Evening Star Newspaper, October 11, 1936, Page 29

Editorial Page Political Round-Up- Part 2—12 Pages CAREFUL CITY PLANNING HELD WAY TO END SLUMS Responsibility Rests Upon Municipal- ities, With Federal Government Co-op- erating in Program, Observer Says. BY JAMES FORD. TH lavish hand our Fed- eral Government in four years has poured hundreds of millions of dollars into the housing of its people. Some of this was to patch up houses and some to patch up slums. To give employ- ment to labor was a major need. Equally needed was a stimulus to manufacture and trade. The idea was good} the execution may in part have ‘been open to question. But if this was the best we could do in the circum- stances, one should not object. Yet why should we have slums at all? Will the Federal programs cure those that we have? Does their pro- gram help in slum prevention? Whose responsibility is the slum? How can we rid our cities of these cancers? How stop the formation of new ones? | ‘These are questions to face before the policies of the next four years are framed. You and I have often heard it re- marked at home, or in our travels, *“Our city has no slums.” This smug contentedness with things as they are will be belied by a little investigation. Ask the city welfare workers where they have the most cases of poverty. Ask the local police where most crimes occur or where most criminals and Juvenile delinquents reside. Ask the tax collector where property values are going down. Ask the sanitary in- spectors what districts have the high- est infant mortality rate, the highest rate for tuberculosis. From their an- swers, with surprisingly few excep- tions, you will be led to districts with unkempt streets and yards, ugly houses or tenements, poorly designed and greatly in need of repair, anti- quated sanitation or none at all, crowded quarters, foul smells, rooms and stair halls dark and often dan- gerous, basement or cellar lodgings, cluttered vacant lots, factories over- shadowing the homes, or nearby rail- Toads, canals, swamps, dumps. Neglect is the essence of slums. Our civilization has hurried by and left them there. They are areas we gladly forget or speak of slurringly as Little Italy, the Ghetto, Nigger Hollow. Irish- town, Chinatown, or Greaser Village. From them we expect no good and to them we still grant no fundamental aid. Where Opportunify Is Restricted Humanly speaking, slums are re- gions of restricted opportunity, of thwarted development. On the worst streets or alleys are the homes of life's misfits — “unemployables” and casual workers, derelicts, unfortunates who have pever been able to make a decent living. Some are the products of gen- erations of slum living. But inter- spersing and surrounding the core of the slum are honest aorkers unable to find work, families too large to subsist edequately on a day laborer’s wages, migrant families’ from rural districts or from other cities who have not yet made good, families “down on their luck.” Their luck stays tragically down, in all too many cases. For here is a vicious circle: Poverty, low-rent paying capacity, insanitary housing, consequent ill-health, heavy doctor bills and loss of job, deeper pov- erty. But deeper poverty means still lower rent-paying capacity, acceptance of still more insanitary quarters, chronic illness and finally institutional care unless the vicious circle is broken. The. best point of attack—short of a Tadical increase in wages—is upon in- sanitary housing. Slums are not necessary. Since they are a product of neglect, patient study and hard work must be substituted for neglect. Existing slums can be squeezed out of existence by pressure on the edges, continuously narrowing their area by staying the process of blight' and substitution of appropriate uses of land for inferior housing, or new or remodelled residences for shambles. New slums can be prevented by discovering their seeds so as to keep them from germinating, or by tearing out their roots before they have grown too deep. Thus cure slowly treats eflects as well as causes. But preven- tion deals directly and quickly with the causes. The Federal slum clearance and rehousing programs (P. W. A.), useful though they are for the few who bene- fit, may cut away a few blocks in the heart of the slum but leave its roots untouched or else leave the slum to rot while homes for a chosen few of its occupants are being erected upon the city outskirts. The Federal pro- grams for housing finance (H. O. L. C., F. H. A) have touched only houses here and there and have made no im- pression upon the slum itself. Both programs doctor the symptoms rather than the disease. Roots in Human Frailties Slums have their roots in human frailties—ignorance, materialism, lack of sense of responsibility, acquisitive- ness and a host of others. They grow because of civic unconcern and neg- lect. One frequently hears that “the poor deserve no better.” The state- ment is false. In this land of oppor- tunity the children born in the slums spend more of their time amid un- ‘wholesome or contaminating influences than in school, playground and church combined. They deserve better—an opportunity to make the most of their given capacities, a chance for health and inspiring surroundings. Other attitudes are in need of change: The builder’s, if he is more interegted in quick profits from shoddy building than in sound construction; the landlord’s, if his only concern is maximum rentals and minimum re- pairs; the slum dweller’s, if in his dis- couragement he says, “What's the use of keeping . my tenement clean?” Builder, landlord and slum dweller each follow the materialistic tradition. Each displays ignorance. For hap- piness is to be found not in riches, but in service—in doing one’s best at one’s chosen occupation and in the routine by our dally wWork and living to the general good? If this could be done builders would take pride in crafts- manship and sound construction, landlords would consider the welfare of their tenants and tenants would take pride in keeping their homes and premises clean and would do what they can to keep up high standards of cleanliness and beauty in their neighborhood and their city. It is not an impossible task. Haphazard, unregulated growth of citles is also a cause of slums. In the past any one has been permitted to put up any sort of structure wherever he pleased. It is only in recent years that there has been much control of urban development. Thus factories and shops were placed on residential streets next to private dwellings, tene- ments or apartments. The owner may have profited, but the neighborhood suffered. Values of house property went down because they could no longer be rented to discriminating tenants. The Process of Blight. Not only the cities, but the suburbs and small towns suffered in this way. The factory or store started the proc- ess of blight and the community started slipping onto the downgrade. Since the residences could be rented only to inferior tenants and rents de- clined, there was no incentive on the owner's part to make repairs. So standards of upkeep and maintenance reflected the discouragement of own- ers and tenants. Slums largely origi- nate in this way. In the last 20 years a means has been discovered to stay this process. It is called zoning. Most American cities and towns have adopted it. It begins in the study of the existing types of buildings and tendencies in each district of the city. It then sets off certain areas for exclusive residen- tial use, other areas for the heavy in- dustries. There may also be commer- cial zones or mixed zones. In each district the type, height, use and area or bulk of buildings is definitely re- stricted by law. Changes in zoning may be made only with the consent of a specified per cent of owners. They are—or should be—consulted before the zones are established. The zones usually represent the wishes of a majority of owners in the area zoned. This practice, at its best, can pre- vent the intrusion of major sources of blight. It needs further development and refinement, in most communities, to accomplish this purpose. Residen- tial neighborhoods are still too un- conscious of the possibilities of self- protection through zoning. A handful of self-seeking owners may still dominate the district councils. Neighborhood improvement associa- tions are also needed. Such an organ- ization kept industries off of Fifth avenue in New York. Another, of Harlem Negroes, induced the owners to keep up their properties, persuaded tenants to plant gardens and kept stores off the residential streets. An- other, in Boston, organized to fight for frequent collection of garbage and refuse, turned to the improvement of its rooming-house district, organized landladies to maintain high standards, fought for improved legislation and thus stayed the process of blight. If each residential cistrict had such a local association, dominated by in- telligent and farseeing leaders, and reaching owners and tenants alike, an instantaneous upward movement for improvement would be observed. Dirty yards and vacant lots would be cleaned. Fences, porches and walks would be repaired. Gardens would be planted. Neighborhood pride would displace discouragement, Opportunity for Improvement. Yet the problem is larger than the individual or the neighborhood. In some of its aspects it concerns not only the city but the entire metropoli- tan region. Narrow streets tend-to make slums. Railroad tracks, elevated | railways, street car lines leave slums in their wake. To replace elevated railways and street car lines with motor busses will give their neighber- hoods an opportunity for improve- ment. The widening of old streets, carefully executed, brightens up dark rooms and makes it necessary for tenements to put on a new front. There are usually slums “down by the tracks.” But many railroads could be induced to co-operate in improving or screening their properties if the city and local improvement associa- tions would improve all buildings or back yards which face the tracks. Still better, industrial districts rather than residences can be planned for the vicinity of railroads. In undeveloped regions the city has its opportunity.to make a fresh start, avoid mistakes of the past and plan for ail of the amenities of life. The checkerboard street system may be abandoned for winding tree-lined streets with wide grass strips, for fre- quent parks, playgrounds and vistas; for the exclusion of factories, for concentration of neighborhood stores in a convenient shopping center, If such a plan for the neighborhood umit is combined with adequate control of construction standards amd sup- plemented by competent architectural supervision provided by the subdi- viders, the slum is banished in per- petuity. This whole process requires a mas- ter plan. This means that there should be a city planning authority within the city government, manned by skillful specialists, with appropria- tlons adequate for intensive study of the facts of city life in the fields of population growth, engineering, rec- reation, housing. From their recom- mendations to the city council the control of development _ becomes possible. Chaos and haphazard growth are eliminated. City water and sewerage systems can reach every home. Through traffic can be localized and kept off the residential streets. High- ways and transit can be so ordered that suburban homes will be possible for persons who work in the city. sanitation have been changed greatly last century by the agencies of public opinion and education. Why |/ “the conviction that wealth an instrumental value—that: seryice pays—that each of us, no tter how humble, can contribute (Continued on Ninth Page.) - EDITORIAL SECTION - he Sunday St WASHINGTON, D. C, SUNDAY MORNING, OCTOBER 11, 1936. Britain and the Fascists Has Nation Swung Away From Leftist France—Is There Secret Understanding With Germany? BY THE RIGHT HON. LORD STRA- BOLGIL. URING the years between 1911 and 1014 a secret understand- ing was reached between the British foreign office, on the one hand, and the French cabinet and war office, on the other hand, by which Britain would go to the aid of France in case of war with Germany. ' Only a section of the British cabinet was informed of this understanding. In the British system of government, of the 18 or 20 cabinet members, there is always an inner circle of three or four. This select inner group deals with the major issues in advance. In the Liberal government at that time the inner circle which knew about the French “alliance” were Prime Minis- ter Asquith, Foreign Secretary Grey and Minister of War Haldane. Win- ston Churchill, then first lord of the lldmu'l alty, knew something, but not all. Other important members of the cabinet, including Mr. Lloyd . George, then chancellor of the exchequer Lord Morley, secretary of state for In- ria, and John Burns, were kept in en- tire ignorance of these commitments. ‘The permanent officials, particularly in the foreign office, knew all about it. ‘The majority of the cabinet was in- formed only on the very eve of war. Unless the prime minister of the day is particularly forceful (a Glad- stone or a Lloyd George) the per- manent officials are the real rulers of the country, checked only from time to time by the politician’s fear df public opinion. The inner circle in the British cab- inet today consists of Prime Minister Baldwin, ex-Prime Minister Ramsay | MacDonald, Chancellor of the Ex- chequer Neville Chamberlain and Lord Chancellor Hailsham—all elderly men, Young Mr. Anthony Eden, foreign secretary, is not in this charmed inner ring. If he is wise, the prime minister of the day keeps the King and the im- mediate royal entourage informed of the most secret phases of foreign | policy, but he does not always do so. Examples of the workings of this secret diplomacy and covert policy were the notorious Hoare-Laval agree- ment for partitioning Ethiopia and buying off Italy last Fall, and the de- cision to remove sanctions after the fall of Addis Ababa and the retire- ment of the Negus from his country. Inner Circle Always Knows. In the first case only the prime min- ister, the chancellor of the exchequer, Ramsay MacDonald and the then for- eign minister—Sir Samuel Hoare— knew what was afoot; the cabinet as a whole was not consulted until the secret was out. And it eame out through the indiscretion of a French newspaper editor. In the sanctions case, the inner cir- cle took their decisions without & full meeting of the cabinet. Chancellor of the Exchequer Neville Chamberlain clinched it by blurting out the govern- ment’s intentions before the cabinet as a whole. And still less did Parlia- ment have any inkling that a decision had been taken. With the above explanation of the who can read the signs aright find considerable evidence that there is a secret understanding between impor- tant personages in governing positions in London (high permanent officials and a select coterie of cabinet minis- ters, bankers, etc.) and certain of those who surround Herr Hitler and have influence with him. To appreciate why such an under- standing has been reached it must be remembered that in Britain a govern- ment of the Right (that is, a Con- servative, almost reactionary, govern- ment) is in power. Its natural sym- pathies are with the Nazis, Fascists and Militarists everywhere. The Right politicians in France, now in opposition, the leaders now in power in Germany, Italy, Austria and Greece, would be the normal collaborators with such a government. Yet, owing to past alignments, for- mer alliances and official membership in the League of Nations, the British government as a whole has been try- ing to work with governments of the Left or Center—notably in France, Russia, Czechoslovakia, Belgium and the Scandinavian states. Europe Dividing Into Two Groups. Europe is rapidly dividing itself into two groups. In one are Germany, Italy, Austria and Hungary. If the military-Fascist movement succeeds in Spain, Spain will join this group and add considerably to its strategical strength, especially as far as England is concerned. Not only would the use of the Spanish harbors facing the Atlantic in a possible war be of the greatest value as cruiser and submarine bases to any British enemy with a fleet, but the naval harbor of Gibraltar would be useless, with a hostile Spain, be- cause it is commanded by artillery mounted among the hills of the Span- ish hinterland. Greece, under Gen. Metaxas, has now joined this group. The strategical position of Greece in the Eastern Mediterranean is of great importance. Over against this group are Russia, real workings of British policy thos | German air force holds a real menace to Britain. London is not only the largest and richest city in Europe, the seat of the government of the greatest empire in the world, but it is peculiarly vulnerable to an attack from the air. Berlin can be screened by an arti- ficial fog cloud, using a device already experimented with in the Ruhr, but attacking airplanes can always find London by following the wide Thames estuary. In the past, so long as Britain had a strong fleet, the sea surrounding her coasts, even the 22-mile wide channel between England and France, was sufficient defense. The rapid growth GERMANY EXPECTS ALLIES TO CONCEDE ON COLONIES Ready to Resume Place in Leagu e When Restoration Is Settled and Enter New Peace Agreements. BY ANTHONY LANE. By Radio to The Star. BERLIN, October 10.—German gov- ernment spokesmen are persuaded that in a very short time—perhaps within weeks—an agreement will be reached with the Allied powers to restore some of Germany's former colonies to her, or to grant her other colonial terri- tories. In return for such concessions Ger- the strength of a mandate, for ex- ample, natives of the mandated coun- try have settled there as colonists, investing their money in land, cattle, etc. Business firms have established themselves, capital has developed natural resources. In addition to this a civil admin- istration has been built up by the mandated power and, a military establishment also. But all these in- stitutions do not constitute the hard- est part of the problem. There are also the local populations to be con- sidered. b Problem of Natives. ministration. In some cases large measures of home rule have been Neither England nor France can very easily say to a subject people: in efficiency, power and, above all, numbers of the airplanes available to attack her have altered the whole position Britain feels herself threat- | ened also in the Pacific by an aggres- sive, clever and despotically ruled Japan, pursuing a settled plan which | will lead her to the Malay States, under British protection, and thus to the gates of India. So much for strategy. But the governing classes in Britain —sogiety, finance, the upper class generally—are terribly afraid of what they call communism. In the eyes of these affrightened people the present French government and the Spanish Loyalists are communist as much as Russia is. Half the British aristocracy and their followers and the “City"—the Wall Street of London—are strongly pro- German because of the supposed men- ace of Communism. There are other forces at work also. On the whole, German influence in Britain is in the ascendant. The result of all these pressures and counter-pressures is that there is a split in the British cabinet on the most important question of policy of the day. There is a section, roughly corresponding to the inne: circle |around the prime minister, Which would make terms with Germany and buy peace at any price. The other section believes that it is impossible to satisfy Germany in any case. section still believes in the traditional British policy, pursued consistently for four centuries, of maintaining the bal- This section, which I may for con- venience call the pro-French section, believes that it is representing the ma- jority of the British voters in support- ing the League. In this contest be- tween the two groups sometimes the intentions of one group prevail; some- times the other. The breach of the freely entered into Locarno treaty, when German troops reoccupied the demilitarized Rhineland | zone, drove a wedge between the Brit- | NEW DEAL SHIFT POSSIBLE IF ROOSEVELT IS CHOICE - Orthodox Democrats Support Adminis- tration for Election—Even President May Change or Lose Control. BY MARK SULLIVAN. OME Democrats, strongly opposed to Mr. Roosevell and acutely disturbed by his administration, have nevertheless reasoned out for themselves a justification for vot- ing the Democratic ticket next month. Many are in the South. They admit that about every reason why the South should vote Democratic has been de- stroyed by Mr. Roosevelt and the New Deal. They admit that the New Dedl makes a head-on assault against States’ rights, long dear to the South. They understand fully that the Democratic party as a national organization is soliciting and apparently receiving masses of colored votes in the North; that the Democratic party as & na- tional organization is now committed to the policy of encouraging Negro voting and of electing and appointing Negroes to office in proportion to their ratio of the population. The Southern Democrats do not see how the party can do this as a national policy—and at the same time permit the South to retain its local policy of discouraging colored voting. Much of the South thinks it imperative to discourage Negro voting in sections where the colored population ‘outnumbers the whites, and where therefore mass vot- ing by the Negroes might result in complete sets of colored office holders. Yet other Democrats feel acute dis- approval of the fundamental theories of the New Deal. Nevertheless they | hesitate to vote the Republican ticket. In their dilemma they do what men | similarly situated often do, they in- | vent an argument which justifies them | in remaining Democratic in November. The argument is plausible. It is not merely an excuse; it has some sub-| stantial justification. It is sincerely | made by conscientious men. It calls| for consideration and respect. | Senate Majority Certain ‘The argument begins by saying that no matter what happens on November 3 there is bound to be a Democratic majority in the Senate. This is true. So many Democratic Senators were slected for six-year terms in the land- slides of 1932 and 1934, that even if | every senatorial election next No- vember were won by Republicaris, the | Democrats would still have a majority | of the Senate. The Senate is abso- lutely certain to have a Demotratic | majority for two years at least. Starting with this condition, the | reasoning runs thus: If Gov. Landon were elected President the Democratic majority in the Senate would in- | stinctively resist him. They would become self-consciously and aggres- sively Democrats. They would in- stinctively and naturally be an op- position party—opposition, that is, to Mr. Landon. The Republican Presi- dent presumably would be following a conservative course, while the Demo- crats in the Senate, instinctively pre- senting a contrast, would ténd toward radicalism. . ‘There would be a duplicate of the condition during the last two years of Mr. Hoover's term, when the Presi- dent was a Republican while the Dem- | ocrats controlled one branch of Con- | gress, the House. The Democratic | majority in the House' led by Speaker | | Garner, was actively partisan in op- | position to the Republican President. That division—the President Repub- lican, the House Democratic—made it difficult for the Government as a | whole to make headway against the depression. Speaker Garner was re- ported to have said that the Demo- crats would do just enough to save the country—but not enough to save Mr. Hoover, in the presidential elec- tion that was just ahead. The division was a material handicap to recovery, a material contribution to the depres- sion going farther than it needed to. It was an unhappy condition. It is opinion inclined to the side of Ger- many in this matter. That was in March of this year. In the Fall of last year public opin- jon supported the pro-League, pro- French group and led to the reversal of the Hoare-Laval policy of partition- ing Ethiopia. This same group in the British cabinet has so far prevented any open declaration in favor of re- storing the former German colonies. But that is not to say that the more powerful group, with its dominating inner circle in the cabinet, has not made this privy understanding with a similar group in Germany. Here is some of the evidence. ‘There is a subtle change visible in certain powerful organs of the press, notably the London, Times, which normally represents foreign office opinion. ‘These “organs of public opinion” are becoming anti-Russian and pro-German. They have done all they can or dare to uphold the position of Herr Schacht, the finan- cial dictator in Berlin. Some of the German arms have been made from raw materials bought with British money. Naval Agreement. Last year the admiralty—which for generations has been the most power- ful ministry in the British system, and has frequently pursued its own foreign policy—made the Anglo- German naval agreement behind the back of the French government and, for that matter, the American Gov- ernment. This was actually brought about by Lord Monsell, one of the closest and most intimate friends of Prime Minister Baldwin, for years his chief whip, both in office and in opposition, and at that time first lord of the admiralty. He has now retired, but the tendency of policy remains. At the Dardanelles conference at Montreux last Suthmer, the British delegation fought hard and single- handed for the right of entry into the Black Sea for a hostile fleet in time of war. This right would have advantaged Germany more than any other nation; and Germany was not even a party to the negotiations. The British were opposed by the delega- | tions of France, Russia, Turkey and Rumania, the three latter the Black Sea littoral powers. 8o far as the British attitude was concerned, the League of Nations might not have been in existence at all. Eventually, the British delegation had to give way; but not before it had exposed ——— ) recent in memory. and it is little wonder if many Democrats wish to so cast their votes this year as to avert reproduction of the division between President and one branch of Con- gress which existed during the two years preceding March 4, 1932. Divided Government. That is one part of the argument: That if Mr. Landon were elected, he, as a Republican President, would have on his hands a Democratic Senate and therefore the country would see & divided Government. The other part of the argument is really the same argument that is used in justification of the position taken in this campaign by Senator Carter Glass of Virginia. That Mr. Glass de- tests the New Deal, everybody knows. Yet in this campaign Mr. Glass re- mains a Democrat, and he says he is going to vote for Mr. Roosevelt. Ap- parently he preserves his intellectual integrity by declining to make any speech in support of Mr. Roosevelt— clearly it would be difficult for Mr. Glass to make such a speech without stultifying hipself and repudiating the strong sentiments of disapproval which he has publicly uttered about the New Deal. But Mr. Glass will vote for Mr. Roosevelt. The theory upon which Mr. Glass is supported in this attitude is the same theory held by many Demo- crats who regard the New Deal with loathing, but who nevertheless feel that in this election their better coursg is to remain Democratic. The theory is that once this election is over the Democrats in the Senate will immediately become Democrats— as distinguished fromt New Dealers, They will take the conservative course. They will follow the leadership of Sen- ator Glass, and of his equally able and conservattve colleague, Senator Byrd. It is even hinted that the present Roosevelt leader in the Senate, Mr. Robinson of Arkansas, will follow what most persons believe to be his per- sonal inclination, and act much as Senator Glass acts. If Mr. Roosevelt continues to be a New Dealer they will resist him. If he sends any more New Deal legislation to Congress they will vote it down. If Mr. Roosevelt tries to appoint any one too radical to fill any vacancy on the Supreme Court the Democrats will decline to confirm the appointment. They will, so the argument runs, go further. They will repeal some of the New Deal legisla« tion and modify other parts of it. They will insist that Mr. Roosevelt accept the advice of orthodox Demoe crats. In short, so this expectation runs, the country will be given a truly Democratic Government, not a New Deal one. It is on this theory, or expectation, or dream, that many Democrats who abhor the New Deal say they will, nevertheless, vote for Mr. Roosevelt. Followers May Change. There is some ground for the argu« ment that if and after Mr. Roosevelt is re-elected the Democrats in Cone gress may depart from his leadership. It is always possible, indeed it is even habitual for Congress to be less sube missive to a President during his sec- ond term. During the first term of any President members of his party |in Congress are under much compul- sion to accept his leadership. They know that presumably he will be re« nominated. They know they will be obliged to support him as a candidate for re-election. And they hesitate to utter any criticism which they might have to swallow later. This motive disappears during the second term. Also, & President during his first term ordinarily exhausts the patronage he has to give and loses this leverage to force obedience from his party in Congress. In sum, it is quite possible for the Democrats in the next Con- gress to act consciously as orthodox Democrats, to reject the New Dea! and reject Mr. Roosevelt's leadership, assuming he is re-elected. Along with this expectation goes another having to do with Mr. Roose- velt personally. This expectation says that Mr. Roosevelt himself -will be conservative after the election, that he will be glad to fall in with the determination of the Democrats in the Senate to be Democrats and not New Dealers. The argument says that with the depression well over, radi- calism will be less strident in the country, and Mr. Roosevelt will be under less temptation to cater to it. May Quit New Deal The happy expectation of some Democrats that they can vote for re- election of Mr. Roosevelt in confident expectation that after he is re-elected he will change, and that in the future Congress the Democrats will be Dem- ocrats and not New Dealers—this expectation might turn out to be true. But it fails to take account of several factors. One is Mr. Roosevelt. It is a hardy hope to assume either that Mr. Roosevelt will change, of that the Democrats in Congress can control him. Men do not often change their natures at the age of 54. Mr. Roosevelt by temperament leans strongly toward the radical side. It is not so much that he has a radical philosophy about gov- ernment; it is rather that tempera- mentally he likes to do striking things : and likes to hive around him men wha have novel ideas. The radicals are what the Spanish call “sympatica” to him. He likes them as company. I’ suspect close observers in Washington - will agree with the judgment expressed | some time ago by Mr. W. M. Kip-: linger, himself one of the closest and most intelligent observers. Speaking’ of President Roosevelt Mr. Kiplinger said: ‘“Personally, temperamentally deep down, he is more attracted to reform ideas of Tugwell than to busi- ness ideas of Roper; he actively warma toward the imaginative Tugwell. * * % He is strongly under influence of the economic planning group, the crusad ers for social control, consumer in- terest, and abundant life. * * * They are the ‘unorthodox element.’ * * ¢ They wish a planned order, con- trolled from above, largely by govern- ment. * * * Mrs. Roosevelt adheres generally to this group, and she is ) influential.” £ That is a correct pict of the = Roosevelt inner circle. And it is dif-* ficult to imagine Senator Carter Glass, for example, taking the place of Mr. intima!