Evening Star Newspaper, May 26, 1929, Page 29

3 TARIFF DEBATE HINGES AROUND SPECIFIC RATE THE SUNDAY STAR, WASHINGTON, D. C, MAY 26, 1929—PART 2. Envoy Has Carved His Way Don Carlo G. Davila Has Done Much to Promote Relations Between United States and Chile O’FALLON CASE DECISION RAISES MANY QUESTIONS Ultimate Results Considered Problem for Speculation, With Immediate Effect on Rates Held Unlikely. Concern of Representative or Senator Is Whether It Is High Enough to BY ANNE HARD. | Satisfy Constituents. ENOR DON CARLOS G. DAVILA. | Ambassador of Chile, is well known in Washington and else- prosperity for his particular industry is associated with protection. Beyond this_the average voter does mot do much thinking about the tariff. He would not be impressed by any aca- demic argument, however elevated, on the relative virtue of protection and low tariff. But the average voter would take prompt notice of any specific tariff rate which seemed to threaten the BY MARK SULLIVAN. HERE must be a fair number of persons in America who would like to see this tariff debate turn on the main question— whether, at this time and un-| der present conditions, a pretty high protective policy is good for the United States. A few persons, perhaps, naively assume that is what the debate is about. | BY GREGORY HANKIN. HE general opinfon prevails that the decision of the Supreme Court in the O'Fallon case will | | there are some, perhaps many, railroads 5 Isc- the ultimate value of which should be | where for his peace-time work . | placed far below the sum necessary for | in behalf of good relations bc- reproduction. But Congress has di- i tween Chile and the United States. i diately aff rected that values shall be fixed upon ‘This Senor Don CBI’]DS(G. Di;\'flav is el "”r" "1‘ ,‘““‘W‘;':cons|dcrauon of present costs along with | just a hard-working newspaper man, tation rates. The ultimate ef- |y other pertinent facts; and this man- | with the lust for activity of the born fect of the decision remains, for the | Trortcrs froratthiyat vl Rin waRA i | date must be obeyed.” present, a problem for mere conjectur(‘“ The view lakn?l by the minority on | carver of a considerable power for him- self by his own exertions. 8nd speculation. {the court's opinion seems to be that Mr. Justice Stone, in his dissenting | (i CONTES SRAMER SCEER B o0 | Like many a North American sim- | it became clear that if he were to be entirely pleased he was to be sent to Washington. 1 So here he is in Washington. He has brought with him to Wash- | tngton one of the handsomest and most | interesting women in the whole diplo- | matic corps. Senora de Davila, besides | being & woman of personality and of | great. dignity and grace of manner, is a painter of some distinction. Since his coming to Washington—and | in part a factor in his choice—Davila | has taken an important part in one of | the great international events of our inlon, estimated that the decision, if | ven effect in all cases, would result in | 1alsing the valuation of the railroads | some $21,000,000,000. Other estimates | g\u a maximum increase of about 10,000,000,000. These increases, how- ete?, will not be due entirely to the | D'Yailon decision. The present primary | valuation of about $21,000,000,000 is | Sased on a valuation of properties ac- Quired before 1914 and additions to the &ll'oprrhes up to June 30, 1919. With e gradual retirement of those prop- ertles and their replacement by new plants, roads and equipments, the origi- nal costs and the reproduction costs will gradually converge to the same figure. ‘Valuation Work Little Affected. Mhe valuation work already accom- pilshed by the commission is little af- fected by the O'Fallon decision. It has been suggested that since the O'Fallon decision was directed against the meth- ods of valuation adopted by the com- fhission, the tremendous amount of val- uation work already done will be | scrapped. The O'Fallon decision will | have no such effect. Thus far the com- | mission has expended over $34,000,000 | in valuation work, of which only about $10,000 is attributable to the O'Fallon. Furthermore, the O'Fallon is the only raliroad against which a recapture order | has been issued. Part of the costs of valuation are ap- plied to lands. This is unaffected by the decision. The greater part of the valuation work of the commission was spent mainly in gathering inventories and inventory changes between 1914 and 1919. These are not yet out of date. Furthermore, whether the O'Fal- lon decision had resulted in favor of the commission or, as happened, against it, the commission would have been obliged to gather these data in accordance with the provisions of sectioh 19 (a) of the interstate commerce act. Part of the costs already incurred prepared the way for a cumulative in- ventory of the railroad’s properties as of December 31, 1927, which will serve as a new valuation base for rate mak- ing and recapture purposes. That, of course, has likewise not been affected by the O’Fallon decision. ‘The commission will thus utilize all the data it has gathered for the purpose of arriving at the aggregate values of the railroads in order to carry into ef- fect the policy adopted by Congress in the transportation act of 1920. But it will have to give consideration to the reproduction cost theory in accordance with the O'Fallon decision. Policy of Recapture. In 1920, when the period of Govern- ment control ended, and the railroad properties were turned back to private control, Congress embarked upon a new policy which may be summarized in the following three-fold object: (1) To prescribe a basis of return which would give assurance to investors; (2) to make the return fairly certain, to secure for the public a lower capital charge than would otherwise be neces- sary, and (3) to require those carriers which under a given body of rates would earn more than a fair return to pay part of the excess to the Gov- ernment, so that it might be used to help the weaker carriers and thus help to maintain the general system of tion, and to retain the re- mainder of the excess earnings as a Teserve fund, to be used only for spe- offic purposes, as prescribed in the ition act. ‘To carry this policy into effect Con- %fllremd the commission to de- e the value of the railroads, and that in doing so it “shall give due consideration to all elements of value Tecognized by the law of the land for rate- purposes, and shall give to the property investment account of the carriers only that consideration which under such law it is entitled to in establishing values for rate-making purposes.” provision was enacted, the reproduction cost of the railroad properties hout the country was about $40,000,000,000, whereas the property investment ac- count was only about $19,000,000,000. Immediately the question arose, What theory of valuation was the commis- sion going to use? The original cost, prudent investment, the reproduction cost theory, and other theories of value suggested themselves. Each of the| theories is based on considerations | which are important elements in deter- | mining the value of an operating rail- road system. Each of these, however, has its objectionable features when ap- | plied to determine the value of a rail- lx‘v'g in relation to all other economic acts. In arriving at the value of the O'Fal- lon Railway properties, the commission did not adopt any one of these theories. It emphatically rejected the reproduc- tion cost theory, having characterized it as “Inconsistent with any sound con- ceptjon of justice,” and as economicaily unsound. It leaned strongly toward the prudent investment theory as mak- ing for stability of investment and as providing a fixed rate base. The commission arrived at its own “synthetic” value of the O'Fallon’s properties as follows: (1) It determined the reproduction cost, less depreciation | at pre-war prices of the property ac- ired prior to June 30, 1914: (2) to this it added the actual costs from July 1, 1914, to June 30, 1919, in excess of reproduction cost at 1914 prices; (3) to this was added an amount for work- ing capital; (4) an allowance for land at the present value; (5) about 5 per) cent for intangibles, such as going con- cern value, and (6) for each of the re- capture periods there was added the | actual investment in additions and im- provements, less retirements, subse- | quent to June 30, 1919. ‘The O'Fallon complained that the eommisison merely used a “formula,” to which it subjected the valuation of the railroad properties without exercising judgment or giving due consideration to the relevant facts, and especially to she reproduction costs, The commission | n its report stated that it had not used any “formula,” but that “It considered and weighed carefully, | in the light of its own knowledge and experience, each fact, cirumstance and | condition, called to its attention on behalf of the carrier.” In fairness to the carriers, it must be stated, that the commission did arrive at @ formula in the making of the valu- ation. On the other hand, in fairness %o the commission’s efforts under the valuation provisions, it must be observed that the adoption of a “formula” is not inconsistent with the use of judgment in arriving at the valuation of the prop- erties, provided, of course, the formula is not so rigid as to exclude from con- sideration relevant facts which bear on the values of the properties. Reproduction Costs Considered. The railroad maintained, however, that the reproduction costs should be given substantial consideration, and this was also the decision of the Supreme Court. The court did not say, however, that reproduction costs must govern | may be declared sideration must be given to reproduction costs. Justice Stone, in his dissenting opinfon, refutes the majority view that’ the commission gave no consideration | to reproduction costs, and regards the | expression of the majority as meaning that the commission should have ziven greater consideration to the reproduc- | tion costs than it actually did give. He therefore concluded: “T should not have supposed that we could rightly set aside the present order without some consideration of the pro- bative value of the evidence of reproduc- tlon costs, which the commisison dis- cussed at length in its report.” If that is the effect of the majority opinion, then it raises many difficultics of administrative law, and, in addition, greatly increases the task of the com- mission. Justice Brandlels, in his dissenting opinion, took the position that while the act requires the commission to consider reproduction costs. it does not require it “to give evidence of reconstruction costs & mechanical effect or artificial weight.” In reviewing the statutes em- powering commissions to find facts, he “h “Statutes have sometimes limited the weight or effect of evidence. They have often created rebuttable presumptions and have shifted the burden of proof. But no instance has been found where under our law a fact-finding body has been required to give to evidence an effect which it does not inherently pos- sess. Proof implies persuasion. To com- pel the human mind to infer in any respect that which observation and logic tells us is not true interferes with the process of reasoning of the fact- finding body. It would be a departure from the unbroken practice to require an artificial legal conviction where no | real conviction exists.” i And in reviewing the decisions of the Supreme Court on that question, he pointed out that while the court has in the past set aside orders because they were entered without evidence, or because matters considered were not in the record, or because the commission excluded facts which it should have considered, there was no case in which the court has set aside an order of the commission, because it failed to give effect to evidence which to the court seemed to be of probative force, or on the ground that the commission had drawn from the evidence an inference or conclusion deemed by the court to be erroneous; that, on the contrary, findings of the commission involving the appreciation or effect of evidence have been treated with the deference due to a tribunal “appointed by law and informed by experience.” Delay in Effectiveness. ‘The St. Louis & O'Fallon Railway did not score a complete victory in the case. In its argument before the Su- preme Court it maintained that the recapture provisions were not applica- ble until there has been a valuation of all the railroads and until uniform transportation rates have been estab- lished throughout the country, or for groups of carriers. The Supreme Court {\lem with the commission on this ques- on. Had the recapture provisions in the transportation act been held not ap- plicable until uniform rates had been instituted, that probably would have delayed their effectiveness indefinitely. And had the commission not adopted its policy of awaiting the decision of the Supreme Court in a test case be- fore issuing further recapture orders, much labor would have been lost, and the revised recapture orders would have been proportionately delayed. As it is, the delay in the effectiveness of the recapture provision on account of the O'Fallon decision will not be serfous. On the other hand, it is evident that the amounts of recapture will be con- siderably diminished. The commission will have to devise practical means for making annual re- production cost valuations of all the railroads, In the arguments before the Supreme Court the commission urged that, unless it is permitted to adopt & synthetic method of valuation, the task of putting the policy of Congress into effect would become too burden- some and doubtful of practical achieve- ment. This was also the view of Mr. Justice Brandels in his dissenting opinion with reference to the task of making an annual valuation on the basis of reproduction costs, less de- preciation (both physical and func- tional). ‘The O'Fallon decision requiring the commission to give due consideration to the reproduction costs of each re- capture period will undoubtedly in- crease the work and expense of valua- tlon. To what extent cannot now be foretold. Effect of Further Legislation. ‘What would be the effect of further legislation approving the commission’s method of valuation used in the O'Fal- lon case? This question is suggested by the holding in the decision that the commission did not follow the mandates of Congress. When the O'Fallon argued that the commission’s order was confiscatory, because the earnings’allowed (without the reserve fund) did not constitute a fair return on its properties, the Dis- trict Court held that the O'Fallon had no cause for complaint, because its earnings (including the reserve fund) amounted to more than 6 per cent on the basis of the O'Fallon’s own valua- tion. The Supreme Court rejected this view of the District Court. It held in effect that this was not a question of confiscation but a question whether the commission exceeded its authority and thus attempted to deprive the O'Fallon of x;oney which Congress permitted it ecp. Should Congress, by further legisla- tion, ratity the method of valuation used by the Interstate Commerce Com- mission, then the question of confisca- tion would be a proper one for the courts, and in that case the view| adopted by the District Court might be followed. "Such a ratification, however, unconstitutional in cases where the carrier's earnings (in- cluding the reserve fund) are not equal to 6 per cent on the basis of such a valuation, . Justice for District Lies in Getting Vote (Continued From First Page.) nies by the British Parliament, which provoked and justified rebellion, pre- sents a partial analogy. But that domi- nation had one redeeming feature which this one lacks. It applied impartially | to all the colonies, thus afficting the | whole country with a common griev- ance. In the instant situation a single city, possessing one two-hundred-and- fiftienth of the whole population, has neither voice nor vote in the choice of valuatio=s, or that they must be given dominsnt’ consideration. Mr. Justice *McReynolds, in delivering the opion of the court, said: “The welght to be accorded thereto 1 2ot the mater before ua o dont dect its rulers or in the disposition of its ! had to get a job. flarly placed, he paid his own way through college, gained the right to practice law, and opened an office filled with law books, chatrs and hopes— but empty of clients. To pay for the books and the chairs and to sustain the hopes, at length, he He got it on the staff of El Mercurio—the oldest paper in South America—and then, in find- ing the job, for the first time found himself. ‘That was only sixteen years ago. Davila is still a young man. Indeed. the government of Chile today is mostly in the hands of young men. The min- ister of forelgn affairs is only 35. Within four years Davila had been everything for El Mercurio, from police reporter to feature writer. But his alert mind had not been contented with the job in hand. It was alway. ‘Already there were a few in Chile who speculated about North American ways, who had begun to wonder wheth- er Chile must learn everything from Southern Europe or whether perhaps Northern Europe and Northern Amer- ica might not also have something that would be useful Davila was one of these. He began studying the American press. great amount of news which is cabled fo @ large South American paper. In two years he was promoted to be what they call in Santiago “general secretary of the editorial department” of & paper. A hard-boiled managing editor would scarcely Tecognize himself under that flowery name, but such Davila actually has become—plus & little dash of being an editor-in-chief. Difference in Papers. ‘More and more, now, he could follow his idea of producing @ paper upon North American instead of European lines. Any one who has read European papers will know at once what the dif- ference is. Advertisements on the front page; long-winded essays and general articles where the American finds his snappy news; political editors instead of political news; “inspired” articles in- stead of impersonal narratives of events; a policy of regarding s paper as the mouthplece of certain persons or parties rather than as a business institution like any other—these and other methods differentiate the papers of European countries from those of North America. In La Nacion he began to get hi chance to turn along the North Ameri- can newspaper road. A Gl page was started and put into the hénds of an artist. Sports and financial sections were added. Cabled news took the place of essays on politics. La Nacion blossomed into being a full- stand the term. And it blossomed so beautifully that other papers followed suit. Davilla had introduced North American journalistic methods into ile. So he took the next step and founded Los Tiempos (The Times), the first tabloid in South America. As so often happens under similar circumstances with us also, the build- ing of & paper into a profitable busi- ness by acquiring large numbers of readers meant the acquisition by its owner of a certain political power. Davilla had now become a personal force in the public life of Chile. ‘We have just seen that Davila intro- duced modern American journalism into Chile. But he was not by any BY HENRY W. BUNN. THE BRITISH EMPIRE.—Archibald Philip Primrose, by inheritance fifth ear] of Rosebery in the Scottish peer- age and in 1911 created Earl of Mid- lothian in the peerage of the United Kingdom, is dead at 82. It is pecullar- ly difficult to estimate him. His politi- cal career up to his brief premiership 1894-95) was exceedingly brilliant and successful, but on his retirement as premier he fairly passed out of the political picture. In 1896 he relinquished the leadership of the Liberal party, and he never made a serious effort to re- cover it. To adapt a famous Roman saying, he would pass down in history as uniquely qualified for the premiership had be never been premier. He was singularly handsome, of ingratiating manners, witty and eloquent; perhaps the best speaker of his time. He en- deared himself to the masses by warm advocacy of measures to ameliorate their condition, and by a happy settle- ment of a coal miners’ strike. His general popularity was not lessened by his passion for horse racing. Being one of the richest men in the kingdom, he entertained magnificently, and he was an ideal host. He owned some 25,000 acres in Scotland and 8,000 in England, and was the most popular of landlords, constant in offices of kind- ness to his tenant. As perhaps the most important champion of liberal im- perialism, he at once strengthed his own party and conciliated the Con- servatives. ~As foreign minister, he showed extraordinary address, winning the amazed respect of Bismarck himself; he gave a determining lead in several lines of policy, especially with respect to Egypt, Russia and the Far East. His appreciation of the colonles won their love, which was vividly ex- pressed in the course of his trip around the world. His admirable little “Life of Pitt” gained him the respect of the pundits, his appointment to the premier- ship on Gladstone’s retirement was generally acclaimed. But his premiership was a failure; almost fantastically so. In Asquith's famous phrase, his government, merely “plowed the sands.” It was only partly his fault, for he was shamefully intrigued against from within his own party, previously concealed party di- visions suddenly manifesting themselves explosively; but, of course, the chief cause of the failure must be sought in him. He developed a curious sensitive- ness to criticism; it touched him on the raw. This is partly explainable by insomnia, which may also account for his later lifelong abstinence from pub- lic affairs. But some further explana- tion seems required. Perhaps it is sug- gested by a remark made on him as a lad at Eton by a tutor, the famous William Johnson Cory, “Ionica” Cory, that he “desired the palm without the dast.” He allowed himself to be ter- ribly put out by the pettinesses incident to the business of statesmanship; and really great statesmen are patient. Furthermore, he was chargeable with a good deal of inconsistency. This may be accounted for by aloofness, by in- dolence, by whatever you please ex- most vital affairs. So long as this con- dition is suffered to remain, the fair- ness, the justice and the idstitutions of the American Republic are justly sub- R s SR cept that he was not timid or wobbly. and that he was perfectly honorable. Whatever the cxplanation, it was a Cer a rich Ef:( ok o branching out in imagination to invent different ways of handling the paper.' fledged newspaper as we would under- | to her civilization. | He left El Mercurio to take charge of the foreign service of La Nacion. He was now in charge of all the relatively | means the only innovator. He is one of a group who have brought about for his country one of the most up-to-date governments existing. and yet a gov- ernment whose experimental side seems safely grounded in certain principles already demonstrated in action by the United States itself. To the student of politics the Chilean state of today pre- sents a most interesting picture. Spanish colonies in America, develop- ing their independence after they had thrown off the imperial rule of Spain, like France and like the European states set up since the World War, while adopting the name of “republics” have been influenced almost entir-iy not by the political structures and methods of this_republic but by the traditions of the British parliamentary system. Al- though without the king. they have car- ried on with a premier actually more rtant than the President, whose political life, together with that of the entire cabinet, is in the hands of the parliament. | stability. Chile has now abandoned it. had lasted longer than that of any other single Latin American instrument of the kind, she had observed that in a parliament of 90 members there we: 12 different parties and that ministri rose and fell almost fortnightly. Papers a Great Force. Davila's papers became a force in the establishment of a new constitution, a new republic, modeled along our lines. The new executive department., how- ever, is divorced as far as possible from politics. The President belongs to no political party. The members of his cabinet belong to no political party. So far as the executive is concerned, it is a government very largely of en- gineers and newspaper men. An engineer, for example, is found at the head of public works, as director general of the nationally owned rail- way. And similarly well qualified men | head the various other departments. portunity is presented to a biograph- fcal genius by the personality and ca- reer of Lord Rosebery. Perhaps no | other considerable figure in history has so disappointed expectations, T observed that Lord Rosebery fairly passed out of the political picture upon the fall of his government in 1895. But that is an overstatement. He continued to be one of the most ardent and e fective champions of liberal imperial ism and of closer intra-imperial rela- tions, and on the outbreak of the great | war he aroused himself and literally thrilled the country with his superb speeches; not even Asquith surpassed | him in that role. All the world knows how at 47 his lordship had realized his triple boast; that he would win the Derby, that he would marry the richest heiress in the | realm and that he would be premier. ‘The chief consloations of the Autumn and Winter of his days were reading, authorship, the generous administra- tion of his estates and horse racing. Of his books, perhaps “Napoleon, the Last Phase,” “Lord Randolph Churchill” You Should H him. BY BRUCE ARRIMAN died 20 years before his time. He wi a tremendous worl but work did not * Kk Xk killed Harriman in bed. E N Thinking in business hours a constructive process. Thinking in bed is usually worry. * Kk K One reason why every man should read history is in order that he may know the folly of worry. What w thinking ! * kK Read the History of Rome, Ferrero, i worry of poor Cicero. Wk e Should he follow the dicta i ience and throw in the friends of Caesar, who had shown him so much kindness? 3 Or should he take what to be the safer cour { | with Caesar's assassin | e R How pitifully unimportant all that worry seems to us 2,000 years afterward. * % * A greater man than Cicero lived through a greater period of trial, emed d join (Copyri) It is not a system which makes for | For, though her previous constitution | AMBASSADOR DAVILA | But these are not the only samples | of this modernistic tendency in Chile. It is experimenting in the most amus- ing way with prohibition. Catholic though the country is, Chile has thrown off ecclesiasticlsm and separated church and _state. Totally without an unemployment problem _(for | Chile has too few workers rather than | too many), the government has insti- |tuted & complete system of social in- surance which provides pensions for old age and iliness, retirement funds and at the death of a bread-winner, two years’ salary plus one-fifth of the an- nual wage until the children have grown up. This, the Ambassador says, it is pos- | sible for the government to do because there are no large fortunes nor great extremes of poverty in Chile, only the government itself being singularly rich. And to this fact also he attributes the absence of such extreme radicalism as is found in certain other South Amer- ican countries. Free Public Education. With the separation of church and | state, the government has taken over | the schools and provided free public | education for all. And then it has gone on to take over the hospitals and put them upon a free and public basis. Most significant of all, so far as our own relations with Chile are con- cerned, is the fact that since the gov- | ernment thus has taken over educa- | tion, English has been made the sec- ond language in the public schools, in- stead of French. Davila had played an important role in bringing about the new Chilean state. With the organization of the new government he was, quite natur- ally, to be offered an important post. ‘Would he like to be a member of the cabinet? Of course he was honored, flattered — but — there was something else he had in mind. Ah! Then it was a diplomatic post? How about London? Vrould he care to be Ambassador to St. Davila looked. if possible, even | James? | other. | time—the reconciliation of Chile and Peru. He went at that job as if it were a newspaper assignment. He observed that the boundary commission had spent over 2,000,00 pesos worrying over a piece of dirt which had not delivered into any one's treasury over 400,000 pesos of taxes, and he concluded, there- fore, that there was mostly an emotion at stake. To put it into more diplomatic phraseology, he saw that the whole Tacna-Arica matter was one princi- pally of “national honor” and senti- ment. Obviously, two friends will not quar- rel over an almost empty name unless they thoroughly misunderstand one an- So Davila’s logic proceeded to look toward getting friendly with Peru | and then talking things over. Using his papers to their full force in the direction of Peruvian good un- derstanding, persuading a fellow news- | paper man to go to the Havana confer- ence as delegate in the same spirit, con- sulting with Secretary of State Kellogg, Davila_became a great factor in ths reconciliation. For the first time in 17 years Chile and Peru exchanged Am- | bassadors. A little incident which occurred at the time of that reconciliation might stand as a parable of the just place of the United States in Latin American affairs. Kellogg an Intermediary. Secretary Kellogg had acted as inter- mediary. The great moment had come. ‘The camera men were all there to send across the world photographs of Am- bassador Davila of Chile and Ambassa- dor Velarde of Peru shaking hands with each other. They tried to get Mr. Kel- logg into the picture, like some benig- nant Uncle Sam. But Mr. Kellogg had done his work. He slipped away, out of the picture, and the two South American powers shook hands alone. It is well known in Washington that Davila grealy favored and had some- thing to do with promoting Mr. Hoover's South American tour. It is also well known that he has entertained the hope that the Presi- dent some day will make some sort of declaration of attitude which might be known as “the Hoover Doctrine.” For Davila realizes, as every intelli- gent Latin American realizes, that there is a vast difference between the actual policy of the United States and the policy exaggeratedly attributed to it in many minds. There is room for clarification, and Davila labors to bring that clarification about. And always, on our side, it is neces- sary to remember that Chile is a white country, not an Indian country, and that Latin America is not one country but both South America and Central America and Mexico and the Caribbean and that even South America is not one uniform mass, but differing and es- sentially different countries. It is high time we grasped the separate individu- alities of these countries. Davila represents to us the alertness and the progressiveness of the Chilean temper. And in his incarnation at once as ambassador of diplomacy and as am- bassador of the printed word he wields a decided power in carrying to his peo- ple and through them to other South Americans the fact of which the be- wildered North American would have them be assured: That we are neither materialists, imperialists nor haters of our southern cousins. Such, in his friendly way, will Da- | | | more flattered and honored—but—then | vila do. and “Peel” are the most noteworthy. Perhaps, like Swift, upon a profound study of men and horses, he gave his | voice for horses—certainly one of the | most. interesting and gifted of the Vic- torians. Elections for the Parliament of North- | ern Ireland were held on May 22. The |election campalgn was, if reports are | true, characterized by fisticuffs on the grand scale. The result was a notable victory for the Unionist (conservative) party, considerably increasing its pre- | vious’ parliamentary majority over the other parties combined. Labor was | erushed; ltkewise the prohibition cause. * ok ox GERMANY.—T postpone to next week | the expert's committee (dealing with |the German reparations problem). | Despite certain discouraging develop- . ments of the midweek, late dispatches justify discreet hope of a compromise | agreement within the next few days. Three new motors to replace three of the four out of commission having been hipped from Friedrichshafen and in- Not Worry BARTON. He was Abraham Lincoln. * kX When he was tempted to worry by some trial that seemed over- whelming, he would s “This, too, will pass.” * kX By which he meant t thousand such trials had men in centuries gone by and d passed away. His trial w important enough to make him think. But no trial could be important enough to make him worry. I8l * Kk ok A certain business man faced his board of directors recently. He had done h best—but he had lost them a large sum of money. * kX One of the directors said to hi “You don't seem to be much worried.” * kX He replied: “You gentlemen don’t pay me any money to worry about your busine You pay me to do my best, according to my judgment and conscience. | have done that. To worry would not add one penny to your balance sheet.” * N x Learn this lesson from history: In all the 6,000 years of history worry has accomplished nothing. further comment on the proceedings of | ~ The Story the Week Has Told stalled, the Graf Zeppelin, with four of her five motors functioning; left Cuers, | France, on Thursday and presumably arrived at her Friedrichshafen base | without incident. “A new flight for the | United States must wait upon investi- | gation of the causes of the breakdown | of four motors. * K X % CHINA —Dispatches continue to indicate very strong probability of a clash in the near future between the | forces of the Nanking government and | those of Feng Yu-Hsiang, governor | (really super-tuchun, though the title | “tuchun” has been dropped as un- savory) of the provinces of Honan, Shensi and Kansu. Commenting last week on a report to the effect that the Kwangsi invaders of | Kwangtung province had been repulsed and expulsed, I ventured to suggest that | 'the next dispatch might show the . Kwangsi gentry back on the pearl. | Three days later a dispatch informed us that Kwangsi troops had captured Canton. The next day we were told that the city had not been captured. but was desperately threatened; and the day thereafter that the invaders had been decisively repulsed. e UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.— President Hoover has appointed a na- tional law enforcement commission to investigate defects in respect of law enforcement and judicial procedure, and recommend accordingly. The commission is headed by George W. Wickerham, Attorney General under President Taft. Some notice of the 10 other members of this very impor- tant body seems called for. Newton D. Baker, Secretary of War under President Wilson, is sufficiently :mov;l;i He was born in West Virginia n_1871. Frank J. Losch was born in Buffalo, and has long practiced law in Chicag of whose crime commission he is vice | { | president. Roscoe Pound, a lawyer, was born in Nebraska in 1870, and served his native State in sundry legal capacities from 1880 to 1910. He has been dean of the Harvard Law School since 1916. ‘William I. Grubb was born in Ci cinnati and began the practice of law in Alabama in 1884. Since 1909 he has been Federal judge of the Northern district of Alabama. Monte M. Lemann was born in Louisiana, He is president of the Louisiana Bar Association and a mem- ber of the law faculty of Tulane Uni- versity. ‘Willilam S. Kenyon was born in Ohio and for some years practiced law in Iowa. He has been Assistant Attorney General of the United States and Sen- ator from Iowa. He is now a judge of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals. Kenneth R. Mackintosh was born in Seattle in 1875. He has held a number of judicial offices in the State of Wash- ington, including that of chief jus- tice. He was a classmate of President Hoover at_Stanford. Paul J. McCormich was born in New York City in 1879, graduated from St. Ignatius College, San Francisco, and has_subsequently lived in Cali- * K Xk Your worry will accomplish no more. ht, 1929.) fornia. He is an instructor in the law department of the University of California and since 1924 has been district judge for the Southern dis- trict of California. Henry W. Anderson was born In Vir- six years, But if one sits in the gallery, one real- | izes the discussion is not about that 4t all. Most vividly, if one moves among | the eddying circles of Senators and | Members who are actually making the | bill, one realizes that discussion about | high tariff versus low tariff is almost as remote from this scene as a disputa- | tion about religious modernism or the Nicene Creed. ‘What the debate is really about, what the actual tariff-making is really about, what is actually in the mind of a Sena- tor or Congressman when he is most in earnest—is the tariff rate on specific products raised or made in his State or district. And in ninety-nine cases out | of a hundred his concern is about| whether the rate is high enough to satisfy his constituents. This—and the fact is full of meaning —is practically as true of Democrats as of Republicans. The number of Democrats who be- lieve their tenure on their seats, their hold on the loyalty of their constituents, would be improved by opposing the | principle of protection—the number of such Democrats is so small as to be practically none. On the other hand, the number of Democrats acutely aware that their tel;\ur:‘ ’I:hd':pre‘gdent on their tting a fairly on some one g: mno're commodities—that number of Democrats is so large as to be prac- tically all of them. There are a few, & very few Demo- crats so situated with respect to their constituents that they can feel they do not necessarily endanger their seat by speaking up for the policy of lower tariffs. Even these Democrats hardly feel that they help themselves by stand- ing for the low tariff doctrine. The more accurate description of their posi- tion is likely to be quite different. They do not have in their districts any in- dustry or industries which hold them | responsible for getting (or at the leas for not impending) satisfactory protec- | tive dutles in behalf of these particular industries. Notion of Contest Is Dream. ‘That is the reality of the present tariff debate. The notion that there is a contest on between low tariff advo-| cates and hi tariff advocates is dream that can only be held by some | one far distant from the reality of tariff-making. | It is doubtful if, throughout the | country, there is any considerable group of such dreamers. The average person —and every politiclan knows lhls—-{ | assumes that Washington will make {rates or keep rates that will maintain | | prosperity in the particular business in | |which each person is interested. The average person takes the continuance | of prosperity for granted. The great | bulk of average persons vaguely take it | for granted that the continuance of | stability of the industry out of which he draws profits or wages. And that is what every Senator and every Repre- sentative knows. The country is not interested in anv abstrusenesses about the economic or moral virtues of any tariff theory. So far as groups of citizens are interested at all, they support those who tell them that protection is good. Quite a few groups—notably organized labor—have gone formally and strongly on record in favor of high protection. (Some groups call it “adequate protection.”) But in all the tariff arguments and propaganda that appear on the present writer's desk each morning, or that he hears in Congress, there is never any statement by any group or representa- tive of a group demanding tariff revision downward as a broad policy. Importers Seek Low Tariff. No doubt there is at least one group, the importers in a few seaboard cities, who, in their own self-interest, would like a low tariff. But one does not hear of them in Congress. The present writ- er cannot recall any one in Congress speaking up for the importers. Even if the importers do want a low tariff, they do not constitute any exception to the general rule. The general rule is that there is not in Congress, or in the country, or among the lobbyists or prop- agandists, any group or any formidable spokesman arguing in favor of lower tariffs as a national policy. That is the record as of today. There is no sign that the condition will change during the period of the present debate. If a change comes at all it will probably come from spokesmen of the farmers, Western and Southern. But the change is improbable. The spokesmen of the farmer have already gone on record in favor of protection. They have done so in several ways. In part they—at least the ones in the Senate—have done g0 by voting for the debenture plan, which plan takes pro- tection for granted—and merely de- | mands that the farmer shall, as to all crops, get his share of protection. If one provokes a conversation about the principle of the tariff, one will find many individuals who will say, “Of course, in theory I believe in free trade, but——" Many others will say, “Of course, in theory I believe in a tariff for revenue only, but—" One will find a good many persons who will say, as to the industry of agri- culture, “I think that farming would ultimately become a growing industry and would increase at the expense of other industries, if we would remove from all other industries the artificial aid which we have given them through protection for 40 years, bul » In all cases the qualifying “but” is the same. The phrase in which it is expressed is the same. Always it is “but | we as a nation can’t get off the stilts ginia ‘and has practiced law at Rich- mond since 1898. He served as a special assistant to the Attorney Gen- eral of the United States. Ada L. Comstock was born in Min- | nesota in 1876 and graduated from Smith College. She has been presi- dent of Radcliffe College since 1923. Mr. Wickersham was born in Pitts- burgh and has lived in Pennsylvania and New York. . | It is presumed that in selection of | the members of the commission an open mind with respect to the prohi- bition issue was regarded as a preemi- nent desideratum. Mr. Wickersham is | reputed to be peculiarly impartial. He | is reported to have said in a recent | speech that the Jones law would de- | feat itself. No one of the members | has been a wet or a dry propagandist. ‘ It is said that the membership is fairly representative of the whole coun- | try. ‘Three members are Democrats— namely, Judge Grubb and Mess Baker and Lemann. Three have ha important investigating experience along the lines indicated for the commis- sion—namely, Messrs. Baker and Losch and Dean Pound. Mr. Baker is chair- | j{man of the National Crime Commis- slon. It is understood that the three | Federal judges will not resign from the bench. | On May 20 the Supreme Court of the | United States handed down an ex- | tremely important decision re the suit | of the St. Louls & O'Fallon Railway | to annul an order of the Interstate | Commerce Commission. Very briefly, | the main point in issue was this: Did | or did not the commission, in determin- ing the total value of the property of the carriers employ the methods of valuation contemplated by the trans- portation act of 19202 You see, the | railway rates fixed by the commission are based in each case on the valuation determined by itself—the higher the valuation, the higher the rates. The | court states: “It is impossible to ascertain what will amount to & falr return upon prop- erties devoted to public service without glving consideration to the costs of labor, supplies, etc., at the time the in- vestigation is made. An honest and in- telligent forecast of probably feature values, made upon a view of all the relevant circumstances, is essential. If the highly important element of pres- ent costs is wholly disregarded. such forecast becomes impossible. Estimates ‘(ior fomorrow cannot ignore prices to- ay.” ‘The court finds that, in estimating the value of the St. Louis & O’Fallon Railway, only very minor consideration was given to “reproduction” costs, and that by failing to give much considera- tion in adequate measure the commis- sion “failed to discharge the definite duty imposed by Congress” (in the transportation act). The general im- portance of this decision with reference to rallway rates in the future is suf- ficient’y obvious. It is of important re- mark, however, that Justices Holmes, Stone and Brandeis joined in dissenting opinion against the majority of five. ‘The Mississippl is behaving obstrep- erously again. Col. Theodore Roose- velt, now in Indo-China on a hunting trip, has accepted the offer of the governorship of Porto Rico. * ok kX NOTES.—After all, Edquard Herriot was re-elected mayor of Lyon (which office he has held for 25 years), though only thanks to a plece of almost in- conceivably stupid tactics of his enemies on the municipal councll, the elective body. The business is of importance as the radical Socialist (to which Herriot belongs) and the Socialist proper. A Spnaish royal decree has ordered reopening of the Universities of Madrid, Valladolid and Salamanca, closed some months ago because of outrageous be- haviour of students by way of demon: stration against the dictatorship (prol ably induced by vicious propaganda) Some 10 persons were killed in fights between students and police. Dictator Primo_de Rivera handled the situation with his customary humorous mixture of firmness and clemency. Rodolafo Lanciani, the famous arch- eological expert and writer, is dead at 82. Gen. Machado has beeg, installed as tending to widen the rift between thel ful in insistence upon a high two great French parties of the Left, ! that of any manufacturer. on which we raised ourselve more years ago.” The “stilt” they have |in mind is protection, and something in addition to protection. It is the stils of the high standard of living which | we have in America. Would Lower Living Standard. It is almost universally assumed, and rarely denied, that to remove protection —certainly to remove it suddenly or all at once—would take away the stilt of our higher standard of living. Even per- sons who are willing to contemplate general tariff reduction, admit that the first and immediate consequence would be a lower standard of living than we now have. They admit we should have a pretty trying experience for a consid- erable length of time, even if—and this “if” might be long deferred—we should ultimately be better off without our stiits. The trying experience, so long as it lasted, would be felt by everybody, including the farmer. | However, all this is academic, all theory—and one prefers to get away | from theory. Confining ourseives to a | statement “of existing conditions at | Washington, the clear present fact is that there is no formidable, or even considerable, body of sentiment in America calling for a policy of general tariff reduction in the direction of a tariff for revenue only. There is no such body in the country and there is no such group within Congress. If there were such sentiment in the coun- try, we shculd hear it at the Capitol, and we do not hear it there. ‘When one lone Congressman (from a Georgia district) declared that he believes in free trade, it was an event. Paradoxically, the event was a sensation in the press, becausg of its rarity, and made no impression in Congress, be- cause everybody knew it would amount to nothing. Occasionally—but very occasionally— there is in Congress an exposition of the low tariff point of view. But there is never enough of it to even make a start toward carrying the tariff debates into an old-fashioned discussion of con- trasting economic theories, such as | Congress used to provide in the days | of Walker, Benton, Blaine, Dingley, Clay |and others. Lozier Makes Genuine Speech. | _ Representative Lozier of Missouri last | week made a genuine, throughgoing /low tariff speech, a careful exposition of what he called the fallacies of pro- tection. He enumerated them, in six headings. In support of his view he introduced quotations from the classic ! arguments of English and older Amer- |ican authorities. He referred to and explained the “wage-fund theory” and !the “marginal contribution theory and j other theories of the classic economists. | He quoted Adam Smith and John Stuart I Mill and David A. Wells and sundry liv- ing academic authorities in American i colleges. But he made no impression jon the House and did not alter the course of the tariff debate by a hair's breadth—because he ran head-on against certain beliefs which, whether |sound of not, are now almost w versally held by the masses of vof Representative Lozier made a persua- sive argument that high wages are not caused by protection—at least, not by protection alone. But Mr. Lozier's theory, however worthy in an academic sense, ran into head-on collision with a very hard political fact—the fact that organized labor is about the most vehe- ment and insistent of the American groups that demand a protective tariff and a high one. The testimony that union labor leaders gave in the tariff hearings and their contributions to current tariff propaganda, are as force- tariff as i All of which s not to belittle Repre- sentative Lozier, but merely to picture the facts of the present tariff situation ‘The tariff is being made on the as sumption that protection is a fund: mental American principle. Speeches like Representative Lozier's are as one n a hundred, compared to speeches dealing with specific needs for specific high tariff rates on specific products in specific States and congressional districts. Throughout all circles of American life, belief in protection is so general, 50 nearly universal, that any Congress faithfully reflecting public opinion in general, is sure to write a fairly high President of Cuba for g second term of B e protective tariff, and to be approved for %0 doing.