Evening star., 1935-02-07

"Indiscretion' is the term generally
applied by newspaper observers to
Postmaster General Farley's gift of
unperforated postage stamps to
friends, including the President.
"Mr. Farley's enthusiasm for new
stamp designs was no secret" de-
clares the indianapolis News, "but his
disposition to favor few friends with
advance issues leads to the turmoil.
1t was not the intention that these
stamps ever should reach the market
where collectors bid against each
other. That some of them did so is
now charged, and as a stamp is worth
whatever a philatelist is willing to pay
for it, and so few Of these specimens
ever would become available, the SELL
ing price mounted into thousands"
To the Syracuse Herald. "the Post
master Generals amiability took the
form of an unfortunate slip" That
paper, continuing, observes, He
should have foreseen what was likely
to happen in the round of philatelic
reactions, and guarded against these
unpleasant probabilities. The Roch-
ester Times Union is of the opinion
that "it Is not a major political issue,
but It does place Mr.. Farley in a
position which is embarrassing, to say
the least"
'If special stamps have been printed
there has been no thought of none
tary profit" says the Milwaukee
Journal, adding that "the principle is
wrong just the same" The Worcester
Evening Gazette agrees that those
who got the stamps got them as curl
osities," but adds: Some day some
one on the favored list of Postmaster
General accustomed to handing out
rare stamps might not have scruples
against realizing a few thousand dol
lars. The question raised concerning
Mr.. Farley's experience ought to show
the possibilities Of stamp favorltism
and put q stop to it. The incident
will. of course, keep the philatelists
on the watch for any repetitions OF It,"
Furthermore" points out the New
London Day, there is always the
question of what the heirs OF the
present recipients of these stamps will
do with the stamp collections, once
the owners are dead and gone. II
they are sold, the price received will
be appreciably higher because of the
generosity of Mr.. Farley" 1t seems
to the Manchester IN. H0 Union
that. when he went out Of his way,
as the charge goes, to present auto
graphed sheets of special issues to
his friends who are stamp collectors,
he must have been aware that the
gifts represented considerable more
than their face value" The Ports
mouth (Ohio) Times states: ''It isn't
as though Mr.. Farley did anything
seriously wrong by getting stamps for
bis friends. He possibly is commit
ting an indiscretion from the political
viewpoint. Philatelists are notoriously
aggressive and touchy where their
hobby is concerned-their occupation,
in some cases. 1t would not be wise
to let them build up grudge against
the whole Roosevelt administration
Just to let Mr.. Farley accommodate
few friends with the stamps which
his department produces"
"If the charges are true" asserts
the Eureka (Calif) Humboldt Times,
Farley Is certainly guilty Of gross
| improperly" and the Lincoln CNebr0
State Journal believes that the inveS-
tigation may prove embarrassing"
The Kansas City Times agrees that
''it Is all right to 60 ahead with the
proposed congressional investigation y
but continues: what could be
brought out in that connection might
or might not be important. But In
the course Of the hearings, perhaps
Mr.. Farley might reveal another