Evening star., 1935-11-03


relief which the Midwest will be
willing to accept as a substitute for
A. A. A. (If A. A. A. were farm re-
ief-and farm relief only-there
would not be so much objection to it,
It Is conceivable that by next year
there may be no need of farm relief.
Or less need. If President Roosevelt
would really dedicate himself to bring
ing about international stabilization OF
and resumption of interna-
tional trade. there might be no need
Of any kind of subsidy for farming.
But from the fact that Mr.. Roosevelt
has tied himself closely to A. A. A. we
can assume he has no expectation OF
bringing about stabilization OF cur
rencies by expansion of international
trade by next year.
Forecast Impossible.
The net of all is that conditions
by next June are impossible to fore
tell. .And it is similarly impossible to
foretell who will be the Republican
presidential nominee, or where he
will come from.
The New Deal has changed much
that America thought was funda-
mental, much that was af1ectionately
held as American tradition and ideals.
But all the New Deal has cost so far
is less than another thing 1t seems
likely to take from US I shall ex-
plain by being concrete.
On April 2 last Democratic Senator
Millard E. Tydings of Maryland ad-
dressed the Senate. His address was
a universal attack upon practically
the whole of the New Deal. The
speech, or a summary of it, appeared
in many newspapers throughout the
country. AS result thousands OF
letters and kilograms came to Sen
ator Tydings, indorsing his position;
of all the thousands only two dis
agreed with him: All these messages
Senator Tydings turned over to the
American Liberty League. which is an
aggressive opponent of the New Deal,
and the league published extracts
from them in a pamphlet of some
5000 words. Parts of this pamphlet
were in turn published in the news
papers of the country. The result is
the country knows that Mr.. Tydings
is a Democratic Senator who is COM
pletely opposed to the New Deal.
Tydings Is Problem.
Now what comes next? What pic
ture is Senator Tydings going to
present to the public from now on?
The public knows-he has proclaimed
it himself-that he is opposed to the
New Deal. The public infers natural
ly that Mr.. Tydings therefore must
be opposed to President Roosevelt
who brought forward the New Deal
and is the symbol of it. But is the
public now going to see Senator
Tydings go along and support Mr.
Roosevelt. for the presidential nomi-
nation? And if the public sees that,
what is the public going to feel about
the intellectual integrity of public
men?
1t is not suggested that Senator
Tydings should unite with the Re
publican party. He has his immedi-
ate chance to express himself by op-
posing Mr. Roosevelt for the Demo-
cratic nomination. There is good rea-
son for saying that the Democrats Of
Mr. Tydings' State, Maryland, would
like to see him oppose Mr.. Roosevelt S
renomina ton.
Senator Glass Also Factor.
What is said here about Senator
Tydings applies equally to Senator
Carter Glass of Virginia and Senator
Harry F. Byrd of the same State
Senator Glass has publicly and re.
peatedly denounced the New Deal in
the sort of .thoroughgoing words that
Mr.. Glass knows how to use. Senator
Byrd has opposed major portions Of
the New Deal almost as strongly as
his colleague. The question now is
what picture are Senators Glass and
Byrd going to present to the public?
Are they going to keep their records
clear by opposing Mr.. Roosevelt for
the Democratic nomination? And II
they do not do this, If they silently
"go along" what will the public think
about the intellectual integrity OF
these Senators?
Of all the detriment Senator Glass
says the New Deal is to America not
the least would be the effect of caus-
ing the public to feel cynical about
honored Democrats who first de-
nounced the New Deal and then sup
port or remain silent about the man
who is the symbol of the New Deal.
It still remains a fact that the
most direct and altogether
best opportunity to get rid of the New
Deal lies in the hands Of the Demo-
Gratis. All they need to do is to nomi-
nate a Democrat or''the presidency
and I have no hesitancy in making
this distinction between Democrat
and Mr.. Roosevelt-the most respected
Democrats have themselves made the
same distinction.
Many Other Opponents.
I have mentioned three Democratic
Senators who have publicly opposed
the New Deal. Several others have
opposed it publicly. Many more are
bitter about it privately, and have
poured out their souls to friends and
aCquaintances. Of SO Democrats in
the Senate. it is safe to estimate that
at least so are opposed to the New
Deal, and that perhaps Is are stirred
to the depths of their souls against
it. OF 1922 Democrats in the House
it would be safe to say fully 200 have
strong convictions against the New
Deal, and perhaps as many as $50
supremely loathe it. Among Demo-
Gratis not in Congress the attitude of
men like ex-Gov. Albert G. Ritchie OF
Maryland, ex-Gov. Alfred E. Smith
of New York and ex-Gov. Joseph Ely
of Massachusetts, is fairly well known
The aggregate of all these men, If
they should act upon their convic-
tions and in concert, would have
much power in the Democratic party
If they fail to make their protest, II
they permit the denomination of Mr.
Roosevelt to take place without any
gesture from their consciences, the
resulting effect on the public, the