The Waterbury Democrat., 1939-03-21
Rev. Alison J. Smith Claims His Attack On Father Coughn Is Based On Fact, Not Fancy-Urges Ayotte To
 Look At Record On Claims Of Radio Priest

VAuANAl AOJ 4OOOs Editor
 Waterbury Democrat,
 Ordinarily I do not bother to answer public letters so full of clumsy invective and bad rhetoric as the one signed by George Ay- otte, but since his was not so much a letter as an ultimatum I make haste to reply so that MT. Ayotte may have no possible ex- cuse for marching in his troops before the March 30th deadline expires.
 Calling people names for want of 8 better argument is a char acteristic of his fuehrer that MT. Ayotte has apparently borrowed. On July g, 1886, F,r. Coughlin was forced to apologize for having called the President of the United States a "liar". (New York Times, July A, 1936). Again, on October 30, 1886, he made a public apology at the instance of Bishop Gall lagher of Detroit for having called him "a scab President. (New York Times, Nov. 1, 1936). On the other hand Father Coughlin stated on August IS, 1936, in Cincinnati, that: If I cannot swing at least 9,0O0,000 votes to MT. Lemke I will quit broadcasting talks on
 economies and politics.. MT. Lemke got exactly 891.858 votes, but Father Coughlin couldn't keep his promise to stay away from the microphones.
 MT. Ayotte is bit confused. Af- ter denouncing me for presuming to contradict Father Coughlin be- cause the latter is a priest, he goes on to say: "The cloak of re- ligion must not hide the facts that we as a nation must face". Agreed! I am not attacking Father Cough lin as a priest, but as a crack pot economist. Father Coughiln does not speak for the Roman Catholic church, and the fact that he is a priest cannot bring him immunity when he steps out of his priestly office and speaks arrant nonsense on social and economic questions. His Emin- ence George Cardinal Mundelein of Chicago clarified this point completely in his statement issued on December II, 1888 and read over a nationwide hookup by Bishop Bernard J. Shell, auxiliary bishop of Chicago, in which he said: "As an American citizen Father Coughlin has the right to express his personal views on cur- rent events, but he is not auth orized to speak for the Catholic church, nor does Ee represent the doctrine or sentiments of that church."
 MT. Ayotte demands proof of my opinions concerning Father Cough lin. I doubt if he will grasp the distinction, but opinions do not need proof. Statements of fact do. and for the few state- ments of fact which I made I of course have ample proof.
 said that Father Coughlin apparently got some of his speech es and articles from the German Minister of Propaganda, Herr Goebbels. On Sept. 13, 1885, Dr. Goebbels delivered speech at Nuremberg at the Seventh Na- tional Socialist Congress. It was vicious attack upon the Jews. The speech was printed in Der Parteitag der Freiheit vom 10-16 Sept. 1885," This was the official report of the Nazi Party Congress at Nuremberg and was published in 1895 by the Franz Eher Press, Munich. under the official Nazi Party imprint. It was reprinted in the same year in an English translation by M. Muller and Sohn, Berlin, obviously for distri- button in English-speaking coun- tries.
 On Dec. 5. 1888. Father Cough lin published an article in Social Justice" over his own signature entitled Background of Persecu- tion". A comparison of this article with the Goebbels speech suggests that large sections of the speech were copied by Father Coughlin verbatiml Parallel columns from the Goebbels and Coughlin articles were published in the "New York Post" and the philadelphia Rec- ord". Although this material appeared in print on all the news stands some months ago I am enclosing some of 1t and this pa-