Stimson & Mussolini Sirs:

I am one of a majority of citizens of this neighborhood who am hopping mad over our Sec. State's apology to that ----* Mussolini; and am convinced that what this country needs more than a good 5-c- cigar is a Sec. of State and a Sec. of Navy of equivalent value. Please answer following questions for the benefit of a dozen or so of your readers:

1) Did this country ever apologize to any nation before in the course of its history?

2) Did any nation in the 20th Century bigger than Albania or Serbia ever turn in an abject apology on demand to another within 24 hours before?

3) Is Stimson just plain scared of the ----* or does he think an apology is something one nation can send to another like a valentine?

DAVE CAMERON

Harrisburg, Pa.

Sirs:

In TIME, Feb. 9, one reads: "All the U. S. people apologized." I beg leave to differ. If the question of apology had been left to the American people, not two percent of them would have voted for it. Would we have apologized, under identical circumstances, to the president of Liberia? Should the president of Nicaragua be miffed at some careless statement of an army officer, would we get down on our knees and pray for his pardon? Can you imagine this country debasing itself just because some petty potentate of some little two-by-four country was peeved at the careless remark of some Marine? If not, why do we become hysterical when Mussolini cracks his whip? Let each man draw his own conclusion.

E. F. GEORGE

Lubbock, Tex.

International history is full of apologies and expressions of regret between great nations, the U. S. not excepted.--ED.

General Butler & Col. Williams Sirs:

In your article on General Butler in Feb. 9 TIME, two instances of gross unfairness have prompted me to write. You say:

"He went back to the Marines, was sent to California. There he denounced and court martialed his predecessor in command of the post on charges of drunkenness after entertaining General Butler in his home."

That is true, so far as it goes, but the impression given is untruthful and unfair to General Butler. He placed Col. Williams under arrest with great reluctance, under orders from his, Butler's, commanding officer. The true story is contained in detail in the enclosed clipping from the N. Y. World. . . .

The second point is that you say:

"Their [Adams' and Butler's] relations were further strained when General Butler laughingly introduced Mr. Adams at a Quantico dinner as 'the Secretary of the God-damned Navy.' "

This is wholly untrue. The story was started as a rumor--a suggestion on some one's part that it would have been a very funny remark for General Butler to have made. . . .

ANNE M. KEEZER

Baltimore, Md.

The World's, account was a statement by friends of the late Rear-Admiral Ashley Herman Robertson, who was Gen. Butler's commanding officer in San Diego, purporting to be Admiral Robertson's version of the Butler-Williams affair, as follows:

". . . Col. Williams invited Gen. and Mrs. Butler to dinner. Arriving at the dinner, Gen. Butler found cocktails already were circulating pretty freely. They left as soon as possible.

"Gen. Butler attended an enlisted men's dance and then went to get his family at a dance at a hotel in San Diego.

"I was standing in the lobby when Col. Williams came in. He was supported by a junior officer and he was very noisy and apparently was quite drunk. Gen. Butler also was in the lobby when Williams reeled up to him and warned him he could not rule with a high hand in the West.

"Gen. Butler turned to me. He said, 'This fellow is disgracing his uniform, but I hate to arrest him just after arriving at this station.'

"I told Gen. Butler I would have to prefer charges against him if he neglected his duty in that way. Under these circumstances there was nothing else for Gen. Butler to do but put Col. Williams under arrest at once.

"I blame myself very much for the distorted stories that got about after the arrest of Col. Williams, and it was an unfortunate mischance that prevented me from giving out the true story."--ED.

Dante & Cervantes

Dante ranks Cervantes. But, put Chandor in panties; By that you will act wittily. Will please the folk in Italy; Whilst those in Spain Will feel no pain! Quixote seems to live again.

JOHN EDWARD BOYS

Los Angeles,' Calif.

Sirs:

. . . You quote a verse by Douglas Chandor (TIME, Feb. 2), the which you very evidently admire.

It cannot be that TIMEditors do not realize that this is merely another in the millions of imitations of Ogden Nash? If they do realize it, why not give this overaped manner a rest, and let Ogden rest on his badly rhymed laurels?

SAMUEL DALSIMER

Brooklyn, N. Y.

Sirs:

Whoa, TIME! stay your hand a bit! Dip your pen in the sand a bit. That rhyme about Cervantes is

A world above my fantasies.

No thimblerigging rapparee,

No jobber in kidnappery

No filcher I ! Be moral, please

And take that wealth of laurel, please

And reverently rest it on

The dome of Mister Chesterton.

DOUGLAS CHAXDOR

Washington, D. C.

Son & Sire

Sirs:

In your issue of Feb. 9 I noticed among your British news--"Up spoke Wayward Winnie who has long sought to wrest leadership of the Conservative Party from Baldwin.*. . ."

I am certain that a magazine of your high repute and obvious desire for accuracy would not publish such a statement unless it possessed some foundation in actual fact. I am always interested in my father's activities, but confess with shame that in regard to this aspect of them I am woefully ignorant. May I, therefore, inquire what is the basis of truth on which you rely for the allegation contained in the words I have italicized and in particular how long and in what way this has been going on.

RANDOLPH S. CHURCHILL

San Francisco, Calif.

Son Churchill well knows that-Sire Churchill, ever ambitious, broke last month with Conservative Leader Stanley Baldwin on the issue of India's future status, resigned from the Conservative "shadow cabinet" on Jan. 27, 1931. He has since continued (with no appearance of success) his attempts (by loud public speechmaking) to get a wagging hold on the Conservative party through its die-hard tail, of which he is the tip.

Son Churchill has seasoned his U. S. lecture tour with such assertions as that Prime Minister James Ramsay MacDonald is a "traitor"--ED.

No Ambulancer

Sirs:

In your issue of Feb. 9, an article appeared relative to the proposed appointment of Ernest A. Michel as Federal Judge in Minnesota. This article does a very grave injustice to one of the State's outstanding lawyers (not an ambulance chaser) who is the choice of both U.S. Senators, every one of the ten Minnesota Congressmen, and who has received a more overwhelming indorsement than anyone who has ever aspired to such a position. Not only is your article incorrect; but it is, in my opinion, clearly libelous.

It is true ,that the firm of Davis, Michel, Yaeger & McGinley specializes in appearing for injured railroad workmen. There is a vast difference between the shyster type, who use tricky methods, and the high type of lawyers (and they are too few) who are satisfied to let the lucrative corporation practice go by the boards and fight for justice to the worker.

Your article, and the appellation "Chaser Michel," conveys the idea that Mr. Michel's work has been only that of a solicitor of cases. This is not correct and it does a gross injustice to a man whose entire work has been that of legal research, briefing and trial work. So far as I have been able to learn, Mr. Michel has never personally solicited a case in his life. While he may be responsible for the conduct of anyone in behalf of his firm, nevertheless to convey the impression that he is a mere solicitor instead of one of the outstanding lawyers of the State is highly unfair.

You undoubtedly were not informed that Mr. Michel had appeared in or briefed cases in causes in the Supreme Courts of probably a dozen States, that he has often appeared in and briefed cases for the Federal Courts, including the Circuit Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court of the U. S.

In fact, one of the cases Mr. Michel argued before the Supreme Court of the U. S. was argued with Mr. William D. Mitchell, the present Attorney General, on the other side. Mr. Michel represented the injured man and Mr. Mitchell the Canadian Northern Railroad Co. The case involved purely and only a question of constitutional law. See Canadian Northern vs. Eggen 252 US 554.

The firm of which Mr. Michel is a member has collected millions of dollars from railroads. Clients do not criticize their methods, fairness or honesty. So successful has the firm been that the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen have retained them as Regional Counsel in 14 States. . . .

. . . Here in Minnesota we feel that Attorney General Mitchell is firmly set against Mr. Michel because he has never represented corporations but only workingmen.

Mr. Michel has never been "cited" for ambulance chasing as stated in your article. The Nebraska case you refer to, 197 NW 599, did not personally involve Mr. Michel nor was he ever before the court in that case nor did the court ever claim any jurisdiction over him.

There is much to be said for the lawyer who faces the brunt of trained claim agents and railroad lawyers. I personally know of many cases where claim departments isolate badly injured men, get statements from them while in bad physical and mental condition from shock, and try every available trick to avoid liability. It takes a specialist to outfight these men, backed by a railroad bankroll. So cleanly has Michel fought that numerous railroad and corporation lawyers are among his written indorsers.

When a man is permanently injured, his settlement check is HIS LAST RAILROAD CHECK. Generally he knows no other work. It is fair that these men or their dependents receive every dollar to which they are entitled. If there were not a few high grade firms ready to take the stigma of so-called "ambulance chasing" (a term incidentally fostered by corporations most affected by their ability), it would be a sad day for the workingmen of America. . . .

THOMAS B. MOUER

Minneapolis, Minn.

All praise to Lawyer Michel for the millions he and/or his firm have justly collected for workingmen. Nevertheless his firm was thoroughly rebuked by the Supreme Court of Nebraska for its unethical practices and no member of a law firm can escape the consequences of such a rebuke on the grounds that he was not personally implicated.--ED.

Birmingham's Relief

Sirs:

YOUR COMMENTS JUDGE PAYNES TESTIMONY CONCERNING RED CROSS RELIEF . . . INFERS BIRMINGHAM HAS ASKED FOR NATIONAL RELIEF WHICH IS ERRONEOUS- STOP WHAT JUDGE PAYNE SAID WAS BIRMINGHAM ALABAMA IS ONLY RED CROSS CHAPTER DOING URBAN ORGANIZED CHARITY AND IS SUPPORTED BY COMMUNITY CHEST STOP IN FAIRNESS TO US PLEASE CORRECT YOUR ERROR IN ANY COMMENTS ON RED CROSS RELIEF YOUR NEXT ISSUE AS WE HAVE NOT ASKED FOR OUTSIDE HELP AND ARE FUNCTIONING SATISFACTORILY UNDER EXISTING CIRCUMSTANCES.

HENRY R. HOWZE

Birmingham, Ala.

* International expletives deleted.--ED. * Please italicize. R. S. C.

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