Indianapolis Times, Indianapolis, Marion County, 26 August 1941 — Page 12

RN

. PAGE 12 EE The Indianapolis Times

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

Price In Marion County, 3 cents a copy; delivered a week.

Mail subscription rates in Indiana, $3 a year;

outside\o? Indiana, & cents a month,

«<P> RILEY 8551

Give Light end the Peopis Will Find Their Own Wap

Owned and published [EE dally (except Sunday) by ate.

Times : Publishing Co, 214 W. Maryland St.

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

TUESDAY, AUGUST 26. 1941

FARM GRAB VETOED PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT did the farmers a service yesterday when he vetoed the bill which proposed (1) to withhold the huge stocks of Government-owned wheat and cotton from domestic markets, and (2) to let wheat growers produce beyond their allotments, without penalty, using the surplus for feed and seed. The veto, of course, was not unexpected, Agriculture Secretary Wickard and other Administration leaders had attacked this measure. As Mr. Wickard warned, it would have opened the way to destruction of the whole wheat program and, by tieing up stocks in an effort to create artificial scarcities and unreasonable prices, would have injured the real interest of both farmers and consumers. And, as Price Administrator Leon Henderson pointed out, it would have helped to make inflation inevitable.

Yet the veto required courage. Although agricultural income is already at its highest point in 11 years, the farm bloc and the farm lobby are continually demanding more special benefits. Against all warnings then had pressured the bill through House and Senate, on the theory that farmers should demand all the traffic will bear. Opposition even to so inexcusable a grab as this was—and no doubt will be —denounced as unfair to agriculture, The reverse is true. Inflation produced by such artificial boosting of farm prices could be of no more than brief, temporary benefit to farmers. It would so burden consumers as to create resentment against all Government efforts to aid agriculture. And, in the long run, the inevitable inflation would be ruinous to farmers along with everyone else. Mr. Roosevelt has set a good example for weakkneed members of Congress, and has shown himself a real friend of agriculture.

TWICE AS MANY INCOME TAXPAYERS

OU may not relish the new taxes which Congress is about to lay on you, but just have a look at yesterday's Treasury statement, showing Government expenses and re-

ceipts for the current fiscal year through Aug. 22, compared to a year ago:

This Year Last Year $2,759,398.801.60 $1,333,121,266.07

7 727,123,389.23 703,435,038.65

This fiscal vear was only 53 days old when these totals were computed and the Government already more than $£2,000,000,000 in the red. We're spending at the rate of $52,000,000 a day, and collecting at the rate of $13,000,000 a day. Compared to last year, our output is higher by $26,000,000 a day, while our intake has increased less than onehalf million a day. In the face of those figures, the necessity for heavier taxation—even much heavier than Congress is now considering—can’t be denied. The people, we think, will not complain about paying the necessary costs of defense—tremendous though those costs are. But at a time when the pump is being primed for defense to the point of running over, the people have a right ot insist that the Government stop some of its extracurricular pump-priming in the non-defense categories.

Come next March 15, when the proposed new income taxes start biting in, the Administration and Congress probably will get around to doing something serious about the Government-as-usual spending. Those taxes aren't going to be popular with the people who have to pay them, if they think part of their money is being wasted. Several million citizens, who never before have paid income taxes, will be meeting a Federal tax collector face to face the first time—if the bill just worked out by the Senate Finance Committee becomes law. The measure reduces exemptions to £750 for single persons and $1500 for married couples. That still will leave a large majority of citizens untouched by direct taxation—since most American incomes unfortunately are below those levels—though, of course, all of us have to pay hidden taxes, and the lower the income the more disproportionate the burden. Congress had to get more revenue, either by direct taxation of income or by laying on more of those invisible levies—and it seems Congress has about decided to choose the former and fairer course. If the plan is approved, instead of only one-sixth, there will be two-sixths of America’s income earners paying in accord with the just principle of ability to pay. : That's going to mean twice as many voters with a conscious pocket interest in economy.

Expenses Receipts

Tsetse een

Teer een

BEATING SOMETHING WITH SOMETHING

HOSE who have been fearful of the advent of socialized medicine would do well to look at the Cleveland Hospital Service Association, through which 500,000 people protect themselves against the chance of sudden hospital expense. Just as in insurance, the members pay a small regular premium; then if hospital service is required, the association pays. The plan has been under way, constantly growing, for seven years. It has a surplus, and everybody, hospitals, doctors, the city, and the members, find it good. In those seven years, one hosiptal alone has been paid more than a million dollars, others in proportion to size. More than 100,000 cases have been handled through the association, with a resultant lessening of worry, tax burden for free cases, garnishees and attachments and borderline compensation cases. Broader means of assuring hospitalization to more people are a desirable social end. If opportunity is offered Ee people to do it co-operatively for themselves, there will less cry for specialization. It takes something to beat

by carrier, 12 cents

go —— Yew

Fair Enough

By Westbrook Pegler

Why Does Roosevelt Maintain Seal Of Secrecy on His Family's Income And Break It on Political Rivals?

ASHINGTON, Aug. 26 —Mrs, Franklin D, Rooseveit has written an article for the September number of the Ladies Home Journal in which she discusses the Roosevelt family income, The press agent of the magazine has sent me advance information on the chance that I might mention the matter and thus stimulate sales which is the proper job of a press agent. I am glad to have this copy for the topic has been one of my favorites ever since the President authorized publication of the confidential income tax returns of various individuals who had opposed him but refused to reveal his own. About that time a Congressional inquiry was running in the House and two opposition ; Congressmen, Treadway of Massachusetts and Ham Fish, the Republican who somehow always re-elects himself in Roosevelt's home district, were allowed to ask questions only with the understanding that they would refrain from pressing any demand for publication of the President's own return, of his mother, Mrs. James Roosevelt, or Jimmy. Not a single return of any member of the Rooszavelt family has been made public officially in all the vears that the family, with the exception of the two youngest boys, Frankie and Johnny, has been riding the gravy train, although the returns of many other men have been analyzed critically and in a tone of voice which implied that a citizen was to be pilloried for strict compliance with the law and ought to have paid more taxes than the law required. In her article Mrs. Roosevelt says that Mr, Roosevelt during his years in the Presidency has spent more than his salary fulfilling the obligations of his office and that she, herself, notwithstanding an increase in her income, has less principal now than she had in 1932, =

o »

HIS may be so, but 1 still have to wonder why the President is so bashful about the family's several income tax returns in view of the fact that he, personally, gave the orders which broke the seal of confidence which normally is supposed to protect the returns of other citizens. Why the special privilege? And, inasmuch as Mrs. Roosevelt's own vast income is derived from the Presidential office in the amount by which it exceeds her average income of the years before 1932 and inasmuch as Mrs. Roosevelt plainly recognizes this excess to be a public trust, I insist that the public has a right to know what she does with the monev. Of course, there is a question which precedes this one. That question is whether Mrs. Roosevelt has exploited the Presidency to make money. John Garner, when he was Vice President, turned down an opportunity as a radio commentator with the remark that the price was more than he was worth as a private citizen but not enough to hire the Vice President, A comparison of Mrs. Roosevelt's earnings before 1932 and since would prove that the Presidential office has been exploited, and after that fact has been established we come to the question of what she did with the money. Jimmy Roosevelt is the only one whose returns have been made public but he did that informally and even so admitted flatly that while he was still a law

student he accepted a job at window dressing for a | group of promoters at $15,000 a year knowing “per- | fectly well that they were paying for the name and |

for any value the name might have.” 8

ET when Congressman Treadway tried to compel an expert analysis of Jimmy's return similar to the hostile inspection of the returns of the President's political opponents, he was blocked by members who were determined that the Roosevelt family should have this special privilege, This subject has been allowed to lie quiet for a long time, but inasmuch as Mrs, Roosevelt hag seen fit to revive it, there is just one answer: That is to be found in the income tax fseturns and nowhere else, and the President has the same authority to break the seal of confidence on Mrs. Roosevelt's return, on his mother’s return, on all Roosevelts—Jimmy's, Elliott's and Mrs. John Boettiger's and on the return of the late uncle, Forbes Morgan. Break out the returns and then we will be in a position to discuss the issue with Mrs. Roosevelt on even terms.

= =

Aviation

By Maj. Al Williams

Billy Mitchell's Posthumous Medal Emphasizes Weakness in Congress.

PROPOSAL in the Congressional Record of recent date: “Be it enacted—That the President is authorized to award posthumously, in the name of Congress, a Medal of Honor to the late William Lendrum Mitchell, a General, United States Army, in recognition of his outstanding pioneering service and foresight in the field of military aviation.” Then a long speech by a Senator, outlining the career of the gallant Billy Mitchell, the man who first made this country conscious of airpower. The Senator spoke of Mitchell as the “prophet,” ete, and pointed to “a moral valor . an intellectual valor . . . that faces undismayed, not the quick, hot death of conflict . . . but the slow, cold death of disgrace and calumny . . . We in the Senate know something of this kind of valor . . . we know the strength it takes.” The posthumous award of a medal is ofttimes the only wav a grateful people can express their honor to a hero who died in his act of gallantry. But in the case of Billy Mitchell it is another instance of a weak Congress, negligent of its obligations, which awakened to an American's greatness and service and valor only vears after his death—withqut carrying on the vision of that man. That vision has been confirmed by an airpower war—an airpower Europe. Yet we still have an air-powerless United States. The main purpose of Gen. Mitchell's crusade was the establishment of a single, separate air force removed from the interference and fumbling of men who didn't know anything about aviation and didn't believe in it. Time and again Gen. Mitchell told me, “They don’t and won't see.”

= = =

F Congress had followed Mitchell's vision, we would at least today be able to hold some one agency responsible for whatever we lack in the way of fighting power in the air. The succeeding heads of the Army and Navy aviation services have done their level best—and in view of handicaps that were wellnigh insurmountable they've done good jobs. But the old Army and Navy hierarchies still command and dominate the airpower situation in this country—not in the orthodox service interpretation of the word “command,” but through the pressures that can be exerted by non-flying officers and by the commercial interests which hold Army and Navy contracts. And any man who stands foursquare in determined advocacy cof his convictions—against such pressures—is doomed to promoted disgrace and to the lonesome satisfaction of having stood by his guns. This is what it means to advocate the diversion of battleship and old-time equipment money to the building of airplanes and engines and airpower machinery. Almost the entire Continent of Europe has been won by an airpower nation. What further proof of airpower's dominance is needed? Must our proof be written in American disasters?

So They Say—

THE LIBERTY THAT we cherish is mocked and threatened with destruction. Only by unity, and particularly by mutual respect in the relationships between employers and their employees, may we expect to win through. —George Meany, A. F. of L. leader. * ®

Dr. G.

NATIONAL defense is everybody's responsibility. — i Wilson, director of transportation,

THE INDIANAPOLIS TIMES

All God's Chillun Got Wings?

ARMY = | CONTROL

m———

The Hoosier Forum

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

CONTENDS WHITAKER ALSO AIDS NAZIS By M. J. M,, Indianapolis John Whitaker states (if cor-! rectly quoted) that “Wheeler and | Lindbergh ought to be in German] uniforms because they are winning more battles for Germany than German generals. . . . Wheeler and Lindbergh and Ham Fish are putting all the conquered countries, on Germany's side.” : |by facts and figures from official But doesn't Mr. Whitaker's em-| Government reports and other auphatic statement that “Britain|ihoritative sources. hasn't a chance to win” put him in| The increasing efficiency of rail-

: oo ; al a Smiley FT : i 3 thas pe |road employees is best measured by Se aoa ny satis ef<|® statistical vardstick called the . s 2 tEE _| “freight ton-mile.” That is, one fect as the speeches of the appeas of freight moved one mile.

; 0 | ton ry a statement is in- | Today, the average railroad emtended to rouse us to our danger, Ployee is producing 143 of these but I don't see how it can do any-| units of transportation for eath 100 thing else but give aid and comfort he produced five years ago. In to the aggressors. What would Mr. [other words, his efficiency has inWhitaker propose, I wonder? Let /crerseq by 43 per cent. Britain fall without our help and]! This increase in efficiency has take on the dictators alone? Helbeen going on for years. It exsays “we'll be absolutely alone with plains why the railroads are carryEngland if we get in the war.”|ing more freight now than they Won't it be worse to be really, ab-|did in 1920, with only half the solutely alone if she succumbs? number of employees they had then. Anyone who has read Francis | Since 1920, the number of railHackett's review of Mein Kambdiiroag employees has shrunk from must see that our destruction oripare than 2,000.000 to a little over subjugation, at least, is on Hitler's 1,000,000, and the total railroad program. payroli has been reduced almost as am puzzled. much gf 8 Obviously, railroad workers lost UNION HEADS TAKE ISSUE jobs through their increasing effi-

WITH RAILROADS’ STAND ciency, so the only way they can share the benefits is through wage By A. S. Uphaus, president, J. J Me-

Govern, recording secretary; H. R. Imler. rate increases. financial secretary: Okley Patch, commit-| Railroad profits are best measthalman. "Indinnapolis Lodge. No. il |ured by the amount of money International Association of Machinists. “available for fixed charges.” That To prejudice the public against!is, the money they have left to the proposed railroad wage in-|pay interest on bonds and dividends creases, the railroads are broad-|on stock, after paying all expenses. casting fantastically exaggerated| According to Olophant’s “Earning estimates of what the increases{Power of Railroads,” a standard fiwould cost. They thus hope to di-|{nancial authority, railroad profits vert attention from the real ques-|averaged more than $600,000,000 a vear by this yardstick in the seven

tion. The question is this: Who will|worst years of the depression, 1930 to 1936.

share in the benefits of the constantly increasing efficiency of the! This profit rose to $924,000,000 in railroads and their employees, and|the year ended April 30, 1941, and will be more than a billion dollars

in the rapidly rising profits of the during the eoming year, because

carriers? Light on this question is provided!the traffic and revenues of the rail-

Side Glances=By Galbraith

+) ih

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

in

3

"It's @ window box, dear—something to putter around in until we

can afford a back yard,"

roads are rising rapidly and their expenses do not increase in proportion. Why should not the railroad workers get a reasonable share of these increased profits, as they propose in their wage requests? Like everyone else, the railroad employees will need more money. According to Leon Henderson, Administrator of Prices and Civilian Supply, retail prices have already risen 20 per cent since the war started, and will go far higher as they follow wholesale prices, which have risen an average of 56 per cent, Because of this increased cost of living, most other large industries have already granted substantial wage increases to their employees, while rail wages have not been boosted a single cent. All this is on top of the fact that rail rates were lower than the wages paid to comparable workers in other industries, even before the latter granted increases. 8 ” ”

CONTENDS TIME FOR TALK NOW IS ALL OVER

By Arthur S. Mellinger, 3500 W. 30th St.

velt says “U. S. Has a War to Win.” It is certainly true that we are al-

been sent into the actual war zones. It is the style now to be involved in “undeclared wars.” The thing to do is get at the job and get it done. Everyone in the United States is a part of it so we all have to sink or swim together. Buy bonds, do everything possible to shove it along. I am not in favor of war, but as we are in we must “put up” or shut up. There has been too much talking for us to stay out now. Let us all work to the end that the seas shall be free to he used by all nations and the weaker groups SSist be gobbled up by the strongest. The most important thing for all of us is to see that the Government relinquishes its extraordinary grant of power as soon as this war is over. Unless this is done, all our sacrifices will be in vain if the individual is not guaranteed freedom of action and an assurance the property he may possess shall not be confiscated by unreasonable taxes. Of course, all modern wars are an outgrowth of the mistakes of its leaders. Hitler became Germany’s “big shot” when it was in a bad depression. He promised a lot of stuff he could not deliver, so had to have a war to cover up his mess. Mr. Roosevelt got power in the same manner, so now, virtually, he is saying to Hitler: “I dare you to knock the chip off my shoulder.”

MY FARM

By VERNE MOORE My fathers once in shirtless brawn Labored here from early dawn That they by clearing rich, black fields Might plant and reap abundant yields. My children, plowing, yet shall hear The hermit thrush sing wild and clear, And as they stride this farm of mine Their sons shall play in its confine. My farm to me is sunset glow, The gris of orchard blooms that ow

Across the many happy springs. My farm is made of precious things, My farm to me is not just land To be exploited by my hand, To me my farm is heritage, A trust from God for future age.

DAILY THOUGHT

By thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.—Matthew 12:37.

WORDS, however, are things; and J man who accords to his lanis

age the license to outrage his soul controlled by the words he .disdains to control~Owen Meredith

Headline of Aug. 20 said Roose- 3

ready in war although no men have] }

a

TUESDAY, AUG. 26, 1941 |

Gen. Johnson Says—

Confusion Over Rationing Gasoline Again Indicates Lack of Planning By Our Officials at Washington,

ASHINGTON, D. C, Aug. 26—The confusion and dismay about rationing gasoline in the East is a symptom of what is the matter with a great many things in the defense effort centering on Washington—lack of facts or failure to study facts and lack of planning or direction,

In the first place is there any shortage? “Shortage” is a compli cated term. It is not alone a lessening of gas in storage. It is that plus the rate by which demand and consumption exceed supply and transportation. It is now quite clear that thera is no actual alarming shortage of gas in storage. Whether a shorte age will develop, due to the trans

fer of our tankers to British us is the real question. Of course, supply will dwindle

if the main reliance on quick bulk transportation is given away. But, even after giving it away, isn'G there any other way to protect the public beside reducing its rations of this over-plentiful commodity? There has been precious little study of that. Al? our Washington war-lords seem to be able to think of when they get themselves into a jam is “soak the public.” If they can't think fast enough to get up some excuses or justification for that, it won't be long before the public begins soaking them—and yow can lay your last dollar on that.

2 2

2

HE 7 a. m. to 7 p. m. order drew Homeric laugh« ter and groans of dismay from all filling stations, It was bound to result in “fill her up” orders at the pumps, as this column predicted, rather than the usual hand-to-mouth buying, especially for family cars, with several drivers—and gasoline consumptiors went up 8 per cent. Now, putting rationing up to the filling stations is just as cockeyed. Station A cuts John Jones doway 10 per cent or some indefinite figure, so what does John do? He just drives around the corner and buys three more gallons from Station B. There 1s only one way to do this—if it hag to be done—and that is by ration cards. But the petroleum czar hasn't supplied any or provided a plan. Neitheyw has he proved that there is any necessity for such drastic action. Such convincing displays of thoughtless incompew tence before so many people aren't doing any good for national morale, yet they are being repeated im a dozen directions. Help! Help! Before this discussion became acute, this column timidly suggested, with no claim to personal expert knowledge, that a lot of gas could be towed in barges, even by the remaining tankers themselves and cer tainly by towage tugs—even on the sea lanes, excep in very rough weather. It is said that the suggestion had come from twa important towage experts. Unfortunately in transcripe tion the words “towage experts” was printed “tonnaged experts,” .

2 tJ

LOT of mail followed that column, some approve ing—some not. The latter mostly said thas tonnage experts didn't know anything about towing and that some naval officers didn't helieve ocean towage possible the year around. : Of course, it is not the ideal method and I still don’t pretend to any expert knowledge but nothing in any of this mail or correspondence was anything more than opinion, hardly expert, and I would rather rest my judgment on the experience of principal men in the leading towing companies of the world. I certainly would try something before - putting all the burden on innocent bystanders, crimping some tens of thousands of small business people and throws ing hundreds of thousands out of work. Now I have on my desk a documented report (too long for this space) that there is a very large tanker capacity on the Great Lakes, some of which could get through the canals and be used on the ocean and much of which will shortly ke tied up for four months by ice. Nothing is being done about that either. Ih was so much easier just to crack down on the public,

2

A Woman's Viewpoint By Mrs. Walter Ferguson

DO wish we could leave God out of our wars. If not to mollify Him, at least to preserve our sens% of sanity. “On Sunday morning,” said the report of an eye= witness to the mid-ocean meeting of Churchill and Roosevelt, “the President and his staff escorted by 200 of the Aue gusta's sailors journeyed to the Prince of Wales for church serve ices. The services on the forward deck of the huge battleship come posed an impressive scene, Witly the war vessel's 14-inch guns lowe ering over the deck as the masseg of officers and men sang ‘Onward Christian Soldiers,’ and ‘Oh Gody Our Help in Ages Past’.” In the moving pictures of this historic event, the huge guns dwarf into insect significance the men gathered there to observe the religious amenities. De you believe their prayers can rise higher than those guns? I think the war we are preparing to fight may bea necessary—at least it now seems unescapable, but I am still reluctant to join the movement to dress i§ up in sacred garments.. If we must set forth ta slaughter our fellow mortals let us do so as sinful but honest men, not as hypocrites crying out for aid to the Source of all Goodness. The individual soldier must be strengthened and uplifted by prayer—I believe sincerely that God walks by his side and that the Everlasting Arms cradle hins wherever he fights. But armed nations commit & sacrilege when they pronounce God their ally, and ask His help for material ambitions. : We may expect to lose many precious possessions in World War No. 2—Iet us hold fast to God if we can, We could afford to sacrifice everything provided we kept our faith in human dignity, integrity and goods ness. Somehow I can't help but feel that we will win better victories if we face honestly the truth about war—it is an evil, man-made enterprise with which our churches should have nothing to do, since thos churches are the caretakers of our spiritual treasure, for the sake of which we believe the world migh# well be lost. ;

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

Questions and Answers

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

Q—-How many Americans served in the ranks of the Loyalists during the Spanish civil war? : A—About 12,000, Q—How many postage stamps bearing Gilbert Stue art's portrait of George Washington have been issued? A—Approximately 50,000,000. Q—When the flag is displayed hanging over the side aisles of an auditorium, where does the blue field go? A—The blue field is run out first from the walls on either side, so that it hangs away from the wall, Q-—Would it require an amendment, to the Constie tution to annex Canada to the United States? A—No. One way that it could be done would bs for Canada to declare its independence of the Britisis Crown. As an independent country the Canadian Legislature could petition for annexation to the United States. The Congress could then enact a law admitting Canada to the Union as a single State op a number of States, subject to approval of the proe posed constitution or constitutions of the state om states. When these acts were completed by the

Canadian and/or Provincial Legislatures, Canadas Staton ads

become a part of the United