Newspaper Page Text
Wem ftotk tffnlntt?
Fir.t to Last?the Truth: New??Edi? toriais?Advertisements Member of the Audit Bureau of ?nrcuUUoM THURSDAY, JULY 15, 1920. Owned and published dally by New York Trlbnn* Jmc. a New York Corporation. Orlen Bald, Preai der.t: O. Vernor Rogers Vice-President; Helen Bonn Reld. Secretary; R. R. Max?old. Treasurer. Ad drew. Tribune Butldlng. 154 Nassau Street, New York. Telephone. Be*kn>*n SOCO. fltTBSCRIPTtON RATES-~Uy mall, including P?state. IN THE ITNITKD STATES. East of Mississippi River: On? ?Sir On* By Mail. Postpaid. Year. Month?. Month. Dally and Sunday.?12.00 ??.00 ?1.00 One *?k, S5c Daily only . 10.00 5 00 .81 On? ??eck. So?. s Sunday only. 4 00 S.aS .40 Sunday only. Canada. e.oo 8.25 .13 FOREIGN RATK8 Daily and Sunday.?25 00 $13.58 11.40 Ball? only.... 17.40 8.70 l.*5 tunday only. ?.?5 5.1? .88 entered at the Ptistoffie* at New Y*ork as ?Second Class Mail Matter GUARANTY You can purckat* merchandlt? advertised le THE TRIBUNE with absolut? sattty?fer If dlmthfaa tlon result* In any ease THE TRIBUNE gu?rannos to pay your money back upon rmuest. No rod tap*. Ne ?ulbbllng. Wo make flood promptly If the advertisn do** not. MEMBER OF TUE ASSOCIATED PRESS The Associated Pros? Is cjccUisiteij entitled to ?he B?e for ?-?publication of all news dispatch? credited to It or not otherw.se credited in this paper, snd siso tho local news of spontaneous origin published he~(n. Ail rights of repnbllcatlon of all other matter herein also are reserved. The German Fact One day the issue concerns the tracing of boundaries; another day, the payment for war damage wan? tonly done, or disarmament, or coal or something else. ' Germany has signed agreements which explicitly define her obliga? tions. But she repudiates her pledges in spirit and goes as far as she dares in ignoring them in acts. The attention of all persons is challenged by a momentous Fact. This Fact is Germany. What she has been she remains?a continuous menace to the peace and order of the world. It is useless to say conditions both within Germany and beyond her borders ar^ not as they should be. Conditions within Germany are not subject to outside control, and her conditions bring coosequences and reactions everywhere. Individual nations discuss peace as something they can always have if they wish it. They can't. A camel cannot have quiet unless willing to be a tiger's food. Before the war Germany deceived the remainder of* the world, or a large part of it. It was said she would never do that which she did. Those who penetrated the German design were prophets with little honor in their own countries. They were denounced as war inciters. And again, despite the warnings given by countless graves, those who do not wish another war deluge and who realize that the way to prevent it is to convince Germany she can? not win are denounced by pretend? ed liberals. ? Germany willed the war. She can will another. She is certain to will another if persuaded she may expect a different outcome. Peace depends not on the wishes of those who stopped her last foray, but on Ger? many's estimate of her chances. This is not to say Germany is in? capable of fundamental reform. It merely ret^ognizes the outstanding fact that she has not reformed and shows no desire to reform. Slip the bonds by which she is restrained, and the ultimate result is not doubtful. Germany snarls and bites, and then whines to be free. Who pos? sessing sanity and good intent would turn her loose? Who would assume responsibility for the flowing of new rivers of blood? The President's fatal policy pre? vented the creation of general bul? warks for peace. So the business of common protection is laid on France, Great Britain and Italy. We may well rejoice that they do not avoid their high and honorable task. These powers of western Europe protect us quite as much as we pro? tect the republics south of the Rio Grande. And as it is the habit of South America to sneer at our mo? tives, so we have a school of opinion that sneers at the motives of our European guardians. Flat or With Reservations Oyi November 19 last, the day rati? fication of the treaty was defeated in response to instructions from the White House, Senator Harding spoke as follows to the Senate: "In the Senate there are four dis? tinct schools of thought in dealing with this treaty. One is the uncon? ditional ratification school?those who, either through their own con? scientious convictions or the lash of the Executive?choose as you will? want this treaty ratified without a single modification or ratification. That is Group No. 1. In direct op? position is the so-called irrecon? cilable group?those who are unalter? ably opposed to any ratification. That is Group 2. The third is the group to which I choose to belong, if I may, who are agreed to bring about the ratification of this treaty if they are convinced that the reservations which have been adopted are suf? ficient to safeguard the interests of the United States of America. There still remains another group, or, rather, a group within a group, popularly known as the 'mild reservationists'? those who are anxious to ratify, who aro anxiou? to safeguard the inter? ests of this Republic, but at the same time desire to make ?Vhe reservations ?s little offensive as possible to those who assumed to negotiate the treaty j in contempt of the Senate." In his response to the challenge ?of Mr. Cox to make the League of Nations project tho paramount issue of the campaign Senator Harding in no degree contradicts the foregoing. He has voted twice for ratification, and may be counted on to forward ratification when the Senate again, assembles, unless it should appear wiser, after consultation with our war associates, to draft a new and better instrument. The issue narrows to the question of whether there, is to be flat rati? fication, as the President has insisted on, or ratification with reservations protective of American liberty of ac? tion and notice that our Constitution is binding on all serving under it. As to this, the San Francisco plat? form, through the addition of the Walsh amendment, practically con? cedes the validity of the Republican position. Mr. Cox will not find it easy to assail reservations and avoid collision with his platform. In various utterances the Presi? dent ihas sought to draw the issue in this wise, "Do you favor a League of Nations to preserve peace, and America's entry therein?" But the fraud of a submission along these lines has been exposed. If President Wilson has not been able to befuddle the public it is not likejy Candidate Cox will be able to do So. The Adullamites Robert M. La Follette, catching a prevailing disease, insists on writing the platform if he is to run. His dic? tation seems to have been accepted. At last accounts a committee of the Forty-eighters was feverishly at work on a document guaranteed to please. Platforms made while you wait; principles altered on an hour's notice. The gentlemen in concourse at Chicago are happily not bothered with a rank and file in their paper organizations. They are all colonels and generals. For them to march first one way and then another re? quires no argument with masses of men. When the convention, whose delegates are self-appointed, is ad? journed the party ceases to exist. It hopes to gain a following, but it ad? mits that it has none yet. Its voice sounds in a wilderness, and the only response so far is the echo of its own moonings. The organization of third and fourth and fifth parties is a regular industry every fourth July. They sprout and flower like buckwheat. But the frost of September is chill? ing, and by Octob?jp only a few blackened leaves remain. A new party sometimes has power to pry a man loose from an old association, but is seldom able to attract him to itself. The Progressive party of 1912 is often mentioned as an exception and is referred to as furnishing evidence i of what can be achieved. But the Progressive secession was orthodox even from a two-party standpoint, l Its genesis was the belief of the | Roosevelt delegates, a belief shared by the Roosevelt voters in the pri? maries, that the nomination had been stolen. Thus there was a split rath? er than a deliberate establishment of a new organization. Colonel Roosevelt would not have considered leading the new venture except for his conviction that the expressed will of the party had been grossly overriden. Nothing in the Chicago proceed? ings is calculated to make either of the old parties shiver with a great fear or tremble with a great dread. It is ?not conceivable that any con? siderable number of Americans have any desire to intrust the Republic to the management of the soreheads, calamity howlers and professional faultfinders who like to see their names in print and who have discov? ered that the easiest way to attain this glory is to have a nice little pri? vate party of your own. A Joint Enterprise The ability of Senator Harding that strikes us as his most essential qualification for the Presidency is his readiness to work with other men. It is this quality which will most appeal to American voters; and this attitude of the voters is a just one, for it is this ability which will in? sure from him if elected a sound and able administration. It is because President Wilson has so glaringly exhibited th? weakness of the leader who cannot cooperate or consult that the mind of the coun? try so ?insistently demands a Presi? dent of another type. But the issue is not a personal orte. The truth existed before the Wilson terms of office and will exist after the next Administration, whatever its charac? ter. It is a homely fact of American political life, of American business life, of everyday common sense. The American nation is a joint enterprise. Its affairs are too big to be contained in any one head or expressed on any one typewriter. The whole tradition and practice of the Presidency have been those of ! common counsel and joint direction. j Colonel Roosevelt carried the devel : opment of Presidential leadership ; far; but he never lost his ability for i taking infinite advice. His was j never a one-man government in the | sense that he was aloof from con? sultation or impervious to the opin? ions of others. The example of Lincoln is, of course, the supreme example of co? operation under the most trying con? ditions. It is an example which no American can ever forget and which comes recurringly to mind when the undoubted ability of President Wil? son is praised beyond its deserts. There is not only Senator Hard ing's declared policy in favor of cooperation ? with Vice-President, with Cabinet, with Congress. There in his record in the Senate, which those who have worked with him and who speak with impartiality confirm. Such a progressive and independent mind as Senator Cummings's, for example, considered Senator Hard ing's capacities ideally fitted for the Presidency. The gift of working, smoothly and efficiently with one's fellows is not a common ability. It is the first essential of a good execu? tive, and good executives are more rare in politics than they are in business. It is from a man's busi? ness associates that one looks for first hand opinions of his ability to cooperate; and the testimony of Mr. Harding's fellow Senators is the best of evidence on this point. We think that Mr. Harding's con? duct of his own campaign reinforces this conclusion. He has taken coun? sel with a wide variety of minds, Mr. Hoover and General Wood among the- rest. There is promise that he purposes to conduct his whole campaign upon the theory that common counsel is best. The Republican party unquestion? ably possesses the personal material for a supremely able Administration. That Mr. Harding, through disposi? tion and attainments, will be able to use this material to complete ad? vantage is, in our opinion, the su? preme reason for his support and election. To the Better Boat There is much to make to-day's cup race glorious and thrilling. No other international sporting trophy has an equal age. This is a post? poned contest, restrained by five years of war, that is unleashed off Sandy Hook. Seldom have two yachts bearing the hopes of nations been so equally matched and maneu? vered for a start with their compara? tive merits so completely veiled in doubt. ' A few minutes may serve to-day to indicate what the final result will be. But more likely the contest will be closely fought and the time allow? ance will declare the victor. This matter of many minutes that the challenger must give the Resolute is an unfortunate complication in what should preferably be a straight boat for-boat contest. The present rule, however, was drafted in a sound cause. If plain water line length is taken as a basis for a boat-for-boat race the tendency to develop freak models of extreme type is constant and unavoidable. The racing for? mula under which Resolute and Shamrock IV were built is a well meant effort to penalize freak pro? portions and encourage a sound, weatherly craft. The only criticism that can be made of the rule is the fact that it fails to prescribe any standard of structural strength. Resolute is frankly a racing machine, built to the limit of lightness, and there are those who doubt her stanchness and question her ability to hold together in a real blow and through heavy seas. Shamrock IV is of sturdier build, but her huge rig may bring her in equal peril if a gale unex? pectedly turns up. It is the hope of many yachtsmen that ultimately a stancher, more seaworthy type of cup contender may be evolved. But, if so, an even more complicated rac? ing rule must be evolved, and the present intricate formula certainly seems to give designers and meas? urers enough of a puzzle. The present series of races may yield much light on these points. They will be watched with eager interest by every lover of sport. ?_y a fortunate stroke of fate an ama? teur is at the helm of each yacht. There is a certainty of a rare duel of skill and of the utmost of fair play, good will and courtesy. A good breeze and a fair test are the wish of every one; and may the better boat win ! , The Aland Problem Compared to the controversies raging about Fiume and Teschen the question of the Aland Islands seems secondary and remote. Yet it has its undeniable importance in the fact that it is probably the only issue from which a permanent danger for the peace of northern Europe, other? wise well insured by the Scandina? vian entente cordiale, may grow. Roughly speaking, Sweden claims the islands on the ground of selt determination and of strategic neces? sity. Finland pleads historic right and geographical as well as naval considerations. It is true that the Aland Islands formed part of Fin? land when that country was united to Sweden, but the separate entity of the group was emphasized by state documents which always spoke of "Finland with the Aland Isl? ands." When Sweden, in 1809, ceded Finland to Russia the islands were handed over, too. Ever since their Russian ownership constituted one of Sweden's most burning problems, for the islands control the entrance of Stockholm's harbor, and if occu? pied by an enemy power render the defense of the Swedish coast practi? cally futile. The group has been de? scribed as a sword pointed at Swe? den's heart. Great was, therefore, the rejoic? ing in Sweden when, after the break-up of Russia, the islanders, Swedish in race and language, unanimously declared for Swedish sovereignty. But the Finnish gov ernment, which is now in possession, proposes to disregard the sentiment of the population. Besides assert? ing historic right (which, hcwever, as was seen, ?b a two-edged argu? ment in this case) the Finns demand the islands on the ground that they guard the entrance to the Gulf of Bothnia, and thus Finland's commu? nications with the outside world. They assert, moreover, that, while the deep channel separating the islands from Sweden never freezes, the sea between the group and the Finnish mainland is covered in win? ter with thick ice. This argument, again, might well be put forward by the Swedes, seeing that a strip of free water affords better contact than ice. Finland has been called the fourth Scandinavian nation, and, politically and culturally, Sweden may be re? garded as her mother country. It would be regrettable, both from the Scandinavian and the general point of view, if the relations of the two states should be allowed to suffer on account of the Aland dispute, which, after all, presents no difficulty in? soluble by peaceful argument. A Call for Cabinets if Announced, Voters Could Better Make Up Their Minds To the Editor of The Tribune. Sir: May I make a suggestion that, If put into effect, will be a great help to the independent voter in making his decision as to tho proper candidate to support next November? Would it not be possible for the various candidates to name their cabi? nets before election instead of after? The voter in casting his vote helps to put in office more than a President and Vice-President?he elects the adminis? trative side of tho government, and much of the strength or weakness of that government depends upon the character of men selected by the Presi? dent for Cabinet positions. Neither of the candidates of the two great parties can be considered big men nationally, and their capacity to handle the job well is an unknown quantity. Those who perhaps have been disposed to vote the Republican ticket do not feel certain just what kind of men will surround Mr. Harding should he be elected. If they are going to be tho men who were moat influential in bringing about his nomination, then many of us will not want to see him elected. On the o,ther hand, if he se? lects men like Root, Hughes, Taft, Hoover, Wood, Schwab, Vanderlip and others of the same caliber as his ad? visers, many independents will feel safe in voting for him. The same holds true of the other can? didate. There is little to choose be? tween the heads of the two tickets? there may be a decided choice if#the Cabinet members are known before elec? tion. There are two major objections to the plan?first, the candidate's time will be too much occupied with cam? paigning for him to give the choice of Cabinet members consideration; second, damaging political enmities may be created by choosing a Cabinet before election. Neither of theso ob? jections can really weigh against the good that can come to the elector by a knowledge of just what kind of gov? ernment he is trying to put in power when he casts his ballot. H. C. GILLESPIE. Suff.em, N. Y., July 12, 1920. Watch It Fail! To the Editor of The Tribune. Sir: Has it occurred to your corre? spondents that perhaps their discussion of "Why the Chsftches Fail" is funny? Take a Bingle denomination?the Methodist, for instance?and watch it fail. Its tithers (Methodists who give a tenth of their income to the church) number only 210,000. Its recent evan? gelistic campaign failed to 'the extent of yielding something like 850,000 new Methodists. And what does its much vaunted centenary fund amount to? Small change! Chicken feed! To be specific, the sum of $115,000,000. There's failure for you! There's fizzle! At this rate Methodism will soon be as extinct as the saloons it killed. Quite clearly it is no longer a power, though wo should not be surprised at that, for to-day there are barely 4,500, 000 Methodists left alive. ROLLIN LYNDE HARTT. New York, July 13, 1920. The Greatest Gift To the Tribune Fresh Air Fund. May I take the liberty of con? gratulating you upon the noble work you are doing for those who are soon to be the backbone of our community, giving them a chance to know that there is something in this life besides industrial unrest, politi? cal agitation and economic distur? bances? Your unselfish and altruistic ?work is but another instance, another bit of evidence, establishing not Merely the possibility of performing invalu? able services to our community, but also the need of our community for such great factors as The Tribune. I cheerfully inclose my little bit, in memory of mv beloved wife, Rose Cohn Hyman, by whom children were held to be God's greatest gift to humanity. WILLIAM A. HYMAN, New York, July 10, 1920. A War of Words (From The Los Angeles Times) It is mainly a matter of verbiage. The Republicans want the league with their reservations and interpretations. The Democrats say they have no objec? tions to reservations and interpreta? tions, but they must not amount to desecration or nullification. The Re? publicans retort that they aim not at nullification, but insist on justification. They ought to be able to get together. What they both want is a League of Na? tions on probation with interpretation of relations. Elihu Root could fix that up in twenty minutes. The Conning Tower First Linen In Pleasant Places rB- O W. out of' Bartlett's Familiar 1 ' Quotation*.] Charming he ?aw hor, Cheek upon her hand; Chief among the blessed three, Childlike and bland. Chill November's surly blast, Cold as any stone; Coward? die many times, Die all alone. Dream of heaven she did, but Early to bed; Emeli? up rose, Eyelids heavy and red. Faith unfaithful kept him Fallen on evil days; Ferdinand Mentez Pinto Hath divers ways. | Friendship is but a name, Frost, a killing frogt; Hoist with his own petar, Honour is lost. Hope bade the world farewell, Kings would not pity; Let not the heavens hear Llewellyn's layi Locked up from mortal eye, Love taught him shame; Love waters cannot quench, Love's holy flame. Marriage is a desperate thing; Means to do ill deeds. Meddling every fool will be Mock the meat it feeds. Here a line and there a line, I and sorrows sit, Hio jaeet, these two narrow words, A very palpable hitl Read, mark and inwardly digest, Then welcome each rebuff; Roundelay, my merry, merry, Skimble-skamble stuff. Some day we may become a Presi? dential candidate, so we risk no charges of anti-Americanism. We here? by go on record as hoping that Sham? rock IV loses and Resoluto wins to? day. King Christian of Denmark hurt his leg yesterday while mounting a horse. The stirrup Btrap broke, the inference being that it was, as Shakespeare im? plied, rotten. The Truth About the Cox Porch Sir: My bitterest enemy smiling? ly has called my attention to your rash columnar conclusion drawn from the published photographs of Governor Cox's home that it is "porchless." I have the authority of the architect* for stating that it has three of these useful orna? ments?whose assumed absence forms the basis of your feeble joke. I say "useful ornaments" advisedly, for they are made to be screened in Summer and enclosed with glass in Winter without giving the house the appearance of a sanatorium. Have you ever sat on the White House porch amusing yourself swatting flies and mosquitoes? ?Oswald C. Hering. But the architect is in error about tho White House porch. It's a portico. In dramatic experience, Miss John stone is well qualified for her new work. She was a member of the Follies of 1915 and 1916 and has had many important r?les in stage pro? ductions?with the Castles in "Watch Your Step"; with Gaby Deslys in "Stop! Look! Listen!"; with Ray? mond Hitchcock in "Oh, Boy"; with Ed. Wynn in '?Over the Top," and so on through a list of real triumphs.? From a Realart advertisement. What do you mean, "dramatic"? The Bonaparte Unselfishness [From th? Evening Post] Napoleon loved her, and immediate? ly after the restoration of the empire, he declared on January 22, 1853, his intention of marrying her to the Sen? ate, the Legislative Assembly and the highest officials of the government in the throne room of the Tuileries. Despite the Times's championing of Governor Cox, it prints a picture of the Dayton News building, "which he bought," the caption says, "when in a moribund condition." The Diary of Our Own Samuel Pepys July 13~Early up, and breakfast at L. Fishel'8, very good, too; and drove W. Botsford' to the city, and so to my office, slaving there till near 2 o'clock; and so with Mistress Hilda Jackson to Woodmere, and W. Botsford trounced me terribly, but Mr. E. Conlin did um? pire the match, and that was a perfect thing. Back to the city late, and had no dinner at all, and to the office, and so home at 11, and to bed. 14?Up betimes, and to the office; and Mrs. Mabel Hill to see me, whom I have not Been in more than a year, and she prettier than ?v?r she was. To get a new tennis racquet and met Mr. Curtis, a fair spoken gentleman; and so to Woodmere again in my petrol-waggon and home again, late. -, # And yesterday evening a young wom? an said she really believed it wasn't as hot as she thought it was. Will the class in journalism as? semble, please? Now then, what do i they hope ? to do to a strike or a | famine? Avert. And what do tennis opponents do? Clash. The class is dismissed. The Socialist party will see the cup races frem their communistic craft, the Proletariyacht. Doubtless the fireflies are plentiful at Flasher, N. Dak. And, as G. A. H. suggests, most of 'em suffer from Bright's disease. Well, well, it's St. Swith,n*s Day. Probably showers, F. P. A. O, DRY THOSE TEARS (Copyright, mo. New York Tribune Iao.) T. R. on Prohibition Favored the 18th Amendment, It Is Asserted To the Editor of The Tribune. Sir: In July, 1918, Theodore Roose? velt by appointment gave an interview to the writer in company with H. C. Scotford, of New York City. So much has been said about the attitude of Colonel Roosevelt toward prohibition and other issues that it seems perfectly clear that the mind of the great states? man, who was always progressive in thought, absorbed though he was with the prosecution of the great war of humanity, was at the same time con? sidering in a secondary way some of the other questions that were before the American public. Casual conversa? tions may place an emphasis upon first one phase of a question and then an? other, which could give the appearance of conflicting views. When, however, the Colonel wrote about his conclusion upon a subject, or declared for action upon it, there was no difficulty of un? derstanding his final analysis of it. I read the conversation with Roose? velt which John J. Leary jr. reported in "McOlure's" for November, 1918. The opening statement of Mr. Leary is that "Colonel Roosevelt was not one of those who favored the Eighteenth Amendment." He does not say the Colonel thus declared himself. The closing statement is that Roosevelt said he would take no part in the contest one way or the other: "I shall not allow it or anything else to swerve me from the (war) work we are now in." The former statement we think is incorrect.? as far as it relates to Roosevelt's final decision. The latter statement we know represents his attitude. Mr. Roosevelt did not desire to turn from what he considered the main issue, and while he had the desire to let nothing else important employ his time, he recognized the merits of both the suffrage and prohibition campaigns and said to Hon. Wayne B. Wheeler, of Washington, and Colonel L. B. Mus grove, of Alabama, that he had to break that rule once in order to help the suffrage fight, and if it became necessary he would do it again in order to help prohibition. In my interview, which was with reference to prohibition | and the Republican party in New York j and the nation, in speaking of the prog- ! ress of prohibition and its ultimate achievement by ratification he said, "I will do everything I can to make it pos? sible." Shortly after this I wrote to Sena? tor Frederick Davenport regarding the matter, inclosing a Roosevelt letter, and Mr. Davenport replied, "I thank you very much for sending me the ! copy of letter of Colonel Roosevelt to j Dr. Iglehart. Coupled with the testi mony of Mr. Wayne Wheeler of Mr. Roosevelt's conversation with him, it makes no doubt of the position of Mr. Roosevelt. I had a conversation months ago with him ahout the matter, and : there isn't the slightest question about what he thought. No man in America j could read the signs of the times more clearly than he." If, in tho conversation with Mr. Leary, there seemed: to be any sugges? tion from Colonel Roosevelt that it might be wise to make a trial of the beer and wine program, it must be re? membered that this was one of the stages of thought which practically all public men reached at one time or an? other, which was abandoned for the complete program, notwithstanding that the earlier notion may have been alluded to at times as a plausible so? lution of the drink problem. Inadver tently, Mr. Leary, in contending that Roosevelt did not favor the amendment, but was willing to promote continuance of beer and wine, makes admission that the amendment to all intents and pur? poses does prohibit beer and wine. If, in conversation with Mr. Leary, there cropped out any feeling of uncer? tainty over what would take the place of the saloon, or any sympathy over the prospective lot of some saloon? keepers whom Roosevelt knew person? ally to be keepers of orderly houseB, and even though there were some Rooseveltian emphasis and vigor tin? gling throughout such an observation on his part, the speculation is altogether overcome in his final conclusions on the subject, which are not set forth in Mr. Leary's article. That article dealt with phases of the problem, and not with the facts of ratification. Mr. Roosevelt's assertion that he would help secure ratification of the ! amendment if it became necessary has its antecedent in a letter which was written right after Congress submitted the national prohibition amendment, December 17, 1917: "Dr. Ferdinand C. Iglehart, care of 'Christian Herald,' Bible House, New York. "My Dear Dr. Iglehart: I thank you for your book and appreciate your send? ing it to me and I wish to congratulate you on what has happened in Congress and the success that is crowning your long fight against alcoholism. The American saloon has been on? of the most mischievous elements in American social, political and industrial life. No man has warred more valiantly against it than you have, and I am glad that it has been my privilege to stand with you in the contest. "Faithfully yours, "THEODORE ROOSEVELT." Many a man has had a certain sym? pathy for saloonkeepers personally known to him, but that has not de? barred him from* welcoming the prohi? bition of the liquor traffic. When Colo? nel Roosevelt wrote the congratulatory message upon the submission of the national amendment he knew it was an amendment which prohibited beer and wine. There were many men who had an opinion that beer and wine were not very harmful, but decided that the brewers of whom the Colonel wrote "They paid money to the German American Alliance" had sinned away their day of grace and that the whole business had to go. ANDREW B. WOOD, Assistant State Superintendent Anti Saloon League. Brooklyn, July 11, .1920. Woven Silence (From The Pagan) ?HPHIS silence has a music; It is the blood of me that hears it, Almost the fingers, too. Had this hand of you, Flower-curved under your sleeping eyes, A voice to murmur repose, And had this hair of you, Soft-seeking to your sleeping cheeks, The humming of its slow, bewildered curve, I should have entering music for the ear; I should be started on a woven song Of the hushed weavers of silence. EDWARD SAPIR. The Gathering of the Clans (From The Buffalo Express) Now is the time for all medium good men to come to the aid of the party by attaching themselves to the cam? paign payroll as sentiment-feelers, prestige-givers, all-around mixers and windjammers. David and Jonathan The Amiable Cynic Applies flu Min?? to Politics To the Editor of The Tribune. Sir: Now that David and Jonathan have so touchingly kissed each other in public, little "pep" is left in the cam? paign and email cause for anxiety u to the result. The brightest thing said of Hughes in 1916 was that if he had not been running he would have voted for Wil? son. Be that as it may, there ii no leason to doubt that Harding will vote for Oox, and certainly none can doubt that Cox will vote for Harding. So why bother to go to the poll? not November? Could there be mtw? nearly two peas from the same pod' The only probable difference in vie? between two such dear friends is that Harding thinks Harding should be elected, and Cox thinks Cox should he \ elected. Together they should stut?! the country arm in arm, alternating at i each stopping of their joint train. i Practically each could make the same speech, explaining that each platform was constructed solely on the principie of catching all votes and repelling none. On the liquor question each hold* sacred to the utmost th? enforcement of the law, and each should be able tc make it perfectly clear to all voten that, wet or dry, they have the ?nth* sympathy of each. And what more eu any proper-minded voter want? As to the League of Nations, both candidates are in complete accord. Such a league is highly favored as is en? tirely constitutional and does not Mn?> the United States to anything s ma? jority of its voters does not v/ant B held for. Probably during the cam? paign Harding will pledge himself, i? elected, to appoint Cox Secretary of State. Whereupon Cox will reciprocate by pledging Harding's appointment ?? Secretary of State, if he, Cox, is elected President. As neither candidate is first, seeouA or even third choice of the majority of the voters of his party, and can he voted for only as a bitter pill, ?W should not the high contracting partie? to the nomination get to a conference and make a sure thing of it for them? selves in any event? One represent? tive of sinister Republicanism and on? representative of sinister Democracy would be ample. Get together, Messrs. Penrose *?? Murphy, and fix things so that ye? forces will win, no matter which ?? your candidates loses. J. H. HARVET. Montclair, N. J., July 10, 1920. Motor Noises To the Editor of The Tribune. Sir: It is my desire to expresa ?P" preciation for an article protesting against noise in city streets hi drivers of automobiles, trucks ?P? motorcycles. I refer to an article s> The Sunday Tribune on the autoiM bile page. The offense is daily? nightly, everywhere in the city, as? gets worse instead of better. The police could hardly engage in a me** important campaign against wrosf than that of suppreasing the viols?* noises of automobiles. ANTI-NOISt New York, July 12, 1920. The Touch of Nature (From The Louisville Courier-Joaraatl A critic has discovered that neaifr every orator at San Francisco has Q?* his infinitives. If that's so, how ?*? the grand old intensely human D?V* eratic party fail to get the symp*** and the votes of the majority?