Indianapolis Times, Indianapolis, Marion County, 15 August 1941 — Page 16

Nn)

PAGE 18

The Indianapolis Times

(A SCRIPPS-HOWARD NEWSPAPER) ROY W. HOWARD RALPH BURKHOLDER MARK FERREE President Editor Business Manager

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

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

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-

reau of Circulations. RILEY 5551

Give Light and the People Will Find Their Own Way

FRIDAY, AUGUST 15, 1941

PEACE—THE NEXT TIME?

HE Roosevelt-Churchill eight points can be discussed from any one of scores of different angles, and they will be so examined and mulled over for a long time to come wherever men put ink to paper. Let's use these few inches of white paper to discuss only one point— “Fourth, they will endeavor, with due respect for their existing obligations, to further the enjoyment by all states, great or small, victor or vanquished, of access, on equal terms, to the trade and to the raw materials of the world which are needed for their economic prosperity.” We choose this point because it seems to us the foremost of the declared peace aims. In it, we think, lies the

greatest single hope that the next period of peace on earth | : | in the cornv tremolo of the guileful demagog their

might possibly be made more lasting than any this scarred old world has known before. Failure to follow through and make good on a similar announced objective after World War I contributed perhaps more than anything else to bringing on World War II. The third of Woodrow Wilson's 14 points pledged: “The removal, so far as possible, of all economic barriers and the establishment of an equality of trade conditions among all the nations consenting to the peace and associating themselves with its maintenance.” But that point was forgotten at Versailles. The vanquished aggressors were disarmed, as Mr. Roosevelt and Mr. Churchill say they must be the next time. Political boundaries were redrawn, in concession to the principle of self-determination of peoples—a principle which the Roose-velt-Churchill statement again holds aloft. But “equality of trade conditions,” the right of equal access to raw materials and world markets—the one thing that might have made it possible for the reconstituted nations to build a permanent economic and social structure in the pursuit of happiness and material well-being—that was not granted. Not at Versailles, nor through the subsequent actions of the victorious nations. On the contrary, barriers were lifted

higher.

Our own United States, let it be admitted to our shame, took a lead in undermining the foundations of the peace. Though President Wilson had fathered it, we refused to join the League of Nations, though we were the world’s greatest creditor nation, we erected the Fordney-McCumber tariff. and later, atop that, the Smoot-Hawley. We demanded that the debtor nations pay us in gold, and made the payment impossible. The British commonwealth went for empire preference. The running battle of tariffs and quotas around the world closed trade opportunities. And nations whose borders had been outlined with such nice regard for ethnology, language, and corridors to the sea, cracked under the hard pressure of economics. Imported democratic institutions gave way, and home-made dictators clambered over the ruins—vowing to acquire by force what their democratic leaders had not accomplished by sweet reason and nego-

tiation. Surely there will be another peace. But will we be able to do better the next time? Or will the Fordneys and McCumbers and Smoots and Hawleys again prévail, and another Coolidge arise to symbolize our unctuous selfcontent by saying, “They hired the money, didn’t they?”

y r

AGAIN—THE TAX-EXEMPT LOOPHOLE

TESTIFYING before the Senate Finance Committee on the revenue bill, Secretary Morgenthau mentioned again a proposal which we were afraid he had forgotten—his reeommendation that Congress forbid future issues of taxexempt securities, Mr. Morgenthau has already cut down the tax-exemp-tion features of Federal securities—that is, all the recent Treasury issues have been made subject to Federal income taxes. But they are still exempt from state taxes. all issues of state and local government bonds are still exempt from Federal taxation—indeed most of them are exempt from all taxation. Here is an all-too-perfect refuge for timid capital. An extremely rich man, for instance, whose income reaches the topmost Federal surtax brackets—where the Government takes 86.9 per cent—can get a larger net return on a 3 per cent tax-free state, county or municipal bond than on a private business investment paying a gross return of 20 per cent. Figure it out for yourself. Suppose the man has an idle $1,000,000. Prospective 20 per cent profit on a private enterprise risk. Gross return, $200,000. The Government takes $173,800. The man keeps $26,200. Alternative: A 3 per cent bond of a state or local government. Gross (and net) return, $30,000. The Government takes nothing. The man keeps $30,000. It’s a better proposition by $3800—and no risk. This glaring loophole in our income tax laws should be closed. :

JUNKETS FOLLOW THE SEASONS

HE Navy had no idle warship to spare for that purpose, it is announced, so the Military Affairs Committee Senators cancelled their projected junket to Iceland. That's too bad, to be sure, for this must be a pleasant time of year in Reykjavik. : Do you suppose it would occur to the Senators to take, as a substitute, an inspection tour of air bases in Florida? Not likely—in August. But a few months hence, when

the cold winter winds blow across the Potomac marshes,

those Florida bases and beaches will probably require a lot of inspection. By then, of course, there will be no need

And |

Fair Enough By Westbrook Pegler

Strikes Delay the Defense Effort, Yet Government Leaders Balk at Any Laws Impairing Labor's Gains’

EW YORK, Aug. 15.—I assume that nobody will argue against the notorious fact that there has

| been vast sabotage of the war effort through union | strikes in shipyards, airplane plants, steel mills and

the like, while young men by the thousands have been vanishing from home into the Army and Navy and most of the civilians have been fumbling for something helpful to do beyond paying heavy taxes and doing without. Who is responsible for this? It would be idle to go howling after any individual Communist or common racketeer of the famliar A. F. of L. type, or any group of them. For a moment's thought will remind any intelligent person that they could be stopped in an hour if the Government of this country really desired to stop them. And a moment's thought will reveal the melancholy fact that the national Government has not only refused to stop them, except in one conspicuous case in California, but also has blocked every effort to enact new laws, or amendments to old ones, whereby the Department of Justice would have unmistakable authority, indeed an urgent public duty, to stop these strikes. * » " =

HE same men who were capable of such mighty Tori over the robbery of frugal little people who lost their savings to the swindlers of the Republican boom, have had not one word to say in pity for these new victims of the new tyranny whose stories have been related in pathetic detail in print and before a sub-committee of Congress almost daily for more than two vears. There are anti-kick-back laws on the books, but those men who have proclaimed

righteous hatred of all oppression, have made no move to compel the refund of a single dollar wrung from the hands of American workers by those who stationed themselves astride the roads and gates leading to defense projects and brutally robbed their victims under the very eyes of American soldiers. Not one dollar has the American Government recovered for these little people, nor has the Department of Justice found any law by which to punish even one such person for extortion. There is a cunning method in all this sabotage and oppression. Charge the Government with connivance and the reply is a cry for “unity” and “cooperation,” plus a plea that Congress, in its wisdom, has not seen fit to enact laws to cover the offenses. But, let some Congressman or committee of Congress bring out such a proposal, and the national Government, judging by past performances, will go into action under cover, by phone, by word of mouth, by intimation that there must be no legislation to repeal so much as a comma of “labor's gains.” And having defeated the remedial proposals, the Government then could say that, although wise men on the hill had recognized the lack of laws, Congress had refused to act, = ” ” UT let it be observed and marked boldly for reference and guidance that not one person in that circle known as “the Administration,” where “labor's gains” are spoken of so lovingly, has demanded, or even admitted the necessity for, any corrective legislation. The same group who were capable of such moist and angry pity for the little stockholders and

pictured them as widows and orphans for dramatic |

appeal, have had no pity for thousands of small Americans who have had to pay from $25 to $300 for the right to work on defense jobs. The same group that exhorts the people to use less gasoline and buy bonds for defense, and drums the sons of American families into camps to soldier with broomsticks and stovepipes, will permit no legislation which would break the power of those who organize mobs at the factory gates to prevent men from turning out shooting guns and ships, propellers, planes and tanks. What are the young men training to defend in these camps where they go through childish motions with mock weapons? For whose benefit are the other sacrifices exhorted? All are sacrificing for the benefit of a few professional conspirators whose privilege has been placed above the national safety, above the lives and human rights of the whole American people. And so it will go for an indefinite time, because you may be absolutely sure that the national Government will not seek to prevent the adoption of any laws by Congress to impair sabotage. Though the nation fall, the right of sabotage must be preserved.

Business By John T. Flynn

"Bigger and Better" Deficits Seems To Be Fate Facing U. S. After War

EW YORK, Aug. 15.—Businessmen around New - York are proioundly interested in what Washington is saying and doing about the period “after the war.” Well, a swift glance at our pocketobok now ang its probable condition then will help us to guess. In 1939 serious men in Wash- ~ ington said that the continuance of $3,000,000.000 - a - year deficits would ruin us. They were right. But the year just closed has had a deficit of $5,000,000,000. And the vear we are in will have a deficit of at least $12,000,000,000, and next year we will have a deficit of at least $20,000,000,000. Lord knows where it will go after that. Senator Pepper says we will spend $100,000,000,000 a year. That will mean a deficit of about $85,000,000000 a year. Very well. Then the war ends. Let us see what our pocketbook will look like. Instead of a deficit of $16,000.000,000 which we had when the depression began we will have a deficit of at least $150,000,000,000 —if we are thrifty and lucky. Now ior the budget. What will it look like? Suppose by great economy we cut down departmental expenditures to what they were before the war started, say to $716,000.000. Then we will have the nationaldefense budget. Our increased Army and Navy will certainly call for a defense budget, not so great as this year, of course, but at least as great as last year— amounting to $6,524,000,000.

But the vast munitions industry will slow down. | Millions will be thrown out of work. Prices will be |

up. Unemployment will be at least as great as it was in 1933 and probably greater. widespread. ” = =

OW much will the Government have to spend on recovery and relief—all over again? Of course it cannot possibly be less than it is this year, when unemployment is lower than in 10 years. Therefore we must figure on spending at least $5464.000,000—the same as this year. Put all this together and you will have an annual bill of—at the very minimum-—more than $12,000,000,000. But in addition there will be the greatly swollen cost of the national debt. It will be at least $150,000,000,000—hence will take at least $4,500,000,000 to service it. That runs your bill up to $18,500,000,000. That is $3,000,000,000 more than this year. The great war profits having ceased, and business being in a state of slump, the tax return will- be pitifully small, compared with the tax return of last year. Hence, even when the war is over, with business in a funk, vast unemployment, disillusionment dark and menacing, a deficit of 10 billions and no sign of improving it—what then will we do? Well,

. we can guess. Vice President Wallace is head of a

committee to plan for this. There will be some sugarcoated trick to spend more billions on peace to substitute for the billions spent on war. Bigger and better deficits! That is what we face as far as the eye can reach.

So They Say—

I DO NOT BELIEVE that many people In our country want to emulate Mr. Hitler's methods. But i= a eoal to exceed his Souilts without impairing of our ocratic society.—Leon

them.

THE INDIANAPOLIS TIMES ooo Stop, Look and Listen!

The Hoosier Forum

I wholly disagree with what you say, but will defend to thedeath your right to say it.—Voltaire.

DISTRUSTS OLD PARTIES, FAVORS A THIRD ONE By Rev. Daniel H. Carrick, 626 Spring St. America needs a third party, so that the American people can ex- | press themselves at the polls and {have honest representation in Con|gress, since both old parties are | jcorrupt and do not represent] American principles. Nothing but a third party will| move this crooked deal out of the, White House, since both old parties are too corrupt for reformation, =

= = FEARS SERVICE MOTHERS ARE CODDLING SONS By Mrs. E. Gurvitz, 663 Blake St. I attended the meeting of the! mothers of boys in training Which | was held at the War Memorial Thursday, July 24. I listened to the

speaker telling the mothers to sign|

the petition, not asking, but telling

When she finished I stood] up and asked if it were permissible to ask questions. I received the answer, “You can ask, but I don't] have to answer.” I asked, “The aim of signing the

petition is to bring the boys home| after a year’s training?” She answered, “Yes.” I asked another question. “What do you expect the Government to do if an emergency such as an attack arises and the boys are home?” She said, “We are not ready to answer this question.” I felt myself

Distress will be |

‘and the life of this nation tossed |aside as so much encumbering mat{ter. I tried again. I told her I {had a son in the service and that {I thought it a little premature to | sign petitions. That we should wai" {and see what happens. I said that the Government wouldn't keep the boys any longer than was necessary. I received no answer so I said, “Thank you,” and took my seat again. The speaker said “Thank you” in return and the meeting proceeded. I realized that the meeting was about over as they were preparing to sign. I walked out. One woman came up and asked what all the discussion was about. I explained my point to her—that the mothers should refrain from signing petitions regarding the length of military service of their sons until they learn from the sons

[’17 WAR DECLARATION

themselves whether or not they

(Times readers are invited to express their views in these columns, religious controversies excluded. Make your letters short, so all can have a chance. Letters must be signed.)

wish such an action. For, after all, the sons are no longer = babies. Mothers want to make weaklings out of their sons—weaklings who are afraid to stand by their country in its greatest need for them. These same mothers who wanted

never declare war against the wishes of the people? . ..

There is a vast difference in allowing Congress a free hand in making our laws and in making a declaration of war. If they make a mistake in passing a law, then that law can be repealed. But if they make a mistake by a declaration of war they can never repeal that declaration and bring back the lives, limbs and health of our boys. Today 90 per cent of the people are against war, yet our President and Congress have led us to the very brink of it against our wishes. In fact some of the high members of the Democratic Party tell us that we are already in it.

their sons home again, had just a few moments before pledged their allegiance to the flag, to the United | States and what it stands for— freedom and justice to all. I hope the above incident may help open the eves of the mothers and fathers of this country to the fact that the United States needs their sons and that they must help keep their sons happy in Army life rather than stir up discontent in the hearts of these young men.

= ” ”

CLAIMS PEOPLE OPPOSED

By Harry Clay, Brightwood So Robin Adair thinks that a war referendum would be nonsense, that we elect able men to govern our nation, that a referendum would show that Congressmen lacked wisdom to pass judgment on certain issues. Mr. Adair says each Congressman repres:nts a certain number of

people, that his action and votes reflect the desires of those people and that Congress will never vote for war against the wishes of the people. Well, Mr. Adair I wonder where you were 25 years ago. The first World War was raging at that time. The Democrats told us that President Wilson and his Congress had kept us out of war and if we wanted to keep out of war we had better elect Wilson and his ticket for another term. The very. fact that the people elected them showed that the people were overwhelmingly against war. * But “within one .month and two days after Wilson took his seat he asked Congress for a declaration of war and got it. Now, Mr. Adair, will you still claim that Congress will

Side Glances=By Galbraith

|

can free by buying

rn so vasa sve, we 1 a 8 po "Think what a saving, dear! | got a can opener and one extra 192 cans of beans!"

I'll trust the fate of my three boys with the 90 per cent any time before I will to a handful of Congressmen who do not have to go themselves.’

” tJ 2 DEPLORES ACTION OF ‘PEACE MOTHERS’ By P. W. Douglas, Shelbyville To one woman who has always had extreme confidence in the intelligence and latent power of her fellow-femmes, it is discouraging to read of the army of “Peace Mothers” who invaded Washington, no doubt at the behest of “America First,” to protest against the draft extension.

Emotionally, no parent can face J

with equanimity the danger of the age to the sons of the nation. But the problem is not a simple opposition of the words peace and war. When people run amuck emotionally their reasoning intelligence goes into total eclipse and they resort to slogans—erand sounding words— which are utterly beyond their power (0 define, There can be no absolute peace nor war anymore than there can be absolute right and wrong, and the use of slogans portends terrors that so far our nation has been fortunate enough to escape. Slogans—grand sounding words—preceded the fall of all the nations now subject to Hitler. The mothers are too late, as women are always too late. When will they consciously unite to perfect and protect a world which will, we hope, be a human world instead of a man's world or a woman's world? When they use their intelligence and latent power, which I still insist they have, then they may go to Washingtop. But now, animated solely by emotion, they are not a pretty sight.

‘DISCOVERS ‘MISTAKE’ IN ALUMINUM DRIVE By B. K., Indianapolis There was only one mistake in the recent aluminum campaign. Pots shouldn't go in the direction of Hitler—we should stick to the idea of only “panning” him.

OLD-FASHIONED GARDEN

By OLIVE INEZ DOWNING In a sunlit nook, by a babbling brook, The deep blue gentian grew; While the larkspur tall, and the coxcomb ball Were interspersed with rue.

And the haystacks fair, in the daisy lair— Showed fringe of moss rose trim; And the zinnia beds, with the bright crowned heads, Were clothed in fashion prim,

So I take a look at this treasured nook Where common flowerets spring— There I know deep joy, and without alloy For peace to me they bring.

DAILY THOUGHT

Set thine house in order.—II Kings 20:1.

THERE IS no man so good, who, were he to submit all his thoughts and actions to the laws, would not hanging 10 times.—Mon-

. North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia.

FRIDAY, AUG. 15, 1941 Gen. Johnson Says—

Agrees Extension Provisions of Army Laws Not Properly Emphasized, Yet Stresses Need for Retaining Men

ASHINGTON, Aug. 15.—Here is a fan letter: “I hate to say this but I feel that you have let us down in not insisting that draftees be discharged after one year’s service. Many of your friends feel the same way. I don’t always have a chance to read your column. Sometimes I don’t see daily papers and sometimes I am not in a place where you are published. “I know that you boosted the selective draft from the beginning, But we were told that it was to be for one year’s ‘training.’ I had several causes for claiming exemption. I had a good job in what is now called a defense industry. My boss promised he would hold it open for a year. I was engaged: 3 f Al My girl promised she would wait. aly I thought it was up to me to get myself ready for whatever might happen. Both of us believed that a year was not too much to sacrifice. “But nobody told us that this willingness was to put us in a special class where, because of it, I would have to serve indefinitely when other men who didn't feel the same way would have no obligaticn whatever. : “The press did not tell us. Our Representatives in Congress didn't tell us. Even you didn’t tell us. W feel fooled,” etc. ‘ ” FJ ®

HERE is not space to quote this letter in full. It is echoed in one way or another in scores of letters, but I chose this one because in its entirety it is so well-reasoned, temperate and sincere that it would bring tears to the eyes of a brass Buddha.

First let me register an alibi. Over and over again this column warned of the jokers (if you want to call them that) in all the service bills to the effect that, if Congress should declare the “national ine terest to be imperilled,” all classes—national guard, reservists and selectees could be held indefinitely. It warned of that during the debate on the Selective Service Act and after it was passed. It warned but it did not protest. If the national interest is imperilled, and obviously it is, there is no escape from this grim inequalisy of burdens. I think my correspondent is quite right. In general this provision in these laws was not given enough publicity and emphasis. In one of the most effectiva speeches in the recent debate on extension of thesa terms of service Senator Vandenberg said something to the effect that some of the greatest frauds are put over in inconspicuous, or what he called ‘agate type” (very small type) in contracts. That is true but it is the business of legislators to read the agate lines and I can’t recall that even the good Senator made much fuss about these “agate” lines which were in the draft act, the National Guard Act of 1920 (amended 1938) and public resolutions 75 and 96 # governing the terms of service of various classes of civilian soldiery, ” ” ” HEN war draws near, and once again I quote from Ecclesiastics, “there is no discharge in that war.” The recent debate in Congress on extend ing the term of service by 12 or 18 uionths was just some more froth. In every form of phrasing I have seen the terms of service can again be extended by Congress, Even if such phrasing were not there, the extension could constitutionally and legally be made, The obligation to military service is absolute and, justly or not, it falls upon those who by training and experience are best fitted to render it. This may be tough, bitter and unpopular reading to such young friends as my correspondent but it is the truth, although it comes with the bark off, if T know our younger generation—and I have four of Them in my own family—that is the way they want

Editor's Note: The views expressed by columnists in this newspaper are their own. They are not necessarily those of The Indianapolis Times,

A Woman's Viewpoint By Mrs. Walter Ferguson

HERE are about 8000 women doctors in the United States. Although the American Medical Association at a recent meeting in Cleveland voted down ¢ resolution to make these women eligible for Army Reserve commissions, maybe the war will he the ill wind that blows them good, With half the people of ths world shooting up the other half, doctors are bound to be popular for some time to come. And since women are urged to prepare themselves for every sort of work, there seems no good reason why they shouldn't handle surgical as well as other tools, : In every city there is a sprinke ling of women doctors. Those I've met are capable, sturdy, intelli gent persons possessing integrity and good sense. They manage ta live useful, happy lives, though few have become rich, In little towns their kind is rarer. Yet rural districts, we are told, fac a dangerous dearth of physicians, Our growing Army has stripped hundreds of small communities of capable doctors. A real shortage exists, and the field is wide open to feminine comers, Women nurses have been doing the messiest and most gruesome jobs in hospitals and near battlefields for a good many years, and they cringe at nothing in their zeal to ease suffering. Their record in every great disaster is a noble one. > And since they match the men in patience, ine telligence and skill with their hands, what's to hirider a big new flock of doctors in petticoats? :

Questions and Answers

(The Indianapolis Times Service Bureau will answer any question of fact or information, not involving extensive vee search, Write your questions clearly, sign name and address, inclose a three-cent postage stamp, Medical or legal advice cannot be given. Address The Times Washington Service Bureau, 1013 Thirteenth St., Washington. D. C.)

Q—Is a former widow of a Spanish-American Wap veteran entitled to death pension from the Governe ment? A—Under the Act of May 1, 1926, as re-enacted by the Act of Aug. 13, 1935, death pension may be paye able to a former widow of a Spanish-American War veteran, provided she married the veteran prior to September 1, 1922, and provided her subsequent or successive marriage or marriages has or have been dissolved either by the death of the husband or huse bands or by divorce on any ground except adultery on her part. Q—During the first World War, did the United States pay the French people for land used by the American Army? A—The United States paid French landowners, for all privately owned buildings and lands used by the American Expeditionary Force for quarters, supply bases, administrative purposes, etc. just as private owners would be paid in this country for any prope erty so used by the Army. Of course, no pRyment was made for battlefields and trenches. ; Q—Which States subscribed to the Articles of Con federation of 1778? Was Vermont one of them? A—The States that subscribed were New Hamps shire, Massachusetts-Bay, Rhode Island and Provie dence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, Vermont did not sign. aa Q—Why are railroad crossties, poles, etc., treated with creosote? % A—They are saturated with creosote, zinc chloride, or other preservatives to prevent decay and destruce tion by insects. The treatment, which is also used for bridge timbers, poles, piling and other woods, more than doubles their service life. Q—What is the source of the story about the Pot of Basil? A—It i from Boccaccio's “Decameron,” IV, 5. It is also the subject of a famous poem by John Keats, “Isabella, or the Pot of Basil.”