Evening star., 1935-06-23


do not know about it. But that Sen
ate has passed this monstrosity twice
and will do so again unless they are
frightened by some rival political pres
sure brought on them. When the lead
ing newspapers, the academic econ
omists and the Supreme Court are on
one side Of a question and the Rev.
Coughlin, the Committee of the Ma
ton, and Senator Elmer Thomas are
on the other, there is just one answer.
Economists Proved Right.
But in your entire administration
you have had little confidence in the
newspapers and still less in the econ
omists. Early in your administration
you disapproved the economists in a
radio talk to the Nation, even before
they had publicly questioned your eco
nomic policies. But two years later
1t is clear that on the issues where the
economists have differed with the poll
cies of the Government, the econo-
miSts were right. They have made q
hit every time they came to bat.
You have approved a number Of
measures that were vehemently op-
posed by an overwhelming majority Of
the newspapers and of the economists.
As . whole both Of these groups con-
demned the abrogation of the gold
clause. They said it was repudiation
nearly two years before the Supreme
Court said it. You said that there was
not enough gold in the world to pay
the gold bond Indebtedness, despite the
fact that the economists had long be-
fore pointed out the truth that we had
just about twice as much gold as we
could possibly need to pay all gold
debts as they fell due, a tiny bit at q
time.
Both the newspapers and the econ
omiSts have known for more than a
year that the N r. A. has retarded re-
covery. The economists said so pub
licly at their Chicago meeting in De-
cember. The Brookings Institution
said so somewhat later. And all they
got in reply was abuse from admins
tration spokeSmen. A majority of the
responsible papers and of the econ
omists condemned the Frazier-Lemke
act and the silver subsidies before they
were passed.
Congress Irresponsible.
This is not merely review of past
history. 1t has q very deep signifi-
canoe now. When a President ignores
the patriotic appeals of the two most
reliable agencies available, he must
turn to politicians, and more espe-
cially to Congress. And you have
been unfortunate in having during
your administration the most ire
sponsible Congress in American his
tory. When they have not been pass
ing bills without even reading them,
they have been busy passing measures
in response to mob pressure. On the
few occasions when they have sum-
moned up enough courage to oppose
you, they have opposed you on meas
ures about which you were signally
right, as in the case of the bonus bill,
the economy measure and the World
Court. In past history 1t has been
possible 70 hope that the Lower House
could be kept under some sort of con-
troll by wiser and more patriotic
Senate, but for two years past it has
been very difficult to tell which is the
lower house.
And this brings me to the crux of
this letter. On my own responsibility
I am undertaking to speak for a great
many millions of people who badly
need your protection, but who are but
poorly represented among your advis-
ers. I am wondering If you are not
willing to consider the Judgment Of
the newspapers and the economists in
regard to certain Of your policies.
On May % you presented your mes
sage vetoing the Patman bonus bill
The message won the practically
unanimous applause of the intelligent
people of this country. In clear and
forceful language you presented the
reasons why q bonus should not be
paid in paper money. The reasoning
you advanced was hawless. In that
message you made an iIrefutable case
against fiat money, against imitation,
against Treasury deficits without tax
alton, and against your own entire
monetary policy since March, 1888.
Ultimate Reckoning.
About fat money you said this:
"It Is easy to see the ultimate result
Of meeting recurring demands by the
issuance Of Treasury notes. 1t invites
an ultimate reckoning IN uncontrol-
liable prices and in destruction Of the
1ContinIIed on Tenth PaQe,l