Indianapolis Times, Indianapolis, Marion County, 26 February 1937 — Page 21

Page PDF (10.54 MB)

Back to issue view

PAGE 20

The Indianapolis Times

(A SCRIPPS-HOWARD NEWSPAPER)

LUDWELL DENNY MARK FERREE °

ROY W. HOWARD ; Business Manager

President

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

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

Owned and published daily (exeept Sundav) 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

‘Give Light and the People Will Pind Their Own Way

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1937

THE DANGER IN OBSTRUCTION (ID) HE spread of dictatorship throughout the globe since the war to make the world safe for democracy has caused many of those opposed to President Roosevelt's court proposal to cry dictatorship here. While we would consider Franklin Roosevelt just about the last among our 130 millions to aspire to that role, nevertheless we believe that there is future danger in the concentration of power which is inherent in his plan. We think there is a better and safer and more permanent solution. And we think also, speaking of dictatorship, that there is another and more probable source for that. It is obstruction—and the feeling of futility on the part of a people when they at last come to believe that the government under which they live has failed to function, and cannot

function, That feeling is an explosive factor in the situation today. We discussed it yesterday, quoting from a letter we had written to a reader. We continue: “Since Roosevelt took office we have seen a program worked out that spells hope for those who have suffered and wider ‘opportunity in the future years for those who work. un » 5 ” ” o “JN that program are such things as debt relief, soil conservation, rural electrification, crop insurance, aid to tenancy, on the agricultural side; on the industrial, assurance of the right of collective bargaining, minimum wages and maximum hours, housing, protection against monopoly, old-age and unemployment insurance. “Apart from what any one of us may think about that

program, and that economic theory, in all the details, the |

fact remains that the things proposed represent a vision of

better days to come such as the plain people have never | | NEW YORK, Feb. 26.—One thing 1 can’t

indulged in before. The overwhelming re-election of

Roosevelt expressed that vision and that hope. “Broadly speaking, the courts now stand as a wall

against the accomplishment. : “The people have voted and they expect delivery. And

anv long-delayed process of legalistic trial and error, hy |

which that expectancy, as written into the language of the law, routed its slow and ponderous way Supreme Court and back and forth, until by chance it be found to fit the interpretations of the Court as now constituted—that in our opinion will precipitate the danger of which we speak. For hove deferred maketh the heart sick, and hope has long been deferred.

“Now all that might point to the Roosevelt packing |

plan as the easy and quick way out. But therein is the other danger—the concentration of power and what that as a precedent might bring about. “So what to do? n xn on un n ”

“IN our belief, if Roosevell’'s proposal is beaten, and no | definite alternative to the court problem accompanies |

the defeat—if mere acceptance of the status quo is to be | | country, that was the regular thing to do

the result—then we foresee developments that will make

he pres a sit-down strikes s by arison | a a the present rage of sit-down strikes seem )y compe | more significant writer than we have ever realized

only a mild flirtation with illegality. “On the other hand, if a workable alternative is the outcome, though to achieve it takes time, we think that the American people, who are patient by nature ‘when thev know something is really being done, will ride along until the fundamental correction is accomplished. “There is, therefore, in our opinion, a closer threat of eventual dictatorship in continued obstruction and frustration than there is in packing the Court. The latter at least

would relieve the tension immediately, and a dictatorship | | and every other line, just as the Nine Old Men did.

move would be a matter for some future coup. But any

acceptance by those who rule that today’s acute condition |

is something that must necessarily become chronic may bring a doctor with the TNT. “So, we say, to avoid the two dangers, the job is to find the alternative. May the debate over the President's plan—the greatest debate since the one which preceded the Civil War—Dbring one forth.” Tomorrow we shall comment on the plan which of all vet discussed seems to us best to fit the need. (To Be Continued.)

PARI-MUTUEL BETTING UCH can be said for taking all gambling from the hands of the underworld and bringing it into the daylight, giving the profits to government and frankly regulating a public fervor which does exist whether it ought to exist or not. Moral crusades and police cleanups have failed to suppress gambling in any large city. The gambling instinct is inherent. No one knows this better than some sincere opponents of pari-mutuel betting who themselves support lottery parties. The United States is the only large civilized country which does not sanction large-scale gambling —witness the Irish Ilospital Sweepstakes, English Derby, Russian and French lottery bonds, Snanish ‘Christmas lottery, Italian municipal lotteries, Prussian State Lottery, Mexican National Lottery, ete. Ilistory shows you can't eliminate gambling by legislation. And paradoxically, gambling seems to have increased during the depression. At least 19 states have legalized pari-mutuel betting. But this same realistic view also forces recognition of the fact that liberality in the condonement of gambling has sprung from the financial needs of hard-pressed government units. States have gone into horse and dog racing to make money. They have been disappointed. Commercial gambling- boomed in 1935—a record year. Yet of the quarter to a half billion dollars legally bet on racing, and a sum estimated at several times this amount bet illegally in “horse parlors” such as Indianapolis and all other large cities have, the states collected only about eight million dollars. ; iS The big profits go to the race track operators. The uninitiated public always pays the bill. The state gets comparatively little in taxes. Most business surveys, such as the one conducted last year by the magazine American Business, look upon legal race track gambling as “taking money out of workers’ pockets” and diverting it from the usual trade channels. And so long as big-time gamblers, and not government, get most of the profits, this gambling will help finance crime. The House has passed a bill to legalize pari-mutuel

Goal rom enact

to the |

| opportunity

THE The First Robin—By Talburt

FRIDAY, FEB. 26, 1937

INDIANAPOLIS TIMES

LISTEN!

DO YOu HEAR WHAT | DO

— aLRyRT

Special Extraordinary Exhibit of Strength—By Herblock |

Fair Enough

By Westbrook Pegler Writer Sees Nothing Wrong in Choosing Men Who Have Been Successful Lawyers for High Bench.

get about all this ribbing and needling

| of the Nine Old Men is the assumption that a lawyer to be eligible for the big bench

must never make any progress in his line, but remain an office hack in sateen sleeves and a green visor or content himsell with hanging

around a police court. From all that I have read about

the ball club in Washington there | seems

to be great contempt for the Nine Old Men because they

| first became successful jJawvers.

As such, a lawyer naturally finds himself in demand by big firms, such as railroads and banks, which have plenty of money to spend. And, of course, he takes the work just as an actor takes the - to move out of the backroom of some saloon and sell his soul to Hollywood at $3000 a week. Under the rules which governed the contest while the present generation of adults were growing

Mr. Pegler up in this Horatio Alger, whoever he may have been, was a

or, anyway, admitted. Though he told the same story over and over, it was, to a whole generation of

| Americans, the sweetest story ever told.

The success-story authors of the post-war Repub-

lican era were only whittling splinters of Horatio's |

one idea and, looking about the present scene, I no=-

| tice a few individuals who are personally imbued with

the same ambition, which is to get up there near

| the top.

Anyway, I know that the rules haven't been changed, and that people are still scrambling and tussling to get ahead in the law. journalism, politics

" ” 5 STILL don't see anything very wrong with the ball team. Those old men have their little vanities and petty personal foibles, but they

| shouldn't count unless you are going to take testi-

mony under oath from all the wives of all the people who gloat over these personal peculiarities and make direct comparison. Everybody has these ornery or silly little traits and if old Mr. Taft had a leaning toward pompous splendor, then what is it that makes the common man move out to the suburbs and join a golf club and his wife sling a cocktail-bridge on the patio as Soon as they get enough money? As for Mr. Hughes and his inconsistencies, I can

show you equal inconsistencies in the writings of |

everyone who has had him in the grease and even

more suspicious ones in the record of Mr. Roosevelt. {

Naturally, a man who has been a corporation lawyer by way of proving his proficiency in the law, will come to the Supreme Court with at least a reasonable mind toward the corporate interests.

” ” n BX What are you going to do? Select a lot of venal old bums to out-vote the niné, or an equal number of judicial tankers to go into the water at the word of command from a man in the White House? And vet, T don’t think it would be illegal to do as the President demands. But I go back to the time when prohibition was slipped over on this country in the absence of the A. E. F. It was finally agreed that this had been a dirty trick, And I think it is indicative of Franklin's way that he didn't mention all this while the people had a chance to vote yes or no, but sprung it as a rush act when we were trying to tie our shoe, phick a duck and change the baby all at once.

General

. ernm~nt we, the people, have dele-

The Hoosier Forum

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

| SUPREME COURT CALLED { CITIZEN'S SAFEGUARD | | By J. G. Tinder | |

Any change in the highest judiciary of this land is of the utmost concern to every citizen. For over 100 years this body has handed |

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

| size of the legislative bodies to | prove the fact that mere numbers | improve nothing and accomplish | nothing but confusion and inefficiency.

Letters

vide an independence of the judi-

down decisions which have been |

controlling factors in the nation’s | get the persons who hold these opin(ions on a stand and ask them to | specify one single recent decision of | | the Court that does other than de- | cide who owns the goat. | True, the Court decided that in {the case of water and its remote electricity, | Government owns it. [ The Government seems to aspire | to own everything. Il is interesting | to note what the private owners >» w Ww

history and Government,

management of our Those powers of gov-

| gated in the Constitution are re- | flected in the Supreme Court of the United States. It has been the bulwark staying all legislation that would tear down or unduly extend | those powers, or suppress the fun(damental principles enunciated in | the Constitution.

| product,

Its importance cannot be over- | think of this decision that the man lestimated. Our Federal Government | OWNing the goat ‘doesn’t own it. The

is described as being built on a sys- | tem of checks and balances, The | 25

executive, judicial and legislative |

| or : i ar branches are separate and distinct | ernment steps in only to thwart S | erookedness and greed that might

| destroy common opportunity. The court and, judge critics, as

in their existences and capacitie {and no one can encroach upon the |

| rights to private property are as old humanity and are grounded in | every instinct and habit,

ciary from the legislative and executive departments. Our machinery | perverts this, but the present proposals would kill and bury modicum of independence that we have. If these critics would get to the bottom and lay these faults on incompetent and perverting legisla- | tures we might find some sympathy for efforts to reform the courts,

the Federal

RAPS DEMOCRATS OPPOSED TO F. D. R. COURT PLAN By Earl G. Cline, New Albany President Roosevelt has evolved the only plan possible for co-oper= ating with the Supreme Court, Are the New Dealers going to stand by

The Gov-

Our various constitutions all pro- |

| field of the other, or tamper with |

{ those powers which the Constitu=- | tion gives it. Each is a bar to pre[vent the others from overreaching their constitutional powers. As such, | the Supreme Court has become the | spokesman of the Constitution. {Since Marbury vs. Madison it has been the final test of any major {enactment of our legislatures. Supreme Court must jour Jovernment shall

so remain if continue in

Our |

| usual, fail to get to the roots. Our [laws and institutions are the products of our legislative bodies. The | groups have loaded the shelves with [laws that conflict and contradict [until no ‘one really knows what a {law is, thus putting an impossible | task on judges. These conglomerations of vision- | aries and self-seekers have caused | the courts to be loaded with cases that accumulate the dust of years.

and allow Hooverism in Congress and the press to defeat this plan? At present, it is useless to talk of either restricting, overriding or taking away the Supreme Court's power of veto. This is the task of some future Constitutional convention, not the New Deal.

The New Deal was established to | pull the nation out of .the depression | and frame measures to avoid future |

Hugh Johnson Says —

unchanging stability. It is not for us to criticize the actions of the individuals of the Supreme Court in the past, or weigh | their decisions on the New Deal | | cases which were declared uncon- | stitutional, or to theorize and | speculate on their advanced years or mental! abilities. Be that as it may, do modern times and conditions warrant taking from them any of their judicial powers? I maintain that they do not. Further, that any attempt to en[large or decrease the number of members force them to retire at a certain age, if sueeessful, would be a curtailment of their powers as individual judges. The passing of President’ Roosevelt's | bill would and could mean nothing | less than tampering with the | | judiciary by the executive and legislative departments. It would be | a great step away from our Fed- | eral system. . ” n n LEGISLATURES, NOT COURTS, ERR, SAYS WRITER By Zz. B. If a man owns a goat, does he own it? Or does the man who is hired to milk it? Or the neighbors, a church, a college, a town. a hoard | of aldermen, the State Legislature, | Congress, & labor union or the | President? |

Free as a bird

| T would not

Ol | Not even a seed | From a weed Can be found.

| Tt

| They'll

For their sake.

Cutter

And he

Can companies of men really own | Chronicles 27:2, anything? I noted. in The Times recently three defenses of the President's | proposal. 10 ¢hange the Supreme | Court. Tt would be interesting to

let

If We Want a Neutrality Bill to Prevent Our Being Pulled Into War to Defend Overseas Trade, Why Not Write Law With That Sole Purpose?

A ROTO, Feb. 26.—There ate four separate and more or less distinet sentiments mixed up in the so-called Neutrality Bill. It does not accurately distinguish them, The first is the popular repugnance to the idea of selling mankilling weapons. There is a good deal of unrealistic thinking about this, but it is a political and emotional factor that must be dealt with. Disclosures about the sinister life and works of Sir Basil Zaharoff and of certain European munition makers disgusted the world. Realistically there is not much difference between selling a belligerent. nitro-powder and selling him the colton linters out of which it is made, Especially in modern war there is hardly a peace-time commodity that is not a wartime munition, Peach stones are a base for gas mask charcoal. : " wu HE sentiment for prohibiting the sale of lethal weapons is more a humanitarian idea than it is a neutrality measure. We just don’t want to make money out of the sale of instruments for human torwire. O. K, but let's not call it “neutrality.” It isn't. The second sentiment that has nothing to do ‘with neutrality is a half-formed and also half-baked idea about venting our economic, as well as our intelloctuNo SisApprOval of ig and — nations which resort \ we do by withholding from them

problems. We can't prevent war or even alleviate war in this Way. We oan only hurt ourselves—both in peace And In war, By all means let's not call this neutrality. nN ” J HE third sentiment behind the “neutrality” bill is a desire to punish those who may make profits deriving from foreign war. This Is strikingly evident in the device of the bill using fines and prison sentences to enforce the prohibitions against sales and shipments, If what we really mean is that we don't want to 80 10 WAT 10 protect American profits abroad, ‘why isn’t that a question of governmental, military, naval and diplomatic policy pather than one of destroying our Xports, our imports and our ocean Carrying trade by making felons out of our citizens who engage in Internationa] commerce? th Sentiment--and the one that most of the public thinks js the only sentiment—is that we don’t want to get mixed up in the presently threatened world War, not even to prevent interference with our Overseas commerce such as sucked us into the World War op as it is popularly expressed; “We Won't send American soldiers or sailors abroad to give their lives 16 protect American goods ventured for Tan Profit into dangeroits waters.”

but a nia or

& A

| We need but the evidence of the

A BIRD'S APPEAL By HATTIE G. SNYDER Dedicated to Bird Lovers and Their Societies in the U, 8. A,

You've often heard, | I can go here or there Or most anywhere; [| But you'd freeze vour nose | And also your toes, mind If food I could find; With snow on the ground

DAILY THOUGHT did that which was right in the sight of the Lord, according to all that his father Uzziah did: howbeit he entered not

into the temple of the Lord. And the people did yet corruptly —II

ET us have faith .« makes might, and in that faith, us to the end, dare to do our duly, as we understand it.—Lincoln.

ite & 3 Tod . — ot wi ne | be.

President Roosevelt is to allow the New

depressions, too intelligent

purpose,

deal with the Supreme Court given the aid which is his due. All

the New Deal should give this aid.

ward turn upon him in a crisis. I prefer a do-nothing Republican to a Jeffersonian, and Frederick VanNuys to follow the lead of Rush then, come election day, I

Holt,

going out “gunning.”

Let's answer this call, » Ww W Bird friends, one and all. will be a treat | To see the birds eat. hop around gavly | At their tables daily And live until summer To sing for the number Who helped to save crumbs

FAVORS SUPREME COURT CHANGE By Lowell Rees I read in The Times that Rep. Pettengill is opposed to Roosevell's vrogram for the simple reason that a “packed jury, a packed court and a stacked deck of cards are all in the same plane.” By using that same reasoning, I can arrive at a point for my support. There is one infallible rule: Every one stands up for things that favor himself. Thus, since the present Supreme Court has done nothing to benefit me, but has, in fact, worked a hardship on me, T am in favor of a change in policies that our Supreme Court has upheld tor 70 or more years.

that right

If Finly Gray | continue |

—-

It Seems to Me: -

| |

By Heywood Broun History of Court Struggle May Record Authors of 'Of Thee | Sing’ As Strikers. of the First Blow. ASHINGTON, Feb, 26.—Two young men who have not been mentioned wet in connection with the Supreme Court fight

' may be identified as the pioneers when pos- | tervity gets around to writing the history of

this |

Deal to be turned from its original |

The President is perfectly able to | if |

and | thousands of New Deal voters are |

this period. Although both are well known to me, I am not informed as to which side they espouse, As a matter of fact, they may have struck the first effective blpw to diminish the prestige of the Court quite unwittingly, They were not playing politics, They were writing a show, It was called “Of Thee I Sing,” and it turned out to be a considerable hit, I have a vague memory that in the beginning there was stffhe little trepidation as to how ‘the theater-going public would accept a seene in which the Chief Jstice of the United States led his colleagues in a dance with tame bourine accompaniment, The answer was, the publie loved it. Possibly during a long run one or two per sons glared at the actors and walked out, I do not think that Morrie Ryskind and George S. Kaufman were consciously much concerned with propaganda, Neither one could justly he accused of radicalism, and when "Of Thee I Sing” was produced the Supreme Court was under no particular pressure, ' Herbert Hoover was President when the piece hee gan, although I believe it lived into the Roosevelt Administration, There is nothing in the play about amending the Constitution or adding additional jus tices, but by implication this musical comedy saicl that the Supreme Court was not sacred and that it could be kidded like any other human institution, And once a group becomes open to public satire all the game laws are off and potshots will he taken So, if and when any gentleman of more than 70 retires from the High Bench on account of pressure he will be within his rights if he shakes his fist at Kaufman and Ryskind before he makes his exit, i

Mr. Broun

Ou Ww ROM a recent but still unexpected quarter ‘fhe President has drawn aid and comfort in his court campaign. The new organization called the Lawyers’ Guild has come on the scene at a propitious time for the President, although that was not the motivating force among the founders of the organization, Senator Bone, of Washington, precipitated the conflict by sailing into the Bar Association at the Lawyers’ Guild dinner held here last Saturday. There was a certain irony in that, for Senator Bone has allied himself with Wheeler, of Montana, in opposing Mr, Roosevelt's proposals, » nn =

LTHOUGH Senator Bone made & speech which was good for the side I favor, 1 can’t pretend to have heen carried away by his eloquence and his timing. During the afternoon I saw him on the front lawn of the White House, and he told me that he would be at the dinner of the Lawyers’ Guild, where he planned to make a few hrief remarks.

This was of interest to me, as I had been prome= fsed a short spot myself. But the minutes and thas quarter hours and the half hours went by and Senator Bone was still talking, Just before midigght he got to his finish and said, “I'm sorry to ve taken up so much of your time, but I had no ¥dea 1 would be called upon to speak, and so I have just been thinking out loud for you.”

The Washington Merry-Go-Round

Roosevelt Has Been Cramming Congressional Legislative Mopper for Purpose of Calling Attention to important Bills Awaiting Court Change.

By Drew Pearson and Robert S, Allen ASHINGTON, Feb, 26,-~Judging from the amount of homework the President has dumped into the lap of Congress, the solons will be sweltering under the Capitol dome well through the summer, Since Jan, 5, when Congress convened, Roosevelt has sent eight separate messages to Capitol Hill-—and there are more in the offing, Plus routine supply bills, any one of these during normal times would be enough to engage Congress for a considerable period. Here is a tabulation of the fodder he has shoved down the Congressional maw so far: Jan, 6, annual message on the state of the Union: Jan, 12, message on Government reorganization; Feb. 1, message asking legislation to authorize acceptance of the Mellon art gift; Feb. 3, report of the National Resources Committee on flood control; ¥eb. 5, message proposing sweeping changes in the Supreme Court; Feb, 10, report of the Great Plains Committee on drought remedies; Feb, 16, message on farm ten ancy; Feb. 18, message asking for crop insurance program,

® ww XCEPT for work given the special session of Congress called immediately after Roosevelt's inaugirration in 1933, this is a record list, Usually Roosevelt gives Congress time partially to olear the decks before sending it new proposals. But this time it was wise strategy for him to emphasize the amount of important legislation await H je Oi ud i le 4 { i veh

Car Ee

NE of the most important parts of the Senate investigation into Pinkerton detective labor spy ing is the technique of the two Senators who draw it out of them, La Follette of Wisconsin and Thomas of Utah, the impresarios of this Senate drama, are as unlike as Mutt and Jeff. Bob La Follette is young, ihoisive, relentless, Elbert Thomas, who had been a Utah college bro= fessor for 20 years before he came to the Senate, looks like a friendly old country doctor. He puts a question in grave, kindly tones, as if he were saying, “How long have you had this fever, Mr. Pinkerton?” La Follette keeps his witnesses on the run. did you do about this confidential report?” .. . “What did he say to that?” . .. “Where did this take place?” Il he gets a witness who wants to talk and ‘has sense enough to be logical, La Follette lights a cigaret and lets him tell his story, But if his man is reluctant or evasive, Bob leans forward and barks out, “Céme clean now=-give us the story!” ‘ Thomas, the ex<professor, is no less persistent, « Te dwells on the ethics of industry and is surprised by the confessions, “You say you had a duplicate, 'key made without Mr, Jones’ knowledge?” he asks. “Do

you think that was right?” And he Insists on accuracy. “You say these men A A

“What

‘

Now what do you mean by ‘Come « , hen ‘ny man Who Joins a union 3