Indianapolis Times, Volume 47, Number 26, Indianapolis, Marion County, 10 April 1935 — Page 12

PAGE 12

The Indianapolis Times 4A *f RIPFS-HOWARD >EWSPAPKH HOT W. HOWARD Fre*ld*nt TALCOTT POWELL Editor KARL I*. BAKER Bu*ine* M*n*ger Fbon RTlty 5751

Member of United Serippe - HetrsirU Newp*rer All!ne*. Newuptper Enterprise Aenociation. Newspaper Information Service and Audit Bureau of Circulation*. Owned and publlabed daily texrept Sunday) by The Indlanapoli* Time* Publishing i'o.. 214-230 W. Maryland-*!, Indlanap- lia, Ind. Price in Marlon County. 3 re n a copy; delivered hr carrier. 12 rent* a week. Mall nubarription rate* in Indiana. $3 a year; ootaide of Indiana, 6.1 cent* a month.

Giro f.ipht and th .Vopl Will Etna Thrir Own Way

- ———f WEDNESDAY. APRIL 10. 1835. WAR PROFITS PLUS AFTER starting out to pass the McSwaln bill to conscript manpower and freeze profits in wartime, the House ended by eliminating the draft and putting in a 100 per cent excess profits tax. As passed this measure is full of faults which should be corrected in the Semite, but it is at least superior to the original McSwain bill. Whether the Senate will pass an adequate bill remains to be seen. One group is unwilling to hurt the war profiteers. Another group at the moment seems to be off on a tangent, expecting to solve this many-sided problem solely by drastic taxation. We doubt the ability of Congress to “take the profits out of war," since our national economy is based on profits. There will be profits, all right, if not open then disguised. About all that can be done at best is to limit the profits—the exempted profits being fixed in relation to current credit and money rates. That should be done. But that is only one part, and a minor part, of the job. More important as a measure to prevent war-mongering is the nationalization and government monopoly of the munitions business. And most important to keep us out of war is a law directing the President to ban all loans and exports for war purposes to belligerents, and to withdraw all American protection from citizens and ships entering fighting areas. The Nye and Clark resolutions introduced in the Senate yesterday are in that direction. It is good policy to curb profiteering when we are at war. It is better policy to prevent America being dragged into the war at all. JOBS OR WAR | jNDERSECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE wJ tUGWELL, speaking at Rochester last night, held up war or revolution as horrible alternatives to providing jobs for the unemployed. “It is not enough to abhor war or to repudiate revolution.” he said. “Pacifists have never prevented a great nation from going to war and all the policemen, law and order available have not preserved the greatest of empires from social revolution. It is only by utilizing the surplus man-power which has been set free by the machine to develop our national heritage and to reconstruct our ways of living that we can avoid the temptations of war and the risks of revolution." A few' days ago, Dr. Charles A. Beard, premier American historian, spoke even more graphically of the danger of being shoved by domestic economic forces into another foreign war. He said: “In the past when go\emments have had to choose between strong domestic and strong foreign policies, they have generally adopted a belligerent policy abroad. ... We must concentrate our efforts to make our great productive machine furnish food, clothes and houses for the masses. Either this or the old way of war —this is the fateful choice that confronts the President and Congress.” The few, but politically powerful, who are whining at the cost of President Roosevelt's work-relief program will do well to contemplate the more costly alternative.

NAVAL GOOD WILL IN response to an appeal to President Roosevelt by the Federal Council of Churches, the Navy Department has announced that next month's fleet maneuvers in the Pacific will be kept at least 2000 miles away from the nearest bit of Japanese territory. Flirthermore, as a good-will gesture, Admiral FTank B. Upham, commander of the Asiatic fleet, will visit Yokohama on the day the fleet exercises begin; and a little later on a squadron ol American destroyers will pay a good-will visit to Kobe. The Church Council feared that Japanese suspicion and antagonism would be increased by the fact that our fleet is to maneuver in Pacific waters. The Navy Department's response ought to go far to meet the objection. It all goes to show the peculiar problem that rests upon the naval authorities these days. If you maintain a fleet, and suspect that you may have to use it some day against a certain power, the logical course is to practice the maneuvers you would have to use if that day arrived. But if such practice stirs up ill-will and thereby helps to bring the unwelcome day nearer—well, what is the answer, anyway? CRITICISMS OF RELIEF A S the President prepares to spend $4,880,000.000 to put men back to work, two big criticisms of the whole theory of government relief get into the headlines. One comes from New York, where the FERA has been paying men and women to perform some rather peculiar jobs—such, for instance, as teaching eurythmic dancing, tumbling, and a thing called ’ boondoggling." studying population trends in Europe in the year 1000 A. D., putting on performances of “Uncle Tom’a Cabin," and so on. The other has arisen mo6t pointedly in Cleveland, where it is found that a certain percentage of relief clients prefer to stay on relief rather than to take Jobs In private industry. It is charged, thus, that the relief program spends money for work which might as well remain undone and that it undermines character by leading people to prefer government support to self-support. Before accepting these charges in toto, it is wise to look into the circumstances amidst which any belief program must be carried on. With work relief, the Important thing is not the work, but the worker. That is to say, we not primarily interested in getting % certain,

Job done; if we were, we would have done it when times were flush and the government had plenty of money. The main thing Is to get a man tied up with a Job—any kind of a Job, so long as it fits his own capabilities and enables him to feel that he Is earning his own living. Some of the jobs may be more or less useless, even ridiculous—but the men and women who are filling them must be kept alive, and we can either give them the wont they know how to do or go ahead and support them in complete Idleness. The first course is cheaper in the long run. The second complaint—that men prefer the dole to self-support—is the most serious criticism that can be made of any relief program. But the Cleveland situation has angles which are not apparent on the surface. It happens, for instance, that some relief clients will actually find their standard of living cut if they leave relief for outside jobs. The average relief budget is S2B a month, with free rent. A man leaving relief to take an outside Job must—naturally—start shelling out to the landlord. In most cases he has a number of debts, run up in the early stages of tie depression. As soon as he goes off relief and gets a Job, his creditors garnishee his wages. In the end, since wages are low, he often finds himself with less to eat, less money in his pockets, and less security than he had when he was on the dole. It may be weak and selfish of him, in such a case, to prefer the dole to a iob —but it is only natural. And the chief trouble may not be with the relief program so much as with the social system which leaves workers at the mercy of wage scales too low for decent living. CHAOS IN COAL IN the Guffey bituminous coal bill Congress has a rational project for stabilization of one of America's sickest industries. This measure is a permanent and comprehensive version of the coal code. It carries out Pres.dent Roosevelt’s demand for government supervision over natural resources in behalf of conservation, stabilization and elimination of “ruinous price cutting and inordinate profits." It approaches the new industrial ideal of partnership between owners, workers and government. The Guffey bill would put the soft coal industry under a national commission, named by the President with the consent of the Senate. This body would estimate the national tonnage needed, and then apportion production among 21 regional districts. It would fix standard hours and wages, and minimum and maximum prices. It would bulwark the workers’ right to br.rgain collectively, select their own checkweighmen, live in other than company houses, buy in other than company stores. A coal labor board would meditate disputes. Ownefs are encouraged to participate by the provision for a 25 per cent tax on mined coal, all but one per cent of which would be remitted to co-operating concerns. An essential feature of the bill is the creaof a huge fund raised through a production tax for government purchase of coal lands forced out of production and for rehabilitating miners thrown out of their jobs through stabilization. This bill is not perfect. The government, w’e believe, should have more power in carrying out production control. The public interest should be guarded by consumer representation on the commission. The commission also should have power to impose mine safety standards. And eventually coal's competing fuels should come under the same sort of regulation. The measure's greatest danger lies in its invitation to higher coal prices and its temptation to profiteering. Coal men, however, should not need to be reminded that theirs is not a monopolistic industry. Any undue rise in coal prices will drive consumers to the use of oil, gas and electricity. Today coal spells chaos in this country, with its mines capable of turning out 100 per cent more than the nation can consume. Some such measure as this is needed to prevent ruin for the operator and destitution for the miner.

BETTER MEN, BETTER LAND TT'EW New Deal agencies have proved as successful as the Civilian Conservation Corps. Few are as well prepared to go forward in our recovery program. Few are as certain to become permanent in our government structure. With general public approval and a fresh Congressional appropriation of six hundred million dollars, the CCC starts its third year with plans to increase its enrollment immediately from an average of 340.000 to 600,000 and to expand its useful work in conserving soil, forests and wild life. In two years more than a million young men have found Jobs in the CCC. From their basic pay of S3O a month they have sent home an average of $25. contributing directly to the support of approximately three million persons, most of whom otherwise would have been dependent upon doles. The number of incendiary fires in national parks and forests has been reduced by half, millions of dollars worth of valuable timber has been saved, great forests for the future have been insured by new plantings, killing of wild game in public preserves has practically ceased. Besides policing and reconstructing public lands, the CCC has helped launch vast soil erosion control demonstrations, and has started work designed to save the western plains country from the dust menace. The CCC is conserving human as well as natural resources. Young men, “green, underfed and untrained,” are rescued from streetcorner idleness and placed in camps where they get the benefits of discipline, good food, medical care and vocational and liberal courses of education. They are learning to use their hands and their brains and helping to rebuild the country for theirs and future generations. With the size and importance of the CCC increasing, great Care should be taken to kep clear its original objectives. Greedy patronage hunters are trying to pack the camps with politically appointed foremen and technical experts. Ambitious militarists are scheming to convert the corps into an auxiliary reserve. Fortunately, both President Roosevelt and Director Fechner are vigilant opponents of the militarists' schemes. But they may find It harder to the spoils pressure.

MEMORIAL TO ‘T. R’ 'T'HE Federal Relief Administration plans to purchase two sizable tracts in the “bad lands’’ of North Dakota and turn them into a public recreation area. Some 42,000 acres of land have been optioned, and present plans call for construction of a scenic drive following the Little Missouri River, erection of cabins and hotels, and laying out of camping site3, footpaths, riding trails, and so on. The interesting thing about this venture Is the fact that the park will be named for Theodore Roosevelt, whose old ranch lies right in that neighborhood. It would be hard to think of a more fitting memorial to “Teddy" than a western park where all the people could enjoy outdoor life. No American did as much to make us conscious of the heart-lifting openness and beauty of our great West as Theodore Roosevelt; nor did any one do as much to preserve the natural resources of that region for the public good. Theodore Roosevelt Park should be a welcome addition to our recreational resources in more ways than one. PARADOX ON THE FARM ALTHOUGH the Federal government has taken unprecedented steps in the last two years to reduce American farm production, an odd little cross-current in the tide of events has resulted in a substantial increase in the number of farmers. Census Bureau officials estimate that at least half a million new farms have sprung up in the United States during the depression. For the most part, it is believed that this is due to the return to rural areas of city folk whose jobs vanished when factories shut down. Over a period of many years our farm population steadily declined. It is surprising enough to find this trend reversed, over a five-year stretch; but to try to figure out just how this reversal is going to go hand-in-hand with our new policy of reducing farm production is something that might keep the brain trust awake nights. Liberal Viewpoint BY DR. pARRY ELMER BARNES 'T'HE clash between Bernard S. Deutsch, president of the Board of Aldermen of New York,, and William Hodson, Commissioner of Public Welfare and chairman of the Emergency Relief Bureau, is one which calls for calm analysis rather than emotional excitement or partisanship. Before picking the beam out of the eye of the social workers who have had charge of the emergency relief work, I would first like to extract the mote from Mr. Deutsch’s eye. He would turn over the Emergency Relief Administration to a group of business men, thus going to the other extreme from the control by social workers. He says; “We need emphasis on business administration and freedom from the professional social service psychology.” To this the obvious answer is that if the business men of New York and the United States were doing their own job of running the nation’s business in efficient fashion there would be no emergency relief problem. All but a few physically and mentally incompetent persons would be employed in regular wark. It is just because our business men have not handled their own job that we have a million persons on relief in New York and more than 20.000,000 on relief in the country as a whole. Therefore, criticism of the social work administration of relief by business men is, quite literally, very much like a criticism of the size of the country's crime bill emanating from the convict population of Sing Sing. a tt IF the business men of the country wish to help the relief situation they can do more by setting the country’s industry and marketing in order. Then there will be little unemployment and the social workers can return to their private charities where their ways are their own business and need concern only those who support such charities. Mr. Deutsch wants New York relief to be placed under “three men of known business ability.” If there are three such men in New York they should not be wasted on New York. They should be sent post haste to Washington to man the business personnel in the NRA, which has not thus far produced three men with such qualifications in any broad sense of the term, whatever their ability to make money for a time. Now for the social workers. Their defects in relief administration are of two major types. One is the result of the very virtue and excellence of scientific social work under normal circumstances. The other is less defensible and grows out of the “close corporation” and exalted professionalism of most present-day social workers. n n n DOWN to about the beginning of the present century social work was chiefly ameliorative. It aimed to relieve existing poverty and had little interest in eliminating the deeper causes of poverty. But gradually social work shifted its interest from relief to prevention. The latter emphasis called for deliberate and calm analysis of causes and a careful consideration of the merits of each case. It meant something more than simply handing out money for food, clothing and shelter—the ordinary duties of relief administration. Social case work made necessary’ the professional training of social workers. In order to protect themselves, social workers quite naturally tried to keep out of their ranks untrained persons and those who had not caught the scientific conception of preventive work. This latter tendency inevitably led to a professional caste spirit and an inclination to value the prescribed training for entry into the social work guild more highly than special individual ability. For the most part, this was all to the good In normal times when social work was functioning on special cases caused more by personal inadequacy than to the general breakdown of the economic life of the nation. The latter—which constitutes the* depression and creates the great relief problem of today—has brought into existence anew and unprecedented problem with which the ordinary method and perspective of professional social work are not competent to cope. From the standpoint of prevention and rehabilitation, for example, it is probably more important to spend $3,000,000 to teach the unemployed to play than to put that much money into food and clothes. But in a pure relief picture such expenditures do not make a good impression. The way out is not to turn relief over to business men or politicians. We need to exploit the professional training and competence of social workers. The solution is for social work to modify its outlook and technique in the light of the present unique condition, to suppress the “close corporation" attitude, to welcome honest criticism and full publicity, and to co-operate heartily with responsible and well-meaning outsiders. Chicago policeman’s life was saved when his billfold stopped a bullet. An answer to those who frown on cops accepting a little something on the side. Indiana woman held by police for throwing away SIOO bills. Probably some more publicity for Huey Long’s scheme.

THE INDIANAPOLIS TIMES

.'■•v v* . y * -. ' v' - V -SK&- y- ‘ . s -rfw*- *— ; r* . .*■ . T. . . .. .► .. ' . ?'■■■/■“■ ' '

The Message Center

(Times readers are invited to express their views in these columns. Make your letters short, so all can have a chance. Llimit them to 250 words or less. Your letter must be sinned, but names will be withheld at request of the letter writer.) a a a PICTURES WORLD IN BUSINESS BATTLE By Old Timer. The stage for the battle of the century has shifted from Washington, Detroit and Chicago, to Berlin. The whole drama is tinged with serious comedy. The industrialists and financiers of every nation are so intent on producing and distributing goods, both nationally and internationally, that they want to prevent all others from doing the same thing. It seems to be an obsession, if not a religion—gathering the raw materials from the far corners of the earth, to make them of service to mankind in manufactured articles or as food, none wish to be excelled by any other doing the same thing. To prevent others from serving the human race with goods, the contenders in service engage in trade wars, order their shotgun carrier governments to levy tariffs to prevent competition from becoming effective; they finance the sale of goods at home and abroad on long term obligations. They insist on preventing goods from other nations reaching the country in such volume as would equal the goods sent abroad, and then ca>l it good business if they hold uncollectable debt obligations, as they must when an equal volume of goods fails to balance international trade. The giants or babes in toyland have their governments create great instruments to kill the inhabitants of other nations who threaten to serve the world’s population with goods. Then armies and navies of the nation are the advance agents of the commercial organizations and also the mop-Op crew, if the competitors become successful in serving more customers than the home crew. They can’t take it. There will be ro war in Europe until the economic balance is threatened, until competitors seize the opportunity to serve. Now locally the boys are so anxious to serve the community that they devise many schemes to drive others from the field. In all these efforts they want to ignore the social implications of industry. Few consider co-ordination of effort on the part of all engaged in supplying goods and services; or in providing their consumers as workers the purchasing power to obtain the products of industry. It’s war among the producers at home and hell for the nations abroad if they intrude on these preserves at home with products for consumption. The World Court ought to set up a lunacy commission to find out why the industrialists have to be two-gun Petes to sell their goods. Armies and navies in modem times are the collection departments of business. They are a relic of caveman’s psychology. There ought to j be a Business World Court, to sentence the lunatics who want to destroy and kill, if others outdo them in delivering the goods. ana A. E. F. SERGEANT SPEAKS A PIECE By An A. E. F. Sergeant I am going to try to answer In the best way I can and in as few words as possible, the WTiter who called himself “A Regular Soldier." The war Was in 1917 and this man

THE LEGION OF THE DAMNED!

Asserts Right to Be President's Critic

By R. R. G. Is it unpatriotic to criticise the President of the United States? “Roosevelt Follower” seems to think so. I think not. It is unpatriotic to dumbly and blindly follow whoever w r e happened to elect to that office, regardless of the outcome. We should not, simply because we happened to be born a Democrat, let that keep us from doing our own thinking. The President is a public servant. We elected him to that office. In other words, w r e hired him. He is working for us and we have to pay his salary. If we are dissatisfied with his services, it is our patriotic business to express our dissatisfaction. I maintain that it is more patriotic to be interested in the welfare of our country than in the popularity of our President.

says he was a regular soldier and joined in that year. I wonder if soldiers are made in one year, or even two years. I joined the Army also and I am not sore because there happens to be an outfit like the Veterans of Foreign Wars. I can join them and I wouldn’t w'elsh if I could not. This guy can’t take it or he wouldn't be crying after 18 years. I have heard drafted men crying also, but I didn’t consider that any of my business and I don’t now. 1 This fellow thinks just because he joined he w r as better than the boy that was drafted, but he wasn’t. We were all alike in the uniform. There is the American Legion he ! can join, which is just as good to belong to as the V. F. W. Well, I will let it go at that, for I can imagine the laugh a real soldier would get when he read the headline “A Regular Soldier,” L“i a year or two. Here’s a few things I wonder if he had to do in the States: Did he have to sleep in the mud and I wonder if it rained in the States as often as it did in France and going over on the boat and coming back? I have seen things happen over there that I hope I never see again and it could not have happened in the States, and these boys were not in the front lines and never got there. But just remember, there are two good outfits to join. We don’t need any more now. I wouldn't be a sorehead if I hadn’t got over the pond. I wouldn't want to go over again, even if I didn’t go to the front lines, but I did ride all over France as I was a dispatch rider and I saw quite a lot. nan EXPLAINS CRITICISM OF PRESIDENTS Mrs. L. F. Kunkel I would like to set Julian Bamberger right in regard to the article I wrote for which he so roundly denounces me. The article was not written in doubt of the integrity of our Presidents. present or past. In fact, I stated I thought our President could guide our nation better by not listening to men like Bernard Baruch, but by taking the reins in his own hands. Only posterity can judge the actions of our present President. It is already judging the actions of a few past Presidents such as Wilson, the first to call in Bernard Baruch. Had I wanted to qiiestion the in-

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

Why not admit that our enthusiasm two years ago was illfounded, for after all. it has not been proved that President Roosevelt’s popularity was justified. It does not require a supermind to appropriate billions of dollars of other people's money, arid to date, very little else has been accomplished, and even that smells to high heaven of political play. The $4,800,000,000 works relief bill, just passed by Congress, is designed to put to work 3.500,000 men. That only leaves 10.000,000 unemployed, according to the latest estimate. So we are going nowhere fast. It has been written that Herbert Hoover has a lot of nerve to cast any glances in the direction of the White House for 1936. Unless there is a rapid change President Roosevelt will require just as much nerve.

tegrity of our Presidents, I would have mentioned the commercial war of President Wilson, for which we are still paying and our children will continue to pay. Are you proud of the Harding administration, Mr. Bamberger? But enough of that. The article was written to show that Mr. Baruch can still be a good target for attack by Father Charles E. Coughlin and Senator Huey P. Long. They would not ha ve dared to use his name had they not facts to back up their arguments. Where there is so much smoke, you can rest assured there will be some fire, or has the smoke blinded you, Mr. Bamberger? I voted for Roosevelt and probably will vote for him again, for I really believe Mr. Baruch will be gradually relieved of his duties, as were a few government men when they were found wanting. nun QUOTES BIBLE IN REPLY TO CITY DOG LOVER By B. ScroKnin. To Dog Lover—Study to present thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. II Tim, ii, 15. I am thankful, Dog Lover, you are not an artist. nun BLAMES JAYWALKERS FOR ACCIDENTS BT l F saw S on Saturday’s front page that officials can’t figure out why traffic deaths have doubled over last year, so they suggest hauling all violators to jail. That's well and good, but as a motorist and pedestrian, why blame it all on the motorist and let the jaywalking public run loose? On the fourth floor of one of the downtown stores, I get thousands of first-hand views of jaywalkers; 60 or more crossing between intersections, darting in between moving Daily Thought Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.—l Corinthians ii, 9. LET still the woman take an elder than herself; so wears she to him; so sways she level in her husband’s heart.—Shakespeare

APRIL If), 3035

autos, risking their own necks and slowing traffic to a standstill for a saving of a few seconds. Traffic deaths would be cut in half and traffic speeded up with the stopping of this dangerous practice. Smaller towns do not allow it and it surely has no place in our “No Mean City.” So They Say Though it is nice to achieve the perfect marriage, you lose the struggle when you get it.—Actor James Rennie, whose 15-year “ideal” marriage to Dorothy Gish faces dissolution. I am not interested in military training from the point of view of preparedness for war, but I am very much interested in it as a training in discipline, the most valuable ihing a young man can get.—Dr. E. M. Hopkins, Dartmouth president. In history, whenever the banking system of a nation has been made subservient to the politics of a nation. that banking system has inevitably been destroyed. Jouett Shouse, head of American Liberty League. Why shouldn’t women demand political recognition, not for personal advantage, but for the opportunity to serve?—Madame Secretary Perkins. Americans spend more for cigarets each year than it costs to maintain the Army and Navy combined.—Mrs. William A. Becker, D. A. R. executive. Food intoxication and alcoholic intoxication are similar in many respects. Each has its origin in perverted appetites.—Dr. R. P. Baker of Pennsylvania, addressing osteopaths’ convention. More dangerous than was Dillinger, perhaps, are those teachers and writers who are telling parents they must never spank their children.—Garry C. Myers, psychologist. Be gold-diggers, wives. Make your husbands dig deep into their pockets to give you improvement in your honfle.—Helen Hayes, actress. You can’t bring about abundance and prosperity through a policy of subsidizing scarcity.—Dr. Harry M. Laidler, Socialist leader. The more I saw of human beings, the better I liked dogs.—Mrs. Isabel McHie of Hammond, Ind. MY CAGE BY VIRGINIA KIDWELL Around and round my self-made cage I pace in gloom and never cease. I storm the walls in futile rage And never know a moment's peace. Around and round I butt my head On cold stone walls rebelliously, I never get an inch ahead. The future holds no hope for me. In wild revolt against my lot I hurt and bruise myself In vain, I plan and scheme —I scheme and plot To find contentment once again. But there Is nothing but a wall It binds my future, as my past, I I know that it will never fall i But Z shall faint and fall at laet.