Harvard, 1911
Sirs:
Only the high regard which I have for the Veritas emblazoned on the Harvard seal--a word which seems to have escaped Mr. Tunis's attention, or possibly exceeded his ability in translation--forces me to step into the white light of publicity, and confess that I am the wreck that penned those pitiful words that headline your column on Education (TIME, Sept. 14), "After 25 years I am an utter failure, morally, mentally, and financially."
The fact that my entire "life" was reported in a purely ironical vein should have been clear to any child old enough to read nursery rhymes, but apparently eluded Mr. Tunis's keen perception in his anxiety for headline material. I have not been able to secure a copy of his book [Was College Worth While?], but judging from the reviews he has lifted a sentence out of its context and omitted a qualifying phrase completely, without seemingly offending his sense of journalistic honor. In case anyone takes sufficient interest, which I doubt, to prove Mr. Tunis's conclusions hokum--except perhaps as they apply to his own class--he could make a good start by comparing myself as the awful example quoted by Mr. Tunis, and the actual facts. Mentally I was good enough to complete the four-years requirements at Harvard in three years with cum laude ranking, and a Phi Beta Kappa key. and only recently I managed to answer TIME'S general information test 97% correctly, so the old faculties seem to be working reasonably well. From the moral aspect, I have never been in jail, am living with the same wife I married 22 years ago, and still pass the plate occasionally. Financially, I am an officer or director in some dozen assorted corporations, able to keep two children in college with an occasional steak at home, and enjoy an income (still greatly reduced) that would make the average member of the Class of 1911, as reported by Mr. Tunis, green with envy.
I refuse to be used as a false premise from which are drawn conclusions probably equally false, i refuse to be a sacrificial goat for, of all people, the Class of 1911 to pile on their own abysmal mediocrities. I am not now, and never have been a member of that dismal class. Thank God, I am 1910, and I suggest that if 1911 wants to wash its own very dirty linen in public, it at least abstain from splashing its cleaner neighbors.
CLARENCE E. HALE
New York City
Sirs:
. . . TIME shines in its own peculiar sphere in publishing the article, [ Harvard | "Class of 1911," by tennis expert John R. Tunis. Aside from the slightly Pharisaical motive which the author's labors seem to suggest, Tunis shows the same astonishingly naive curiosity as to why even Harvard men hate President Roosevelt, as was expressed in a recent magazine article by co-operatives expert Marquis W. Childs. Both gentlemen should hark back to such Rooseveltian phrases as "hatred of entrenched greed." "unscrupulous money changers." "discredited special interests.'' "resplendent economic autocracy,'1 "enslavement for the public," "the forces of privilege and greed," and "economic royalists," with which our President demonstrates his yearning for the votes of the proletariat, and cease wondering.
ROSCOE PEACOCK
President The Moore-Cottrell
Subscription Agencies
North Cohocton, N. Y.
Sirs:
Those poor, unfortunate inanities of Harvard 1911 have my profound sympathy. They, with their fellow Yale and Princeton men, represent the shattered remnants of the Puritanism that Santayana has so aptly described. The really sad thing is that they are too damn stupid to work the system out to its logical end. . . . They prefer to stay shut up in their own self complacence, completely oblivious of the changing world about them.
Plenty of the rest of us are in just as sore straits but at least we are looking ahead. I know that their imagination doesn't extend beyond the ends of their noses, or at least they would have enough vision to vote for Roosevelt. . . .
J. C. KELLY
Ogdensburg, N. Y.
Reds & Whites
Sirs:
I wish to invite your attention to your inaccurate use of the terms "Red" and "White" when referring to the contestants in the war in Spain. . . .
Those you designate "Reds" are unquestionably the forces of a legal government, as lawfully elected as was President Roosevelt. Those you designate "Whites" are a mixture of renegade officers and, mostly, foreign mercenary troops. . . .
J. R. HENDERSON
Lynchburg, Va.
TIME'S use of the designations "Red"' and "White'' in the Spanish Civil War refers only to the political philosophy of the contestants, has nothing to do with the legality of each force. A government can be Red (e.g. Russia), Black (e.g. Italy) or Brown (e.g. Germany) and still be legal.--ED.
Goldblatts
Sirs:
Without holding a brief for or against the Brothers Goldblatt as a native Chicagoan, I cannot help but resent the implication that a name like Goldblatt will per se besmirch the beauty of State St., and dip its standards into the mud. I would like to point out to you gentlemen of limitless knowledge and particularly to your erudite Chicago editorial staff that such distinguished Anglo-Saxon and Norman names as Marshall Field and Carson, Pine Scott & Co.. rather than symbolizing State St., Chicago, have long stood and do stand forlornly alone amid the non-Aryan hosts.
I refer to Maurice L. Rothschild, directly across State St. from the new Goldblatt super-bargain palace; Henry C. Lytton's Hub, across the other boundary street, Jackson Boulevard; the old Spiegel-Cooper store (now Sears, Roebuck) down the street: the Brothers Mandel on the "world's busiest corner"; the Netcher's Boston Store; Komiss Co., ad infinitum. . . .
JEROME B. STRAUSS
Chicago, Ill.
Sirs:
YOUR DISPARAGING COMMENT ABOUT GOLDBLATT BROTHERS IS AN ALL TIME HIGH FOR NEWS REPORTING THAT HITS BELOW THE BELT AND IS MADE OF THE NASTY STUFF THAT FANS THE FLAMES OF RACE PREJUDICE. HAS TIME INHERITED THE DISTINCTION OF BECOMING HITLER'S MOST HELPFUL MOUTHPIECE IN AMERICA? YOUR COURAGEOUS PUBLICATION SHOULD SIDE STEP THE TEMPTATION OF TAKING OCCASIONAL WALLOPS AT THE JEWS. HAPPY NEW YEAR.
A. A. ERIN
Chicago, Ill.
Lenin's Will
Sirs:
In your issue of Sept. 7, you refer to a will left by Lenin in which he ''explicitly warned Russia" against the rise of Stalin.
Would you be good enough to print a little further information on this subject? ....
M. A. JAMES
Hollywood, Calif.
Text of Lenin's political "will" is printed as The Suppressed Testament of Lenin and sold for 10-c- by Pioneer Publishers of New York City, a branch of the U. S. Trotsky organization. Written in December 1922 and January 1923, the "will" is a contemporary character analysis of the Communist high command. Of Stalin, Lenin says: "He has concentrated an enormous power in his hands; and I am not sure that he always knows how to use that power with sufficient caution. Stalin is too rude, and this fault, entirely supportable in relations among us Communists, becomes unsupportable in the office of General Secretary. Therefore, I propose to the comrades to find a way to remove Stalin. . . ." --ED.
Sirs:
I have heard that the famous Lenin will is now repudiated as forgery. What certain and documentary evidence is there that permits TIME to refer to it. ...
FRANCES POLSON
Oklahoma City, Okla.
After Lenin's death his "will," hitherto unpublished, was made public by Widow Krupskaya Lenin at the 13th Party Congress in Moscow in 1924.--ED.
Great Little State (Cont'd)
Sirs:
I notice you received several critical letters about your recent article on South Carolina politics (TIME, Aug. 24).
A couple of people who seldom read TIME read the article at my suggestion and agreed it was quite good on the whole. We naturally allowed for some overemphasis of the race and religious issue. Your photographer succeeded in getting some interesting shots around the courthouse. While the voters pictured in the article are not distinguished by their appearance, anybody knows that they look no different from the voters in other states. In fact, I saw the doubles of several of them running stores and filling stations up around Philadelphia, where I spent some time this summer.
In your surprisingly thorough job you did not bring out one fact that largely accounts for South Carolina being the "solidest" Democratic State in the Union. That is, over 90% of the people living here were born in this State, the highest percentage of native born of any State in the Union.
GIST LESESNE
Spartanburg, S. C.
Sirs:
The letter of Charles Edward Thomas, of Indianapolis, in your issue of Sept. 14, about South Carolina, is so strangely well-informed, so keen in accurate discernment, that I cannot forbear to write you saying so. Only one who knew his subject would have quoted from John Locke's Fundamental Constitutions, written at the Earl of Shaftesbury's request, for the Lords Proprietors of the Colony, the warning against a ''numerous democracy." It may be that a too numerous democracy is a present-day affliction also beyond South Carolina's borders.
W. W. BALL
Editor
The News and Courier
Charleston, S. C.
Scurrilous'?
Sirs:
I have received a letter from you suggesting that 1 subscribe to your magazine.
It had, in fact, been my intention to do so but your scurrilous article on King Edward has decided me against it. Not only do you deny His Majesty the common right of privacy but your article placed unnecessary emphasis on certain factors. . . . Your magazine is not of the sort to be seen in any decent family drawing-room.
TREVOR E. HODGES
Trevor E. Hodges, Ltd.
New York City
Sirs:
Ever since we discovered TIME in Australia 18 months ago, we have been constant and avid readers of your publication.
We have been in London seven weeks and the weekly reading of TIME has been the one thing that has cheered us through the muddle and jumble of job-hunting and the effort of combating new (though mostly old) surroundings.
To be able to read in clear, concise, pithy phraseology of world events, even if the events themselves be of muddled nature, is very satisfying. The succinct remark about Miss MacDonald's tooth acting and the holocaust of letters it involved was most cheering.
In our copy of this week's TIME (Aug. 31), p. 19 & 20 have been deleted by the British censor. To insure that in future we get our TIME intact we are ordering our issue direct from your circulation office.
With our thanks to you for your grand publication and our best wishes for its continued existence and increasing success.
MRS. CHARLES H. BASSETT
London, England
Valuable Post-Mortem
Sirs:
In TIME, Sept. 7, under the title of "Half a Brain," you gave an excellent review of this most interesting case but you have failed to call attention to the fact that the patient received her injury on Nov. 20, 1935 and did not die until March 4 of this year.
After I removed the blood clot from the left side of the cranial cavity, her condition was markedly improved for some time and the point at issue was whether or not there was a recurrence of the original infiltrating glioma. This shall ever remain unsolved on account of the failure of the people to grant us permission to examine the brain after death. It shall always be our regret that this very unique case could not have been completely reported.
TIME should be congratulated on such an accurate and detailed report of this case, thereby clearly demonstrating the extreme value of post-mortem examinations.
J. EDWIN PURDY, M.D.
Canton, Ohio
No Reflections
Sirs:
In your issue of Aug. 17 there appears (on p. 18) an article containing comments in connection with the dismissal of the Permanent Secretary of the British Air Ministry which, as regards our client, Sir Eric Geddes, are at variance with the facts as will appear from the following extracts from the official report of the Board of Enquiry recently held in this country:
Paragraph 5. "We desire to record our considered opinion that the representatives of Imperial Airways have behaved throughout with perfect propriety. The action taken by them has been dictated by a jealous regard for the honour of the Company and the maintenance of public integrity, and sprang only from a natural apprehension lest the barest suspicion should arise that the relations between the Company and His Majesty's Government had been influenced by individual and personal interests. . . ."
Paragraph 9: "In the spring of 1934, negotiations were about to begin, between the Air Ministry and the General Post Office on the one hand, and Imperial Airways on the other, with a view to the carriage of first-class Empire mail in pursuance of the scheme referred to, and Sir Christopher Bullock conceived the idea that it might be an opportune moment for the recognition of the services to the State of Sir Eric Geddes (Chairman of the Company) by the conferment upon him of a high honour. He put this idea before Lord Londonderry, then Secretary of State for Air, who enquired whether an honour would be acceptable to Sir Eric, and, if so, of what nature. Sir Christopher Bullock interpreted this as giving him authority to approach Sir Eric as to his views upon the matter. . . ."
Paragraph 15: "That Sir Christopher Bullock did not understand Sir Eric's objection to receiving an honour at that juncture is shown by the fact that he again raised the question in October, 1934. The question, however, was not ultimately proceeded with for a reason given to us in evidence, namely, that while it was felt that the honour was in itself eminently suitable, it was at the same time recognized that its award during a period when an important negotiation was in progress between the Air Ministry and Imperial Airways was out of the question. There was documentary evidence before us showing that this reason for dropping the matter exactly accorded with Sir Eric's own sentiments. . . ."
Appendix One: "The report contains in an appendix extracts from the letter dated September 12, 1935, of Sir Christopher Bullock to Sir Eric Geddes and Sir Eric's reply, referred to in the Report. Sir Christopher's letter said:--
" 'This note is merely to clinch our conversation of last night, when we agreed that I should not raise in present circumstances a subject on which we had a very casual word a long time since--I think at least 15 months, but it was so casual that I made no mental note of the date.
" 'I was grateful to you for seeing me. It was news to me that concrete rumours of so specific a character were prevalent--and I am rather puzzled to know why there should be such a crop at this juncture. In general gossip of this kind there is. of course, nothing either new or surprising if it arises (or recurs) sporadically. . . .
" 'Even before I took up my present appointment four and three-quarter years ago it was common knowledge among my friends and acquaintances that I might not wish to remain permanently in the Civil Service and that I was interested in the City and business generally.
Obviously, if I left the Service, the particular direction under discussion was one of a number which I might be expected to consider pursuing, if opportunity arose, indeed in the past friends of mine have taken the initiative in suggesting it.'
''Sir Eric Geddes replied:--
" 'Dear Bullock, "'Thanks for your letter of the 10th-12th, which I got today.
'' 'No one knows how rumours get round or what impetus is given them or why, nor is rumour the important point. The important point to my mind is that while contractual relationships between Imperial Airways and the Government are under discussion and you and 1 are the negotiating parties, any discussion and for understanding between us on matters affecting our individual and personal interests are most undesirable. I know you agree with the ethics of this point.
" 'Yours sincerely,
" 'ERIC GEDDES.' "
We think you will agree that your article conveyed a reflection on Sir Eric Geddes that was quite unwarranted and no doubt you will publish a withdrawal of your remarks.
CLIFFORD-TURNER & Co.
11 Old Jewry
London
TIME intended no reflection on able Sir Eric Geddes or able Sir Christopher Bullock, took pains to point out that no corruption was involved, that the only offense was indiscretion on Sir Christopher's part. To set the record straight, TIME gladly prints Sir Eric's attorney's letter containing excerpts from the Board of Enquiry Report which was not available to TIME when the original story was written.--ED.
"Tough, Ugly, Vulgar" Sirs:
I appreciate the space which you gave to my book in TIME, Sept. 14, but I want to make a mild protest against what seems to me to be a bit of illogic.
I refer to the statement: "Beginning with the admission that 'for some reason, completely obscure to me, there is an amazing lack of interest in the United States in Latin-American affairs,' Author Rourke gives facts that quickly answer his question."
I cannot see how the facts which follow in Gomez, Tyrant of the Andes would account for disinterest. They might account for dislike, distaste or even nausea, but scarcely for disinterest if my knowledge of psychology is worth anything.
Spain, considering her size, has always represented the nadir of news value among European countries but it was only necessary for her to descend into the same sort of social disorder and barbaric cruelty as constitute my facts about Venezuelan political history to achieve front-page spreads in every newspaper in the U. S. . . .
According to TIME'S reasoning, it seems to me that the affairs of Spain should have been more than ever ignored by the American press the moment they became ''tough, ugly and vulgar. . . ."
THOMAS ROURKE
Miami, Fla.
Does Author Rourke really find as much news drama in a bloody little one-sided tyranny as in a big bloody two-sided revolution ?--ED.
Thought
Sirs:
On the cover of your magazine (Sept. 7) you stated: "You can buy a rubber stamp for .50 cents." We think you should have stated also where the stamp could be purchased: "At the H. M. Nutter Co., San Francisco."
This is just a thought from us.
H. M. NUTTER
H. M. Nutter Co.
San Francisco, Calif.
Marble's
Sirs:
With that "Where there isn't a Wills there's a way . . ." line on its cover TIME (Sept. 14) certainly led with its chin.
It seems so obvious that Helen's tennis was fine until she played Marble's.
MAYNARD OWEN WILLIAMS
Chevy Chase, Md.
This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.