Evening star., 1951-03-25
Trumon Held FuithIess
To Some Friends
Johnson and Bruce Seen
Abandoned by President
By Frank R. Kent

Inc SCOCk QeleIlSe OucTeQ lOT MI. 1Tu-
mans extraordinary tolerance toward
the unsavory exposures of the sordid
activities upon the part of members of
the White House circle and his intimate
friends in official position is becoming
somewhat worn and frazzled. Moreover.
upon examination, it just does not
stand up.
In effect, this defense is that one of
Mr.. Truman's outstanding character
istics is "unshakable loyalty to his
friends" He trusts them. He does not
believe they would do anything wrong
and he will flight to the last ditch" for
them. That is the legend. .but there have
been instances where his loyalty was not
unshakable and he did not fight to the
last ditch" Notably this was true in the
case of Louis johnson and again in the
case of James Bruce.
To both these men Mr.. Truman was
under great obligation. He struggled
hard to discharge these obligations, but
yielded to the very strong pressure
against them. This is not said particu-
larly In criticism of Mr.. Truman and it
has nothing to do with the respective
merits Of the MesSrS. johnson and Bruce.
But the fact remains that in dealing
with them he did not live up to either
the loyalty or the 'laSt-ditch" advertise
ments. Especially was this so in the case
of Mr.. Bruce, who had not sought the
British Ambassadorship. performed in
valuable services for Mr.. Truman in 1948
and became an aspirant solely at Mr..
Truman's inSistence. And yet Mr.. Tru-
ad
mics to make him-Mr. Truman-retreat
from his unequivocal commitments and
appoint man of whom he had never
ficulty in remembering.
There is no doubt that Mr.. Truman
personally suffered considerably at hav-
ing to yield in his desire to hold fast to
Mr.. johnson and to appoint Mr.. Bruce.
But yield he did. He did not like to break
his word but certainly it was broken in
the case of Mr.. Bruce, against whose
selection no adequate reason ever pub
licly was advanced. And he did insist at
one time that Mr.. johnson would stay
as long as be wanted. Probably there
always will be two points of view as to
whether or not Mr.. Truman was justi-
fed in his retreat. 1t is conceivable that
a situation had arisen where it became
inexpedient and very difficult for Mr..
Truman to stand by" these friends.
But that does not wholly explain the
contrast of his failure to live up to the
Truman loyalty and last-ditch legend in
their cases and his sturdiness-or Stub
bornness-in living up to it in others,
for which he has been both lauded and
criticized.
There was, for example, the case Of
his crony, ex-senator Mon Walgren, of
Washington, whom he appointed to the
National Resources and Security Board.
Due to the fight made by Senator Harry
F. Byrd, of Virginia, Mr.. Walgren was
refused confirmation. He was the first
man in the history of the Senate, Sen
ator Byrd has said. to be rejected solely
on the ground of "unfltness." Mr..
Truman at once named him to the
Federal Power Commission and. under
strong White House pressure, he was
confirmed for that Other examples
are afforded in the Presidents truculent
defense of members of the White House
staff, of Chairman William Boyle Of
the Democratic National Committee.
and his aides along with other admin
up in the ugly RFC mess exposed by
the Fulbright committee.
X
The facts this committee has brought
to light constitute scandal which has
pretty well filled the country with dis
gust and lowered the whole admin
istration in public esteem. Yet Mr..
Truman vigorously insists that all those
thus exposed are honorable men" and
that there is nothing to criticize about
their ethical conduct or moral stand
ards" All one can say about that is
that it would be difficult, indeed. 20
find any one not obviously biased in
their favor or in some way connected
with them to agree with him.
What, then. is the explanation of M.
Trumans last-ditch loyalty to some of
his friends and his lack of that quality
toward certain others? There will be
differences of opinion about that, but
two things seem clear-one. that under
certain conditions Mr.. Truman yields
to pressure and does not live up to the
legend; the other, that his own ethics
and moral standards can hardly be
higher than those he defends. II they
were, naturally. he could not defend
them.