Indianapolis Times, Indianapolis, Marion County, 10 March 1937 — Page 14

Page PDF (10.74 MB)

Back to issue view

PAGE 14

a a a hak

THE INDIANAPOLIS TIMES.

The Indianapolis Times

(A SCRIPPS-HOWARD NEWSPAPER)

W. HOWARD MARK FERREE President Business Manager

ROY LUDWELL DENNY

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

by carrier, 12 cents a

week, Mail subscription rates in Indiana, $3 a year; outside of Indiana, cents a month

Member of United Press, Scripps - Howard NewsPaper Alliance, NEA Service, and Audit Bu- ChE reau of Circulations. Rlley 5551

Give Light and the Peopie Wil Find Their Own Way

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 10, 1937

THE BAKER-CANCILLA RECESS

3 cents a copy; delivered |

65 |

OEL BAKER, while he was in hiding the night after the |

brutal assault on Wayne Coy, telephoned police that his friend Cancilla would surrender in a few hours. He did not. Now. after authorities have searched for nine days, not only tor the fugitive Cancilla but also for the missing Joel Baker, Florida messages are received by two Indianapolis newspapers purporting to come from Joel Baker and saying that he will return here later this week. These messages were sent after the Investigating Committee announced it would recess yesterday because of its failure to find Baker and Cancilla.

Of course, the sender of these messages— |

whether Joel Baker or someone else—was careful not to | communicate with the Committee or authorities searching |

for Baker and Cancilla. We hope Joel Baker does return quickly to testify, both in his own case and in the Cancilla case. For Joel Baker has a right to his day in court, and of all the damaging testimony presented against him none has been as devastating in the public mind as the mere fact of his disappearance. In recessing yesterday, pending the appearance of Joel Baker and Cancilla, the Legislature's Committee promised to continue as soon as possible its sweeping investigation. Meanwhile, County IP'rosecutor Spencer and his aids are preparing for presentation to the grand jury the case against Cancilla for “assault and battery with intent to kill.” Whatever may the these cases, two things at least have been proved by the official inquiries since March 1: One is that Joel Baker and Cancilla practiced political intimidation of the worst sort.

he outcome of

County Welfare Board.

THE FIRESIDE TALK

"THROUGH the President's speech last night ran a stub-

born, somewhat defiant, insistence that his own in-

genious plan for revamping the Supreme Court is the only |

way to carry forward the purposes of the New Deal. He conceded—though it seemed a somewhat reluctant

concession—that there are some Americans “who honestly | believe the amendment process is the best and who would

be willing to support a reasonable amendment if they could agree on one.”

But the alternative of a constitutional amendment as a |

method of curbing the exercise of the judicial veto of economic and social legislation was waved airily aside. “There are many types of amendments proposed,” Mr. Roosevelt said. “It would take months and years to get substantial agreement upon the type and language of an amendment.” Other possible alternatives he ignored entirely, such as, for example, the proposal that Congress specify, by legislative act, that the Court cannot overrule legislation except by a vote of two-thirds or more of the Supreme Justices. Some eminent constitutionalists have held this to be a perfectly proper remedy. the President's “cure.”

It would be as speedy as

And, certainly, if it succeeded, it would be of more |

lasting consequence. For the President's scheme does not

In any way restrict the powers of the Court; it merely pro- |

vides a way for him to put his own Justices on the Court.

And it is altogether probable that future Congresses would | find those same justices standing in the way of legislative |

solutions to the problems of other generations. =n " on (OR the moment, let us revert to the President's phrase “substantial agreement.” It is quite true that no alternative would have much of a chance unless great Congressional and public support rallied behind it, and that as vet there has been no such “substantial agreement” on any other plan. : 3ut it also is true that that happens to be an outstanding weakness in the President's plan. Although a good number of Democrats in Congress are going along with him, they are going reluctantly, and largely for partisan political reasons. Their hearts are not in the fight. And—this we think is significant—as yet not one single Republican in Congress has indorsed the plan. Can the President say that a plan denounced by all Republicans in Congress and by a large bloc of independent Democrats has behind it that “substantial agreement” which he rightly holds to be necessary for effective action. Mr. Roosevelt is a good prosecutor. His indictment of the reactionary majority justices, who have masked their “economic predilections” and social prejudices to usurp the policy-making powers of Congress and state legislatures, rang true. Mr. Roosevelt is also a good salesman. But he has failed to sell this particular bill of goods. And he might do well to be less impatient with those who see flaws in his merchandise. He might, if he weren't so cocksure of the infallibility of his own judgment, consult with others whose motives are as pure and purposes just as progressive as his own, and thereby arrive at a real “substantial agreement” on some compromise method, support for which would not have to depend upon a party whip but would rest upon the solid foundation of popular approval.

KIDDING THE TAXPAYERS HE Government has to have the half billion dollars annually that it gets from the so-called “temporary” nuisance taxes which expire around July 1. But the House Ways and Means Committee has decided to postpone action until June, and then rush through an extension bill. Congressmen are in the profession of politics. They think that politically it is more prudent to skim the revenue off the cost of living. Their reasoning is that direct taxes are visible amtl therefore painful, while indirect taxes are invisible and therefore painless. The argument, it seems to us, is one that places a pretty low valuation on the intelligence of rank-and-file voters.

Secandly, that Joel Baker | and Cancilla are members of a larger political ring whose | ramifications reach into the State Legislature, the Indian | apolis Police Department, Marion County courts and the |

’ I =,

ATR TARE TREES

Turning on the Heat—By Talburt

“ae X

stn

—— an 7G TW

——

Fair Enough |

By Westbrook Pegler Dramatics of the Over, but the Real

Reconstruction Has Just

NEW YORK, March 10.—Now that the

Begun.

Flood Are | Work of

| PARTLY DEFENDED

| By Gene Engle

water has gone down the Ohio River |

nothing more is heard about the flood, be- | es

| pockets of consumers annually.” individual wretchedness of the |

cause there is nothing dramatic about the worry and thousands of people whose homes stood up to the eaves in water or just disappeared from view, When the river was up, and the apparent as a whole the situation lent itself to writ-

ing and qualified as news all over the country. There were many heroic acts with which to adorn the narrative, none more dramatic than that of a crew of men in Evansville who kept to their work in a well or pit below the river level for days to maintain the water system, kncwing that if the walls ever weakened they were just gone Then, too, there was the excitement and a general spirit of selfsacrifice in which the American Legion, the Red Cross, the National Guard and the local doctors pitched in to lend a hand wherever they But the dramatics and the news ebbed inch by inch with the water. and by the time a town was high and dry again the story was over. High and dry? Well, high but not dry, a house which has stood in the Ohio River week or 10 days does not dry out at once. people came back to find silt everywhere. And, of course, there were other houses out in the current which walked away to jam against the trees or other houses or overturn against hidden obstructions.

disaster was

Mr. Pegler

because for a The

n n ” N the rural country, cows, horses, mules, pigs and chickens were gone. After the food goes down the disaster character. ponent little disasters, and these, individually, are not the stuff that headlines and radio broadcasts are made of. Then it is every man for himself, each with his family to care for, his ewn job of reconstruction and his problem of running his credit at the store

changes

| or buying new animals somehow,

If new houses are to be built in the place of the dwellings which were lost or damaged bevond building that will be a blessing, as too manv of the hovels which were finally affected vears after they

1e-

had served their time had paid themselves out.

8 ” on O reduce the problem to simple terms, what happens when a man comes back to a little home that has stood in a flood for a week? Our kind of man hasn't any money, that's certain, because the

could. |

It breaks up into all its thousands of com- |

| |

The Hoosier Forum

I wholly

disagree with what you say, but will

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

GAMBLING AND DRINKING

umns, cluded. I'd like to voice my opinion on | the things that H. L. Seegar is so set | against: He mentions gambling first. $6.600,000,000 out of

a the It does take money out of the pockets of “suckers,” “marks” and “saps.” But where does the money go? Into the bank to stay? I'll tell the world it doesn't. Gamblers are the biggest spenders in this country. They can't keep their money. They spend it on automobiles, traveling, cating and other things If they spend it on how many men does work to? I'm not writing this because 1 believe in gambling. I'm not against it, either. I just don’t do any gambling, but if there are people foolish enough to throw their money away instead of using it to a good purpose, let them go to it. You can't keep them away from it by merely telling them to quit.

of the law's

the Government

the country.” automobiles

that furnish Of

similarity

registered,” Mr,

tates of sound

| have registered.

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

| permit this one all-embracing test constitutionality move up to the Supreme Court. But, he said, “despite the pleas of | not stockholders’ money , companies, under the advice of their lawyers, brought 60-odd cases against Government

Suits Mean Fees course every for the counsellors, to other “About 80 per cent of the holding companies of the nation have not Landis “Some companies, following the dic=- | business | and not the bad advice of lawyers, |

invited to

Letters

to Explains Lawyer Control “Lawyer control of the high court,” he said, “rests only on public sufTerance and tradition. , . , That is why we need to check up on our- | selves. . . . | “Legal philosophy sets up a meth- | od of thinking that is not accepted | by any other profession. . .. Other men are known by their fruits; we | judge our work only by logic. Con- | gress looks forward to results, the

to waste the . . the holding

throughout the

suit meant fees | regardless of i's

suits,

continued. judgment, | not |

They were

STATE SENATES AND LEGISLATURES.

Dime. a.

E MORE |LO2EN LEG)

SLAT, ; STep " ORs E THAN (nN MENT,

«+ BUCK*PASSING BETWEEN

It Seems to Me

By Heywood Broun

Roosevelt Seems to Have Happy Faculty of Making Best. Speeches When There Are Men on Base.

NEW YORK, March 10.—President Roosevelt seems to have the happy faculty of making his best speeches when there are men on base. lis appearance at the Victory Dinner was certainly in the role of a pinchhitter. And he delivered.

The argument for or against the present composi= tion of the Supreme Court is likely to last into May and I do not think any columnar commentator should feel called upon to discuss it every

day. This one has no such intention.

Indeed, this column is offered as noncontroversial since I purpose to discuss the manner of the President rather than the substance which he brought up in one of the most skilful public utterances he has ever made. That isn't controversial. Even his enemies admit that he was very good last: Thursday night. Of course, if I use the words, “stirring Mr. Broun political address” instead of ‘“skil-

ATA A9

Why not let them gamble and set such a high income tax on money gained in this way that gamblers will be discouraged in pursuing their work? Mr. Seegar says that more than three and a half billion dollars are spent on liquor every year. Well, where does that money go? Thousands of men work in breweries and distilleries to make that liquor, others haul and transport it. Bartenders mix drinks, waiters and waitresses serve the liquor and musicians are employed to the drinkers. What do all people do with the money carn? Keep it? I don't drink. I have my opinion of drinking, as well as gambling. " n n

those they

OFFERS COUNSEL FOR

U. S. COUNSELLORS By W. S. The controversy which has arisen over President Roosevelt's proposal to overhaul the Federal judiciary, 1 believe, makes timely a review of what

| American bar had to say recently

| concerning

certain practices and

tendencies of their profession.

James M. Landis, who soon is to|

| retire as chairman of the Securities

{ kind I have in mind are just pay-day people when |

they can get work and there hasn't been much work these last few years. The mud is pretty bad, but he and the family slush

| it oui the doors and open windows, if there are any

left, to let in the air.

| after

bedding dry out. but the plaster is bulging. The table and chairs are all sprung, and will have to be put togethel The widow suffer

might

most drop

the children always funeral. Someone

and the father's

| around and see how they are doing— just in case they

| need a dollar.

| of all direct munitions in war.

General H ugh Joh nson Says —

| lawyers. His remarks were so timed |

and Exchange Commission to become dean of Harvard Law School, delivered the other day what was

more than an academic lecture on!

legal ethics to high-priced utility

| and pointed as to make them of

| holders who pay the fees. Gradually the place and the |

special interest to utility stock-

entertain |

two eminent members of the |

| their ordinary functions and | advantage of returning while the rest of the industry, un- | registered and therefore

lagged and suffered tremendously.”

One company which did register, | putting out a refunding | issue on which it will save $900,000 |

he said, is

a vear in interest. But the companies

Liberty League lawyers,” “have been cutting their own and their stockholders’ throats” “have cost the consumer and | stockholder unguessed sums”

penalties, ranging as high as $500,000

A PORTRAIT

By PATRICIA BANNER She wears a faded calico. Won't bother to wear shoes. Dips snuff and chews tobacco, Never known to have the blues. She works for every one in town, A most consistent thief. Attends camp meetings around, And clings to her belief. Wardrobes are locked when around; The most beloved old town.

she’s rogue in

DAILY THOUGHT

unable tol issue securities and take advantage | | of the present capital market, has |

which defied | (| the law on “the mad advice of the | he said, |

miles |

Legal philosophy requires us to consider modern labor relations in terms of precedents made by slave

| light of decisions by men who, if they heard the term, would have thought it meant return of fugitive slaves.” 7 It just happens that both tioned prominently as Roosevelt appointees to the U. S.

| Supreme Court.

tributing to a little

% much-privileged profession. # a n* | STERILIZATION LAWS HELD DANGEROUS

| By Lowell Rees

The State Senate acted in favor |

| of a bill to enact a sterilization law.

| pertaining to feeble-minded persons. | To me, any law of such a nature is | Indiana !

distasteful. I know that has had a sterilization law regarding a particular kind of insanity since 1873 and that it has not been abused. However, such laws are dangerous. | In Germany, for instance, | person who does not see eye-to-eye with the powers that be is declared | insane or feeble-minded.

What we need is laws that strike |

owners, and social security in the!

Mr. | Landis and Mr. Jackson are men- | possible |

every |

at the root of such afflictions, not |

| at the innocent persons.

The ma- |

Celebrating the Government's | sweeping lower court victory in the Electric Bond & Share Co. case, Mr. Landis recalled that when it first started administering the Utility Holding Company Law the SEC asked all holding companizs to come forward and register, and

standing

ereth.—Quarles.

Take vou wise men, and underand Known tribes, and I will make them rulers over you.—Deuteronomy

~f HE light of understanding hu1 mility kindleth. and pride cov=- |

Senator Nye Wants Government to Manufacture Direct Munitions In War, but, Assuming Press Reports Correct, This Is Military Suicide. |

EW YORK, March 10.—Senator Nye

wants |

the Government to undertake the manufacture |

Assuming the press

accounts of his bill are correct, what the Senator pro- |

poses is military and naval suicide. No one doubts the good faith of Gerald Nye. He is fanatic on the subject of war profiteering. To the

extent that it has been practiced, it is enough to make |

anybody fanatic. But the way to kill a cancer is to cut it out. There is another way to kill it—by cutting the patient's throat. The operation is successful but the patient dies. That is the technique of Senator Nye. He scrubs our soiled baby and then dumps it down the drain-pipe with the dirty backwater. Those who mobilized American man-power and industry in the World War long ago called attention to war profiteering and inflation and, for the first time in history, proposed adequate legislation for taking the profits out of war. They had seen the whole complex economic and military process of war-making in intimate detail and at first hand. They knew what could and ought to be done and what was impossible without defensive paralysis.

u ” 2

ENATOR NYE hadn't seen anything and didn’t know anything. That is no criticism—he was a very young editor in North Dakota. But it is criticism that he didn't give a hearing to anybody who had seen and did know about that greatest of collective national efforts—Baker, Hoover, Garfield,

}

McCormick, Baruch—all the heads of the most ef- |

fective war mobilization in history.

Not one was |

consulted except Baruch and that only to try and |

discredit him,

Instead, Senator Nye called to council |

a bunch of parlor pinks who knew even less than he |

did, : It was a telling slogan and they appropriated it— Take the profits out of war.” But at instead of meaning “abolish all profits due to war,”

| it came to mean “abolish all profits 1n war.”

| |

n n n HAT also was cutting the patient's throat Kill the cancer, because our whole economy geared to the profit system. quires the economic structure functioning at its peak of efficiency. It is a paralyzing suggestion that a nation shatter the very foundation of its economic system at the first far threat of war. What Senator Nye proposes here is pure communism. The only country that ever tried it in the midst of war was Russia and it ruined her. The Senator's present proposal to nationalize munitions manufacture is similarly tragically dangerous. Production of munitions in a major war requires the conversion of from one-third to one-half of all peace-time manufacturing facilities to the produc-

their hands, |

to | is

Modern major war re- | same high and lofty purpose—that of preventing any

tion of direct munitions. The idea of the Government |

providing stand-by plants to do this work involves paralleling the existing industrial set-up and holding it in idleness.

| Johnson resents the Administration's secret sabotag-

| faulters.

among your

1:13.

ful political address” some might object that I was taking sides. So let it stand at | “skilful.” Mr. Roosevelt's great ability as an orator lies in | part in his range. There was a time when the critics said, “Oh, yes, he’s very good, but there's too much of the Roosevelt charm. He tends to coo at the lis- | tener. Indeed, during some of his fireside chats you might. get the impression that he was both talking and toasting marshmallows at the same time.” But there were no marshmallows last Thursday night and not very much of the Roosevelt charm. He bit his words and did not caress them. One factor in the success of Mr. Roosevelt as a speaker has been the element of surprise. For instance, there was a pretty general notion that the speech for the Victory Dinner would be only a warm-up for the Fireside Chat on the Constitution and the state of the nation, " " " NE of the technical devices used very effectively by Franklin Roosevelt is the repetition of some phrase. In a sense he is less a phrase maker than his | fifth cousin was. But T. R. was a phrase maker in a different and it seems to me a lesser sense. He succeeded in popularizing certain combinations of words | not very much in general use. : With the possible exception of “economic royalist” this has not happened to Franklin D. Roosevelt. One

he succeeds in putting extraordinary emphasis on the [ word “now.” And “now” may constitute the vital ar- | gument which the President is making in favor of his | proposals. ( ” ” on | TN his capacity as a popular psychologist President Roosevelt has at times espoused difficult causes, | There can be no doubt that the Supreme Court issue | has always been regarded as political dynamite. But, Franklin Rocsevelt has been wise in adjusting his strategy to familiar lines of American thought. And one of the most familiar questions in this country happens to be “Why not now?” Remember, IT am not arguing the merits of the President's plan. As I have said, this is a noncontroversial column. It concerns Mr. Roosevelt's tech= nique rather than his political philosophy. And so I think I am still being completely neutral if I end bv saying that the Victory Dinner speech was so good that T have no idea how anybody will be able to make an effective answer.

The Washington Merry-Go-

Round

With Roosevelt Turning Heat on Senate for Approval of His Court

Reform Plan, Position of

By Drew Pearson and Robert S. Allen

ASHINGTON, March 10—As Roosevelt turns more and more heat on the Senate to obtain approval of his Supreme Court reform, the position of the liberals becomes like that of the victims of the | Spanish Inquisition. They are in great pain, but religious fervor comes first, Actually, their convictions are almost identical with Roosevelt's. - They believe categorically that the Su- | preme Court should be curbed. They differ only in the method of approach, All of them, of course, claim to be motivated by the

President, no matter who he is, from getting too much power. But they have their personal prejudices besides. ao " ”

HEE is the roll-call of the outstanding Liberals, with their personal reasons for opposing the President’s judiciary reform: Senator Hiram Johnson has been irked of late over the way the White House has been falling over itself to appoint any and every Democrat—some of them very mediocre—whom the other California Senator, William Gibbs McAdoo, has recommended. Also

ing of his law barring U. S. loans to war debt de-

Liberals Becomes Increasingly Unpleasant.

Senator Borah, at heart, is no real foe of the courts. Also, despite his refusal to support Landon last year, he is, and always w:ll be, an old-fashioned Republican partisan. Senator Burt Wheeler of Montana, like Johnson, has been offended at the type of appointments made

| by Roosevelt in his state.

Down deep in his heart, Wheeler considers Roose

| velt much of an opportunist, and his Court scheme | an instance of this trait.

” ” ” ENATOR O'MAHONEY of Wyoming, another able and hard-working Democrat, secretly is piqued at the Administration's indifference to his Federal Incorporation Bill. Although he dislikes the Roosevelt plan, O'Mahoney is likely to vote for it rather than see the reactionaries win. Senator Nye of North Dakota is a militant liberal, but subject to occasional outbreaks of G.O.P. partisanship. He kept out of last year’s Presidential fight because he was secretly for the New Deal, but in the closing weeks of the campaign permitted the disclosure of some Munitions Committee testimony regarding Elliott Roosevelt which savored of Republican propaganda. Like O'Mahoney, Nye is no last-ditch foe of the

President's proposal, and in the end may be found voting for it, /

da J v

can hardly speak of him as having coined a word when’

, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 10, 1937 | Some Reasons State Rights May Be Lost—By Herblock