Evening Star Newspaper, February 8, 1931, Page 27

Editorial Page EDITORIAL SECTION he Sunday Star, Part 2—8 Pages WASHING TON, D. C, SUNDAY MORNING, FEBRUARY 8, 1931. NEW CONGRESS PROMISES MESS OF RI VAL POLITICS Democratic and Republican Leaders Fight Special Session, With Factors Swaying Both Ways. BY MARK SULLIVAN. HEN this session of Congress began on December 1, 1930, & prophetic newspaper head- line said: “Most Bitter Session in Years Is Fore- cast. ‘That the headline has been adequately lived up to is a fairly com- mon judgment. Now the session nears its end. ‘This Congress dies on March 4. Thereafter the new Congress (the one elected No- vember 4, 1930), comes into existence. Its actual sittings will begin either in June (in event of a special session) or certainly and automatically on De- cember 7. And so ancther heidline, looking forward to the new Congress. to the condition that will exist after March 4, again predicts: Sure to Be a Mess. Why should it be “a mess”? To try to put the answer in a sentence would be misleading. But the answer (at least, most of tne answer) will be found in what follows. ‘The new Congress will be an “almost™ Congress. That is, it will be “almost Republican” or “almost Democratic,” depending on how a certain number of deaths and some other accidents turn out. The Republican majority—if there is a Republican majority—will be about two. The Democratic majority (if there is a Democratic majority, as there may be, due to deaths or Re- publican defections) will be about two. This condition exists in both cham- bers. A shifting majority of two in a body of 96 Senators, along with a shifting majority of two in a House of 435 Representatives—that condition, standing alone, is enough to justify the prophetic “sure to be a mess.” His- torically, there has never been any- thing like it. The condition has existed before in one chamber, but never in both simuitaneously. Chance for Democrats. If the Democrats happen to be fa- vored by deaths or other whims of fortune, they will control both cham- bers of Congress, in which case we shall have the whole of Congress dominated by one party—with the presidency in the hands of the other. In another outcome, the Democrats may control one chamber and the Republicans the other—with the two chambers delib- erately practicing mutual obstructive- ness as the almost inevitable conse- quence of normal political behavior. For simplicity’s sake let us consider what is ahead (a part of what is ahead) from the standpoint of one of the two chambers, the House. (Al- though, as I have said, the condition exists in both chambers.) Likewise, for simplicity’s sake, let us survey the situation upon the assumption that the Demccrats will organize and control the House. The Democrats can organize the House if they want to. On the count of the election the figures are: Republieans .. 218 Democrats . 216 Farmer-Labor 1 Upon that count (omitting changes that death may bring) can the Demo- crats organize the House? The answer is, they can, easily. In the first place, they should be able to get the help of that lone Farmer-Labor member. I say this without knowing the present disposition of Representative Paul J. Kvale, who comes from Minnesota. It is obvious, however, that Farmer-Labor Kvale is in a position to become the pleased recipient of agreeable solicita- tions from both the Republicans and the Democrats. Even if the Democrats don't get Mr. Kvale, they can, if they want to, or- ganize the House. Among 218 Repub- licans, 218 men of any sort, there are sure to be one or two or 10 or 20 who can see greater virtue—or perhaps, in some cases, greater personal advantage —in going over to the other side. This sort of thing has happened again and again and yet again. Democrats do it when circumstances are as the present; Republicans do it when the circum- stances are reversed. It was done in 1917 in Wilson's administration when the Democrats were a few short of a majority, but were able to organize the House with the aid of some Republi- cans and Progressives. One of the Pro- gressives, incidentally, came also from Minnesota. His name was Schall, and after voting with the Democrats he turned up with the agreeable per- quisites in the nature of appointment upon the prized Committee on Rules. ' Frequently with Democrats. ‘That Schall knew his political onions s suggested by the fact that he has since gone up in the world and is now Senator from Minnesota. In the Sen- ate he calls himself a Republican—and votes with the Democrats a good deal. Senator Schall is blind, but politically speaking, he sees very well. The net of which is that the Demo- crats can organize the House—if they want to. But do they want to? There went about Washington last month, and into the newspaper dis- patches. announcements that the Democrats, in anticipation of the new | Congress, would caucus on February 28. Thereafter there went about Washing- ton statements that the Democrats would not caucus on February 28, but would postpone their getting together until as late a date as they can post- pone it to, until right upon the eve of the actual sitting of the new Congress. The reason given for the postpone- ment was a good and sufficient one, a motive now general in all circles and deemed to be virtuous; namely, the motive of personal economy. The cau- cus was postponed, so it was said, be- cause the Democratic leaders did not want to put upon their 51 new Repre- sentatives (not members of the present body. but members of the new one) the burden of an extra trip to Washington. “You see,” said Democratic Leader John Gainer to a friend, “we Democrats are poor and these bad times have not left us much money. We are happy and harmonious, but travel is expensive and it costs a lot to come to Washington So we think that we'll give the boys a little more time to save up before call- ing them in.” The author of this report about what Democratic Leader Garner gave as the Teason for postponing the caucus of his arty is the veracious and exceptionally F’rlnk Kent, political correspondent. And it was the same Prank Kent who, exercising his scuteness, added on his own account: “Oh, yes, indeed!” Leaders and Their Reason One infers that Mr. Kent had a satirical smile upon his vivacious coun- tenance as he worte those last three words. One infers, in short, that the Democratic leaders may have had a dif- ferent reason for not wanting that cau- cus on the 28th of this month and for po-lponlnlnu just as long as they can ne_it. It '::“hplor Kent, likewise, who puts in words the presumed deeper reasons for postpone cratic potential Speaker-to-be) Garner —which are the same troubles that descend upon any man in either party, and upon any other man in any walk of life, at the moment when he is about to step across that doorsill, on the outside of which one's Tole is that of carefree critic, but on the inner side of which is the room of responsibility. As Mr. Kent puts it: “The drawbacks of power often make a man wonder why he wanted it. In politics very frequently ambitious men who dream of the satisfaction of am- bition achieved find when they reach their goal more different kinds of trou- ble than they thought existed. Nearly all Presidents have "had that experi- ence. Mr. Hoover could give interest- ing testimony on this point. So, too, can the amiable, able, admirable and astute Democratic leader of the House Mr. John N. Garner of Texas. * * * As the carefree leader of the minority, Mr. Garner has had a grand time for a good many years. Without responsi- bility and with the Democratic appe- tite for ple dormant, because there was no pie, he has had behind him a united and harmonious party. It has func- tioned without friction ‘and he has given an exhibition of efficient and effective leadership. So great was the majority against him that he has not, of course, got anywhere; but neverthe- less, he provided a good show. Now, however, there is real possibility the Democrats may become the 'majority instead of the minority party. * * * And then ‘Good Old Jack’ would be- come Speaker and the Democrats take over all House committee chairman- ships, which are the key positions and most coveted of House prizes. This possibility would make the caucus of Democratic members of the next House. which Mr. Garner planned for next month, the most interesting held since 1916. That is, it would be interesting if it were held—but it is not going to be held—at least not next month.” Hammering to Be Done. Mr. Kent thinks and many of us with experience of politics think, that the reason the Democratic leaders post- poned that caucus was dread of what may happen whenever those 216 Demo- crats find themselves all inside the walls of one room. In one room, that is, with no Republicans present. If there were some Republicans present everything would be normal and happy. In that case the Democrats would har- moniously unite in hammering the Re- publicans. With no Republicans pres- ent, however, they will hammer each other. That coming caucus of ‘the Democratic members of the new Con- gress—perhaps not literally the first one—but some one—is going to be a second edition of the 1924 Democratic National Convention, when they fought for three weeks, with practically no in- terruption except occasionally for food that would sustain them to fight some more. What will they fight about? The bones of contention (among many) will be, alliteratively, prohibition and pie. I do mot think they will fight about pro- hibition in the first caucus. The Demo- crats are going to succeed, I think, in marching shoulder to shoulder on the prohibition issue up to and through the presidential election of 1932. All Democrats, of all shades and opinion, expect to win that election—and the cohesive power of the expectation of office will hold them together. But some time the Democrats in Con- gress are going to fight gloriously over prohibition. The cleavage among them is deep and stark. Of the 216 Demo- cratic members of the House, slightly over half come from the South or from the border States or from rural sections of Western States—and are very, very dry. Somewhat less than half come from Northern States, chiefly from the large cities (a solid block of 23 from New York City alone), and they are very, very wet. ‘To be sure, there is within the Re- publican party a dry faction and a wet faction. But the Republicans have a way of sinking their differences or patching _them up or compromising them. Democratic Senator Claude Swanson of Virginia says: “The Re- publicans are divided on principles and policies—but united for patronage and perquisites.” Depth of Cleavage. ‘The Democratic cleavage is deep; the looks that pass over the chasm from one side to the other hardly conceal smoldering dislike. Behind each of the factions is a train of bitter mem- ories running back to the 1924 fight between the wet partisans of ex-Gov. Smith and the dry partisans of Willilam G McAdoo Nevertheless, as respects the cleavage on prohibition, the Democrats may manage to get by with- out an explosion until after the 1932 presidential election. As respects ple, however—as respects patronage, perquisites and power, the Democrats are likely to have their fight in the very first caucus. They won't fight over making Garner speaker; that will % through without friction—al: though, doubtless, already Mr. Garner finds himself unpleasantly pulled and hauled. They will certainly fight about the position of floor leader. And about the committee chairmanships there will be not merely one fight, but a Donny- brook Fair of Kilkenny cats. Committee chairmanships, according to custom, go by seniority. On each committee there is already and at -1l times a leading Democrat. So long 73 he is merely the leader of the mino.. y, no commotion arises, for minority lec. ers on committees have no power to speak of. But the instant the Demo- crats become the majority party trouble will break loose in almost as many directions as there are committees. By the seniority rule the Democratic chairman of the Immigration Commit- tee, for example, would be Dickstein, of New York City. Other Democrats, who don't like this prospect, say that Congressman Dickstein always votes against immigration restriction—from | which fact, assuming the fact is cor- | rect, arises discontent among Southern | Democrats, who strongly favor immigra- | tion restriction. The Democratic chair- man of the committee having charge of the District of Columbia would be another New York City and Tammany member, Christopher D. Sullivan—and southern Democrats don’t like that. Northern Leaders’ Grievances. On the other hand, Northern Demo- cratic members have their own griev- ances against the Southern ones. Most of the Northern Democratic members are new, and, therefore, at the bottom of the list on committees. Since the South follows the useful practice (use- ful from the point of view of the coun- try as well as of the party) of re-elect- ing their members, the bulk of the com- mittee chairmanships will go to the South. Texas alone would get six chair- manships, four of them quite impor- tant And Texas would have also the sp-akership. Two quite important committee chairmanships, Military Af- fairs and Ways and Means, as well as Census also, would go to the compara- tively small State of Mississippi. In addition to complaints against geo- cal distribution, there are argu- a’a‘. some of them. quite sound, based » - Famous Blunders Recalled Maj. Gen. Butler’s Case but One of Many Where Slips Have Brought Censure Upon Authors. LEFT TO RIGHT: MAJ. GEN. SMEDLEY D. BUTLER, REAR ADMIRAL WILLIAM S, SIMS, REAR ADMIRAL T. P. MAGRUDER AND BRIG. GEN. ‘WILLIAM MITCHELL. BY JOHN WALKER HARRINGTON. ESIDES Maj. Gen. Smedley D. Butler, whose court-martial for an alleged indiscreet speech ap- proaches, many other officers of the Army and Navy and even high diplomats have found themselves in hot water for unwise remarks. That voluble and gallant soldier who is ac- cused of making a slurring remark con- cerning Premier Mussolini of Italy is only one of a long line whose slips of tongue or pen have brought censure upon themselves. An after-dinner speech. a jest in pri- vate conversation, a hastily written con- fidential note, even garbled accounts of casual remarks, have led to interna- tional complications. Oddly, diplomats of long training and experience are on the list. Army and Navy officers, attached, as | they often are, to embassies, have much the same status as have accredited en- voys. This applies especially to naval men, whose official visits to foreign ports are so often akin to diplomatic missions. American history is marked by many maladroit steps in our rela- tions with other powers, and not all of them are chargeable to this country. Spanish Envoy Blundered. One of the earliest of such indiscre- tions was that of Count d'Aranda, who was Spanish Ambassador at Paris dur- ing the American Revolution. Said he: “The independence of the English col- onies has been recognized. It is for me a subject of grief and fear. From the beginning France has acted against her true interests in encouraging and supporting this independence, and so I have often declared to the ministers of that nation.” to this country as a pigmy republic, which would one day be a colossus, and with prophetic view saw it the cause of his country losing her posses- sions in the Western World. His main indiscretion was in letting his remarks become public, as to them may be traced many misunderstandings which came long after his death. John W. Foster recalled in his “His- tory of American Diplomacy” that in the early days of the Republci the re- call was requested of three British Ministers, one French, one Spanish and | one Russian. Of these probably the cne who made himself most unacceptable was Ed- mond C. Genet, first Minister from France to the United States. He arrived here when Washington was Psesident. The French at that time were at war with Great Britain. Genet did not go directly to Philadelphia, then the ton, recruiting privateers to pillage English commerce. Washington regarded such an act -as & violation -of American The Spanish diplomat often referred | National Capital, but landed at Charles- | S. C., where he busied himself | neutrality and issued a proclamation forbidding any one joining in any hos- tilities against a nation with which this country was at peace. ‘Washington Asked Recall. ‘The behavior of “Citizen” Genet when he was received by Washington was regarded as overbearing and offen- sive. When Thomas Jefferson quoted to him passages of international law as defined by the distinguished Swiss jurist, Vattel, the “Citizen” sneeringly replied that they were mere “diplo- matic subleties” or “aphorisms of Vai tel and other: ‘Washington asked for the “Citizen’s” recall and France retaliated by asking for the recall of the American Minister to Paris, who had made scathing re- marks about Genet. Out of this situation came a slogan which is credited with having kept this country and France at variance for several years, and from 1798 to 1800 in a state of limited war. It was “millions for defense, but not a cent for tribute.” The sentence is commonly attributed to Charles C. Pinckney, who, with Elbridge Gerry and John Marshall, was on a special mission to France. It was inti- mated to them by emissaries of Talley- rand, then French minister of foreign affairs, that a good deal of money ought to be paid before thé resentment | toward the, course of President Adams could be removed. The suggestion was repulsed with the reply, “No, no, not & sixpense,” although the envoys did offer to see what they could do about get- ting a loan from the United States for the French Directory, then in power. Pinckney Utterance Questioned. John Bassett Moore, authority on in- ternational law, maintains that the ex- pression about millions for defense, which so closely resembles a phrase used by Jefferson in refusing to bribe the Barbary wers to keep their piratical hands off American commerce, was never uttered by Pinckney. The sentiment, he declares was a toast given at a public dinner to John Marshall in Philadelphia on his return from France. In its dramatic form it spread in the American press and then to France, where it stirred up anger. Another bit of literature which added fuel to the flames was an ode referring to “base Galli written by Je h Story, afterward ssociate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, calling on Harvard College, where he was just finishing his studies, to take up arms against France. A youthful and rather extravagant composition was the poem, but it pursued its author even when he had won fame as a Jurist. Social etiquette and matters of prece- dence_at state dinners disturbed diplo- (Continued on Fourth Page.) Great Leader of Women Susan B. Anthony’s Life Great Inspiration in Fight for Recognition of Equal Rights Principle. BY ANNA E. HENALEY. EW leaders of reform movements were so fortunate in getting the right start as was Susan B. An- thony. Miss Anthony was born among the Berkshire Hills of Massachusetts, Pebruary 15, 1820, with the spirit of a reformer and in an atmosphere of pro- gressive thought. She was more fortu- nate than most reformers, too, in the choice of location on this earth. The beautiful Berkshires even now lure tired folks for recuperation in their ‘“deep silences,” and many a writer and think- er still finds inspiration at the foot of old Greylock. For six years that mountain peak, like a martyr's crown, left its silent impress @pon the mind of the child destined to lift civilization one notch higher in the ever-ascending scale and become the “woman of the ages.” 'Susln B. Anthony was born in a home where love of the quiet, Quaker variety Teigned supreme. Although some of the staid men and women of that faith have realized the full mean- ing of self-sacrifice and have lived lives of excessive hardship, their tem- pers have proved equal to the strain and their tongues have spoken no word of bitterness; children are taught les- sons in fortitude early in life. Susan B. Anthony was a master of an art long since lost to modern civilization, that of letter writing. Her thousands of let- ters were a mine of precious metal, when at the end of a long and success- ful life, her biographer, Ida Husted Harper, took up the task of making the great stateswoman known to posterity. However, her early attempts met the rebuke from her less ambitious sister, Guelma: “Susan, thee writes too much; thee should be more concise.” Took Charge of Children. When 15 years of age Susan was put in charge of the small children of the neighborhood ~ during the Summer months and thus acquired her first ex- perience in teaching. Later she con- ducted & school outside of the home limits for the munificent sum of $2 a week. The more domestic arts were not ignored in her training. The use of the needle was much encouraged by public opinion of that time, and Susan learned to make the infinitesimal stitches used in hemming ruffies on the shirt bosoms of men and the dainty lingerie of wom- en; a sample is still in existence made by her at the age of 11 years and a bed quiit still survives in which the pleces are sewn together with stitches so small as _to be hardly discernable. Indesd, to the end of her long life of 86 years, she took pride in hemming Pt SR ——— on the ground that some of the Demo- crats who, through the seniority rule, will happen to come to committee chairmanships, are ill adapted by ex- perience snd temperament to the par- ticular posts. It is going to be difficult, however, for the Democratic leaders to tell that to the Democratic chairmen- to-be who are involved. To tell a man he ought to give his chairmanship to some one better equipped is decidedly & controversy-provoking act. net of it all is that the first DeTnh:cnuc caucus will contain a lot of dynamite, y;ln. saying all this we have found some light (though not all) on the question whether there will be a spe- cial session. Obviously, the Democratic leaders want to postpone their respnnsi‘- bility. Obviously, therefore, they don’t want a special session. Certainly the Republican leaders don’t want one. 8o far as leaders can avert it, there will be no special session. But leaders don't have as much power as they used to. towels and dainty articles of wearing apparel. The life of the great leader was a well rounded one, largely because of the lights and shadows that criss- crossed the pathway of the little Quaker maid. The public life of more than 60 years was a matter of knowl- edge to all who kept in touch with pub- lic affairs, but few realized that in addi- tion to that intense activity of conven- tions, lectures, committee meetings, legislative hearings and various other public events, there was a private life of as great intensity in its affectionate nature, love of the beautiful in all forms of nature and a constant longing for the comforts and joys of a real home life. Perhaps the experience that placed Miss Anthony in the class of ex-nurses was that of her nine-week vigil at the bedside of her brother, Daniel R. Anthony of Leavenworth, Kans. A telegram telling her that he had been shot and seriously wounded came as she was ready to deliver one of her convincing addresses at a suffrage con- vention in New York. The message was withheld until after the speech had been delivered and its purpose ac- complished. Then she worked all night putting everything in order and took an early train for her brother's home. Knowing her capability as a nurse, the brother counted the hours until her arrival. Then the instinct of a nurse combined with the love of & sister fought and won one of the most famous battles of medical history. After four weeks of anxious watch- f WOERW OO D 5 * UMDgg woob SUSAN B. ANTHONY. ing, the physician in charge announced that the only way of saving his life was by keeping a constant pressure upon the artery above the wound. This required such delicate handling that the pressure could be applied only by the fingers. ‘The tender-hearted brother Merrit, the loving wife and the capable sister Susan took turns in giv- ing this difficult and tender ministry for five weeks, day and night, without cessation. When the battle with the grim agent of death was over congratulations came from all parts of the country, not only to the public official, whose life had hung in the balance, but to the nurse whose ability, coupled' with an affec- tionate nature, had met the crisis with the slogan, “failure is impossible.” Susan B. Anthony's work as a teach- er was so highly considered that she was called the smartest woman who ever had lived in Canahojarie, where she taught school. Her association with the principal was so uniformly pleasant that 50 years later he invited her to speak to the school over which he was then presiding, on any subject, even woman suffrage. It was during the years of enforced teaching that Miss Anthony came to feel, with such intense indignation, the injustice meted out to woman teachers in the matter of salaries. The women did the same work as the men and sometimes better work but received only one-fourth of the salary paid to the men. When Miss Anthony received $1.50 & week in a small school she was satisfied because it was the usual wage paid in that place. But when she went to a larger school and did the same work as a man and found that he re- ceived four times the amount paid to her, her Quaker blood boiled. From then she began to sound the alarm which never ceased to ring until every woman teacher in the country demanded the same pay for the same work. - It was largely for this reason that she demanded of Davies the right to speak in the New York State Teach- ers’ Convention. When it seemed as if the heavens might fall at her audacity, she stood on the floor for one-half hour, waiting for the assembled man teachers to decide her fate. At last the motion that a woman member of the convention be allowed to speak was adopted and Miss Anthony voiced a sentiment that should have shamed all man teachers into stanch support of her cause. The question un- der discussion was: Why is not the pro- fession of teacher respected as mucg as that of the lawyer, doctor or preacher? She said: “It seems to me that you men fail to comprehend the cause of the disrespect you complain of. Do you not see that 50 long as society says a woman has not brains "enough to be a doctor, lawyer or preacher, but has enough to be a teacher, every man of you who con- descends to teach, tacitly admits before all Israel and the sun that he has no more brains than a woman.” Never again was a woman teacher denied the privilege of speaking in a New York State Teachers' Convention. If Susan B. Anthony were living today it is likely that she would be at a meeting of the Curriculum Commis- sion, urging that the achievements of women be given an appropriate mention in the new text books of the public schools and that the pictures of such women as Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Lucy Stone, Clara Barton and Frances Wil- lard be hung alonside of Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt and other makers of American history on the walls of every school building of the country and she would probably suggest further that some of the school buildings be named after thes: great women. Taught for 15 Years. Miss Anthony taught school for 15 years. At the end of that time she felt that she had become strong enough to respond to the call for workers from the two great reform movements of the time. d, too, she wanted to try her salls on a larger sea and match her strength with the brave men and women who dared defy the prejudice of public opinion for a cause. Only the many enforced visits into the intimate family life of the American home could have made her understanding soul cry out so pitifully for a greater freedom for women. Among the many struggles toward the ideal of true democracy that will com- pel the attention of students of history in succeeding generations none will be so fascinating as those of woman suf- frage and anti-slavery, the former “car- ried on” for 76 years, while the latter m‘e.rad a p‘e(rlud oldlbmn 250 years of jon. Men and women grew gray in the cause of human treegm then gave way to younger ones, fresh with the spiritual fire that knew no cessation until every slave became free and every woman’s political status changed from subject to citizen. When the saint-like Samuel May re- buked the opponent of antislavery, Willlam Loyd Garrison, for language too hot and strong for the temper of |4 the time by laying his hand on the earnest man's shoulder and saying, “Why, man you are all in fire.” The reply came softly with an_answering rebuke, need to be all in fire, I have mountains of ice all around me to melt.” Susan B. Anthony counted it (Continued on Fourth Page.) ] ALL POLAND Territory Taken as BY FRANK H. SIMONDS. ARSAW.—In the German mind the present mo- ment one issue outweighs all others. For all Germans the supreme question is that of revision of the peace treaties. More- over, while this demand for revision is threefold, and relates to reparations, disarmament and frontiers, what counts most is the matter of frontiers. Peace to the whole German peoples is condi- tioned primarily upon the recovery by the Reich of most, if not all, of the tér- ritories lost to Poland, with the Corridor and Upper Silesia as the irreducible minimum. But is such recovery possible this side of a new war? Is there the smallest prospect that Poland, either on her own initiative or under pressure from the rest of the world—from France pri- marily, and from Britain and the United States less directly—will consent to any such sacrifice in the interests of European peace and more immediately in her own interests, menaced as she patently is alike by German and bol- shevist dangers? In the search for an answer to this question I came from Berlin to War- saw. During three weeks I have talked with the leaders of all departments of Polish life, political, military, indus- trial and jous c. I have “bliz- zarded” through the Polish Corridor, visiting cities, villages, private houses, I have stayed in Danzig to hear the tragic story of the Germans of the Free City, I have journeyed to Gdynia to see the development of that “boom city,” which has risen in five years from a fishing village of 300 inhabitants to a town of 45,000, with docks and machin- ery that make it already the best- equipped post of the Baltic and insure that tomorrow it will be a deadly men- ace to Danzig. Will Tell Experiences. Of my experiences in the Polish Cor- ridor I shall speak in another article; in the present I shall try to give the Polish answer to the proposal for terri- torial revision. And that answer is, after all, simple. Poland not only re- fuses to consider any such proposition, but every Pole, without regard to politi- cal party, social eircumstance or mate- rial interest, women as well as men, boys as well as gray-haired burghers, is prepared to go to the front. Of itself, revision seems the easiest and simplest means to abolish the most dangerous of all threats to European peace. To restore to Germany that corridor created by the Versailles treaty fact, the direct consequence of President, Wilson's own decision—thus reuniting East Prussia to the Reich, has for years found support alike in Europe and the United States. The solution assumes a different aspect, however, once it is plain that it 1s to be reached only by a new war. Obviously in a néw war between Germany would have to arm beyond ‘the limits of the treaty of Versailles. And victorious, ‘would ¢ confron iy on’. 2 e 'lnhth:m uNme mufl‘ Pruss . poleon IIT 1870 "after having de- g 2 S g Position of France. Realizing this, {nnce will not per- mit Germany to Hestroy Poland while she stands idly by. ° Beyond Britain, already disturbed over the Sovietbll:"lemce. looks with frigid dis- approbation upon a prospect that would involve inevitably a p‘::lt for- ward push of Soviet frontiers to the Vistula, a wide extension of the area of Bolshevist anarchy, and bring measurably nearer a complete European social breakdown. As to the Polish standpoint, it can be quickly disposed of. The territory that Germany claims constitutes the sole access of a nation of 32,000,000 to the sea. This territory today contains fewer than 250,000 Germans in a total population of 1,250,000. Although it had been Prussian for nearly 150 years before the treaty of Versaiiles, it was Polish for more than 300 years before the first partition. 'To the Pole it is land stolen from him by Frederick the Great and restored to him by Woodrow Wilson. Moreover, the possession of this territory is the symbol of his in- dependence, as the loss was the signal for the extinction of his liberty. The Polish state of mind is, too, affected by a wide range of factors. ‘While, like the German, the Briton and the American, the Pole is suffering from a world-wide economic _ecrisis, even in depression his actual circum- decade and a half ago, when his long- divided nation was the battlefleld g( three empires, that a difficult present seems tolerable by contrast. And he is conscious, as every visitor to ‘Poland must be, of the enormous progress of the recent years, material, economic. New railways have been built, new communications have been created, new cities are rising. Not since Italy after half a century of struggle won stances are so much better than a{all DETERMINED TO HOLD EX-GERMAN AREA Symbol of Nation’s Independence—War Threat Does Not Intimidate. her liberty and unity two generations ago has there been anything to com- pare with the Polish renaissance. Poland Is Enthusiastic. Thus Poland is throbbing with long- repressed energy, enthusiasm, activity. Schools, hospitals, factories are rising everywhere. And the new Poland, suddenly come to life, realizing its dream in a fashion that two decades ago seemed beyond imagination, means to live, is animated by something of the spirit that won the West for the United States and by all the patriotic fervor that realized the Italian Risorgi- mento. Again, this new Poland is already flushed with the sense of victory. The evidences of a century of Russian domination have been swept away over- night, Austrian and Russian Poland bave come together utterly, while in the old German faction, formerly the scene of the most desperate battle to preserve Polish language and customs in the face of Prussian colonization, 10 years of liberty have sufficed to abolish German majorities in many cities, to recover vast areas of expropriated lands, to replace 700,000 Germans by the better part of a million Poles. ‘With a higher birth rate and a lower standard of living, the Polish race is replacing the Germans in all the lands of the east. If at the moment when it was returned to Poland the Corridor, including Danzig, contained something like an equal number of Poles and Ger- mans, today the Poles are nearly three to one, despite the fact-that Danzig still holds out, its solid German ranks unbroken. Time Factor Stressed. Time—the German and Pole alike agree as to this—is working for Poland. “Give us 10 years more and I have no fear,” said Ramon Dmowski, the great Polish statesman. And precisely in the same fashion the passionate outery in Germany for revision is based upon the tragic perception of the daily ebbing of German population, influence, stre: ‘Today the Corridor has already been submerged by the Polish flood, tomor- row Danzig, isolated and overshadowed by Gdynia, may have to surrender. And beyond lies the far greater question of East - Prussia, economically prostrate, strategically indefensible, threatened by an almost inevitable infiltration of the Slavic tide. . Since Poland will fight rather than yleld, the prospect of territorial revision of the treaty of Versailles must be re- ‘moved from the list of possible solutions of the present peace problem in . It must be removed because no one in Europe wants war. Even Germany, for whom peace seems inconceivable with- out the return of the Corridor, is actu- ally dominated by the belief that in some way, peacefully, Poland can be persuaded or compelled to surrender. But the truth is otherwise. Today Po- land has a standing army of 300,000, at the outbreak of war it could mobilize 1,500,000 troops, trained and equipped. And this army would move even to a hopeless war rather than yield an inch t | of Polish territory. ‘What even 4ny one con- cerned over the question of peace itself, is the utter irreconcilability of the two national opinions. Here are two peo- ples, equally eager for peace, equally aware that a new war means ruin for both, uncompromisingly marching along roads that make collision inevitable. Millions Discuss Issue. More than that, in the east of Europe, along the frontiers of Poland and Ger- many, not peace but war actually ex- ists, war carried on by every means save those of arms alone. And the na- tion that today is losing was yesterday and must be again tomorrow the most powerful in Europe. On either side of an imaginary line millions of men and women are with utter fatalism discuss- ing the next war, which cannot be avoided, which will bring mutual ruin, which will involve the destruction not :i{l nrmll%s hbuzm of cities and country- les, which will mean war to utter an- nihilation. v, I do not know of any way it is pos- sible to translate to an American audi- ence, living in assured peace, in confi- dent security, discussing with serene ob- Jectivity such projects as the World Court and the Kellogg pact, the state of mind and the state of fact existing be- tween the Baltic and the Carpathians, the extent to which the minds, the feel- ings, the very lives of men and women are being poisoned by this racial clash, the degree to which daily life is col- :’r:: and dominated by ethnic obses- But one thing emerges clear beyond else: Who talks about territorial revision of the Treaty of Versailles, so far as is affects Poland and Germany, so Xlrlfi; it concerns the Polish Cor- ridor Upper Silesia, talks about war. There is no futility more patent and more unmistakable than the fa- milar thesis of peaceful revision. Far if Germany says “No peace without re- vision,™ Poland replies “No revision without war,” and both mean it. (Copyright, 1931.) Birthdays of 12 Famous Americans In Hall of Fame Fall in February Twelve famous Americans, the larg- est_number of person in the Hall of Fame to be born in the same month, was-aninounced vestorday. by By Habers iced yester Dr. Rol Underwood Johnson, o e Hall of Fame for famous Americans, situated on the campus of New York University. They include two Presi- dents, a general, an explorer, two phi- lanthropists, four educators and two poets. Mark Hopkins was born on Februa: 4, 1802, at Stockbridge, Mass. Uporlz graduation from college he began to practice medicine, but gave it up to take the chair of moral rhflosophy and rhetoric at Willlams College, later be- coming its president. Willlam Tecumseh Sherman was born at Lancaster, Ohio, February 8, 1820. After his graduation from West Point he fought in the Mexican Wi He was commissioned colonel in and major general the following yea Later he was commander of the Army of the Tennessee. In 1866 he became lieutenant general and general three years later. Daniel Boone Was Colonel. Daniel Boone, born in Berks County, Pa., February 11, 1735, achieved fame West ot "he Aileghentep. - He ‘explored west 0! He e: the headwaters of the Tennessee River and the Kentucky River valley and made it possible for pioneers to settle ere because of his work among the Indians. In h,:gohmun he won the rank of colonel. Ny, Peter C('mg;:'l ‘was born g New York City on Fel nryh.u. 179! m.nur a meager school m: ufactare, u%’n‘ . Iron r of the| Coun of the first Atlantic cable com; Il{ndk founded. Cooper Union in pk:gvy/ ork. Abraham Lincoln was born on the 12th of the month, 1809, in Harding ty, Ky. He served four terms in the Illinois Legislature and then en- tered the House of Representatives. A series of debates with Stephen Doug- las precipitated his_election to the gl;:fldency in 1860. In 1863 he issued Emancipatior Proclamation, was l:l-ldm'fid to tne presl:;iency in 1864, en he was assassinated by John Wilkes Booth. s Peabody Began as Clerk. George Peabody was born in Danvers (now Peabody}, Mass, February 18, 1875. After serving as a clerk in sev- eral stores in this country, he became owner of the business of Elisha Riggs. He later established the banking house of George Peabody in England. A promihent educator and president of Wellesley College, Alice Froeman Palmer was born at Colesville, N. Y., February 21, 1855. After graduation from college she became principal of the East Saginaw, Mich.,, High School and non-resident dean of the women's department of the University of Chi- 's chief claim to fame, how- ever, rests in the birth of George Wash- ington on the twenty-second of the month in Westmoreland County, Va. He was a colonel in the French and In- the , com- 4