Evening star., 1951-08-03

Much of the 1850 Maryland sen.
atorial campaign was in the regu-
lar and traditional American po-
litical pattern. And like any Wig
orously fought election, it hao
good and bad features that stand
out.
But the Maryland campaign
was not just another campaign
1t brought into sharp focus certain
campaign tactics and practices
that can best be characterized as
one destructive of fundamental
American principles. The Subcom-
mittee unreServedly denounces
condemns, and cenSures these tao
tics.
This investigation has developed
ample evidence that in the Butler
election there were two campaigns
within one One was the dignified
front street" campaign conducted
by candidate Butler in his speak
ing coverage of the State and in
which that group of responsible
citizens of Maryland who differed
with candidate TydingS on tradi-
tional, historic, and basic beliefs
operated on unreasonable, efficient
and decent plane.
The other was the deSpicable
"back street" type of campaign
which usually, if exposed in time
backflreS. The back street" cam
paign conducted by Maryland
outsiders was of a form and pat
tern designed to undermine and
destroy the public faith and con-
fidence in the basic American 10y
atty of a well-knoWn figure. II
followed a specific theme and
course which has become, unfor-
tunately, means and weapon
which strikes to destroy as suS-
piciously subversive, rather than
simply to defeat an issue.
1t might be an eXaggeration to
call this back street" campaign
big lie" campaign. But it GER
tainly is no exaggeration to call
it a big doubt" campaign. In
fact. the man who conceived and
shaped the campaign along with
other outside influences. the But
Ter campaign manager. Jon NJ
Jonkel, himself characterized the
heart and theme of the campaign
strategy as exploiting the doubt u
Reference to the now infamous
composite picture is hardly neces-
sary with the universal condem-
nation that it has received as a
result of the subcommittee pub
lie hearings. 1t was even too
odious for campaign manager
Jonkel who told the subcommittee
that he had disapproved of it
Even the members of the false
front of Young Democrats fol
Butler refused to defend it.
The Butler campaign treasurer
Cornelius P. Mundy. characterized
it as stupid. puerile and in bad
taste" Only its creators upheld it
While parts of the tabloid From
the Record are well within the
time -honored tradition of fair
comment, other parts of the tab
loid From the Record are subject
to severe censure. One story in
the tabloid charged former Sena-
tor Tydings and the Senate Armed
Services Committee with holding
up arms to Korea and another
story with responsibility for the
high casualty rate in Korea. There
can be no question that those sto-
rieS were designed to create and
exploit doubt of the patriotism of
former Senator Tydings. In effect
they questioned not only the pa
triotism of former Senator Ty-
dings but of the II other Senator
members Of that committee. The
implications of such tactics as a
threat to our American principles
should be obvious and frightening
To a certain extent, any candi-
date for public Office and any pub
lie offlceholder must realize that
he subjects himself to any and all
kinds of attacks. More properly
1t would be said that he subjects
himself to every fair comment and
criticism which can be made to his
activities. And to be realistic, one
must recognize that fair COM
ment" is so broad under our Amer
ican freedom of speech and free
dom of the press that it encom-
passes many abuses. Surely the
fine line separating fair comment
and libelous defamation in cam
paign material is not easily drawn
But if the tabloid From the
Record constitutes fair comment
within the intent and meaning o1
the law, then surely the law must
be changed and adequate statute:
enacted which would afford candi-
dates for public Office protection
against wrongful and unfounded
attack upon their loyalty and
patriotism.
If one candidates campaign
chooses to inject into an American
election the poison of unfounded
charges and doubts as to alleged
subversive leanings, this tends tc
destroy not only the character OF
the candidate who is it's target, but
also eats away like acid at the very
fabric of American life. The right
Of disagreement is an inherent
American right and privilege. But
to recklessly imply to those with
whom you disagree the taint OF
subverSlve leanings will rob de-
mocracy of its priceless heritage OF
the right to make up it's mind as
1t sees fit.
1t is not a sufficient defense tc
say "let the people themselve,
judge the Charges" The fact il
that the people themselves are not
N possession of sufficient reliable