"History Repeats"

Most modern U. S. Presidents sooner or later fall into the habit of comparing themselves, directly or obliquely, with one of their greater predecessors in office. In 1931 Herbert Hoover went to Valley Forge to deliver a George Washington address. When he got through, the Press had the distinct impression that the 31st President was thinking of himself and his troubles in terms of the First President, that the noble general who shivered at the Valley Forge of the Revolution and the great engineer who was then shivering at the Valley Forge of the Depression, were really not so far apart in spirit and motive (TIME, June 8, 1931).

Last week came Franklin Roosevelt's turn to compare himself to a great President and, being a good Democrat, he picked Andrew Jackson. The occasion was the Democratic Party's Jackson Day Dinner in Washington. The meal cost 2,000 diners $50 per plate-- $5 for food and $45 for the Party's campaign chest. When he had eaten tomato stuffed with lobster, diamondbacked terrapin soup, breast of capon, hearts of palm salad and other things, the 32nd President of the U. S. arose and broadcast as follows on the 7th President of the U. S. :

"To the masses of his countrymen his purposes and his character were an open book. They loved him well because they understood him well--his passion for justice, his championship of the cause of the exploited and the downtrodden, his ardent and flaming patriotism.

"Jackson sought social justice and fought for human rights in his many battles to protect the people against autocratic or oligarchic aggression. . . .

"The beneficiaries of the abuses to which he put an end pursued him with all the violence that political passions can generate. But the people of his day were not deceived. They loved him for the enemies he had made. Backed not only by his party but by thousands who had belonged to other parties or belonged to no party at all, Andrew Jackson was compelled to fight every inch for the ideals and policies of the democratic republic in which he believed. An overwhelming proportion of the material power of the country was arrayed against him. The great media for the dissemination of information and the molding of public opinion fought him. Haughty and sterile intellectualism opposed him. Musty reaction disapproved him. Hollow and outworn traditionalism shook a trembling finger at him. It seemed that sometimes all were against him--all but the people of the United States.

"Because history so often repeats itself, let me analyze further. Andrew Jackson stands out as a great American, not merely because he was two-fisted and fought for the people's rights but because, through his career, he did as much as any man in our history to increase, on the part of the voters, knowledge of public problems and interest in their solution. . . .

"History repeats--I am becoming dimly conscious of the fact that this year we are to have a national election. Sometimes at the close of a day I say to myself that the last national election must have been held a dozen years ago--so much water has run under the bridge, so many great events in our history have occurred since then. And yet 34 months, less than three years, have gone by since March 1933.

"History repeats -- in these crowded months, as in the days of Jackson. . . .

"Whatever may be the platform, whoever may be the nominee of the Democratic party--and I am told that a convention is to be held to decide these momentous questions--the basic issue will be inevitably the retention of popular government--an issue fraught once more with the difficult problem of disseminating facts and yet more facts, in the face of an opposition bent on hiding and distorting facts. . . .

"May a double portion of Old Hickory's heroic spirit be upon us tonight. May we be inspired by the power and the glory and the justice of his rugged and fearless life."

Political commentators were quick to pick up the implied analogy between Jackson and his times and Roosevelt and his. One was a rough frontiersman, who came into office as a popular military hero; the other was an Eastern bluestocking, who reached the White House by the usual political route. Yet for both, the banks and the power they represented served as prime political targets. One threatened to send U. S. troops to Charleston in defense of the Constitution; the other advised Congress to put aside Constitutional doubts, "however reasonable," when enacting important legislation. Yet neither of them held the Supreme Court in high regard. One shocked Washington with White House parties at which the democratic rabble played a riotous part; the other eliminated all but State receptions there. When one left office, a severe panic swept the nation. When the other entered office, a severe panic had just done its worst.

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