Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1936-10-15

ION o ETgfHKl2R firm
full as it is, the federal government
has not and cannot have any func-
ton in that field for the reason that
it inevitably leads further into pol
itics, further into waste and the
eventual destruction of the people
whom the demagogues claim they
are helping.
The reason have advocated this
action so strongly is the fact that
there are too many tenant farmers
in the United States now, far too
many. It is fundamental, in my
opinion, that this nation can get on
with the present trend. It is sad,
but it is true, that there are about
forty per cent of our farms now
operated by tenants. In other
words, one out of less than three
farms in the United States is worked
by man who does not own it.
Some information was made pub
lie the other day to the effect that
IS per cent of the
FTeSS TOT newspapers of the
Ldnd0n country were sup
porting Governor
Landon as against President Roose-
welt in this campaign. I do not
know the actual percentage and !
do not vouch for the figures I have
reported to you. But of this I am
certain: I believe that Governor
Landon does have more editorial
support than any presidential NOM
inee has had in the last six cam
paigns, with the exception of Pres
ident Roosevelt as a candidate in
1882.
It has been interesting to watch
the various important Independent
newspapers as they have studied
the two candidates this year and
have reached conclusions as to the
nominee they will support. I am
not now referring to hide-bound Re
publican papers, nor to newspapers
that could normally be expected to
support the more conservative of
the two candidates. / am thinking
of independent or distinctly Dem
ocratic newspapers that have an
nounced their opposition to the
Roosevelt cause. Let me mention
few of them: The St. Louis
Fost-Dispatch, the Omaha World
Herald, the Baltimore Sun, to men,
ton only three.
There was great newspaper, one
of the greatest, that took a stand
=, for Presid e mt
Ne10 xorR Roosevelt a few
Times days ago. I re-
fer to the N lew
York Times. No one can ever say
that the New York Times ever has
failed to arrive at its conclusions
without giving all factors concerned
careful study. I am saying by this
that the New York Times is honest
and sincere. But I must say at
the same time that the New York
Times has background as an in
stitution and it has a clientele of
readers for whom it speaks and its
accession to the Roosevelt cause is
a perfectly natural position for it
to take. For years the New York
Times has commended that America
should participate to a greater ex-
tent in world affairs. 1t has con-
tended, without exception, for policies
of an internationalism with which
a great many thinking people dis
agree. Its view, concretely, appears
to be that we cannot correct de-
preston conditions unless tn e
United States as a nation whole
heartedly moves in the circle of
governments that rule Europe and
Asia, especially in matters Of an
economic character.
I do not know what Governor
L d ms announcements on
foreign policy are going to be. But
I have observed the policies that
have had the backing of the New
York Times over a number of years
and it seems to me that they re-
suit in greater benefits to a limited
class than to the country as whole.
I am not rabble rouser; I do not
link the New York Times with the
money-changers of Wall street as
the demagogues describe them. It
is just the perspective that I have
gained of the whole picture since
have no axes to grind.
In the case of those newspapers
that have turned against Mr.. Roose-
welt, there is to some extent a con-
sideration of local interests, circum-
stances of concern to the communi-
ties which they serve, just as in
the case of the New York Times.
The point is, however, that in the
case of newspapers turning against
Mr.. Roosevelt, their new positions
are predicated on what appears to
me to be traditional American
bases. That is to say, they are
adhering to the principles which /
believe to have been the foundation
stones of American history. have
no quarrel with the attitude Of that |
school of thought that believes we
should engage further in interna-
tional affairs than we have done.