Valedictory Canceled

Sirs:

I had presumed too much. I was about to indite my valedictory; then came your manifesto--Dec. 29 issue--affirming your determination to hold fast to all those virtues for the presumed jettisoning of which I was about to leave you.

I and so many others in Canada have for over two years relied upon TIME. . . .

That simple, natural, excusable national bias, combined with national censorship, would of necessity cramp your style, I had no doubt. And I felt sorrowfully reluctant to read a TIME relegated to propaganda, however compulsorily. So, immense credit is due you for stating honestly to your readers your exact position with regard to the news.

But, in wartime, as the phrase "military information" acquires such elasticity as to be practically all-inclusive, I am of opinion that TIME . . . will have the dickens of a time keeping its editors out of jail.

W. S. PATTON Toronto, Canada

> TIME expects to have the dickens of a time, but it does not expect to be discouraged.--ED.

Sirs:

. . . Your introduction to the Dec. 29 issue of TIME is an insult to the intelligence of every patriotic citizen.

Nobody, with the exception of enemy agents, expects you or any other U.S. publication to tell "freely and frankly all the things" in connection with the prosecution of the war by the U.S. Freedom of the press is a great ideal indeed, and there is still quite a lot of that freedom in this country. But even a child, an American child, can understand that to preserve this and the other freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights the public must not be told "all the things" which only the Government and the military chiefs should know.

Your explanation was, therefore, absolutely uncalled for. . . .

MAURICE WINOGRAD Jewish Daily Forward New York City

Sirs:

In your issue of Dec. 29 you inform your readers that ". . . TIME finds itself unable to tell its readers freely and frankly all the things it knows." In time of war that is just as well. In the same issue there appears a typical TIME article: "Civilian Defense--Confused & Unprepared." Is this article wise, considered and constructive in time of war? How carefully did you consider the effect that it would have in enemy countries? . . .

CHARLES H. RUSSELL New York City

> From a short-range viewpoint, it may be that news of bungled civilian defense in the U.S. may give momentary solace to the enemies of democracy. In the long run, it is certain that democracy's ability to publish such news and criticism will improve its ability to fight and preserve undiminished faith and courage. The dark flame of Winston Churchill's candor and its galvanic effect on the British people are mortally hated and feared by the Nazis, who try to conceal their mistakes until concealment becomes impossible.--ED.

Sirs:

The Japs know when they attack. Withholding the facts can mean only that those in authority must feel that Americans can't take it, that they are not adult. The people are united now as they have never been in our entire history. If they are treated as men they will remain united. . . .

PRENTISS BROWN Los Gatos, Calif.

Through the Wood

Sirs:

A few hours ago I received my copy of the Dec. 29 issue of TIME. . . .

I don't know what kind of pace you maintain in the pursuance of your journalistic activities, but it must be killing. Anyway, as far as reporting alone goes, this time I'd say you have not only hit the nail on the head, but that it's been driven clear through the wood!

GEORGE C. MCMILLAN Downers Grove, Ill.

Sirs:

CONGRATULATIONS COVERAGE, PARTICULARLY WRITING, "U.S. AT WAR." A SUPERB MAGNIFICENT JOB. TO US OUT HERE WHERE INCREDIBLE DOES HAPPEN SUCH STORY COMES AS INSPIRING RESTATEMENT OF EVERYTHING FOR WHICH OUR NATION IS NOW FIGHTING.

JAMES GRAHAM CHESNUTT YANCEY B. SMITH San Francisco, Calif.

Sirs:

Thank you for your excellent coverage of the Philippine situation. . .

My husband is on General MacArthur's staff and the only word I have had from him was a cable sent Christmas Eve. . . .

Please continue to give your pluperfect information on everything. It helps, when one reads your every word as avidly as I, to find such gems.

EDITH HIRSCH Columbia, S.C.

Big Wonder

Sirs:

One of the big wonders to us Latin Americans of how you are trying to win this war, is the fact that apparently you do not take it seriously enough. You have had thousands of your soldiers killed in Hawaii, also thousands of civilians, and yet you expect to win without using as much energy toward the enemy as modern warfare demands. We are far away from the age of chivalry, and if the other fellow hits below the belt, you Americans must do likewise. A few examples:

In TIME, Dec. 15, you state: "One Japanese was arrested for snipping telephone wires" (in Manila); this a full day after the little yellow men had assassinated thousands of Americans in Hawaii. He should not have been arrested, he should have been shot immediately. This is WAR, not monkey business.

Or do you suppose Germans arrest anyone caught cutting wires?

Another thing; you people think you have only to be in the defensive and your almighty production lines will take care of winning the war. Why has the U.S. in almost two weeks' time not yet bombed Tokyo ? It could easily be done from Siberian bases. Even from Alaska. Or could it be you are afraid Los Angeles and Frisco would be bombed in return? Wars are not won being afraid. You have to take chances, else you get beaten. . . .

You will undoubtedly think I am blunt and maybe a little excited, but a few true words won't hurt you much and they may possibly do some good.

CARLOS DIAZ Mexico City

> Tokyo had not been bombed from Siberian bases, when Reader Diaz wrote, for a good reason: Siberian bases belong to Russia and Russia, for good reasons (TIME, Dec. 22), was not at war with Japan. U.S. bombers cannot reach Tokyo from Alaska and return without refueling en route. But Reader D`iaz' words are welcome as a bellicose sample of Mexican feeling about the war.--ED.

State of the Sun

Sirs:

The article in the last issue of TIME [Jan. 12], referring to the Chicago Sun is very inaccurate, unfair, and damaging to the interest of the Chicago Sun.

This newspaper has consistently, day after day, scooped the competition on important news stories, international, national, State, local. These stories are matters of record.

In spite of tremendous initial distribution difficulties, our net paid daily circulation has --each day--been in excess of 300,000 and our Sunday circulation--each Sunday--has been in excess of 400,000.

Of Chicago's eleven leading retail stores (who buy about half the retail advertising in Chicago's newspapers) ten are actively advertising in the Sun. Several have made the Sun their first or second medium. Only approximately 1% of the Sun's retail linage has come from what could be called new advertisers.

More than 270 national advertisers came into the Sun during its first month. Included were most of the large advertisers who were currently using space in other Chicago papers. The important banks and financial houses have been strongly represented.

The Sun is now Chicago's second classified advertising medium.

Amusement advertisers have made the Sun a complete directory of theaters, movies and other amusements.

The article also states that a figure of 500,000 was "confidently predicted a month ago."

The pre-publication solicitation of advertising was based on a circulation of 300,000 and this alone disproves your statement. Neither of us at any time has made any predictions about the newspaper or promises for the newspaper, other than that it would be a fair and impartial newspaper and that we would try to make it as good a newspaper as we possibly could.

That we have done--and that we will continue to do. . . .

MARSHALL FIELD, Founder, SILLIMAN EVANS, Publisher The Chicago Sun Chicago, Ill.

> TIME reported the best figures available on net Sun circulation, the Sun having refused to give its own figures on unsold copies. TIME welcomes Messrs. Field and Evans' more encouraging report, will gladly report future Sun progress. -- ED.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.