Evening Star Newspaper, July 28, 1935, Page 29

Editorial Page Civic Activities EDITORIAL SECTION he Sunday Star -_ Part 2—10 Pages GUFFEY BILL RULED ON BY Result of Capper’s 1921 Attempt to Con- trol Industry Ap Measure, Says Expert. BY W. Du B. BROOKINGS, | Manager, National Resources Production | Department, United States Chamber | of Commerce. | EGISLATION similar to the | Guffey-Snyder coal bill was in- troduced in Congress 15 years | ago. It did not deal with bi- | tdminous coal, however, but with m-! other important natural resource— | the forests. The story of this proposed legislation, introduced in 1921 by Sen- | ator Capper, affords valuable lessons | to those interested in the Guffey-Sny- | der bill. | Like the Guffey-Snyder bill, the| “Capper bill,” the proposed forestry | legislation was called, involved a both- | ersome constitutional question. The Guffey-Snyder bill is intended to give the Federal Government au- | thority to regulate production, prices | and labor conditions of the bituminous | coal industry. The Capper bill was | intended to give the Federal Gov-| ernment control over the forest and | logging operations on all timberlands. | Repeated efforts were made to find constitutional means by which this‘ could be done. | The Capper legislation was advo- | cated by a group of conservaunmsts‘ led by Gifford Pinchot. As early as | 1906, Mr. Pinchot stated that the country would face a timber famine within 17 years. Undoubtedly he was sincere in this belief, and in 1920, fol- | lowing the war, when prices of lumber rose to unprecedented heights, the | time seemed opportune to emphasize | the need of vigorous measures to as- | sure a plentiful supply of forest prod- | ucts. Problem Is Complicated. | Just as the widely dispersed owner- | ships of coal lands among several hun- dred thousand individuals in 28 States, | RAISES ISSUE HIGH COURT plicable to Coal | only that incidental restraint and | regulation which a tax must inevita- | bly involve, or does it regulate by | the use of the so-called tax as & penalty? If a tax, it is clearly an | excise. If it were an excise on a commodity or other thing of value,‘: we might not be permitted, under | previous decisions of this cour: to| infer, solely from its heavy ourden, | that the Act intends a prohibition instead of a tax. But this act is more. | “Its prohibitory and regulatory effect 1 and purpose are palpable. All others can see and understand this. How | can we properly shut our minds to it2” Declaring it the duty of the court to decline to recognize or enforce laws of Congress dealing with subjects not intrusted to Congress, but left by the supreme law of the land to the control of the States, the Chief Jus- tice said the court must perform that duty, “even though it requir us to refuse to give effect to legi tion designed to promote the highest ooa? Intention Held Insidious. He added: “The good sought in unconstitu- tional legislation is an insidious fea- | § ture, because it leads citizens and | legislators of good purpose to promote it without thought of the serious breach it will make in the ark of our covenant, or the harm which | will come from breaking down recog- nized standards. “In the maintenance of local sclf- government, on the one hand, and the national power on the other, our country has been able to endure and prosper for near a century and a half.” Out of proper respect to a co- ordinate branch of the Government and the several thousand operating | the Supreme Court has gone far to mines, make uniform regulation diffi- | sustain taxing acts as such, Chief cult in the coal fields, so the hundreds 1 Justice Taft indicated, adding that of thousands of owners of timberlands | this had been done “even though and some 30-odd thousand saw mills | there has been ground for suspecting complicate the problem in the lumber | from the weight of the Lax 1t wos Industry. General compliance With intended to destroy its subject.’ He | regulations providing that trees shall | sajq: be left to seed the ground, that certain species shall be cut, that brush and debris be burned to prevent uncon- trolled fires, and that proper methods | of logging be used, costs money—and | non-compliance gives a competitive | advantage. To enlist the Federal Government in the task seemed to the forest con- servationist the simplest method. The first proposal was introduced in May, “But in the act before us the pre- | sumption of validity cannot prevail, because, the proof of the contrary is | Director of Vehicles and Trafc, District | found on the very face of its pro- | visions. Grant the validity of this | law and all that Congress would need | | to do hereafter, in seeking to take over to its control any one of the great number of subjects of public interest, jurisdiction of which the | States have never parted with lnd‘ 1920, by Senator Capper of Kansas| yhich are reserved to them by the (S. 4424), whose State has no forests, | tenth amendment, would be to €nact but buys much lumber. It provided | detailed measure of complete regu- for a “Federal Forest Commission” on which the Secretaries of Agriculture and Labor and the chairman of the Federal Trade Commisison were to | serve with the United States forester | as executive officer. This commission | was to promulgate the general princi- ples to prevent forest devastation, and i regulations to govern the harvesting | of forest products so that “forest crops : everywhere shall be harvested in a | manner suited to the peculiarities of | forest crops.” Cutting or removing for- est products in violation of these reg- ulations was to be a misdemeanor punishable by a fine or imprisonment, and the annual net income- derived | from forest products cut in violation of the regulations and shipped in | commerce was to be taxed 10 per cent. It was so apparent that this legis- lation was a direct assumption by the Federal Government of authority properly belonging to the States that a new method of approach was pre- | sented in a second Capper bill | (S. 1435), introduced May 2, 1921. It proposed to divide the United States into forest regions, and authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to make reg- | ulations for each forest region cover- ing “such reasonable standards for | the harvest of forest crops as he should | deem necessary to secure in such re- gion a continuous succession of forest | crops of reasonable quantity and qual- ity.” To assure compliance, every lumber operator was to be taxed at the | rate of 5 cents per thousand board feet on all lumber manufactured in! accordance with these standards, and $5 per thousand on all lumber manu- | factured otherwise. Lenroot Thinks It Impractical. Senator Lenroot was a prominent conservationist and the question of | the constitutionality and practicabil- | ity of this type of legisiation was | submitted to him. His opinion was | that the legislation would be consti- tutional “provided the Supreme Court sustains our existing child labor law.” He referred to the child labor act of February, 1919, then being tested in the courts. On the question of -the Ppracticability he said: “I feel that the administration of such a law would be a colossal task requiring an army of inspectors, which would be a very serious objec- tion. I congratulate you upon the making of a plan that will, in my judgment, stand the constitutional test if our child labor law is found constitutional, and I am sorry that I cannot believe that the adminis- tration of such a law would be prac- tical” - On May 15, 1922, the Supreme Court declared the child labor act of 1919 to be unconstitutional. There had also been some maneuver- ing to find legal means by which the Federal Government might regu- late child labor. In September, 1916, Congress had passed a law which attempted to abolish child labor by excluding from interstate commerce products in whose mahufacture child labor had been used. The Supreme Court declared this Act unconstitu- tional in June, 1918, on the ground that it was an unwarranted attempt to use the Federal power over inter- state commerce to control matters properly belonging to the States. next. attempted to solve the problem by imposing & tax of 10 per cent upon the annual net profits of establishments employing child labor. It was this legislation that ‘was declared unconstitutional May 15, 1922. The opinion was by Chief Justice Taft, and the language is so pertinent to present-day attempts to use the Federal taxing power to reach objectives other than revenue, “hat it is here noted in some detail. The Chief Justice asked: Y “Doumhhwimpuelhxw% lation of the subject and enforce it by a so-called tax upon departuru] from it. To give such magic to the | word ‘tax’ would be to break down | all constitutional limitations of the | powers of Congress and completely Legislation Is Dropped. This decislon was so directly appli- cable to the Capper legislation before Congress that it was immediately l | dropped. | On February 16, 1924, Senator Capper presented another bill (8. | 2514). It was similar to his previous | bill in matters of administration and | regulation, but provided a “bounty” plan for enforcing compliance. In-‘ stead of a 5 cents per 1,000 feet tax | on compliers, and a $5.00 tax on non- compliers it proposed to tax all oper- | ators $5.00, but to return a “bounty” of $4.95 to compliers. The net re- sult was the same, although the method was different—non-compli- ance was to be penalized. The constitutionality of this type of legislation was also vigorously questioned. The Capper forestry leg- | islation was ultimately dropped, but the effort to give the Federal Gov- ernment, through its taxing power, authority to regulate a great industry is revived in the Guffey-Snyder bill. Rules and regulations are to be im- posed on the industry in the form of a code. All coal operators are to be taxed 25 per cent of the value of the coal at the mouth of the mine—but all who comply with the code will re- ceive a rebate, or “drawback” as the bill calls it, of 99 per cent of the tax. The Capper bill “bounty” reappears under the new name of “drawback.” This chapter of experience is also valuable as showing the difficulty of projecting legislation to meet future conditions. The Capper bill was pro- posed to prevent a timber famine which originally had been predicted for 1923. Although this famine did not materialize, the forest conserva- tion group believed as late as April 22, 1922, that the situation was seri- ous. Secretary of Agriculture Wal- lace, as spokesman for this group, wrote to Senator Norris, chairman of the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, April 22, 1922, in sup- port of the Capper bill. In that let- ter he said: “The United States is now con- suming wood nearly four and one-half times as fast as it is being grown. We are steadily eating up what is left of our forest capital. As a result the country now faces the definite pros- pect of a growing scarcity and in- creasing cost of everything made from wood.” Timber’s Market Restricted. ‘Today, instead of exhaustion of their forests, timberland owners are menaced by lack of markets for their products. Careful inventories indicate that reproducing areas are more exten- sive and reproduction more rapid than had been previously believed. More- over, substitutes have cut greatly into use of lumber. The emphasis in forest conservation has shifted, and today is upon the need for recre- ation areas, stream control and pre- vention of soil erosion rather than fear of an immediate shortage of forest products. ‘The Nation's need for forest prod- ucts will continue to be large and new uses are developing. This demand will necessitate conservation meas- ures; but the pressing need for in- tensive measures so long advocated to assure lumber supplies. seems to have passed. Senator Lenroot had a conviction that administration of the Capper bill was impraticable.* The Supreme Court bore out his doubt as to its constitutionality, Subsequent events WASHINGTON, D. C, Stopping Traffic Slaughter What Are We Going to Do About Qur 36,000 Annual Automobile Fatalities? BY. W. A. VAN DUZER, of Columbia. N 1914 there were 1,754,570 au- tomobiles registered in the Umwd‘ States, In 1934 there were 21.- 524,068 registered, thus showing an increase of 1,125 per cent. In 1914 there were 257,291 miles of surfaced road in the United States. In 1934 there were 950,000 miles of improved road—an increase of 270‘ per cent. In other words, there were in 1914 6.84 automobiles per mile of improved road, while in 1934 there were 22.65 | automobiles per mile. During this same period in the District there has been an increase in automobile regis- | wipe out the sovereignty of the States.” ration from 8,000 in 1914 to 185,372 in 1934. | In 1914 there was not more than | one driver for each car registered. In 1934 there were at least 30,000.- | 000 operators of automobiles in the United States. District First With Permits. It must be remembered that ex- cept in the District operators’ per- mits were not issued by any State until about 1908. Rhode Island was the first State to pass a modern drivers’ license law, requiring a per- | mit. New Hampshire followed, in 1909, Connecticut in 1915 and Mary- land in 1919. SUNDAY MORNING, JULY RSN NN The Problem and the Solution | If the city of Cumberland, Md., were wiped out by some terrible calamity caused by human carelessness and the lives of its 37,000 inhabitants needlessly sacrificed, the Nation would be shocked into immediate action to prevent the recurrence | | of such a tragedy. | Yet 36,000 men, women and children were killed last year on the streets and highways in automobile accidents—most of | | them due to ‘preventable carelessness. Tens of thousands of | | others were maimed and injured for life. If the automobiles involved in one year’s fatal accidents | | were to be assembled in a junk yard, the yard would have to accommodate 44,460 automobiles—one out of every four | | in Washington today. { Is there any way to stop this slaughter of men, women and children? Is there any way to save the millions of dollars represented in property losses from accidents? In the accompanying article William A. Van Duzer, Washington's director of vehicles and traffic, discusses some | | of the aspects of the automobile accident problem and some of the hopes for partial solution, at least, of that problem. | | The Eastern Conference of Motor | Vehicle Administrators, which is com- posed of all the motor vehicle com- | missioners in the Northeastern part of the United States, became very much exercised over this form of ad- which involve convenience and com- | fort, but he is oftentimes creating a false impression with his customer when he advertises the speed possi- bility of the new cai. ‘The other day I saw an advertise- ment for one of the new models offering a guarantee that the car would travel 100 miles an hour. This, advertising and if such advertising vertising. At their meeting in 1934 and again in 1935 they passed a resolution condemning speed adver- | in my opinion, is the wrong kind of | tising. This resolution is as follows: “Therefore be and it is hereby re- In a great many of the States those | continues I believe that the time will | solved: That this conference go on who were then operating automobiles were blanketed in as drivers without | any kind of examination or test. At the present time there are only 18 States which have an operator’'s per- | mit with examination, and in some | of these States the operator’s permit is good until revoked. In other words, these drivers may continue to operate a motor vehicle, even if they have physical defects, as long as they are not involved in an accident on ac-| count of which the permit would be | suspended or revoked. - Whiie there was a general increase in traffic accidents throughout the country last year, States which have operators’ peérmits, where examina- tion is required, showed a smaller in- crease in accidents and fatalities thén those States which do not have drivers’ license laws. Auto Engineering Advances. During the 20-year period above re- ferred to the automotive engineer has made rapid strides in improving the design of the motor vehicle. The first notable developments by the automo- tive engipeer was the electrical head- light the self-starter. These were soon £ ed by balloon tires, four- wheel Drakes, non-shatterable glass, steel frgmes and bodies. Then came the bumper, front and back. While this has proven to be a safety factor, it is alsc one thing which has re- sulted in some rather flagrant vio- lations 6f the parking regulations. While the automotive- engineer has been buflding safety into the automo- bile, he has also increased the horse- power and the possibility for greater speed. This increased horsepower and speed possibility have created a desire on the part of many drivers to speed. This horsepower and increased speed possibility ire, in the hands of a skillful, carefu: driver, a real safety factor, but in the hands of a care- less, negligent, reckless or willful driv- er become a potential menace. The careful driver knows how to control his speed and how to get out of a tight pinch by stepping on the gas, but the reckless or careless driver is likely to get into trouble when -he steps on the gas because of his lack of skill and ability to handle a car at high speed in an emergency. Speed Advertising Scored. The automobile manufacturer and salesman can well devote his entire time when selling a car to the im- proved mechanical and safety factors of the car and to the new features have shown that the fears of a timber soon arrive when the Legislatures and Congress will make it illegal to stress | the speed possibility of the various models or any speed which is greater than that which is legal in the par- ticular State in which the advertise- = ment occurs. record in recommending to their sev- eral Legislatures to pass laws making it illegal greater than the legal and safe speed | in that State.” . One reason why the motor vehicle | administrators are so much concerned DYNAMITE WILL PACK to advertise auto speed | NEXT CAPITOL SESSION BY JOHN SNURE. DEMAND of Senator William E. Borah, insurgent Republic- an of Idaho that Congress remain in Washington to No- vember 1, if need be, to finish its work, has brought out more clearly the difficulties ahead of the next session of Congress. Just at a time when there was some talk in administration quarters of making next Winter's session brief and quiet, to avoid adding to the troubles of the 1936 presidential cam- paign, Senator Borah’s demand, with other recent developments, has made it plain that the next session will be charged with all manner of political dynamite. o Moreover, it may prove to be a long session. It is sure to reek with partisan discussion, and there are growing indications that a series of measures will be forced to the front which will be embarrassing for the administration with a presidential campaign just ahead, and embarrass- ing for members of Congress who seek re-election, especially Democratic members. Snell's Remarks Indicative. The intensity of partisan discus- sion which may be looked for next Winter, or in the latter part of this session if it should be much pro- longed, is indicated by recent remarks of Representative Bertrand H. Snell, Republican leader of the House, in which he suggested impeachment of the President because of alleged vio- lation of his oath to support the Constitution. Of course, the idea that Mr. Roose- velt is to be put through the experi- ence of Andrew Johnson in the “tragic 'Talk of Keeping It Brief and Quiet Fades as Relief Spending and ’36 Campaign Await Debate. ers and administration aids at the Capitol hastened to berate the pro- posal of Senator Borah that Congress remain here this Fall and dispose of the Frazier - Lemke farm mortgage refinancing bill and the bonus bill. Of course, the Borah plan will not be followed. Senator Borah, how- ever, emphasizes what is undoubtedly true—that these two issues must be met by Congress. They will be forced to a vote next session if not now. Hence, he maintains, they might. bet- ter be dealt with now than shunted over to the campaign period. Advocates of the Frazier-Lemke bill involving inflation, or at least refla- tion, and the bonus bill, also involv- ing inflation, have not the slightest intention of -curbing their activities. They plan to make intensive drives next session if they are balked this session. The backers of the Frazier-Lemke bill, an actual majority of the House, stirred to wrath because the House Democratic organization has induced certain signers of the discharge peti- tion for the bill to withdraw their names, are more than ever bent on going forward with their program. But other matters on the horizon appear even more troublesome and worrisome to the Democratic leaders and the rank and file in the two houses. Most serious are the swelling expenditure of the Government and the rapidly expanding public debt. 1t is now clear that the coming ses- sion will be called on by the ad- ministration for a large additional appropriation to keep the expanded machinery of Government going and meet further the costs of works and rellef. That appropriation, accord- ing to preliminary figures under con- sideration by officials, is likely to be $3,000,000,000 or more. ‘When (Continued on Third ), E] 28, 1935. | ( Special Articles T ravel — Resorts DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS URGED TO CURB POLICIES Nation Could Be Headed to Normalcy by Firm Attitude of Leaders Toward Roosevelt, Is View. (sulted his party leaders in Congress E CAN write and talk, as we! before sending measures to them. BY MARK SULLIVAN. do, about the presidential| On one occasion, when the President \/‘ v election next year; about | after deciding on something Congress the fact, as it is assumed, ) should do, sent for the leaders of the that the change being made in the | two branches. It was apparent even American form of society and govern- | to outsiders that when the leaders ment can only be stopped by defeating | arrived they found the President pre- Mr. Roosevelt for re-election. Those pared with mimeographed state- who wish desperately to avoid what ments ready for release to the press, Mr. Roosevelt is taking us to are will- | stating what Congress would do. ing that his defeat should come either | It should be added, however, that by a Republican candidate for Presi- | lately the Democratic chairmen of dent, or by a coalition ticket of Re- | committees, and the members, have publicans and conservative Democrats | Degun to examine the bills that the headed by some Democrat like Senator | President’s advisers write and send to Harry F. Byrd of Virginia. | them. They, men of direct minds, To talk about that is well enough. | have come to be suspicious of the But the election is more than a year away. And the fact is there is a simpler way to save America from | what is being done to it. There is a | simpler way and an agency more im- mediately available. That agency is the Democratic party in Congress. | The Democratic leaders in Congress | know well that America is being taken | toward a changed form of society and government. They say so frankly, in | private conversations, and they de- | plore it. They could stop the process | in an hour, if they were willing to | do so. How Changes Start. Let us look at how the change to a | new form of society in America is be- | ing brought about. It starts, of course, | with President Roosevelt and the curi- | ous little coterie of advisers who are | close to him. From these proceed the | extraordinary series of ideas, more and | more startling as time goes on, that | compose the New Deal. What happens is this: President | Roosevelt sees one or another or sev- | eral of the advisers. Out of the meet- | ing a new idea arises. Occasionally | | oversubtlety of some of the Presi- dent’s advisers. They have come to feel that many of the measures have hidden implications, Yet in describ- ing the attitude of the Democrats in Congress, it is difficult to make a cor- rect generalization. Only 10 days ago the Democrats passed a most impor- tant measure, one taking from all citizens the right to sue the Govern- ment on any Government bond—and that measure had been written wholly by some one in the administration, not one word of it had been written by anybody in Congress. Might Quietly Resist. If this way of doing things is un- fortunate, if there is disquiet about much of what has been done and is being done under this system, then what is the natural and simple im- mediate remedy? It is merely for the Democratic leaders to say to the President—they can say it without rancor and without any publicity at- tending it—that they must be con- sulted before the President decides upon legislation which he desires them to put through Congress. Practically all the Democratic lead- the new idea surges up in Mr. Roose- | velt’s own brain. More often the new idea comes from one of the coterie | around him. It is going to be neces- | sary for the public to understand Mr. Roosevelt’s temperament, the ways of about this type of advertising is that | if a car is advertised to go at a speed | of from 80 to 100 miles an hour, | | some drivers are sure to take the | manufacturer at his word and try to | | travel at that speed, and it is a well | | known fact that there is not one | | driver in a thousand who is capable | | of operating a motor vehicle At that | | Tate of speed even on a race track, |let alone on a highway which is | being used by all kinds of traffic. The automotive engineer has done an excellent job in improving the de- | sign, mechanism and the safety fea- | tures of the motor vehicle, but the | highway engineer has not kept pace | With the automotive engineer for sev- | eral reasons. One of the principal | reasons is that he has not had suffi- | cient funds to build and maintain the mileage needed to meet the demands of the motoring public. Another rea- son is the cpntinuous changes in the | policies of the various highway de- partments due to the political in. fluence and to the building of politi- cal roads instead of building of high- ways which traffic surveys show i should be built. These changes in the management of the highway de- partments through political influence has seriously interfered not only with the location and design of highways, | but also with the preliminary traffic ! studies and transport surveys which | are so urgently needed in order to “ge\_'le;op a proper plan upon which to | build. Factors Must Be Known. To lay out a system of highways which will meet adequately the public needs, the approximate <origin and | destination of all vehicles should be known. These are the factors which create traffic. Many of the States have not obtained this information and have built the roads on a “hit- or-miss” plan so that numerous high- ways have been built of more or less durable construction, but with width entirely inadequate to carry the traf- fic. Some of these roads were built as two-lane highways and they are now carrying more than a safe ca- pacity, which encourages cutting in and out of traffic, causing a large percentage of the automobile acci- dents in country road driving. The highway engineer, if given build proper highways which will carry the traffic in a safe manner. These highways will carry super- elevated curves, sufficiently reduce curvature to enable cars to be operated on these curves at the legal speed limits allowable in the State. They will eliminate grade crossings, and, where the traffic justifies it, they will eliminate highway grade cross- ings and all left turns by the con- struction of clover-leaf underpasses. They will build sufficient lanes to take care of the present and future traffic within the economical life of the road and, if given sufficient funds, will provide adequate .ight-of-wa to take care of the future developmen of these highways. Another phase of this subject which calls for attention is night accidents, caused primarily by lack of proper illumination on the highways and by reduction of light at night. At pres- ent, nearly one-half of all accidents are occurring at night, although less than one-fifth of the traffic is on the road at night. More Light Needed. Clifford C. Paterson, in a recent paper with special relation to safety on the roads, printed in the Journal and Record of Transactions, the Junior Institution of Enpgineers, England, brought out the fact that a great source of danger is that the eye is asked to function where there is so little light. He said that the different {llumination levels are shown by the following figures: Bright _sunshine — 8,000 foot candles. Ordinary daylight—700. Dusk—3. Moonlight—0.02. Badly lighted street—0.01. must be done either | his mind. That is too large a subject | to be dealt with fully here. For the present it is enough to say that Mr. Roosevelt has an extraordinary re-| sponsiveness to new ideas from all | sources and of all kinds. | Mr. Roosevell does not get all his| ideas from the brain trust. Some he gets from perfectly conservative per- sons who happen to talk with him. And some of the ideas Mr. Roosevelt generates himself are entirely con- | servative. At the conferences Mr. G | Roosevelt hold: twice a week with| & ° newspaper men he sometimes talks as | conservatively as if he were Calvin Coolidge. But the very next occasion he will talk with equal earnestness in behalf of some idea so alien to Amer- ican habits of thought as if it were Stalin speaking. It is one of Mr.| Roosevelt’s principal traits that he gets boyish pleasure out of experi- | ment. In some of his speeches he | praises what he calls “bold experi- mentation.” It is not so much | intellectual conviction as a temper- mental trait. Sometimes it seems a {case of experiment for experiment's | sake. Permanent Convictions Hit. In Mr. Roosevelt's mind is no body of permanent principles or convictions, an | ‘ers are, without being extreme con- servatives, doubtful about the New lDeal. Much of the New Deal they | acutely deplore. To make this state- ment is, of course, purporting to state the beliefs that certain individ- uals hold in their own mind. The statement is made upon private con- versations the Democratic leaders have had with their friends and upon their known convictions and habits of mind. The condition is proved by a recent | incident. Some time ago the admin- | istration, in this case Secretary of | Agriculture Wallace and his associ- ates. sent to Congress certain amend- ments to the A. A. A. statute which Wallace desired—amendments strengthening and tightening A. A. A The amendments, as usual, were passed without material change by the House—the House, excepting on one occasion, has been extraordinarily supine in passing legislation desired | by the administration. | The A. A. A. amendments, after | being passed by the House, went to the Senate. In the Senate occurred an episode which throws light on the | whole situation. Borah Leads Fight. Among the amendments when they | arrived on the Senate floor was one | which took away from every person who has paid a processing tax any right whatever to sue for the return | of the tax in case the A. A. A. statute {should be found unconstitutional. prejudices or settled points of View,| Against this amendment a fight was such as most neen have by inheritance | made by Senator Borah of Idaho and or education o- association, which are | Democratic Senator George of Georgia. to most men &t once the ballast and | Due to their earnestness and due to the compass of their minds. The con-| the fact that many Democratic Sen- | sequence is that the ideas Mr. Roosevelt | ators were shocked as soon as they | embraces have no pattern, his course | discovered the nature of the amend- no consistent cirection. (While this| ment, the conflict was prolonged. may be true of Mr. Roosevelt, there| The fight in behalf of the amend- | are in his inner coterie men who know | ments was made by the official Demo= | perfectly all the minute distinctions, | cratic leader of the Senate, Mr. Robin- | who know exactly what the American |son of Arkansas—Senator Robinson Tsystem is, know exactly what the alien | was living up to the role in which | system is and know exactly what would | Mr. Roosevelt had put the Democratic carry America to the alien system.) |leaders in Congress. Finally there In a session of Mr. Roosevelt with was a vote. On the roll call 39 Dem- one or more of his advisers, as often | ocrats voted against the amendment, | as not a casuat and informal coming | voted against what the Democratic | together in tae White House, a new | leader, Mr. Robinson, had asked them | idea is generated. Mr. Roosevelt be-|to do. Only 21 Democrats voted with | comes enthusiastic about it—enthu- | siasm for the new is one of the Presi- | Mr. Robinson. Here was plainly a case in which dent’s marked traits. Mr. Roosevelt the Democratic leader, Mr. Robinscn, sufficient opportunity and funds, will | tells one of his coterie to put the new idea into the form of & bill. The bill when written is sent to the Demo- cratic leaders in Congress with direc- tions to enac; it. Most of the legislation that has been enacted since Mr. Roosevelt be- came President was not written by anybody in Congress. It came to Congress from the administration al- ready written.. As a rule it has been enacted by Congress without reading or certainly without close reading. Not only has the legislation not been read | by the rank and file of Congress; in some cases it has not been read by the Democratic leaders, certainly mnot closely enough to understand it fully. This is an extraordinary condition. Under normal conditions it is the leaders of the majority party, the chairmen of the various committees, | who write the statutes. In the debate the other day about the President’s measure outlawing suits on Govern- ment bonds, Representative Hollister of Ohio, turned to the Democratic leaders and asked: “How many of you chair- men of committees here today know who prepared the bills you have intro- duced in the last two years? How many of you even read them before their introduction?” Question Goes Unanswered. Bear in mind Representative Hollister was addressing himself not to the rank and file of Congress but to the Democratic leaders, the ‘majority leaders who in every administration from the beginning of the Govern- ment until the Roosevelt one, were supposed to write the bills. No one answered Mr. Hollister’s question. The relation between the Demo- cratic leaders in Congress and the President is so unusual as to be fan- Almost it is safe to say, that was doing what the administration wanted him to do, and not what a majority of the Democrats in the Sen- ate wanted done. America could be headed back | toward normal by a simple action on the part of the Democratic leaders of | Congress. They could go to the Presi- | dent and tell him he must consult with them before he sends measures to Congress. They could do this without emotion, without offense to the Presi- dent, without publicity, without any commotion. It would be merely 8 | return to the normal functioring of the American mechanism of go7ern- ment. It would produce legislation | which would reflect the Democratic party—instead of legislation which re- flects the minds of the unmature and unexperienced experimenters around the President. [ (Conyright 1935. New York Tribune. Inc.) Great Powers Stress Planes’ Value in War LONDON (#).—Every great power in Europe has some type of “mys- tery” plane in project or under de- velopment. League of Nation ex- perts at Geneva regard this as indi- cative of the vast progress being made in Europe for new and more devastating air forces. The general belief prevails in Geneva that swifter progress is being made in aviation technique than in land or sea armaments. Experts here generally believe any future war will be fought first, if not finally decided, in the air, and that lasting advantages will go to the na- tion best prepared to strike hardest upon the outbreak of hostilities. Gufde for Readers Organization As