Indianapolis Times, Volume 47, Number 15, Indianapolis, Marion County, 28 March 1935 — Page 14

PAGE 14

The Indianapolis Tir.es it rmrr* Howard sEWirArt>i *OT W. HOWARD l*rel<i*nt TALCOTT POWF.LL Editor KAI L D. BAKER . Basinet* Manager I* hen* Riley SMI

Member of Urea*. S-ripp* - Howard Newtpaper Alli*ore. Newp*per Kotarpri*e Ao<'l*’lon. X***p4*r information Jtervice and Audit Bmq of Or'-nlarlon*. Owned and published daily (irept Sandart by The Indlanapoll* Tin-ea i'uhltablng Cos 214-22*1 W. Marylaod-at. Indianapolis. Jnd. I’rlr* in Marino County. 3 rent* a rr py; delivered by carrier. 12 een’a a week. Mai! *ob*rlptlon rate* in Indiana. Fi a year: outside of Indiana. 6S ceota a month.

A* ■ ( Gi * lAQht nn*f t A# fvopl# Will fin* Oi m w vit

THURSDAY. MARCH 2*. 1335. BRITAIN FLIRTS WITH HITLER r I 'HI’ S.mon-Hi’ler conversations in Berlin were not as futile as some of the dispa’ches state. At least this meeting clarified and confirmed two basic factors in the dangerous situation. One is that the chief threat of a German-made war is a drive against Russia. The other is that Germany is working on the tory British government as the weakest ilnk in the allied chain opposing war. For the moment Hitler has not persuaded the British. But that does not mean much. The British government is facing a general election in the fall with possible defeat by the Gabor party. So it must move with unusual care and secrecy. Since it has not yet revealed it policy ar.d since the German negotiations are only in an early stage, final results can not be forecast. Hitler is shrewdly trading on the London government's fear of German* and hatred of Soviet Russia. If Hitler can remove Londons fear of a German attack and convince London that the new Nazi militarism is aimed solely at Russia, he has a chance to obtai \ British neutrality or even secret support in such a Rus ;an war. British neutrality would break the British-French-Italian united front on Germany’s western flank. Then H.ti°r, with his new and shaky Polish ally, might move av;ain t Russia with the hope that Japan uould keep most of the Soviet army busy in the Par East. Maybe Hitler will succeed in the first part of this diplomatic strategy. That is. he may be able to remove British fear of the increased German air force by signing the London aviation pact, and remove British fear of German navai revival by accepting a much lower quota than the 400.000 tons now claimed for bargaining purposes. Even if Hitler persuades the British that he can be trusted in some such air and sea acrremcnt guaranteeing Britain from German attack, there remains another important question. Could Hitler isolate his little war with Russia, or would it lead quickly to a world war? If the anti-Russian war could be isolated, doubtless it would be worth while from the British tory point of view. But if such a war spread to western Europe and the Near East, it would suck in Britain inevitably and wreck her empire—regardless of the nommal victor. Sane observers are pretty well agreed that such a war certainly would spread, destroying not only the British empire, but most of western civilization as well. It remains to be seen whether the British Tories are sane, or whether their hatred of Russia blinds them to their self-interest. Britain's true self-interest is to stand with France. Italy and Russia against Hitlers eastern war plans. The hope for peace rests largely on the intelligence and pacific desires of the British people, and their ability to influence the wavering policy of their Tory government. PRESIDENT ON THE SPOT PRESIDENT ROOSEVELTS decision to head the works relief allotment committee and take upon himself the responsibility and criticism that goes with the job is in accord with his promises to congressional Democrats. The latter, nursing grudges for rough treatment at the hands of Harold Ickes and Harry Hopkins, had to be mollified. But before much of the $4 880 000.000 is spent the partisans may wish they had not placed their party leader on the spot. Messrs. Ickes and Hopkins heretofore, politically speaking, have been convenient buffers. They have stopped brickbats that now may be hurled at the President. Os course the President will have to lean for advice upon Ickes, Hopkins, and Undersecretary Tugwell, who. according to reports, •re to sene with him on the allotpient committee. They will continue to stand between the President and pork-barrel congressmen who will want a hog's share of the public funds to fertilize the home political districts. But in the next year more of the blame for decisions will fall upon the President. It is fortunate. Indeed, that Mr. Roosevelt has broad shoulders, a disarming smile and popularity. He will need those assets when Podunk :s refused anew post office. THE BANK CASES TNDIANAPOLIS has been waiting for many A mon’hs for additional action in the bank cases. Now the Criminal Court, working with the Marion County Prosecutor's office, has forced the issue and reopened a matter which has been of great interest to every one who was involved in the closing of these institutions. It appears that the Criminal Court ar.d Prosecutor’s office have some tangible basis for the action or members of the grand jury probably would not have been discharged. The Tunes hope* that if there is basis for criminal action that It is carried to the limit so that thousands may know the true conditions which led to loss of thousands and thousands of dollars. VICE SQUADS /~HIEF MIKE MORRISSEY’S decision to block gambling and other rice in this c.% through a nine-man vice squad is interesting In more ways than one. Closing up of the horse race betting places In Indiana polls shows that s he law can be enforced. The action also shows that the police of Indianapolis are fully aware of vice activities that have been rampant in this city for manj years and that apparently there lias

keen decided laxity on the part of members of the force and their superior officers. Frankly, the establishment of a rice squad is 'jomethir? that will be open to many arguments. The history of vice squads Is bad. Cities the size of Indianapolis and larger have experienced great difficulty with vice squads and many of the outstanding police scandals of years gone by originated in rice squads in which the few officers had such complete control over the situation that bribery, false arrests and other chicanery created, rather tnar stopped, vice. Chief Moirissey will do well to keep in constant, personal touch with the vice squad. He has had experience along this line and his knowledge should be of great assistance to the police officers who have been asrijned to the squad. The vice squad has been named for a definite purpose It should not fail to perform this duty. NOTHING OR SOMETHING DURING the World War and shortly thereafter we lent to our European allies approximately 10 billion dollars. They paid back about two billions seven hundred millions, and then stopped paying. For three years, little Finland alone excepted, they have thrown our duns into the wastebasket. They say they will pay no more until we scale down the debts. These bald facts offer little comfort to the American taxpayers, who are left holding the bag for the seven-odd billions of unpaid principal plus interest. Salmon O. Levinson —Chicago lawyer, reorganizer of big industries, and father of the Kellogg-Briuud peace pact—has evolved a plan to salvage something out of the war debts wreckage. He proposes to forget the interest, accept 60 cents for each dollar of the principal, and make up the difference in savings on armaments. America and her European debtors would build no new armaments for five years, and gradually reduce existing armaments 50 per cent. He estimates the aggregate arms savings to the United States at three and one-quqrter billions over the next 12 years. This sum, added to scaled-down debt collections, would give American taxpayers future benefits totaling about six and three-quarters billions up to the date of the twelfth ar.d final annual installment. Added to the collection* of the last 15 years, this would tou.l about nine and a half billions—only a half-oillion short of the total of our war loans to Europe. Subsequent savings would close this gap This plan may not be popular with the hundred percenters who insist that European countries pay to the last dime. But our present policy is forcing American taxpayers to shoulder Europe's debts, sink more billions into bigger and costlier arms, and drift on toward another possible world war. Some new approach to the problem is imperative if it is ever to be amicably settled. And we will have to take the initiative. European governments will not bring up the subject if we do not. Great Britain, France, Italy and the others have said so repeatedly and plainly. We can either proceed as business men do when facing a similar situation, and propose a settlement to get at least something. Or we can stubbornly say, “all or nothing "—and get nothing.

HOW TO KEI-Ji* PROMISES 'T'HE voters of Lane county, Oregon, have recalled a state representative because he refused to vote for a legislative memorial asking Congress to adopt the Townsend oldage pension plan. The most interesting thing about this is not so much the fact that it reveals strong sentiment for the Townsend plan, as it is that the representative who was called paid the penalty for violating a campaign pledge. VVTen he was seeking election, he promised to vote for the memorial; once he got in the Legislature, he changed his mind. Viewed from that angle, the recall is a wholesome affair. Too many politicians are ready to promise anything under the sun while the campaign is on. They will make promises that they do not dream of keeping, trusting that the voters will forget all about everything in a few months. Our politics woulu b? much healthier if every broken campaign promise were followed by recall proceedings. DUST STORMS TF you have wondered just how much earth was moved in the recent western dust storm, you might be interested in the estimate submitted by A. F. Turner of Kansas State College. Mr. Turner says that if a 96-mile line of l’j-ton trucks could be put to work hauling 10 loads apiece daily, it would take them a year to haul back to western Kansas the dirt that was blown over to the eastern half of the state. Altogether, he says, there would be 46.5C0.000 truckloads to be moved. Putting the thing in that form helps us to realize the terrible destriictiveness of the storm. You don’t need to use your imagination very hard to understand that a lot of good farm land must have been ruined to provide those 46,500.000 truckloads of dust. DECORUM. ABOVE ALL! r I 'HAT peculiar British habit of conducting A even the wildest of anti-government demonstrations in an orderly manner was never better illustrated than in a recent display at Glasgow. Some 70.000 unemployed put on a great march to protest against the national unemployment act. They carried red flags and banners, they shouted -Down with the national government.” “Down with Ramsay MacDonld” —and even “’Down with the King!” which is about as lor in the direction of bloody riot and revolution as any British crowd can go. But there wasn’t a sign of actual disorder. The 1900 police called out to handle them had nothing whatever to do. The demonstrators marched, waved banners and shouted—and that was all. In what other country on earth could a wild, passionate demonstration of that kind have been staged in just that way? The English instinct for being orderly seems to control even those who want the government overthrown. There can’t be enough April showers to suit a June bride. That 3-year-old Pasadena, Cal., lad who smeared another boy with paint seems destined to be a politician.

Looking at America BY GEN. HUGH S. JOHNSON

TULSA, Okla., March 28.—Herbert Hoover's letter to the Republican assembly at Sacramento is fine. Thousands of wild schemes spring up every year. With a two-party system. at least fundamental issues can be decided squarely by a majority popular vote. None can be decided that way when you have only a remnant of a disciplined conservative party on one side and, on the other, a strong, liberal democracy plus a hash of varied dissent from both. We are in the latter condition today. It opens the way to control by minority blocs. They can’t win an election, but they can win an issue by threatening to withdraw support from an administration which in part depends on them. It is a dangerous situation and, as Herbert Hoover says, lies on the very lip of the ‘sink into which one great nation after another abroad is falling.” It is just such a lack of clean-cut balance between pro and con, Fascist and Communist minorities—sometimes ridiculously small—that has seized Italy. Russia, Germany. Spain. Poland and Hungary. There is hardly a hair's breadth of difference between what Hitler said and organized and did in Germany and what Father Coughlin is saying and organizing, and may do here. I disagree with almost every other paragraph in Mr. Hoover’s letter but I surely agree with that 'one. The Republican party does have to decide whether it is to stand by its guns of clear conservatism or whether it is to adopt a dilute democracy. If it does, the latter is lost. If it heists its ancient banner, the people of this country can at least decide whether they want the New Deal or the old. u tt a MR. HOOVER hoists the old flag. There is hardly a word in the letter that varies in sense from what he said when he was a candidate—both times—and when he was President. My own opinions in opposition to his are too well known to need repeating. Smali industries have not been oppressed—they have been freed ant! salvaged. There is no regimentation of our people, but only popular control of powers that did dominate them. The New* Deal policy is not an economy of scarcity. It is an economy of balance; instead of the economy of unmanageable surplus for which Mr. Hocver has always stc id—especially for agriculture. It is far better adapted than Mr. Hoover’s old order to lighten the windows of American homes with hopes—to use his own expression. In fact, it has already done that, against the darkness of despair in those windows which it found when it started. 7he letter is so Hooverish that it even echoes prosperity just around the corner and ragged individualism—“We stand on the threshold of a great forward economic movement,” and "America must look to the creative impulses of free men and women born of the most enterprising and self-reliant stock in this world.” Whether you agree with him or not—and never did—it is good to see a fighter who stands for something and is not afraid to say what it is—however unpopular that may be. Copyright, 1335, by United Feature Syndicate, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or Ir, part forbidden.)

Liberal Viewpoint BY DR. HARRY ELMER BARNES

ONE of the main claims for the Roosevc-lt Administration has been that through the NR A the barbarism of child labor has been abolished. But it is a commonplace among investigators of the subject that the ostensible abolition of child labor has been by no means rigorously enforced, and least of all in those states where the menace is greatest. If the NRA had actually outlawed child labor, our reactior aries and our predatory employers would not be so wrought up about the destiny of the child labor amendment. The latter would merely be ratifying an existing fact if the NRA clause against child labor were actually being enforced. In picking up newspapers all over the United States in the last few months, it did not surprise me at all to find that a vicious campaign against the child labor amendment is being conducted in the conservative and reactionary press. It is wholly compatible with their bitter opposition. to the New Deal and to the spirit of humanitarianism as a whole. It is part and parcel of their “the whole hog or none”-policy. But I was at least mildly astonished to find that even some liberal journals were delivering a broadside against the amendment ana urging its defeat. And I must admit that I was especially amazed to pick up the foremost liberal organ of the Middie West and one of the halfdozen leading liberal papers in the United States, the great St. Louis Post-Dispatch, and read an editorial a column long sailing into the amendment with language and arguments not much different from those in the thoroughly reactionary* press. Baa THE Post-Dispatch editorial devotes nearly half of its space to what many persons would regard as a trivial technicality, namely the fact that the amendment has now been before the state for some 11 years. The editorial points out that the Supreme Court has ruled that an amendment must be ratified “within some reasonable time” after the proposal. It expresses the opinion that the Supreme Court would find that 11 or more years is not a reasonable time and would therefore void the amendment even if ratified. It is evident that ihe Post-Dispatch does not take this argument too seriously. If it does not favor the child labor amendment, then all it would need to do would be to wait and let the court set it aside after ratification. Throwing off his sheep's clothing, the editorial next reveals its true colors by pulling out of the hat the already shabby “bureaucracy bogey” so highly prized by the reactionary press: “We are against the amendment on its merits. It would build still higher the towering bureaucratic structure at Washington—a structure that has grown enormously in the last few years. "It would diminish still further the rights and the duties of the states to deal with, local problems in ways best suited to their respective needs. It would write a set of police powers into the Constitution—something against which we should have been sufficiently warned by our unhappy experience with the eighteenth amendment.” a a a THERE may be danger in bureaucracy, but these are the days of bureaucracy and a child labor amendment is cetrainlv a strange place for a liberal journal to call a halt. If our bureaucracy can salvage railroads it can certainly protect babies. Bureaucracy which is justifiable in the interests of big business can assuredly be invoked in behalf of human life and welfare. The editorial then throws out “the arbitrariness bogey.” which would imply that if the amendment were passed the government would step in to prevent a farm boy under 18 from helping his father milk the cow or a girl who had not yet turned her 18th birthday from assisting her mother In setting the table. Finally the editorial ends up on the familiar “we are against child labor tut—” line of argument advocating patience until the backward states see the error of their ways and outlaw child labor. In other words, we can allow thousands of bovs and birls to go on in stunting labor, taking jobs away from needy adults, until plutocratridden Legislatures shed their spots some time in the 21st century. Our industrialists are just now very fond of turning to England as a leader in recovery policies. Let them recall, incidentally, that England began resolutely to repress child labor on a national scale more than a century ago. Hitler' evidently intends to have peace if he has to fight every nation in Europe. India Isn’t the only place they have “untouchables.” Ask any American borrower.

THE INDIANAPOLIS TIMES

7 .. yw/,> I A /p/ S£p / ' // ,

The Message Center

their views in these columns. Make your letters short, so all cqn have a chance. Limit them to 250 words or less. Your letter must, he sinned, but names will be withheld at request o] the letter writer.) a a a PROPOSES ADEQUATE AGE PENSION By E. L. Reeves. According to press reports President Roosevelt said in a few words he is in favor of an old-age pension law for those that he termed unemployed at the age of 65 and older with disabilities, so I am appealing today to Congress for immediate action. According to the New York Post Nov. 22. 1C34, there are about two and a half millions at the age of 65 years or older in this country that are in need, dependent -on relatives or on relief or on charity. Some are sick and others with disabilities. There are about four and a half millions that are 65 years or older who are not in need. There should be something done for these people immediately. Could not the government and each state co-operate on a 50-50 basis so as to give these old peopie enough pension money to take care of them? I do not think people 65 or older who have a comfortable income for the rest of their life would care to accept pension money, so I am in favor of those that are needy being eligible for pensions. There is no j respectable boarding house that . would give board and room and ' laundry for an old man for sls a month. There are not many" persons at the age of 65 years who have children of the age of 18 years ; or under. These persons’ children as a rule are married or moved away and some of them are unable’ to care for their parents any longer. A poor man's opinion of the Townsend Old-Age Pension Plan— I would call it a one-sided plan. It is more for the rich man than the j poor man. It would be unadvisable | and not a practical plan. Asa rule the majority of the people are ready to accept anything that is given them free, regardless of the result and there is no exception to this rule between the rich and the poor. This plan does not benefit the man around 50 years of age and his wife and several children to care for j —he would have to pay all of the j increased taxes the same as those that would be receiving S2OO a month. Under this plan the people j ■4hat would receive S2OO a month in about two years would need S4OO a, month to keep up with the increase j in prices on everything. It does not look like the government would have an accurate plan to tell whether this S2OO was spent each month. Suppose about one-half of those old people would fail to send in their return receipts, then according to this plan they would forfeit the rest of their pension money. Thus the government would be out that first S2OO. This looks like nothing but confusion. a a a HE STANDS FOR WARRIGHT NOW! By M. Rudolph Kuehn. “Shall We Go to War?” was your leading editorial Monday. Sure, let's go to war! Why the delay? I can't understand it. Why arouse our curiosity about that strange island people called the Japanese and then equivocate about it? Let’s go before Rep. Ludlow makes the state of Indiana ridiculous. “The citizens of Indiana, like the citizens of every other state in the Union, seem unanimously opposed to war.” Oh yeah? How do you get that way, Mr. Editor? Or did you intend to be reporting merely what they “seem”? I am 101 per cent opposed to Rep. Ludlow's resolution and 102 per cent in favor of war, right away. The i

WELL LOOK WHO’S HERE!

Opposition to War Expressed

By Peggy Miller. After reading what Heywood Broun had to say in your paper of March 21, I could not keep from writing this. War! What a word. Is there one person in this great country of ours who wants war? I hope not. There are always petty quarrels going on all over the world, but Germany seems to be the starting point of the most serious ones. Will someone put me straight on this point? Being only a child when the war ended, I have missed some points of it. I always

ostensible intent of that resolution is to give every man and woman a chance to stay out of war. Its real effect will be to make jackasses out of all of us. That’s just what every other American ambassador in London has wanted, 10, these 20 years. The land is filled with spies and agents bidding the lovers of peace to join the AAA (AngloAmerican Alliance) or the SSSS (Sargasso Sea Sunday School). Moreover, 1935 is the British king’s silver jubilee and if we join, we get to hear the marimba band from Indianapolis. Personally, I have not yet decided ! whether the trip across the Pacific, will be a better tonic for most of our people, or the one over the Atlantic. And while we’re giving j Great Britain a good trimming, long j since overdue, for the insults to our | flag and government between 19141917, and for double-crossing President Wilson before 1918 and trip-' ping him up after 1918, and for big j bills due, the 50,000 odd members of the AAA in the United States can; make it, for China and pull the j British chestnuts out of the fire in, the name of “hands across the sea.” j I did forget in passing that these, 50.000 members of the Anglo-Amer-ican Alliance are “the salt of thej earth.” (Literary Digest please copy.) In view of The Indianapolis Times’ interest in getting things started, I suggest that we get started not later than July 4, 1935. And Indiana, as the editor already has suggested, is as good as any state in the Union “to show the nation how to keep out of wars that do not affect us.” That’s just my point —grab the initiative and affect them! Don’t you see, Mr. Editor? Why wait? Why equivocate? Asa compromise, for this is a democracy, may I suggest through your column to President Roosevelt that those who prefer to remain at home to read the war news from the two fronts, be permitted to do; so. Thus everybody will be satisfied. Or, is The Times’ paramount business iike that of the “freedom of the press” throughout the country— 1 to camouflage the horseplay under j the able direction of Mr. John Bull, j It's time to plant turnips, Mr. Editor. a a a DEFENDS REARMING BY GERMANY Bv Marlin Simon. The readoption of general con- j soription in Germany has stirred up the resentment of the former allies and their press upbraids Adolf Hitler ; for having infringed on the terms of the Treaty of Versailles and for preparing anew war. But is it really so? Was it actually Hitler who first j neglected to heed the disarmament! clauses of the treaty? Were not rather the allies the ones who failed to fill the disarmament obligations to which they were bound just as well as the Germans? For 16 years Germany has been i waiting for the fulfillment of the ' obligations before deciding to fol- i low the example of the other part-; iiers oi the peace contract. Tot IS •

[I wholly disapprove of what you say and ivill 1 j defend to the death your right to say it. — Voltaire. J ;

thought, ‘‘to the victor belongs the spoils.” Why then, if the allies won the war wasn’t Germany divided between the countries of Europe? I belie,ve this would prevent war to a certain extent. The way I see it, as long as Germany was invading other countries, she liked war, but as soon as the allies came into German territory tramping on their toes, they just called the whole thing off and sent the Americans back home where they belonged. Another question—Just what can an ordinary citizen do to help prevent war? More power to Louis Ludlow.

years France has under the pretense of protecting herself from a German attack, armed herself and turned her land into one big fortress. Germany on the other hand has filled her obligations, disarmed fully, demilitarized the entire western part of her land up to 50 kilometers (32 miles) east of the Rhine, razed her fortresses; she had no military airplanes, no' heavy artillery, no tanks. She was absolutely defenseless. Considering this, the eternal cry of the French for greater security must be regarded as a mere humbug. Since the war France has become the greatest military p ver of the world, which means a continuous menace to Germany, a menace accentuated because of the close relations of France to the strongly armed “Little Entente,” and Italy that, as Mussolini himself stated, is able to throw seven to eight million men upon any theater of war in Europe, and also to Russia which has a peace strength army of nearly one mililon men. All these nations have armed to the utmost and encircle the disarmed Germany in a ring of steel. Very little indignation was aroused by this fact. The English and French papers had no word of protest. The allies were not put on the pillory because they had broken the treaty by their failure to disarm. But now. when the German govern- j ment, after having waited for 16 years, at last decided to provide security for its own country in order to place it in a state of defense against the increasing menace of the steel ring, it is accused of being a disturber of the peace and one encourages the other to adopt stern measures against the breaker of the j contract. None of the allies have disarmed. Therefore Germany, in order to be on equal terms with them, must j arm. a a a FAVORS GOVERNMENT LOANS TO INDUSTRY By R. F. S. One fundamental which contributed to the establishment and growth of the United States of America was constructive and productive work. This fact is yet true and undisputable. To bring this fundamental into action will preclude many problems now so confused in the minds of many persons. The compensation Daily Thought If the wicked restore the pledge, give again '.hat he had robbed, walk in the statutes of life, without committing iniquity; he shall surely live, he shall not die. —Ezekiel, 33:15. A WISE man will make haste to forgive, because he knows the full value of time and will not suffer it to pass away in unnecessary pain. l

.MARCH 28, 1935

| for productive labor is liberty and I comfort. I Representative Louis Ludlow Js working for the passage of a bjll which will permit direct loans deserving industry for the purpose of employing labor at a living wajje. Every thinking American shoujd support this constructive legislation by writing to Representative Ludlow, House of Representatives) Washington, D. C„ and assuring him of hjs or her support of this labor creating bill. ; In 1930 a petition was signed by a number of Indianapolis business men, asking the President to sebk legislation permitting direct government loans to industries producing necessary commodities but which through lack of money were unable to continue the fundamental American custom of employing labor. At that time the unemployed numbered about five million; today that number has increased about foijr times. Unless correct fundamentals are put into effect what will tomorrow be? The petition of 1930 was forwarded to President Roosevelt Ui 1933 to support his expressed putpose to put men back to work, $s by interpretation it was. thought such a plan as outlined was in substance, his idea. Our government did not then nor does it now have to borrow money and pay unnecessary interest but can loan direct to industry United States money without inflation. Who are the red-blooded Americans who want dole or a measly pension while able to perform woi|k to which custom trained them? Do these persons want idleness? No, they want work, family and home.; “Labor Omnia Vincit.” , t So They Say | ! 1 ■ > No man is free when he can not sell his labor—H. H. Stever(s, Canada’s former minister of tra<Je and commerce. , f Every punch in the eye I give Schmeling is one for Adolf Hitler.iMax Baer. J The practice of law is not a gaflie to get a criminal free, but m attempt to arrive at justice. / lawyer who knows his client is guilty and permits him to perjure himself makes himself a party to the act>Judge Horace Stern of Philadelphia. Cigaret Smoke; L BY MARY JOHNSON If idle pleasure turn mystic then! I Perceive it there inside the smoke drawn rings, • In the melt and mingle of the piiff sigh, ; In the blue haze and secret thought that swings ! Within the maze that lies and hangs between; Those are the things we hold, repress or hide, ! The rare deeper self-words who pa£s unseen, Before they are grown whole have gone have died. As the curtain drifts low above (is now • And keeps our lone’y minds within this musing spell. The two grey puffs do lightly mix and how We shall discern the two we can not tell, Nor now our thoughts can we divide or part, From us they came and now are one complete. Thus ’tis idle, this—still a magic art, In terser words, mind-friend, I will repeat With this puff ring I now thee wed, In thought, and that by us left most i MftfcaiA