Evening star. [volume], October 06, 1939, Page A-13, Image 13

About Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972

Image provided by: Library of Congress, Washington, DC

                
Economics
Can Enforce
Safety Zones
American Republics
Have Precedents in
Prize Court Rulings
By DAVID LAWRENCE.
Declaration by the Pan-American
republics of a “safety zone’’ extend
* ing about 300 miles out to sea along
the coasts of North and South
America south
of Canada con
stitutes one of
the most signifi
cant steps ever
taken by neutral
nations and is
well - supported
- by precedents in
Intern a t i o n a 1
law.
Even the ques
tion of enforce
ment within
that zone per
mits a practical
program which
the belligerents Davia Lavrmce.
are bound to respect for, contrary
to recently expressed suppositions in
the press, the United States and the
other countries of this hemisphere
need not use physical force at all,
but merely need apply economic
pressure to attain compliance.
Both the North and South Amer
ican continents contain supplies vi
tally needed by both sets of bellig
erents. While it is true that direct
German purchases have been dis
continued, nevertheless indirect pur
chases through European neutrals
like Russia and Italy, as well as the
Scandinavian countries are well
’ within the control of the Pan
American republics.
There is not the slightest need to
Use a naval patrol to keep bellig
erent ships out of the “safety zone,”
for the United States and Pan
American countries will shortly no
tify the belligerents that trade
within the safety zone must not be
molested if the belligerents are to
continue to be permitted to obtain
supplies from the Americas.
Conforms to Precedent.
* The proclamation of a safety zone
conforms to precedents established
in various so-called prize court de
cisions and awards of international
arbitration tribunals dealing with
blockade. It is a well-established
rule that notice of blockade must
be specific and that zones of block
ade can be delimited so that any
neutral vessel seeking to enter
such zone may be captured. But
there is no justification in the prece
« dents for making the whole ocean
a blockaded zone. The Pan-Ameri
can republics, whose representatives
met at Panama, were modest in
their outline of the area to be in
cluded under the safety zone, for
logically neutrals could have in
sisted that no shipping shall be
interfered with unless destined for
Europe, and only then for countries
contiguous to the belligerents.
The idea that a ship plying be
tween New York and Rio de Janiero
is subject to a submarine blockade
by Germany or a naval blockade
by the British is so contrary to prec
edents of the past that it is difficult
* to see how the outline of a safety
zone can with logic be protested
unless some abuse of the privilege
should develop within the zone
among belligerent vessels of either
group—the allies or the dictator
ships.
Destination alone justifies seizure
and condemnation of ship and cargo
in voyages to ports under blockade,
and even a mere sailing toward a
blockaded area has not been held to
sanction detention of ship or cargo.
In the famous “Peterhoff” case
involving damage claims, it was de
cided that a vessel destined for a
« neutral port with no ulterior desti
nation for herself and none by sea
for her cargo to a blockaded place
Violates no blockade.
Grew From Last War.
The whole doctrine of submarine
Warfare arose in the last war
through the formal announcement,
first by Great Britain of a blockade
In the North Sea against Germany
and subsequently a counter-blockade
of even wider extent by the Berlin
v admiralty. The announced inten
tion of conducting "unrestricted
submarine warfare" by Germany
related solely to the blockaded war
zones and made access to neutral
ports in Europe virtually impos
sible to American ships.
In the present instance, however,
the United States and her sister
republics have not sought to discuss
or quibble about the extent of the
blockaded zones adjacent to Euro
pean countries, but have merely set
up a counterpart of the theory of
blockade—a safety zone within
4 which neutrals expect to be able to
carry on legitimate trade without
searches or seizure. Since every
country can control its own exports,
violation of the safety zone may
become the basis for joint embargoes
to be imposed by some or all of the
Pan-American republics. It seems
a safe assumption that if the safety
zone is formally outlined in notifi
cation to the belligerent govern
ments there would be little likeli
hood of violation.
It is not customary to make
’threats or mention possible penalties
In international relations, so Ger
many and Britain can only infer
what might happen if they violate
the safety-zone proclamation. Both
the German and British naval com
manders probably will get instruc
tions soon to do nothing within the
safety zone which might possibly
produce complications with the re
publics of North and South America
wm
Cabot’s Waterprooflnr is a
sure cure for damp walls.
922 N. Y. Ave.No. 8610
, AT 5»2S
TXJ?m THIS AFTEBB001
I Listen to
I “Hook, Line & Sinkor11
■ Over WMAL at 5:25 P.M.
■ Presented
■ CT«fy Tan., Than. & Friday !
I Cl Fills
| Sea Food Restaurant
I 1011 E St. N. W.
■ NO. T riS IT MARKET ■;
r •
The Capital Parade
Significance Seen in Report
Repeal Debate Will Be Curtailed
By JOSEPH ALSOP and ROBERT KINTNER.
A meaningful straw In the wind Is the spreading conviction that
Senate debate on repeal of the arms embargo will last only about half
as long as originally predicted. The Senate debate is the great set
piece of the embargo fight. Once the Senate acts, leaders on both sides
think the House will be content with a couple of days of talk. And, if
the senatorial oratory is to continue for three weeks instead of six, then
opponents of repeal have less chance than ever.
This does not necessarily imply that the special session of Congress
is due for early adjournment. Strong sentiment exists, both among Re
publicans and Roosevelt-distrusting Democrats, to keep Congress on the
job without interruption. House
Republican Leader Joseph W. Mar
tin, Jr., is reported to be seriously
cuxiMuermg making an issue oi tne
matter, once the embargo is out of
the way.
Meanwhile, the prophecy that
the Senate will soon get tired of A
listening to itself comes from im- A
pressively diverse and authoritative r
sources. Even the chieftains of the '*«
isolationists privately admit that —
uti*. iuxcvci. n-epcttiiSL siraicgists, sucn as me asiuie senator
James F. Byrnes, are Inclined to believe that they can get a vote in just
over two weeks more. The shrewdly cynical leader of the Senate Re
publicans, Charles L. McNary, who may be accepted as a pretty im
partial judge, has been heard to remark that "the trail is getting pretty
dusty.”
The truth is, pretty nearly everything there is to say on the embargo
issue has been said already. Senators do not mind repetition so long as
they do not have to hear too much of it. But, in this case, the Senate
Democratic Steering Committee has decided unanimously against con
sidering any other legislation. The President has issued strict orders to
his department heads, warning them of dire penalties, that there must be
no requests for special bills. No committees have even met except for
the Foreign Relations Committee, and the Senators have nothing to do
except listen to one another. It affects them as having to sit through a
five-act opera every night would affect a normal music lover.
Some Qualifications
Besides the probability that debate will be shortened, another factor
operating in favor of quick action is the ending of the flood of letters
about the arms embargo. The mail coming in now is a mere trickle.
However they may be exhorted, it will be difficult to persuade Cough
linites and members of other anti-repeal groups to write again when
they have written already.
None of this should be taken, of course, as absolutely insuring repeal.
The unforeseen can happen at any moment, and often does. At present,
the betting on repeal is at least two to one, but it would return to even
the instant the President interfered in the struggle. In that event, the
conservative Democrats, who have been willing to line up behind men like
Byrnes, would feel free to walk out again. Other possible developments,
such as a real indication that the German "peace offensive” was meeting
with success, would prove damaging in other ways.
There also are many possible, developments which might reverse the
prophecies of brief debate without affecting the struggle's outcome. Several
Senators have ideas for amendments on which they are insistent. The
problem of the 90-day credits may take time to iron out. despite the fact
that the credit provisions of the present bill are stricter than those in the
sacred Neutrality Act. The problem of cash-and-carry's effect on our
merchant marine may also prove troublesome, although Senator Josiah W.
Bailey is working hard to obtain an agreement to keep American shipping
on the seas.
Nets for Dowagers
Whether it is long or short, however, the debate cannot be very im
pressive. With one or two exceptions .the repealists are too timid to voice
their real argument, so movingly put
■< Dy me veteran ueorge Norris, mat
H repeal will help to keep America out
of war by helping to avert the only
» situation in which this country
[) might consider fighting—danger of
s- defeat of the English and French.
V As for the Senators on the other
K side, with all their sincerity and
IJ, eloquence, they can hardly make
much of the idea that, if the em
bargo is repealed. Germany will at
i bt'iupi waiiine i t-pi isaia. 11, suunus luo luuin line me isewpuri dowagers in
the last war. The well-upholstered ladies heard there was a submarine off
Baileys Beach, concluded they must be the chosen victims of its torpedoes,
and refused to go in swimming until an expensive anti-submarine netting
had been erected.
(Released by the North American Newspaper Alliance, Inc.)
Federal Code Revision
Sought by House Bill
Creation of a joint congressional
committee to revise the judicial code
of the United States was proposed
in a resolution introduced yesterday
by Representative Chandler. Demo
crat, of Tennessee.
For the past three years the House
Judiciary Committee has been
making a special study of the Fed
eral judicial system. The Chandler
resolution would have a joint com
mittee of five Senators and five
Representatives with authority to
employ personnel to do the detailed j
work.
In addition to recodification, the
committee would be empowered to!
propose needed changes in existing
statutes to bring the basic law up
to date.
Many changes have occurred
| since 1909, when writing of the
present code began. Representa
! tive Chandler emphasized that
| many changes are needed to mod
| emize and simplify the practice as
i well as expedite trials.
CTHE opinions of the writers on this page are their own, not
x necessarily The Star’s Such opinions are presented in The
Star’s effort to give all sides of questions of interest to its
readers, although such opinions may be contradictory among
themselves and directly opposed to The Star’s.
Washington Observations
Excellent Opportunity Goes Begging for Great Speech
On Real Reason for Arms Ban Repeal
By FREDERIC WILLIAM WILE.
There have now been half-a-dozen
eloquent Senate speeches on the
neutrality bill—by Pittman, Con
nally and Schwellenbech, for, and
Borah, Vanden
berg and Nye,
against. But
there seems to
be a conspiracy
of silence, ex
cept for occa
sional innuen
does from the
opposition, as to
what all the
shooting is really
about. What’s
the use of minc
ing words, dodg
ing issues or
pussyfooting at
such an hour? Fredtrle William WUe.
Why doesn't some Senator, prefer
ably a supporter of embargo repeal,
rise in his place and boldly utter
the underlying, unadulterated truth?
What is that truth? So far as I
know, it has never been so frankly,
fearlessly or fully told in any quarter
as it was by my gifted colleague,
Arthur Krock, Washington corres
pondent of the New York Times.
Writing on September 6, Krock said
that the object of embargo repeal is
to help the allies, that the actual
reason why the administration
wants the embargo removed is be
cause it deprives, in this instance,
Great Britain and Prance, of 10 per
cent of the war-making materials
which would help them defeat Ger
many. Krock added that “there
has been little official concealment
that this is the real reason for the
unsuccessful attempt in Congress in
July to eliminate the arms ban. It
is the actual, rather than the tech
nical, reason which animates the
opposition.”
* * * *
Opportunity for Great Speech.
There is waiting in the United
States Senate at this hour an op
portunity for a speech that will
ring down the ages, perhaps like
Edmund Burke’s address on the
American Colonies in the British
Parliament, or, to go modern, like
William Jennings Bryan’s cross-of
gold epic at Chicago. I mean a
speech that will not use language
as a vehicle for concealing thought,
but which will tell the plain truth
about this neutrality business, as
Arthur Krock did. strip it of its irra
tional and irrelevant technicalities,
and put it to the American people in
terms of burning simplicity. The
Senate anti-embargo group con
tains several men who oratoricallv
have what it takes. Sherman
Minton of Indiana and Josh Lee of
Oklahoma both won their Demos
thenesian spurs in college days.
Burke of Nebraska has the elo
quence, which Speaker Tom Reed
once defined as "logic on fire,” requi
site for the task. Bailey of North
Carolina would be impressive, too. If
Carter Glass’ health permits, that
hard-hitting statesman, of course,
could shake the dome with the sort
of argument he's capable of making
on high political occasions. On the
Republican side Bob Taft ought to
do a good Job, despite the jinx that's
attached to his speaking reputation
ever since his Gridiron Club flop
last winter.
* * * *
Here’s a Text.
If some embryonic Patrick Henry
wants a text for the kind of neu
trality speech herein urged. I com
mend to him the matriculation
sermon just preached to under
graduates at Yale by President
Charles Seymour. Remember, more
over, that he was talking to a group
of “our boys," probably 90 per cent
of whom would be fighting if we
went to war. Taking as his text
King Solomon’s prayer for wisdom,
Dr. Seymour insisted that issues
were being fought in Europe to
which we could not close our eyes
and upon the result of which we
dared not turn our backs. A defeat
for the Western democracies would
necessarily be regarded as a disaster
of the first water, he stated.
Peril in Nazi Victory.
“Purely in the political field,”
President Seymour continued, “we
could not view with any comfort a
situation characterized by the pre
dominance in Western Europe of a
victorious Nazi government, which
has opened the eastern gates of the
continent to the Russian flood of
Communistic imperialism.
“Our Nation will not sacrifice its
peace because this or that legislative
enactment is maintained or repealed,
or by reason of any alleged group
interest in a commercial boom for
through haphazard hysteria. We
are not governed by a fatalistic
onrush of circumstance. We can
maintain free decision as our inter
ests dictate.”
When Connally Was Disarmed.
As I sat listening to Tom Con
nally’s stentorian plea for the neu
trality bill—an irreverent Dixie
press galleryite called it “a good
anti-lynching bill speech” — I
couldn’t help recalling the occasion
uu mutii me iexas oenaior, men a
member of the House, was disarmed
in Great Britain during the World
War. Tom had arrived on a visit
to the embattled European scene.
As John Bull was at the height of
his troubles with the rebellious
Irish, any alien landing at Liverpool
or Southampton bearing the good
Gaelic name of Connally was auto
matically suspect. When the Amer
ican was asked by the customs
authorities if he carried any arms
on his person he promptly produced
a revolver, which, it was explained,
was not an unusual accompaniment
of a Texan on tour. He was relieved
of the artillery, which was turned
over to the United States Consul
General in London, Robert P. Skin
ner, for safe-keeping. A few weeks
later, hearing I was on my way
home for a brief vacation, Mr.
Skinner intrusted me with the deli
cate mission of seeing that Repre
sentative Connally’s weapon was
duly restored to him. And it was.
* * * *
“The Skyline of Futility.”
Senator Vandenberg, who. if cer
tain things happen, may have deliv
ered his "speech of acceptance" in
the Senate on Wednesday, divested
himself of some snappy phraseology,
of which he's no mean master.
Speaking of the 40.000 Americans
killed in the World War, the editor
statesman said: “Their crosses dot
the skyline of futility.” Discussing
“this idealogy which we hear about,
and which is pleaded to our interest,
it seems to be a dangerously fluid
sort of thing. Frequently it appears
to depend upon ‘whose ox is gored.
The only thing of which we can be
absolutely sure is that it will be oui
ox if he strays into these pastures
of dissension.” As to the young mer
now in the battle line overseas, Van
denberg called them ‘‘the class ol
1940, which now answers reveille.’
Let’s Look at the Record.
Not often does one man contrive
to monopolize an issue of the Con
gressional Record. That grade has
just been made by Representative
Jerry Voorhis, Democrat, of Califor
nia. whose "America Must Stay Oui
of War” speech on October 2 fills thf
whole six-page issue of the Recorc
of October 3. A1 Smi1,h made a rec
ord in the Record this week, too, bj
having his recent anti-embarge
broadcast appear twice, after simul
taneous introduction in both House
and Senate.
Gen. Trujillo's Family
Awaits Him on Yacht
By the Associated Pres*.
, MIAMI, Fla., Oct. 6.—The family
of Gen. Rafael Trujillo, army chief
! of staff for the Dominican Republic,
| came here by train yesterday from
New York and Washington and
j boarded the general's yacht, Ramfls,
to await his arrival by plane.
• Senora Trujillo, who recently vis
ited France, was accompanied by
her 10-year-old son and an infant
| daughter and by Senora Matilde de
| Pastoriza, wife of the Dominican
i Minister to Washington.
The party plans a visit to Havana
within the next few days, retum
i ing here to greet Gen. Trujillo.
We, the People
Issue of Father Coughlin Awakens Church
To Danger of Having Neglected Encyclicals
Bjr JAY FRANKLIN.
The death of Cardinal Mundelein and the adoption of the “Coughlin
clause” by the National Association of Broadcasters have raised the issue
of Catholic leadership in American public life.
Father Coughlin’s opportunity to win and hold his following came
with the publication, on May 15, 1931, of the first of the great encyclicals
on social reconstruction. Cardinal Mundelein also seized this opportu
nity and used the encyclicals as the foundation of a broad-based social
program in Chicago and the Midwest. Between them, the two men
have demonstrated the power of the social doctrines of their church to
win and hold enthusiastic support from masses of Americans.
But the same fire which can warm a hearth can bum down the
home, and Father Coughlin’s use of radio to create Catholic political
parties, to spread race hatreds and to “pressure” national policy in the
international crisis has awakened the church to the danger of having
failed to apply the encyclicals in America.
Danger to Church
The danger is, primarily, to the church itself. Father Coughlin
has proceeded so far that he may become either a Savonarola or a
Martin Luther, unless Mundelein's policy becomes the general practice
of the Catholics in America.
For more than 20 years the issue has been forming. Is there to
be a deeply rooted native American Catholicism, as expressed by men
like Archbishop Ireland, Cardinal Gibbons or Cardinal Mundelein? Or
is there to be a cautious policy of appointing weak or timid men as
bishops and archbishops, men who “won’t make trouble”? Cardinal
Mundelein’s last command to Bishop Shell of Chicago has brought the
issue out in the open, supporting the President and discrediting the
Cough Unites. The question is at last inescapable. Will the Catholic
church in America let Father Coughlin steal the thunder of the encych
cals for cheap political theatrics, or will the church itself obev the en
cyciicais ana tnereoy reduce Father Coughlin to a mere incidental voice?
Reports in Washington reflect a sharp division in the Catholic hier
archy on this point. They sense the danger that Father Coughlin Is too
strong to submit to hierarchical discipline. A man whose followers picketed
Coughlin’s own Bishop Mooney of Detroit with "Unfair to Coughlin”
placards and whose supporters flooded the Vatican with 8.000 letters a
week is not likely to accept control by his hierarchical superiors. The
moral vacuum created by the church's neglect of social justice will always
be at the mercy of religious racketeers, just as the social and economic
vacuum in the share-cropper belt was at the mercy of Huey Long. Father
Coughlin can only be silenced if the American Catholics as a whole obey
the social orders which virtually all but Mundelein and Coughlin ignored.
Await Vatican's Decision
The decision of the Vatican itself will be revealed when the vacant
archbishopric of Chicago is filled. If the post goes to Mundelein’s
friend and right-hand man, Bishop Bernard J. Shell, it will be taken
as a sign that the encyclicals of Pius XI were not simply the opinions of a
weary Pontiff, but that effective social justice is increasingly the policy
of the Catholic Church. It will also be a clear hint to Father Coughlin's
followers that "Roman Catholic politics’ 'are out of place in American
public life and that the church desires to remove the political issue
which he is raising.
If, on the other hand, the "don't-make-trcuble” theory prevails and
a safe, pious and weak man is put in Mundelein's place, Catholic leader
[ ship in America may go by default to Father Coughlin.
As for the "Coughlin clause' 'in radio, it will not stand up for long,
if the timid policy prevails, for there w-ill be no check to Father Coughlin's
political advance and he will win back the right—perhaps over a station
of his own—to buy time on the air and roll his own social justice for the
benefit of a growing and dangerous Fascist movement under his leadership
and control.
___ /
Have You Seen the New I
H
in the Distinctively Smart I
Richard Prince Suits I
' w
If you haven’t, you’ve a rare treat in store for you. B
We honestly believe no suit can match its striking H
brilliance in styling, exclusive pattern and tailoring. B
Richard Prince in Double Plain Stripes g
is the answer to your plea for a suit that is » S
really different— with a distinctive air un- %p 2 CT jj|
obtainable elsewhere at this price_ J J B
Richard Prince Topcoats I
Imported Hand-woven Harri. Tweeds, SOO.50 Syd *%.00 B
Camel’. Hair end English Covert. ^7 H
For Fall—a New Shirt by
With a New Collar Style
The newest note
in Shirts for Fall
—Manhattan’s
^REED-in
striped cheviot
featuring the
smart round col*
lar style.
Othtr Manhattan Shirts to $5.00
presents
ft THE IMPERIAL
l new line ot custom
quality shoes, cover
ing a wide range of
styles and leathers.
. Featuring the rich
^ new Shell Cordo
ns van.
|t *8”
Isolationist
Stand Is Held
Inconsistent
Ban on All Goods
S' •
Would Appear
Logical Conclusion
By CHARLES G. ROSS.
There is still so much confusion
of thought, so much of sheer emo
tion, in the letters which Congress
men are receiving on the neutrality
problem that it
seems worth
while to empha
size again the
simple and clear
alternative that
confronts the
United States in
the formulation
of a consistent
neutrality policy.
The United
States can con
sistently follow
either of two
courses. It can
either, as the
chsriei o. Bom. pending bill pro
poses. offer any of its goods for sale
to the belligerent nations on the
same terms to all—these terms be
ing, in the proposed law, that the
purchasers take title to the goods
before they leave this country and
carry them away in other than
American ships. Or, alternatively,
the United States can clamp down
an embargo on the shipment of all
kinds of goods to the belligerents.
The adoption of either of these
courses would be fully defensible in
international law, fully logical and
fully an act of neutrality.
wnm/ wic uppuncnwj ui uie pena
ing bill are urging is not the logical
alternative—a complete embargo—
but an embargo running only
against arms, ammunition and im
plement* of war. Herein is the fatal
inconsistency in their position. For
the distinction between arms, am
munition and implements of war on
the one hand and all other goods on
the other hand is unsound.
Virtually everything that may be
shipped to a belligerent is or may
become contraband. As the Presi
dent pointed out in his speech at the
opening of the special session, wheat
and lard and cotton are likely to be
as essential to the survival of a na
tion at war as guns and shells. Nor
is there any valid distinction, when
it comes to exports to warring na
tions, between completed instru
ments of war and the materials that
go directly into their making.
To use the President’s simple
examples of the paradox which
marks our existing legislation and
which the opponents of embargo re
peal would continue, there is no real
difference between the export of
cotton and the export of guncotton,
between the shipment of brass tub
ing in pipe form and brass tubing
in shell form, between the sale of a
motor truck to a belligerent and the
sale of an armored motor truck.
Stand Is Inconsistent.
The point need not be labored; It
has been frequently and effectively
made. To be consistent, those who
are standing against the effort to re
vise the neutrality law would have
to accept the challenge of the Presi
dent to bring in a bill banning the
sale of every kind of commodity to
belligerent nations. All goods or no
goods—the rule should be one or the
other.
One certainty in this neutrality
fight is that the material interests
of this country and its traditional
policy—the former alone, if vou
please—carry sufficient weight with
Congress, all other considerations
aside, to block any effort that might
be made to impose an all-inclusive
embargo. Only from one Senator on
the isolationist side—Senator Nye—
has there been any serious sugges
tion that the isolationist views be
pushed to their logical conclusion.
Now in the attitude of those anti
repealists. the overwhelming major
ity of them, whose recommendations
stop short of this logical goal, there
is a realism that might well be ap
plied to the whole neutrality con
troversy.
It was an entire lack of realism
which led the House at the last ses
, sion to adopt an amendment to the
) then pending Bloom bill drawing
a hypocritical distinction between
arms and ammunition on the one
side and implements of war, includ
ing airplanes, on the other. It was
said in defense of this amendment,
which would have left arms and am
munition under the embargo but
permitted the sale of airplanes, that
somehow the country would be
“comforted” to know that "lethal”
weapons of American make were not
going to be used in the wars of
Europe.
More Glossing on Pending Bill.
A similar tendency to gloss over
the facts is observable in much of
the discussion of the pending bill.
On the part of the pro-repeal Sena
tors. this shows itself particularly
in the gingerly manner in which
they refer to the material benefits
to the United States from repeal of
the embargo. They seem to fear
that the country will think them
animated by sordid motives if they
mention the profits in war trade.
What is the good of ignoring the
fact that there will be profits—or the
hope of profits—from the sale of
arms, Just as there will be, and now
is from the sale of other commodities.
It would be indeed a shameful thing
to repeal the arms embargo with
material benefit to ourselves as the
controlling motive. But there are
other motives that dominate; even
those in the Senate who are most
bitterly opposed to repeal concede
the high purpose of the revisionists.
It happens that the opportunity
for profits and for putting some of
the army of the unemployed to
work will be a collateral benefit of
repeal. That is a fortunate circum
stance, Just as it is fortunate that
repeal will run to the advantage of
Prance and England against Hitler.
Why not, then, frankly admit the
expectation of profits? There's no
reason to be ashamed of it.
Not only is there no reason to be
ashamed of it. There’s every reason
to be grateful when a prospective
incidental benefit, involving no sac
rifice of idealism or convictions,
offers us the chance of bettering our
economy and in so doing strengthen
ing the United States for whatever
tests It must face.
Wanderbirds Hike
The Wanderbirds will sponsor a
"-mile hike over Bull Run Mountain,
Va., Sunday. The group will leave
at 8 a.m. from the National Theater,
1335 S stmt N.W.
THE 6/DDUP Uho whoa) POLL OF PRIVATE OPINION
I
Seriously—
Wilkins
Really is
Better Coffee
k
GIDDUP POLL INTERVIEWS PEOPLE
WHO WEAR DARK GLASSES WHEN
THEY LOOK OUT OF WINDOWS TO
WATCH FIRE ENGINES GO 8Y ....
901,202-'Wilkini ii Bette* Gofyee
6-'X0ULDN'T GET WINDOWS OPEN
4 A i