Walsh for Bonus

Sirs:

Say, is TIME trying to rook Senator Tom Walsh? In issue of July 7, you said he voted against the Soldier Bonus. He did not . . . (profanity deleted). He voted FOR the bonus, not once as some white-livered Senate sisters did, but TWICE ... to ride over President Coolidge's veto. That bonus vote of his is going to help re-elect him this year and don't you forget it! He's a good guy, even if the photo of him you used don't look it.

PATRICK JOSEPH XAVIER McGovERN (1st Sergt. A. E. F.) Billings, Mont.

To a Washington researcher, a thorough going reprimand for gross error. -- ED.

Double Editors

Sirs:

In your issue of July 7 you were kind enough to carry a story concerning the Darling libel suit against The Taxi Weekly. In the centre, surrounded by the story, you carried a picture supposedly of myself. I have received so many favorable comments my concerning my "aggressive fighting improved face'' good that I looks, as think well it is as only fair to you that I send you for future use a photograph of myself instead of my double. The photograph that you ran, I believe, is that of Mr. Innis Brown, managing editor of The American Golfer. For many years Mr. Brown and myself have been confused, and as I am undoubtedly lesser known, I feel that perhaps Mr. Brown is not so complimented by being referred to as the editor of The Taxi Weekly. . .

H. A. INNESS BROWN Editor The Taxi Weekly New York, N. Y.

To double Editors Brown, apologies for the confusion.--ED.

Nebraska's Howard Sirs: The undersigned are either subscribers or readers of TIME, and would be pleased to have a report on Edgar Howard, member of the House of Representatives from Nebraska's Third Con gressional District.

OTTO F. WALTER GEORGE S. REEDER A. J. PHILLIPS HAROLD KRAMER LOUIS FlGHTNER H. H. HAHN W. A. BARUCHER

Columbus, Neb.

The record of Representative Edgar Howard of the Third Nebraska District is as follows : Born: at Osceola, Iowa, Sept. 16, 1858. Start in life: a printer's devil. Career: aged 13, he went to work in a printshop at Glenwood, Iowa. He went to public school, worked his way through Western Collegiate Institute, attended Iowa College of Law. He became a tramp printer, a wandering newswriter, worked for journals throughout the U. S. Last subordinate job: as city editor of the Dayton (Ohio) Herald. In 1884 he married Elizabeth Paisley Burtch of Clarinda, Iowa and settled in Nebraska. She gave him one son, Findley--for the past five years financial adviser to Salvador--and two daughters. He edited the Papillion (Xeb.) Times. In 1891 he was already full of Democratic sentiments: William Jennings Bryan made him his secretary, took him to Washington (paying his expenses, but no salary). This position lasted but a few-months. Howard returned to Papillion, entered politics. Only straight Democrat running against the American Protective Association, Populist ("Demopop") and Republican candidates, he was elected to the State legislature in 1895. From 1896 to 1900 he served as Probate Judge of Sarpy County. He purchased the Columbus (Neb.) Weekly Telegram, edited it. In 1917 he had one term as Nebraska's lieutenant governor, returned to journalism, made the Telegram a daily in 1922. In 1923 he was elected to Congress, sold control of the Telegram, though he still writes for it daily and receives an editorial salary. In Congress: most entertaining of representatives, but no clown, he is a cogent contributor to the work of the committees on Public Lands, Territories, Indian Affairs, Coinage, Weights & Measures. He calls himself a "Free Democrat." but is seldom not ''regular." He is friendly with Republican leaders like Speaker Longworth, Congressmen Tilson and Snell, whom he humorously denounces. He is one of the last of the old-school Demo-cratic "statesmen." He voted for: Restrictive Immigration (1923), the Soldier Bonus (1924), Farm Relief (1927. 1928), the Farm Board (1929), the Jones ("Five & Ten") Act (1929). He voted against: the Tariff (1930), Tax Reduction (1924, 1926, 1928, 1929), the Navy's 15-cruiser bill (1929), Reapportionment (1929). His vote is Dry; there is no rumor of his drinking. Regarding foreign affairs he describes himself as "an old-fashioned American," favoring isolation, the Monroe Doctrine. Legislative hobbies: farm relief, protection of U. S. Indians, veterans' care. On the first two, at least, he is an expert along party lines. In appearance he tries to resemble Bryan, facially better resembles Benjamin Franklin. He is heavyset, bobbed-haired, mild-mannered. He dresses in the traditional rusty-grey frock coat, the wide-brimmed black hat of Bryan and the oldtimers, which helps distinguish him among the more babbitty modern members. In the House his voice assumes a peculiar, almost clerical (but not monotonous) drone. Then he is meek, likes to remind his listeners that his mother was a Quaker. His own faith is the Episcopalian. He drives out of Washington for Sunday services in country churches. He smokes three cigars a day. does not chew, swears privately. His fraternal affiliations: Masons (32nd degree. Knights Templar. Shriner). Rotary. Odd Fellows. (Continued Outside Congress: he lives with his wife at George Washington Inn, modest hotel opposite the House Office Building. There almost nightly he holds a non-betting card-game with such Congressmen as Garner of Texas, Ohio's Brand. He likes to watch baseball games, horseraces He says: "I am a natural sport." He bitterly opposes Sunday blue-laws, will not attend Sabbath sporting events. When in Nebraska t talks to the farmers in their own language, and to the Indians in theirs, being particularly adept at Santee Sioux, with which he baffled stenographic reporters at the Interparliamentary Union in Paris.

Impartial House observers rate him thus: a fine example of what Congressmen were in the last century, plus a pointed, ubiquitous sense of humor. An adept at floor strategy able to transcend House rules of debate by his witty, original methods, thus an insidious protagonist of minority measures. Perhaps the greatest "character" in the House and the most universally liked Congressman.--ED. "Spend Till It Hurts"

Sirs:

John Sherman once said "The way to resum specie payments is to resume them." The same would seem true with the much discussed improvement in business conditions.

The present difficulty is largely psychological. People fear to spend principally because of the thought that what may be bought at a certain price today may be bought for a few pennies less tomorrow. . . .

The difference between periods of flush prosperity and trade stagnation seldom seems to amount to more than 15%-The United States is a nation of some 130,000,000 people. Let the per capita expenditure for goods of all kinds be increased as much as ten cents per day, and we immediately put into circulation $13,000,000 which is not now circulating, which would mean that at the end of a month $390,000,000 extra would have changed hands, and in the course of a year, $4,680,000,000.

If we wish to accelerate this return, publishers and publicists, trade organizations, chambers of commerce etc. can make common cause in a publicity campaign the slogan of which might be (paraphrasing Wartime Red Cross, Y. M. C. A. and other campaigns) "Spend Until It Hurts," setting forth the reasons why.

L. B. ROBERTS

Minneapolis, Minn.

Style Swiping

Sirs -- In your issue of July 14, you published a letter by De Witt and Van Aken, attorneys for Vogue. Because the name of my organization appears twice in the list against whom infringement suits were instituted I believe that I have something to say that . . . will show by what some of these suits were motivated. About three years ago the Marion Dress Co. and the Leading Dress Co. asked us to prepare a full page opening season announcement to appear in Women's Wear . . . informing the trade that the Fall lines would formally open on a given date. The week previous an artist with whom we never did business submitted samples of his work which pleased us. We instructed him to make type layouts, and we gave him the texts of the ads. He submitted a layout for each organization, and included therein an illustration for each. . . . We asked the artist where he got these ideas for the illustrations, and he stated it was all original. We showed them to the clients, who accepted them, and the ads appeared. A few days later Vogue instituted two suits for a large sum of money. The writer called on De Witt and Van Aken, and explained the situation. He specifically called the lawyer's attention to the fact that these illustrations had nothing to do with the ads, and that the concerns did not infer anywhere in their copy that these dresses, which were a negligible part of the illustration, were their own creations or any part of their line. The lawyer (I think it was Van Aken) told me that this didn't release us from any responsibility, and that they were forced to go through with their suit because the Infringement De- partment was under a heavy expense and there was no other way of contributing to it except in such cases as ours. We immediately released the clients from all responsibility, because they were also served, and we settled the suit for $250. The curious part of this whole matter of infringement is that it is utterly impossible to check up on all magazines in the matter of art work; and that this business of styling is such a terribly involved one that 1 doubt whether any illustration of any garment, anywhere in America, is absolutely original with its creator. As an authority in the ready-to-wear business, who has studied that field for 15 years, I can safely state that less than 10% of all so-called original styles are really original. Style swiping is the bane of the business and in this country it is almost impossible to be original because the designers and sketchers are definitely influenced by merchandise seen elsewhere, and shipped by the French creators. . . . It is, therefore, my opinion that TIME could do a commendable piece of work by advocating the following ruling: An illustration should not be considered in- fringement or piracy if the responsible party can prove that he was ignorant of the matter, and that the infringement was not used for the purpose of selling the specific illustrated article; or giving the impression that the illustrated article was created by the advertiser, and was illustrated for the purpose of selling. I also notice in this letter by De Witt and Van Aken that the lists represents art services, department stores and publishers. Inasmuch as nobody else, to our knowledge, represents art service, it is to be inferred that H. Serwer, Inc. is the art service. If this were true, we would quite obviously be responsible for the infringement, instead of which we are an advertising agency which in its service buys art work--and in good faith. HARRY SERWER H. Serwer, Inc. Xew York Citv

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.