Evening star., 1941-07-28

which the pres s
ent AdminIstra- <& AsaEs
ton since 1888 David Lawrence.
has been priding itself on. as against
what it has so often termed the
reactionary point of view.
Freedom OF speech means free
dom for those who disagree with
lis as we'll as those who agree. 1t
means the right of individuals to
express themselves without punitive
measures being taken against them
by the Government Such meas
ures when practiCed by members
OF the Government can amount to
assassination of character by the
imputation of improper or un-
patriotic motives. Since members
Of the Government, too can give
wide publicity to their comments
and can through economic or regu-
iatorv measures touch the mediums
Of expression. it is all the more I'M
portant that Government officials
exercise restraint in public debate
and regulatory action. The activity
of the Federal Communications
Commission i'll its relations to radio
and the press is a case in point.
Likewise the case of Mr.. Llndbergh
versus Secretary Ickes is an inter-
esting one to penetrate.
Many people disagree with the
noted flyer as does this correspond
ent who happens TO believe that Mr..
Lindbergh's point of view, if adopt
ed as a national policy, would be
harmful to our national security.
But the merits of the Lindbergh
speeches or writings seemingly have
little to do with the controversy that
has been engaged in by the Sec
retary of the Interior.
Personal Motives Questioned.
The Ickes addresses have been
directed at the personal motives and
patriotism or lack of it, of Mr.. Lind
DeIEn. JuNl WHY SOIIc IlI5I4 1ON
eminent officials can't carry on a
debate without getting personal is
difficult for fair-minded persons to
understand.
America has been trained to be-
heve in craftsmanship and not in
beloW-the- belt tactics. The impress
sion given by the ICkeS attacks on
Mr.. Lindbergh is that somehow the
flyer is connected with the NazlS.
The Secretary asks, for instance,
why Mr.. Lindbergh hasn't returned
his Nazi decoration. This CORE
spondent would be happy to see Mr..
Lindbergh do it, but the latter may
have good and sufficient reasons for
not doing it, one Of them possibly
being that the Secretary has openly
demanded it and sometimes people
Just get contrary.
With respect to that decoration,
Il should be noted that Mr.. Lind
bergh didn't know it was to be
awarded and was just as much sur
prised when it was pinned on him
as were the officials of the American
Embassy whose luncheon in Berlin
he was attending Other Americans
have accepted German decorations
and degrees and honorS from their
institutions and it is a matter OF in
dividual decision as to what they DO
about them. The only important
point to establish is whether Mr..
Iindbergh is actually connected with
the Nazis and this Mr.. Ickes has not
proved. When q thing like this
cannot be proved it is dangerous
accusation, coming as it does from
member of the cabinet Of the
President of the United States. 1t
is a mark of disapprobation which
inevitably discourages others to at
tempt to oppose administration pro-
posals. 1t is an old form of intimi-
dation.
Personal Abuse AsSailed.
Mr.. Lindbergh may be wholly mis-
taken in his views and many mil
lions of people think So but that he
Is a disloyal American will never
be accepted by true liberals. This
technique of attack-personal abuse
has been too much part Of the
New Deal anyway and its net effect
Is to make friends for those who are
vrongfully abused. Mr. Llndbergh
married Anne Morrow, the daughter
of former Ambassador MorroW-one
of the finest Americans in the last
half century. Mrs. Lindbergh's views
are criticized, too, as being closer
to the Nazi philosophy than tc
democracy. But anybody who has
known these two people intimately
knows that their convictions are
deep-seated and sincere and could
not have been inspired by any for
eign government or its agents.
In a democracy where the -four
freedoms" are the keystone of good
government, debates usually are
not won by intimidation or by per-
sonal abuse or by name-calling
They are won on the merits of the
argument. 1t is not at all i'm
probable that many persons who
hadn't thought much one way OF
the other about iSolationiSm have
been attracted to it by reason OF
the violent attacks made against
the isolationistS. This is alway:
one of the boomerangS of injustice
There are so many persuasive
arguments which can be used Il
refute Mr.. Lindbergh and the isola'
tionists that the use of suspicion
and imputation of improper mo-
tive would seem to be wholly super
f1uous. President Roosevelt in
Jackson Day address few year
ago urged tolerance and said tina
when name calling was resorted t.