The people's voice. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1939-1969, 1948-03-05
An Open Letter To The Editor
of The Nation"

In the February of the Nation you printed
of letters from readers protesting attiud
toward Henry Wallace and his candidacy for president
third party ticket These letters doubt prompted
by article by Freda Kirchway in the issue following Wal
ace article confused in its reasoning
which must have impressed Others did having
been written without conviction of the validity of the argu
ments presented.
In your February you unsigned
Gle listed in the index for that number "edora entitled
Our ThirdParty Critics. the editors of the Nation thought
that this editorial would impress the readers OF this pubca
argument against Wallace the third party
they hold the intelligence of their readers in
The conclusion have reached, I
eve the will be number of other readers,
is that the Nation in perhaps moderate degree than
other publications. has nevertheless joined IN the redbang
campaign.
You state the editorial that think the leader
ship is mirage 1t will fade out in due course but in the
meantime succeed in confusing good many American
progressves at hour when the clearest vision is needed
Reading the the article leads
that this clarity vision essential for the support
of the European Recovery Plan which this editorial well
Freda Krchways policy statement declares mandatory To
be Freda Kchway in her policy statement and this ed
o!a ny Speahs % Ie necovey ran
without political conditions does not seem possible that
group such the editors of the Nation could be fauousy
hopeful that such plan even being given even cursoy
consideration Do the editors of the Nation think that its
its readers read only that publications that they unable
the editors of the Nation apparently to the final
obectves OF the Marshall plan successor to the Truman
Doctrine.
do not believe that there is single reader of the Nation
who would be in European Recovery Plan adj
mnsered by agency of the United Nations favored by
Wallace And that the only kind of plan which would be
free from selfish, political motives.
Your third paragraph in the editorial here discussed ev
IDENTIFY mail down your for opposition
to Wallace In this, you say:
Our for believing in the tentative nature Of the
Wallace movement is that through wish of its leader,
derives its only organizaona support from
the Communists and their sympathizer Emphasis ourS)
has been rejected by the CO. the ALL and the four
railway brotherhood by the Socialists by organized farm
groups and by the overwhelming majority of New Deal
leaders who served under President Roosevelt Even
staunch admrer of Henry Wallace Senator Claude
Pepper has repudiaed the crusade and Glenn
Taylor has to rally to the Entirely from
the theological dangers of making progressive party
dependent organized Communist strength the fact is
to do to build quicksand Let the line change
beyond the control of Mr. Wallace and the
foundations of his movement will collapse overnight"
call this statement misleading nforma-
The Nation The first sentence cassifes all supporters of
Wallace and the third party Communists sympahizes
of Communists and by inference declares them in
pay with the Communist party than with effort to break
the srangehod of the eaonares the policies of both of
the parties This particular sentence do not hesitate
classify deliberate fasehood direct following of the
red-baiting line.
state that all of the major labor organizations and
organized have rejected the Wallace movement
Don't information except such CLEAN from
reports in the suborned press? Perhaps is to
that CIO international Unions with combined member
ship of 10000 voted against the Go executive board
ory attack the third party movement and that while the
National Union has openly endorsed Wallace the
division of that organization Overwhelmingly
suggest that get head of the
sand in touch with the people again, and