Indianapolis Times, Indianapolis, Marion County, 20 February 1937 — Page 10

Page PDF (10.30 MB)

Back to issue view

PAGE 10

The Indianapolis Times

(A SCRIPPS-HOWARD NEWSPAPER)

LUDWELL DENNY MARK FERREE Editor Business Manager

ROY W. HOWARD President

Price in Marion County, 3 cents a copy; delivered by carrier, 12 cents a week.

Owned and published daily (except Sunday) by The Indianapolis Times Publishing Co., 214 W, Maryland St,

in Indiana, $3 a year, outside of Indiana, cents a month.

Co RIley 5551

Give Light and the People Will Find Their Own Way

Member of United Press, Scripps - Howard Newspaper Alliance, NEA Service, and Audit Buvreau of Circulations.

“WY

SCRIPPS — HOWARD

SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1937

FLOOD CONTROL CONFERENCE EPRESENTATIVES of nine Ohio River Basin states, meeting here to co-ordinate flood control efforts, have accurate information on much that needs to be done. The problem is no mystery. It involves building dams at the headwaters, prevention of soil erosion, reforestation, planting of soil-conserving crops, moving some flood-plane communities to higher ground, planning for flood control in city lowlands, as in Indianapolis.

The job ahead is to get these things done. That is

what the Ohio Basin Conference is working on. The effort |

is to prevent any continued unrelated action by the states involved which might delay a proper solution. So the states are seeking an integrated plan—one touching water supply and diversion, poilution, drainage, navigation, recreation and conservation. ! Long-range planning recognizes water control as a national program. The Council of State Governments, backing the conference here, called for uniform state laws on interstate and Federal co-operation in flood control. The Indiana Legislature this week enacted such a law. Groundwork for a national program has been laid by the recent National Resources Committee report and dozens of other surveys. The bringing together here of legislators, administrators and planners from the (lood-hit states is a step toward broad mutual approach to the problem. The recent floods provided an emotional urge toward co-operation. can capitalize on this momentum.

WHEELER ON THE COURT PLAN

N citing the dangers in the President’s Court plan—a

Mail subscription rates | 65 |

Wise planning against future flood disasters |

plan which he pointed out could be employed by a Hard- |

ing and a Daugherty as well as by a Roosevelt and a Cummings—sSenator Wheeler last night made a potent and characteristically courageous appeal to the liberals of the nation to stop, look and listen. Because liberalism and the New Deal have been synonymous, and because the Supreme Court blockade of New Deal legislation has been so devastating, the first instinct of the progressive when the President’s proposal fell from a clear sky was to go along with Roosevelt, even on this. But the obeying of that impulse was checked by many with a second thought. And as that second thought took on length, the dangers in the plan became more and more apparent ; danger first of reposing such power in the executive; danger in the precedent; danger in the proposal’s failure to present a permanent solution of a problem which has plagued the country in so many times of crisis in the past. When Wheeler speaks vou are listening to no Liberty Leaguer. You are listening not only to a life-long liberal but one who in the days of Daugherty suffered indictment, prosecution and persecution because of his progressivism. And when in his speech you read the references to Brandeis and to Holmes and to Norris and to Walsh, men who through many of the years of Wheeler's liberal career went with him against the then almost impregnable ramparts of reaction, vou realize that here is an opposition for no political effect, but rather one which expresses the deepest and sincerest of convictions on the part of one whose liberalism stands unchallenged.

IT'S UP TO TOWNSEND HE outcome of legislation for the merit system in State Government rests largely with Governor Townsend. The Legislature has not vet proved itself seriously interested in backing personnel management. It is common talk at the State louse that the Governor is not behind the movement. Yet the Governor and legislators—Democrats and Republicans alike-—were elected on platforms pledged to the merit system. Public demand for this tax-saving reform is unquestioned. I“avorable reaction has come from the Federal Government, from many states and cities. Arkansas and Tennessee recentiy passed merit laws said to be similar to the pending Indiana proposal. In Michigan, Republican and Democratic legislators, backed by Governor Murphy, are pushing a merit bill. Connecticut and other states are join ing the parade. Indiana presents a paradox. National civil service authorities say that more work for public personnel management has been done in Indiana, by the League of Women Voters and others, than in most other states. Yet we appear in danger of getting fewer results. Townsend can change this picture. The power is his. The responsibility of the leadership also is his.

PUBLIC WELFARE WORK EXPLAINED

HE free lecture series on local public welfare activities, |

opened this week by the Indiana University Extension Division here, is another example of how practical adult education is being adapted to current community needs. The series of 10 talks is intended for civic and other groups and for social workers. A similar first semester series, given chiefly by members of the State.Public Welfare Department, drew an enrollment of 386. The program should result in a clearer understanding of problems affecting public welfare departments of the State, City and County.

“WHERE THE STATES FAIL"

HE late Elihu Root had something to say touching on the issue now agitating Congress, the White House and the Supreme Court. It was: “It is useless for the advocates of state rights to inveigh against the supremacy of the constitutional law of the United States, or against the extension of national authority in the fields of necessary control, where the states themselves fail in the necessary perform@nce of their duty.”

| tributing out of her | income tax of 1 per

states. The other is by conventions in those states. Roy Deal of Winston-Salem,

Fair Enoug

By Westbrook Pegler

110,000 Employees of New York | City, All Exempt From Federal

Income Tax, Get Wage Cuts Back. | OPPOSES COURT REFORM

NEW YORK, Feb. 20.—Herbert Lehman, the Governor of New York, who pays

neither I'ederal nor state income tax on his | salary of $25,000 a year, has declared an end |!

to the emergency which required reductions in the pay of 110,000 employees of New York City whose base wage is $2000 a year or more, and who pay no Federal income tax on these salaries. Many of them pay no state tax, either, although people in private business or private employ who live in Governor Lehman's state have to pay both taxes on incomes in the same brackets. In fact, your correspondent knows a young woman earning one-tenth of Governor Lehman's tax-exempt salary who pays both Federal and state taxes, and is allowed no exemption for a younger sister's education because the sister is more than 18 and not a dependent in the strict legal sense.

Although the Governor sees the Mr. Pegler

| end of the emergency which com-

pelled the reduction of tax-exempt salaries, he does not vet see the end of the same emergency for those who provide his own $25,000 a vear, including the young woman with the nondependent but otherwise necessitous sister. yvoung woman still has the special privilege of consalary and extra emergency cent imposed by Governor Lehman for the period of the emergency. Perhaps it is a mere coincidence that the Governor discovered a way to increase the salaries of 110,000 voters in the public service whose already were nicely within the income tax brackets but all exempt from Federal taxation and, in many cases, from state taxation as well. This is a mayoralty vear in New York, and it is hard to see how this

generosity to a well-paid mass of citizens, already |

enjoying an important advantage over the tax-paying types, will react against his party.

" ” ” OWEVER, the Federal and state salary reduc-

tions have been restored, and as these are all |

exempt from one or both income taxes it would he unkind, to say nothing of its being bad politics, to discriminate against the city employees. Your correspondent observes an interesting reaction from the tax-exempt employees of the Federal,

state, county and city governments, to the proposal |

that they should pay in their brackets en a common footing with those who support them. They have been exempt so long that they deem it outrageous to propose their inclusion in the tax group.

The subject is large and is confused by the fact that many states have no state income tax.

” Ld ”

EW YORK, however, has an uncommonly hostile attitude toward a large group of commuters who live in New Jersey or Connecticut. An American living 10 minutes away in New Jersey is not even allowed certain deductions which are extended to aliens living in New York City. He discovers that his tax is deducted by his employer without any consultation at all. The employer just takes it and claims to hand it over to the State. But an alien living in New York may deduct various expenses and contributions, and at least he has the privilege of making out his own return. :

Amendment Calling for T

THE INDIANAPOLIS TIMES Mr. Lewis Resting After the Auto Strike—By Herblock

SATURDAY, FEB. 20, 1937"

me me er ee —————

Two Points of View !—By

hs # e

Talburt

fos Ee

SWELL NEW

BENCH~ NOW WE

CAN GET RID

a SAINI IE CASE! LOOK OUT ==

THERE'S A DIgTATOR

IN ITY

REMEMAER THE WOODEN HORSE

The Hoosier Forum

1 wholly disagree with what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it.=Voltaire.

EXPRESSES REGRET BORAH

By W. Scott Taylor Progressive Republicans, who have little to say in Indiana except at

the polls, will be somewhat disap- | |

cluded.

(Times readers are invited to express their views in these columns, religious controversies exMake your letter short, so all can have a chance. must be signed, but names will be withheld on request.)

| of corporation attorneys who owe | their position in life to big business. { Nor can I help but sympathize with | small stockholders, businessmen and industries, together with the | farmers, for refusing to respect de-

Letters

| preme Court.

pointed that Senators Borah and | | Johnson have decided to champion

| other millionaires, because we have

Americans have a mand representation in every

| cisions passed down by such a Su- |

right to de- |

The |

salaries |

| illusions, rather than face realities. |

What are these illusions? They are the illusions that the meaning of the Constitution is not a matter | of opinion, but an

| indisputable fact. They sions that were dispelled

illuthe

are by

unchangeable, |

important labor laws coming up for consideration. The present Supreme Court, I believe, would declare these bills void because the majority of the Justices are conservatives and this is liberal legislation.

let big industries pull the wool over your eyes?

Chief Justice himself when he said |

“the Constitution is what judges say it is.” Now that these illusions have been dispelled, it becomes obvious to everyone that when judges presume to decide questions upon which the framers of the Constitution left no word of | guidance, they are usurping the | policy-determining powers of Congross. When Senators Borah and Johnson refuse to meet this situation in a prompt and practical manner, as proposed by the President to carry

out the will of the people expressed |

at the polls, they confess themselves to be baffled by illusions which have long since been discarded. The Senators should not be fooled

by the clamor set up by reactionary |

newspapers, politicians and notables

the |

{ ” 3 ” SUGGESTS SURNAME FOR GEORGE VI

By Daniel Francis Clancy, Logansport

King George VI will have to have | some surname. In a newspaper the | | other day I saw the phrase “wooden |

regard for precedent” in relation to | him, George VI? George the Wooden. (he wooden do anything that his predecessors wooden). . . As Ickes weuld say before he left the room, “Pardon me-—I've got to sce a man about a hog.” . . . Poor Dr. Townsend, the only thing he's guilty of is excessive Americanism, That is a crime, but it shouldn't be punishable in America. . ..

v ” n

throughout the country. The masses |

lof people will be silent, as usual, | expressing themselves only at the | polls. When the President the election that “a way” would be | found to carry on the New Deal, the masses took him at his word. They | left it to him to find the way. The | people want action, not oratory, and they will be no more easily confused by the slogan “packing the court” then they were by the other slogans which they consigned oblivion. " " »" | BELIEVES CONGRESSMEN | SHOULD RECALL ELECTION |

| By K. W. 8.

said before |

to |

| LABOR HAS RIGHT TO COURT | REPRESENTATION, BELIEF | By L. L. Patton, Crawfordsville It seems to me it is time for | Americans to quit kidding them- | | selves that we can change a cor- | poration attorney into a people's {attorney simply by putting a Su- | preme Court kimono on him. It is [time to recognize the old adage, | “Once a corporation attorney, always a corporation attorney,” and to apply the good old American principle of representation to the Supreme Court. I cannot help but sympathize with labor for refusing to respect a court decision passed down by a group

How much longer are you going to

branch of government, including the judicial. The present precedent for appointments to the Supreme Court | does not give them that representa- | tion, If we are to have respect for the Supreme Court, we must make it a representative institution. We can do this by recognizing the economic cleavage that exists masses and by establishing a prece=-

preme Court that will representation to all classes. Mr. Roosevelt seems to be starting us on the way along this line,

” ” ” LEGAL BETTING STILL BETTING, WRITER SAYS By O. N. Moore Maybe R. F. Jr. is right in his letter in the Forum Feb. 3. Maybe | legalizing betting on horse races is | the very thing. It involves a good | principle, too. Betting is consid. [ered wrong. In fact, il’s a crime, | but pass one law and iv would be a virtue to bet your hard-earned | money on horse racing. | Not only that, “ut you would become a public benefaccor, as 10 per

cent of what you lost would go to [the tax man. In addition, that

| fine, upright class of people who | (and |

| follow the sport of kings bums) would be attracted to the

| state.

R. F. Jr.'s letter should be read. | | It has much food for thought. The |

| whole idea in the cure for crime lis to legalize and tax it. |crime a license to operate and let | all sober people keep out of the way. G-men by the hundreds chasing kidnapers—just a waste of time and

among our |

dent for appointments to the Su= | guarantee |

Give |

To those who question whether |

In acres

| men were carried to victory through DAILY THOUGHT So likewise shall my heavenly Van- | pather do also unto you, if ye hearts everyone his brother their tires- | power to appoint six Supreme Court | passes.—St. Matthews 18:35,

from your

| justices and name a retirement age | | for old ones, a big controversy has arisen. Opposing the movement are | the du Ponts, Morgans, Fords and

mercy, and

General Hugh Johnson Says—

wo-Thirds Majority of Supreme Court to

Invalidate Legislation Seems Wisest Path Out of Present Impasse.

ASHINGTON, Feb. 20.—Now that there develops a possibility of the President's court-packing plan not going through the Senate, the question arises, “What then?” The difficulty of writing any amendment to the Constitution has been discussed at length by many commentators. If you suggest, “the Congress will have power to regulate that commerce within any state that affects more states than one,” you are writing what, in the language of Chief Justice Marshall, has already been said, The question would still be one of interpretation. If you write “the Congress shall have power to regulate industry, labor and agriculture within the several states,” you would raise, especially in the South, the question of states’ rights so emphatically that it is doubtful if any such amendment could be ratified. ” " o

O% smart idea that has been presented to this writer is that the President's bill be passed as proposed and that a constitutional amendment preventing any future packing of the Court be submitted to the country. This is expedient. It attacks the enemy in his own camp and, I believe, would be ratified. But it is another slick trick and ought not to be seriously considered. The Constitution provides for two methods of ratification. One is by the legislatures of the several

served with me during the war, has given me a very intelligent brief which suggests that. Since ratification by conventions is a power conferred by the Constitution itself and the Constitution is supreme law conferring what aathority it gives to the Federal Government, the Congress could prescribe all the incidents of ratification by conventions. If this is correct, and I have yet to hear any argument reasonably refuting it, the Congress could propose an amendment with a two-thirds vote and provide for conventions within any reasonable time— a month or three months,

» ” ”

S has been previously suggested in this place, whenever the framers of the Constitution did consider the veto power, they provided for a twothirds majority. Under the Anglo-Saxon system of trial by jury, unanimity is required, either for conviction or acquittal, Yet, in military trials, a majority is made sufficient except for the sentence of death. Having observed both systems, the writer's opinion is that a better rule than either would be the twothirds majority. The writer's suggestion in the present impasse Is a joint resolution calling conventions in all the states within three months to pass upon a proposed amendment to the Constitution requiring a two-thirds ma-

C.,, a lawyer who

aL A

jority of the Court for the invalidation of any act of Congress or of the legislature of any state

STRIKE—=YOU, TOO, FARMER?

By KEN HUGHES The worn plow Is red with rust While the plumes of weeds Wave the dust

Where the yellowing grain Once felt the beat | Of crystal rain,

———

“W hand folks over to God's

selves.—CGeorge Eliot.

he Washington Merry-Go-Round

money, Make kidnaping lawful and give the Government half of the ransom. I heard of a man in Chicago who paid $50,000 just to have one of his enemies taken for a ride. The police are still looking for the man who did the work. Under R. F. Jr.'s pian, we could license the gunman and collect $25,000 in taxes. There seems to be something wrong with the whole idea, however. Suppose, for instance, a man woke up some night, saw a burglar going through his trousers, took a shot at him. When the cops showed up he might be licensed second-story-operator,

The

forgive not

play an illuminated sign. But 1

don't know, perhaps

anticipation of how much we are going to win on the parimutuel machines. I'm ag'in’ it.

show none our-

held for murder of a | law should require burglars to cis- |

we'd better | struggle along without the glorious |

OF TROY!

It Seems to Me

By Heywood Broun

Connecticut Farmers Seem to Be Against President's Court Proposal; Town Meeting Held at New Canaan,

NEW YORK, Feb. 20.—My fellow-farmers around Stamford, Conn., seem to be up | in arms against the President’s proposal to liberalize the courts. From my cornfield I can see the turrets of the taller barns in New Canaan, where a town meeting has just been held to register a stern dissent. When I'm home nothing ever happens, but if I stray off to New York or Washington, Stamford or one of the neighboring towns ims mediately makes the front page. Possibly if one sat long enough on the Hunting Ridge Road the whole world would pass him by. 3 In a sense the town meeting fe 3 ea indicated that the world has al- § Ea ready passed New Canaan, since F the report in the Herald Tribune - said, “Probably not since the days vi of anti-slavery agitation has this E quiet little town of 6500 popula | tion been so stirred a national issue.” The analogy is not altogether happy, since in those days New Canaan was on the other side and | fought against slavery and the decision of the Sus | preme Court which would have extended slave terris tory. The Republican Party in those days led the fight for amendments. The process was constitutional, 1 suppose, although a little cumbersome. The device | employed was a civil war, Only 300 of New Canaan's embattled farmers turned up at the recent town meeting, but as Archi= bald E. Stevenson explained, “Half our people are in Florida or California at this time of year.”

up over

Mr, Broun

”

HILE Archie Stevenson, late associate counsel for the Lusk Committee, is leading the fight for freedom in New Canaan, Walter Lippmann has taken over the command of the strategy in New York. Mr. Lippmann has become somewhat milder in the tone of his remonstrances against the Roosevelt pro= gram, Mr. Lippmann has now returned to the art of persuasion, and, indeed, he has gone to the length of admitting that he himself has not been entirely satisfied with the judicial setup in this country. “Ewer since 1912, when I first began to realize what the Supreme Court was doing to social legislation in the states, it has seemed to me that something was wrong,” he writes. Today or tomorrow Mr, Lippmann is going to an« nounce his own remedy after worrying about the problem for 25 years. I am beginning to understand now what some of the critics mean when they say that Franklin D. Roosevelt is too hasty,

”

EFYORE announcing his own plan Mr, Lippmann has examined and discarded every other—or at any rate, all four groups into which most of the pro=posed amendments fall. Like many other crities, he has assailed the President for not seeking change through the “orderly process of an amendment.” But the unwritten postscript seems to be, “Try and find one.” Even if Mr. Lippmann’'s own plan is excellent i% will still serve to muddy even further the approach by amendment and leave confusion worse confounded, I have no faith in people who are “all against child labor,” but also against the amendment. And I am beginning to have my doubts about a great many passionate believers in progressive legislation who merely { think the President is using “the wrong method.” 1 | think their passion should be accepted only when | heavily salted.

u u

” ”

Chief Justice Hughes' Greatest Pride Has Been the Supreme Court, and

With Controversy Raging

By Drew Pearson and Robert S. Allen ASHINGTON, Feb. 20.—As he nears his 75th birthday, Charles Evans Hughes, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, is a tragic and lonely figure. There is nothing which Mr. Hughes dislikes more than controversy. He used all his persuasive eloquence, all the weight of his prestige, all the power of his careful legal reasoning to heal the breach between the liberal and conservative wings of the Court.

But the greater his effort, the greater the conflict appeared to become. The keynote of Mr. Hughes’ character is reasonableness. He is one of the most reasonable men in the world. There was a day when he was ambitious for greater renown, brighter limelight, bigger and better things for Charles Evans Hughes. Those were the days when he resigned from the Supreme Court to become a candidate for the Presidency of the United States. Those were the days also when he was a spectacular and highly successful Secretary of State, and when, after resigning from public office, Mr. Hughes appeared to accept any and every case which came his way, no matter what its merit, in order to rebuild his private fortune.

ww » HARLES EVANS HUGHES is very honest, and

according to his own reasoning, a sincere and plausible person, In fact, plausibility is his chief

About It, He Is Tragic and Lonely Figure,

weakness. He has championed s0 many causes on so many different sides of the fence that he seems able to argue himself into the firm belief that almost any side is right. And in his latter years on the Supreme Court he has swung back and forth between the liberals and the reactionaries so furiously in his apparent effort to please, that he has pleased no one--unless it is himself. Mr. Hughes’ greatest pride—at least until the present—has been in the Supreme Court. He has wanted it to be efficient and the most respected body in the land. ” ” ”n R. HUGHES has discoursed at some length on the place the Court might occupy in public esteem if it kept its decisions free from politics. And during the last three years of Court decisions on the New Deal Mr, Hughes has made it evident to his colleagues that the prestige of the Supreme Court was very much at stake. During the inner chamber argument which the justices held on the constitutionality of the AAA last year, newspapermen standing in the corridor could hear high-pitched voices. Suddenly above all the others came the strident voice of the Chief Justice: “Gentlemen! You are not only ruining this coun-

try, you Pe ruining this Court!”