Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1938-09-25

tenn on the abortive
B. ~ efforts of Mr..
~ Roosevelt to drive
'"A"A "@@A out of public life q
group of men, within his own party,
who had the courage and, 1t might be
added, the good sense to oppose him
in regard to certain extreme and I'M
American proposals.
Let the New Deal propagandists ex-
plain and defend Mr.. Rossevelt's ig-
nominious failure as they may. But
New Deal explanations and alibis cam
not hide two conclusions which logic
ally result from the entire purge cpl
sode. The first is that Mr.. Roosevelt's
activities revealed more clearly than
any other thing he has done his de-
termination to be the supreme ruler
Of the United States-to constitute
himself a one-man government. His
actions revealed him as q man who
cannot tolerate opposition to his will.
This disclosure is highly important
when we come to consider Mr.. Roose-
welt and his intentions In regard to
other policies.
Handout Promises Cannot Buy.
The second unacceptable conclusion
which flows from the purge episode,
likewise, is highly important 1t is that
the American people cannot be bought
with promises Of handouts from the
Federal Treasury once their eyes are
opened to the intentions of their
President. In spite OF the billions Of
dollars which the New Deal has and
which it offered to spend in certain
States, the Roosevelt-indorsed candi-
dates in the recent primaries suffered
crushing, humiliating defeats.
The results of the Democratic pri-
maries in South Carolina, Maryland
and Georgia-to name only the three
States where Mr.. Roosevelt put forth
his greatest efforts-failed to sustain
the colorful contentious Of Al Smith
that no one is going to shoot Santa
Claus and Of Vice President Garner
that you can't beat four billion dol
lars" II the voters in Maryland,
South Carolina and Georgia did not
shoot the Santa Claus they, at least,
told him to go home"
For Santa Claus certainly was in evil
dence in these States during the days
preceding the primary elections. In
Maryland, Senator Tydings' opponent
opened his campaign speeches with
announcements that the United States
Housing Authority would spend mil
lions of dollars on housing projects in
the State. President Roosevelt pub
licly approved expensive bridge prof.
ectS in that State-bridges, which it
now appears will not be built with Fed
eral funds In the closing days of the
Georgia contest millions of Federal
dollars for highways and other prof.
ects were allocated to that State.
The people OF Maryland and Geor-
eia, however, were unimpressed by
these promises OF New Deal spending.
Even in the counties OF Maryland where
the promised bridges were to be To-
Gated and where the Federal housing
was to be constructed, the voters gave
substantial majorities to the man
marked by Mr. Roosevelt personally for
defeat.
Turner Catledge, chief political news
writer for the New York Times and
among the keenest and most objective
observers in the country, after the
f1asco Of the Roosevelt purge in Geor-
gia reported that failure Of spending
inducements" was one of the factors in
the crushing defeat Of the President s
candidate
Mr.. Catledge reported another obser-
walton regarding the Georgia primary
which is contrary to the New Deal
propaganda that although Mr.. Roose-
welt lost in the purge contests he and
his administration remain rs popular
as ever.
New Deal Criticized.
This New York Times writer assert
ed that reaction against the New Deal
was major factor in the result and
added that from all OF the protesta-
tons one heard during the campaign Of
love Tor President Roosevelt and. the
New Deal, no objective observer could
fail to note decided undcrtone OF
general criticism in many quarters"
Furthermore" Mr.. Catledge added
this criticism was not confined to the
business interests but could be noted
as well out in the country, particularly
IN the cotton and tobacco producing
sections where low prices and quota
restrictions under the new farm pro-
gram were anything but conducive to
good feeling"
Does any one really believe that II
Mr.. Roosevelt were now as popular in
Maryland and Georgia as he was in
1885 that his personally selected and
supported candidates would have been
defeated as overwhelmingly as they
were? OF course not Actually manv
persons in those States in voting
against his candidates were expressing
their resentment and hostility against
what ne has done and what has hap
pened since 1896.
Inc truth of the matter Is that the
Roosevelt administration has lost the
coincidence of great MANY persons
who voted for the President in 1895
They were shocked by his Supreme
Court packing bill and they have be-
come convinced of the fallacy of tn.
New Deal by the evidence of the Roose-
welt depression. Instead of facing
these facts. the New Deal propagand.
lists are trying to bluff their way along
nIAc rtlIFF lAgp-lI .r.->