Monday, Aug. 22, 1949
Help Wanted (Cont'd)
Sir:
May one of the lower-income group offer a word of consolation to one of the "better educateds," namely, Elizabeth G. Wallick whose letter appears in TIME [Aug. 1]? It is simply this: thank your lucky stars for your infertility--and stop wasting your own time and others, trying to correct the condition. For one thing, it puts you in a position to offer love, intelligent care and even some financial aid to some of the thousands of little waifs already in existence who are in sorry need. By expending your energy on underprivileged children, you would undoubtedly be doing more for humanity than by putting another one or two human beings on earth in this period of devastating readjustment.
JEAN LEONARD Palo Alto, Calif.
Train Ride
Sir:
I wonder if the Editor of TIME can imagine himself in a position of the returning World War veteran who, because of his training for war and lack of training for civilian opportunities, has found it embarrassingly necessary to accept his taste of the so-called 52-20 "gravy train" [TIME, Aug. 1]. If so, I am sure he would not feel quite so unconcerned about the predicament of the large majority of veterans forced to submit to such a means of temporary economic survival for their families.
ARTHUR L. WEIR JR. Fort Worth, Tex.
Sir:
Since the war's end, the only good veteran, it appears to me, is the rich or dead veteran . . .
HILARY HURTUBISE Saco, Me.
Sir:
... So it was wonderful while it lasted? I fail to see anything wonderful about a guy receiving a $20 per week check while he's trying to find a job.
That some dead beats made a good thing out of it is for sure. But does that justify putting a stigma on eight million men? That's a lot of men you're branding as a bunch of loafers.
S. H. GRANDIN
Berkeley, Calif.
Sir:
. . . What and where is the rest of this G.I. gravy train TIME writes of? I must live at a whistle stop, because I didn't see it come through.
HUNTER PASCHALL San Dimas, Calif. P: Some other cars which are likely to be rolling for some time: bonuses, guarantees on mortgages, veterans' preferences on government jobs, loans for farm and business equipment, educational benefits.--ED.
Sir:
The 8.5 million 52-20 clubbers fall roughly into three categories: 1) the former drugstore cowboys taking postgraduate study at the local taverns, and living with their parents who still, somewhat erroneously, hope that Johnny will soon get "readjusted" and settle down; 2) the men on temporary jobs, moving from state to state, or those honestly looking for jobs when their state benefits have run out; 3) the-G.I. student looking for a short carry-over between sessions, or the graduate looking for work. Would I win a bet that 80% of the money paid out has gone to Group One?
The dole system was instrumental in the ruination of Roman economy, so perhaps it is well that we learn a lesson from the ancients.
What really hurts is that I've got 48 more weeks left, and between the end of summer session on Aug. 20 and the fall session on Sept. 15, things are going to be a tighter fit than my wedding ring. A month ago I could see $80 coming . . .
DONALD E. CRITTENDEN
Brighton, Mass.
Unfortunate Controversy
Sir:
Re Spellman-Roosevelt controversy [TIME, Aug. 1]: as a Catholic, and as an American, I am in full accordance with the views of the cardinal. There are many Catholics, however, who feel that he was unduly harsh . . .
My personal feeling is that the criticism leaves little opportunity to Mrs. Roosevelt of admitting gracefully that she might be even partially wrong.
To say that the cardinal's attitude is unChristlike is ridiculous, since Christ Himself found many opportunities for using strong language . . .
GRACE SHEA
Yonkers, N.Y.
Sir:
What an appalling blunder in public relations ... If Mrs. Roosevelt's attitude constitutes anti-Catholicism, then I've got news for the cardinal: this country is just full of "anti-Catholics" who feel just as she does on this subject. And his methods have done anything but lessen their number.
JOHN C. ROBB
Flint, Mich.
Sir:
We agree that the Spellman-Roosevelt controversy is extremely distasteful but only because a man of his stature would attempt, or rather condescend, to enlighten such an obvious publicity seeker . . .
MARTY ANN POWERS
Urbana, Ohio
Sir:
In her . . . debate, Mrs. Roosevelt was clearly ahead on points. The subject that provoked the controversy, the cardinal's loss of temper, and her own adroit mode of expression were all in her favor until she gave way to some quiet gloating in her column about the favorable response in her mailbag. Surely, she must have realized that a considerable proportion of this response came from people afflicted with the fault which had been attributed to her and which she was in the process of disowning . . .
JOSEPH F. MAGEE
Philadelphia, Pa.
Sir:
. . . Cardinal Spellman should stick to prayer and forget politics.
JANE CURTIS
Maywood, N.J.
Sir:
I doubt if Mrs. Roosevelt's silence was "shocked," on receiving Cardinal Spellman's letter. She was probably surprised on receiving such a thorough and adequate reply to her unnecessary attacks on our Catholic Church . . .
MRS. A. W. PORTER JR.
Stafford, Kans.
Sir:
Mrs. Roosevelt should have remained in shocked silence. By stating she supported Al Smith in his every campaign she does not answer the cardinal's questions . . . Had she not supported Governor Smith she would have been a traitor, not only to the Democratic Party, but to her husband as well . . .
JOSEPH F. FOGARTY JR.
Savannah, Ga.
Sir:
Cardinal Spellman's contribution towards solving the problems of federal aid for education has been negative. His letter, as quoted, reads like something by Pegler.
IRVING PESKOE
Miami, Fla.
Sir:
In his ill-considered set-to with Mrs. Roosevelt, Cardinal Spellman has lost considerably more than the argument. The mantle of the great Cardinal Hayes, which was beginning to look as though it had been cut to fit, has slipped from shoulders too small to hold it. Thinking people of all faiths must be sorry.
CRAIG D. KELLY
Stratford, Conn.
This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.