Where Would the U.S. Be?

Sirs:

The people are awake, you say? It is our Government which is responsible for our confusion? Listen, the people are the Government, and if they are awake, then people do the damnedest things awake. They went into hysterics when Congressmen set up a pension plan for themselves. . . . The people started frothing at the mouth when Congressmen applied for X gasoline-ration cards. . . .

But when something really important comes up, do the people rise up in their wrath and demand action? With prices flying higher, do the masses demand that the selfish blocs in Congress cease pressing their inflationary schemes, that Congress give us effective price and wage control? . . . Are they retiring the Congressmen who were wrong, and putting in men who were right? Are they doing these things? Don't make me laugh!

So the people are awake, eh? But Dr. Gallup says the people in F.D.R.'s home New York district will probably re-elect Hamilton Fish to the House of Representatives. . . . He finds them admitting that Fish was wrong before Pearl Harbor, "but so were a lot of us"; so that makes it all right. . . . The people's ad runs like this: "Wanted: as Congressmen, mediocrities. Successful applicants need no extra gasoline, should have no extra brains, will get no social security at all. Superior individuals need not apply." . . .

Are the people awake? No! And they will probably get just what they deserve.

Sometimes, in a defeatist moment, I say to myself: "I still believe democracy is the highest, most practical political ideal, the only one under which intelligent, well-informed people can be happy. But, by God, I wonder if the U.S. is ready for it?"

That, of course, is the wrong attitude. A better angle . . . is to consider that if the U.S. were not a democracy, men like our Wheeler, Nye, Brooks, O'Daniel, Fish, Taft, and B. C. Clark might have been able to seize power during the last five years. And if they had, where in hell would the country and the world be now?

A. W. HETHERINGTON Chicago, Ill.

Calm, Cold Voice

Sirs:

When the Day of Judgment in American politics comes, I'll look back over some of my issues of TIME (Aug. 3, in particular) and then stand up and salute you, if I have legs and arms to do it.

In these days of sickening war slogans, catch phrases, gooey optimism, when people slosh about in the lowest ebb of journalism in history--yours is the only voice that hasn't become hoarse and raucous, but remains calm and cold--furiously cold. . . . Maybe from this you can gather that paradoxically you're reflecting the ideals of quite a number of people in this country. . . .

LIEUT. Louis K. BASSETT Q.M.C., U.S. Army Durham, N.C.

Sales Tax

Sirs:

You seem to admit that a general sales tax is inequitable (TIME, Aug. 3). Yet you continue to report it favorably.

Consequently you must be convinced that no equitable tax can be found which will achieve the same anti-inflation ends. . . Thousands upon thousands of American families are underfed because of poverty. Already their incomes have been reduced roughly 15% because of the increased cost of living. The sales tax will further burden them. The income-tax type need not, and yet can be adjusted to bring in far more inflation-causing excess income than can the sales tax. Let TIME explain why a more equitable tax cannot accomplish the same ends, or else stop crying for the sales tax like a stubborn child.

HERMAN KEITER Oneonta, N.Y.

> A major share of the $40,000,000,000 that war has added to the national income has gone to farmers and workers. But the tax program itself proposes to siphon off only a small portion of the increase from these groups. Since Congress is afraid to increase the direct taxes on these groups so they will pay a heavier share of the war's tax cost, and since even a 100% tax on all incomes over $25,000 would bring in only $200,000,000 more, the only remaining important possibilities are: 1) a sales tax, 2) inflation, or, 3) more probably, some of both. If Congress had to adopt a sales tax, it would undoubtedly exclude necessities vital to the poor.--ED.

Bluff

Sirs:

I'll be drafted soon but nobody believes it. They say, "Anybody who knows as many influential people as you know shouldn't have any trouble staying out of the draft." My draft board is made up of reputable men who have led blameless lives in this community, and no one could get any undue deferment from them. Everyone should know that as I know it, but there is a cynicism about the people that makes them proceed always on the supposition that pull can do anything.

When I tell them I have made no effort to avoid the draft, they say "Oh!" as if they just met an insane man. And when I tell them I have not made application for commission, they are either impatient or embarrassed. . . .

One man said: "If I were you, I'd make them give me the rank of major or I'd tell them to go to hell." . . . When I remind them that I know nothing about military duties, they say "Bluff! That is all the Army is. Look at the brass hats!" They say, "Bluff, like the rest of them."

C. H. COLLIER Berkeley, Calif.

All Out To Death

Sirs :

. . . I have yet to read of a civilian going all out to death on the war effort. There probably have been many deaths due to overwork, however, which have not been diagnosed as such. I know of one case which I am sure could be diagnosed as extreme effort--that of my brother, Wendell James Dernberger of Grand Rapids, Mich.

He had charge of material procurement and, I think, production on one of the large-size anti-aircraft guns now under production. He has been working night & day since about Dec. 15, traveling throughout the country arranging for materials . . . and the thousand odd jobs that go into production of a new article for a factory. . . .

He and the company achieved many seemingly insurmountable tasks and production was much greater than calculated. I definitely know that his extreme effort was made . . . so that the men in the Army would have sufficient weapons wherewith to fight. He envied me my commission in the Army Reserve and the opportunity for what he considered a more direct effort to a successful conclusion of the conflict.

This week after a 14-hour day at work he arrived home at midnight and collapsed. Taken to the hospital unconscious, he is not given a chance to live.

His case is just one of many in which persons really believe in the value of our way of living, in what we are fighting for, and in fully backing up the armed forces. . . .

They are the unheralded heroes of total war. They are the true patriots of the U.S. They are worth fighting for.

LIEUT. WALTER H. DERNBERGER Signal Corps Boston, Mass.

Brass Hats

Sirs:

You left out one item (except by implication) in your list of articles, which the Navy still insists shall be made from virgin metal [TIME, Aug. 3]. I refer to brass hats, another particular in which a change of specifications is apparently long overdue.

ROBERT B. SEARS Durham, N.H.

Sock In the Eye

Sirs:

. . . Some time ago you spoke of the difficulty night-shift workers have in sleeping in the daytime [TIME, June 15]. A black sock worn spectacle fashion should help (the toe over one ear, the top over the other--and the middle covering eyes and nose). It is cool, dark and comfortable. . . .

JULIAN RICE Cos Cob, Conn.

The Leonski Case

Sirs:

TIME has a widespread reputation for accuracy and fairness. I dissent. In TIME'S report [July 27] on the Leonski case you represent that "To wheedle a picture for the News . . . Reporter Al Willard told Mrs. Leonski that her son had just been cited for bravery." [Actually he had been arrested for strangling three Australian women.--ED.]

A local telephone call would have established 1) that I am not a reporter but a photographer; 2) that I did not interview Mrs. Leonski and have never seen either her or any member ot the entire Leonski family.

In this business, as in others, a man is jealous of his reputation. Your false report was a vicious piece of writing, based, obviously, on the unconfirmed word of somebody who did not know what he was talking about. You say in your article "there was no excuse for the manner in which the news of Leonski's arrest was broken to his aged Polish-born mother." I say there is no excuse for the manner in which you smear one in your own craft. . . .

AL WILLARD

The News New York City

> Before publishing its story, TIME interviewed Mrs. Leonski and her daughter Helen. They said that the News's Al Willard had lied to them about Private Leonski's true status, that as proof, they had a receipt for their photograph of the young soldier, which the News had published, and that the receipt bore Willard's name and address. TIME telephoned the News and was told that Willard was a reporter there. So TIME labeled Willard as the misinformer, but the Leonskis and TIME were wrong.

Actually another News Reporter, not Willard, signed Photographer Willard's name to the receipt after securing the picture of Private Leonski.

To Photographer Willard, TIME'S wholehearted apologies for unintentionally besmirching his good name.-- ED.

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