Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

September 7, 1927

ular Catholic (especially of one so qualified for the office as is Governor Smith) would be ineffective; that it would be far more effective if some Catholic could be got to present that view. To me it seems that the experiment has not been successful; the motive is somewhat too obvious.

It is not even sure that the entire South is so troubled as is Judge Crabités about the question of Governor Smith's religion. The following extract was reprinted in the Springfield "Republican" of August 13 from the Charleston "News and Courier:"

"Democrats quarrel among themselves and beat around in circles while all this is going on. One leader is not good enough because he is a 'wet,' another because he is a Roman Catholic, and another because he is a 'dry.'

"As though any of those questions were of importance by the side of that other, whether the average citizen has a chance to be the independent owner of a home, a farm, a store. Whether the average man shall live at all except by sufferance of the mighty in money.

"Woodrow Wilson was the representative of the average man. . . . Conservative, cultivated gentleman that he was, not even Andrew Jackson was hated by men of great possessions as he was, and they still hate his memory because they fear it.

"Governor Smith is far from the kind of man that Mr. Wilson was, but he is like him in that he is a representative of all the American people except the one in a hundred or a thousand who has most to hope from a Government controlled and operated as a subsidy of the Mellon interests.

"The Democrats can win in 1928 if the Democratic defeatists do not deliver the party into the hands of the enemy before the campaign begins." ELLEN GATES STARR.

Chicago, Illinois.

The Protestant Clause

IN

[ocr errors]

the issue of The Outlook of August 17, in the article "Is It Time for a Catholic President?" by Judge Crabités, I find this language: "When Jefferson and his Virginia friends insisted that the Federal Constitution should proclaim that no law shall be passed respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, what was really back of their minds was to protect the Episcopalians of Virginia against the Methodists of North Carolina," etc.

This statement may apply to some of Mr. Jefferson's Virginia friends, but I do not believe it was true of him. I do not

believe, therefore, that this statement of Judge Crabités's is historically correct. Do you propose to let it go unchallenged?

It is interesting to note that Judge Crabités gives no credit whatever to Mr. Jefferson and his Virginia friends for desiring to establish freedom of worship beyond the seas, but readily accords such a worthy purpose to Lord Baltimore and his English Catholics.

I suppose that Protestants generally believe exactly to the contrary of both statements made by Judge Crabités. What is the truth?

The article also contains this language: "Events often move slowly. It may take a few more decades to eliminate the 'Protestant clause' from the Constitution." Does he mean that it should be eliminated and that the United States should support the support the Catholic Church?

In my opinion, the solution for the problem which may be presented is less Fundamentalism, more Modernism, more evolution, more science, in which event, religious superstition, both Catholic and Protestant, will crumble long before the "Protestant clause" will be stricken from the Constitution.

Offices of Brady, Dean & Hobbs, Lawyers, Brookhaven, Mississippi.

IN

T. BRADY, JR.

A Catholic on Religious
Liberty

N an article published in The Outlook of August 17 Judge Crabités expressed certain political opinions and forecasts in the event of the Presidential nomination of Governor Alfred Smith.

I do not wish to discuss these opinions and forecasts, but I think it highly important to call the attention of your readers to a very serious historical misstatement made by Judge Crabités. This misstatement is all the more serious because it misrepresents the minds of the founders of the Republic, and misrepresents that Constitution which is the corner-stone of our entire National struc

ture.

The Judge says:

When Jefferson and his Virginia friends insisted that the Federal Constitution should proclaim that no law shall be passed respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, what was really back of their minds was to protect the Episcopalians of Virginia against the Methodists of North Carolina, the Dutch Reformed Church of New York against the Congregationalists of Massachusetts, and the Baptists of

15

Georgia against the Quakers of Pennsylvania. . . . These men never thought of Catholics and Jews when they carried out their give-and-take program.

What was back of the mind of Thomas Jefferson and his associates is not a matter of conjecture or private interpretation. This is what Thomas Jefferson himself says on this point in his autobiography:

The bill for establishing religious freedom, the principles of which had, to a certain degree, been enacted before, I had drawn in all the latitude of reason and right. . . . With some mutilations in the preamble, it was finally passed; and a single proposition proved that its protection was meant to be universal. Where the preamble declares that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting the words. "Jesus Christ," so that it should read, "a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion:" the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend within the mantle of its protection the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo and the infidel of every denomination.

While it is true that religious intolerance was characteristic of the colonies, it is equally true and significant that when the colonists united in the defense of a common cause they at once saw how mean was their narrowness. Their common patriotism brought the dawn of religious tolerance. When, on November 5, 1775, Washington issued his order against the celebration of Pope's Day, declaring that "the observance of that ridiculous and childish custom of burning the effigy of the Pope" would not be permitted, his action signified that religious persecution, under the law, was no longer in our country compatible with patriotism.

It was with no misgiving, such as fills Judge Crabités, that Congress in its resolution of February 15, 1776, authorized the appointment of Charles Carroll of Carrollton on a committee of three of its members, and instructed him to "prevail on Mr. [Father, later Archbishop] John Carroll to accompany the committee" on its momentous mission to Canada.

When the Federal Congress adopted Dickinson's address in which "all the old religious jealousies were condemned as low minded infirmities" it laid the foundation of religious tolerance. That this was the thought of the Union patriots was made clear on July 4, 1779, when in

16

old St. Mary's Catholic Church at Philadelphia the "Te Deum" was solemnly chanted in commemoration of the third anniversary of the Declaration of Independence and General Washington and the officers of his staff were invited to the ceremony; and again when, after the victory over Cornwallis at Yorktown, the members of Congress, the Supreme Executive Council, and the Assembly of Pennsylvania were invited to attend a service of Thanksgiving held in the same church on November 4, 1781.

It was therefore but natural that when the Constitutional Convention had concluded its debates and the whole frame of the Government with its powers and duties had been agreed to it adopted as a final clause the words of Clause III, Article VI:

No religious test shall be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

That clause was not voted without discussion. It was voted unanimously by all the States of the Confederation, as is attested by the Journal of the Federal Convention. Quakers from Pennsylvania, in whose State any one holding public office was required to denounce under oath as "superstitious and idolatrous" the "doctrine of transsubstantiation, the adoration of the Virgin Mary and all saints, and the sacrifice of the Mass," joined without reservation their votes. with the votes of Representatives from every other State; with the Catholic Representatives of Maryland as well as with the Episcopalians from Virginia, the Methodists from North Carolina, the 'Congregationalists from Massachusetts, the Baptists from Georgia, to make this clause the Supreme Law of our Nation and to place it at the very end of the Constitution in evidence of its all-embracing character.

The Outlook fo

At its first session under the Const tution, Congress agreed to the first te Amendments, and submitted them to th Legislatures of the States. The first d these reads:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

One after another the States of th Union have embodied in their Constitu tions the spirit of that Amendment. Th record of court decisions leaves no doub as to the true meaning or scope of tha Amendment.

Much more might be said on this sub ject, but this is doubtless enough to make clear to your readers the fact tha there is no historical background for the statement of Judge Crabités.

WILLIAM F. MONTAVON,
Director, National Catholic Welfare
Conference.

1312 Massachusetts Avenue N. W.,
Washington, D. C.

A

On the Sacco-Vanzetti Case

I-From a Layman's Standpoint

S an old friend of The Outlook I wish to register my disappointment at the wholly inadequate manner in which you have dealt with the Sacco-Vanzetti case. I freely concede that I do not know all there is to be known in regard to this case, but I have followed it with great care and have read every word of Governor Fuller's decision and the decision of the advisory committee, many of the statements by the Defense Committee, the full argument before the Massachusetts Supreme Court, the decision of that Court, and, in fact, for the last three weeks have read practically every word in regard to the case which has appeared in the New York "Times." I believe, therefore, that I have a fairly good basis for forming an intelligent opinion in regard to this case, and my opinions, in connection with such other matter as I have read, may be summarized as follows:

1. That Sacco and Vanzetti did not receive a fair trial.

2. That Judge Thayer was not a fairminded and impartial judge.

3. That Judge Thayer should not have been the sole and final judge of his own errors and prejudice.

4. That the Massachusetts Supreme Court refused to consider the case on its merits and decided that these men, even

if innocent, must die, because all legal formalities had not been complied with.

5. That until some one gives convincing answers to the many weaknesses in the evidence the "New Republic" of August 24 states some of these weaknesses most reasonable-minded persons will continue to believe that Sacco and Vanzetti are innocent.

6. That Governor Fuller's decision is not convincing.

7. That the advisory committee's decision is equally unconvincing.

8. That the refusal of the Federal Government to open its files-when it is claimed that these files will prove the innocence of these men-is difficult for any fair-minded person to understand.

9. That the commission of unlawful acts by others has nothing to do with the question of whether Sacco and Vanzetti murdered Berardelli in 1920.

10. That the fact that legal delays usually result in guilty persons escaping punishment is no proof that Sacco and Vanzetti are guilty of murder.

11. That your two recent editorials"Terrorism vs. Law" and "The Law's Delay"-while clearly indicating your belief that these men have had a fair trial and were guilty of murder, give no reasons bearing directly on this issue, but bring in side issues which are not germane to the question which at the mo

ment is the one of most vital importance. Instead of contributing anything to this discussion, your editorials merely tend to confuse and obscure.

12. That free-handed and impartial justice is the corner-stone of the American Nation, and that such justice should be administered just as fairly for the poor and ignorant as for the wealthy and educated.

13. That no greater peril can face any democracy than the subordination of true justice to legal formalities and legal technicalities. The necessity for the latter is recognized, but they must remain means to an end and under no circumstances be permitted, as in this case, to become the end itself.

14. That no personal reputation is as important as the need for true justice. No one desires to injure personal reputations except as this is incidental and unavoidable in the effort to obtain justice, but neither should any one deny justice in order to save personal reputations.

15. That on this important question The Outlook has signally failed to grasp the real issue, has failed to assist its readers to a clearer understanding of the real facts in the case, and has ranged itself on the side of injustice.

Having been a regular reader of The Outlook since 1909, and therefore being

September 7, 1927

thoroughly familiar with its past record and its consistent stand for right and justice, regardless of wealth, power, or social position, I cannot but view with regret this radical change in its policies.

A

I am afraid The Outlook must be included (only so far as the Sacco-Vanzetti case is concerned) among those whom you describe in your last editorial --"Even in this country there are some

17

more accustomed to speaking and writing than they are to thinking."

HENRY F. SCHWARZ.
Toland, Trimble & Co.,
Members of

Philadelphia and New York Stock Exchanges,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

II-From a Lawyer's Standpoint

S this is written the evening papers announce that the Supreme Court of Massachusetts has refused to interfere with the execution of Sacco and Vanzetti, and I am delighted to note that this Court has had the courage to decide this matter according to the law, and that this, like other great courts in our land, is not going to be deterred from doing its duty and that trial by bomb, bombast, bullying, and ballyhoo shall not be permitted in this land of ours.

It has been my privilege to read pretty much everything that has been sent out by the Associated Press, and even other news agencies, concerning this very much discussed case.

I have also read Professor Felix Frankfurter's "The Case of Sacco and Vanzetti" (Little, Brown & Co., 1927), and I read with exceeding interest the entire report of the commission appointed by Governor Alvan T. Fuller, of Massachusetts.

There has been a great deal of special and specious pleading urged in behalf of these two murderers (for I am accepting the verdict of the jury and the final decision of the Supreme Court of Massachusetts when I thus designate them), and the case has attracted much more attention than its importance warranted.

We have here two men who upon the witness-stand admitted that they were Anarchists, enemies of our Government, and who had disseminated literature, and possibly spoken openly as well (at least one of them so admitted), against our Government and its functions, while at the same time claiming the right to be tried in our courts, but who have not been willing to abide by its decisions, because they claim they have been treated unfairly. When they accepted the valuable privileges of free speech and peaceful surroundings and protection offered by the Government to which they were opposed, did they think they were unfairly treated? Had they any greater right to commit murder and robbery than one else?

any

The commission has found, and looking at the matter from a purely legal standpoint-and as a former member of the bench as well as an active member of the bar-there was ample evidence upon which the jury might find a conviction.

It appeared in the case quite clearly that from the defendants' own testimony -for their attorneys deemed it wise to permit them to become witnesses in their own defense and behalf-they were Anarchists and that they had an antipathy to our form of government and our mode of doing things. Must such men be believed in preference to law-abiding citizens?

Coupled with that fact it also appeared from some testimony, at least, which the jury had a right to believe, and did consider, that the identification of these defendants was complete. The jury also had a right to conclude that the alibis attempted to be shown in their behalf had failed. There was evidence that the pistol which was used, at least by Sacco, was the one which he owned and from which the bullets were fired, and if the statement of Major Calvin H. Goddard is correct, he, a perfectly disinterested person, of manifest intelligence and experience, proves unequivocally that the exploded shells were the ones which came from Sacco's pistol.

Without pretending to review the various pieces of evidence which when fitted together pointed directly at these two defendants as the murderers, the point I am stressing is, that in this case, as in many others, a conviction was had upon sufficient evidence, but if you can retry a case after a conviction has been affirmed by the court of last resort, when will there be an end to any case?

I happen to have had a personal acquaintance with the attorney who first represented them, and who started his legal experience in the city of Spokane, Washington, as the attorney for the I. W. W.'s, and who continued in the work of defending these semi-criminals and in some instances active criminals, and from his knowledge and experience gained in that practice he ought to have had sufficient ability to take care of every legal right of these defendants and to safeguard them thoroughly as to a fair and legal trial.

It is further reported by the commission that the presiding Judge made no comments upon the trial to which exception could be taken, but that he commented upon the evidence and verdict after the trial.

In an experience extending over the trial of all kinds of civil and criminal cases for upwards of forty-five years, this is the first time that I have ever heard anybody attempt to secure a new trial after a court of last resort has passed upon all the legal questions involved because of any comments made by the trial judge after the verdict.

Judges are human, and very naturally express themselves as to whether or not a conviction was justified. They often do it from the bench when motions for a new trial are made or sentence is imposed, and there is no reason why they should not do so when off the bench and after the trial is over. They have the right to their opinion as to what, in their judgment, the evidence proved. In other countries the courts do not hesitate from the bench during the trial to give opinions as to the guilt or innocence of the defendant, or as to whether or not a witness is telling the truth, but in some of our States I think unfortunately-the court is not allowed to comment upon the testimony during the trial. Great Britain and other countries give their criminals as fair a trial, if not fairer, than we do. They certainly elicit the facts and do not encourage hiding them behind technicalities.

I have been amazed at the ignorance of the facts as adduced upon the trial, and of the law as administered, both by the trial and appellate court, on the part of some of the lawyers who have criticised this decision, and especially of laymen who have not even taken the time to read the report of the commission or to know what facts were elicited at the trial. Lawyers of more than ordinary intelligence have refused to accept the facts as found by the commission. When asked why, they say it was unfair and represented the capitalistic class. And they call themselves "lawyers."

Because of a most unfortunate delay in the final hearing and the decision in this case, a semblance of an excuse has been given the defendants' sympathizers, who have renewed the slumbering fires of parlor Socialism, street-corner anarchism, and capital hatred, with all its amplifications, and a great deal of unfounded and unjustifiable criticism and comment has resulted.

Some years ago Professor Frankfurter

18

appeared in a very celebrated case at Rochester, New York, where a large clothing firm was suing a labor union for damages caused by a strike, called not by reason of any differences of the employers with their own laborers, but because of a controversy between two unions.

He was unsuccessful in that case, but it and other cases in which he appeared and comments in which he has indulged make me think that Professor Frankfurter is so steeped in what he thinks are the wrongs of the laboring people that he has lost his perspective of what is right and fair, and has therefore done what any technical or theoretical lawyer can do find the weaknesses or flaws in any trial, and yet overlook the main facts and the main controversy. In a criminal trial which lasts a number of days and where much of the evidence must be circumstantial and technical, and where many rulings are made, any lawyer of average ability can take the record and point out discrepancies, and even possible errors, but these will not necessarily destroy all other testimony which may have been given, nor other rulings which may have been made, nor will they bring about an unfair or illegal trial.

From the very beginning of the publicity in this case (much of which, I think, has been carefully prepared and

P

most wonderfully exploited) our newspapers have paid altogether too much attention to its importance. Hundreds of men have been convicted and sentenced on evidence very much weaker than appeared in this case, and there has not been the hullabaloo which for some unaccountable reason has been created in this case. Even our reputable newspapers have lent themselves to extravagant headlines and over-conspicuousness in printing its features. I know of newspapers which on the afternoon of President Coolidge's succinct announcement that he would not choose to be a candidate for President in 1928 gave that most important news item a very few inches of space and headline, causing it to be entirely dwarfed by the greater publicity given to the activities in behalf of Sacco and Vanzetti.

In my own community, where I am constantly meeting lawyers at lunch and Bar Association meetings, and other places in and out of court, I have been amazed at the ignorance displayed by members of my own profession of the actual facts upon which these convictions were founded, and of the further fact that the Supreme Court of Massachusetts, under the laws of that State, cannot pass upon the facts, but can only decide whether or not on questions of law the trial court was correct. Such lawyers, like many others, have come to

The Outlook for

the conclusion that because of the long delay of the ultimate decision of this case there must of necessity have been something wrong in the trial and which was inimical to the rights of the defendants.

Several decades ago one of the ablest judges of the Supreme Court of the United States wrote an opinion in a case where two factions sought to control the destinies of a large and wealthy Presbyterian church. As a result one faction seceded and attempted to secure to itself some of the very valuable real estate which the church owned.

The Court held up the decision for a year, and the writer of the opinion said he had done this in the hope that these factions would manifest a greater "Christian" spirit and quit their quarreling and conclude to remain together.

It might be well if a little more Christian spirit were manifested towards the members of our judiciary, who are not all crooked and biased; and to the members of juries who have the disagreeable task of deciding murder cases, and who are not all prejudiced and unfair; and to members of a commission who reluctantly assume a task as uninviting as confronted them in the instant case. SAMUEL R. STERN,

Formerly Judge of the Superior Court of the State of Washington.

Seattle, Washington.

Publicity and the French Mind

ICTURES of President Coolidge, the taciturn, the silent, the restrained New Englander, attired in chaps and sombrero; stories about President Coolidge and his worms and trout; gifts to President Coolidge of bucking broncos and chocolate birthday cakes-what godsends all these items are for the novelty-seeking reporters and the Sunday rotogravure sections, and how droll they seem to our French friends across the water!

[blocks in formation]

By GOLDA M. GOLDMAN

such thing as a personality column. Occasionally a photograph will show Mistinguett, of the Moulin Rouge Music Hall, wading on the beach at Deauville. That is really getting very intimate for the newspaper.

The writer who has done interviews and special-feature articles in both the United States and France finds himself obliged to use absolutely different tactics in the two countries. The contrasts are, without doubt, best illustrated autobiographically, so I will indulge in a few personal reminiscences of my experiences in gathering copy in Paris.

I came over a year ago with orders from several American radio magazines for articles on the big Paris stations. Two of these were Government-owned, and two were private property. Through the introduction of a French journalist, I was given an appointment at the station of the Petit Parisien one afternoon, but, to my amazement, found that no broadcasting was in process and that I was to be shown only the power rooms.

To my explanation that I wished to see the studio in operation, and to have photographs, etc., the engineer replied firmly that no visitors were ever admitted. I finally obtained an interview with the announcer, who, after much discussion, agreed that I might come to the studio during a performance if I would write the article as though I had not been there! I agreed to this extraordinary request, and called at the appointed time. My promise was quite unnecessary, as heavy draperies were drawn between me and the artists, so that I sat entirely alone in a big room, and saw nothing at all. I might just as well have listened in from the United States. At Radio Paris, the largest of the French stations, the director answered questions in monosyllables and regarded me with absolute suspicion. To both of these large private organizations, which maintained posts at great expense for publicity purposes, it was absolutely inconceivable that the American public actually was interested in biographical notes about

September 7, 1927

19

[graphic]

a

dir

the

pr

nei

abe

[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

pubilo. Le personnel du Parlement du peuple irlandais nouvelles causes d'infériorité. Or, notre indus- | extrémistes allemands. Assomme 1, epehéril-1 sur les préjugés précaneus. Le tempe amène des ebesdus accueil chaleureux. Seuf toutefois auprès que os changemente se fassent dans le sens du Mon Irie des constructions navales, qui aura évidem- A ce comple-là, la Jeune Droite est assurte gements qui sont inévitables. C'est à nous de vellier ment à fabriquer la majeure partie de cel ouM. Redmond, chef du petit groupe qui eof en il n'aura plus es careprésent POUR NOTRE MARINE MARCHANDE illage, travaille elle-même dans des conditions des Allemands raisonnables et ceux-el, grace maletenant presque au complet et j'espèra que ce Incule du pro-parti responsable de la chute de M. Cosgrav Lo'y ser p ractère de gouvernement d'union nationale qui faisait la force de la combinaison qui vient L'acuité des problèmes financiers et moné liers étrangers. Cette difficulté ne pouvait premiers, se sont vite rendu compte des exagéreJeune Drefte, et non seulement n'accordent lers et de ses amis marquait une étape d'une imde se disloquer. L'impression existe que la dernières années a fait passer au secand plan échapper à la commission. Aussi, sans mécon- tions incroyables et de la Thomas Johnson all arrive au pouvoir. D'une Afrique de Bord Les perparlers franco-spa-crise actuelle n'est pas seulement déterminée par des divergences sur la solution à apporter taires qui se soal posés en France pendant ces plus onéreuses que la plupart des grands chan-à Dieu, sent ea asses grand nombre que Parlemani se montrers digas de es peupls. eelies concernant les matériaux utilisés par nos chantiers na- aucun erédit à son commentateur, mais préfére-portance capitale dans le sens de Fordre consti mande, mal renseignés, auxquels lee talents et les art, M. de Valère garderait une altitude passive peuvent comme lors des négociations anglo-Irlandaisse de Dau in Serre, Su DELAGE ence de ces divergences n'a été que le prétexte de notre devise se trouve pourtant intimement les que l'admission temporaire accordée pour dès que les circonstances le permet-magne ou qu'il y tot 11 est bon que les Alle-rultés pour le nouveau gouvernement de M. Ait 1921-1992, mais exigerait de eon allié politique chniai par les éléments monarchistes du parti Howie de Jour.- Chronique dicerilent loul particulièrement de retenir la rétablies, eleolument D'autre part, le journal de Farmée républicaine ogle-Revue de in pryse. ouvernementale qui consolidait en fait le ré- l'avenir de Pour ce qui concerne l'industrie de l'arme-hardesses de ce jeune palerin patient vis particu- tention générale. Les travaux récemment treat, les primes à la construction. PAGE principe, l'octroi de primes ou de compensa- manière la plus formelle, que tout dites, elle a, du moins, pro-derit, soutient, promet, il est seul, Adinics-La Vie desemique et sociale.gime républicain et galt la Tière de ce parti. Si cellos se con- terminés de la commission extraparlemen La demeni da impia en juillet 1917. firme, il faudrait voir dans celle crise le Cette commission fut constituée, on s'en sou- tions proprement Courier put, Pat Mor groupe politique eririmista distinct du parti restauration de la monarchie contre le régime portunément d'en rappeler l'importance. vient, ea mai 1922. Présidée par M. Brindeau clamé la nécessité de mettre en oeuvre, suivant seul en France, à le penser, à l'écrire, à le pre- irlandaise publie un appel belliqueur à la nation, abli, ce qui provoquerait sans doute une réac L'aspect le plus sérieux de la crise, même On pourrait sourire de ces juvéniles intempé-Fianas Fall de M. de Valera. Cest un part! di questions maritimes ainsi que sûr la tants auiorisés de l'armement, de navi- tion jugé indispensable, mais encore la com- compte pas al M. Zalmis réussit à rallier à sa nouvelle composée des parlementaires spécialistes des le crédit maritime à bon marché. Ce sera là qui le constitue tout entier. Il est dommage qu'en guerre Firlande et l'invitant résister comme -La Remise ital da Central ipho-ment, c'est qu'elle risque de retarder l'apples constructions navales, des peindustrie des liter l'exécution du programme de reconstrue- mot do Talleyrand: Tout ce qui est axagéré no s'appelle Farmés républicaine irlandaise et a tion des mesures indispensables à l'assainisse-gauts, du commerce et des diverses adminis-pensation nécessaire des avantages du même qu'ait à ment des finances de telle sorte que irations publiques intéressées, elle fut chargée ordre qu'assurent les Etate rangers à leurs rances si tout ce qui a trait aux rapports franco aurrection dont les cing députée ont, jusqu'ic posée utilement au la question ne pourrait Conse cours de la prochaine session du conseil de de rechercher les mesures d'ordre général de pavillons respectifs. En Grande-Bretagne, no-allemands et à f'intercompréhension des deux D'ailleurs, les de au succès de laquelle il croit Gendre. La responsabilité des graves quences qui pourraient en résulter pour la lica commission extraparlementaire et les cinq ment, le crédit maritime. Grice incomberait, dans ce cas, à ceux qui sous-commissions ca lesquelles elle s'était di pose le problème de notre marine marchande préconisant des solutions qu'aucun Françaisout délibérément provoqué cette alerte parce visée sont pas lenu moins de 87 séances. Les masion ne se bornent pas là. Elle s'a négligé contribuar. La porant les termes du prebilme LA NEGOCIATION ANGLO-EGYPTIENNE densés dans un rappor député, volume da Elle rappelle aux importateurs et aux expor-même ceux qui consacreat lears forces à la cause par M. Charles Les renfermant, outre les sug- tateurs français que le devoir aussi bien que du rapprocheusent entre les deux nations n'ac LA CRISE MINISTERIELLE EN GRECE n'ont pas au sacrifier les intérêts de leur résulfate de leurs travaux se trouvent con- aucun des multiples aspects sous lesquels so franco-allemand sur des plans Imaginaites, près de 400 pages, commission, toute une Tintérêt leur commandent de faire transpor❘ cepterait seulement de discuter, comment l'an plus instructives. De ce ter, de préférence, leurs marchandises sous qu'intéres - propre qui répond certainement aux CORAMPONDANTS PARTICULE DU C document important, dont on ne saurait trop pavillon national. Aux pouvoirs publics, el maleur de la Jeune Drolle

This-Sparta-Fafermations financières- tica asses vive de la part des républicains sénateur, qui en avait suggéré la création: une méthode rationnelle el sur un vaste plan, mettre. Le parti de la Jeune Droite, c'est ful alléguant que l'Angleterre s'apprête à faire la

imposent actuellement à la Le bruit ayant eeurs que le roi Alexandre période de réorganisation po Grex en pleine p Euge Gecosmique, nous exprin.ions is artista que la metais d'une nouvelle crise de Yougoslavie était ea route pour Munich, afin ideale as vial insprometire ces lous-ceorditar un moidecin de catre ville, on déclare Varsovie, 13 OL es efforts Us Wigramme d'Athines Bousa de suure compétente ne rien savoir d'un pareil Jedi eu lieu à Varsovie inauguration du hier qu'à la suite des divergences de projet du rei al produites entre Maphandarie, septième congrès international de la Pas romana. De nombreux discours ont été prononcés, entre autres par le délégué français, M. Remond Vivace, 13 avel que jeudi soir un avion

Fame such as that which has come to Graham MacNamee or the "Happiness Boys" was beyond their comprehension.

artists or announcers.

Written requests for personal interviews in France, even though backed by the introduction of a reputable magazine or newspaper, usually go unanswered. Telephone requests, at least eight times out of ten, are politely refused. And even when at last face to face with a rare cornered victim, one is in a dilemma on the subject of what can possibly be asked a Frenchman without being considered insulting. I was recently granted an interview by M. Laskin, chief-ofcabinet for M. Bokanowski, Minister of Commerce. I was doing an article on M. Bokanowski, and when finished with details of his career, I asked what his personal interests and hobbies were outside of the political world. My French husband, who was assisting at the séance, blushed with shame for my indiscretions and the chief-of-cabinet was utterly nonplussed. I finally extracted that the gentleman in question likes golf and polo. Has he a family to whom he is utterly devoted, like Mr. Mellon? Does he go on camping trips like Ford and Edison? I have yet to see a line in any French paper which might tell me, and only a braver woman than I could ever ask.

PRESIDENT DOUMERGUE takes his va

cation on the Presidential estate at Rambouillet. Four or five times a year the papers carry three lines to the effect that the Chief Executive has quit Paris

[ocr errors]

The characteristic front page of a French journal

for the château. What does he do there?
Can any one imagine him photographed
with a butterfly net, or dressed in the
velvet pantaloons and big black hat of
As he leaves the
a Breton peasant?
Elysée Palace on his vacation he passes
into privacy that is absolute obscurity.
What one knows about his private life
one gets through the filterings of gossip,
and for his likes and dislikes, whether
he is talkative in private, whether his
charming smile is only worn for the pub-
lic, whether he has many intimates, who
can tell?

There is no one whose public life is
followed more avidly than is Poincaré's.
She
Every move, every word, is watched.
There is also a Madame Poincaré.
undoubtedly is the first lady in the land.
I once saw a photograph of her next to
the Premier at the unveiling of a monu-
ment. In two years I have never heard
her discussed. Has she pet charities?
Does she visit the Girl Scouts, or do they
present her with flowers? When she re-
tires to the Poincaré family estates in
Lorraine, does she walk in the gardens
with her dogs, like Mrs. Coolidge? All
is silence.

т

ernment Tourist Office carries on the
poorest propaganda of any European
From my Paris office I can
country.
obtain all the pictures I need of Berlin,
Vienna, Prague, Rome. But for a pho-
tograph of Paris the Government Tour-
ist Office, the Syndicat d'Initiative de
Paris, the Chamber of Commerce, will
all refer you one to the other, and you

IT is notorious that the French Gov

will end by buying your photograph
from a private photographer and paying
for the rights of reproduction. When I
arrived in France with introductions
from the very able gentleman in charge
of the New York office, I waited three
weeks for indications from the director
of the Paris office, attempted vainly to
see him, and was finally sent a letter
which began "To whom it may concern,"
and asked that Paris in general receive
me kindly. There was no attempt to
direct me to proper authorities, or give
me so much as an address in order to
insure my receiving a good impression
of the country, no attempt to make use
of my avowed purpose of writing
friendly articles about the country. In
marked contrast was the service of the
German Government, who gave me an
itinerary, free passage, cabled to hotels
to receive me as a guest, and did ten
times what could reasonably be ex-
pected.

It is reported that this French Government service is about to be reorganized under the direction of M. André Tardieu, the able director of the Ministry of Public Works. M. Tardieu knows his America, as his fine book of this past winter shows, and has undoubtedly learned many valuable advertising lessons from it.

[blocks in formation]
« AnteriorContinuar »