davidaulloa/AmericanStories huggingface dataset:
New-York tribune., 1920-01-23

apparently, to a local Cleanup"
wave. Parker will stand as the
regular Democratic nominee for
Governor. Yet it is significant that
the Democrats of Louisiana should
nominate a man for Governor, how
ever high his personal qualifications,
who supported Roosevelt against
Wilson in 1912, and who four years
later was himself candidate on an
opposition national ticket.
Mr.. Parker is one of the most dis
tinguished citizens of Louisiana. He
has shown great courage and
breadth of view in separating on
occasions from the Democratic party
there and in preaching the doctrine
of an open mind in national politics.
His success as a candidate in the
Democratic primary is a hopeful
sign of liberalization and progress
He is a real leader and will make
a worthy Governor.
New-York tribune., 1920-01-23
The Unhappy Paleface

To the Editor of The Tribune.
Sir: Z. II. G. Tyagohwens objects to
my incidental reference to the American
Indian of Colonial times as "barbarous
and untutored" on the ground that, as
an allen, my views are partisan. In
stead of telling me to return to Europe
If 1t doesn't suit me here, he takes so
broad an attitude that I must perforcc
adopt defensive and conciliatory tactics.
abandoning my project to overthrow by
violence the idea he represents.
Scion Of the noble Onondagas, sup
pose you and l here highly resolve to
take the warpath against all the bigots
on all the sides of all tho controversies.
My ancestors were robbers, but you ad-
nit they could drink rum even in their
pulpits. I, the unhappy legatee Of their
pilferings, would cheerfully restore to
you all the Kingdoms of the Six Nations
for one small tavern in which l might
purchase a glass of real beer.
SUMNER WILLIAMS.
New York. Jan. II, 1920.
New-York tribune., 1920-01-23

Parker's Victory in Louisiana

LOUISIANA, where elections have
lacked excitement for manv wears
has just had a real political fight
in 1t the Democratic state machine
was smashed and stunning blow
was dealt to the Democratic boss %
New Orleans, Martin Behrman.
John M. Parker, formerly a leader
In the National Progressive partv
and that party's candidate for Vice
President in 1916. led the revolt
against Behnman, who had put up
regular, or "ring," ticket for state
Offices. The struggle occurred, of
course, In the Democratic primary,
for Louisiana, like the other states
OF the lower South, is now operating.
for all practical purposes, under the
one party system.
Eehrman had maintained control
In New Orleans by narshaling be-
hind him the forces Of the lower
world. He was accuscd by his op-
ponents Of giving protection to "rcd
light" interests. The SUCCESS Of the
Parker ticket was due invlarge part,
New-York tribune., 1920-01-23
A Batch Of Tickets

To the Editor of The Tribune.
Sir: juno will be here almost before
we know 1t, and (our rulers) the poli~
ticians are busy selecting whom we
are to vote for. How do these men
strike you, my masters?
REPUBLICAN
president and Vice resident)
General Leonard Wood, of Masss-
chusetts.
Governor Henry Z. Allen. Of Kansas.
DEMOCRATIC
Ex-Secretary Of War Lindley M.
Garrison, Of New Jersey.
United States Senator Hoke Smith,
OF Georgia.
NATIONAL
Citizen Henry Hoover, Of California.
Ambassador Brand Whitlock, Of Ohio.
Each one Of these men carries his
sovereignty under his hat" Each one
Of them has been tried and not found
wanting. Not one of them is boss.
Not one Of them would be bossed.
RYERSON w. JENNINGS.
Philadelphia, Jan. Is, 1920.
New-York tribune., 1920-01-23
MIR. Cmmings's Complaint

Homer S. Cummings seems to re-
sent little The Tribune's modest
effort to put him into the Hall of
Fame as the greatest chairman of
the Democratic National Committee
since the days of William n. Bar
num-or even since Democratic ma
tional committees were organized.
We had been reading in the news
papers what we innocently supposed
was press agent matter issued In
support Of the great Democratic
campaign fund drive which Mr..
Cummings projected. and were pre-
pared to hail him as the most CO.
lossal campaign fund collector in
American politics, whose fame would
obscure Marcus A. Hanna's s as the sun
obscures the flicker of tallow dip.
Mr.. Cummings now insists that he
is making no such bid for immortal
ity. On the contrary, he says that
rumors that the Democratic Nation
al Committee would collect $2OOOO,-
600, or S10,O00,0O0, or even $5,OO0,-
900, were not subtle publicity sug-
gestions on his part, but "unfriend-
ly" inventions.
The country will feel relieved to
know that Mr.. Cummings doesn't IN
tend to put from s5,O0O,o0O to s2O,-
100000 into an effort to continue
Democratic administration in
power. Such an expenditure would
divert many able-bodied workers
from productive pursuits. Profiteers
of all kinds could draw but one con-
clusion from the fact that people
had so much money to put into such
q venture. They would think that
the public wasn't yet a sucked
lemon, and new boosts In the cost Of
living would be inevitable
Mr.. Cummings is wrong in inti-
mating that The Tribune is dis
turbed on partisan grounds because
the Democratic party is going to
spend too much money" Our con-
Germ was bipartisan and economic.
We are glad to know the chairman
agrees with us that national cam
paign funds should be kept within
moderate limits. A large percentage
Of such funds raised in the past has
been wasted In cxtravagant publica-
ton ventures and overhead organi-
zation.
Mr.. Cummings says that "the
Democratic National Committee has
New-York tribune., 1920-01-23

never in its history received or dis
bursed as much as has the Republi-
can National Committee" Accord
ing to the statements made at the
end of the 1912 campaign, the Demo-
cratic National Committee collected
S1,110,952 and spent 81, 1894 The
Republican National Committee col
lected $904,S28 and spent $900,363.
In 1915 the Democratic National
Committee raised $1,808,348 and
spent more than that. The Republi-
can National Committee received
$2,445,421 and spent all Of it but
1886.
We can see no good reason why
either's campaign fund this year
should be exceptionally large.
New-York tribune., 1920-01-23
Holland and the E.x-Kaiser

The question Of the surrender of
the former Kaiser for trial is COM
monty discussed from the standpoint
of whether the Allies have right to
make demand on Holland.
But why not turn the issue around
and ask on what grounds Holland can
Justify the protection of this crimi-
nal? Is it not her moral duty, as it
is her legal privilege, to expel him
on her own initiative? Does she not
become an accomplice after the fact
by shielding so monstrous an Of
fender? There is nothing in inter-
national law or the usages Of ma
tions requiring her to give asylum
unless she wishes to. She is as much
at liberty to say to the Hohenzollern
as we have said to the deported
Reds: "We don't want you here,
and you can't stay here"
The Kaiser for years plotted to
bring on the world conhagration.
This has been proved by documents
taken from German and Russian
archives. From conspiracy he pro-
ceeded to act and deliberately
pressed the button for invasion of
peaceab}e neighbors. Not satisfied
with this, he cynically broke treaties
and then ordered the commission of
unspeakable atrocities. If murder
relates to killing, and not merely to
breaking law which forbids killing,
the Kaiser Is the most sanguinary
and cruel murderer the world has
ever known.
Has Holland the right to give asy-
lum to such an offender? Is it not
mockery Of law for her to say that
she may SO use discretionary power
as to defeat the ends of law? In
what jurisdiction is 1t recognized
that criminal fleeing from justice
can or may be housed and guarded?
In times past, when government was
considered an enemy, it was the in
stinct Of man to assist the quarry,
but to evoke this primitive feeling to
shelter the deliberate wrongdoer is
to indulge in queer ethics.
The Kaiser lives In ease and plenty.
His court is diminished, but it is still
populated by sycophants. The smell
of blood Is on him, and foul is the
odor to the worlds half-empty
homes. And yet Holland acts as if
in some way she will be entitled to
sympathy if she refuses to cleanse
herself. For nearly fifteen months
Holland has bespattered herself by
companionship with the filthy. Is it
not long enough?
New-York tribune., 1920-01-23
Shoe Prices Defended
Increases Declared No Greater
Than General Advance

To the Editor Of The Tribune.
Sir: A communication on the editorial
page of Tuesdays Tribune headed
Costly Cheap Shoes" is SO full Of
misinformation that it may be of inter.
est to your readers to learn some Of
the facts.
Leather footwear has advanced since
1914 from 100 per cent to 200 per cent
according to the style Of the shoe and
the material of which it Is made. The
heavy working shoes for men have ad-
vanced less proportionately than tho
finer made, more delicate shoes for
women. This doesn't mean that there
has been "profiteering" anywhere in the
process of getting the shoe from the raw
material to the consumer.
The cost of each process, from feeding
the cattle to the shoe retailers rent
and clerk hire, has advanced. Freight
and labor, which go to make up large
part of the cost, have advanced from
100 per cent to 200 per cent since 1914.
The advance on leather footwear IL
no greater than the advance on cotton,
clothing, many foodstufFs and other
staple articles. Competition prevents
unreasonable profits on shoes.
If any consumer feels that ne is being
overcharged, his best remedy Is to
shop around among a number Of differ
ent retailers and compare prices. He
will find as few shoe retailers inclined to
ask unreasonable profits as in any other
line Of business, and those few who
may be attempting to do so are not max
ing any conspicuous success.
The above applies to leather and can
vas footwear. Rubber footwear has sd.
vanced on the average only 27 per cent
since 1914. How many other kinds Of
staple merchandise have advanced %
little?
1t has been shown over and over
again in the economic history of tho
United States and all civilized countries
that there is no possible way of perrna-
nently regulating or controlling the
commodity prices except through com.
petition and the unchanging law Of sup
ply and demand
EDWARD c. THAYER.
New York, Jan. 21, 1920.
New-York tribune., 1920-01-23
All Is Vanity"
The Cryptic Utterancc of an Editor
Is DULY Intcroreted

To the Editor Of The Tribune
Sir' l was very much interested in
reading Paul Dana's letter In to-dav's
Times and the editors reply. It
seems to me that Mr.. Dana asks a
very pertinent question when he saws.
"Will you tell me on what grounds the
minority Of the Senate, even though
backed by President Wilson, can prop
erly insist that the majority of the
Senate shall yield, with the threat that
otherwise there shall be no peace ?"
In his answer the editor of "The
Tines says, "All is vanity" When
he said this--to be colloquial- GER
tainly "said something" Every indi
cation points to the fact that it is the
vanity Of the President that is hold
ing up ratification.
1t IS quite generally understood that
the treaty would have been ratified lust
before the Christmas holidays but for
the Presidents qualification" letter.
lie and his representative, Senator
Hitchcock, have treated the majority as
If 1t were proper that they should yield
to the minority, which, as Mr.. Bryan
very we'll pointed out, is absolutely
contrary to the essence of democracy.
AS he stated substantially, "Why fight
q war to make the world safe for
democracy and then refuse to allow the
majority in the Senate to pass such
reservations as they think necessary to
Americanize the treaty7"
Mr.. Wilson In his jackson Day letter
was cryptic, as usual, in his state
ments, and the next day no also had
as usual, his friends place various in
terpretations upon the letter, and they
read into it things that obviously were
not there. The Democratic leaders and
Senators admit openly that they do not
know where the President stands on
reservations, except that he is against
them. 1t seems to me that the Presi-
dent has had his say to the full and
that he should withdraw his obvious
pressure on Democratic Senator's
If this were done, the Senate would
undoubtedly pass the treaty promptly
with the Lodge reservations slightly
modified. Then 1t will be up to him to
decide whether or not he will deposit
the treaty and let US have the peace
that he has talked so long about-and
done so much to delay. If we are to
have constitutional government in this
country, the majority must rule, and If
the majority can make war they cer-
tainly should be allowed to make peace.
1t Is apparent to any one that there
Is only one obstacle to prompt ratifica-
ton, and that obstacle is Mr.. Woodrow
Wilson, and all friends of prompt rati-
dcation should direct their notes and
comments to him and not to Mr.. Lodge
or the Republican majority in the Sen
ate. A. W. ERICKSON.
| New York. Jan, 21. 1920.
New-York tribune., 1920-01-23

President discover 1t was necessary
to make the world "safe for democ-
racy" and that to effect this "the
utmost practical cooperation in coun-
sci and action with the governments
now at war with Germany" was
essential. The Presidents great
change of mind must have occurred
late in March, 1917. All at once his
eyes were opened to truths that
Colonel Roosevelt and others had
been laundering for many, many
months.
Heretofore the Presidents course
in February and March, 1917, has
been little studied. His supporters
have kept away from the topic and
his critics have been considerate.
But historians will dig into the data.
When they do, light will doubtless
be thrown on the mystifying fact
that preparations authorized by
Congress were not made.
Perhaps an explanation will also
be found for the instructive unwill-
ingness of many to give the Presi-
dent blank check during the peace
negotiations, for as he changed his
mind in the spring of 1917 so he
seemed to change it again in the
autumn Of 1918 and to revert to the
idea that Germany was not specially
to blame. Hence, also, the indis-
position to accept him as specially
wise on league of peace matters be-
cause his conversion to the idea of
world responsibility had been late.
New-York tribune., 1920-01-23
The Policy of March, 1917

Admiral Sims has said that In
March, 1917, when leaving for
abroad, he was told by some one
high in authority Eve would as soon
fight the British land hence all the
Entente Allies] as the Germans"
Bearing on this, Judge Lacombe,
whose memory is good, recalls semi
official statements which appeared
in Administration organs about the
same time.
On February 6, 1917, The Worlds
Washington correspondent wrote
that the President did not intend to
join In the general roundup of Ger
many to protect civilization; that
his object was merely to vindicate
American rights against all comers,
and that he did not intend this coun-
try to be "made party to en-
tanging alliances" and that it would
eight it's own battles against either
or both sides in the present Euro
pean conflict"
The public record supports the
conclusion Of this correspondent
On February 3, when the break in
diplomatic relations with Germany
was reported to Congress, the Presi-
dent said not a word concerning any
duty to the world. On February 26
he again spoke to Congress, and
once moro failed to see in Germany a
general menace. All he asked was
authorization to establish armed
neutrality. In his inaugural ad-
dress of March 4 he significantly
said, with respect to the war, "All
the while we have been conscious
that we were not a part Of TIA
declaration that did not differ much
from the prior Presidential declara-
ton that "the Issues Of the war do
not concern US and cannot affect u.s."
Not ~0til April 2. LOAF. did the
New-York tribune., 1920-01-23
By
Heywood Broun
Copyright 1920. New York Tribune 1no.

but would follow US as soon as we
started off to the orchard. He was like
a pet dog and could not bear to be left
alone in the uncongenial company of
other domestic creatures-dogs, cats.
fowls, turkeys and geese. He regarded
men and women as the onlv suitable
associates for an ostrich, but was not
allowed in the rooms on account of his
inconvenient habit of swallowing metal
objects such as scissors, spoons, thin
bles, bodkins, copper coins and ANYTHING
of the kind he could snatch up when no
one was looking. In the orchard when
he saw US eating peaches he would do
the same, and if he couldn't reach high
would beg of US. 1t was great fun to
give him half dozen or more at a time.
then, when they had been quickly COB
bled up, watch their progress as the long
row Of big round Jumps slowly travelled
down his neck and disappeared one by
one as the peaches passed into his CROP"
Austin Bishop has written most en-
gaging story for boys in his Bob
Thorpe, Sky Fighter in the Lafayette
Flying Corps" (Harcourt, Brace &
Howe). Nor are we sure that 1t should
be recommended only to boys. It is the
most exciting book about aviation which
we have encountered. There is a bit
of a spy sub-plot which is familiar and
threadbare enough, but whenever the
author gets into the air he writes vivid
~. The book makes no pretense of
writing down to young readers. 1t is
never patronizing. In fact, in some Of
its technical moments 1t Is far above
our head. For instance:
"The first thing that Bob tried was
the vertical turn, which is often called
the reverse control turn 1t Is given
that name because the machine is
banked up vertically to the ground, max
ing the elevator become the rudder and
the rudder become the elevator. Most
expert airmen refuse to consider it in
that sense. They say that when thew
are flying they are flying, and that the
position of the ground has nothing to
do with it,; the rudder is the rudder. no
matter what position the machine and
the ground hold in relation to each
other"
That makes practically no sense at all
to US, but we suppose that it will be
simple enough to any Of those mechan,-
cally minded youngsters who take one Of
those boxes of loose wires and blocks
and things and finish up with a suspen.
sion bridge or a miniature submarine
However, no particular mechanical bent
Is needed to enjoy the story Of the first
patrol or the attack on the German
balloon or any one Of the dozen other
exciting incidents in the book which are
told with great vividness.
Usually when one says Of a book
that 1t is useful he does not mean it in
any material sense, but on the cover Of
Florence 1rwin's "The Complete Auction
Player" the definite claim Is made. ut
earns dividends" That may be. but we
must first be convinced Of the wisdom of
the authors dogmatic declaration. "No
matter how strong, nor how weak. the
material for the bid may be, I distinctly
dlsapprove of an opening bid that /,
higher than one"
New-York tribune., 1920-01-23
Belated Ardor

Nron Tho Richmond Times-Dispdtch)
Admiral Decker reports that through
tho efforts Of his publicity agents in
Spain pro-Ally bullfghter swayed the
masses his way, while the aristocracy,
with whom Ambassador Joe Willard
consorted, inclined to the Germans. On
his side Mr.. Willard can cito the dec
laration Of the King of Spain that he
was painting to bcstrdc his fiery stccd
and lead his army and mobiles to the aid
OF tho French. The fact seems to be
that all the war spirit in Spain, on both
sides, was developed after the war.
New-York tribune., 1920-01-23
Governor Holcomb's Chance

The Tribune hopes greatly that
Governor Holcomb Of Connecticut
will see his way to call a special
session of his states Legislature to
consider the ratification of the Fed
eral suffrage amendment. The Re-
publicans of New York have an
especial interest in seeing the vote
of this neighboring state cast for
this political reform, now inevitable
and close at hand.
Twenty-six states have already
ratified, and of this number twenty
two have Republican houses. Of
eighteen Governors who have called
special sessions twelve are Republi-
can, six Democratic. This over
whelming1y Republican support OF
the amendment followed naturally
upon it's proposal by a Republican
Congress, chiefly through Republi-
can votes.
Three Democratic states--Georgia,
Alabama and Mississippi-have al
ready refused to ratify. No Re-
publican state has as yet refused to
ratify. Of the remaining nine Re-
publican states which have not yet
ratified prompt and favorable ac-
ton is certainty in four, prob
able in three others and clearly
doubtful only in Connecticut and
New Jersey. In the latter state the
question is complicated by the de-
sire for a referendum on the pro-
hibition amendment, which may de-
lay action on the suffrage amend
ment as we'll. If Governor Hol-
comb calls no special session Con-
necticut is likely to be the only
Republican state refusing to con-
slider the suffrage amendment in
time to permit of women's voting
in 1920.
1t is q splendid record that the
Republican party has made in this
new grant of political rights. We
cannot but hope that a record SO
begun will be properly rounded out.
There should not be a single Re-
publican state refusing its assent
when the necessary ratification of
thirty-six states is achieved. There
are three Democratic states-Ari-
zona, Oklahoma and Nevada-which
will unquestionably ratify In time,
leaving only states Of the Solid
South in dissent. Connecticut should
not remain in this Democratic
column.
In view of these facts we think
Governor Holcomb might we'll sub
ordinate his personal convictions to
the extent of calling the Legislature
in special session and letting the
legislators of Connecticut take such
action as they may determine upon.
1t is not as if Governor Holcomb
had any constitutional share in the
question of ratification. The gov
ernor Of a state has no vote or veto
upon such action. We are not
therefore urging Governor Holcomb
to exercise legislative prerogative
against his convictions, but merely
to give his Legislature the oppor-
tunity to register its independent
will upon a matter within it's sole
charge. The distinction is q vital
one, and we hope Governor Holcomb
will recognize it for the sake of his
party and the success of a great
reform.