Evening star., 1944-09-21
Letters to The Star
'Meanness' Held Not to Blame
For League Rejection


To the Editcr Of The star
wonder how long The Star will tol-
crate the sort Of drivel appearing day
after day in Lowell Melletts ION the
Other Hand" column. There is an utter
lack Of objectivity and fairness about
all of these articles and quite obviously
they constitute New Deal propaganda.
For example, on September 10. speak
Ing OF the moving picture Wilson"
Mr.. Mellett arrogantly assumes that
ali who opposed the League Of Nations
did so gut OF. "meanness," and says, I'VE
must not, again, let our meanness DOM
mate us" He also assumes that the
peace to the world"
There were many men and women
who conscientiously were convinced that
the League was not the panacea for all
our international ills. Perhaps some
opposed 1t out of meanness or for the
sake of politics (Mr. Mellett and all
other New Dealers, of course, are far
above that sort of thing, But many
opposed the League from sincere and
honest motives. Only recently, in the
light OF all that has happened since
World War I, Walter Lippmann has ex-
pressed views which conflict with the
idea that the League would be the best
safeguard against the age-old scourge
Of war.
Even more important, Mr.. Roosevelt,
since he became President, has not ad-
vocated anything resembling the League.
The Star of February 3, 1882, carried
a speech by Gov. Roosevelt at a meeting
of the State Grange when he was a
candidate for the Democratic presi-
Dental nomination. In that speech
Gov. Roosevelt stated that he did not
favor American participation In the
League" AS The Star pointed out at
the time, Gov. Roosevelts pronounce
ment followed by few days the chal-
lenge OF William Randolph Hearst that
he announce his views thereon" Mr.
Hearst then was the owner of number
of influential newspapers and was very
much opposed to American participation
In the League. And 1t generally was
recognized that Gov. Roosevelt would
not have had a Chinamans chance for
the Democratic nomination had he taken
a position favorable to American par
ticipation. However, the position Gov
Roosevelt took in 1882 was a reputation
of his attitude IL years before when, as
the Democratic vice presidential NOM
inee he worked and spoke in behalf of
American participation in a League of
Nations Whether his recantation in
1882 was prompted by political ex-
pediency or just plain "meanness," we
shall leave to Mr.. Mellett. If all who
opposed the League are to be accused
of meanness, what shall be said of the
great torchbearer who has failed TO
support this holy cause because Of politi-
cal cowardice?
I, myself, remember hearing Mr..
Roosevelt, then strong, robust young
man, make a speech before the OAR
here in Washington in which he fatty
and vehemently contradicted President
Wilson'S assertion that I'VE are pre-
pared" Having made such a point of
preparedness then. it might have been
hoped that when Mr.. Roosevelt became
President he would have seen to it that
the United States should not be caught
unprepared again. But. alas, Pearl Har-
Dor! And, alas, poor China induced to
bleed and die and struggle on by the
promise of aid which never has been
given in adequate amounts and for the
lack Of which our own boys must soon
bleed and die In increasing numbers
while the struggle with Japan is pro-
tracted. Think how far along the
road of adequate preparedness we could
have travelled If only some part Of the
$45 900 100000 spent on political leaf
raking in the stupendously wasteful 30s
had been spent for guns and ships and
planes! The war itself might have been
prevented
Well, Mr.. Mellett, the late Senator
from Massachusetts,, the senior Henry
Cabot Lodge, may have led the fight
against the League Of Nations out OF
meanness, but his grandson the present
Henry Cabot Lodge, recently resigned
from safe place in the Senate to 70
to the battle front as soldier. Franklin
D. Roosevelt went to Europe during the
First World War as a civilian Assistant
Secretary of the Navy-a snug berth in
any mans war His pose now as
Commander in Chief, entitled to all the
credit for the great strategy of World
War II. is no worse than the claim,
several times made by inference in pub
lie addresses, that he actually fought as
a soldier in World War I.
CHARLES D. DRAYTON.