No Prowler

Sirs: Two months ago, a friend called my attention to the notice in your magazine about my action in chiseling off the offending letter "s" from the Poe monument in Wyman Park Baltimore (TIME, June 16). The statement that I did the work under cover of darkness is false, as I did it an hour before dark, and with five men looking on--all of whom approved except one, who called a policeman. I did not pay much attention to the error in your magazine until recently, when rumors and stories have been circulated about me as a prowler in the dark, and with many versions. Most of them are humorous, but some are malicious, and they are very discreditable to me, so won't you please make the proper notice of correction in TIME. Please say that the chiseling off of the error on the Poe monument was done by Edmond Fontaine an hour before dark. Patrolman Charles Perkins, of the Northern District will witness to this statement. This error is a serious matter to me.

EDMOND FONTAINE Baltimore, Md.

No Cable

Sirs: Although sadly conscious of the fact that his efforts over a period of many years to educate the editorial staffs of the daily press to differentiate between "cable'' and "radio" as communications media for the transmission of foreign news despatches have been only moderately successful, the writer was profoundly chagrined to note that in its issue of Nov. 17, p. 15, TIME states that President Hoover despatched a "cablegram'' felicitating the King of Siam upon his birthday.

This telegram, like thousands of others in modern business today, was sent by Radiotelegraph and not by Cable; hence, the designation ''cablegram'' is a misnomer.

TIME is noted for the accuracy of its statements and for its progressiveness in keeping abreast of the times, and its failure to include in its lexicon the word ''Radiogram" when referring to communications transmitted by radio is regrettable, even though excusable. We expect TIME to set the pace, not follow it.

Just as TIME represents the ultra-modern in news presentation, so Radio epitomizes the latest in communication methods, and TIME should not be the last to accord proper recognition to a term that is so widely used in all parts of the world.

Old habits are hard to break, but in a radio-minded age, TIME will tell.

W. A. WlNTERBOTTOM Vice President and General Manager

R. C. A. Communications, Inc.

New York City

TIME'S habit is hereby broken.--ED.

Cinema v. U. S. Ships

Sirs: In the Paramount cinema Laughter, Tycoon Gibson's daughter arrives from Europe on the MAJESTIC. Perhaps there were no convenient sailings of the LEVIATHAN, AMERICA, GEORGE WASHINGTON, REPUBLIC, PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT or PRESIDENT HARDING. Following this the hero who can choose his sailing date, plans to take passage Europe-ward on the ROTTERDAM.

When will American movie audiences be let into the secret that there are splendid express liners flying the stars and stripes on the North Atlantic? And when will movie producers decide that this American enterprise deserves support?

ELEANOR WENNERBERG

Cleveland, Ohio

Let Subscriber Wennerberg consider that whereas wines and cocktails are had on the Leviathan, etc., they are not part of the official scenery on U. S. boats and are necessary to much cinema.--ED. Positive

Sirs: In TIME, Nov. 17, when speaking of President Hoover's Thanksgiving Day proclamation, you state that ". . . the election returns offered him small inspiration. . . ."

In the New York Times of Nov. 1, I believe. I noticed the President's proclamation, three days before election day!

Being almost positive that I am right & hoping I am,

RICHARD C. CONNOLLY

Choate School Wallingford, Conn.

To Choate School's Connolly, praise for acute observation.--ED.

John Brown

Sirs: I am a very faithful, and I may say admiring reader of TIME and I feel that I should point out what perhaps many people will consider a breach of good taste.

Whatever opinion one may have of John Brown and his potent New England backers, to die for an ideal is tragic and to use a tragic incident for advertising purposes, such as you did on p. 63 of your issue of Nov. 17 should, to my mind, be shocking to those Cultivated Americans to whom your advertisement is addressed.

CARL CNOBLOCH

New York City

Did TIME (in its "historical series") tell the tale truly and well? If so, John Brown would be the last to object.--ED.

Stone Blind

Sirs: The story goes that an old woman was interestedly engaged in examining the contents of her lunch basket when her train, suddenly and unexpectedly, rushed into a tunnel. She is reported to have thrown up her hands and cried "My God struck stone blind!" You can relate a similar experience to the American, who finds himself in Florence, Italy, deprived of your valued publication TIME-- struck stone blind.

EDWIN B. JACKSON

Florence, Italy

Cash for Soldiers

Sirs:

As a subscriber I take the liberty of questioning the editorial alertness of the ''wait and see'' policy, as expressed on p. 78 in the footnote [comment] to a letter from T. J. Leary (TIME, Nov. 10).

Must the entire A. E. F. write in to assure you of their interest, their downright forthwith interest, in the payment of the Adjusted Compensation Certificate (this is their engraved title!) now and not after their ultimate demise?

I hope not!

As a point of additional interest you might make an inquiry of the National Banks to see just how many of them will now make loans on these Certificates as provided for under Section B. There is quite a joker there! Look into it!

Personally, I think you overlook an item of news interest of first rate importance. Why not "take a chance"' and open up the subject in a big way (and incidentally make a host of friends) ?

JAMES BRYCE

P. S. If TIME makes an error in calculating its payroll, does it "pay up" at the end of 20 years? Or does it "adjust" it--at once?

Milford, Pa.

Sirs: . . . I feel qualified in asking that you investigate Mr. T. J. Leary's statement (TIME, Nov. 10) relative to payment in cash of Adjusted Service Certificates. A lump payment would be the only way that we (or the majority) would get any material benefit from these certificates. The yearly loans and interest are slowly eating mine up and there are a million others like me.

W. D. BURCH

Atlanta, Ga.

Sirs: By all means check T. J. Leary's statement in the Nov. 10 issue of TIME. It just happens that I am situated financially so that the outcome of this one way or the other would make no difference to me personally. I do, however, have a sincere appreciation of the condition of a lot of ex-service men. .

JOHN A. WESLEY

Ex-First Lieut. Inf.

Rhinelander, Wis.

Sirs:

One man in particular told me that a bank demanded the signature of another party on his note for $125 which he borrowed on a $700 certificate. He was unable to get the loan until another person guaranteed the payment of the note when due, making the certificate amount to nothing as far as its loan value was concerned. . . .

A. B. CLOSE

Taylorville, Ill.

Sirs: . . . I am the holder of a War Bonus Certificate whose face value is $1,584 -- incidentally, one of the largest I have ever heard of. I feel that I am as competent a judge as any as to whether I should have this amount in a lump sum now, or at the end of 20 years from the date of issue if I live that long. If I knew, now, that this amount would be paid to me soon after the first of the year, I would heave a mighty sigh of relief. I am sure that my wife and three babies would also. The money would neither be wasted nor spent foolishly. Frankly, the only interest I have in those reasons why we should not be paid this bonus in a lump sum now is that occasioned by an obstacle to an intense desire. . . .

WILLIAM WALLACE MITCHELL

Monte Vista, Colo.

Sirs:

All the buddies I know favor it [cash] except sonic officers who expect preferment with the administration or their employers such as banks, oil companies, etc. . . .

H. N. MCASHAN

Glendale, Calif.

Sirs:

Am heartily in accord with T. J. Leary in his article in your Nov. 10 issue. . . .

I feel that a good many of the veterans would at this time be well able to use the few hundred (Continued on p. 72) they have coming to them on these Certificates: then again no doubt among our unemployed would be found thousands of vets who could use the money now. That in my opinion would relieve many a bad situation and no doubt some vets' families from hunger. I've met many in the past four years, married, who were in dire need. Another thing. Those of us who are not in any immediate need of the money could put some of it in circulation--which would in a measure relieve the present unemployment situation--and deposit the rest in some good building and loan association which would pay from 5% to 6% on it. . . .

FRANK E. MEYERS

U. S. Naval Hospital San Diego, Calif.

Sirs: ... I am one who is hoping that these I. O. U.'s will be redeemed immediately, not in 1945. As for myself, if I could get the $1,100 represented by my certificate, I could get out of the unemployed list and back into my profession--optometry--and put that much money into immediate circulation, and safely resume that profession, which would mean more money placed in circulation each succeeding month.

GEORGE C. GASTON

Seattle, Wash.

Sirs:

. . . Now is the most opportune time for the government to help their ex-soldiers. I know from my banking association with a great number of these veterans in this community, that right now they are right up against it. A great number have already borrowed the limit on these certificates.

M. E. BLYTHE

The Community Bank, East Liverpool, Ohio

Sirs:

I was much interested in T. J. Leary's letter on veteran's adjusted compensation and should like to have TIME investigate the subject.

While I am satisfied with the treatment accorded me since my discharge from the Navy after War service by state and federal governments, I nevertheless could make good use of the compensation and would be pleased to receive it if it would not be a burden to the government at this time; if it would overcome the present depression; or if the government would be taking advantage of an economy by paying the certificates now.

F. J. HELGREN

Waukegan, Ill.

Sirs: . . . I have previous to this taken the matter up with several Congressmen and others and it seems to be one of those things that most are in favor of but no one wants to start and do anything about. In my own case the payment of the Federal Bonus at this time would be of great assistance in paying off the most of a first mortgage on my home. An ex-service man on a farm has a chance to borrow from the Farm Board but we in the towns have to pay up to 7% or more when we can get money at a bank or loan company. . . .

CLARENCE A. THOMPSON

Assistant Superintendent State-City Employment Service, Youngstown, Ohio

Sirs:

Very keen interest here concerning subscriber T. J. Leary's letter in your issue of Nov. 10, "Cash Payments to Soldiers." Will you print more about it?

RICHARD STANLEY

Chamber of Commerce, Lindsay, Okla.

The Adjusted Service Certificates were issued in 1925. They were commonly called the Soldiers' Bonus. Veterans resent that term. They say the money was due them for War work done at insufficient wages. They point out that after the War the Government adjusted its contracts with the railroads and the War contractors, paying them $1,600,000,000 and $2,000,000,000 more, respectively, in cash. The Certificates were given the form of 20-year paid-up endowment policies. Values (maximum averages $1,500) were computed by the following equation:

Days of Service

$1 per day for home service or $1.25 for foreign + 25% of this sum

Times

An Age Factor (averaging 1.89 to 2.55)

President Coolidge vetoed the bill of issuance. Congress overrode the veto. Congress has lately altered the law to give soldiers until 1935 to apply for Certificates. The face value of the Certificates today is $3,400.000,000. In the Treasury today is some $625,000,000 of the sinking fund being built to retire all the Certificates in 1945. While preparing to retire the Certificates, the Government will lend, for a period not to exceed a year, money on the Certificates, amounts of loans depending on Certificate's age (above a two-year minimum). About 52 1/2% of the issue's face value could now be borrowed. On such loans both Government and banks are authorized to charge 2% more than the current commercial discount rate. The Government rate, however, must not exceed 6%. To retire the entire issue now with cash payments would necessitate floating a Government bond issue of $2,775,000,000. That would increase the Public Debt to almost $20,000,000,000. It would be adding back one-third of what has been paid off the Public Debt in eleven years. It would add $97,000,000 to the U. S. budget for interest alone and in view of a possible deficit next year would in all probability mean immediate increase of taxation. Finally, as a practical matter, wise bankers believe that the notation of a bond issue in any such amount, at any interest rate, under peace time conditions is impossible; and that even serious discussion of it would impair national credit, prolong and deepen the depression and aggravate the unemployment problem. The American Legion convention at Boston in October voted against asking for cash payment of the Certificates at this time. The Veterans Bureau agrees that cash payment is " impractical" at this time.--ED.

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