"Third House"

Sirs:

In TIME, May 16, in your article headed "Locusts," you quote the President of the U. S. as saying that the halls of Congress were ''haunted by a locust swarm of lobbyists" and then TIME remarks, ". . . active and successful lobbies which pay their legislative agents $10,000 or so per year to secure Congressional favors include the following. . . . Motorists. The American Automobile Association, whose special pleader is Alexander E. Johnson, failed to block a Senate increase in the automobile tax."

This Association employs no legislative agent, never has employed one to my knowledge, has no such man as Alexander E. Johnson on its payroll and no one at our headquarters has ever heard of such an individual in Washington. A director of our affiliated Louisville, Ky. Automobile Club named Alex E. Johnson is Chairman of our Legislative Committee, the principal function of which is to outline and formulate policies for submission to our annual convention. Mr. Johnson has not been in Washington as our representative at any time, has taken no part in the presentation of our views on national taxation. He does not and has not received any compensation from this organization.

Furthermore, in the interests of editorial accuracy, may I point out that the Senate has neither accepted nor rejected an increase in the auto tax as it has not in this session had the question before it for vote. . . .

We do not assume that you would classify the appearance of business men before committees of Congress to set forth their views on legislation of vital importance to them as "lobbying."

ERNEST N. SMITH

Executive Vice President American Automobile Association Washington, D.C.

1) TIME'S source of information was the A. A. A.'s publicity department. 2) Yes, TIME does designate as "lobbying" the appearance in Washington of citizens endeavoring to influence legislation to their own benefit. But TIME attaches no stigma to such lobbying, either by paid or unpaid agents, where openly & honestly conducted. The practice has become a necessary part of U. S. legislative procedure.

Chief current criticism of U. S. lobbying has been aimed at the delay and confusion caused. Outside of regular hearings there have been much buttonholing in corridors, much crowding around committee room doors, much pestering of legislators at homes, hotels, clubs. Many States require lobbyists to register as such, sometimes to pay fees. Not so in Washington. The late sarcastic Senator Caraway used to call the lobbyists "The Third House." Others have suggested that lobbyists be recognized and dignified as such, given a forum of their own in Washington, given rules & regulations and caused to function as a debating body in the Government where the private friends & foes of legislation could air their views for the edification of busy legislators.--ED.

Sirs:

I always give your magazine credit for knowing actual facts, but in your issue of May 16 under "Locust" active and successful lobbies which pay their legislative agents $10,000 or so per year, to secure Congressional favor . . . you list Dr. Clarence True Wilson of the Methodist Board of Temperance.

Do you mean here that Dr. Wilson receives $10,000 and if so, who is paying this money?

L. NORTHROP CASTOR

Philadelphia, Pa.

Lobbyist Wilson is paid $6,000 per annum by the Methodist Board of Temperance, Prohibition and Public Morals.--ED.

Sirs:

TIME of May 16 had a very interesting column under the caption "Locusts." However it would have been more interesting if its details had been free from error. Luther Steward, not Stewart, is President of the National Federation of Federal Employees and as its spokesman represents more than 65,000 organized "Federal Employees." . . . Again in the same "Locusts" column John not Joseph Simpson is president of that very fine Farmers Union.

EARL R. HOAGG

Denver, Colo.

Sirs:

. . . May I call your attention to the fact that Miss Detzer (not Detzler) does not represent the League of Women Voters, but the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom: does not work for legislation for women, but for Peace measures; and unfortunately does not receive $10,000 a year.

M. MILES

Office Secretary

Women's International League for Peace and Freedom Washington, D. C.

Sirs:

Startling indeed is TIME'S list of the "locust swarm of lobbyists," appearing in your May 16 issue.

But why has TIME failed to include the powerful shipping lobby that has obtained for its members millions upon millions of dollars under the guise of "mail contracts." Huge amounts are so paid in many cases for the alleged carriage of mails over steamship routes which could not possibly be utilized in the dispatch of anything but the bulkiest freight.

As revealed by Writer William P. Helm in his recent syndicated articles, over $40,000,000 has been paid by the Post Office Department to shipping companies under these contracts for the carriage of mails that actually brought to the Government a total postal revenue of only $3,600.000.

While a tolerant American public might permit the expenditure of millions of Government funds for the maintenance of regular express and passenger liners, it is inconceivable that, once in possession of the facts, the public would tolerate application of the system to slow freight lines, particularly where such lines are engaged chiefly in the delivery of cargo sold by their owners.

Numerous examples might be cited, but an outstanding case comes to mind. A well-known lumber company on the Pacific Coast within the past six years purchased from the Government at a total cost of approximately $400,000, and under easy credit terms, a fleet of eight vessels estimated to have cost the Government in the neighborhood of $8,000,000. These ships are now engaged from the Pacific Northwest and California via the Panama Canal to Porto Rico and Buenos Aires, principally for the purpose of marketing lumber. This firm was thus granted distinct monopolistic privileges by the Government in the marketing of lumber in Porto Rico and Argentine, and accordingly proceeded to "squeeze out" of these markets any competing American firms who were left without transportation facilities.

As if these advantages were insufficient, the Government then awarded a so-called mail subsidy contract, under the provisions of which a total of $759,000 has been paid to the lumber company's steamship line for the "carriage of mail" that actually brought the Post Office Department only $274 in postage.

Under this contract, with a total of ten years to run, payments of $3,150,000 will be made. The entire fleet of ships, for which $400,000 was to have been paid, thus becomes not only an outright gift, but an additional $2,750,000 in cash is paid to the ship owner. . . .

A. R. WATSON

Oakland, Calif.

Shipping interests lobby jointly through the American Steamship Association, headed by Herbert B. Walker with offices in Manhattan; attorney and usual legislative representative, Edwin Hamilton Duff.--ED.

Sirs:

... I am in the general practice of law; but it is quite true that I have clients who are much concerned with legislation, and if making arguments to Committees of Congress and dealing in a decent way with matters of legislation that affect clients is lobbying, then I have lobbied and to that extent I am a lobbyist.

You know that in England they have what they call a Parliamentary Bar. Possibly it might be well to have such a body of persons in this country able to deal in behalf of clients with the Congress of the U. S. ... If it be lobbying to appear in behalf of persons affected in such situation, then lobbying in a decent fashion would appear not only to be proper but necessary and justified from all standpoints. . . .

LEVI COOKE

Washington, D. C.

Lady Astor's Nightgown

Sirs:

Your story about Amelia Earhart Putnam's flight to Ireland (TIME, May 30) notes that Mrs. Putnam slept at Ambassador Mellon's house "even as Lindbergh slept at Herrick's." From the enclosed newspaper clipping you will observe that even as Lindbergh borrowed Ambassador Herrick's pyjamas so did Mrs. Putnam beg a nightgown of Lady Astor.

JONATHAN BACON

Chicago, 111.

Also like Lindbergh, who borrowed a suit from Ambassador Herrick's son, Mrs. Putnam borrowed a blue woolen dress from Ambassador Mellon's daughter, Mrs. David K. E. Bruce. To Correspondent John Steele of the Chicago Tribune ("World's Greatest Newspaper") all praise for scooping the world on Lady Astor's nightgown.--ED.

Captions

Sirs:

An editorial note in your issue of May 16 states that 'Tn the U. S. the Literary Digest has imitated TIME'S method of captionmg pictures by quotations from the printed text. Likewise the New York Times magazine section has adopted to a degree the same style of cut caption."

May I have the privilege of your columns to correct any misapprehension the statement may cause in the minds of TIME'S readers? The New

York Times magazine . . . was using quotations from the printed text to caption pictures before TIME was born. . . .

C. G. POORE Sunday Department The New York Times New York City

These News

Sirs:

The sentence "Last week these names made this news" brings to my memory an excerpt of correspondence, I believe accredited to Samuel Johnson, in which he answers a request for news by the assertion "No. not a single new." Perhaps you should change your caption to read, "Last week these names made these news."

CHAS. E. HARVEY

San Francisco, Calif.

Ingenious is the theory that "news" derives from an old newspaper practice of printing the compass points

N E WS

to advertise their universality. Actually, of course, the word derived from the French nouvellcs and is now construed as singular. It used to be a plural. Queen Victoria, for example, wrote: "The news from Austria are very sad. . . ."--ED.

Macy's Training School

Sirs:

I was reading your May 9 issue with great interest when I came upon the story of Walter Hoving and his new position with Montgomery Ward & Co. of whom we were once stanch customers back in the summer lake-months in northern Minnesota. But what interested me mostly was your phrase "entered Macy's 'training school' in 1924."

I am wondering why that was placed in quotes and I am also wondering how one enters Macy's '"training school" and also what the "training school" consists of. I have been advised to go into business and am trying to make a private little survey on how people get where they do. What I want to know now is how one enters such an institution as Macy's. . . .

DONALD E. SQUIRES

Long Beach Junior College Long Beach, Calif.

Macy's "training school" consists in a course of sprints through which new personnel ambitious for executive jobs are put. Prerequisites for a tryout are a college degree or at least three years in college, also a special psychological test. Past experience is taken into account as well as the impression the candidate makes when personally interviewed. For the young men & women who enter the "school" Macy's provides much actual experience as salesmen and floorwalkers, also lectures on merchandising and bookkeeping.--ED.

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