Federal Union in Peoria

Sirs:

I deeply appreciate the importance you attached to the third national convention of Federal Union, as shown by the generous space (TIME, Nov. 22). . . . As an old newspaperman, I was greatly impressed by the speed with which you "got on the street" with your report, especially since our convention came at your deadline. . . .

Had your correspondent enjoyed even one day more in which to have given a more considered report, I am sure he would have avoided a number of mistakes and given a more penetrating account of our sessions. For example:

"For two days," your report says, "in a do-gooder atmosphere of maiden ladies, ministers, matrons, high-school students and professors, the Peoria convention drowsed. . . ."

Analysis of the total number of adult delegates and members registered shows that 54% were men, and of these almost exactly 50% were businessmen. ... As for the ministers and professors, I am not afflicted with your correspondent's high allergy to them, but would merely note that together they formed only 6% of the total registered.

Your correspondent gives a vivid impression of a convention "floundering" along, and then being thrown in its last hour into a "frenzy of plans" through a "bystander," Mr. L. H. Schultz, who "stood just about all the aimless dreaming he could stand." I dislike to spoil a dramatic story, but perhaps the facts will improve it:

At the start of the convention it was decided that its major task would be to find ways & means to achieve its policy. Mr. Schultz, one of the delegates, took part in the general discussion. Then, with a dozen other businessmen & women he sat up till 3 Sunday morning as our ways & means committee to put these plans in shape. When he rose at that last hour, it was to present his own plan with the committee's support.

Democratic discussion may seem inept and dreamy, but what counts are the results achieved in the end. Certainly those achieved at Peoria encourage faith in the democratic system for which Federal Union stands.

CLARENCE K. STREIT

President

Federal Union, Inc.

Washington

>TIME, wrong on Sparkplug Schultz, assures Unionist Streit that 1) some of its best friends are ministers and professors, 2) it does not find democratic discussion necessarily inept and dreamy, 3) it agrees that results count.--ED.

The Patton Case

Sirs:

This fuss about General Patton losing his temper (TIME, Nov. 29, Dec. 6) makes us look pretty soft. Who the hell ever heard of a war going on without some emotional excitement? If, in his excitement, he struck the wrong man, why start an uproar? . . .

Of course some Congressman must call for an investigation to have something to tell the homefolks during the next campaign. Pretty soft!

R. E. HALE, M.D.

Bellamy, Ala.

Sirs:

... If Patton is off balance enough to strike a sick man, he is not fit to command troops. We would suggest examination by a civilian psychiatrist, followed by disciplinary action.

In the meantime, one of us is going to try an experiment. He is toddling down to the nearest military hospital to strike a sick colonel. If there is any protest, he will, of course, apologize.

(Servicemen's names withheld)

Los Angeles

Sirs:

. . . This soldier was suffering from nerve shock. Is it too amazing to assume that General Patton, too, might have nerves? Nerves that are strained to the breaking point from the responsibility resting upon him?

Is he the only man who has lost his temper and struck even his own son? . . . I wonder how many of us have the right to cast the first stone . . .

ELIZABETH S. MASSENGALE

Atlanta

Sirs:

Lieut. General Patton slaps and abuses a private suffering from shock--he is "severely reprimanded" for doing so.

A Colonel Colman of Selfridge Field shoots a private and he is "demoted" to the rank of captain, though he was recently retired.

What is this--open season on enlisted men ?

(Serviceman's name withheld)

St. Louis

Tom, Not Jack

Sirs:

Either I got tongue-tied or your reporter doesn't know how to spell "T-o-m," or both, for there is one mistake in your otherwise splendid article on me and my boxing museum (TIME, Nov. 22). You quote me as saying Jack Sharkey was the fifth greatest fighter. Of course, it was Tom Sharkey, the original sailor boy, whom I meant. Tom was a real fighter.

. . . I'm groggy from answering letters (you have an army of boxing fans among your readers) from people who think I'm punch drunk from so many years in The Ring.

NAT FLEISCHER New York City

>T-O-M.--ED.

Man of the Year

Sirs:

I would like to second the nomination of Douglas MacArthur for Man of the Year. . . . He has done a magnificent job in the Southwest Pacific, and the careful planning and precise execution of the Salamaua-Lae-Finschhaven campaign give a hint of what he could do if he had larger forces at his disposal. . . .

CATHERINE A. MOHR

Rockville Centre, L.I.

Sirs:

I give you . . . Premier Joseph Stalin.

(Sgt.) D. BURNS

Camp Polk, La.

Sirs:

For Man of the Year: patient Cordell Hull. He kept faith with America. . . .

(Pfc.) JOHN D. PEOPLES, QMC

Fort Warren, Wyo.

Sirs:

For Man of the Year: Franklin D. Roosevelt, President of the U.S.

LEONE C. BALLIN

Bluffton, Ind.

Sirs:

. . . John L. Lewis, who has done more than any other to lengthen the war and weaken our economic basis for the postwar world.

GEORGE C. CANER JR.

Boston

Sirs:

Wendell Willkie, our world statesman.

C. H. PIER

Indianapolis

Sirs:

. . . the forgotten man, Sumner Welles. . . .

HANNAH W. ABRAMS

Newton, Mass.

Sirs:

I nominate Pope Pius XII.

JACK VESSELS

McAllen, Tex.

>Nominations for Man of the Year are now closed. The leaders, to date: Stalin, Hull, the Russian soldier.--ED.

On Mathematicians

Sirs:

... I quote (TIME, Nov. 29): ''Because modern war is largely based on mathematics, the U.S. has been severely handicapped by its shortage of top-flight mathematicians." The implication is that top-flight [U.S.] mathematicians are lacking. . . . The actual fact is that the deficiency lies ... in the failure of the civilian authorities to use mathematicians at an early time, in adequate numbers and in the proper way.

Five years ago American mathematics ranked first or nearly first in the world. Distinguished European mathematicians have been coming to us since then, so that at the beginning of the war the U.S. had unquestionably the greatest mathematical talent of any country. . . .

. . . Yesterday [at the annual meeting of the American Mathematical Society at Chicago] the Bocher Prize was awarded for the best memoir on mathematics published in American mathematical journals during the last five years (contributors include scholars from all lands). . . . The award went to Jesse Douglas, born in Brooklyn, N.Y.

The armed forces early began to bring in mathematicians for war research. . . . The civilians charged with civilian war research have unexpectedly taken on considerable numbers of mathematicians during the last year. ... I have no hesitation in saying that had this policy of a full use of mathematicians been adopted at the beginning of civilian war research . . . the effect of American scientific participation in the war would have been substantially increased.

MARSTON MORSE

The Institute for Advanced Study

Princeton, N.J.

>To Dr. Morse, winner of the Bocher Prize in 1935, expert in the mathematics of chess (which he does not play because he considers it a waste of time), a star in Princeton's galaxy of top-flight mathematicians, TIME's thanks for a stout reminder of men too easily forgotten.--ED.

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