washington. In justice to all concerned, the government speedily should bring these charges into the open and give the accused a fair chance to defend themselves. WHO SHOULD BE TAXED? TT is fair that those who actually are earning ■*- money these days should be required to pay a little more in income taxes to the federal government so it may try to revive industry and put the Jobless back to work. For this reason we favor the first three of the four alternative tax suggestions made by the President through Budget Director Lewis Douglas to the house ways and means committee. It is true that, in increasing the normal tax rates, great as well small incomes are touched; but the Roosevelt-Douglas plan should be amended to provide for higher surtaxes and corporation taxes, as well. Douglas likewise suggested the general sales tax; he put the rate low and permitted no exemptions. As before, this newspaper opposes the principle of the sales tax. It is too easy to levy, too hard to repeal; its burden is an insidious one. hidden but sure. The invisible tax is a bad tax. Perhaps in this emergency it will be necessary to levy a general sales tax. If it comes to a final choice between putting men to work by reason of a sales tax, or keeping them idle by killing a sales tax, we would choose the former course. But a sales tax should not be resorted to until other rich sources of revenue have been tapped. President Roosevelt must have had the same idea, and Budget Director Douglas as well. For their first three out of four suggestions were for higher income levies. The President, in all fairness, has put the troubling tax question up to congress to solve, with the announcement that if it does not select the new levies by ‘‘the first of the week,” he will recommend his own. He thus clearly lias shown against his belief that this industrial recovery bill, taxes and all, must be enacted quickly. Speed is an extreme necessity in the situation. DR. BUTLER’S INTERVIEW PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT'S pronouncement on world disarmament gains much by the prompt and enthusiastic support of Dr. Nicholas Murray Butler, one of the world’s leaders of the peace movement, president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and Intimately known and highly respected as a peace advocate throughout Europe and the world. The president of Columbia university called the statement against armament which President Roosevelt addressed to fifty-four nations an epoch-making document—"a historical event of the utmost importance.” He touched the vital spark in the declaration when he said that no human document ever had so widespread an immediate hearing. “The genius of President Roosevelt for democratic leadership.” he declared, "is demonstrated in his appeal to the people through their heads of the state rather than through their government, . . . The President aimed at the sound judgment of the people and not at the temporary administrators of their affairs." Dr. Butler visualized the remarkable statement, going not through diplomatic channels secretly incased in code, but to the people of all classes everywhere, appearing immediately in their newspapers. He said: "It is brief enough to be published in full: sufficiently clear and simple to be understood by all men. I can see them reading it—in Belgrade, in Warsaw, in French hamlets, in Africa; in cases, on tramways, in homes.” This is diplomacy as it should be. It is difficult to see how diplomacy in the future can remain underground and strut secretly in the chancelleries of the world in gold braid and pompousness. The people fight wars; the people should be addressed directly regarding means and movements aimed toward elimination of wars. Dr. Butler commented further upon the effects of President Roosevelt's statement in ending America's isolation. He pictured the United States of America ts now a world citizen, a world leader, committed to open-and-above-board efforts to make all the people of the word realize their

essential kinship and interrelationship and interdependence. Apart from the inherent intent and effect of the President's great pronouncement, it has a separate and great value in striking at the motheaten methods of the traditional diplomacy. ‘SPLENDID ISOLATION’ TYTHEN President Roosevelt addressed ’ * himself to the people of the world on disarmament, America's famous tradition of "splendid isolation” went toppling over into the dust, and it seems probable that it will stay there. Asa matter of fact, of course, this splendid isolation toppled years ago. But the tradition remained, and that was what caused trouble. We had a tiadition to which we gave almost unanimous support, and it failed to jibe with the facts. To support it meant that we had to shut our eyes to the realities. We were fond of talking—and acting—as if the Atlantic ocean were just as wide now as a century ago. We laid our International course on charts drawn up in the days of sailing ships and stage coaches; and when we steered ourselves into trouble, we wondered, plaintively, why fate was being so unkind. Nineteen years ago Europe got into a war, and before it was over we got into it also—although we’re still trying to figure out just what we gained by it. Since the war Europe has packed a century of troubles into a decade and a half; and a good many of them have slopped over the edges and spilled right on us. The Bolshevism of Russia, the rivalry between France and Germany, the tangled finances of Europe as a whole, the trade wars growing out of the post-war mixup, the need of foreign nations for American money and, later, their inability to pay that money back—all these things have had a tremendous direct effect on the conditions of life for each one of us. In the face of those uncomfortable facts, our tradition of isolation has had a thin time of it. We are as close to Europe today as the England of Pitt w r as to the France of Napoleon. Not only is it impossible for us to remain aloof from European quarrels; we can not even restore our own internal prosperity as we w T ould wish to until Europe’s most pressing problems are settled. We have, wlien you get right down to it, about as much real isolation as a traffic cop on a busy comer. Well, then—so what? Won’t it be a good thing if at last we accept the realities of the situation and do what we can to set things right? If we must make commitments overseas, let us make them and be done with it. However it turns out, we shall at least be looking the facts in the face.

NON-AGGRESSION BY MARINES reason the United States never has achieved much in its crusades to make the world safe for democracy, or Christianity, or any other goal, Is its failures to practice at home what it preaches abroad. Especially in the matter of world peace and non-aggression pacts, this has been a barrier. When w r e told the Japanese that they should not send troops into China in violation of treaties, they at once replied that they merely were following our example in Latin America. They justified their policy of aggression by calling it a Monroe doctrine for Asia. The comparison was not exact. The Monroe doctrine does not apply to United States intervention in Latin America against a Latin American country, but merely for United States protection of Latin American countries against foreign intervention. Nor has our military intervention in Latin America been in violation of specific treaties, while the fact that Japan has violated her treaties is the chief count against her. i Nevertheless, apart from technicalities and legalities, there was much to be said for the spirit of Japanese and other foreign criticism of our hypocrisy in sending marines to occupy weaker countries. Therefore, one of the chief virtues of the new Roosevelt doctrine, as laid down in his world peace declaration Tuesday, is the President’s application of the non-aggression policy to the United States intervention in Latin America. Both the President and the secretary of state have made it clear that the proposed non-aggression pact, in which the nations would agree not to send troops across a frontier, would prevent American marine occupation of the Vera Cruz and Nicaraguan type. American marines now' are in Haiti and in China, but under specific treaty rights. It is to be hoped that even those troops will be withdrawn soon. But, in any event, it is essential that the United States hereafter refrain from foreign intervention in violation not only of the letter, but of the spirit of anti-war and non-aggression treaties. Otherwise our attempt at world leadership • for peace is likely to prove as futile as it is hypocritical. President Roosevelt has faced this issue honestly. The Roosevelt policy will increase our own self-respect, improve our relations with Latin America, and heighten our prestige throughout the world.

REDUCING OUR FLEET IF one eared to be super-patriotic, it would be fairly easy to work up a good bit of excitement over the fact that one-third of the entire United States fleet is to be placed in reserve commission on July 1, with a reduction of more than 2,000 men in the navy’s enlisted personnel. That this reduces the fighting efficiency of the fleet goes without saying. A navy which must pull a third of its ships out of dock-yards and find crews for them at the recruiting stations in the event of sudden trouble undeniably Is below the standard which its paper strength gives it. But there doesn’t seem to be much real ground for worry, even so. as the world is, moderately competent statesmanship at Washington ought to bring us through the next few years without letting us get into a war. A war right now would be a calamity for us, anyway, even if our fleet were twice its present size.

YOUTH’S VIEW OF WAR r T'HE Intercollegiate Disarmament Council recently polled more than 21,000 American college students on the attitude they would take if the United States should get into another war. Nearly 39 per cent of the students who replied asserted that they never would participate in any w-ar. A slightly smaller number said that they wmuld fight only if the United States actually were invaded. As evidence of a changing attitude on the pan of youth toward war, this Is extremely interesting. Probably, however, it does not represent as much of a paciflstic tendency as appears on the surface. Youth is impetuous, vulnerable to strong emotional appeals; it is a safe bet that a good many of these lads who insist they never will fight would find their way to a recruiting station pretty promptly if we actually went to war. JOHN GRIER HIBBEN ■pvß. JOHN GRIER HIBBEN was a man devoted to self-dependence. At 71 he drove the car which the trustees of Princeton gave him last June on his retirement as president of that institution, after twenty years of sendee. This assertion of self cost him his life when his car collided with a truck on a Jersey highway. Dr. Hibben w r as one of the last of the school of college presidents drawn from the ministry, his father before him having been of that calling. But, except for four years in active preaching, Dr. Hibben devoted his w'hoie active life, forty-three years, to the faculty of Princeton. After his retirement he chose to live on there in the delightfully bucolic surroundings amid which, as president of Princeton, and successor to Woodrow Wilson, he had in twenty years increased the university’s endowment fund fivefold, its buildings and acreage nearly two times and its faculty and student body by 60 per cent. But the contribution on which he prided himself was the development of student character. Personally a liberal, he championed the rather old-fashioned virtues of duty, loyalty, honor, self-control, service and sacrifice —virtues worth emblazoning upon the portals of any college and upon the intelligence of any youth. When he w f as elected president of Princeton he was serenaded by the students, who sang: “Here’s to Hibben, we call him Jack, The whitest man in all the sac.” He believed ardently in college athletics. With support of the student council he discouraged the student practice of keeping automobiles. He barred Buchmanism from the campus. He turned from a sincere dry to an opponent of the eighteenth amendment. He believed in American participation in world affairs. He warned of the dangers in the activities of Germany’s Hitler. A sound man, much loved, widely famed, he died an untimely death while still living life to the hilt. John D. Rockefeller has ceased giving out those shiny new* dimes, says a story. Perhaps he has joined those opposed to “free silver.” Post mortem examination by Smithsonian scientists reveals a baby gorilla's brain weighed about a third of the average human brain. Can it be that the gorilla Is slipping? Barrel shortage threatens draught beer famine in Chicago, says a dispatch, which leads one to suspect that maybe those unpaid school teachers are wearing ’em. A Colorado truck driver with a load of dynamite has been missing for three weeks, but nobody suspects amnesia.'

M.E.TracySays:

GERMANY under Hitler promises to be a stumbling block in the path of disarmament, but this fact should not be taken to mean that the allies are blameless. . Germany under Hitler is a logical result of allied blundering of the Treaty of Versailles, of the stubborn attempt to hold a nation in servitude. Sooner or later the Versailles treaty must be modified. Its provisions are incompatible with European peace. It was formulated in a spirit of vengeance and contains sanctions at variance with the first principles of equity. Europe can not have peace as long as it is guided by the animosities of war. The very presence of Nazism furnishes a vivid illustration of where these animosities lead. No group of nations can presume to dominate the policy of a neighboring nation without fostering just such a reaction. Signing of the Versailles treaty foredoomed Germany to Nazism. Communism, or some other exaggerated movement to express her bitterness of feeling. a n THE idea that a healthy republic could be established in Germany under such restrictions as the allies imposed was just one more absurd illusionment bom of victory. If a revival of the war spirit succeeds in crushing Hitlerism, it will only be to make room for some other party devoted to Germany’s emancipation. Statesmen are dealing with elemental emotions, rather than a calm rationalization of public interests and public problems. The more they scratch and irritate old wounds, the more difficulties they will have to overcome in laying the foundations for peace. Permanent peace presupposes a parity of armies and navies. The very thought that one country must be held back because of what happened fifteen or twenty years ago is irreconcilable with the major purpose. Nations have no choice but to trust one another or revert to the old order. Such factors as the Versailles treaty, the nonrecognition of Russia, the insistence of France that she must be protected against further decline of the dollar will have to be eliminated. n * THE civilized world faces no choice but abandonment of certain old conceptions if it would establish anew order. Those growing out of the war are among the first that should be abandoned, because they represent the latest and most powerful source of discord. The failure to make better progress thus far can be traced definitely to the insincerity of leaders who imagined that they could arrange new agreements without abrogating old ones, that they could retain the prestige and spoil of victory and still enjoy the whole-hearted cooperation of their beaten enemies. The time has come to admit that such attitude is impossible, impractical, and unworkable, that it not only perpetuates antagonism between and among nations, but constantly threatens the deveiopygient of revolution wit&a -n,atipa&. „ .

THE INDIANAPOLIS TIMES

(Times readers are invited to express their views in these columns. Make your letters short, so all can have a chance. Limit them to 250 words or less.) Bv W. J. Rnmineer. In your editorial of May 18, Repeal and Revenue, you seem to forget common sense or reason, for you refer to President Roosevelt with a fine sense of time, making a disloyal attack upon the Constitution of the United States in a message to congress. In demanding a quick repeal of the eighteenth amendment, the President makes another attack upon the Constitution, in accord with your suggestion that he could care for a public works bond issue, which he could eliminate when repeal is completed. The Constitution makes provision for all emergencies as to its safeguarding and amendments by first administering an oath upon all officers. The President himself is not allowed to attack the basic law. So it seems that time sense is not the kind of sense needful, but a sense of his oath as the highest officer of our land, a constitutional sense, with just a little brains back of it and him. The Constitution also makes provision for money, but not for bonds and this nation has the machinery and laws for money, so why violate or nullify the Constitution to pay with bonds and favor a few with interest to make an excuse for taxes. While we are printing money rather than bonds, we can print enough for taxes and other government expenses. We also have laws for those inclined to be traitors to our Constitution and during my life this government has seen fit to apply that law r . Since prohibition has been in the Constitution, as a mechanic I have received a high w’age and acquired some property, which is getting away from me while the President

THERE are right-handed and left-handed people and, though few' people realize it, also persons with special preferences of one eye or ear, even though both have normal ability. From the beginning of time, left handedness has had the idea associated with it of evil and right handedness of good. In a report on the subject by Dr. Ira S. Wile, he expressed the view that there is abundant evidence that man in the first place was primarily ambidextrous, that is, could use both hands with equal facility. Dr. Wile points out that the great artist, sculptor, and anatomist, Leonardo da Vinci, had equal facility with both hands, though he drew with the left hand and painted with the right. It has been argued that the an-

SOMETIMES we regard as unimportant facts that are tragic enough for tears. I give you an instance which comes in a letter from a 28-year-old school teacher. “Where,” she asks, “does a girl in my position meet attractive and eligible men and how should she go about it?” I only wish I could give her a satisfactory answer. The suppressed though natural longing for masculine companionship, and for the same happy recreations that other people enjoy, seems to be the bitter heritage of the American woman teacher. For her profession, one of the first to open its doors to girls, offers the poorest matrimonial opportunities. That this should be so destroys the highest purpose of education and condemns as fools those of us who profess to believe in that purpose. Only girls inspired by more than ordinary ambition and possessing ability above the average go in for permanent teaching. And they are engaged in a work that stands next In importance to motherhood itself.

u

The Message Center

Men of Old Were Ambidextrous

A Woman’s Viewpoint

Quittin’ Time!

More Jobless? Bv W. M. Lindlev. 'T'HE attached copy of an editorial by Julius G. Berens was called to the attention of the delegates to the convention of railroad telegraphers here in Montreal and I think your railroad readers in Indianapolis would like to read it Friday: The railroad bill pending before the senate is little more than hodge-podge legislation. Even its sponsors admit that the bill is little more than permission to the railroad managements to go ahead regardless of anti-trust laws and similar statutes for a limited time, and to effect economies which can be accomplished under the plan set forth in the bill.” The remarks quoted were made by Secretry of Commerce Roper at senate hearings. The testimony thus far has failed to refute the charge that one of the most certain results of the proposed legislation would be dismissal of a great many railroad workers, estimated as high as 300,000. These W'ould be added to the 800,000 railroaders now out of work. Thi£ seems a high cost for the privilege of giving railroad managements free hand in recommending economies w'hich presumably are to re-establish the financial integrity of this twenty-billion-dollar industry. and the editors are nullifying and trying to repeal the real law of the land, for with a sober brain the laboring man can care for himself. Do not forget this fact on election day. Bv C. 8. In your issue of Friday, May 12, you have an editorial on justice for veterans as of war-time serviceconnected disabilities. You say that

BY DR. MORRIS FISHBEIN

Editor Journal of the American Medical Association and of Hvsreia, the Health Magazine. cient Hebrew's and all Semitic peoples were left-handed, since they wrote and read from right to left. Morover, the Bible mentions specifically the fact that David received a company of men who could use both the right and left hands in hurling stones and shooting arrows out of a bow r . The evidence available from a study of the ancient drawings and paintings and from implements found with mummies and in caves, indicates that men tended to become more and more right-handed dow’n to modern days. The suggestion has been made that as civilization advanced man had new' hazards to face, including the exposure of his vital organs to his enemies.

BY MRS. WALTER FERGUSON

—the care and training of children, and the guiding of youth.

a a a BY the very nature of this work, it is reasonable to think that they would make good wives and especially good mothers. Unfortunately, however, men looking for wives do not utilize their reasoning Questions and Answers Q —Which Presidents of the United States were members of the Masonic order? A—Washington, Jackson, Polk, Buchanan, Johnson, Garfield. McKinley. Roosevelt, Taft and Harding. Filmore vas a Mason at one time, but recanted. Q—How many times did Gene Tunney fight Harry Greb? A—Five times—winning twice, losing once, and two no-decision fights. ,

your paper always has insisted on adequate care for veterans who are victims of actual war injuries. I am for you on that as far as it goes, but what the writer would like to know' is. What is your feeling toW’ard the peace-time service-con-nected disability man? You know there is such a thing, do you not? If you don't, you would better wake up. You speak of the President’s spirit of fair play. Why don’t you use a little of it yourself and give the peace-time service-connected man a break on your editorial page? I read The Times and like it, but I don’t like your spirit tow'ard the exservice man with peace-time disability. I would like to see your answer to this in your own words, as an editorial in your paper, at once. I have a service-connected peacetime disability and I expect and believe that my government will not do me an injustice. My injury happened to me while I was serving the goveiyiment and it so happened that because of said injury I have been turned down for jobs by three big corporations. They would not give me work on account of my not being able to pass their physical examinations. Therefore, I feel as if I should be getting three times as much as I am. I have been out of work for more than three years, ow r e debts I would like to pay, have a family of four children and wife, and I will work if I can find any. I w r as working in an army printing office when I received an injury causing me to lose the sight of one eye. Now, what do you say? Give us a break through your editorial page. EDITOR’S NOTE—The Times' policy on pensions lias been expressed frequently. It believes in the most generous care lor those whose health has been damaged in connection with their war service and lor the dependents of those killed. It does not believe in the pavment of compensation for non-service connected disabilities. Mr. C. S., who writes the above letter, certainly appears to have a service-con-nected disability and the government should care for him adequately.

He therefore protected his left side, the side on which lies the heart, and turned his right side toward his foes. Death probably removed those who could not make the adjustment. Thus, right hands became dominant. Moreover, man came, more and more, to depend on the sun, facing the east. As he turned to the east, man’s right hand followed his eyes, so that the right side became the fruition, the promising and life giving, as opposed to those things on the left side, dark, hazardous, and sinistral. Moreover, it has been found of late that attempts to cause the right hand to dominate in a child normally left-handed are likely to lead to difficulties of mental hygiene, perhaps more serious than any disadvantage that may inhere in the use of one hand or the other.

faculties. They are ruled by their emotions and not by their brains. Hence most of them will pass flippantly by the well-trained and sensible teacher to marry some noaccount fly-by-night, and then will spend the rest of their lives deploring the general worthlessness of women. Wouldn’t it also be wise for communities to recognize this quality in teachers and so encourage contacts that would lean to marriage and a permanent estabishment in the locality? Surely those to whom we entrust the training of our children are fitted to fill other important rules. Instead, we usually put insuperable obstacles in the paths of these women and girls and hedge them about with the most rigid school board rulings. We discourage all natural youthful pleasures and doom them, almost from the start, to lonely frustrated living. For all that they contribute, the teachers are given the sorriest recompense from the community. .

-MAY 20, 1933

It Seems to Me = BY HLYWOOD BROUN =

NEW YORK. May 20.—'"They will send no armed force of whatsoever nature across their frontiers.” Franklin D. Roosevelt. President of the United States, has offered to the world and principle upon which there ought to be an internationally united front. And yet lam afraid the message will not escape criticism. There will be thunder on the left and grumbling from the right. We will be told that war is inevitable under our economic system or that you can't change human nature. It is quite true that any man would be a fool if he undertook to declare that there can not be another war. But we can say, “There must not be.” The air is filled with fumes. Lathes turn. Metal sizzles in its moulds. When the wind is right, you can hear the distant roll of drums, the tramping of the feet. Men in high office rattle sabers and' talk of blood and iron. But. worst of all. we sit at home on porches and in back rooms and say: "It's bound to happen. There's no getting away from it. Os course it's terrible, but what can anybody do about it? It's inevitable.” a a a A Word for Quitters WAR is possible. War Is probable. But “inevitable'’ is a word which never should be used by any man until he has lowered his hands and watched the towel tumble across the ropes. You who have sons, are you going to say, “It is inevitable that they shall be ripped by machine guns and shattered under shells? - ' Are you going to give your flesh and the flesh of your flesh to be burned? No man who ever has seen a w r ar has the right to say, "You may fire when you are ready. It must not be. But what can I do? One of the simplest things is to stop doing here and now many of the things of which we have all been guilty in recent wee ks and months. The man or woman w-ho sat in a little group last Thursday, let us say, and remarked, "Os course, there's going to be another war for all the signs point to it,” probably will not be stigmatized as the sole author of the conflict. But when millions begin to take the same attitude of bending their necks to w’hat they think is inevitable, it does mass up to the making of a world psychology for preservation and promulgation of war. Throw' enough pebbles into a pond and you can create a tidal wave. a a a Need Not Be So High THE cynic and the realist and the man who has read history have all done their little bit to break down resistance to the coming of the next great folly. We must rid our minds of the notion that w'ars are made by a few old men scattered over the face of the world and sitting upon the seats of the mighty. They have done their evil in the past and would again, but not one of them w r ears the armor of inevitability. We can tear them down from their high places. A boy lies in the wheat field, with his chest torn away. He is groaning. He will not dies till nightfall. And do you mean to say that nothing can be done about it? Why, man and mother, this is your son out there wreathed in agony. Are you going to say that it is inevitable and that there Is nothing which can be done about it? Well, then, who says it? Who is the man so arrogant that he can undertake to skip ahead through the pages of the great book and read us chapter ten before it has been written down? “But history says ,” objects a realist. History says what we tell it to. We make it. A generation made the war. Anew generation can abolish it. If there is to be blood upon the clean page it will be our blood. “Slower, driver! Slower! That soldier with the bullet in his groin screams out each time you jolt us.” It lies within our hands whether or not we spill the ink of existence upon those chapters yet to happen. a a a It Needs a Multitude YOU can’t make a war without men and women and orators and “my country right or wrong” boys and radio broadcasters and editorial writers and cartoonists and farmers and machine workers. It needs the acceptance of millions upon millions. We do not accept. We will not accept. If even a decent percentage of every people refuses to fight under any circumstances, then it becomes inevitable that there can be no war. And there must be that morning when no bugle call can get us up. Beat your drums and sound your trumpets till your lungs and shoulders sag, and even then w r e will vive no vivas or give so much as a fingernail to make the world safe by putting it again to the torch. (Copyright. 1933. by The Times*

So They Say

It would be comparatively easy to dynamite the industrial system; it requires long and rigid discipline of training and of creative thinking to bring it into the service of human needs.—Rexford G. Tugw'ell, assistant secretary of agriculture. The educational system of our states and of our colleges are so bound up in tradition and bureaucratic control that it is almost impossible to make even the obviously desirable changes in the curriculum. —Raymond S. Jewett, past president, New York State School Boards’ Association. The old fellow who has been receiving people at the treasury since Adam came in for a tax rebate told me that he believed that we have gone through more in these two months than the treasury ever has before.—William H. Woodin, secretary of the treasury.

Watching

BY URSULA MARINE I climb up to the top of the hill To be nearer to the skyi And live in silent ecstasy .As spring goes dancing by.