Message Collect

TUCSON, ARIZ. DPR COLLECT, UNITED PRESS, NEW YORK

"I HAVE GIVEN THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT TO ANOTHER PRESS AGENCY . . . AND TO BE FAIR I HAVE STIPULATED THAT IT IS AVAILABLE TO YOU BUT NATURALLY I DO NOT WISH IT REWRITTEN OR ONLY PARTIALLY DISTRIBUTED. AM SENDING IT COLLECT BUT IF YOU DO NOT WISH TO USE IT I WILL PAY THE COSTS. I HAVE NOW HAD OPPORTUNITY TO READ THE SUPREME COURT DECISION. APPARENTLY. . . ."

Thus a telegraph machine in the Manhattan offices of the United Press began to print a message one afternoon last week. Sentence followed sentence--50 words, 100 words, 200 words. The machine clicked on, stopped to catch its breath, began a new paragraph:

"THERE ARE FIVE COMPELLING REASONS FOR THIS ACTION. ONE IT WOULD. . . ." An astounded UP editor who had watched this unsolicited opinion from a person unknown unravel before his eyes, sprang into action. To Tucson he flashed this query: WHO IS SENDING COLLECT ENDLESS OPINION ON GOLD? Back came the answer: SENDER OF COLLECT MESSAGE IS HERBERT HOOVER.

The UP man grinned. Meantime another 100 words of collect message had come through on the first machine. Soon 400 words had been clicked out. The editor's brow clouded: Was this an expensive practical joke? He sat down again and asked: TUCSON, ARIZ. ARE YOU SURE COLLECT MESSAGE IS SENT BY EX-PRESIDENT HOOVER? Click, Click, Click. The machine responded: SENT BY HOOVER IN PERSON. The editor shrugged. About that time, at the end of 600 words, the original message ended. Cost to the United Press: $19.10.

Thus for the first time since he left the White House did Herbert Hoover become politically vocal on a specific national question. Heretofore he had written magazine articles and delivered speeches but his ideas were always muffled in a fog of meaningless political platitudes. Now as he was traveling home to California from his first New York Life Insurance directors' meeting, the Supreme Court rendered its decision on the gold cases (TIME, Feb. 25). For two days newshawks had trailed him, begging in vain for some comment. Sternly he put them aside with: "I am no longer in public life." At Tucson, however, the press clamor became so insistent that he put his private thoughts on public paper for the Citizen, personally distributed them collect to the Associated Press, the United Press.

The gist of Mr. Hoover's remarks: he favored going back on a gold basis, paying 59-c- in gold to any holder of a devalued dollar. He argued that such action would reduce unemployment, give business a rush of confidence, stop the spread of "inflation poison" in the national blood.

Politicians, certain of Herbert Hoover's desire to re-enter the White House, were sure that the 31st President of the U. S. was trying to make political capital out of a major division of public opinion on New Deal policy by showing himself 1) "liberal" in that he accepted the 59-c- dollar as an accomplished fact and 2) "sound" by advocating resumption of specie payments. When newshawks caught up with him at Chandler, Ariz., Mr. Hoover gave his own reason for his act: "I felt it was my duty to do so."

In Washington two good Republicans, Senator Barbour of New Jersey and Representative Hollister of Cincinnati, made gestures of Hooverish loyalty by introducing joint resolutions calling for specie payments. New Dealers snorted derisively and Senator Connally of Texas got up to bedevil the onetime President for playing politics. All went smoothly as long as he stuck to that topic but when he added that the U. S. is now on a gold standard, peppery Senator Glass popped up to object:

"So far from being on a gold standard we are on a fiat currency basis, and under the decision of the Supreme Court we are on a fiat bond basis."

"I do not undertake," said Mr. Connally trying to avoid a debate with a fellow Democrat, "to answer the Senator from Virginia. The Supreme Court has already answered the Senator from Virginia."

"No!" roared Mr. Glass, "The Supreme Court has not answered the Senator from Virginia. The Supreme Court said what Congress did was a cheat and a repudiation, and then it further said that those who had been cheated and those upon whom repudiation has been practiced, if they undertake to recover what the Government agreed to give them, can go to hell!"

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