Evening star., 1937-11-06

bhhb ~
would become extremely difficult to
stop.
1t is fact. abundantly demon
strated, that once first step Is taken
in the direction OF collectivism, the
second step follows IS more or less
automatic result OF the first. From
the second step, in the same way,
comes a third. And SO on until a
country has gone so far in this direc-
tion that return Is difficult or i'm
possible.
In the conviction that this process
is under way in America. Mr.. Hoover
and others felt that the country should
have before it a clear alternative.
They felt that the fundamental prin-
ciples of the American constitutional
form OF government, and of the Amer
ican individualistic conception OF So
ciety, should be restated. At the
same time it was felt that while these
principles shouldi be restated, they
should be restated in way that takes
account of changed world. Even
more was it felt that the old doctrines
OF the Republican party should be
modified in the light of changed con-
ditions. AS Mr.. Hoover put it In his
recent speech at Boston, the Repub-
lican party should be 'reoriented" in
adaptation to present-day conditions.
Call for Chicago Meeting.
With the notion of such state
ment of fundamental principles, many
Republican leaders agreed. The ques-
ton was brought up at a recent meet
ing OF the Executive Committee OF the
Republican National Committee. 1t
was decided to call at Chicago, for
November S, meeting of the full
national committee consisting OF two
members. man and q woman, from
each OF the 48 States. the District of
Columbia, and the four Territories and
dependencies.
The tentative program provided
that the national committe, at its
meeting at Chicago, should authorize
the creation of a policy committee. P"
The policy committee" would be
chosen. presumably, by National
SAldll dJd NOIud VIII
sist of Republican leaders of varying
schools of thought. The policy COM
mittee would arrive at a declaration
of principles.
That, roughly, Is the plan as it lay
in the minds of Mr.. Hoover and other
leaders. Apparently 3 majority of
the Republican National Committee
favored the idea, with such modifica-
tons rs might be arrived at by the
committee in its Chicago session.
However, objections arose. Many
Of the objections came from Republi-
cans now in the Senate or House.
Some Of them said that 1t is these
sitting Republican members of Con-
gress who have the right to make
party policy. They made the point
that these sitting Republican members
Of Congress have direct franchise
from the Republican voters, in the
sense that they have been nominated
and elected to the offices they hold.
Republican members of Congress
argued that no other party leaders
have direct, present franchise from
the voters to make policy.
Issues Provide Problem.
Another objection had to do with
the kind of issues to be considered
in any attempt to lay down Republic
can policy. The intention of those
who promoted the notion was that
the issues upon which the party
should take a stand should be limited
to fundamental ones. such as the in
dependence of the courts, the pres
ervation of the dual system of State
and Federal powers: preservation of
parity between the three branches of
government, legislative, judicial and
executive.
Directors to the project pointed out
that it would be difficult to restrict
the project to fundamental principles.
They predicted that many persons
would want the midterm convention
if 1t were called, to take positions on
questions that are currently contro-
versial, such as farm relief, taxation,
and questions having to do with labor