Wanted: A Leader

Recently, Death loomed, up and two of the leaders of the Progressive movement left forever the scene of their labors--Senator LaFollette and Senator Ladd (TIME, June 29).

In the extreme left wing of U. S. politics there were few leaders remaining--possibly only three Senators-- Brookhart, Frazier and Norris. Although Senator Brookhart was apparently reelected last fall, his title to a senatorship is not yet clear (a recount will be undertaken July 20), and his prestige suffered severely from his close escape. Senator Frazier does not appear as a possible leader of his group. Senator Norris, therefore, was Mr. LaFollette's logical successor--by elimination if for no other reason. (Senator Wheeler, Mr. LaFollette's running mate last year was not generally considered a likely possibility, 1) because he is a Democrat and the LaFollette movement is largely a Republican off shoot; 2) because he has his hands full, at least temporarily, with the charges which the Department of Justice brought against him.)

But last week Mr. Norris wrote a curious letter formally renouncing this place. It was in answer to a letter from one Warren Shaw Fisher of the "Progressive Political League" of Manhattan: I have received quite a large number of other letters similar to yours, from other sections of the country, in which the writers make the same statement that is made in your letter that is, that I have "assumed" the leadership of the Progressive Party. I do not understand how this idea became so prevalent over the country.

In the first place, I would consider it improper for me to "assume" the leadership of any party or faction. As you perhaps know, I was not in favor of the organization of a Third Party, and did not join the movement. I never questioned the sincerity or patriotism of those who went into the Third Party movement, but it seemed to me that what the country was suffering most from was too much partisanship.

Party ties rest very lightly upon me, and, as I have said, my idea is that one of the greatest evils of government is that so many people tie themselves up to a party, when as a matter of fact it seems to me they ought to be independent of all parties. Under existing conditions, I presume parties are necessary, but it is a mistake to regard a party as anything but an instrumentality of government.

I expect to work in the future, as I have in the past, for those things in government that I believe to be right, and I will support them regardless of whether they originate with Democrats, Republicans, Progressives or men bearing any other party label.

I shall be glad to work in unison with anyone, regardless of his party affiliation, if he believes in the same progressive principles of government that I advocate, but I do not want to be associated with any political party as its leader.

Thanking you for your letter, I am

Cordially,

(Signed) GEORGE W. NORRIS.

Evidently, Senator Norris believes it more politic to remain in the Republican fold--as far as he can--"with party ties resting lightly."

But who will lead the extreme left?

1) Will there be no leader, and will the LaFollette following disintegrate?

2) Will someone from the Progressive left--Borah, say, or Shipstead-- eventually rally the LaFollette followers to his banner, or go over to their more extreme position?

3) Will a new leader rise from the Progressive ranks? The dates have not yet been set for special elections to fill the vacancies left by Senators LaFollette and Ladd. In Wisconsin, there is talk of Mrs. LaFollette and of young Bob LaFollette. But a newcomer in the Senate would hardly be able to pose as a leader of a party. The future is cloudy for the present.