Evening Star Newspaper, November 17, 1935, Page 40

THE EVENING STAR With Sunday Morning Edition. WASHINGTON, D. C. SUNDAY ............November 17, 1935 e THEODORE W. NOYES...........Editor e The Evening Star Newspaper Company. Business W‘: ‘Pennsyiventa Ave. APk SRte: 10 East 42nd Br. Ne : Cale Office: ke i an Building, BurcSoa Smoe: T4 Rekent St. London. England. Rate by Carrier Within the City. 1 tar._. The Senins ane- s Sifaays) o x'%‘fi R "B S5t i = Ccllection made at the end of each month. Ordors mas basent by mad of telephons Na- tional 5000. Rate by Mail—Payable in Advance. Maryland and Virginia. e ily an .. $10.00; 1 mo. 8¢ . .00; 1 mo.. B Slnday”"ox 3 3085 1 Eo 4ol All Other States and Canada. Ffl! and Sunday__) sr. $12.00; 1 mo. $1.00 ily ‘Only_-ooeacc] Y. $8.00: 1 mo. 7 oz Jr 3806 1 mos 80 Member of the Associated Press. The Assoctated Press 1s exclusively entitled to the tse for republication of all news dispatches credited to it or nog otherwise credited in this paper and also the local news publish Il rights of publication of special erein are also reserved. Peace by Preparedness. Because of the emphasis his Armistice day address laid upon the trade treaty with Canada, President Roosevelt's references to national defense on the same occasion escaped the general attention which they deserve. They have particular pertinence because of un- settled conditions in both Europe and the Far East, and because next month’s Naval Conference at London will call for a reaffirmation of American policy. 1t is already a foregone conclusion that, far from paving the way to any reduc- tion of navies, the conference will find most of the sea powers ready with plans for extensive expansion of their fleets. The British government has just been reinstated in office after a campaign in which its program for increased naval and air forces was a paramount issue. An addition of twenty cruisers to Brit- ain’s present complement is specifically planned. Japan's demand for abolition of the 5—5—3 ratio and for parity with the respective British and American fleets has long been heralded. Ger- many's right to possess a navy one-third as large as the British has been granted by the London government, despite the prohibitions of the Versailles treaty. France feels it necessary to build more ships to match the German menace. Italy, which has always required parity with France, will automatically be im- pelled to meet the French increase, quite apart from the call for more Fascist sea power, which springs from Mussolini’s differences with Great Britain over the Mediterranean. In every direction revived competition in naval armaments is foreshadowed. America, as the President said at Arlington, “cannot hide her head in the sand.” She must “go forward with all her strength to stress and to strive for international peace.” But, coincident with zeal for peace, Mr. Roosevelt de- clares, “America must and will protect herself.” He pledges that aggression on the part of the United States “is an impossibility in so far as the present administration is concerned.” Then, in terms that assuredly command the over- whelming support of even our ardently peace-loving democracy, the President affirms that “defense against aggression by others—adequate defense, on land, on sea and in the air—is our accepted policy.” After this unequivocal statement of America’s position Mr. Roosevelt issues what amounts to an invitation to the world to consider substantial reduction of armaments. He sets forth that the measure of American defense “is and will be solely the amount necessary to safe- guard us against the armaments of others. The more greatly they reduce their armaments, the more quickly and surely shall we decrease ours.” The American doctrine of peace by preparedness has never been more effec- tually proclaimed. e A conference of mayors must reveal some interesting studies if there is time to go into intimate local affairs. —————————— A political candidate’s prospects are measured in some degree by the amount of heckling he can face and take it. More Norris. President Roosevelt has openly lent the weight of his approval and of his personal solicitation to prevail upon BSenator George W, Norris to seek re- election in Nebraska. The veteran pro- gressive Senator is disinclined, he says, to run again next year. Indeed, he was quite positively quoted in Utah only a few days ago as saying that he was not a candidate, More recently from California, however, came a denial from Senator Norris, leaving the door open for his candidacy. Those who follow the more immediate political history will remem- ber that five years ago the Nebraska Senator declared he did not choose to Fun again. And now an invitation, almost a plea, comes from the White House, that Sen- ator Norris, ostensibly a member of the opposing political party, seek re-election. The polite fiction that the Nebraskan s a Republican is disregarded by Presi- dent Roosevelt, who, in his brief eulogy of Norris, urges Democrats and Repub- licans alike to demand that Norris re- main & Senator as long as he lives, The President’s statement in effect is a notice- to the Democrats of Nebraska that they need not apply. So far as he is con- cerned the Nebraska Senate seat be- longs to Norris, if he can be prevailed upon to run. It is more than a suggestion to the Democrats of the State to give their indorsement to the re-election of Norris. It is obvious that if the Presi- dent has his way, and Senator Norris is persuaded to run again as a Repub- lican candidate for the Senate, the Democrats of Nebraska will place no poe in nomination sgainst him. Last ] year the Democrats elected one of their own, Senator Burke. So-strong is Senator Norris with the voters of Nebraska that it has seemed impossible for any man to defeat him, Republican or Democrat. The more regu- lar of the Republicans may try to defeat him in the party primary, if he accedes to the plea of the President. What the Democrats will do, now that the Presi- dent has spoken, remains to be seen. The withdrawal of Senator Norris from the race next year, as a matter of fact, would leave conditions somewhat chaotic for the Roosevelt New Dealers in Nebraska. It is conceivable that the Democratic faction, led in the past by Arthur Mullen, might succeed in nominating a can- didate. That would not be at all pleasing to Senator Norris. Mr. Mullen, during the campaign for the nomination of President Roosevelt, was one of his strong supporters, a floor leader in the convention. Since then Mr. Mullen has been practically forced to leave the Democratic National Committee under the rule laid down by the President that members of that committee should not represent clients before Government de- partments in Washington, Norris in Nebraska, as in the Senate, has been a tower of strength for the Roosevelt New Deal. . Senator Norris, addressing a national conference of progressives in Washington four or five years ago, said: “What the country needs is another Roosevelt!” The President was then Governor of New York, and his prospective presi- dential candidacy was just around the corner. When Roosevelt became the nominee of the Democratic party he received the prompt support of Senator Norris for election. What the country needs now, according to the President, is not another Norris, but more of the same Norris. It is conceivable that the Nebraska Senator may yet yield to the importunities of the President. “Teach or Advocate.” The controller general should, if re- quested by the Board of Education, “clarify” his decision regarding the “teaching” of communism in the public schools. It is not customary for the chief accounting officer of the Govern- ment, the controller general, to expound the procedure of reaching a decision. In this case, however, he is in a position to undertake an interpretation of the questioned word used in the appropria- tion law, the language of which is not sufficiently definite. In any case it is not improper that he be asked specifically to explain whether he regards the word “teach” as signifying anything more than a factual presentation by a teacher to a class of students. If in the eye of the law to “teach” a subject means to advo- cate an involved principle or practice there is need of considerable revision of the curriculum and methods of in- struction in the public school system. On the other hand, if it does not mean advocation there is no trouble whatso- ever in this immediate situation. It is not the function of a teacher to advocate any cause or subject or prin- ciple of life. It is the teacher’s function and duty to present facts and the ac- cepted laws of their relationship and their operation. It is a fact that com- munism is a principle of government advocated by a certain group of peo- ple, and at present in operation in one of the largest countries in the world. To state that fact and to explain the theories and workings of communism is not breeding in the minds of students a partisanship for that hypothesis of government, which is abhorrent to the American ideal. Indeed, it may be urged that it is far better for the students to be given a clear understanding of the precise nature of communistic admin- istration from a teacher in the school, and so to recognize its dangers and dis- advantages, than to learn of the exist- ence of such a doctrine elsewhere from its deluded partisans and advocates. It is altogether likely that those who drafted the paragraph in the appropria- tion law which has caused all this dis- cussion and difficulty had in mind a unity of meaning between “teach” and “gdvocate.” The phrase in the law is significant in that it says “teach or ad- vocate.” The alternative conjunetion is perhaps indicative of an intent to in- clude both teaching and advocation. It is in fact a badly phrased injunction, after the fashion of much of the legis- lation that is hastily framed and care- lessly edited in the processes of enact- ment. The courts of the land have been kept busy for many years wrestling with problems arising from ambiguities in the statutes due to slovenly phrasing. It would be outrageously unjust to im- pose upon teachers who conscientiously discharge their duties of instruction in the District public schools the penalty of a loss of compensation because they have followed the rules adopted by the Board of Education based upon an opin- jon by the corporation counsel of the District, which has now been inferen- tially challenged by the controller gen- eral. From whom are the teachers to take their orders, the Board of Educa- tion or the controller general? If from the latter there should be & clearer definition of the meaning of the ap- propriation act than that which has now been given, Reprocity is a large word in diplo- macy. It has a meaning that tends to supersede the idea of retaliation. 11 Duce Clunges Generals. Replacement by Duce of General Emilio De Bono in the leadership of the Italian forces in East Africa by Marshal Pietro Badoglio, chief of the general army staff, suggestively recalls the change in the German field command twenty-one years ago, when Von Moltke was replaced by Von Falkenhayn. The German campaign had started out bril- liantly and successfully with the occupa-~ tion of Belgium and the penetration of France to s considerable depth, almost to Paris. There it was halted. The thunderbolt had spent its force. Then, in November, 1914, the Kaiser—or the high command that dictated his military policies—replaced Von Moltke with Von Falkenhayn, who in turn, in August, 1916, gave way to Von Hindenburg, the hero of the Magurian Lakes, in East Prussia, where he had stopped the Russian ad- vance and administered a crushing de- feat upon the Czar'’s forces. Now in Ethiopia the Italian advance has pro- gressed according to schedule, as far as it can be understood, but it is evi- dently not satisfactory to the supreme authority of Rome. If that is the fact, General De Bono's displacement by Mar- shal Badoglio is clearly explained. Yet it 1s possible that De Bono has been re- lieved from active duty at the front because he is unable physically to stand the stress of campaign in the field—and such & fleld! Upon De Bono fell the burden of organizing the cgmpaign. He spent a year doing this, most of the time in Africa. And yet within a few weeks after the first shots were fired and the first moves made he is called home. Hon- ors will be heaped upon him. If therc is any bitterness in the interruption of his career in Ethiopia it will probably be salved by tributes and praises at home. But the thought will not be escaped that somehow, in some degree, the campaign in Ethiopia is not going as well as Il Duce desires. Certainly there is a suggestive parallel between 1914 in France and 1935 in Ethiopla. Will that parallel extend to 1939? If motion pictures had been available when Shakespeare wrote, no doubt he would have utilized them with consum- mate art. Shakespeare did pretty well anything he attempted. It has remained for modern genius to supply any defi- ciencies of the Elizabethan court in ballet facilities. Old Christopher Hatton, who achieved honors as a dancer, did the best he could, but he was no Max Rein- hardt. ‘The Lyddane case,is soon to come up again in the suburban courts. It is an interesting example of the rural excite- ment that may arise in homicidal inves- tigation, with nobody actually killed or even wounded. Vivisectionists who contemplate man as an animal and regard their experi- ments as of benefit to humanity partici- pate conscientiously in any “be kind to animals” week. Civilized humanity is at least agreed on two points. Beethoven was the great- est musician and Shapespeare was the greatest poet. Neither lived long enough to secure a Nobel prize. Banker Robert Fleming says the banks are willing to set an example by minding their own business. The influence of the American banking system could not have been more hopefully indicated. ——— The King of Kings says he will fight in person for the defense of Ethiopia. He cannot set an example which will require all eminent title bearers to face the ter- ror of war along with their own troops. Modern biographers contradict senti- ment and in historic analysis do not find it possible always to speak well of the dead. —— s John D. Rockefeller is under obliga- tions to a dutiful son for some charming radio programs as he listens in on his way to his 100th birthday anniversary. Shooting Stars. BY PHILANDER JOHNSON. Wild Doings. Thought he was a “superman” When he came to view, Civilian or trooper man, He was something new. Then he raised the rioters With a wild acclaim. Servants and proprietors Worried all the same. No one knew just what his lot Was about to be; If at sunrise he'd be shot, Or at a formal tes. As we scan his curious plan, With results in store, He was just & “whoopee man"— That and little more. Moral Authority. “We are in a mechanistic era,” sald the man with dark glasses. “What's the difference,” said Senator Sorghum. “We may need a few more police, but ethical principles must even- tuslly rule both cash registers and speedometers.” Jud Tunkins says you can give & man work, but sometimes it would be cheaper pay him cash for keeping out of to the way. THE SUNDAY STAR, WASHINGTON, D. C, NOVEMBER 17, 1935—PART TWO. THE MISUNDERSTOOD CHRIST BY THE RIGHT REV. JAMES E. FREEMAN, D. D, LL. D, D. C. L, BISHOP OF WASHINGTON. Work-Relief in Election Year By Owen L. Scots. Harry Hopkins, the President’s highest pressure producer, at last is in sight of his 3,500,000 job goal. He will come close enough to ending the Federal dole by December 1 to sustain his reputation for delivering on promises. But that Herculean task of creating millions of jobs is scarcely performed before the New Deal policy formers are asking: “Where do we go from here? Relief is on the way to being ended. Money is starting to flow in large volume. Yan:thumwprmmvmtmpeofla want?” Good reason exists for the questioning. In the first place, money to maintain about 2,500,000 of the job is going to run out about March 1, according to present estimates. Only about $i,100,000,000 out of the $4,000,000,000 job fund has gone the present billions if the new work-relief program is to continue through the next 12 months. In the second place, political diagnos- ticians are jittery. They see highly vul- nerable points of attack in the program of job giving. A wide range of boon- doggling projects, fund soliciting among relief workers by local politicians and irritations that will flow from the uncer- tainties of the jobs, all combine to raise serious questions concerning the wisdom of work relief in an election year. * % ¥ ¥ As a result, a memorandum is reported going the rounds in the higher New Deal precincts advocating an end to all forms of direct Federal relief to the un- employed, either through the dole or through jobs. Instead, the problem would be turned back to the States, with Uncle Sam confining his activity to providing financial aid to individual States. W. P. A. officials, even before their program is fully under way, are worried over the prospect of a complete new shift in policy. Out of that situation grows this observation: Six years of depression and unemploy- ment have produced no settled Federal policy for meeting this dominant na- tional problem. President Hoover insisted as long as he could that aid for the unemployed was not a Federal function. Finally, he was forced to grant relief subsidies to States. * % x ¥ Mr. Roosevelt started out by broad- ening the program of State aid to finance the dole. Then, in the Fall of 1933, when the N. R. A. boom had collapsed and unemployment was rising again, Mr. Hopkins sold the President on the Civil Works Administration. He put 4,000,000 men to work in a month and spent a billion dollars in four months. But C. W. A. promised to be & Frank- enstein and was dropped like a hot po- tato, to be followed by a modified form of work relief. About that time Mr. Hopkins got deeply interested in use of labor of the unemployed to produce goods for distribution among those without jobs. Business men, who thought they saw the beginning of a little socialistic state in the production-for-use plan, caused its death. Relief then fell back into a rut—at a cost of about $1500,000000 & year— until last January, when President Roosevelt announced that the Federal Government would “get out of this busi- ness of relief.” Mr. Hopkins had sold him on the idea of providing Federally financed jobs for those on relief rolls able to work, turn- ing the unemployable individuals back to the States. Care of the destitute always had been a duty of the soverign States of the Nation. *x x % But at that point, Mr. Roosevelt lis- tened to other counsel. He saw visions of using the millions of unemployed to carry out vast national planning projects. He would build huge dams, carry through flood control projects, eliminate grade crossings, clear slums and do & large number of other large-scale things. Mr. Hopkins knew that these projects, if carried out, would cost so much money for each job created, that the goal of work for 3,500,000 idle could not be reached. The President, with $4,000,- 000,000 to spend, felt that he had to give a large slice of those billions to Harold Ickes, with his pump-priming Public Works Administration and Housing Ad- ministration. He set aside a big slice for Dr. Rexford Guy Tugwell, who had just had a tiff with his boss, Henry Wallace, and wanted to show what he the way of experimenting with the farm problem. More went for grade-crossing elimination. i ** % ¥ Ax;d'lth'hltmultmthelomd Jobs' Dr. Tugwell, with $167,000,000 to spend, has created 3,730 jobs. Mr. Ickes, with $180,000,000 to spend, has created 1,800 jobs. Mr. Macdonald, with $500,000,000 to spend on roads, has created 32,000 jobs. The War Department, with $145,000,000 to spend on rivers and harbers, has created about 38,000 jobs. jobs. Mr. Hopkins, with $1,100,000,000 to ;g::d on W. P. A, has created 1,007,208 TR E & 3 i e i : i 5 | i years ago a journalist wrote bring person and ministry of Jesus within the range of, the average man’s thinking. ‘There nothing theological about the book, and for this reason it made a widespread appeal. In a letter written to a young man, Timothy, by name, a great preacher and apostle, speaking of his own antagonism and bitter persecution of the great Nazarene declares that, “I did it igno- rantly in unbelief.” He also affirms that, “I was before a blasphemer, and a perse- cutor, and injurious.” No impartial study of the life and ministry of Christ as contained in the gospel, can leave one unmoved or indeed unconvinced as to the sublimity of His character or the transcendent beauty of His teaching. While Renan, the skeptic, could not acknowledge His di- vinity, he was compelled to appraise the ministry of Jesus as utterly incomparable. This has been true of the greatest leaders the gospel or being made familiar with its exact language, we accept interpre- tations of it as they come to us from various sources. The experience of Lew Wallace, the author of “Ben Hur,” is a striking one. On being challenged for what he held of religious belief he tells us he was driven to make his own study of the gospel narrative. He evidently did this.with fine sincerity and with a desire to inform himself as to what was the purpose of Christ’s ministry, with the result that he came to the inevitable conclusion that He was more than man and that His design was to interpret life as no one before nor since had ever interpreted it. His conclusion was that, he found in Christ the source of his assurance and supreme joy. ‘That our modern world is turning more and more to study the life and ministry Fifty Years Ago In The Star PFears lest the new Democratic admin- o Y e Ceveiand, would piay - Cleveland, we y Merit System pavoc with the civil Maintained. service system by util- R izing all public ap- pointments as political spoils, proved un- warranted. The President proceeded to maintain the merit system and his reor- ganization of the Civil Service Commis- sion was to that effect. The Star of November 10, 1885, says: “The new Civil Service Commission starts off sensibly by effecting an organi- zation in the ordinary American way by electing officers. It was one of the crotchets of the old board that all the members were on an official equality. 8o far as a presiding officer became necessary in their deliberations, the com- missioners filled the place in turn. This was a clumsy plan and the new board does well to discard it. “In other respects the new commis- sion shows an inclination to remodel its rules in the light of experience so as to meet all legitimate objections to the civil service law. And it is by such changes of detail rather than by revo- lutionary methods of repeal that the operations of the commission will be affected. Even the New York Sun, which may be relied on to fight the new law for all it is worth, confessed yesterday that it was idle to talk about the repeal of the Pendleton law in view of the fact that the Senate and the President would be sure to oppose any such efforts. * * * The then new Pension Building in Pension Office 3 m'l:cm‘y ypmmn itici , ago as it has been Is Criticized e November 12, 1885, says: “The new Pension Office Building, from its size and elevated position, mounts up in & way to command ob- servation. It is of the bam-style of architecture, designed to give the most space within its walls at the least cost for construction. As in this structure, however, three immense barns are placed architecture, would afford the maximum of room at the minimum of cost. But if the country is too poor to consider the matter of beauty, grace or dignity 1n its public buildings here, it should at place its plain, cheap structures in inconspicuous position where they not challenge criticism.” year. Straight work-relief. wants this substitute for the present Bnaneed jobe 1 mmm"m&hu—m; lor W] “Jobl He thinks that 3,500,000 jobs, on worth-while projects, could be financed for from two billion to two and s half billion dollars a year. of Jesus and that it is appraising more fully the supreme worth of His teaching is quite evident. Amid all the complexi- ties and confusions of our time it is seeking to find in Him the solution of its vexed problems. St. Paul’s statement that his antago- nism and persecution of Christ was due to ignorance and unbelief finds its parallel in the lives of many men and women today. While they are seeking for light on their darkened pathways they are turning to many teachers other than Him who “spake as never man spake.” The multiplied cults and. schools —too many to be named—that are com- mon to our age, have their unsatisfied advocates and devotees. Multitudes of men and women find themselves con- fused and disillusioned and their prob- lems unsolved as they go from one" teacher to another and from one school to another in search of peace and sat- isfaction. Repeatedly in the course of my ministry I have come in touch with people of this sort, and in every case I have commended to them a more careful study of the gospel itself. Rarely in such instances has this personal study failed of its purpose. Frequently it is not only unbelief issuing from ignorance, but unbelief issuing from a desire to pursue a selfish and willful course that prompts men to turn away from Him whose message concerns the more abundant life. The .causes that lead men and women away from the ministry and teachings of Christ are many, but not the least of the world’s unbelief is due to ignorance and a first-hand knowledge of Him and His philosophy of life. He stands before us today, as He has through the cen- turies, awaiting the judgment of men, and the principles He sought to enforce have never been more pertinent than they are in this present critical hour. An open-minded, sincere study of the gospel and a willingness to accept Him whom the gospel portrays as life’s su- preme interpreter has compensations incalculably great. Capital Sidelights By Will P. Kennedy. » Whence comes Congress? From all walks of life. Preachers, teachers, news- paper men, lawyers, doctors, out of orphan asylums, from cigar factories, off railroad trains, from slaughter houses, cheese factories, lumber camps, foot ball gridirons, coal mines, glass factories, steel mills, distilleries, druggists, jewelers, surgeons, cowboys, aviators, professional base ball, rat catcher, fish monger, auc- tioneer and “quo vadis.” Wish a few illustrations? Representatives Charles A. Eaton of New Jersey is a Mayflower descendant, was pastor of churches in Massachusetts, Toronto, Cleveland, New York City; edi- tor of such publications as Leslie's Weekly and Light. Representative Peter A. Cavicchia of New Jersey was born in Italy, was a law professor. Representative Louis Ludlow of Indi- ana and William R. Thom of Ohio are among those who previously were Wash- ington correspondents for important newspapers. Representative Clarence Cannon of Missouri was a former history teacher and later parliamentarian of the House and of Democratic National Conventions. Representative Will Rogers of Okla- homa was a “school teacher by profes- sion” and engaged in educational work in his home State for 15 years. Representive Josh Lee of Oklahoma won the national collegiate oratorical championship in 1916, is an author, lec- turer and rancher. Representative Raymond Cannon of Wisconsin is a lawyer who came out of an orphan asylum and earned his profes- sion playing base ball. Representative Reuben T. Wood of Missouri went into a cigar factory when only 14 to help support an invalid father, mother and five sisters, and was later na- tional legislative representative of rail- road workers. Representative Harry Sauthoff of Wis- consin and Representative Jennings Randolph of West Virginia were college professors and athletic coaches. Representative Gardner R. Withrow of Wisconsin was employed in the train service of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad. Representative Joseph Jefferson Mans- nleold of Texas was a former railroad em- ploye. Representative Martin Dies of Texas was admitted to practice law when only 19. John L. McClellan of Arkansas was only 17 when ready to practice law and had to wait for a special act of the Leg- islature to give him sanction. Senator Tom Connally of Texas was :vn enlisted man in the Spanish American ar. Representative William P. Connery of Massachusetts and Representative Fritz Lanham of Texas were vaudeville top- liners. Representative William T. Schulte of Indiana was also-“engaged in the the- atrical profession.” Representative Leonard W. Scheutz held an executive position with Swift & Co. for 15 years. Representative Compton I. White of Idaho after being a sawmill pioneer was in the railway service as telegraph operator, trainman and conductor. t Raymond 8. McKeough was employed by the Elgin, Joliet & Eastern Railroad for 17 years. * Representative Edward A. Kelly of Illinois and Representative William J. Granfield of Massachusetts were profes- sional base ball players. Representative Marion A. Zioncheck of ‘Washington, born in a part of Austria now in Poland, caught rats for 10 cents per pelt, peddled fish from a two-wheel cart, rode herd on a chicken farm, was & jeweler’s apprentice and a lumber jack. Minority Leader Snell was a lumber Jjack and later a cheese manufacturer. Col. Charles 1. Faddis of Pe: 1= vania is & graduate horticulturist, with a distinguished World War record and citation from Gen. Pershing. Representative Hamilton Fish, jr., of New York was captain of the Harvard foot ball team. Representative Philip A. Goodwin of New York was in the steel bridge build- ing and lumber businesses. Senator Joseph C. O'Mahoney of Wyoming is & former newspaper man. Delegate Samuel Wilder King from Hawaii attended the United States Naval Academy and attained the grade of lieu- tenant commander while in the naval service. Representative William M. Citfon of Connecticut used to peddle kitchenware in districts. rural Senator Park Trammel of Florida was & traveling salesman, newspaper pub- lisher and Sunday school teacher. Representative Bernard M. Jacobsen Jowa used to work in a brickyard and Sectionalism of the Supreme Court By Frederic J. Haskin. It has long been said that Virginia is the mother of Presidents, so many Chief Executives having been born in that State, but New York must receive the palm as mother of justices of the Su- preme Court. The Empire State fs far in the lead. This is sometimes regarded as the more remarkable for the reason that the South has traditionally been considered as a special seat of learning in the law, Having for so many generations a trane quil agricultural, almost a baronial cive ilization, life in the South was conducive to study. Younger sons of planters ale most invariably read for the bar. This was in contrast to the North, where there obtained an industrial civilization. A greater proportion of the people were engaged in manufacture and trade and the pace of life was brisker. There were few long leisure hours for study. Two elements other than legal equip- ment doubtless have served to give the great preponderance of justices of the Supreme Court to the North. They are the greater population embraced in the Northern States and the fact that there have been more Republican Presidents. * % Kk % Up to the Civil War the South was in the lead so far as membership on the court is concerned. Of the five Chief Justices of the United States who served before the war, three of them were Southerners. They were John Rutledge of South Carolina, John Marshall of Virginia and Roger B. Taney of Mary= land. The two Northerners were John Jay of New York, the first Chief Justice, and Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut. These five rank among the greatest hold- ers of the office. Of the 31 associate justices of the Supreme Court before the Civil War, 18, or well over half, were Southerners. * ok ok X New York gains her title of Mother of Justices for the reason that, in addition to having had two of her sons serve as Chief Justice, no less than nine have been associate justices. No Southern State has furnished more than four as- sociate justices. Maryland and Virginia tie for that mark. Each also furnished a Chief Justice. Ohio has furnished five associate Jjustices to the Supreme Bench and is of« ficially credited with two Chief Justices, Samuel P. Chase and Morrison R. Waite, the latter coming right after the former. Actually, it would seem that Ohio should be credited with three, for the late Chief Justice Taft was an Ohioan, elected as President from that State. It was after his presidency that he took a professore ship at Yale University and was main- taining a residence there at the time of his elevation to the Chief Justiceship. For this reason he now is counted as having been appointed from Connectitut, thus making Connecticut one of the three States claiming two Chief Justices. The other was Oliver Ellsworth. For purposes of this discussion, Magy- land and Kentucky have been classed as Southern States. To be sure, neither joined the Confederacy, but the civiliza tion, the manner of life in these States, especially before the Civil War, were dis tinctively Southern and are largely so, outside the great cities, to this day. L = Although New York now is in the lead, her start was slow. Of course, John Jay, the first Chief Justice, was a New Yorker. He was appointed in 1789, and it was not until 1806 that a second appointment to the court from New York was made. H. Brock Livingston was appointed in that year and served until 1823. In 1823 Smith Thompson of New York was named, and followed in 1845 by Samuel Nelson. These were all the New York jurists named to the court prior to the Civil War. Massachusetts, one of the leading northern States of the early days, did not fare well before the war. It never has had a Chief Justice. William Cushing was appointed to the first court in 1789, but it was not until 1811 that the second Bay State man was elevated. He was Joseph Story and has the distinction of being the youngest member ever to be appointed. When commissioned by President Madison he was but 32 years of age. He served 34 years on the bench and is regarded as one of the greatest occupants. The name of Story at any bar stands in American juris- prudence on much the same high pedese tal as Coke and Blackstone in England. £ & % After Mr. Justice Story, Massachusetts did not receive another appointment to the court until 1851, when Benjamin R. Curtis was named. He served one of the shortest terms, retiring after six years. Pennsylvania, with a record now of six justices, furnished half of them before the Civil War. James Wilson was a member of the first court. but it was not until 1830 that Henry Baldwin became the second Pennsylvanian to be named. Robert C. Grier was appointed from Pennsylvania in 1846, but no other until after the war. Although Ohio now has such a good record with five associate justices and two, or, if one includes Mr. Taft, three Chief Justices, the State could boast of only one appointment before the Civil War. John McLean was named in 1829 and served until 1861. The next Ohio appointment did not come until 1862, when the war had begun. Noah H. Swayne then was named. * ok X X Louisiana is a Southern State only once represented on the court, but then with such distinction as to warrant pride. In 1894 Edward Douglas White of Louisiana was appointed as associate justice. In 1910 he was elevated to the position of Chief Justice of the United States and by a Republican President, Mr. Taft. Chief Justice White was the only Roman Catholic ever to be named to this high post. Another State only once represented is Mississippi. Here, too, we find a remark= able man. In 1857 Lucius Quintus Cine cinnatus Lamar was elected from Mis~ sissippl to the House of Representatives. He left the halls of Congress in 1860 to join his Confederate countrymen. He rose to the rank of colonel in the Con= federate Army and also was employed in the diplomatic service of the Confederate cause. He was sent on a mission to France, England and Russia in an ate tempt to gain the support of those na« tions for the Confederacy. After the war —and this is an interesting example of how the American democracy has func- tioned—Mr. Lamar again, in 1873, was elected to Congress, then to the United States Senate in 1877. The year 1885 sees him Secretary of the Interior, and in 1888 he is elevated to the supreme bench. LI Politics is presumed to have no part in affairs of the Supreme Court, and, once a man is on the bench, immediate political questions are non-existent. Broad general trends in the evolution of the Nation may very gradually be recog- nized, but there are no partisan politics. However, it is customary, although by no means invariable, for Republican Presidents to appoint Republicans to the Supreme Court and for Democratic Pres- idents to name Democrats, s ¢