Evening Star Newspaper, March 24, 1935, Page 31

DENIAL OF FREE SPEECH SEEN IF ORDER CHANGES America Must Reso rt to Suppression if | Necessary to Prevent Destruction of Rights, Observer Says. BY MARK SULLIVAN. NDER the spell of habit, we continue to think of American politics in the familiar terms of Republican versus Demo- crat, of who will get the Republican presidential nomination next year, of whether Huey Long will have a third party, of whether Gen. Hugh Johnson will next year go back to his native Oklahoma and try to displace the venerable (and admir-| able) Senator Thomas Gore. All that is, under present conditions in America, mere chit-chat. the polit- fcal gossip characteristic of the calm America of the past. What i really fundamental in American politics today is a tug-of-war between two groups of forces and of men, one group pulling us toward a new conception of society and government, the other trying to hold America to our old- time mooring of democracy. In that struggle a test is about to| take place. Yet hardly one person in ten recognizes this test as what it is. Indeed, hardly one in ten realizes the elemental character of the struggle that is on. If democracy is to be pre- | served in America. one of our great | needs is to find writers and speakers having the patience and the particu- lar kind of ability necessary to make | the new kind of issue clear to the people. On Free Speech. The immediate issue, the immediate | test in the larger struggle, can be put | in the form of a paradox: In order to| save free speech, there comes a time when it is necessary to deny free speech. A citizen of Great Britain, Mr. Evelyn John Strachey, apparently a believer in Communism. now lectur- ing in the United States. has been arrested and is threatened with de- portation. The charge is that upon his application for permission to enter | the United States he made false an- swers—presumably the answer that contained falsifications, if one did, failed to reveal Mr. Strachey’s views about organized society. This Strachey | incident is one of many recent ones, all reflecting concern upon the part | of officials and of the people about the | propagation of sentiments which aim at destruction of the existing order of society in the United States and sub- stitution of another Mr. Strachey is defended, and the action of the Government is violently condemned, by those who believe, many of them passionately, in free- dom of speech as an essential, perma- nent and never-to-be-interrupted rule of life and government in the United States. But let us look below the sur- | face. Experiments in Government. There are in the world three con- &picuous new experiments in govern- ment and society: Communism in Russia, Fascism in Italy, Nazi in Ger- many. To think of the three as sepa- rate is a mistake. The three are varying manifestations of one funda- | mental conception. The central fact | to keep our eyes on is that there is | one new conception of government | and society in the world, manifesting | itself in three differing forms in three great countries. This new conception is frankly a challenge to democracy. It is a sub- | stitute for democracy and it under- | takes to destroy democracy. So long | as the new conception lasts, democ- | racy in America is endangered. Our | democracy is endangered not merely through direct propaganda coming from exponents of the new conception in Europe. Democracy is endangered also by temptation on the part of some American minds to imitate the new. Without naming all the character- | istics of the new conception of gov- | ernment, one outstanding and basic | feature of it is necessary for America to consider right now. The new con- | ception of government absolutely ex- | cludes freedom of speech. In Russia | freedom of speech is rigidly sup- | pressed; freedom of speech accom- | panied by a purpose of changing the | government was recently supprmedi in Russia by mass executions directed | by the government. In Germany | there is no pretense of freedom of speech; recently leaders of a minority, dissatisfied with the government, were subjected to a “purge” which | included wholesale executions di- rected by the Nazi government. In Italy likewise there is no pretense of freedom of sbeech; one of Mussolini’s methods of suppression a few years ago consisted of subjecting the free- speaker to forced consumption of large quantities of castor oil. Here, then, is the picture: A new conception of society which denies freedom of speech is attempting to get a foothold in America. The| American system not only permmi but exalts freedom of speech. What | now must America do? We are in danger of succumbing to a concep- tion of government which denies free- dom of speech—and our own wor- shiped freedom of speech handicaps us for defense against the New Deal. To state it in slightly different words, freedom of speech in America is in danger of being lost through sttacks | on the American system of society from advocates of a new system which, once it gets its foothold, will not permit freedom of speech at all. The Way Out. ‘What then is the answer? About that there can be no possible doubt. ‘We cannot permit the freedom of speech, which we prize, to prevent us from safeguarding this very principle. ‘We cannot allow our belief of free- dom of speech to prevent us from re- sisting Introduction of & form of so- ciety which, if it wins in America, will destroy freedom of speech (as well as the independence of the courts and many of our other prized institu- tions). The situation prevents opportunity for abstruse argument by those who deal in dialectic refinements. But as 2 practical matter there need be no hesitation. We cannot permit de- struction of our freedom of speech by invasion from another conception which does not permit freedom of speech. If we are to save our own freedom of speech we must, in this time of conflict, deny freedom of speech to those who wish to destroy our own. The individual rights in- herent in democracy do not include the right to destroy democracy. To express what I have in mind, to carry understanding of the princi- ple involved to the average reader, is not easy. I hope I have succeeded | in being clear. I supplement what I have said by a passage from a particularly enlightened commentator, Mr. Walter Lippmann: “Men may not use the facilities of liberty to impair them. No man may invoke a right in order to destroy it. "The right of free speech belongs to those who are willing to preserve it . . . There is nothing in the princi- ples of democracy which requires a people to surrender democracy or re ieves them of the obligation to de d nd it. . A free nation canm | ica is not clear to many. | clear to me, but I prefer not to befog | ception, tolerate much, and ordinarily tolera- tion is its best defense. It can tol- |erate feeble Communist parties and feeble Fascist parties as long as it is certain that they have no hope of success. But once they cease to be debating socleties and become for- midable organizations for action, they present a challenge which it is sui- cidal to ignore. They use liberty to assemble force to destroy liberty. When that challenge is actually of- fered, when it really exists in the judgment of the sober and the well informed, it is a betrayal of liberty not to defend it (liberty) with all the power that free men possess.” Menace of Communism. Just how great is the present men- ace of Communism to America? To discuss the menace in terms of Com- munism alone is misleading. Let us put the question in broader terms: Just how great is the present men- ace to democracy in America? Just how great is the threat that our American democracy may succumb to one form or another of the new concep- tion of government that is now virile and triumphant in three nations of Europe? The answer is that the menace is very great indeed. What particular form of the new conception consti- tutes the immediate menace to Amer- It seems this article with intricate refinements. Whether, if democracy is destroyed in America, its successor will be Com- munism or Fascism or something like Nazi is not easy to answer. It is not materigl rhat this question should be answered. For us the only question is: Is our democracy threatened? Most certainly it is threatered. If the threat should succeed, the successor to democracy would not be identical with either Communism or Fascism or Naz. When the new conception takes root in any country it does not literally imitate the form it has taken in any other country.” For example, Nazi is similar to Fascism and is undoubtedly inspired oy Fascism—but Nazi is not a literal duplicate of Fascism. In each country the new conception, when it takes hold, is modified by existing conditions. The point I am making is that if the new conception of government takes root in America and supplants democracy, it will not be identical with any of the three forms in Eu- rope. But it will contain all the basic characteristics of the new con- including suppression of freedom of speech. Fascism Seen Successor. My own notion, and the notion of the most thoughtful persons with whom I discuss the matter, is that if democracy is destroyed in America its immediate successor will be Fas- cism. With us, however, Fascism would not last long. Our traditional American suspicion of lodging too much power in what we call “big| business” is such that a new form of society which lodges much power in big business would not last long diate successor would be Fascism— T THE ENTRANCE TO SANTALUCIA PARK IN SANTIAGO, CHILE. BY EDWARD TOMLINSON. ERE is a Nation-wide opinion | that the republics of South | America, with their 80,000,- | | 900 people, are of tremendous | | commercial importance to the | United States. | | Bankers and manufacturers, pro- | fessors and politicians, editorial writ- | ers and radio commentators from the Potomac to Puget Sbund agree | that the trade opportunities in these countries have been inexcusably neglected. Indeed, it is a dull day when tome manufacturing association or Cham- | ber of Commerce is not pointing out and passing resolutions to the effect that since in previous years we were | supreme in the markets of Brazil, Ar-| gentina, Chile, Peru and other na-| tions, and since our yearly sales to the continent have fallen from n.ore than $500,000,000 to less than $200.- 000,000, action ought to be swift and immediate. Meantime the Government itself has embarked upon the policy of re- ciprocal bargaining by which it de- | clares we shall not only be able to | regain our lost southern markets, but shall expand them and even open up new ones, In view of all this enthusiasm. agitation and planning. it might well be pointed out that restrictions which | we ourselves have imposed have al- ready served to close some of the | South American markets to us, while they have reduced us to third and fourth places in others. South American business men themselves chide us about deliberately this rich commercial | abandoning fleld. “ “European countries.” one of them | reminds us. “were the pioneers in | developing the markets of South | America. Long before the beginning | of the present century Great Britain, | Germany and Italy had built rail- | roads, established banks and organ- | with us. 8o I think that if democ- | tina, | racy in America succumbs, its imme- | ized trading companies in Argentina, | Brazil, Chile and Peru. Moreover, | they had connected «ll our important Losing $300,000,000 a Year American Trade With South America Falls and It’s Largely Our Fault—Barriers to Be Surmounted. LOADING COFFEE - BRAZIL SHIP! fact that you exclude our meats,” they say, “but to the manner in which you do it. Instead of putting | a prohibitive tariff upon it, as you | do upon other products, you put an embargo on it. You say to the world, ! ‘Hoof and mouth disease is prevalent | in Argentina’ You publish to tife ! OUR EMBARGO ON AR(C FRESH MEAT IS A SORE POINT. S US THREE-FOURTHS OF HERS, world the statement that ‘Argentine meat is diseased and not fit to eat.' | This despite the fact that your own packing companies operate the largest plants on the Pampa, and that 40.- 000,000 Britons have eaten Argentine | peef for 75 years without one person suffering 1l effects.” HUNGARIANS TO REGAIN LOST GLORY| STRUGGLE People Consider Themselves Central ‘ Europe’s Bulwark Against Tide of Communism. BY RANDOLPH LEIGH. but Fascism would not last more than | geanorts and those of the Old World | Special Dispatch to The Star. a few years and would probably be succeeded by some form of Com- munism. The reader will ask how grave is the danger to America. It is very grave. The menace goes much beyond those incidents in the past when we felt ourselves threatened by mere vocal attacks by such past leaders as Eugene Debs, Emma Goldman and others. The present threat includes much more than the speeches of itinerant lecturers, like Mr. Strachey. Our present menace is not fully meas- ured by the vocal and written advo- cacy of a new conception of govern- ment by our own radical press and by organized groups having consid- erable momentum. Our present me: ace includes the teaching of the at- tractions of the new conception of government in many schools and col- leges. Our present menace includes the presence in the administration, mainly in subordinate yet important positions, of persons who, by their words and their assoclations—to de- | scribe them mildly—can hardly be | depended on to make a valiant strug- | gle to defend democracy. ‘The President’s Part. If we are to be complete and can- did we must say that America's pres- ent menace includes the perhaps unintended consequences of some ac- tions of President Roosevelt. He says he is going to bring about a “new order of things” and a ‘“permanent readjustment of many of our ways of thinking and therefore of mfany of our social and economic arrange- ments.” He may not realize that his “new order of things” and his “per- manent readjustment” implies aban- donment of the form of society America has known, and adoption of the new conception of society that now flourishes in Europe. In yet another way, the danger to the American form-of society includes the presumably unintended conse- quences of President Roosevelt’s ac- tion. If some revolutionist were to inquire what is the best way to bring about the new conception of govern- ment and society in America, the answer would be obvious. It would be: “Make the present order unworkable, keep the depression going.” And this is the direct result of Mr. Roosvelt's putting “reform” and “readjustment” ahead of recovery. But the limited text of this article is: Can we allow free speech in Amer- ica to be used by those whose purpose is to bring about abolition of free speech? The answer is, we cannot. If America is an effete nation, if it has not sufficient vitality, sufficient devotiog, to act in defense of its own form of society, then infallibly that form will succumb to the new con- ception which just now in Europe has so much virility. Muffs Will Be Barred At British Court Fetes s LONDON (#).—Though denying implicitly that the order has any po- litlcal significance, the court cham- berlain at Buckingham Palace has decreed that debutantes and other presentees at the jubilee courts this Spring must no. carry muffs. ‘The Queen, it was explained, “de- sired that muffs not be worn,” but there was a suspicion that Scotlend Yard had a hand in banning the lit- tle fur pieces that have enjoyed a revived popularity this Winter. Persons wearing muffs have their hands concealed, and Scotland Yard does not like persons with concealed hands to mingle with their maj Not even debutantes. ] | with steamship lines. Turn to United States. “Then came the World War. South American buyers, cut off from their accustomed source of supplies, turned | to the United States for their manu- | factures and financial assistance. | “And even though from the moment | the guns became silent on the western | front until the dawn of the great depression the European countries | waged unceasing competition, their | efforts met with little suctess. Our | people had become accustomed to the | products of your factories. | “You had further fortified your posi- tion by opening up credit facilities and | establishing banks in all our large | cities. Indeed, you had not only sup- planted the countries of the Old World commercially, but also financially. “Then, like the Arabs, you suddenly | folded your tents and slipped away. First you cut off every avenue of | credit. Then you began raising pro- hibitive tariffs against South Agerican products, which naturally invited re- taliations from the South American | governments. You stopped buying from us; therefore we were unable to buy | from you. Under the eircumstances, | we cannot be blamed if we have turned once again to our original sources for credit and commercial ex- change. “Of course, recently there has been an improvement in relations between our governments and yours. But con- cessions from us will be slow in ma- terializing unless you yourselves are 4 ready to make very material ones.” | "No matter what theories we may | hold in regard to foreign trade, our share of the South American markets is to be had only by the process of give and take. And in the case of Ar- gentina we shall have to give to a considerable extent. an Argentine diplomat in Washington the other day, invoked the idea that trade, to be profitable, need not be direct. “If you sell your beef and wheat to England,” he said, “England buys cot- ton from us and we sell automobiles to you. That makes the wheels go round, you see. Trade is triangular.” “Yes,” replied the diplomat, “trade may be triangular, but freight is not. If your ships come down loaded with goods we have bought, they must not return home empty or their owners will soon go bankrupt.” Anyhow, the phrase, “We buy from those who buy from us,” is the slogan in Argentina today. Indeed, it is more than a slogan—it is the basis upon which practically all foreign business is carried on. Trade agreements al- ready made with England, Germany, Spain and other countries make it necessary for Argentina to use all the exchange from these countries to pay for their goods and services. Conse- quently, we may expect to be able to increase our trade with the Argentine Republic only in proportion to our purchases from her. Prospect Unpromising. Since this is the case the prospect does not seem promising. First of all, in many respects Argentina and the United States duplicate each other. Each produces wheat, corn, cattle and sheep. And when the wheat and corn growers of the Middle West are strug- gling with huge surpluses we aren’t going to buy grain from the Argen- tine, Nor are the cattle men from ‘the West likely to stand by and permit Argentina steaks to come in and com- pete with theirs. “Of course,” says an Argentine ex- pert, “we know that selling beef to Uncle Sam is out of the question.” Even so, our exclusion, by means of an embargo, of all Argentine fresh meats from the United States is & sore point in commercial relations between the two countries. ¢ “We don't object so much to the A United States Senator. talking to | UDAPEST.—Paradoxical Hun- t gary! It has not a foot of seacoast, yet is ruled by an admiral. Its constitution pro- vides that it shall be a mon- archy and that its King shall be a | Catholic. yet it has no intention of tolerating a King, and its Regent (Admiral Horthy) is a Calvinist. It | is in such desperate straits econom- | ically that it would seem io be an | ideal seedbed for communism, yet | | (having had that malady once) its people are the most violently anti-| Commuist to be found anywhere. |, This is the last and least of the | “punished” nations. and the most out- | spokenly resentful and determined to throw off its chains. The press, the | stage, the people clamor incessantly | | for restoration of its territory (two- | thirds of which was taken away) and | for the preservation of its nationality. | Last night at the opera, for in-| | stance, I witnessed the premiere of | the ballet “The Dance of the Com- | muists,” the music for which was by | Leo Weiner, who won, in 1933, the international musical composition | prize offered by the Elizabeth Sprague | Coolidge Musical Foundation, in | Washington. The Regent and other leaders were present, and the house | was jammed. Hungarians See a Mission. | The greed, the goatishness, the chaos of a civilization turned upside down were portrayed solely by music :nnd pantomime. It was the first time | that I had seen the stage used in just | that way, and it shook me up con- siderably. It also worked powerfully | upon the audience. | Hungarians take themselves and their misslon very seriously. Further- more, they think that theirs is a mission of immense importance ‘to European civilization. They think of themselves as the battered shield which Europe has for centuries held up against the menace of the Orient. Two centuries ago, they say, that menace was the Turk. Today they call it the Slav and bolshevism. Of course, true to the heroic mold, they exaggerate their part in history. ‘The real stemming of the Turkish tide was by the Germans at Vienna, and the largest-scale counter-offensive to Slavic bolshevism was that shortly after the World War by the Franco- Polish army, and more recently by the ideology and firm front of Hitler- ized Germany. Nevertheless, the Hungarians, hav- ing been overrun, or rather taken over, by Communists, rose against them and put them down. That was in 1920, and since then they have been vigor- ously anti-Slavic and very conserva- tive. They have developed a feverish nationalism, surrounded as they are by Slavic enemies and weakened by the pressure of French policy. Three Treaties Cast Shadows. It is hard to say which neighbor they dislike most—Rumania, Yugo- slavia or Czechoslovakia. They have been despoiled in the interest of each of these, and even in the interest of Austria, which was given a small bit of formerly tory in the Trianon treaty. Central Europe lives (or struggles not to die?) under the shadow of three treaties— that of Versailles, of St. Germain and of the Trianon, disposing of Germany, Austria and Hungary in turn. The object of the first was rather simple— namely, to punish Germany, force restitution from her and render her impotent as a world power.. The object of the second was to dispose of Austria and give the entente some additional strength by creating new nations and forces in opposition to her. There must have been some similar object in the arrangement for Hungary, although it is in many ways the most severe and whimsical of the three. ‘The result of these three freaties in one direction, that of languages, is | | amazing. Self-determinism having been one of the keys to the settle- ments under the treaties. we have now between the Baltic and the Black Sea | some 20 linguistic-racial groups where | jnq.ctrv of the United States. there were (in active existence) barely a fourth of that number before the war. There, doubtless. was much hatred and oppression and violence through- out this area in equilibrating these groups under the old system. That, however, I have only read about. But I have been passing through this present-day Babel-world and I can testify to its chaos, its economic end social incongruities, and to its dis- similarity to the millenium, which idealists (with occasional sharp fel- lows of the baser sort at their ears) | sought to create. Treaties Affect 120,000,000, In the nations created by or under restraint of the treaties there ere | fully 120,000,000 people, approximately the population of the United States, with, roughly, less than a third of its territory and not one-tenth of its wealth. Their languages have been multiplied. Their frontiers halt the flow of trade. Their mercurial cur- rencies paralyze initiative. Their only increasing product is hatred. In spite of herculean effort, they seem to keep only a few jumps ahead of actual starvation. In Hungary this situation has fos- | tered a nationalism which puts all local and even economic considerations in the background. Yet where is this stout, tough little nation to find its necessary allies? It seems to rely on Italy and Poland, but from week to week the strength of those alliances fluctuates as the European scene changes, ‘and particularly as Franco- Italian relations vary. A proud, des- perate and in many ways pitiful people! ‘They are a stern people, too. For instance, the government does not give doles to the needy. What is done is done by private charity. At the most a man is given a bed and food for a time. To meet the unemployment situation the government restricts the use of machipery wherever it seems desirable to do so. An incredible number of men harness themselves to small wagons and haul heavy loads of brick, lumber, etc. The work horses look half fed. 50,000 Schools Erected. Yet 50,000 new schools have been built here under the new system, and all the usual trimmings of civilization— theaters, libraries, art galleries, the dansants, etc—are much in evidence, and many largé projects are under “‘;‘o be sure, in the chief art gallery the attendants wear fur coats and fur-lined caps, with heavy ear-flops, just as if they had recently been called in from the steppes and did not in- tend to be caught unprepared by any blizzard which might sweep through the portraits of warm nudes which surround them. But those same shag- gy, rufanly-looking fellows know something about the treasures they are guarding and are willing to _ex- plain them in what sounds like Chi- nese or Patagonian to any American who comes along. Those treasures, by the way, are not all from ancient days or alien lands. Indeed, some of the finest of modern art is to be found here and much of it is Hungarian. Lazzlo, the Hungarian whose portrait work is in great demand in America and Eng- land, has several of his finest works here, including & portrait of the Pope and one of Horthy. Hungary has certain unigue and philosophical electoral regulations. For instance, every man of 24 years and every spinster of 30 must vote. However a married woman of only 20 1s a voter. Does that mean that mat- rimony is the great educational insti- tution for women, or that . wges them 10 years sutomatically? HE SUNDAY STAR, WASHINGTON, D. C., MARCH 24 1935—PART TWO. NTINA'S Our tariff on linseed, or flaxseed, | the oil from which is used in all paints, in the manufacture of linoleum and for many other every- day purposes, operates to our disad- vantage in Argentina, with appar-/| ently little corresponding advantage | at _home. | The United States is the world’s | largest consumer of linseed oil, yet | we grow only about 10 per cent of | what we need. Four-fifths of the | world’s supply is grown on the Pampa. | In 1903 our tariff on raw linseed | was 15 cents a bushel. Under the | Hawley-Smoot tariff the import tax was 65 cents a bushel. And the do- | mestic output of linseed has not ma- terially increased. “This sky-high tariff on linseed,” one of the leading paint manufac- turers told me the other day, “has not only failed to increase the pro- duction of linseed in this country, | but it has destroyed another flourish- ing native industry. All through New Jersey and Eastern Pennsylvania, a few years ago, you could find large | linseed ofl factories and factories for | | utilizing the various by-products. | These are no more. Buy From Competitors. “Instead of buying the raw product | from Argentina,” he said, “thereby preserving home enterprise and at | the same time encouraging profitable | trade with a rich neighbor, we now buy linseed oil from Great Britain | and Holland, our competitors in the Argentine markets. For some reason the tariff on linseed oil is only a fraction of what it is on the raw product.” Such barriers and restrictions and the accompanying retaliations, with | the consequent fall in our exports, | { do not mean that products bearing | Yankee trademarks are no longer found in Argentine shops and stores. | They are, but they are not imported | direct. When sales began to diminish | & few years 8go, branch factories be- | gan to spring up along the Rio de la | Plata. A list of American branch factories, assembling and distributing | plants in Argentina today resembles | & roster of the whole manufacturing | | For instance. there are some 180! establishments turning out wheat and corn products, 400 footwear factories | and more than 4,000 industrial fur- | niture establishments. The cigar and | cigarette industry employs 20.000 | workmen, the electrical materials and radio industry 8,000, while 15,000 men are employed in automobile fac- tories. In all there are 20,695 differ- ent plants operating in the republic today., & great portion of them branches of North American com- | anies. On the other hand, and with just as serious results to our export trade, some industries have taken advantage of the Roca-Runciman trade agree- ment, by whnich Argentina gives pref- erence to products originating in | British territory. to establish branch plants in Canada and England. Be- cause of thi- we lose the taxes, in- surance premiums, ‘wages to employes and transportation revenues which such factories now pay out abroad. | Because of our inability to purchase | | nitrates and copper, there has been | Next to | Argentina end Brazil, Chile was for- | merly our most valuable market on | the continent. We once supplied prac- | | a similar reaction in Chile. tically all of her imports of manu- factures. lar exchanze she has not only turned ished goods—to France, Germany and Japan—but has become a thriving manufacturing community on her own account. Laid to Republicans. Deal point out that the restrictions and conditions which contributed to bringing about this situation were the work of Republican administrations and that the present policy of recip- rocal trade i. designed to correct it. However, it may be pointed out that varfous of the present regime's do- mestic policies are also reacting to the disadvantage of our industrial and agricultural exports. The restriction of cotton produc- tion, the processing tax imposed upon the manufacture of textiles, which have resulted in higher prices of raw cotton and textiles, may be of tem- porary benefit to planters and manu- facturers at home. At the same time they have not only made it difficult and in some cases impossible to com- pete in the textile markets of South America, but have brought about a tremendous expansion in the produc- tion of cotton in Brazl, Argentina, Peru and Colombia. In the last two years North Ameri- can cotton goods have practically dis- appeared from the shelves of Argen- tine, Chilean, Peruvian and Brazlian dry goods stores. The foreign mana- ger of one of the largest textile export houses in the United States returned from & survey of the South American markets a few days ago with the ver- dict that our South American textile business is a thing of the past. Since the birth of the N. R. A. and the A. A. A. Brazl alone has in- creased its cotton production more than 3,000 per cent. A recent trip to the cotton country in the northern states of that giant republic disclosed to me that sections never before known to produce the fluffy fiber now resemble the cotton sections of Mis- sissippi and Texas. Even regions which were formerly sugar cane and cacao centers are now given over to cotton. More interesting still, the coffee section of the south, even the State of Sao Paulo, has turned to cotton grow- ing on a large scale. Coffee growers But because of lack of dol- | elsewhere to swap nitrates for fin- | Now, then, disciples of the New‘ are now sowing cotton between the rows of coffee trees. Peru, Colombia reaped large profits Argentina have cotton pro- D—3 CAPITAL AND NEW YORK OF THE 80s COMPARED Washingtonians Took Life Easily 50 Years Ago, While New Yorkers Lived on Excitement. This is the forty-seventh of a series of weekly articles on inter- esting persons and events in the National Capital during the 80s, by Frank G. Carpenter, world- famous author and traveler. The next chapter in the series will be published next Sunday in The Star. l and to find out what the people are talking about. Washington City is the poorest atmosphere in the United States from which to judge the people of the country. Its citizens have different objects in life than those of other cities, and its every attribute is enervating and artificial. Here in New York everything throbs with the chase for the almighty dol- lar; you catch the spirit of intense CHAPTER XLVIL BY FRANK G. CARPENTER. AM spending a day or 5o in New York to get myself out of the ruts of Washington do-less-ness energy which pervades every part | of the metropolis. In Washington pleasure takes the | place of work; all your surroundings tend to deaden rather than quicken you into activity. Here on Broadway a street car will not stop for you if it is half a block away. You must wait for the next car. In Washing- ton people stop the cars by waving their hands when they are three blocks off and then walk leisurely to them while the drivers wait patiently. I have seen herdics and cars stop two minutes or more for passengers, and no one pretends to hurry to reach them. In New York if an 80- cent legal tender dollar of our dad- dies was rolled along the sidewalk every one on the street would make a rush for it. In Washington it would be watched with interest, the people would wonder why it was rolling and where,it came from before they would make any effort to get it. In New York the chief talk is of money. In Washington gossip and great men are the leading subjects. | In New York a fall in stocks sets all tongues to buzzing. In Washington if a chief of a bureau loses hi head the same result is accom- plished. New York is a city of things as well as of money; Washington is a city of persons. A lady said to me today: in Washington you can see any great man you want to see.” She was right. Still on the whole Washington is the pleasanter place to live and, with all of its great men, there is more of a chance for a nobody to become somebody than in the great whirlpool of New York, which seethes and boils, which keeps the poor and moderately vell to do at the bottom, and which allows to be seen on the surface only | those who are worth their millions or have made themselves famous. William Dean Howells. William Dean Howells, the greatest of American novelists, is spending a month or two in Washington. I called | upon him yesterday and had a chat | with him about his work. I found him different in appearance from the impression conveyed by his pictures. He is short and stout and his every | feature is that of a college-bred business man, rather than that of the cranky conventional author. He is free from egotism and he looks upon duction in the last 12 months. Peru’s depressed agricultural situation has been materially improved because of increased production and higher prices for her cotton. which has found a ready market in Japan and England. Cotton textile and cotton products manufacturing, heretofore a negligible industry in Argentina, are now being | rapidly expanded. The ramifications into which this cotton question leads are amazing. The boycott of German products and the falling off of German trade with the United States is proving a boom- erang to the cotton growers of the South. Whereas Germany formerly purchased 1,800,000 bales of United States cotton a year, she is now turn- ing to other markets, particularly South America. She has already made | barter arrangements with Brazil, Ar- gentina and Peru, by which they will exchange cotton for German manu- facturing. British Principal Buyers. Of course, the principal buyers of Brazillan cotton are the British, who for years have been the largest buyers of our own. British expert advisers are helping the Brazilian growers to improve the grade and staple of their product. Looms in many Lancashire | mills are being altered to accom- | modate the Brazilian fiber. We have been arguing with the Brazilians that since Great Britain buys very little of their coffee, while we buy at least three-fourths of it. they ought to increase their purchases | of manufactures from us. By utilizing | more and more Brazilian cotton, our | British competitors are now able to make the same request. Herein lies the answer to the argu- ment that Brazilian cotton can never replace United States cotton in the British markets, It must be remem- bered that Great Britain is a manu- facturing nation and a competitor of the United States. She has to sell or dispose of enormous quantities of manufacturers abroad or go bankrupt. ‘Therefore, if she is given the choice of swapping more finished goods to Brazil for a raw commodity which she needs, or of buying that commodity outright at higher cost in the United States, there cannot be much question about what she is going to do. Besides, the advantages of a fur- ther increase of cotton production are in Brazil's favor. She still has limitless acres of cheap virgin land. State and federal taxes are low. While her present supply of cheap native labor is by no means exhausted, she offers a haven to the unemployed of the crowded countries of the Old | ‘World. Although two years of po- litical uncertainty and the crisis in the coffee industry served to shut off immigration, the doors are again swinging ajar; groups from Germany, Italy, Poland and the Balkans are coming to colonize and start life over again in & new land. Even Japan has taken out several concessions and begun the cultivation of cotton in former waste places. Increasing demands for cotton and agricultural products call for more aborers, and more laborers mean an increasing market for manufacturers. Thus it is easily seen that our diminished and diminishing trade with the important countries of South America is due in no small degree to policies and practices of our own. And, although it may have been in- tended, and even expected, that these measures would benefit the American people, in many cases both the direct and indirect mul‘ have proven oth- erwise, “In New York you can | see anything you want to see, while | his profession much as a merchant does upon his store. Mr. Howells has a large head cov- ered with fine, brown hair, which is cut close at the back and falls in thin locks over his temples. His complex- fon is dark with a florid tinge, his head is joined to a pair of broad, healthy shoulders by a short, well- padded neck, his face is full and his forehead broad and high. Twinkling | blue eyes smile at you from under {1t as he talks and a thick, iron-gray l‘muswche half covers his mouth. The great writer dresses in business | clothes. This morning he had on a | pair of light pantaloons and a dark | cut-away coat with vest to match. His white collar was a turn-over and his necktie a scarf which entirely | Ailled the front opening of his vest | As he chatted he gestured now and ‘!hen with his hands and I noticed | that they were remarkably small and free from the ink stains of the ordi- nary literary man. ks Mr. Howells was modest in speak- | ing of his work. He told me he does | not believe in the word “genius.” He thinks he has a natural bent toward | literature but that his success is due to hard work. He is sure that long | terms of intellectual inactivity are | Injurious to a writer. Mr. Howells works right along the year round and prefers to take his rest day by day irather than in a lump. In response to questions as to his habits of work, | Mr. Howells said: | _“I rise about 7, breakfast at 8 and then go to work. I eat the usual | American breakfast and find that a | good hearty meal agrees with my labors. When I came back from Eu- {rope I did think that I would keep up the foreign custom of a light breakfast of coffec and rolls. But I dropped it after a time. It is not adapted to our climate, not suited | to our habits with the children going to school so early with nothing but a | light lunch at noon. After break- fast I sit down and begin to write, and I work away for three or four { hours until the family lunch time. I then drop my work for the dav ! is | and spend the remainder of the tine in chatting, walking, driving or doing whatever comes along.” “What is your average day's work?" I asked. “About a page of Harper’s Monthly or an editorial column of a newspa- per,” replied the novelist. *“I do not like to write fast and I write, rewrite and change both words and matter over and over again. I don't think anything pays a writer so well as going over Lis own work. Some of my novels I have entirely rewritten | such as, for instance, “The Foregone Conclusion. I consider that one of the best picces of work I have ever done and its revision improved it greatly. I should like to be able to do this n all cases but am often unable to take the time. Sometimes I rewrite a whole chapter, or I find often that I can condense a chapter into a single paragraph. Many of my | novels are not completed at the time of their pubiication in the magazines, but I do not let them begin until I have a good lot of copy ahead. “How long does it take me to com- plete a novel? Well, it differs ac- cording to the subject and the time | I have to do it in. In writing the last part of ‘A Modern Instance’ I turned out 25 pages of copy s day, which is twice my usual amount. I write at the rate I have told you and it took me nine months of ‘steady work to produce ‘The Rise of Silas Lapham.” ‘The Lady of the Aroos- took’ was written in six or seven months. but it was plain sailing from the beginning. I have never more than one novel on hand at one time, though I may now and then write a sketch of travel by way of a change. Of course, I have a general idea of what I am going to write before I begin a new book. but I do not analyze a plan and think it up in chapters beforehand. I invent the | incidents as I go along. Thus each morning consists of new inventions: the work is pleasant and does not grow stale. “I invent my characters,” Mr. How- ells continued “I know no man liv- ing who_corresponds exactly with Bartley Hubbard, nor is there in existence a Silas Lapham. But I hope my characters have enough | fidelity to nature that men can be | found who are more or less like them. | I do not grow enthusiastic nor senti- mental over the persons in my novels, though I am, of course, deeply inter- ested in them and have to live close to them during the writing. I have never written a book stmply for the purpose of producing something for people to read, but always to give my readers something to think about which might better themselves and the world. I do not believe in the theory of art apart from morals and everything else. This couplet of an Italian poet. which keeps running through my mind, expresses my idea in this regard: *“‘Our work of making books is all in vain If books in turn do nothing to make men.’' John J. Ingalls. For pure sarcasm which cuts and rankles as it goes into the soul there is no man in public life who can compare with John J. Ingalls of Kansas. Ingalls came nearer to being a natural genius than any other of the United States Senators. His long, iron-gray head works like a steam engine with a weight on the safety valve. It is the embodiment of perpetual motion and the sparks of thought fly from it like those of an electric wheel running at the rate of a thousand revolutions per minute. He has a new idea on al- most every subject. Senator Ingalls shaves his face twice before he comes to the Senate to make a great speech. He has his hair carefully combed, takes a Turkish bath and Ilooks as he rises from his seat as thought he had popped out of a bandbox. His Prince Albert coat is buttoned tight around his interro- gation point of a frame, his red neck- tie Is of the freshest and he has a half inch of red silk handkerchief sticking outside of the left breast pocket of his coat. Gen. Joe Wheeler. When Senator Edmunds made his great speech yesterday I noticed on the floor of the Senate Gen. Joe Wheeler, the noted Cavalry leader of the Southern Confederacy. He came in wearing an old $25 overcoat, but- toned around his little frame in wrinkles, and he stood leaning against the post at the side of the door just under the clock, with his soft felt hat crushed into a shapeless mass under his arm. Gen. Joe Wheeler weighs no more than a hundred pounds. He has dark hair, an open face, twinkling black eyes and a long, soft black beard into which old Time 1s fast marking the gray lines of his autograph. He cares nothing for per« sonal appearange, but he is exceed- ingly popular.