Evening Star Newspaper, March 4, 1940, Page 3

Welles Given View Of West Front Lines In Leaving Reich Dieckhoff Says Farewell To U. S. Emissary at End of Berlin Vi By the Associated Press. BASEL, Switzerland, March 4.— United States Undersecretary of State Sumner Welles, en route from Berlin to Paris on what many Euro- peans interpret as an effort to end thelr war, saw the western front wno-man’s land” today. President Roosevelt's fact-finde? arrived here by train at 11 am, traveling through Bavaria along the Karlsruhe-Rhine line. From the train window, he could gee both Germany's Siegfried Line on one side of the Rhine and the French Maginot Line on the other. Mr, Welles said he planned to rest in Lausanne, taking the Sim- plon-Orient express for Paris either tomorrow or Wednesday night. At Berne Mr. Welles was met by United States Minister Leland Har- rison, Mrs. Harrison and’ members of the Legation staff, with whom he chatted during a 10-minute wait. Baron H. Sigismund von Bibra, the counsellor of the Berne German | delegation, also was at the station, but said he had come to “greet the German undersecretary for wa- ters and forests, who arrived on the same train.” Mr. Welles, it was learned, will write in Switzerland his second com- plete report to Washington, which will be given to Mr, Harrison for transmission. U. 5.-Nazi Differnces May Be Ironed Out i BERLIN, March 4 (#).—Sumner Welles left for Paris last night after | a farewell from Dr. Hans Dieckhoff, recalled German Ambassador to the | United States, which aroused specu- lation as to whether they mighc} have ironed out the question of rep- | resentation between the two coun- | tries. Dr. Dieckhoff, who has remained here since November, 1938, when the American Ambassador was called home from Berlin to report on the anti-Jewish campaign, ap- | peared with other officials at the blacked-out Anhalter Station to bid | Mr. Welles farewell—after being | conspicuous by his absence at Mr. | * Welles’ arrival Friday. Protocol calls for a diplomat sc- credited to another country, but temporarily at home, to greet ar- riving diplomats from that country. | Besides Dr. Dieckhoff, Germans who went to the station to bid Mr. Welles farewell included Baron Ernst von Weizsaecker, state sec- retary in the foreign office, and Baron Alexander von Doernberg, | chief of protocol. Absence of Envoy Regretted. Quarters close to the German for- eign office have said that Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop | particularly regretted the absence | of an American Ambassador from Berlin at this time. In Mr. Welles’ talks with Fuehrer Adolf Hitler, Ribbentrop, Deputy Party Leader Rudolf Hess and Field Marshal Goering the question of a possible improvement of relations between Germany and the United States was said to have revolved around the question of a return of | Ambassadors to Washington and | Berlin. Mr. Welles wound up his fact- | seeking stay in Germany yesterday | with conferences with Goering and | Hess. The conference with the portly Goering at Karin Hall, the number two Nazi's wooded country estate north of Berlin, was as hedged by official silence as his Saturday’s talk with Hitler, but it seemed certain the American envoy again was told of German confidence in military and economic power to attain vic- tory. Apparently Goering had plenty to tell Mr. Welles about German au- tarchy, in which he plays a prime role as director of the four-year plan for economic self-sufficiency, as well as the air force which he built up as | Germany's air minister. Three Hours at Karin Hall. Accompanied by United States | Charge d’Affaires Alexander Kirk, | Mr. Welles was kept at Karin Hall more than three hours and stayed for luncheon, which had not been planned originally. Playing the generous host, Goering chatted with the Americans in his | study, guided them around his coun- try residence in its woodland setting and showed his collection of weap- ons, paintings and sculptures. ‘When they departed they in- scribed their names in Goering's guest book. Prior to seeing the field marshal, Mr. Welles paid a courtesy call on Hess, Hitler's deputy in all party matters, and stayed to talk with him an hour.® Mr. Welles’ visit to Hess was re- garded as a courtesy gesture to the Reich’s home front and was under- stood to have been suggested by Germans. Through German eyes it con- stituted the first official American recognition that, to use Hitler's own words, “It is not the state which commands the party, but the party which commands the state.” Clarified Position of Party. Hess took occasion, according to authorized sources, “to clear up any mistaken notions about the Naz party, its tenets and its functions in the state.” The Nazi view was that Mr. Welles’ previous knowledge of Naziism had come only from other persons, many of them prejudiced, and that now he should “learn the truth” at first hand. It was understood Hess tried to interpret Nazilsm in democratic terms, claiming it is the real expres- sion of democracy in that under the leadership principle a career is open to the poorest as well as the wealth- lest. The deputy Nazi leader argued, these sources said, that Naziism came to power at the will of the peo- ple and that referenda since had proved the people still stand behind the movement. Mr. Welles arranged to go directly to Lausanne “to do nothing but sleep, sleep, sleep,” as one member of his party put it, commenting on the strenuousness of the stay in Ber- lin, Elaborating on the thesis of per- manent hegemony - over Bohemia- Moravia, Slovakia, Poland and | with an annex at 1422 K street, | opportunity of preying on the un- | spiracy, and may be prohibited or | indictment. { made. WASHINGTON, ALTON, ILL—TWISTER IN ACTION—This i3 how the funnel of a tornado, which hit parts of two States, appeared in its “up-dip” here. It disappeared a few seconds after the picture was —A. P. Wirephoto | Group Health Membership 'Now Tofals 2,458 Group Health Association, crux of | the case against organized medicine, | is a going concern which, its offi- | cials claim, still is growing in-mem- bership and service to Government | employes. | It was the alleged boycott and restraint of trade against this as- sociation by organized medicine. which led to the long-drawn-out court battle climaxed today by the decision of the Court of Appeals, validating the anti-trust indictment against the doctors. G. H. A, according to reports today, now has 2,458 members, in| 47 agencies of the Government, in-! cluding both legislative and execu-| tive branches. Through these mem- bers, the medical co-operative fur- nishes care to 5,768 persons, includ- ing families and dependents of its members. The principal clinic of G. H. A. is located at 1328 I street N.W., which accommodates the physio- therapy and eye, ear, nose and throat departments. Perry R. Taylor, formerly of the Rural Blectrification Administra- tion, is the administrator of G. H. A. on a loan from Good Will Fund, Inc., which has paid his salary, and Partial Text of (Continued From First Page.) means, the quack and the charlatan have been largely deprived of the fortunate and the credulous. We also recognize that in personal conduct and in professional skill the rules and canons, so established, have aided in raising the standards of medical practice to the advan- tage of the whole country. We are mindful of a generally known fact that under these rules and stand- ards there has developed an esprit de corps largely as a result of which the members of the profession con- tribute a considerable portion of | their time to the relief of the un- fortunate and the destitute. All of which may well be acknowledged to their credit. Notwithstanding these important considerations, it cannot be admitted that the medical pro- fession may through its great med- ical societies, either by rule or disciplinary proceedings, legally ef- fectuate restraints as far-reaching as those now charged. “An act harmless when done by one may become a public -wrong when done by many acting in concert, for it then takes on the form of a con- punished, if the result be hurtful to the public or to the individual” against whom it is directed. Eastern States Retail Lumber Dealers’ Asso- ciation vs. United States, 23¢ U. S. at p. 614. If there is any justifica- tion for the restraint, so as to make it reasonable as a regulation of professional practice, it must be shown in evidence as a defense, since it does not appear in the Restraint Would Restrict Group Health’s Liberty. Restraints prohibited by section 3 of the Sherman Act are those which unduly hinder a person from em- ploying his talents, industry or capi- tal in any lawful undertaking and thus keep the public from receiving goods and services as freely as it would without such restraints. Enough has been said to show that the restraint here charged would restrict the common liberty of Group Health, the doctors and the hospi- tals from engaging in the pursuit of their respective functions. If, on the trial, the charge of confedera- tion to this end is sustained, defend- ants’ method of reaching their ob- jective may be thereby defeated, but if the objective is wise—as they insist—they still have left, as was said by the English judge in the Pratt case, the safer and more kind- ly weapons of legitimate persuasion and reasoned argument. In the proper use of these, much, as we think, may be accomplished to avoid the growing movement toward pro- fessional regimentation. Or, this opportunity neglected, members of the medical associations in the Dis- trict of Columbia perhaps may find in section 3, as we construe it, their only protection in the right to prac- tice on a fee for service basis. In the light of what has been said, we consider the numerous cases involving the reasonable operations of trade associations and trade unions as inapplicable. Organiza- tions and rules which have as their purpose the improvement of condi- tions in any particular trade or occu- pation, and the muuth.:eol“rfl:; tlons between traders, s nave just pointéd out, beneficial rather than detrimental to the pub- lic interest. But when these same organizations go so far as to impose plans to send Mr. Taylor through- out the country later, to help install medical co-operatives elsewhere. Cameron G. Garman of the Farm Credit Administration is president of G. H. A, and other officers are from various branches of the Gov- ernment, Medical (Continued From First Page.) on Medical Education and Hospitals, and Dr. Roscoe Genung Leland, director of the Bureau of Medical Economics. From the Medical Society of the | District of Columbia, these officers | and former officers—Dr. Arthur | Carlisle Christie, Dr. Coursen Baxter | Conklin, Dr. James Bayard Gregg Custis, Dr. Thomas Allen Groover. Dr. Robert Arthur Hooe, Dr. Al- phonse Martel, Dr. Thomas Ernest Mattingly, Dr. Francis Xavier Mc- Govern, Dr. Thomas Edwin Neill, Dr. Edward Hiram Reede, Dr. Wil- liam Mercer Sprigg, Dr. William Joseph Stanton, Dr. John Ogle War- fleld, jr.; Dr. Prentiss Wilson, Dr. Wallace Mason . Yater and Dr. Joseph Rogers Young. Three Principal Issues. Three principal issues were in- volved in the case. The first was whether the practice of medicine man Anti-Trust Act. The second was whether, if the law is applicable, the restraints charged in this case were unreasonable and therefore illegal, and, thirdly, whether the indictment was defective in form. The Court of Appeals held the anti- trust to be applicable, ruled that the question of the reasonableness or otherwise of the alleged restraints was a matter to be proved at the trial, and decided that the indict- | ment ‘was not defective in form. With respect to the applicability of the Anti-Trust Act, the court said: “We think enough has been said to demonstrate that the common law governing restraints of trade has not been confined, as defendants in- sist, to the field of commercial ac- tivity, ordinarily defined as ‘trade, but embraces as well the field of the medical profession. And since, as we think, we are required by the decisions of the Supreme Court to look to the common law as a chart by which to determine the class and scope of offenses denounced in Sec- tion 3, it follows that we must hold that a restraint imposed upon the lawful practice of medicine—and a fortiori—upon the operation of hos- pitals and of a lawful organization for the financing of medical serv- ices to its members, is just as énuch in restraint of trade as if it were falls within the purview of the Sher- Medical Anti-T we repeat that the charge made! here, and for the purposes of the demurrer admitted, is that the so-| cieties sought to restrain an asso- | ciation of persons of modest means | from receiving medical services at lower cost and to coerce doctors and hospitals to this end. The charge may be wholly unwarranted and the facts, when they are disclosed on the trial, may show an entirely different state of affairs, but for present purposes we must take the charge as though its verity were established; and in that light, it seems to us clear that the offense is within the condemnation of the statute. It certainly cannot be doubted that Congress intended to exert its full power, in the public interest, to set free from unreason- able obstruction the exercise of those rights and privileges which are a part of our constitutiofal in- heritance, and these include im- munity from compulsory work at the will of another, the right to choose an occupation, the right to engage in any lawful calling for which one has the requisite capacity, skill, material or capital, and there- after the free enjoyment of the fruits of one’s labors. Congress un- doubtedly legislated on the com- mon law principle that every per- son has individually, and that the public has collectively, a right to require the course of all legitimate occupations “in the District of Co- lumbia to be free from unreason- able obstructions; and likewise in recognition of the fact that all trades, businesses and professions, which prevent idleness and exercise men in labor and employment for the benefit of themselves and their families and for the increase of their substance, are desirable in the public good and any undue restraint upon them is wrong and is immedi- ate and unreasonable and, therefore, within the purview of the Sherman Act, * * * Defendants contend as a subsid- iary argument that, without regard to whether the restraint would or would not “be an fllegal act ordi- narily, it is not so in the present instance for the reason that Group Health as a corporation is itself ille= gally practicing medicine. The United States District Court decided to the contrary some time ago, in a suit for declaratory judgment. There was no appeal, and the question, so far as we are concerned, may be said to be open. On this ‘demurrer it is unnecessary, and indeed unde- sirabje, that we should pass upon it except to decide whether, as de- scribed in the indictment, Group Health is necessarily violating the directed against any other occupa- required. In these respects, it dif- | fers from the medicine-practicing corporations which in many of the | States have been held to be illegal. Without more, therefore, than now appears, we are unable to say that Group Health is illegally practicing medicine. We come finally to the question whether the indictment is sufficient in form., The learned trial judge was of opinion it was not. He thought the indictment afflicted with vague and uncertain state- ments and lacking in material facts. On the argument in this court, ap- pellees’ contentions may be sum- marized as follows: That the in- dictment is generally indefinite, full of conclusions and opinions, and does not set out the offense with particularity; the allegations as to the background of the conspiracy and the power of the medical or- ganizations are irrelevant; the char- acter of Group Health and the busi- ness of the Washington hospitals are not properly shown; there is a variance between the risk shar- ing plans described in the back- ground of the conspiracy and the description of the activities of Group Health; the averments as to the principles of medical ethics and the operation of the ieties are in- sufficiently stated; there are no facts stated as to restraints on hospitals; the averment as to dates is in- sufficient, and there is no charge against the individual defendants. ‘We shall consider briefly these points. It has been stated time and again as a fundamental rule that in an indictment all the essential elements of the offense must be averred with sufficient clearness axgd particularity to enable the accused to understand the nature of the charge against him and enable him intelligently to prepare to meet it, and to plead the result, whether conviction or ac- quittal, as his protection against another prosecution for the same offense, But the degree of particu- larity requisite to accomplish these purposes is all that isrequired. * * * Held No Overt Acts Needed to Be Charged. In Nash vs, United States, 220 U. 8, 373, 378, it was held that no overt acts need be charged in an indict- ment under the Sherman Act, and the cases under the act show that the indictments usually set out the organization of defendants, the ex- tent of their control over the trade, their relations with each other, and the means whereby they conspired to perpetrate the restraint. The in- dictment at hand contains these law. * ¢ Unable to Say Group Health Practices Jllegally. But in all the cases we have ex- amined in which the practice has been condemned, the profit object of the offending corporation has been shown to be its main purpose, and in no case were the circumstances precisely like those described in the indictment, i. e., & non-profit’ or- ganization, conducted so that the proper doctor and patient relation- p {3 preserved;. alty to his patient s0 as to com- mercialize medicine in a way con- unreasonable restraints on the oper- ations in their field, they become subject to the prohibition of the Sherman Act. Sugar Institute vs. United sh.m. 29 U. 8. vWM' . Hungary, Germans asserted this| 600. *Int leadership, not domination, A . | Individual Type Needs; Applied Psvcholesy averments. It charges that all the defendants have engaged in .a com- bination and in restraint of trade. It sets out the place of the conspiracy and the plans of the conspirators and the means taken to make them effective. The restraint ‘was to be imposed on Group Health, on’ physicians, and on Washington hospitals, and it is specifically stated thist the conspiracy was to prevent doctors of Group Health from treat- ing and operating on patients in the HEALTH LECTURES HEAR DR. LLOYD C. SHANKLIN - 25 yre. matienally known henlth authority. Meon., Mar. £th, 3. 3.m. end 8 D.mwt Tyes,, ‘Mar. Bth, 3 p.m. and 8 p.m. lectures, L Food Demeonstrations; Exercise; Narmon- fous Eating for Health snd Lengevity; Your and Mastaphysies; Youth snd Beauty Cul- ture, Weloeme. Every afterncen % p.m., every night 8 p.m., all woek, LEAGUE LARGER LIFE 1414 16tk BL N.W. ‘D, tion, or employment, or business. And, of course, the fact that defend- ants are physicians and medical or- gunizations is of no significance, for Section 3 prohibits ‘any person’ from imposing the proscribed re- straints. “Congress did not provide that one ¢iass any more than snother might impose restraints o that one class any-more than another might be subjected to restraint.” Y On Allegations of Power. “Allegations as to the power of the medical organizations are not irrelevant, They give to the con- spiracy s significance in regard to restraining the practice of medicine, which it might not otherwijse have and are similar to allegations, in other indictments, of the control over a large amount of a particular trade. & “The point that Group Health is not sufficiently described is an- swered in the paragraph of the in- dictment which sets out its incorpo- ration, its purpose, its character, its activities, and its pelationship to its members. \Victory ls Forecast For New Hatch Bill Facing Senafe Today Meosure lndoifidbi o National Civil Service » Reform League By J. A. OLEARY. Passage of the new: Halch extending to thousands of State and municipal pmployes ‘the law “The alleged variance between the th risk-sharing plans described in. the ‘background,’ which it is charged the American Medical Association habitually opposed, and the plan of Group Health, seems to us immate- rial. ‘The obvious purpose of the indictment is to charge that all risk-sharing plans” have been op- posed and that the present restraint is merely another attack, The appellate tribunal held: “The common law rule was ap- plied principally to contracts where- by & man promised not to engage in his occupation, including the prac- tice of medicine, and in many Eng- lish cases such a restraint on the practice of medicine was described as a contract in ‘restraint of trade.’ Defendants contend, however, that whatever the English usage, the word ‘trade’ had in this country a definite and well-understood mean- ing, and as used in the Sherman Act was confined to transportation and buying, selling or exchanging of commodities, and in any case was not intended to apply to any employs ment or business carried on by they ‘learned professions.’ The determi- nation of this aspect of our problem lies in the answer to this proposi- tion.” Enlarges Acceptance of Word. Discussing the case further, the appellate court said: “The indubitable effect of all these cases, English and American, is to enlarge the common acceptance of the word ‘trade’ when embraced in the phrase ‘restraint of trade’ to : cover all occupations in which men are engaged for a livelihood. We think it makes no difference that, after the practice ‘of medicine had been recognized in the doctrine of ‘restraint of trade’ Davis vs. Ma- son, supra, a number of judges pre- ferred to speak in broader terms of rust Decision by Appeals Court hospitals within the District of Co- lumbia. The preamble to the reso- lution adopted by District Society, to which we have already referred, declares the society’s apparent power of hindering Group Health if it can prevent patients of physicians in the employ of Group Health being received in the hospitals, and the indictment charges the subse- quent circulation among the hos- pitals of the white list as the means to this end. This is a sufficient charge of a conspiracy to restrain the business of Group Health, the doctors and the hospitals. ‘The point that Group Health is not sufficiently described is an- swered in the paragraph of the in- dictment which sets out its incor- poration, its purpose, its character, its activities, and its relationship to its members. The alleged variance between the risk sharing plans described in the “background,” which it is charged the American Medical Association habitually opposed, and the plan of Group Health, seems to us imma- terial. The obvious purpose of the indictment is to charge that all risk sharing plans have been opposed and that the present restraint is merely another attack. We think it was unnecessary to set out any more detailed facts as to the contents of the Principles of Medical Ethics and the operations of committees and society meetings. It is enough to charge the con- spiracy and the means used to effect the unlawful restraints. Overt acts are unnecessary. There is a sufficient allegation of dates. The indictment, it is true, states the beginning of the conspira- cy shortly prior to the incorporation of Group Health, but it also shows that it continued to the date of the presentation of the indictment. That is enough. ‘The final point is that there is no definite charge against the indi- vidual defendants. The indictment in the opening paragraph names the associations and persons made de- fendants. The individuals are stated as the persons “who will be referred to hereinfater as ‘individual defend- ants’,” and they are thereafter de- scribed in the succeeding paragraphs 23 members or officers in the so- cieties and members in or officers.of the hospitals or members on the House Shies at Finnish Loan In voting Finnish loan, Congressmen evaded possible poli- “for and against.”’ We go on record that Marlow’s Famous Reading Anthracite. cut your coal billi,. T¥y it.. :hhfalwmm' we bave no alibl, ‘Marlow Coal Co. 811 E Street N.W. In Business 82 Years names 'e_seek to avold no league urged approval of the bill as vital “in the interest of sound government administration and our Iree election system.” Uncontrolled political activity by public employes, the league contended, underminds confidence in “our traditional party system of government.” . Mr. Kaplan’s letter said undue partisan activity by public employes invites political reprisals. The pending bill, he said, will enhance public confidence in impartial gov- ernment administration. Only One Jailable Offense. ‘The bill would apply only to those | State and municipal employes, in administrative positions, whose sal- ary is paid in whole or in part from Federal-aid funds. It also applies specifically to the personnel of the District .government. Only one offense in the bill calls for fine or imprisonment, namely, the section making it a violation of law for a public official to use his official authority to influence an election. The penalty for other re- strictions, such as taking active part | in a campaign, is merely the power given the Civil Service Commission to withhold Federal funds from a State agency. - ———— ‘public policy’ and the like without using the word ‘trade.’” ‘Today's decision was unanimous. | The appellate court followed its | usual practice of assigning the case | to only three of the six judges that comprise the tribunal. - Associate | Justices. Harold M. Stephens, Henry W. Edgerton and Wiley Rutledge | apparently took no part in the de- | liberations of the A. M. A. case. In | an attack on a corporation which was allegedly improperly practicing law, the Bar Association of the Dis- trict of Columbia recently raised the point that when three judges of the appellate court hear a case, that does not constitute a majority of the tri- bunal. The Supreme Court, how- ever, apparently ignored this con- tention. Building construction in l*ono- lulu, Hawail, last year broke all records. M Regular fortnightly sailings by the great American Flag Liners HoskengTon MARCH 23) Wantictn (FROM GENOA, March 23 “*7.55% * See vour TRAVEL 1CENT or XEXX XX pRERXY UI.§. Lines 912 15th Street N.W. National 2600 : KKKk kA KKKk kK “See Ets and See Better” o0 DON'T NEGLECT YOUR EYES? At the first symptom of eye trouble, the only safe thing .to do is to have your eyes examined without de- lay. Neglect of the eyes may have serious consequences. 608 13th N.W. Between ¥ and @ N.W. responsibility. bi4 National 0311 Our Coal and Service Must Be Good F.C.C. Declines to Bar ‘Confucius Say’ Jokes By the Associated Press. The Federal Communications ommission declined today to bar ‘Confucius say” jokes from the air. The commission, in reply to a let- ter from a Pittsburgh man asking that such jokes be banned, said it did not have authority.under the law to direct radio stations to broadcast or to refrain from broadcasting such programs. TODAY’S SPECIAL Newest type fishi: - ding % Deautilel eui diamends. $20.00 $40.08 KAHN-OPPENHEIMER, Inc. 329 Valxe 903 F St. N.W. NA. 7 NOTICE! © There's still time to learn to dance for your Spring parties—if you take your first lesson at Arthur Mur- ray’s today. You'll love danc- ing the fascinating rhythms of the Rumba, Fox Trot, Wialtz or Conga. Don't de- lay!. Be a graceful, expert partner . . . enjoy the thrill of being twice as popular. Studios open until 10 P.M. Ethel M. Fistere's ARTHUR MURRAY STUDIO 1101 Conn. Ave. DI. 2460 ALL GLASSES * Complete with Examination $*2.50 w~o HIGHER Why Pay More? This Includes EYE EXAKINATION BY MEDICAL DOCTOR (Oculist) o Single e Debie Visiw Loases cheice of popular styied gold- filled fri ‘meuntings. Case and cleaner. METROPOLITAN OPTICAL Nw 1737 Pennsylvamia Ave 9AM to6PM RE 3 hls Carl mechanics car before you go Call Carl plant; moderate cost. UPTOWN You Can Depend On a Pleasant Week-End Drive, it you have dependable Call DOWNTOWN Coal, Fuel Oil—Oil Burners’ RS, MILLER Phone NAt. 5178 6 P Yo mibmire 25¢€ 1320 N. Y. AVE. WILKINS COFFEE COUPONS FOR VALUABLE ARTICLES | @ This is the genuine Calex. Made of Pyrex Glass. Com- | plote for use on electric or gas bumner. Upper and lower | bowl may be had separately | foe 3 coupons, plus S0c for the upper bowl. 5S¢ for the fower. Bring or mail with $1.00 to the John H. Wilkins Company, 525 Rhode fsland Ave. N. E. If mhailed, @dd 10c for cost of packing ‘and mailing each article. IMPORTANT: The_illustrated folder under the key on each can contains ouch unusual bargain offers, the manulacturers would not pormit us 1o advertise them, Be sure 10 read this folder. @ coupon in the bottom. can. Do not open cans 4n advance to obtain coupons— etcle Cotiee will result.. All offers subject 1o withdraw- @l or change without notice, [ims IS BETTER COUPONS plusS] 00 UNDER KEY OF EVERY CAN FOR OTHER 816 OFFERS There's of each Upen whom mod- ern ngten motorists depend for safe, smooth traveling, go over your over the road. Leave your car at the nearest inspection is FREE, and adjustments will be expertly made if needed at * NORTHEAST Phone District 2775 qn. LOANS ON - Life Insurance CASH VALUES Bank of Commerce & Savings Main Office TN & E Sts. N.W. Branch H ot No. Capitol Membder Fedaral Depostt Inswance Cory.