Naval Building
Sirs:
I cannot refrain from expressing to you my satisfaction at the eminently fair and understanding manner in which the naval building program was presented to your readers in your issue of Feb. 20, 1928. (Slight errors in the biographical paragraph concerning Admiral Hughes are of course of no consequence.)
J. D. MOORE
Lt. Comdr. U. S. N.
Hydrographic Office
Navy Department
Washington, D. C.
Let Lt. Comdr. Moore specify the "slight errors."--ED.
Bruce Barton School
Sirs:
In your Feb. 6 issue, under "Religion" you find fault with a certain miner for the feeling he evinces towards ministers and their enviable financial position.
[The miner sang: "How much money does a clergyman need, for reading out the gospel and mumbling the creed? He lives at home and he doesn't pay rent--if he gets a plugged nickel, he's a very lucky gent."--ED.]
In support of this position you cite the large financial recognition received by dentists and other professional men as compared with that of ministers.
I am afraid that, in the minds of many readers, this attitude will place TIME in the ranks of Philistines and others of the Bruce Barton school who interpret the world's most cherished illusions in the light of their pragmatical souls.
Christ, during his entire ministry, so continuously insisted that his disciples should give up the things of this world that there can be no reasonable doubt entertained as to his meaning.
And what, pray, has the excellence of Dr. Jefferson's preaching and his freedom "from garbled sensationalism" got to do with the remuneration he receives. Did St. Paul, St. Francis, St. Ignatius claim return from their saintliness?
Of course not. . . . No, this miner you quote may not have been actuated by the highest principles, but in the light of the four gospels, I confess, he's not so far wrong.
K. OLIPHANT
Los Angeles, Calif.
"Bank Robbers"
Sirs:
Having been an interested reader of TIME for several years I feel sure that you will be glad to correct an erroneous statement made on p. 30 your issue for Feb. 13, 1928, wherein you state under caption "Bank Robbers," that two innocent Mexicans were shot in front of a Bank at Midland for the sake of the rewards offered by the T. B. A.
These Mexicans were shot in Stanton, Texas, 20 miles east of Midland and their assailants are now under indictment for murder. This press statement has given our town some rather unwelcome publicity, your part of which I am sure you will be glad to rectify.
I am a former subscriber but for the past year have been buying TIME at the newsstand and sometimes I often get there too late to get a copy. I enclose my check for $5.00 for a year's subscription.
D. L. HUTT
Midland, Texas.
Prescient
Sirs:
Your reference to "notorious, noisy" George Jean Nathan (TIME, Feb. 13) suggests the idea that you might develop a column devoted to critics, to be called, perhaps, Critica. Review the reviewers of books, plays, events--political, social, local! It would be priceless to see the punishment fit the crime and the notorious, noisy one wriggling under the scalpel of a pen as acidly penetrating as his own.
Anyhow I think TIME owes it to me to consider this suggestion. I am no mere static subscriber but a regular newsstand purchaser who demands his TIME sonorously over the counters of the Statler Hotel in Detroit--that all may hear and take notice of the name. The officiating maiden usually hands me a Times (Hearst's local publication) whereupon I spell the name of your newsmagazine and thus secure for you further free publicity. . . . Long life to your prescient, colorful pen.
GARNET WARREN
Detroit, Mich.
Prizewinner Burk
Sirs:
I enjoy your keen observations on the great and near great and give you credit for ability to draw portraits to the point of truth. However, that of Dr. William Herbert Burk, in your issue of Feb. 20, would give one not acquainted with Dr. Burk's personality a wrong impression of the man.
To one knowing him more or less intimately for thirty years, "sly, uncertain, embarrassed, tiptoeing" makes perhaps an amusing picture but fails completely to describe a type of man rarely found in the ministry: a man who fights for his ideals with both feet on the ground, with moral and physical courage apparent in every act, a salesman superlative and about as human a man as can be found in any walk of life. That is Dr. Burk.
One might criticize him because of his methods and sometimes because of his mistakes but never because of his being either sly or uncertain. When, therefore, I read your portrayal of this year's recipient of the Bok Prize, I could not do other than tell you that you had more nearly described his antithesis. Mr. Beck must have overwhelmed Dr. Burk with something more than oratory to bring into being even temporarily the "little white-haired clergyman" you portrayed.
D. P. PUGH
Norristown, Pa.
TIME described the awarding of the prize and the appearance of Dr. Burk as they appeared to an observer. TIME also indicated, with emphasis, that the puppylike exterior of Dr. Burk bore small resemblance to his moral qualities.--ED.
Mr. Moses Peaceful
Sirs:
In TIME, Feb. 6, p. 24, speaking about Yehudi Menuhin, you state that his father is Russian and his mother is Tartar. This is not so. His father and mother are Jews who came to the United States from Palestine. An analysis of their names will prove that they are not Russian names, nor Tartar, but Hebrew.
Take the father's name, Moshe; it is Hebrew for Moses. The last name, Menuhin, is also Hebrew; it means "peaceful." The boy's name, Yehudi, is unmistakably Hebrew; it means "a Judaean." Have you ever heard of Russians or Tartars having 100% Hebrew names?
Mr. Menuhin, senior, settled in Palestine when a young man. His name at that time was not Menuhin. He adopted this Hebrew name to signify the peacefulness which his sensitive spirit found in the land of his forefathers, Palestine. His wife was a native Palestinian Jewish girl. They married, emigrated to the U. S. and made their home in San Francisco.
I trust you will print this letter or in some other way correct your original but erroneous statement, thus placing the credit where it is due.
J. L. BERENSON
Stoughton, Mass.
Coal Truth
Sirs:
I am President of the Pittsburgh Terminal Coal Corporation, one of the coal companies referred to in your issue of Feb. 13, 1928, under the heading of ''LABOR HORROR IN PENNSYLVANIA.". . .
Your periodical has come to my house for several years and I feel that you want to print the truth.
The publicity that has been coming out of Western Pennsylvania the last few weeks, in relation to the strike situation and the operations of the coal companies, is no doubt promoted by the miners' organization. Lots of the material is untrue. Much of this publicity is overdrawn and designed for only one purpose--to elicit public sympathy for a losing cause. . . .
HORACE F. BAKER
Pittsburgh, Pa.
TIME printed last week a letter from C. F. Taplin, lawyer for Subscriber Baker's company, ably refuting a story which had reflected upon its good name.--ED.
Engineer's Oath
Sirs:
Our attention has been called to an article appearing on p. 19 of the Feb. 13 issue of TIME on the subject of "the lawyer's oath." Much has been said and written regarding the Hippocratic Oath of doctors and lawyers.
The American Association of Engineers recently prepared and adopted an oath for the engineering profession entitled "The Engineer's Vow of Service." This is the only oath written thus far for the engineer. Because we believe that you will be interested in the Vow we are enclosing copy with this letter. We shall be pleased to receive your comments.
M. E. McIVER
Secretary
American Association of Engineers,
Chicago, Ill.
The Oath:
We dedicate ourselves to the service of mankind as members of the Engineering profession.
We consecrate our professional knowledge and skill to the advancement of human welfare, safety and progress.
As we benefit by the technical knowledge and public esteem won for the Profession by the Engineers who labored in the past, we shall ever strive to augment that heritage before passing it on to the Engineers who are to follow.
We therefore affirm our guiding purpose:
So to live and work as to justify the trust and confidence reposed in the Engineering Profession.
To carry out professional engagements with generous measure of performance, and with fidelity toward those whom we undertake to serve.
To foster a spirit of courteous consideration and fraternal co-operation within the Profession.
To extend encouragement and a helping hand to younger Engineers and to those in need.
To place Service before profit, the honor and standing of the Profession before personal advantage, and the Public Welfare above all other consideration.
The Hippocratic Oath is better than the Engineer's Oath. The latter is too vague. Let engineers construct an oath containing specific detail of which they are supposedly masters.--ED.