Evening star., 1947-07-09

the nomination of Catholic to
these high ofices.
II. As reported, both Mr.. Roose-
welt and Cardinal Mundelein held
such views, it certainly does not
seem logical that either Of them felt
that this position was defensible.
On the contrary, the viewpoint ex-
pressed was q surrender to the ideas
of the so-called practical politi-
clans" 1t was q condition rather
than n theory which they thought
they faced.
Willing to Test View.
Mr. Farley, with considerable ex-
perience rs politician, thought
such q view wrong and was willing
to test 1t If Mr.. Roosevelt would say
the word. Apparently Mr.. Roose-
velt-with due regard for his own
political fortunes and believing, as
he did, that he would be drafted
for q third term-did not feel he
should take the risk Of a political
religious controversy in that 1910
campaign by putting Mr.. Farley on
the ticket. Something of the same
self-interest. 1t is said, caused Mr..
Roosevelt in 1914 to discard, for the
vice presidential nomination, Henry
wallace in favor of Harry Truman
when the practical politicians" told
him Mr.. Wallace would be o handf-
cap to the national ticket because
OF his radicalism and possible op-
position from Catholic voters.
Since Mr. Roosevelt was looking out
for his own political future and Mr..
Farley felt he was sufficiently popu-
lar with the party to be elected Vice
President along with Mr.. Roosevelt,
1t Is natural that the former Post
master General should feel hurt
when the religious issue was raised
as bar to first or second place.
Evidently Mr.. Roosevelt was dis
turbed, too, for, after Cardinal Nun
delein lunched with the President at
the White House early in 1910, the
prelate asked for Mr.. Farley to meet
him in New York. At this con-
ference, Mr.. Farley relates, the
cardinal urged him not to press
himself as q candidate. The cardi-
nal did not profess to speak for Mr..
Roosevelt, but is quoted by Mr..
Farley as having said:
James, you have always been
most frank and open with me so that
feel entirely free in broaching
confidential matter TO you. It is
my sincere feeling that = Roman
Catholic could not be elected Presi-
dent OF the United States at this
time or for many years to come. I
hope, therefore, you will do nothing
to involve the Catholics of this coun-
try In spother debacle such rs we
experienced in 1922
Farley Disagreed.
= But Mr.. Farley disagreed. He
thought AL Smith and the 1928 CAM
paign ON prohibition were wholly
different from the 1910 situation
and that the country understood the
difference. He went on to tell the
cardinal: you are the tirst person
In the church who has ever at
tempted to influence me on a po-
1itical matter, and I have been in
politics for 80 years.
But in fairness to the cardinal, 1t
must be assumed that he spoke in
his individual capacity as he had
every right to do. He was not pre-
suming to speak on this subject for
the church as an institution. Hav-
ing accepted this hypothesis, one
may differ with the cardinals per-
sonal prediction as to the outcome OF
a presidential election II q Catholic
were nominated The whole coun-
try has gone a long distance along
the road of tolerance since 1928,
and even in 1910 the test, 80 far as
the vast majority were concerned,
would not have been religious but
the capacity of the man nominated.
Mr.. Farley quotes anew what he
said in a public speech in March,
1910, shortly after the Mundelein
interview. The Postmaster General,
addressing the annual banquet OF
the Friendly Sons of st. Patrick,
said:
: I'VE must never permit the ideals
Of this republic to sink to a point
where every American father and
mother, regardless Of race, color or
creed, cannot look proudly into the
cradle Of their newborn babe and
see a future President of the United
States"
Answer to Article.
This was really in answer to q
newspaper article published few
days before by q reputable corre-
spondent In the confidence OF the
White House quoting Mr.. Roosevelt
rs having said that Jim Farley
would not be q good candidate for
Vice President because of his reli-
gion.
One would like to believe that II
Mr.. Roosevelt were alive today and
not listening to the practical poll
ticians," he would not only applaud
the quotation above but would urge
publicly the nomination OF a Cath
olic If there happened to be q man
OF that faith conspicuous in the
political limeight. For 1t cannot
be forgotten that Franklin D. Roose-
welt placed q Catholic, Alfred E.
Smith, in nomination at the Demo-
cratic National Convention in 1928,
and then campaigned for him.
Mr.. Farley is out of politics now.
While some may question the wis
dom of his publishing memoirs. 1t
cannot he ovsrlooked that when anv