Evening star., 1937-07-30
THE POLITICAL
MILL
BY C. GOULD LINCOLN.

".
chairman OF the Democratic National
Committee, is talking now about united
Democratic party for the congressional
elections next year. He has announced
his support OF Senator Duffy of Wiscon-
sin, one of those who was counted against
the Presidents court bill. who comes up
for reelection next year. In a speech
delivered at Salem. ILL.,, on Wednesday,
Chairman Farley was at some pains to
say that, now the row in the Senate
is over, he expected the Democrats to
show united front again.
These announcements while politically
wise are somewhat different from the
speeches which the Democratic chair
man was making early in the Supreme
Court bill fight. Even at comparatively
recent date, he and other strong ad-
ministration followers were taking about
the need of supporting the Presi
dent in this contest, as evidence of party
loyalty The implications were that if
Senators and Representatives failed in
their party loyalty, there might be re-
prisals. But . now the tenor of his
speeches has changed, apparently. The
WORD has gone forth that the party
breaches must be healed The Wayward
'oAAo s~AS w W NNASOllCu dSdll.
~ ~
Chairman Farley, to show that he is
not one to remember contests among
democrats, went back to the days of
1882 and the Chicago convention when
PRESIDENT Roosevelt was first nominated
ne Said IN TINS connection, addressing
MS Salem audience: There were other
eminent candidates for the Democratic
~
you doubtless recall even more emphati-
cally, the battle in many States between
those who accepted our proposal and
thoSe who favored other candidates.
lhat Rttle extended even to the ma
tlonal convention in Chicago 1t is typi-
cal OF Democratic habit and procedure
that the bitterness Of that fight was for
gotten when we went to the polls in No.
Vember 1t goes without saying that the
side that won held no bitterness toward
those who opposed Franklin D. Roose-
Velts nomination. When the fight was
on, each delegate was categoried in nv
minc, according to his position. It is,
perhaps, reflection on my memory to
tell you that after my election as chair
man OF the Democratic National Com
mlttee l never thought of the difference
between the Roosevelt delegates and the
anu-Roosevelt delegates"
And then, bringing this magnanimous
spirit down to date, the Democratic
chairman continued: Possibly there is
an application of that outcome in refer
ence to the situation today You NAV.
perhaps, have noted the bitter character
OF some OF the speeches made in a recent
controversy. Do not take these too seri-
ously. The talk OF a party split comes
from the Republican side-from those
who hope for Democratic division as
the only possible means of returning to
power the party Of privilege, that was
turned out OF Office by you and nearly
every other State in the Union five wears
ago, and kept out by still larger num-
Der OF States last year.
Earnest men In the heat of contro-
versy are prone to exaggerate. If YOU
believed half of what is said In the fury
OF debate, you would conclude that a
majority OF our public men ought to be
In Alcatraz Prison instead of in Office
1T Is all part of our political habit
and While we give the authors of intem-
perate utteranceS credit for sincerity
when they storm and rage and call
names, We know from experience that
the tempers cool when the fight is over.
We know further also from experience
that no man or group in the Democratic
party Is stronger than that party. And
l look to see even the f1ercest among
those who are In opposition today fight
ing the Democratic battles Of the future
as vigorously as ever I think they are
making mistake. and regret to see them
IN even temporary discord with the
party principles and the party spirit.
But, as I have frequently said. I have
worked with these gentlemen before and
anticipate working with them again."
X \ X X
And there you have it. 1t will be in
teresting to see how other adminis-
tration warriors feel about the recent
strife over the court bill Will thew be
as willing to forget and forgive? What
about the Governor of PENNSYLVANIA.
Gov. George Earle? He recently de-
manded the political heads of all those
who opposed the President in regard to
his court program. Gov Earle has been
credited with having aspirations for the
Democratic presidential nomination in
1870: He has been acclaimed at Demo-
cratic meetings in the keystone State as
the next President. Considering the
number OF prominent Democrats, who
doubtless will be influential when it
comes to the election of delegates to the
Democratic National Convention of 1910
and to the convention itself, who were
opposed to the President in this court
hight, the Governor of PENNSYLVANIA
seems to have said mouthful. Then
there was the Governor of Indiana,
townsend. who expressed the opinion
that his Democratic organization could
not and would not support Senator Van
Nuys for denomination.
This attitude on the part of the In
diana Governor may have been natural.
1t Is even said that the organization
would have been against Senator Van
Nuys had there been no court bill fight.
But for the Governor of Indiana to have
made his statement about not support
Ing Van Nuys, which was emphatically
made as the Governor was leaving
the White House, in the midst Of the
court battle. was scarcely wise. The up
shot for the present seems to have been
to give Van Nuys support which he might
not have had. 1t may have created q
situation in which, II Van Nuys is not
nominated by the Democrats, there may
be strong chance for the Republican
nominee for the Senate to win in that
State next year. Certainly Republicans
in Indiana have begun to look the field
over with the idea that If Van Nuys is
not nominated they will enter the lists
for the senatorial nomination with q
great deal of real interest.