Indianapolis Times, Indianapolis, Marion County, 20 February 1937 — Page 11

Page PDF (10.70 MB)

Back to issue view

PAGE 10

The Indianapolis Times

(A SCRIPPS-HOWARD NEWSPAPER)

ROY W. HOWARD LUDWELL DENNY MARK FERREE

President

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

Mail subscription rates in Indiana, $3 a year, outside of Indiana, 65 cents a month.

Y SCRIPPS = HOWARD

Give Light and the People Will Find Their Own Way

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

Member of United Press, Scripps - Howard Newspaper Alliance, NEA Service, and Audit Bu-

veau of Circulations. RIley 5551

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. X 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 sur-eys. 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. Wise planning against future flood disasters can capitalize on this momentum.

WHEELER ON THE COURT PLAN

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

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

ing and a Daugherty as well as by a Roosevelt and a Cummings—>Senator 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 you 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, you 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 yet proved itself seriously interested in backing personnel management. It is common talk at the State House 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. Favorable 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 joining 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: “Tt 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.”

Business Manager

12 cents a

Roy Deal of -Salem

NS PE

THE INDIANAPOLIS TIMES

TH penn

oa Ab AGREY ential

Fair Enough

By Westbrook Pegler

110,000 Employees of New Yok |

OPPOSES COURT REFORM

City, All Exempt From Federal Income Tax, Get Wage Cuts Back.

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 yet see the end of the same emergency for those who provide his own $25,000 a year, including the young woman with the nondependent but otherwise necessitous sister. young woman still has the special privilege of contributing out of her salary and extra emergency income tax of 1 per 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 salaries |

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 year 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. 8 n " [ JOWEVER, the Federal and state salary reductions have been restored, and as these are all exempt from one or both income taxes it would be unkind, to say nothing of its being bad politics, to discriminate against the city employees.

Your correspondent observes an interesting reac- |

tion from the tax-exempt employees of the Federal,

state, county and city governments, to the proposal |

that they should pay in their brackets on 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. n n un

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. :

SWELL NEW

BENCH= NOW WE

REMEMRER THE WOODEN HORSE

The Hoosier Forum

I wholly

disagree with what you say, but will

defend to the death your right to say it.—Voltaire.

EXPRESSES REGRET BORAH

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- | cisions passed down by such a Supreme Court.

Letters

| pointed that Senators Borah and |

| Johnson have decided to champion | other millionaires, because we have | important labor laws coming up for

illusions, rather than face realities.

Americans have a right to demand representation in every branch of government, including the

LOOK OUT = =: nil x THERE'S A DICTATOR ie Vii

It Seems to Me

The |

What are these illusions? They are the illusions that the meaning of the Constitution is not a matter | of opinion, but an unchangeable, | indisputable fact. They are illusions that were dispelled by the Chief Justice himself when he said “the Constitution is what the judges say it is.” Now that these | illusions have been dispelled, it be- | comes obvious to everyone { when judges presume questions upon which the framers

of the Constitution left no word of |

| guidance, they are usurping the | policy-determining powers of Congress. 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 |

that | to decide |

| By Daniel Francis Clancy, Logansport

{ him. George VI? George the Wooden, (he wooden do anything that his predecessors wooden). . . As Ickes wculd say before he left

| the room, “Pardon me—I've got to | + » POOL}

see a man about a hog.”

punishable in America. . ..

| representation to all classes.

King George VI will have to have | Roosevelt seems to be starting us on |

some surname. In a newspaper the | other day I saw the phrase “wooden |

regard for precedent” in relation to | | BETTING, WRITER SAYS

judicial. The present precedent for appointments to the Supreme Court does not give them that representation, 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-

dent for appointments to the Su- | guarantee | Mr. |

preme Court that will

the way along this line. o n ” LEGAL BETTING STILL

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 |

Betting is consid-

ered wrong. In fact, it's a crime,

among our |

| newspapers, politicians and notables | throughout the country. The masses | |of people will be silent, as usual, | expressing themselves only at the | polls. When the President said before 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 con- | fused by the slogan “packing the court” then they were by the other | slogans which they consigned to oblivion.

By L.

to apply the ” o ”n

| BELIEVES CONGRESSMEN | SHOULD RECALL ELECTION | By K. W. 8S.

Supreme Court.

L. Patton, Crawfordsville It seems to me it Americans to quit kidding selves that we can change a cor- | fine, upright class of people who | poration attorney | attorney simply by putting a Supreme Court kimono on him, time to recognize “Once a corporation attorney, always a corporation attorney,” and good old American principle of representation to the

I cannot help but sympathize with labor for refusing to respect a court decision passed down by a group

”

money on horse racine. Not only that, “ut yeu would beIs time for | cont of what you lost would go to them- [the tax man. In addition, that

into a people's | follow the sport of kings i bums) would be attracted to the | state.

It is

old adage, should be read.

the R. F. Jr.’s letter whole idea is to legalize and tax it. Give 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

To those who question whether Roosevelt or Landon was elected: Remember an election in 1936, | when Roosevelt was the standardbearer for the New Deal and Landon led the old Republican Party and | Roosevelt stomped all over the Lan- | don supporters? | It was a battle between the rich land poor. In that election we gave | Roosevelt the power to handle our | economic affairs because he showed | | us that he was interested in legisla- | | tion for our good. Some Congress- { men were carried to victory through | | his election who should be on their | knees begging our pardon. Van- | Nuys is one unworthy man. Now that Roosevelt wants the power to appoint six Supreme Court justices and name a retirement age | for old ones, a big controversy has | | arisen. Opposing the movement are

Wave In acres

from your

{ | |

STRIKE—YOU, TOO, FARMER?

By KEN HUGHES

The worn plow Is red with rust While the plumes of weeds the dust

Where the yellowing grain Once felt the beat Of crystal rain. DAILY THOUGHT So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye hearts everyone his brother their trespasses.—St. Matthews 18:35,

E hand folks over to God's mercy, and show none our-|going to win on the parimutuel ma-

| | a | the du Ponts, Morgans, Fords and 'selves.—George Eliot.

General Hugh Johnson Says —

Amendment Calling for Two-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. » n ”

NE smart idea that has been presented to this O 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 Snomy i wis own amp and, I believe, would be rati3 ut 1t is another slick trick be seriously considered. Plus wie The Constitution provides for two method ! s of ratification. One is by the legislatures of the several states. The “other is by conventions in those states. » N. C, a lawyer who

served with me during the war, has given me a very intelligent brief which suggests that. Since ratifica-

conferring what authority 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, * ¥ 9» 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,

cient 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 majority of the Court for the invalidation of any act of

Congress Or of the legislature of any state,

tion by conventions is a power conferred by the Constitution itself and the Constitution is supreme law

unanimity is required, either for conviction or acquit- | tal. Yet, in military trials, a majority is made suffi-

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. Tyere seems to be something wrong with the whole idea, however. Suppose, for instance, a man woke up some night, saw a burglar going

him.

licensed second-story-operator. The law should require burglars to dlisplay an illuminated sign. But 1 don't know, perhaps we'd better

forgive not

anticipation of how much we are

chines. I'm ag'in’ it.

'but pass one law and it would be |

la virtue to bet your hard-carned | | LABOR HAS RIGHT TO COURT |

REPRESENTATION, BELIEF

| come a public benefacoor, as 10 per |

(and |

It has much food for thought. The | in the cure for crime |

through his trousers, took a shot at | When the cops showed up he might be held for murder of a

struggle along without the glorious |

CAN GET RID

’

SE dase

lewis" as

PACKING

CASE !

Cals a NN

IN iY?

$ 5 Ll re ata

OF TROY!

SR a.

‘By Heywood Broun

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

EW 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 heen 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. In a sense the town meeting indicated that the world has already passed New Canaan, since the report in the Herald Tribune said, “Probably not since the days of anti-slavery agitation has this quiet little town of 6500 populas tion been so stirred up over 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 Supreme Court which would have extended slave territory. The Republican Party in those davs led the | fight for amendments. The process was constitutional, I 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.”

Mr. Broun

” u u

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 program. 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, “Ever 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.

” ” ”

EFORE announcing his own plan Mr. Lippmann has examined and discarded every other—or, at any rate, all four groups into which most of the proposed amendments fall Like many other critiss, 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 it 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 pas= sionate 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.

The Washington Merry-Go-Round

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.

» td ”

HARLES EVANS HUGHES is very honest, and according to his own reasoning, a sincere and

| weakness.

About It, He Is Tragic and Lonely Figure,

He has championed so 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. on ” ” 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=

plausible person. In fact, plausibility is his chief

try, you Fe ruining this Court!”