Indianapolis Times, Indianapolis, Marion County, 17 July 1939 — Page 10

PAGE 10 The Indianapolis Times

(A SCRIPPS-HOWARD NEWSPAPER)

ROY W. HOWARD RALPH BURKHOLDER MARK FERREE President Editor Business Manager

_ Owned and published Price in Marion Joundaily (except Sunday) by ty, 8 cents a copy; delivThe Indianapolis Times ered by carrier, 12 cents Publishing Co., 214 W. a week, dlaryland St. Mail subscription rates in Indiana, $3 a year; outside of Indiana, €5 cents a month.

«> RILEY 5551

Give Light and the People Will Find Thetr Own Woy

Member of United Press, Scripps - Howard Newspaper Alliance, NEA Service, and Audit Bureau of Circulation.

MONDAY, JULY 17, 1989

TO THOSE WHO PAY THE DUES HE labor leaders overplayed their hands and the politicians walked out. You can always count on politicians to do just that when a “cause” ceases to indicate votes. So the WPA strike against the Government is flattening, as support in Washington is withdrawn by the group of U. S. Senators who galloped in and galloped right out again. Reason given—“embarrassment.” Thus the prevailing wage issue dies, so far as this session of Congress is concerned. The incident is a part of a pattern, and of a trend. When politicians quit labor, as when politicians quit prohibition, things move fast. What has happened because of excesses now endangers not just the form but the substance— the whole principle—of the Wage-Hour and Wagner Labor Laws, two of the greatest advances ever attained for those who work by the sweat of their brows. Reaction has set in. = » ® ® 2 HE WPA strike, with the exception of the sit-down, was a mistake. It may prove the most disastrous thing that has ever happened to the workers, to relief, and to social security in general. It is jeopardizing the whole WPA program. “You cannot strike against the Government,” said President Roosevelt. But, in defiance of the President and in disregard of public opinion, the leaders continued the strike, and blood flowed—of all places—at a WPA sewing project. More than almost any other type of project the WPA sewing activities are pure relief, utterly made-work. Such a strike has given to the critics of Mr. Roosevelt and to the opponents of relief excuses to say: “See, we told you so. There is complete lack of appreciation.” But it wasn't the sewing-project workers who started the strike. They were the poor and unfortunate pawns in a power game going on among the leaders at the top of the labor movement. =

= = ® n = HE strike has played into the hands of every reactionary in the country. It has been a boon for all those elements who would like to crush unions, suppress civil liberties and regiment the people as they have been regimented in Germany, Russia and Italy. It is suicidal for | organized labor. It is building public resentment not only against WPA, but against all those other human measures adopted under the New Deal to help the poor and weak. The nation knows that a strike against the Government

Fair Enough

By Westbrook Pegler

Recalling Some Interesting Bits Of History Concerning Huey Long And the Oil Industry in Louisiana.

EW YORK, July 17-On Nov. 27, 1934, when Huey Long was at the height of his power and fighting the Standard Oil, the United Press carried a small item out of Baton Rouge which read as follows: “The Win or Lose Oil Co. sponsored by a group of Huey Long's followers, came into being Sunday, and preparations were made to begin drilling 50 wells on state property. For its share the state will receive one-eighth of the wells’ production if oil is found. The drilling, however, is in the center of the State's richest oil fields. “Charter has been granted by the State, showing capitaiization at $10,000 and naming James A. Noe, Long's legislative leader, as president, Noe owns 98 per cent of the stock. Seymour Weiss, described as unofficial treasurer of the Long organization, is vice president, and Earl Christenberry, Long's secretary, is secretary of the oil company.” The Win or Lose Oil Co. appears to have prospered. Mr. Noe and Mr. Weiss each reported an income of $902,396 from Win or Lose in 1935.

” =

N a recent dispatch from Baton Rouge, Ray Daniell of the New York Times reported that Earl K. Long, the present Governor, Huey's brother, had demanded the resignation of the incumbent head of the minerals division of the State Department of Conservation and had appointed as his successor Davis McConnell. Mr. McConnell happens to be a brother of Mrs. Huey P. Long, and Mr. Daniell writes that Mrs. Long “is reputed to be the president of the Win or Lose Co., which holds valuable gas leases.” The Conservation Department, of course, has to do with the protection of such natural resources as oil and gas, and the minerals division, of course, would be the bureau directly in charge of these public treasures within the earth. The pattern of Louisiana politics and interests is unusually blurry at the moment, so the particular qualifications which commended Mrs. Huey Long's brother for the important responsibility of preventing unwise exploitation by oil companies, including the Win or Lose, have not been brought to public attention. An intimate or venal official in this job might overlook or tolerate irregularities in the industry, but the new Governor took counsel of his maker and his conscience on assuming office. Thus it may be hoped, at least, that his selection of Mr. McConnell was prompted by the highest motives—which would be a novelty in Louisiana. ” 2 ®

BOUT the time Win or Lose was chartered, Huey Long, serving an ancient personal grudge

=

against Standard Oil, enacted a high tax on oil re- | | fined by Standard. Standard then threatened to close | | down and disemplov thousands of Louisiana voters |

who in this alarming situation turned their resentment on the Kingfish. This flurry of anger was in part responsibie for a pathetic little. rebellion in arms at Baton Rogue which Huey put down with the state militia. Nevertheless, Huev backed down. He explained that his intention was to promote the prosperity of the Louisiana oil industry, which, incidentally, includes Win or Lose, and agreed to waive 80 per cent of the tax on Louisiana oil refined by Standard. Thus far the public has nothing more than a very rough sketch of the oil situation in Louisiana politics and of the affairs of Win or Lose.

Business By John T. Flynn

If War Occurs Then Will Be the Time For Congress to Chart U. S. Stand.

is in itself a form of rebellion. It knows that if Congress | can be whipped by strike action into passing certain laws, | then the next logical step is to compel other legislation by | other violent means. Hence, the public revulsion. Hence the run-out by the politicians from a strike that cannot be won—a strike which, if continued, could only react increasingly against those engaging in it. Those who have been taking part have been woefully misled. Yet to them—to the rank and file of labor, as to the voters in a political democracy—stems the power to deal with, to correct and chastise and change their leadership.

CARL G. FISHER ARL G. FISHER, who died Saturday in Miami, was one | of the genuinely great promoters of his time. He | built cities. He was one of the founders of the Indianapolis | Speedway. He established the Prest-O-Lite Storage Battery Co. He was identified with various automobile manufacturing companies in Indianapolis when men were dreaming of this city as the automobile center of the nation. Although he had not lived here for a number of years, one has only to ride through the city to see monuments on every hand to the imagination and speculative daring of this colorful Hoosier. And down in Florida magnificent Miami Beach will always stand as a monument to the peculiar talents and abilities of Carl Fisher.

DUCKING THE TAX COLLECTOR UOTING from a statement by Undersecretary of the : Treasury John W. Hanes, favoring a proposal to prohibit future issues of tax-exempt securities: “Each of two individuals receives $2,000,000 of income, derived in one case entirely from taxable sources, and in the other, half derived from tax-exempt bonds and half from taxable sources. One of these individuals pays a tax of $1,448,000; the other $678,000. Both of these individuals have the same amount of income but the one deriving half of his income from tax-exempt securities reduces his effec- | tive rate of taxation from 72.4 per cent to 33.9 per cent. he individual receiving half of his two-million-dollar income | from tax-exempt securities had as much left after tax as an individual receiving $4,800,000 of taxable income.” “Anyone with a net income of more than $18,000 can derive a net tax advantage from buying wholly tax-exempt securities. In 1937 there were nearly 100,000 such persons specifically recorded by the income tax statistics. There are, of course, many others not recorded in these statistics because many individuals do not report their holdings of tax-exempt securities. We know, in fact, that some individuals with very small taxable incomes have very large taxexempt security holdings. One special analysis, for instance, revealed that in 1934 33 individuals who reported less than $5000 of net income received tax-exempt interest ranging in amounts from $100,000 to $1,000,000. In other words, tax-exempt securities can—and do— afford opportunities of tax avoidance, not only to the 100,000 individuals with taxable incomes over $18,000, but to a substantial number of others whose taxable income is but a minor part of their actual income.”

HE'S NO OYSTER GECRETARY ICKES has issued a message commending the ovster growers of America. We, also, like the idea of growing more oysters. And, now that we know of’ Mr. Ickes’ regard for the oyster, we wonder why he so seldom emulates that admirable oyster characteristic—

| to remain neutral.

silence. (

about the Neutrality Bill which seems to persist. The charge is made by the supporters of the President's policy that the bill as it now stands will tie the hands of the country and force it to be on the side of the aggressors if war should come. The theory of this is as follows: The law prohibits the shipment of arms to either party to a war as soon as the President proclaims that a state of war exists between such countries. The result of this will be to prevent this country from shipping arms to the nations which are attacked, to the democratic naticns as well as to the Fascist nations. Now the confusion arises out of this—that this law will prevent this nation from putting itself on the side of what it may consider justice and right. This is not true. The law says, in advance of any war and not knowing just where or when a war may break out or about what, that when it starts no arms can be shipped to either side. This means that the President, the State Department, the munitions makers shall not have the right to sav who shall be helped. The instant war starts a condition of complete neutrality will ensue on the part of this country. But when this arises, the country may not wish It may feel a sense of outrage against one of the parties to the war. Some aggressor nation may attack some principle, some right or some nation in which our people feel a deep interest.

Congress’ Power Protected

Is there anything in this law which will prevent the country from changing its policy and throwing in its support on one side or the other by means of money or credits or arms or whatnot? Absolutely nothing. All there is in this law is an enactment which prevents anybody from committing the country but Congress itself. If and when a war starts Congress—the body entrusted with the war-meaking power by the Constitution, the body which represents the people— may change this law. But the President cannot do this, nor can anyone else. The question then arises—who should be entrusted with this power of putting this great country on one side or the other of a European quarrel? The President or Congress or both? The advocates of the neutrality policy believe that only the Congress of the United States and the President, acting together under the Constitution, should have the right to say what side of a war this country will adopt as its own. And that it can do even with this law on the books (Copyright, 1939, NEA Service, Inc.)

A Woman's Viewpoint

By Mrs. Walter Ferguson

ERTAIN adjectives damn with faint praise. For { example, when somebody tells me that Fran is “the sweetest person who ever lived,” my instincts sound faint warnings, and forever after I shall be on my guard against Fran. Experience has long since taught me that the woman commonly known as “sweet” can be as deadly as an army with banners. Her voice is sdft, of course, and her manners are pleasing. She purrs over you as a fond pussy cat would. But you sense the sharp sheathed claws, ready to scratch and eager to destroy. All her news is delivered well wrapped in virtuous implications. When she wishes to draw attention to some escapade of youth, she doesn't spit forth the facts as they are, but “feels so sorry for Mary, who is really a good hearted girl, but who simply doesn’t understand men, poor thing.” Her words are smooth as butter, all her phrases have double meanings, and often her deadliest remarks are uttered in the tones of a saint telling his beads. And what is this dear creature like in the home? I'l tell you. She is a full-fledged tyrant. Never permitting an issue to come to a head, she takes her own sweet way by assuming the drooping attitude of a lily tainted by the foul air of strife.

Neither nerves nor heart can endure bickerings; :

therefore, if crossed, she sesks refuge in her own sweetness and as a consequence her family feels exactly like a bunch of persecuting Romans at the trial of a Christian martyr. By this method, Mamma wins the dav. What a relief it is to leave one of these “sweet” sisters stewing in her own syrup to talk with a woman who says what she thinks and thinks what she

a

yi i ER

| put on rations of mouldy bread and

ed ape SR No caw

INDIANAPOLIS TIMES

Careful, Sonny Boy !—By Talbwt

Bn Ss

rag,

A £0 @\ Ss.

I wholly disagree with what you suy,

The Hoosier Forum

defend to the death your right to say tt.—

but will Voltaire.

CITES HITLER IN (Times readers are invited OPPOSING DICTATORSHIP | to evprevs thelr ia By Anti-Dictator { . ‘ "os Someone ought to take L. F. aside | these columns, religious conand explain to that person In Worcds| troversies excluded. Make of one syllable that a dictator] Vail L WL | your letter short, so ali can have a chance. Letters must

system isn’t going to bring equality of opportunity to America. Granted be signed, but names will be withheld on request.)

views

that 163 years have proved we have | done an awful job of governing] ourselves, I submit Mr. Hitler's] seven vears as the grand example of dictatorship, : He has accomplished more In gyction cycle that will yield to labor seven than we have been able 10 gy cents out of every dollar taken do in 163. We have only the “lower gy the final user or consumer. | one-third” in squalor and misery mhese are Federal Government fig- |

a. ie Vier Juie Way ed with the long production chain | A Ey oy Co oi 4 trouble is entitled to a fair percentage of| : y Dt he cost; if labor gets 84 per cent without sufficient medical care, or, | ° 8 pe Yay Nee Da a HA Cond | cessive as oy profit for productive | } es jenterprise and distribution. comfortable concentration camps | : : Sib where men’s eyes are gouged from a i » oy their heads and where they are g aw : rl : much government. High taxes are' (killing the consumer end of the proy _.. duction train. I'll gle} . : THINKS WPA STRIKES {HURT LABOR'S CAUSE | By Sympathizer

water for weeks at a time. L. F. can have Hitler. Hippa Hula. ” = 2 TERMS CURIOUS TEN QUESTIONS CONSTRUCTIVE By Voice in the Crowd The most constructive contrib o J V | tion that T have ever seen in theistrikes are deing the cause of unionForum in the 10 questions asked by, ism considerable harm. Curious. Every reader of The Times, Why was it that the so-called should study those questions and if labor leaders waited until the meas- | possible comment on them. ure became a law before they set up This is especially true of business-| any kind of protest? Certainly they | men and people of the middie class. | knew that the skilled labor provision Their future is going to be deter- Was part of the act. Col. Harringmined by the viewpoint taken by ton testified for it at a lengthy hearthe majority of our people on those |ing before the House committee. points so ably covered by “Curious.”| NO strike ever succeeded without If those points are properly solved (Public support; and certainly in this and generally understood, we will fight the unions are in a hopeless have peace and prosperity, and the |IMiNority. great “Middle Class” (those who al-

and bad housing and low earning ures and are probably based on pre-|to this country. power (if any at all) and general new Deal taxes. Everyone connect- | {abjectness. . NEW YORK, July 17.—There is one misconception

CLAIMS REP. SWEENEY THOUGHT ONLY OF U. S. By Patrick J. Fisher

The prolific pen of the Logans-|

port Literator has scratched again. The State's only unpaid by-line writer has again spoken with his all-inclusive wisdom. In his attempt to beat the deadline, however, he let his prejudices cloud his

terial from the earth starts a pro- | vision. “un | Mr. Daniel Francis Clancy criti-

cized Rep. Sweeney for reminding the British monarchs of their debt These are the

same sovereigns who reign in that!

Empire which loans money to Poland, vet refuses to pay a long-

the remaining 16 per cent is not ex- standing obligation to the United |

States. Mr. Clancy condemns “all

of those Irishmen who didn't attend the Congressional reception in the Capitol rotunda to greet their royal guests.” Why does he condemn only the Irish? Many other Congresesmen, actuated by the same motives as Rep. Sweeney, refused to attend. . . . The mere fact that the sentative’s name happens

repreto be

{| As a long standing friend of labor Sweeney causes Clancy to conclude | u-'it occurs to me that these WPA that he is being solicitous for Ire-| land rather than for the United]

States. Need I point out that Rep. Sweeney, as well as the other Congressmen, were protesting as citizens of the United States—citizens who have at heart the interests of America and of America only. . . .

It is very true that America does! 4 | blows or punishment.

not approve of assassinations and terrorism, but what do we find in Egypt, and who is responsible? Is the political philosophy of the United" States imperialistic? No. Neither is that of Eire. . . .

ways find a way of taking care of themselves), will remain as the dominant section of American life. Commenting on his first point I wish to say that all production starts

New Books at the Library

with an individual. He is either the Some o> he ay « OU can see the trees dead from| man with the idea of producing. A N { Therefore it would seem that from Is yours dronsin sy Yarouzh the start to the finish most of us, the close green woods of the hills. are a part of production. . . « It's fresh and green again and Without the man with the idea, orithe drought is a year away and without a final purchaser who can nature forgets, I reckon, like men use or consume, there can be no pro- | and women forget. If there was duction of wealth. The processionly some way to make men restarts with an individual and ends member the world would be a better with an individual. {place to live in. But they forget The man that produces raw ma-|and nature forgets and each year

Side Glances—By Galbraith

|

Xb % [a SUR AR Q " SING

7-17

| QOPR. 1339 BY NEA SCRVICE, ING, T. WM. REG. U. 8. PAT. OFF.

"| hope it's all paid for, son. "The credit company stuck me on

they hope for something better and they try to live on hope.” Jay Strickland, however, was not one of those who forgot. He saw the poverty of the Oklahoma hills, saw the farmers struggling to win a living from wornout soil, saw the tenant farmers, the sharecroppers, the laborers beaten down by the combined forces of depression economics, the abuses of landlordism, and the low wages made possible by land workers without a defensive organization. It is Jay Strickland who moves through the pages of “The Stricklands” (Little), slowly, doggedly working to organize the Southern Tenant Farmers’ Union—a union which was to embrace all—white, black. and red man.

Interwoven with the story of

Jay and the union is that of Jay|

and his family—Crosby, his father, a lover of the land, patient

‘jand uncomplaining; wild Pat, his

brother, whose recklessness led him into tragedy; Belle, Pat's wife, who knew and loved Pat for the gay, defiant boy that he was. And there are the others, their neighbors— plain men and women, mostly “living on hope,” and possessing an underlying sweetness of nature, a rough sort of gentleness, which imparts its tone to the entire book. We feel that Edwin Lanham must have known and loved these Oklahoma

“hill billies,” he deals with them so,

tenderly.

PRETENSION

By DANIEL FRANCIS CLEARY Looking up at the American sky I pretend it is an English one . . . And envision black enemy planes Flying in the crepuscular blue Over the twilight fields.

DAILY THOUGHT

Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death by the mouth of witnesses: but one witness shall not testify against any person to cause him to die.— Numbers 35:30.

HE object of punishment is the prevention of evil: it can never

that last note 1 signed with you."

be made impulsive to good.— Horace Mann.

MONDAY, JULY 17, 1039

Cen Johnson Says—

Terms It Unfair to Infer That To Disagree With Administration On Neutrality Gives Aid to Axis.

ASHINGTON, July 17.—It has several times been hinted by the Administration and its supporters that disagreement with its views on neutrality legislation is something like “adherence to the Axis powers, giving them aid and comfort.” Substitute “enemy” for ‘‘Axis powers’ and vou have the constitutional definition of treason—the greatest crime in our code. The AXis powers are not enemies in that sense because there has been no declaration of war. But if the Administration doesn't already regard them as enemies in practice, it surely counts them as far from friends. Its attitude in this very matter makes that clear. It is certainly a curious kind of peace and amity that would put something of the stigma of treason on a man who believes and urges that we should do nothing directly or indirectly to favor either side in a foreign dispute to which we are not a party. This writer happens to favor the Administration's stand here—not because he thinks that it contributes either to neutrality or preventing war or keeping out of it—but solely because he regards the issue of too little practical importance to create so great a rift and that it is not logical or even very frank to embargo the finished product of actual weapons of war and yet permit the export of all that goes to make

them.

” 2 ®

IKE it or not, if war actually comes to us, freedom of speech will dry up overnight. Such is the nature of modern war that only a dictatorship in the full Nazi sense can successfully conduct it. Knowing something of these matters from first-hand experience, this writer would be among the first to advocate that. But this is not war, and to reach into a possible future to borrow something of war powers and war psychology to intimidate opinion in peace seems a wish to control it—war or no war. It is frequently said in Washington that Berlin and Rome are jubilant over anything that indicates that Congress or the people are not solidly behind the President in his policy or attitude toward the European unpleasantness. It is even suggested that, if war comes to the world, those who now insist on their own opinions as to how far we should mix into it, must take a responsibility for all the slaughter and ruin that may come in Europe. Even worse is hinted—that since, if war comes, “we can't keep out of it,” these independents will be responsible for bringing war to their own country—war mongers, not to mention treason. =

LL this is grossly and fantastically unfair.

= A

It

is an obvious fact that neither Congress nor the country are solidly behind the President in what at | least seems to be his policy toward Europe. In the present state of public opinion they would | be even less solidly behind any open act of unneu- | trality or lining up with either side of that argu- | ment. Since these are the facts, what is gained by trying to make it appear that there is a solid front on these disputed questions? It is like trying to hide a frenzied bull in a china shop. If the “joy-bells ring in Rome and Berlin” at any such casual indication of these facts as adverse votes in Congress or | comments in the press, the bell-ringers are a bunch | of suckers. | It is the facts that count and not these symptoms.

Surely Rome and Berlin know all about them.

Aviation By Maj. Al Williams

‘Suicide’ Speedboats Latest Device To Spell Trouble for Big Battleships.

ASHINGTON, July 17.—There was a time when battleships, or frigates, were able to roam

| around the oceans alone or with other battleships, | always ready to fight anything afloat. The seas then { held no menace for the big warships except a | numerically superior force of battleships. | The submarine and the torpedo put an end to | the self-sufficiency of the big warship, and ushered in escorting protective screens of destroyers and cruisers. The next type of hit and run operator against the warship was the bombing plane. To offset the submarine, battleship designers concocted the double skin plan and divided the battleship hull into multiple water-tight compartments. To withstand punishment from the air bomb, the battleship’s deck plating was increased in thickness. The submarine was by no means fast, nor highly maneuverable. It depended upon surprise and stealthy approach—a purely hit-and-run operation. The bombing plane, on the contrary, depends upon high speed and maneuverability, plus a certain hope of taking the biz ships unaware. Neither of these challengers tn the battleship can take hard body

| 1 |

| | |

50 M. P. H. in Rough Water!

And now, to plague the cumbersome battleship still further, we find Italy, Germany, France and England building suicide fleets of small, fast speedboats, capable of 50 miles an hour or more, equipped with

converted aircraft engines as powerplants, and with such fighting tools as two 21-inch torpedos (or four 18-inch), power-operated turrets housing rapid-fire guns, smoke screen apparatus and depth charges. The British Power Boat Co. has been singularly successful in buildnig this type of craft, 70 feet in length and powered by three 1000-horsepower RollsRoyce engines. Fifty miles an hour is fast in smooth water, but these British boats have made scores of open sea trips at that speed in the rough English Channel and the North Sea. Highly maneuverable, able to turn on a dime, a de= termined fleet of these little hornet boats could make life mighty miserable for a surface fieet in foggy weather, or in generally poor visibility conditions. They are just another hit and run unit added to ware fare on the sea. Their torpedos are obviously for use against surface ships, but their rapvid-firing guns will be of undoubted effectiveness against low-flying enemy aircraft. You don't hear much about them now, but in the next war they will more than earn their keep.

Watching Your Health

By Jane Stafford

EWS of the attack of appendicitis, complicated by peritonitis, which Jack Dempsey, former | worid's heavyweight champion, suffered came as a | shock to a great many people throughout the nation. | Many thousands of people face this same danger | every year, and not all of them win the fight. More | than 16.000 lives were taken by appendicitis in the | United States in one year, 1936, the editor of the | Journal of the American Medical Association pointed ‘out only a few weeks ago. In spite of adequate knowledge for treating appendicitis successfully, the | death rate from this ailment has been steadily rising | during the past decades. | Two factors chiefly responsible for this increase in appendicitis mortality are: 1—the increasing use of cathartics for abdominal pain; 2—delay in the diagnosis and treatment of acute appendicitis. The operation for removal of the appendix in {t= self is associated with a mortality which is practically nil, it is pointed out. The deaths which occur are found only in those patients in whom a peritanitis has developed from perforation of the appendix. In these cases pus and germs have escaped from the ruptured appendix into the abdominal cavity and set up inflammation of its lining membranes. Absorption of poison from these germs may cause death. But when all cases of appendicitis are recognized early and operation is performed early, no one need die of the results of this disease, medical authorities declare. An attack of appendicitis requires prompt action in summoning a doctor. He will be responsible for prompt diagnosis and operation. All -the layman need to remember is that cathartics ar laxatives should not be taken in case of a bad pain in the abdomen or stomache (they may only hasten rupture of the appendix by increasing the activity of the digestive tract) and that a doctor should be called if the pain persists. !