Evening Star Newspaper, June 19, 1930, Page 28

B—12"' JORNSON ATACK PAETAS “UNFAIY London Treaty Endangers U. S. Defense and Imper- ils Commerce, He Says. | tives obligingly yielded. | Cruisers. f The cruiser is a necessary in | dispensable part of a navy. Great | Britain desires one kind. ‘The United ! States up to the time of the London treaty has desired another kind. Great Britain has many naval bases and nu- | merous large merchant ships capable |of ready transformation into fighting ships. America has few naval bases ( and not one-fourth the merchant ships | available to Britain for naval fighting auxiliaries. The Washington Confer- ence limited the maximum tonnage of cruisers to 10.000 and the size of guns | which might be mounted upon them to 8 inches, and authorized merchant ships | under certain circumstances to carry 6-inch guns. Great Britain in the long | (Continued From First Page) the mildest suggestion of inquiry or for | SOurse of nekotiations suggeeted & (nia] investigation and study was met with | i "8 o6 4™ TR American Navy de- ill-concealed impatience that soon de-|gireq that, up to the total tonnage, Yeloped into downright denunciation.)Great Britain should build such cruisers By many newspapers and advocates it| g she wighed, and the United St Was deemed & sort of les majestie in |ghould nu:fl such cruisers as we deemed any respect to question such a Sacro-|appropriate. The necds of the two na- sanct document, and the endeavor Was| ions admittedly are different, and the made to bludgeon into silence any|gisparity between the two jn naval who had the temerity to speak other-|polec's 4 merchant ships which might Wise than in praise or worship. A pe armed made this difference. Great treaty asserted to be in the holy name | pritain has consistently and pertin of peace and good will among all men, | ciously declined to permit ihe two na- strangely enough, aroused in its advo- | tions to build within the limits of the cates a spirit 'which would brook | fonnage such cruisers as each thought neither question nor opposition; and | pececsary. Finally Great Britain sug- a week ago, over this same radio, the | gecied two categories of cruisers, divid- distinguished Secretary of State, while | g them, in substance, into those car- indulging in platitudinous generalities | yyt o6 inch guns and those carrying | and omitting detailed explanation of |g¥inch guns. Six-inch-gun cruisers are | the treaty, displayed an angry intoler- | of Jittle value to the United States, par- ance toward any who might not agree|tjcyjarly in the matter of protecting with him and all who, under process. | smerican commerce, and the position had been compelled to testify beforé the | of our country nas always been that Senate committees contrary to his View. | the first duty of the Navy is commerce Tt is neither as an opponent of dis-| protection, | The 6-inch-gun cruisers armament nor as a big Navy man that | are, generally speaking, all-sufficient for I am against the London treaty. It iS|Great Britain. The representatives of as an American with the due regard of |our Navy :n Washington at the in- the average American for national|gistence of our Government, and that security and defense, but with the|pn ‘acreement of limitation might be ever-present hope that the nations of | reached, finally reluctantly agreed to an the world will limit and reduce arma- | irreducible minimum of twenty-one 8- ments; it is as a Californian, born|inch-gun cruisers, ,while ~asserting, there and living a long life only there. | nevertheless, that we should have 23. with eyes upon the broad Pacific and Great Britain refused to permit us 23. a firm belief that the Pacific ultimate- | Great Britain refused to permit us 21. 1y will be the theater of world activity; | Ultimately, Great Britain offered to it is as one grown old in public service, | “permit” the United States t6 build 18. to whom the safeguarding of the Na-| Even this under the treaty wa® coupled tion's future is far more ' important | with the condition we could have only than an immediate petty political tri-| 16 during he life of the treaty and 2 umph, that I take issue upon an in- | thereafter. Of course, an equivalent of strument utterly lacking in the con-|g-inch-gun cruisers was offered, but summation of its high-sounding pur-these the great preponderance of naval marines with us, and our representa- | poses, and in_its terms unfair and unjust to the United States. | Pleas Aren’t Reasons. | To say that the London treaty has | the sanction of one man or another; | to plead to the Senate that two of its | members have participated in its ne- gotiations, are to state no reasons for its ratification. Does it relieve our people of what politicians like to_call the crushing burden of taxation? Does it provide, in reality, naval limitation? Does it prevent competition in na building in the future? Does it our Navy parity with that of Great Britain? Does it preserve what we, thought we had achieved in previous | disarmament conferences? Does it | finally give to our country a sufficient | Navy to enable us to protect our sea- | borne commerce in case of difficuity, | and does it accord us adequate national | defense? If it does these things, the treaty should be ratified. If it does| not do these things, then it ought not | to be ratified. And the decision far| transcends in importance our pleasure | in bending to influence and power or our loyalties to personalities. The Washington Conference—Ratios of Navies Then Established. | ‘We are not without past experience | to guide us; and the past humiliating | experience, if it has not taught us| wisdom, should at least have taught! care and caution. In 1922 at Washington a conference | upon naval limitation was held. There | were more panegyrics delivered con-| cerning it and more apostrophes to | peace because of it than have been in- dulged even in respect to the Lon-| don treaty. That we were egregiously fooled then is generally conceded now. As a result of that conference we scrap- ped a part of our Navy, wherein we were far superior to all others. We destroyed actually hundreds of mil- lions of dollars of our taxpayers' prop- erty’ when others did little in compari- son. We did it with high-sounding phrases like we hear today—to limit navies, to prevent forever competition in naval building and in the holy cause of peace. And when the confer- ence had closed. with our cheers, and | some others’ smiles, the American del-| egation, with Mr. Hughes at its head,| wrote of the treaty they then made: | “It is obvious that this agreement | means ultimately an enormous saving | of money and the lifting of a heavy | and unnecessary burden. The treaty | absolutely stops the race in competition in naval armament. At the same time it leaves the relative security of the great naval powers unimpaired.” Cites Washington Conference. Time has demonstrated that the Washington Conference did nothing cf | the sort. It neither lifted any burden | of taxation, nor did it leave the relative | security of the great naval powers un- impaired, and worse still, instead of stopping, it actually started a race in competition in naval armament. And these unpalatable results of the Wash- ington Conference are mnow blithely | stated by the proponents of the London treaty as reasons for its ratification. Exaclly the same unfortunate results that followed the ratification of the ‘Washington treaty will follow in intensi- fled degree the ratification of the Lon- | don tresty. And at the end of the life of the London treaty, we will find our country in still worse position. Our | weakened situation at Rondon, due to the Washington Conference, is the ex- cuse for accepting other provisions that render us weaker still; and in 1935, if | the nations mcet again, and our repre- sentatives adopt the theory apparently adopted by them at London again we must yield to yet unknown and worse | conditions. | At Washington, in 1922, the ratio of the navies of the three great powers in capital ships and accepted in principle for all auxiliary craft, was five for | Great Britain, five for the United States and three for Japan. We then agreed in order that this ratio might be fi and as the price for it, that we would not strengthen our bases in the far Pa- cific. We kept faith. We hoped then that the disadvantage of our lack of naval bases might be offset by our naval superiority accorded by the 5-3 ratio with Japan. Our naval experts then and now are unanimous in the opinion that that ratio is essential for our safety. At London, upon the de- mand of the Japanese, this ratio was destroyed, and Japan was accorded a | ratio of substantially 10 to 7, instead | of 10 to 6; but the United States still | continues to pay the price of the 5-3 | ratio, and still is forbidden to utilize | to the full the bases in the far Pacifit Notwithstanding this 5-3 ratio, Japan demanded at London equality in sub- ive | —VWill Not Crack Sag or Fray —Guaranteed Washable It's the quality INSIDE, with a sti Landers Washade =-ar and wear. Landers is musA more reasonable in the end. Let us make vour next window shades of famous Landers Wash- aae and jearn for yourself the superiority of this shade fabric. Landers is washable, and may be scrubbed time and again with- out detracting from its original lovelin HADE HOOPER & KLES | should be as designated by her. 1! build. At London, Mr. Macdonald never | may be as many as 19 during the | our disadvantage covering many future urdy pyroxiyn coating that makes And NER authorities_hold to be of little conse- quence to the United States. Gives Britain's Geneva Attitude. In 1927 at Geneva the same aftitude was maintained by Great Britain. Great Britain then insisted, as she in- sisted at London, that the klnd‘ of cruisers we should have for our Navy ur Tepresentatives at Geneva thought we ourselves should determine the kind of cruisers within the limitation we might varied in his demands, and we gra- ciously vielded. The question involved is far greater than a mere three or five cruisers, as the case may be. In 1936 the surplus of British and Japanese cruiser strength, counting built and building tonnage over and above the 5—5—3 ratio, will be for Great Britain 87,000 and Japan 44.000. Again we are restricted in the type of cruiser best suited to our need: And if we admit this principle now., we are definitely committed to it at the forthcoming con- ference of 1935 and at the long series of distant future conferences so rosily pictured by Secretary Stimson. At these there will be many American cruisers cut to foreign pattern if we now accept the principle. Moreover, & casual reading of the treaty would lead an unsuspecting person to believe that during the life of the treaty we were to obtain 18 cruisers, as compared with 15 for Great Britain. As stated. we are to have but 16 during the life of the treaty, and when the complicated ramified exceptions to the treaty are unraveled, it develops that the number of this type of cruiser -which the Brit- ish are to have is not 15 at all, but greater part of the life of the treaty. Thus, there are at issue in reality the question of 11 cruisers, 7 American and 4 British, and a principle operating to cruisers, British, American and Japa- nese. Important to England. Accept if you will the minimizing of what is called the cruiser controversy, the fact remains that the question was of sufficient importance for Great, Brit- ain, from first to last and during all these years, to deny us what we de- manded for our protection and was deemed of sufficient importance by Great Britain at London to threaten the collapse of the entire conference. In justification of the violation of American interests in the matter of cruisers, it has been suggested that we had little cruiser tonnage to bargain with, and that a great concession. has been granted us by Japan and Great Britain in “permitting” us to build up to their cruiser strength. Yet an ex- actly parallel situation existed respect- ing our destroyer and submarine ton- nage. We entered the conference with a substantial advantage in both these categories. If it had been a matter for pargaining, we gave away our ad- vantage there without any correspond- ing return in relation to cruisers. If the n_ treaty is carried out as contemplated by its terms. the ratio " & & @ Combat Constipation! . . by eliminating all poisonous waste matter which is allowed to ac- Cumulate in the intestinal tract. HEXASOL Safely Clears the Intestinal Tract of Poisons Due to our mode of living, na- ture is handicapped in keeping the system free of poisons. Constipi tion results when the system is n Tegularly evacusted, Constipation is the forerunner of many serious ilinesses. Do mot allow it to con- nue. Combat_constipation with HEXA- id, pleasant, saline laxa- ieves intestinal stoppage. 60c at All Good Drus Stores “In the New Yellow and Blue Packare” HEXASOL =, Desentaie Saline Laxative Used and Endorsed Since 1904 because of its long service ess. HOP THE EVENING SENATOR HIRAM JOHNSON, —Harris-Ewing Photo. in 1936 for combined cruisers, destroyers and submarines, counting ships built and building, will be 5 for us, 5.7 for Great Britain and 3.6 for Japan. This | is the abandonment of the ratio fixed by the Washington Conference— the | ratio for which we destroyed the world's greatest battleships, sunk hundreds of | millions of the taxpayers' money and | stopped_fortifying our own possessions | in the Pacific. And the destruction of this ratio, in case of difficulty, imperils our seaborne commerce and endangers our national defense. And not only is it an aban- donment of the necessary ratio agreed to at Washington. but it makes of our boasted parity a mere irridescent dream. The Cost of the Treaty. No Saving to Taxpayers. The testimony that has been adduced | demonstrates that if we build up under the London treaty, and, of course, it | is of no use wnatsoever to us unless we | do, it will cost us $1,071,000.000. By some sort of arithmetical legerdemain, it | is constantly asserted by the advocates of the treaty that it results in econom: for us, because figuring first upon how much it would cost us to replace certain battleships, which upon the mere sug- gestion of the countries involved, could | have been eliminated, and then adding | a complete new building program which | doubtless never would have been con- | summated, the treaty devotees reach a | sum almost as great as that rendered | necessary by the treaty itself. The | mode of computation is like the descrip- | tion of his winnings in the inimitable Van Bibber stories of some years ago. Van Bibber at the close of a day of racing announced his winnings to be & | very large amount, and they consisted | of the addition of the sums of the bets | he had intended to make, but none of | which he made, and all of which would | have been lost, and which because not | made he counted as winnings. The fact | is if we enter into this treaty we have got to carry on, and we have got to | spend more than a billion dollars and spend it building in part ships that are | of little benefit to us, and which can- | not adequately perform the proper function for our Navy. ‘ | The “Escape” Clause Precludes Limi- tation, ‘The “escalator” or “escape” clause, of | course, makes a mockery of naval limi- | G- STREET_BETW CLOSING Formerly $1 and traveling...most of and conservative thrifty women will buy “less than cost” prices, BROOKS' COATS 929 H ST.NMW. Awnings Tallored to Your Windows M-Brooks.-Co REMAINING SPRING In Two Clearance Groups 40 ~ 4 Dressy Cloth Coats Smart Silk Coats Trim Sports Coats These are fashion right Spring coats of the types that are so useful for vacatton evenings or blues or tans...there are cape coats, fur: trimmed coats, scarf coats, high tic waistline straightline tation. It provides that if any party to the treaty believes its security de- mands it, it may build additional ship: and the other parties may then do like wise. ‘The greatest contributing cause to limitation of navies is economic neces- sity. In the present situation neither Great Britain nor Japan is in any posi- tion economically to indulge in com- petitive naval building, and we, | fortunately, under no circumstance: wish to indulge in an armament race with any nation. In existing conditions of the great nations of the world there was no excuse for our people yielding the ratios so dearly bought with Japan in 1922, or our right to build the kind of ships we desired, so consistently fought for for eight vears in the past and maintained so vigorously by Presi- dent Coolidge at Geneva in 1927. the will to stop competition that America has, with the power to indulge | in it if America had to, our represent- atives at London, while respecting all others, without difficulty and without rancor, could have maintained our rights, and could have maintained our rights without jeopardizing in the slightest peace or good will. The Papers in the Case Which the Administration Refuses. Much lately has been said about docu- ments related to the negotiation and consummation of the treaty. With studious misrepresentation the facts have been distorted and the simple re- quest for these papers has been paraded in a certain part of the press as an unheard-of and unwarranted pro- cedure. The simple fact is the signers of the treaty themselves made public a document which referred to certain dis- patches and other communications and which contained, in quotation, the re- marks of Premier Macdonald in relation to cruisers and referring to Japan and the British dominions. Of course, when CLAFLIN Optician—Optometrist 922 14th St. N.W. Established 1889 STAR, WASHINGTON, D. C.,. THURSDAY, the proponents thus put in evidence and in the public record this document opponents of the treaty demanded that all the related communications be pro- duced. Parts of them, as confidential communications, were sent to the for- eign relations committee by the State Department and other parts refused as incompatible with the public interest. The remarkable situation is presented. therefore, of those who favor the treaty making public a part of the record and refusing to make public such other | parts as they see fit to designate as| incompatible with the public interest. | Before any treaty can bind this country | the Senate must consent to it. ‘The | Senate is thus made by the Constitution | a part of the treaty-making power. To | deny it the papers and communications | upon which the treaty is negotiated | and finally signed is to deny it the full | information upon which its partner in | treaty-making acted. ' To refuse the | Senate, as in this case, where the coun- try's future security is at stake, what- | ever may be relevant and pertinent is to destroy its coequal power in treaty- | making and relegate it to mere sobordination to the Executive. This | the Constitution does not do. Where | the signers of the treaty use a part and then refuse the remainder there is in the refusal neither justice nor fair. ness nor candor. The statement of the situation and | the attendant circumstances of the re- fusal are illuminating and require no | comment. The Officers of the Navy. ‘The internationalist newspapers, and | those who seek the flattery of other peo- ples by decrying their own, are united now in a dismal chorus of denunciation of naval experts, and yet., while de- nouncing the vast majority, depend upon the small minority for ratification of the London treaty. In his radio ad- dress a week ago the Secretary of State joined this chorus and in staccato tones talked of “fighting men” and ‘“war- riors,” who had before Senate commit- tees answered the questions propounded to them and expressed themselves ad- versely to the treaty. The first rule of good sportsmanship is never to hit a man who can't hit back. Officers of the JUNE 19, 1930. United States Navy cannot personally | respond to the assaults made upon them | by the Secretary of State and the spon- sors of the London treaty, and the ve: fact of the assaults taints the cause in behalf of which they're made. The Sec- retary, however, after voicing his con- tempt of officers generally of the Navy in order to justify his opinion of the treaty, devotes a paragraph in praise of one arrior” and “fighting man” who expresses himself as the Secretary de- sires. It is true that Admiral Pratt, who is about to become the chief of Naval Operations, has expressed himself in favor of the treaty. and it is_equally true that Admirals Wiley. Robison, Hughes, Jones and Coontz, all of whom preceded Pratt as commander in chief of the fleet. and Admiral Chase. wh to succeed him, all expressed thes as against the treaty. For each officer of the United States Navy who took the easier course and agreed with the ad- ‘ministration, at least six, with a courage | | that does them infinite credit. demon- strated the iniquity and inequity of the London treaty. These officers, true to the highest traditions of their service, with full knowledge of the possible con- sequences of their testimony, with the self-sacrificing patriotism that has ever | distinguished the American Navy. dared | to tell the truth One group of these constitutes what is known as the Gen- | eral Board, and they are the duly se- | lected technical adviser of the Govern- ment in all naval matters. They told | |how this London treaty with the in- creased ratio to Japan was a disadvan- | tage to our country, imperiled its sea- | borne commerce and might endanger | our national sectrity, and with abso- | lute unanimity they agree that the | cruisers permitted us by Great Britain | |are insufficient for our naval needs. | Admiral Pratt, it is true, approved. but unfortunately for himself, Pratt is of | record concerning the ratio with Japan, and when he expressed himself in writ- | ing some years after the Washington Conference in 1922, he said, in part: Insists Upon Ratio. “We must insist upon the maintenance ‘ of the ratio established regardless of whatever pleas may be made by an couritry that its particular interests requires special consideration. This w: one of the great points gained at the | lished igood will, accept inferiority in future | the position we fought to gain. last conference. ~We sacrificed our projected battleship strength to gain it. We gave up our position as the coming leading naval power to establish it, and. having made the sacrifice, we should | insist that it be maintained by the | powers party to the treaty which estab- it. Although our assets are greater and our potential strength is| far greater than that of any other single power, our desire to limit arma- ments is well known, as is also our wish to establish economy in the ad ministration of government. These facts | may be played upon in the endeavor to have the United States accept a position which she would be sorry for later. +Pressure may be exerted to make us, in the interests of economy | | | and | naval limitations proposed. But we, when we were strong, accepted equality | with England, and in the case of Japan we scrapped actual ships and dollars and cents, for the sake of the cause of peace and economy, when Japan actual- Iy scrapped nothing except a paper progeam, with the exception of two ships partially constructed. Therefore, we can not and will not, I take it, yield More- | over there is no country, when condi- | tions are analyzed closely and we con- ! sider imports, exports, loans, assets, | trade in general, prestige, size, and so forth, who has a fairer claim to equality with the best, and certainly a prepon- | derance of naval strength in the ratio of 5—3 with any others. ‘ The 3—5 ratio gave Japan ample | strength for defense, and article 19, which preserved tne status quo of | Pacific bases, drew our teeth both in | a defensive and in an offensive sonse, | and really gave Japan a preponderance | in the Eastern Pacific. We have no right now to put the United tes in | a position of inferiority in the matter | of foreign relationships, and as is well | known historically, a countiy’s strength | in international relations bears a direct ratio to its naval strength. The genera- | tions that come after us, if they be good Americans, will not thank us for heving | done it. | Must Not Yield to Pressure. Just ponder these words of the chief witness of the Secretary of State: must insist upon the maintenance, of the ratio, regardless of whatever pfi; may be made. * * * Pressure may exerted to make us, in the interests of economy and good will. accept inferi= ority in future naval limitations pro= ed. * * * We cannot and we will not vield. * * * The 3—5 ratio gave Japan| ample strength for defense, and article 19 (Washington treaty), 'which p served the status quo of Pacific b drew our teeth both in a defensive offensive sense and really gave Japan proponderance in the Eastern Pacifl We have no right now to put the Unite States in a position of inferiority. * The generations that come after us, they be good Americans, will not thy us for naving done . _Ah, Admiral ; some of us (Continued on Psge B-13. ® @ The BROADMOOR Siluer Grill 3601 Connécticut Avenue Try Our Famous Chicken or Steak Dinners Py or choice of Our_Full-Course Dinner or Cold Cuts Dinner One Dollar / / P4 Our “Own-made” Ice Creamd are served here. An ideal place to arrange vour lunch- eons, teas or dinners. Special menus prepared to suit you. Cleveland 6000 for Reservations Washington's Coolest Dining Room with | || neen tickel Salt rm Satisfaction Since 1859 NGsPALACE 810-818 Seventh St. N.W. $1 Sizes printed sleeves, vestees Day. 35 Summer Coats Formerly $10 to $14 Sizes 14 to 46. Colors are black, tan, green, wine, N OuT 300 5 to $49.75 navy and rust. 40 Dresses Formerly $15, $16.50 and $19.75 11 4 Wombat Fur Coats Formerly $59 Sizes for misses and small women. Handsome, serviceable and fashion- able. Georgette, crepe and can- ton crepe. Black, navy, prints and light shades. Dresses Formerly $10 These are designed for the short miss, in sizes 14, 16 and 18, and are won der ful bargains. o $1.00 & $1.50 Silk Hose and Silk-and-Rayon Hose 0dd lots, including sec- onds of full fashioned thread silk hose and seamless silk net, silk- and-rayon and rayon hose. Popular colors. Street Floor $1.50 FULL - FASHIONED SILK HOSE, including silk-to-the-top chif- fon hose and Ifll:le-’wp servlc; weight. Seconds, in assorte | colors 0 39¢ FULL-FASHIONED K HOSE, slight irregulars of $1.50 grade from noted makers. All-silk chiffon @ | and lisle-top service weights.. $1.25 OUTSIZE SILK-AND-RAYON HOSE of beautiful quality. These nrrhrell‘ extra sizes, sut}»,jecwlm slight irregularities, Popular | colors 59c CHILDREN'S SOCKS—25¢ and 35¢ | lisle and rayon half-socks, % socks, | misses’, children’s and women's “whoopee” socks and boys’ golf 15¢ hose; perfects and irregulars. . $1.00 TO $1.50 RAYON UNDER- WEAR—Runproof “Chardonize” and delustered Rayona garments in reg- ular and extra sizes. Gowns, bloom- ers, chemises, step-ins, panties and vests. ‘Tallored and lace 5Q¢ | WOMEN'S DOUBLE EXTRA UNION SUITS for Summer | comfort. Band top, sh tight knees . GHILDREN'S UNION SUITS with | waist attachment. Of white checked nainsook with bloomer knees 9= or atraight legs. Sizes 2 to 12 Street Floor. Broken Lots—500 Men’s Shirt C s"ze' 5 9 14 to 17 This Fridsy selling of Summer shirts includes fancy printed percales and broadcloth shirts. Collar-attached | shirts in many color combinations. Perfects and irregulars. Street Fioor. | 98¢ Window 3 | Shades C Odd lot of olled opaque and Holland shades, slight seconds, with perfect rollers. Reduced for quick selling. EXTRA SIZE WINDOW SHADES, slight seconds of $1.50 and $2.00 grades. Olled opaque and Holland shades, sizes 42, 45 715 and 48 inches. o¢ REMNANTS FLOOR COVERINGS —Certainteed Floortex, printed and inlaid linoleum, lengths 2 to 10 yards, many pieces matched. Square 18 yard ..... C ODD LOTS RUGS — Certainteed Guard Floortex and other kinds— slight seconds. 9x12, 9x10.6 and 9x! 7.6x9 ,$3.80 M4 $2.39 Third Floor No C. D 18 20 Evening Clearance of Ready-to-Wear Reductions So Sensational That Many Lots May Go in a Few Minutes—Be Here | Early! These Are Real, Old-Time Bargains the Best in Many a Long O. D.’s or Will Calls—All Sales Final. 34 Ensemble Suits Formerly $16.50 to $25 Sizes 14 to 38. Covert, tweeds and Snowflake $ Crepe. Silk blouses or novelty shirts. 75 Dark Rayon Dresses Formerly $3 to $5 Sizes 16 to 46, In black, navy and brown. Long or short sleeves. 20 Navy Blue Chinchilla Coats Formerly $10 Double - breasted belted models, sizes 14, 16, 18, 38. These $10 a month from now. 10 Winter Coats Formerly $24 and $29 Sizes 14, 16 and 18. Pur collars of Man c hurian Wolt (dog) and caracul Black, brown and navy. t Frocks voile, batiste, percale, cotton prints, linene and pique. to 17. georgette, flat crepe, crepe and washable 36 to 46. silks, twills and sports fabrics. Black, navy, sports shades. 20 Ensemble ! 16 and 18. Made with silk blouse and wrap- around skirt, Long sleeve models, especially suited for black and tan. SPECIAL REDUCTIONS | 88| 16 to 20, 36 to 52 in frocks of broadcloth, dotted and flowereg House Sleeveless, cap sleeves or short White or contrasting collars, | and bands, | » Second Floor. 60 Summer Dresses Formerly $10 and $12 Bizes 14 to 42, 11 In prints, chiffon, Canton Formerly $15 to $25 In I | Suits Formerly $10 and $12 50 Rayon Dresses Formerly $6 and $7 Sizes ravel. Navy, them are wanted blacks models. Many two or three at these IN ALL SIZES in the lot. SECOND FLOOR. 29c¢, 39c, 49c and 59c Materials Printed Cliffon Vode Rayen Flat Ceepe C Printed Rayon Crepe Plain Colored Voile Printed Batiste Printed Percale Printed Lawn Rayon Satin Printed Dimity 1 to 5-YD. LENGTHS Yard Seamless Sheets “No-Laundry” Tablecloths Slight seconds of excellent | _Size 50x50 in these handsome and quality seamless bleached sheets | Practical cloths that ara easily wiped that will give you superior service. Sligrt soccnds, i whiter §old, eope; n sizes 72x90, 63x ¢ A ndiSo0: Eaeh... s 69(1 TN T N Street Floor Men’s 25¢ BOYS’ Initial C| wasn 4 Handkerchiefs, SUITS c All-white and colored initials, ex- Popilar Mammmmer siyles: i washy cellent imported quality. Not all (|| suits or crash, beach cloth, cham- initials. bray, broadcloth and linene. White, solid colors and cambinations. wl’l?e‘ TO '1:8 “lbl;’nou?—.:loe 5 Sizes 2 to 8. in _sal ns; 1.00 BLOUSES — 3 10 yard lengths; yard....... Se °{':f,: ahx;dlr'd makes fiiu;fi: 5¢ TO 3¢ LACES — Amorted || mocras Slouser=” with atacho Oy o Yo acan e Aty l’; madras blouses, with attached bralds in narrow widths; yd. “~C . Street Fioor Summer $2, $2. V. Hair Hats Toyo Hats P. Brim hats in wonderful variety, smart pokes ‘navy, 1,200 Charming $1.77 Lacy Straws White Felts el Felts 50 and $3 alues and off-the-face m i e h:dde\o—ln black, Children’s Wear $10.98 WHITE DRESSES, 6 of ;hel’r;‘. :n sizes 8, lg, 12 and 14 years, n flat crepe an orgette crepe. Slightly mussed. FNE o C. O. D. or phone orders. All sales final.. $5.98 WHITE ES of silk crepe de chine; long-waisted model with shirred, pleated or ruffied skirt. Sizes 7, 10 and 11 years. Slightly Al 33 98 sales fnal........c..0 .. by 3%9¢ HICKORY WAISTS—Muslin waists for button-on drawers. Taped buttons and side fasteners for sup- porters. Sizes 0 to 14 25¢ yea: 59¢ B, S D SUN SUITS, sizes 24 to 28, 2 to 7 years. Of soft knitted yarn with plain trunks, tops of striped or novelty weave; sun suits with mesh 500 top and suspenders..... Second Floor Corsets | $5.00 NEMO GIRDLES 4 Ne- | mofiex girdles made of broche com- bined with elastic gores over hips, Si: hose mppom: x $2.95 R & G STEP-INS—8 of these $5.00 step-ins made of broche with knitted elast{: inserts over hip- line. Me d'fil m hip. @9 Q5 Lightly bon $3.50 NEMDFLEX CORSEL ETTES of rajon stripe material with elastic over hips; bol over diaphragm and in back. C. O. D. or phone @] Q5 orders; all sales final.. o $400 R & G GIRDLES, closed back style with elastic top, long hips and elastic over $2.95 hipline. Heavily boned - Second Fl e e