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

PAGE 4

The In cl ianapolis Times (A gCßrrpft. HOWARD NEM SPA I’F.R ) ROT W HOWARD President TAT.COTT POWELI Editor EARL D BAKER Bus) net* Manager Phone—RHey 3551

r ——m " ■** W

Member of United Pro**, Script** - Howard Newspaper Alliance, Newspaper Enterprise Association. Newspaper Information Service and Audit Bureau of Circulation*. Owned and published daily 'except Sunday! by The Indianapolis Times Publishing Cos. 211-220 'Vest Maryland afreet. Indianapolis, lnd. Price in Marion county. 2 cents a copy; elsewhere. 8 cents—delivered by carrier. 12 cents a week. Mail subaerlptlon rates In Indiana, t?, a year: outside of Indiana, C 6 cents a month.

f H OWUi

G v 0 Light ann the People Will Finn Their Own Way

SATURDAY MAY 20. 1933

TIIE SHOALS INQUIRY IyrORE impressive than the denials of the power companies and the army engineer oT:cers is the demand for prompt investigation ol the charges of misuse of government equipment at Muscle Shoals. The public will not be disposed to prejudge the facts. Nevertheless, it i c easy t,o understand the general concern over these charges. Senator George W. Norris, Secretary of the Interior Harold L. Ickes and Louis R. Glavis, who made the preliminary investigation for the government, are names that carry weight. When they fear something is seiiously wrong, it is time to act. That apparently if. the attitude of President Roosevelt. He has assigned Huston Thompson, former federal trade commissioner and government counsel in the New River power casejHo continue the probe. Washington is even more concerned over the pos.Vility 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 oi 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,” lie will recommend his own. He thus clearly has 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 T)HESIDENT 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. Tho 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 as now a world citizen, a world leader, committed to open-and-above-board efforts to ipaifp 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’ President Roosevelt addressed himself to the people of the world on disarmament, Americas famous tradition of “splendid isolation” went toppling over into the dust, and it seems probabl 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 tradition 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 wole, the trade wars grooving out of the post-war mixup, the need of foreign nations for American money and, later, tehir 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 was 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 would wish to until Europe's most pressing problems are settled. We have, when you get right down to it, about as much real isolation as a traffic cop on a busy corner. 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 QNE 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 we 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. 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 cared 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 ih 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. Troubled 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 'TPHE 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 war. A slightly smaller number said that they would 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 pacifistic 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 pvR 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 service. This assertion of self cost him his life when his car collided with a truck on a Jersey highway. Dr. Hibben was 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 whole 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, sendee and sacrifice —virtues worth emblazoning upon the portals of any college and upon the intelligence of any youth. When he was 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. ft a THE idea that a healthy republic could be established in Germany under such restrictions as the allies imposed was just one more absurd illusionment born 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 on? 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. nan 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 development of revolution within nations.

THE INDIANAPOLIS TIMES

(Times readers are invited to express their views in these columns. Make your letters short, so all con have a chance. Limit them to 200 words or less.) Bv VV. J. Rominger. 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 at 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 yvith 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. Since prohibition has been in the Constitution, as a mechanic I have received a high wage 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 m importance to motherhood itself

I I

The Message Center

Men of Old Were Ambidextrous

: : A Woman’s Viewpoint : : - BY MRS. WALTER FERGUSON —■

Quittin Time!

More Jobless? Bv W. M. I.indlev. npHE attached copy of an ed- -*• itorial 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 w r ere made by Secretly 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 would be added to the 800,000 railroaders now out of work. This seems a high cost for the privilege of giving railroad managements free hand in recommending economies which 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. By C. S. 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 llvgeia. the Health Magazine. cient Hebrews 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. 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 down 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.

—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 lor 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 was 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 toward 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 toward 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 government and it so happened that because of said injury I have been tuiTied 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, owe debts I would like to pay, have a family of four children and wife, and I will work if I can find any. I was 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 has been expressed frequently. It believes in the most generous care for those whose health has been damaged in connection with their war service and for 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 lead 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 - B 1 HEYWOOD 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 a principle upon which there ought~to be an international]',' united front. .And yet lam afraid the message will not escape cruicism. There will be thunder on the left and grumbling from the right. We will be told that war is in* evitab.e under our economic svs* tern or that you can't change humafi nature. It is quite true that any man would be a fool if he undertook fij declare that there can not be an* other war. But we can say, “There must nor 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 front it. Os course it s terrible, but what can anybody do about it? It's inevitable.” b a a .4 Word for Quitters WAR is possible. War is probable. Bui •’inevitable” is ft word which never should be used by any man until he has lowered his hands and watched the towel tumbl9 across the rones. You w ho have sons, are you going to say, ”It is inevitable that thev 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 so“n a war 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 wrecks and months. The man or woman who sat in a little group last Thursday, let us say, and remarked, “Os course, thercs 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 what 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. b a b Need Not Be So High 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 r 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 wears 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 cai 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 yvithin our hands whether or not we spill the ink of existence upon those chapters yet to happen. B u a It Needs a Multitude YOU can t make a war without men and yvomen and orators and “my country right or wrong 1 ’ 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 unde* 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 youp trumpets till your lungs and shoul* ders sag, and even then we will viv§ no vivas or give so much as a fin* gernail to make the world safe hi putting it again to the torch. (Copyright. 1933. by The Times]!

So They Say

It would be comparatively eas? to dynamite the industrial system! it requires long and rigid discipline of training and of creative think* mg to bring it into the service of human needs.—Rexford G. Tugweii, 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 sky; And live in silent ecstasy As spring goes dancing by.