Mrs. Hoover's Portrait
Sirs:
I wish to call your attention to a copyrighted Underwood & Underwood portrait appearing in your May 13th issue, in which a painting by Mr. David Cleeland of Mrs. Herbert Hoover appears on your cover. This particular painting is an exact copy from a copyrighted photograph made by this company.
Mr. Cleeland violated the copyright laws in copying this portrait and I am sure that in future you will see that our copyrighted portraits are not copied by artists without written permission from this company.
JAMES ELLIOTT, President Underwood & Underwood New York City
To Underwood & Underwood, all credit for its portrait photograph of Mrs. Hoover. To Artist Cleeland, added credit for his painted portrait, which in TIME'S opinion is not an "exact copy." Artist Cleeland used the Underwood & Underwood photograph, a copy of which was bought for him by TIME for the purpose, as a basis to which he added creative values of modeling, lighting, color. After "working up" his canvas, Artist Cleeland submitted it for Mrs. Hoover's inspection and criticism. Mrs. Hoover resumed her costume and pose, at the White House, and sat for Artist Cleeland while he made important corrections, finishing touches. If this constitutes a violation of law, TIME will not knowingly transgress again.--ED.
"Strange As It Seems"
Sirs:
"Strange As It Seems" by John Hix was in preparation in December, 1927, was announced by The McClure Newspaper Syndicate in February, 1928, and was released on regular schedule, March 26, 1928. Perhaps the fact that its list of clients has steadily grown, this month adding the Washington Post, the Buffalo Times and the Boston Globe, accounts for TIME'S belated discovery of it. But TIME could have seen it in at least 50 other newspapers, big and little, a year ago. Usually TIME is more timely, and in this instance it would have been fairer to have been 14 months earlier with its news.
HAROLD MATSON, Managing Editor, The McClure Newspaper Syndicate New York City
Neutral "Monitor"
Sirs:
There appears to be a possibility that readers of the article which appeared in your April issue may believe that Willis J. Abbot represented the Christian Science. Monitor when, at a meeting of the American Society of Newspaper Editors in Washington, a short time ago, he proposed an investigation of the alleged control of newspapers by the International Paper and Power Company. Therefore, I am writing to say that Mr. Abbot spoke only for himself on this occasion and in his capacity as a member of the American Society of Newspaper Editors and without having consulted the Board which is responsible for the Christian Science Monitor's editorial policy. The Board has taken no position with regard to the subject in question.
ORWELL BRADLEY TOWNE Christian Science Committee on Publication for the State of New York New York City
Der Pabst Lebt Herrlich
Sirs:
On p. 26 of your May 27 issue you quote a U. S. College Song, beginning: "The Pope he leads a merry life," etc. It is only fair to remind you that this is originally a German college song of which the first stanza runs as follows:
Der Pabst lebt herrlich in der Welt,
Es fehlt ihm nicht an Abiassgeld,
Auch trinkt er taeglich seinen Wein,
Ich mocchte dock der Pabst wohl sein.
The song has three more stanzas, and I am sure it is a very old song; it was old 60 years
D. DIEPHUIS St. Louis, Mo.
Tagore's Disgust
Sirs:
The American who writes in disgust over "Tagore's Disgust" with America is an example one whose desire to break into print with misinformation puts him in the classification of "the prejudiced and despicable American."
There never was any proposition either on the part of Tagore nor of the University of Southern California to "pay him $10,000 for seven 'conferences.'" He never had any opportunity to spurn an offer of $5,000 for such 'conferences,' for no such offer was made to him. In fact the University made no offer of any kind to pay him for such conferences with the students. Dr. Tagore came to the University at his own expense amounting to about $3,000 under the misapprehension that he might hope to find substantial support in the propagation of his ideals of international brotherhood and peace. He returned to India a broken-hearted and disappointed man.
Dr. Tagore has never sought for anything for himself, and has in fact given away the whole of his inherited and earned fortune, amounting to about $500,000, for the propagation of his ideals. Certainly such a man deserves our support and admiration and not our contemptuous scorn. It may be that some Americans may yet learn that courtesy and fairness play a large part m bringing about mutual understanding and good will between the Occident and the Orient. May God grant us the wisdom to have learned this lesson in time.
BOYD W. TUCKER New York City
Dog-Robber v. Striker
Sirs:
Your statement on page 4 of the May 20 issue, as a footnote to a letter written by Frederick O'Brien is, to use the common expression, ''hooey."
A striker in the naval sense (it originating in the Naval Service) is an apprentice who is under instruction aboard a ship or serving at a shore station. For example, a ship might have five yeoman (clerks) and two "strikers," or men learning the duties and preparing for examinations which would qualify them for ratings (non-rated men are those who hold the rate of seaman or fireman and below) as petty officers.
No enlisted man of the U. S. Navy or Coast Guard performs in any manner the duties of a servant, other than negroes or natives of the islands, who are enlisted for such purposes. For a regular sailor to wait upon or act as a flunky for any officer is strictly forbidden by regulations and I am sure no naval officer would dare to ask any enlisted white man to do personal acts in the capacity of a servant.
The enlisted men of the Army might be different. But I believe the officers of the Army "get away" with more rough stuff on the enlisted men than any other branch of the service. The white enlisted men in the army who are foolish enough to allow any officer to order them to perform humiliating acts of service are not called "strikers," but "Dog Robbers."
The entire military scheme of things, as far as the enlisted man is concerned is far from perfect, but who are there that will protest in behalf of the "Dog Robber?" He has no vote or is he other than future cannon fodder -- the officers, well, that's the great argument!
Hoping that you will know the difference between a "Striker" and a "Dog Robber."
EDWARD FRANCIS SULLIVAN Oakland, Calif.
The footnote was Letter-Writer O'Brien's, not TIME'S. And it was correct, not "hooey." "Dog-robbers" were called "strikers" often enough to get into Webster's Dictionary under "striker." U. S. Army officers were forbidden to use enlisted men as servants by Act of Congress July 15, 1870.--ED.
Guck=Gook
Sirs :
I have read your magazine from cover to cover and I was a great deal surprised when I came across (in the May 20 issue) my uncle's picture, Homer Guck. You stated that his name was pronounced "Guke," allow me to correct you, it is spelt Guck as in book.
Knowing that correcting mistakes is your hobby, I send this to you with pleasure.
HOMER L. GUCK
(Nephew) Laurium, Mich.
Mushing Bishop
Sirs:
. . . The account of Bishop Brent reminds me of the story of Bishop Rowe of Alaska. One day the Bishop met a prospector on a stretch of bad trail, and asked him how the trail was. The prospector described the condition in language such as a dog-musher is supposed to be complete master of. Then, pausing for breath, he said, "And how is it where your way?" Without a moment's hesitation the Bishop, "Just the same as you describe." At the next roadhouse the old-timer was much chagrined when told that he had passed the bishop on the trail and had used unseemly language in the presence of the well-loved churchman.
ORAH DEE CLARK Ridgefield, Wash.
Can't Sleep
Sirs:
Again I congratulate you on the selection and execution of the subject representing the adornment of the cover of TIME for last week. Mr. Adams is a personable gentleman with attractive features and the little touch of color in the picture enhanced the effect.
The features of Mayor Walker the previous week showed a jolly individual who might be a charter member of the Association for the repeal (or nonenforcement) of the Volstead Act.
The contents of TIME between covers continues to be the best reading in the country and the only criticism I make is the observation that, having chronic insomnia, I have formed the habit of perusing the magazine during wakeful hours, and it is far from a soporific and I need a mental sedative rather than a mental stimulant. Unless you can insert some poetry between advertisements I shall have to find a substitute for TIME for night reading. The only poetry I can comprehend is limericks. Perhaps you will suggest some particularly stupid magazine guaranteed to produce sleep.
HENRY W. RING
New Haven, Conn.
It would ill become TIME to designate any other magazine "particularly stupid . . . guaranteed to produce sleep." But perhaps TIME-readers know of some such magazine. If so, let them advise sleepless Reader Ring, c/o Taft Hotel, New Haven. Conn.--ED.
11, 13, 14
Sirs:
Living in the interior of Brasil as I am, TIME is absolutely invaluable to me, an American. It is too of extreme importance in the education of my children--particularly the three oldest of five, my two daughters age 13 and 14 and son 11. It will be of invaluable assistance when they go to school and college in the States to have been able to keep in accurate touch with the affairs of their country as well as foreign news of importance.
We have, though eight hours from Sao Paulo, Capital of the State of Sao Paulo, available very splendid Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo papers with current events (written in Portuguese, not Spanish, as even yet some poor misguided Americans think).
However, there is nothing to take the place of TIME and I consider it the greatest magazine of its kind ever given to the American public.
TIME sincerely tries to give the unbiased truth to its readers, I believe.
PAULINE BOGANDUS WERTH (Mrs. James R. Werth) Araraquara Estado de Sao Paulo, Brasil
Life Subscriptions
Sirs:
Is your readiness to establish a life subscription rate (TIME, May 27, p. 4) well considered? "Sufficient interest" seems to be hardly sufficient reason. Life-expectation tables can have little bearing on the rate, as such subscriptions would be relatively few; nor has the life subscriber an assurance that TIME will not change its policy, cease publication, merge with another. There remains also the advertiser, whose best assurance of sustained reader-interest is the addition or renewal of annual (or possibly biennial or triennal) subscriptions.
A. E. HAWKINS
Burlington, Vt.
No TIME subscriber who believes either that TIME will change its policy (for the worse) or cease publication, or merge with another magazine, will consider a life subscription. The advertiser will have plenty of assurance of sustained reader-interest in the renewal action of hundreds of thousands of non-life subscribers.--ED.
Sirs:
Life subscription? Sure--if not too much of a lump sum blow for youngsters just getting their sea-legs in business.
R. W. GRAHAM Philadelphia, Pa.
Sirs:
Here is another original subscriber who would like to take a life-term behind TIME'S flexible bars.
Congratulations on your aerial advertising in this issue. It is a fine tribute to your forward-looking policy.
Why not establish a separate edition of TIME for England, Australia, South Africa? And later expand in other languages. Thus TIME would spread its fine influence throughout the world more effectively.
ARTHUR MENKEN New York City
Subscriber Menken is ambitious but not fantastic.--ED.
Sirs:
I have read every issue of TIME since I have known of its existence--cover to cover--and I do not ever want to be without it. So please put me down when life subscriptions are in order. I wonder if TIME readers realize that the newsmagazine is a self-correcting publication. . . .
J. L. FlTZ-GlBBON General Manager Tex-La Pecan Orchards San Antonio, Tex.
Sirs:
Permit me to add my endorsement of a Life Subscription Plan as outlined by other subscribers in your issue of May 2 7.
I am 26 years of age.
GEORGE E. TARBOX JR.
Birmingham, Ala.
Sirs:
I should like to take a life subscription. Born July 14, 1876.
A. JAMES MCDONALD Shreveport, La.
Sirs:
I too am one of your original subscribers and read every word of it.
I could do without any other periodical sooner than yours, and would certainly consider a life membership if given the opportunity. I believe my subscription is now paid up until February 1930.
FANNIE B. AYERS New York City
Sirs:
To me the idea of a life subscription for TIME presents considerably more attraction than simply relieving me of the bother of renewing my subscription every year. I would look on it muck as I do an insurance policy but for one point: a "life" subscription does not ensure that my wife and children will continue to get TIME when I finish my time. Why not make it a transferable or inheritable subscription? Would it cost so much more?
CARL ANDERS St. Paul, Minn.
Sirs:
Just make my subscription "perpetual."
S. O. LlNDEMAN Greensboro, N. C.
A Perpetual (that is, to the end of TIME) and Inheritable Subscription would cost little more than a life subscription. TIME'S decisions will await further comment from subscribers.--ED.