THE EVENING STAR
With Sunday Nomina Edition
THEODORE W. NOYES, Editor
WASHINGTON, D, C.
TUESDAY..March 29, 1938
The Eveninf Star Newspaper Company
Main Office; llth St. and Pennsylvania Ave.
New York Office: 110 East 42nd 6t.
Chicago Office: 435 North Michigan Ave.
Delivered by Carrier—City and Suburban
Regular Edition
Evening and Sunday_fl5c per mo. or 16c per week
The Evening Star—45c per mo. or 10c per week
The Sunday Star __ __ _5c per copy
Night Final Edition
Night Final and Sunday Star_TOc per month
Night Final Star 55c per month
Collection made at the end of each month or
each week. Orders may be sent by mail or tele
phone National 6000.
Rate by Mail—Payable in Advance
Maryland and Virginia
Daily and Sunday_„l yr.. $10.00; 1 mo., 85c
Daily only -1 yr., $8.00; 1 mo.. oOc
Sunday only-1 yr., $4.00; 1 mo., 40c
All Other States and Canada
Dally and Sunday 1 yr., $12.00; 1 mo., $1.00
Daily only-1 yr., $8.00; 1 mo., ',6c
Sunday only-1 yr., $5.00; 1 mo., OOc
Member of the Associated Press
The Associated Press is exclusively entitled to
the use for republication of all news dispatches
credited to it or not otherwise credited in this
paper and also the local news published herein.
All rights of publication of apecial dispatches
herein also are reserved.
Up lo the House.
Senate leaders acted wisely In the last
minute decision to let the far-reaching
Government reorganization bill go to
the House as a separate measure, thereby
giving that branch of Congress full op
portunity to consider every phase of it.
When the Senate voted to pass it, by
the close vote of 49 to 42, the original
plan of the leadership was to make the
entire measure an amendment to a
House bill, which might have sent the
whole subject directly to conference
without thorough consideration in the
House.
Fortunately, this course was aban
doned ana now the Senate bill will be
referred to committee in the House, and
go through the normal legislative chan
nels that so important a measure should
take.
When a legislative body in which the
majority party has 77 members out of a
total of 96 divides 49 to 42 on an admin
istration measure, it reflects a difference
of opinion that warrants careful delib
eration rather than short cuts.
It should be remembered that the Sen
ate bill contains two major changes in
governmental machinery that have never
been acted on by the House—abolition
of the Civil Service Commission and the
General Accounting Office.
me nouse Din which leaders first
considered using as a vehicle to send
the subject to the House, and thence to
conference, dealt only with the general
power of the President to regroup bu
reaus, and to create a new department
of welfare. If this course had been fol
lowed, the House, at best, would have
been limited to an efTort to instruct its
conferees on those broad features of the
Senate program which up to now the
House has not considered.
In the closing days of the Senate's
long battle over the bill appeals were
received for further hearings on the bill,
and no harm would be done now if the
House Reorganization Committee took
a little time out to comply with these
requests.
No one quarrels with the general ob
jective of promoting efficiency and elimi
nating overlapping in governmental
agencies, but the Senate bill does much
more than that. It discards the bi
partisan Civil Service Commission for
a single administrator, and it estab
lishes an entirely new system for the
supervision of Government accounting.
In abolishing the Controller General's
Office, established in 1921, to give Con
gress an independent check on expendi
tures, it places current accounting under
the Budget Bureau and creates a new
auditor general to make post audits.
i ne senate vote Is evidence of a sharp
division of opinion on the entire bill and
it will be far better for the Government,
for Congress itself and for the country
as a whole if the membership of the
House goes as thoroughly into the argu
ments pro and con as did the Senate.
Much of the opposition to the bill in
the Senate was based on a belief that
Congress should retain as a legislative
function the right to approve or dis
approve reorganization orders of the
President before they take effect. As
the bill stands no affirmative action
would be necessary and the otders would
take effect after sixty days, in the ab
sence of legislation of disapproval,
Since such legislation could be vetoed,
one-third of Congress could prevent the
overriding of the veto. Furthermore, it
would not always be easy to put a reso
lution of disapproval through both
branches of Congress within the re
quired sixty days. The House might well
give further study to the amendment
which the Senate rejected, requiring
Congress to take affirmative action
promptly on reorganization orders be
fore they go into effect.
Colonel House.
The verdict of history must be that
Colonel Edward Mandell House failed in
his efforts to achieve the protection of
the democratic philosophy he loved.
Death came to him at a moment when
every concept dear to his heart had
been defeated. The Versailles Treaty,
of which he was an author, has been
tom to fragments by both the Allies
and the Germans, and the League of
Nations, of which he was an architect,
has been defied and defamed by even
the little countries for which, especially,
it was designed to be a defense and a
guard.
Colonel House, slowly fading from the
world picture, knew that his hopes had
been destroyed, his labors rendered
vain and useless. Unlike his friend and
leader, President Woodrow Wilson, he
was fated to survive until it had been
demonstrated beyond any question that
democratic ideal be preserved
| by compromise. There was, it seems, a
sorrowful satisfaction for him in the
complete disaster which inevitably fol
lowed upon the concessions which the
United Stated was persuaded to make
at Paris in 1919. He never was blind to
the dangers, never deaf to the cries of
protest raised against the betrayal of
the fourteen points. With a genius
natural to his character, he fought as
best he could for moderation and jus
tice. The punitive point of view, how
ever, prevailed, and Clemenceau opened
the "doors of opportunity for Mussolini
and Hitler, the Fascists and the Nans.
But Colonel House never despaired.
Up to the last he still campaigned for
the doctrines to which he was self
dedicated, still maintained his faith
that human intelligence is not unequal
to the problem of greed and violence in
organized form. He was an amateur
diplomatist always, and it was his
preference to toil alone. Millions were
familiar with his name, yet never saw
his face. He was in truth a man of
mystery, shy of crowds, shrewd, keen,
sometimes even cunning, but not quite
sure enough of his cause. Perhaps the
explanation of his disappointments may
be found in his unofficial status. He
was merely the private adviser of Mr.
Wilson. Generally, his credentials were
indefinite. He was handicapped on
occasion by the realization of those with
whom he dealt that he spoke only for
his President, not for the American
people.
Now he Is gone, and his friends mourn
him as a tragic figure of a tragic period.
They understand, as a larger public
may not, how deeply earnest and sin
cere he was. Also, they comprehend
the significance of his intent and the
altruistic purpose of his broken dream.
It is plain to them that he symbolized
an aspiration which the humble, in
articulate multitudes shared. His frus
tration, they sadly confess, was that of
the bewildered and suffering masses in
whose interest he gave all that lay in
his power generously to give.
New Deal Victory.
The Supreme Court decision uphold
ing contested provisions of the Public
Utility Holding Company Act of 1935
marked a major triumph for the Roose
velt administration and climaxed a
series of legal victories that seemed
impossible of attainment two years ago.
The Federal Government, from the
viewpoint of those who believe in the
desirability of centralized power, is now
entrenched on strong legal ground. Pri
marily through the adoption of a broad
interpretation of the commerce clause
of the Constitution, the Supreme Court
has opened the door to a degree of gov
ernmental regulation of business that
would have been undreamed of a gen
eration ago. This step was taken by
the justices 'in the face of realities that
could not well be ignored. On one side
was the pressure of the President s effort
to reorganize the court and on the other
a growing belief that "big business” had
reached a point where the hope for ade
quate State regulation was demonstrably
futile.
On the face of the record as it now
stands there appears no likelihood that
the New Deal will meet with an adverse
ruling from the justices in the near
future. There is no case involving New
Deal legislation still awaiting decision
during this term and most observers
agree that the Supreme Court will rule
for the Government in cases coming up
from lower tribunals.
In deciding the utility holding com
pany case, the court upheld the legality
of the registration provisions of the
act and the penalties imposed for fail
ure to register. Despite an urgent plea
from the utilities, the court .refused to
pass on the constitutionality of other pro
visions, rejecting an “invitation” to enter
into "a speculative inquiry for the pur
pose of condemning statutory provisions,
the effect of which in concrete situations,
not yet developed, cannot now be defi
nitely perceived.”
This, however, was victory enough for
the newly appointed Solicitor General,
Robert H. Jackson, who read into the
court’s language an implied warning
that "even great aggregations of financial
power must be made to operate under
the law.” That statement from the New
Deal’s chief “trust buster,” if not the
signal for revival of the momentarily
forgotten anti-monopoly campaign, may
at least be interpreted as a warning to
the utilities that drastic enforcement of
the holding company act is in the offing.
The political "grab bag’’ is mentioned
as a feature of the present situation. It
may be as well to serve notice that
everything has been grabbed, before
throngs come over from Europe to be
taken care of.
--> « — ■
Europe is called on to pay, recogniz
ing that where Hitler executes a coup
there must also be a bill.
A Good Day’s Work.
Law enforcement in the District and
the suppression of rackets won a dis
tinct victory in the House yesterday in
the quick passage of the numbess bill.
Credit is due to the members of the
House District Committee who pried the
bill out of a pigeon hole an^l forced its
report and passage over the outspoken
opposition of the chairman. Senator
King,' who twice has obtained Senate
approval of this bill, may be depended
upon to work for its final enactment
through Senate concurrence with the
House amendments, suggested by United
States Attorney Pine.
The important thing about the num
bers bill is simply this: For several years
now police and prosecutors have asked
in vain that their hands be strengthened
through statutory recognition of the
numbers game, giving them Authority,
previously lacking, to deal with a mod
em variation of the old policy game.
As long as they lacked such authority,
a convenient and perhaps perfectly legit
imate “alibi” was available as an excuse
for failure vigorously to go after the
numbers operators.
With enactment of the pending meas
ure, that alibi will no longer exist. The
police will be expected to go after the
operators and they can count on United
States Attorney Pine and his office to
back them to the limit.
The police may never be able to stop
gambling. But the police can and It is
believed they will break up a racket In
Washington that has assumed incredible
proportions. And the way to go after
that racket, as Mr. Dewey has so well
demonstrated in New York, is to put
the racketeers behind the bars, where
they belong.
To Stop Chiseling.
Prompt steps by the District Unem
ployment Compensation Board to prose
cute four persons charged with illegally
obtaining compensation checks may
rightfully be considered in the interests
of good administration.
No condition could be more injurious
to effective operation of the unemploy
ment insurance plan than one of promis
cuous “chiseling” allowed to continue
without speedy punitive action. Essen
tial in any type of insurance system
are confidence in the integrity of ad
ministration and faith that benefits will
come to those and only those who are
deserving.
Despite reasonable protection through
checks on employment and separation
records, opportunity exists in the local
administration of the program for un
scrupulous persons to obtain benefit
checks for a short period. There is vir
tually no opportunity, however, for such
abuse to go unnoticed beyond a very few
weeks as the lag in examination of all
records is passed.
With the board possessed of authority
to prosecute any who participate in
such illegal practices, the responsibility
and the power to maintain the integrity
of the system are theirs and should be
exercised. Vigorous utilization of such
powers should have a salutary effect on
all who feel genuine interest in the un
employment insurance program and give
pause for thought for those who con
template its abuse.
Goering says that not hatred but
necessity prompts the hardships which
old families are called on to endure.
That ancient fable about the punish
ment which hurts the one who inflicts it
more than the victim is evidently being
revived along with the swastika.
It is intimated that Stalin has been
tricked into turning some of his most
capable subjects over to the executioner.
When sufferers of the death penalty are
so numerous, the fear of mistakes in
evitably arises.
f " T *** 1
The New York stock market has shown
some surprises that will call for an ac
complished lawyer to explain them and
possibly add to the incidental expense
that must be met.
There are people who wish heartily
that Hitler had made a brilliant suc
cess of his efforts to become a painter.
Even a career as a house painter would
have been more'peaceful.
Many compliments are extended to
John L. Lewis as an orator, accompanied,
however, by reminders that a man may
make a good speech and still land on
the losing side. v
Reports of renewed Chinese attacks
upon the Japanese, with victories on
several fronts, suggest that the war that
is not even yet a war may eventually be
rated as a genuine conflict.
Shooting Stars.
By PHILANDER JOHNSON.
_ ft
As Doc Braney See* It.
“I know the world looks easy, son,”
Doc Braney said, one day;
“It seems that wondrous things are done
In such a simple way
That luck or genius have the call,
And work seems little use.
Yet, son, the question, after all,
Is this: Can You Produce?
“It’s wonderful to see the schemes
That lightweights can put through.
This easy-going world, it seems,
Was waiting just for you.
But promising's a simple task!
No longer on the loose,
The old world pauses now to ask,
‘My Boy, Can You Produce?’
“Your gentle and persuasive smile
Is worth far more than gold.
Alas, this world of grief and guile
Must traffic as of old.
As bright intentions fade away
None waits for an excuse.
The man who Is a Man today
Must hustle and produce.”
Campaign ef Education.
“You say your visit home was In the
nature of a campaign of education?”
“More or less,” answered Senator
Sorghum. “I listened attentively and
learned a number of interesting things."
Jud Tunkins says farming has be
come such a scientific proposition that a
man has to learn to use more different
kinds of tools than he does in a golf
game.
Motor Melancholy.
Of signs of spring which now expand
The hardest to endure
Is that which looms on every tyuid—
The grim old word, “DETOUR." »
"To apologize for the past," said Hi
Ho, the sage of Chinatown, "may lose
precious time that should be devoted to
preparing for the future.”
The Real Cost.
My garden tools with Joy intense
I buy and never lose ’em;
But the biggest item of expense
Is a hired man to use ’em.
"Tastes differ so much," said Uncle
Eben, “dat even a radio has got to be
J«s’ somethin’ else for de fam’ly to quar>
, rel aboul” —
A *
I THE POLITICAL
MILL
BY G. GOULD LINCOLN.
Senator William E. Borah, whose
Ideas are anathema to the internationally
minded, does not see much difference
between foreign alliances and “co-opera
tion.” He said as much in the National
Radio Forum last night, discussing the
question of “Foreign Affairs,” as they
affect this country. He put up a very
persuasive argument to prove his point.
His address, which was broadcast
throughout the country, was apparently
designed to offset the talk of “co
operation” by President Roosevelt, Sec
retary Cordell Hull of the State De
partment and others who have spoken
for the administration.
Co-operation, said Senator Borah, has
an excellent sound. It is only when we
get down to brass tacks that the Ameri
can who does not believe in entangling
alliances--and both the President and
Mr. Hull Insist they are opposed to such
alliances—finds himself puzzled over co
operation by this country with another
nation. Senator Borah pointed out the
difficulty of arriving at measures of co
operation with another nation, discuss
ing co-operation with Great Britain.
Some Americans, he said, had desired the
United States to co-operate with Eng
land when Anthony Eden was in the
saddle and he did not wish to negotiate
with foreign dictators, but even thought
of "whipping” those dictators.
In the twinkling of an eye, he showed,
Mr. Eden was no longer directing British
foreign policy and Mr. Chamberlain was
in his place. Mr. Chamberlain's policy
is one of negotiation with the foreign
dictators. Where, suggested Senator
Borah, would that have left the United
States if it had engaged in co-operating
with the British government while Mr.
Eden was charting the course? Decid
edly, there seems to be something in
what Mr. Borah has to say. On the
other hand, if the United States had
been willing to "co-operate” with Great
Britain, Mr. Eden might have remained
in the saddle, .and the United States
might have been drawn very danger
ously into these European quarrels.
Ik ik * *
Senator Borah's proposal Is simply
that the United States remain friends
with all the world and mind Its own
business. This is a good program. How
ever. it takes two to be friends, and if
another nation or nations should deside
to be no longer a friend or friends of the
United States, there may be war after
all—if the peace-at-any-price party does
not prevail.
The Idaho Senator takes the question
of America’s foreign relations very seri
ously. He started speaking out plainly
about them back in the days when the
Versailles treaty and the League of
Nations Covenant were before the Sen
ate. He called the Versailles treaty last
night "the mother of modern arma
ments,” since it was unjust and unwork
able. Ever since it was negotiated, he
maintained, the world has been arming
for war. What the framers of the
Versailles treaty did to Austria was far
more disastrous for the independence of
that country, he said, than what Mr.
Hitler has Just done.
* * * *
The burden of Senator Borah's talk
was that Americans should stop, look
and listen before they permit themselves
to be drawn into "co-operation” with
any nation, even though the present ad
ministration is talking of co-operation.
After all, he said, who is to decide with
what nation we shall "co-operate” and of
what that co-operation shall consist?
Presumably the Chief Executive, in
charge of foreign relations and their
negotiation, will be the man to decide.
While Mr. Borah does not like the
talk of co-operation advanced by the
President and Mr. Hull, he gave his
hearty approval to the address recently
delivered by American Ambassador "Joe”
Kennedy in London. Mr. Kennedy, he
pointed out, said that the American peo
ple do not like entangling alliances.
Most of them insist upon retaining a
free and independent hand to act as they
see fit in foreign affairs. America has
no intention of attacking any one, but
intends to remain friends with all. If
force of events makes this impossible,
Mr. Kennedy said, America will then de
cide what it shall do to preserve the
welfare of its citizens. All this, Senator
Borah Insisted, should help to clear the
air. What he fears, apparently, is that
other voices in the administration will
not sing the same tune.
m. m * w
The discussion of foreign relations
very likely will bob up when the Senate
considers the billion-dollar naval con
struction bill, which has passed the
House and is now before the Senate
Naval Aflalrs Committee. To some of
the Senators this proposed building pro
gram is excessive and they will say so.
But whether they do or not, the naval
bill will pass the Senate by a substantial
vote—Just as it did the House. It is a
tough proposition to beat a naval con
struction bill in the American Congress.
Fortunately there are a good many
Americans who, believing in no en
tangling alliances, feel that it is neces
sary for the country to be prepared to
defend itself. The two positions are
entirely logical and supplementary to
one another.
The President got his Government re
organization bill through the Senate by
the skin of his teeth. Three votes changed
would have sent the measure to strangu
lation in the committee from whence it
came. It was a victory for the adminis
tration-won after desperate fighting.
But it was a victory that gave evidence of
the weakening hold which the adminis
tration has over Congress. Presumably
the House will follow suit and pass the
President’s bill. However, the drive
throughout the country to beat the bill
finally has developed astoundingly in
the last few days. With representatives
of the American Federation of Labor,
the American Legion, the railroad
brotherhoods and many other organiza
tions working against the bill as it
stands, the administration has reason to
fear for it.
That the administration has its fears
about what the House may do to the
reorganization bill was shown by the
maneuver which Senator Byrnes of
South Carolina, in charge of the bill,
sought to put across yesterday in the
Senate. He tried to have the Senate
£ill substituted, as an amendment, for a
House bill dealing with certain features
of the proposed reorganization plan, but
not mentioning the abolition of the
Civil Service Commisslbn and General
Accounting Offlce. Had this been done,
it would have been in order for the
House to send the bill to conference
without ever having considered such im
portant questions. Possibly the House
Itself would not have stood for such a
high-handed procedure, even if Senator
Byrnes had succeeded.
* * * *
It was Senator Bennett Clark of Mis
souri who threw a monkey wrench into
this administration plan to smooth the
way for the final passage of the reor
ganization bill. He threatened to offer
the anti-lynching bill as an amendment
to the House bill if that measure were
taken up. Clark to a supporter of the
aatt-lynnhlng bill, just as fc^to an
THIS AND THAT
BY CHARLES B. TRACEWRLL.
We felt that day as If something very
fine should be written about spring,
when along came a correspondent with
just the thing—a poem upon the sub
ject!
Spring sometimes is too powerful. It
tears the pen out of the hand, and
causes one just to be satisfied with seeing
and hearing.
Everybody knows that feeling.
Over in Arlington, Va., however, they
love the birds, with the following results:
"Dear Sir:
"Hast never heard
A little bird
Conversing with its fellow?
Its throat distending.
With rhythm blending
In notes so clear and mellow?
“The pert chit-chat
Of this and that,
When good birds get together,
Is understood
In fen and wood
By fellows of a feather.
“What do they say
In song so gay.
In notes both high and low?
Who dare deny,
In their wild cry.
They’re uttering words we know?
“Does Bob-o-link
Sit down and think
What he's forever saying?
Does old Bob-white,
Out late at night,
Pretend that he is praying?
“The changing call
Of Cardinal
Is like the hurdy-gurdy.
To do him fame
I must proclaim
He's quite a wordy birdie.
“P. S. and L Envoi:
“I guess the spring
Inspired this thing.
When all the sap doth rise.
And versifiers—
Goldarn liars—
Praise Nature to the skies.
"Well, if this spring
Inspired this thing,
With tacit ifs and buts,
I'll step aside
Ere I abide
Forever with the nuts.
“Birdistically yours,
“J. W. H.”
* * * *
Spring had no such effect, evidently,
on J. C. A., who on the same morning
added his say on the momentous subject
of whether birds “say words” or not:
“Dear Sir: Is there any one to.gainsay
that the word ‘chink’ does not chink
true; that the word ‘crack’ does not crack
true: that the word ‘sw'ish’ does not swish
true? Sound-copying words like the
preceding three, a few among the jnan.v
such coined for our English tongue, ail
fail to strike the right tone. As at
tempts at duplication of sound they fall
flat at the very best.
“Now, to turn to the music of the birds.
I shall begin to listen to what some of
your correspondents are trying to sell us
in the matter of reproduction of bird
notes by means of letter combinations, if
flrst of all, they will advance a little con
vincing advertising of the worth of their
theory by offering a spelling that will
buzz true, and secondly another spelling
that will hum true. Less difficult for
them, perhaps, I shall lend them ear if
they can talk with words exactly as a
a baby cries without words. And the
baby need not be a bird baby; Just one of
our own kind.
sir * sAr * sir
"Speaking of those birds that bear !
names alleged to be imitative of the
sound they make, we who have heard a
chebec sound off should feel deep sor
row for him were he ever heard to say
Just ‘chebeck,’ for we should know he
had passed his heyday. Who would go
into the woods to hear a chickadee say
Just ‘chickadee’—wouldn't that give a
sparrow a laugh?
“In all honesty is there the remotest
resemblance—on the one hand, the name
with which we have labeled the bird,
and, on the other, the sound that the
bird produces?
“Watch the song sparrow with his
head aloft, pouring out his melody. Note
in the main the vibrations of the throat.
Listen to the tuning fork. Note in the
main the vibrations of the prongs. No
part of the world’s fastest human can
vibrate thus. Man is not made of the
same stuff as a tuning fork, and hence
cannot resound in common therewith.
The throat of man and that of the
song sparrow are not of the same mould.
They are structurally different, and
even of different stuff, as it were, and
hence man and the song sparrow don’t
resound in common.
in snort, men, man cannot duplicate
the tone of either by means of his own
vocal chords, let alone with the use of
words—mere words.
‘‘So I say to the other J. C. A., whose
letter appeared at a recent date, that
man is indeed presumptious when he
attributes to himself personally the
power to duplicate sounds in general,
and bird sounds in particular.
“In the case of sounds wre are dealing
with vibrations, wave motions, wave
lengths, and all such like. Man isn’t
a universe in himself. He's but a part
of it—one sound in that universe. Every
word of his is a sound; but every sound
in that universe is not a word, nor can
it be reduced to a word; that is to say,
an utterance (speech, song, whistle, sigh,
or grunt) of a human. Man does not
have the necessary sounding equipment
within himself.
“Were not the foregoing true, any one
of your readers could write a composition
that would sound in the reading exactly
as 'The Blue Danube’ sounds in the
playing on a violin.
“Your correspondent stated that he
hopes you don't resent his thinking that
you are wrong. Just so, I hope he
doesn’t resent my saying that he can
find no physics text to agree with his
theory of word and sound. Take up any
physics book at random—the proof is
therein for the reading.
The longer I live the more wonders
I see,’ but I venture to say that the day
will never come when I can talk music.
The pity of it is that as long as I have
been trying I have not succeeded even in
singing music.
“Sincerely yours, J. c. A.”
. STARS, MEN AND ATOMS
Notebook of Science Progress in Field,
Laboratory and Study.
BY THOMAS R. HENRY.
Smoking may definitely shorten life.
Dr. Raymond Pearl of John Hopkins
University preaches no anti-tobacco
sermon but presents cold statistics of a
recent study carried out in his labora
tory in a report just published in
Science.
Between the ages of 30 and 70. his
tables show, the chances of survival are
less for heavy smokers than for light
smokers and for light smokers than for
non-smokers. It cannot be said, of
course, that smoking itself kills any
body. The smokers, whatever the rea
son may be. are more likely to die. Per
haps it amounts to the same thing in
the end.
Dr. Pearl drew his data from the rec
ords of nearly 7.000 white men in the
laboratory files. These records were se
lected at random, and the men classified
later as to smoking habits. Here are
some of the striking results of the an
alysis:
At the age of 30 the death rate per
thousand for non-smokers was 8.18. for
moderate smokers 7.86, for heavy smokers
16.89. That is, a heavy smoker at 30 is
more than twice as likely to die as a man
who never touched tobacco at the same
age.
At 35 the death rate for non-smokers
is 8.78, for light smokers 9.63, and for
heavy smokers 21.27.
At 40 it is 10.01 for non-smokers. 11.89
fdr light smokers, and 23.91 for heavy
smokers.
At 50 it is 15.16 for non-smokers. 18.61
for light smokers, and 27.49 for heavy
smokers.
At 60 it is 26.73 for non-smokers. 30.49
for light smokers, and 34.29 for he*vy
smokers.
At this age any significant difference
ends. The death rate at 70 is 51.69 for
non-smokers, 52.84 for light smokers, and
52.73 for heavy smokers.
Once past this point and the trend
reverses itself. At 80 the death rate per
thousand of non-smokers is 103.22, for
light smokers 97.95, and for heavy
smokers 100.44.
At 95 the differential becomes quite
significant in favor of the smokers—a
death rate of 273.2 per thousand for non
smokers, 265.1 for light smokers, and
268.9 for heavy smokers.
This merely means. Dr. Pearl holds,
that the smokers who survive to 70 are
so tough that any lethal quality in to
bacco. or associated with tobacco, long
since has done its worst and failed.
The statistics, of course, are subject
to some rather complicated interpreting.
It would be absurd to maintain that ap
proximately eight men out of a thousand
between the ages of 30 and 35 are killed
by tobacco. Probably most of them
would have died anyway. Perhaps to
bacco, per se, is hardly a factor at all.
The man who never smokes is almost
the exception, rather than the rule. In
many cases the habit is not formed be
cause the individual is one of those
fellows forever worrying about health
who i;f just as meticulous about every
thing else that might undermine his
constitution.
Dr. Pearl would be one of the last
men in the world to enter upon an anti
tobacco crusade. He is governed by his
opponent of the reorganization bill.
There was no telling what might have
happened if he had offered the anti
lynching bill as an amendment—beyond
the certainty that the reorganization bill
would have been tied up in the Senate
for days and weeks to come. So Mr.
Byrnes abandoned his attempt to get
the bill to conference without first hav
ing the House pass up«" all Its pro
visions.
statistics. In justice to his reputation
it should be recalled that with the same
unemotional statistical methods he drew
upon himself the animosity of rabid drvs
a few years ago by showing that alcohol
was not nearly so bad for the constitu
tion as had been painted.
He says: “In the customary way of
life man has long been habituated to the
routine usage of various substances and
materials that are not physiologically
necessary to his continued existence.
Tea. coffee, alcohol, tobacco, opium and
betel nut are statistically among the
more conspicuous examples. It is prob
ably safe to say that over 90 per cent of
all adult human beings habitually make
use of one or more of the component ma
terials included in this group. All of
them contain substances of considerable
physiological potency.
“Widespread and long continued ex
perience, however, has shown that mod
erate usage of any of these materials, if
measurable deleterious at all. is not so
immediately or strikingly harmful phy
siologically as to weigh seriously against
the pleasures felt to be derived from in
dulgence, in the opinion of vast numbers
of human beings.
“The situation so created is an ex
ceedingly complex one physiologically,
and purely hedonistic elements in be
havior, which are present in lower ani
mals as well as in man, have a real im
portance. Indeed they frequently over
ride reason.”
But, like it or not. he seems to have
demonstrated that the way of life with
which smoking is associated—not neces
sarily, it must be understood, smoking
itself—significantly effects longevity. For
example, the man who smokes is more
apt to drink than the man who does not
smoke. He is more apt to sit up all night
in a smoke-filled room playing poker.
He is more apt to take a chance on get
ting his feet wet. By and large, he is
probably a more dissipated, adventurous
fellow.
Bridge and Poker.
From the Macon Telegraph.
That new bridge deck with five suits
may do all right for the ladies, but if
Mr. Husband makes a mistake and
rings it in in a poker game and deals
himself five aces, chances are the sur
geons will have to remove the bandages
before he can get it explained.
Municipal Cash System.
From the Arkansas Gazette.
Fort Myers, Fla., which has cut off
fire and police protection, water, sewer
and other services for non-payment of
taxes, seems to be working on the old
fashioned notion that you have to pay
for what you get.
Who Will Try It?
From the SMlnaw Newi.
Naturalist says a man can hold a
crocodile’s mouth shut with one hand.
Sounds easy, but then again it might
be Just a snap for the crocodile, too.
Pioneer.
From the Indlanepolls Star.
The goat that ate a windshield gadget
is the first to discover any real use for
the thing.
The Eastern Question.
Worn the South Bend Tribune.
Can the Japanese militarists conquer
the Japanese people as well as the
Chinese?
ANSWERS TO
QUESTIONS
By FREDERIC J. H ASK IN.
A reader can get the gnawer to any
question of fact by writing The Star
Information Bureau, Frederic J. Haskin,
director, Washington, D. C. Pldase in
close stamp for reply.
Q. Which of D’Annunzio’s books tells
of his romance with Eleonora Duse, the
actress?—L. G.
A. “The Flame of Life,” published in
1898.
Q. What are apostle spoons?—E. G. K.
A. Apostle spoons were of silver or
silver gilt with the handles terminating
in figures of the apostles, each bearing
their distinctive emblem. They were
common baptismal gifts during the 15th
and 16th centuries, but were dying out
by 1666.
Q. What is the circulation of the pulp
magazines?—W. H. R.
A. The pulps have a total of 10,000,
000 circulation.
Q. When did the United States recog
nize Russia?—C. W. B.
A. The United States recognized Rus
sia on November 16, 1933.
Q. Where is the most tin produced?—
D. C. R.
A. The largest producer of tin in the
world is the Federated Malay States.
Q. When was Ty Cobb manager of the
Detroit team?—E. M.
A. He managed the Detroit team from
1921-1926. I
Q. Who discovered Niagara Falls?—I
W. B. I
A. The falls were discovered by Father|
Hennepin In 1678.
Q. What was the cost of our World
War memorials dedicated in France last
summer?—M. B. H.
A. The total amount of money spent
on American World War memorials,
chapels, etc., in Europe, which were
dedicated last summer, was approxi
mately $4,300,000. Eight chapels and
11 monuments were dedicated.
Q. How many bison are there in this
country?—T. D.
A. The latest census showed that there
were 4,404 bison in the United States.
Q. When was Sir Harry Lauder
knighted?—J. H.
A. The Scottish comedian and song
writer was knighted in 1919.
Q Has any State a law which protects
ilder workers in industry from unemploy
ment?—H. K.
A. Massachusetts has a law which em
powers its Department of Labor and In
dustry to publish names of employers
who have been proved to have discrimi
nated against persons on account of age.
There has been proposed legislation
along the same line in other States and
New York has set up a legislative inves
tigating committee which Is holding
hearings on the question.
Q. What is a Masonic Blue Lodge?—
G. W. B.
A. The Blue Lodge is a symbolical
lodge in which the first three degrees of
Masonry are conferred.
Q. How does the former Republic of
Austria compare in size with a State of
the United States? Czechoslovakia?—
E. H.
A. Austria, with 32.377 square miles,
was a little smaller than Maine, with
33,040. Czechoslovakia, with 54,250
square miles, is somewhat larger than
Arkansas, with 53.335.
Q. Why are some of the night clubs in
New York City so exorbitant in price?—
J. K.
A. There are many assessments which
New York night club owners have to pay.
.Some of these as outlined in an article
by Jack Gould in the New York Times
are as follows: State Liquor Authority
license, $1,200; police department cab
aret license, $150; Internal Revenue Bu
reau retail liquor dealer license. $25;
health department restaurant license.
$10; New Year eve all-night permit, $10;
three per cent Federal tax on checks
above $2,50; two per cent sales tax, Fed
eral and State tax on purchase of liquor
from wholesaler, building department fee
of 10 cents a square foot per year for
the area of a sign, fee of the bureau of
combustibles of the fire department for
refrigerators, corporation tax, social se
curity payments, State unemployment
insurance, and water tax. This list does
not include many other night club taxes
Q. How old is the United States Cus
toms Service?—R. H. N.
A. The Customs Service was establish
ed by the First Congress in the Act of
July 31, 1789. The Act of August 24,
1912, authorized the President to re
organize the Customs Service, abolish
ports and abolish or consolidate districts,
and under this authority the present
form of field organization was effected
by the presidential proclamation of
March 3, 1913.
Q. How much does it cost to go over
the Queen Mary?—V. C.
A. Formerly the fee was $1. It now is
25 cents.
Curious Customs
How They Originated.
Why do you throw rice at the bride at
a wedding? Why do you wear black for
mourning? Why do you blesa a sneeze!
Or cover a yawn? Do you know the
origin of the little customs we practice
today almost from force of habit? Do
you know what they originally meant,
and what people practiced them? The
booklet, CURIOUS CUSTOMS, contains
such fascinating and curious informa
tion about the whys and wherefores of
many of our superstitions, ceremonies,
clothes, customs and habits. Order your
copy of this entertaining little publica
tion now. Ten cents, postpaid.
USE THIS ORDER BLANK.
The Washington Evening Star,
Information Bureau,
Frederic J. Haskin, Director,
Washington, D. C.
I enclose herewith TEN CENTS in
coin (carefully wrapped) for a copy ol
the booklet, CURIOUS CUSTOMS.
Name.
Street or Rural Route.
■
. .City'..
State.
(Please order by mall only.)
L-*-—