The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1932-11-04
BY HARRY ELMER BARNES

BY HARRY ELMER BARNES
During many months, the attacks
on Herbert Hoovers professional
past we're greeted with silence on
the part of the President and his
friends. But Hamill's book became
best seller" and Liggett's volume
attracted the attention of dignifled
and serious readers. SO in time the
eulogists of Mr. Hoover took up
their pens in his defense.
The first stroke in behalf of Mr..
Hoover was contained in an article
by the New York lawyer and publi-
cist, Arthur Train. 1t was published
in Golfers for February, 1882. Train
sailed into Hamil, treating him
about as roughly as the latter had
Mr.. Hoover.
He revealed certain important err
rors Of fact and Judgment in Ham
Ills book, but he did not in any way
upset the general picture of Mr..
HooVers interests and activities as
presented in the book.
He could not rehabilitate the
legend Of the great engineer, He
MADE no effort to meet the argu-
ments of other authors. His article
later appeared in book form.
Next came Will Irwin, who wrote
an amiable article for Liberty. He
was far better natured than Train
and tried TO offset the assaults made
on his friend by laughing them out
of court.
Shown as Good Natured
He represented Mr.. Hoover as a
sort Of second Taft, not too thin
skinned and given to reading abb
Surd attacks upon himself with
amused contempt. But the fact
that Robert Allen lost his post with
the Christian Science Monitor as a
result Of his mild chapter on Hoo
yer In the Washington Merry-Go-
Round" made it rather difficult to
sustain the thesis that Hoover en-
Joyed criticism.
Thereupon, Herbert Corev.
Washington newspaper man. nre-
pared a quasi-of1cial rejoinder to
the anti-Hoover literature. This
even more than Trains book. was
a case Of the kettle and the pot. He
attacked the critical authors on all
sorts of personal and irrelevant
matters.
They emerged from his pages as
yellow Journalist and Big Navv
Dockery; Lizard Hamill-a first
rate lizard" "a distasteful creature"
who also Is liar" and careless of
his linen; Constitution" O'Brien.
shady and illiterate political hack:
Red Liggett, who wished to feed
starving Russians, whatever their
economic views, and Shadow"
Wood, who rewrote HaniilPs book
to save the publisher from possible
loss II the earlier volume was barred
from sale.
Corey Goes Too Far
Further, Corey overreached him
self by contending that he could not
ind ore true charge in the whole
38l pages Of Hamill's book, which
is more absurd than the publishers
claim that 1t Is 100 per cent accu-
rate. Such a book was not likely
to carry any more conviction than
the most violent of the attacks upon
the President.
Now Colonel Edwin Emerson
comes to Hoover'S defense in his
Hoover and His Times" 1t is called
in sub title IAN Impartial History
OF Our Generation" If it is such.
then Hoover not only deserves to
be President of the United States
second time, but dictator of the
world.
Our generation appears as the
Hoover age par excellence. Colonel
Emerson does not devote much
space to refutation of abuse of Hoo
yer, but creates out of Hoover a
figure to rival Sargon, Alexander,
Augustus, Charlemange, Genghis
Khan, st. Francis of Assist, Leo the
Isaurian, Napoleon and Florence
Nightingale. He also repeats the
absurd charge made b. Corey that
Liggett was in the pay of Russia
when organizing Russian relief.
Colonel Emerson reproduces I'M
abashed the engineer in politics"
legend and contends that nothing
less than the White House could
have been an appropriate goal for
man Of such qualities and quail
f1cationS.
Not Great Statesman
UpShot of the whole controversy.
then, is that the historical studies
recently made of Mr.. Hoover before
1920 show that he possessed none of
the major qualifications convention
ally put forward in support of his
candidacy for nomination and cleo
ton to the presidency. He was not
an engineer, social engineer, an
engineer in politics." or a
sentimental humanitarian who
'bled for the world" He had not
in any sense proved himself a
statesman before 1928.
Hoover brought to the presidency
the ideals and experiences of a very
successful business man of rather
specialized type. How well. they
fitted him for his high Office must
be judged primarily by the fruits of
his administration.
This is the major import Of the
whole biographical episode for the
present campaign. If it is true that
Hoover has not yet been disgraced
decisively by the critical biographies.
it is equally true that they have
proved he has no legitimate claim to
ride into a second term on the
momentum of the Hoover myth of
19l5-1928.
THE END.