Clay
Sirs:
For many years one of my most pleasant experiences has been the reading of TIME. ... In the past if anyone ever said to me in defense of an argument that they read it in TIME that settled the argument for me. However I must admit that in this last year at various times I have been surprised at articles that made me wonder if the good old TIME was operating in its usual unbiased manner. I received this week's magazine today, and I am completely disillusioned. I will not go into the details of the sneering article that appeared in it concerning Rev. Charles Coughlin. I will not attempt to defend him for he needs no defense. His magnificent loyalty and splendid principles are well known to the American people. For a publication like TIME to put the stamp of bigotry on itself and to openly sneer and condemn the cause for which Father Coughlin is so courageously working only identifies it with the same lack of principles held, I regret to say, by so many of our newspapers. The common people may well count the radio a blessing. Through it they have learned the Truth.
I shall never see a copy of TIME again without a regret that something that I respected so highly was after all such common clay. . . .
NELLIE WALKER
Hampton, Iowa
Abreast
Sirs:
Thought you might be interested in the part played by TIME in a recent accident.
On the night of Dec. 2, the gas heater in our home became unruly and gave off carbon monoxide fumes. At six-thirty I felt very ill and went upstairs where I became so ill that I could not stand. My wife came upstairs also and threw herself on the bed and called me twice. I was so far gone that I did not hear her come upstairs nor did I hear her call me. When she dragged herself to the bathroom door and announced that she too was so sick that she could hardly stand I realized that we were both being overcome by the poison. Luckily we were still able to open windows, doors and shut off the heater.
Unable to attract neighbors we spent a miserable evening out on the cold porch. Finally my wife who apparently was not as ill as I managed to reach the phone and telephoned a doctor. He soon came with a supply of Methylene Blue which is a newly discovered remedy for this poisoning heretofore unremediable. He had learned of this discovery through reading TIME, and admitted this to me since I also had read of this cure (TIME, Dec. 19, 1932).
Most persons who have gone through this experience suffer the rest of their lives from anemia and general weakness; even mental weaknesses have been reported, I have since learned. The Methylene Blue restores the red corpuscles which the poison breaks down, but knowledge of this would not have been available to me had not TIME made the announcement. Neither of us have any after-effects from our experience. The physician. Dr. G. Ralph Maxwell, should also be commended for keeping himself abreast of the times in this manner.
We are grateful, then, for your service.
KENNETH D. HUTCHINSON
West Virginia University Morgantown, W. Va.
Dean Hill's Bet
Sirs:
Don't fail to print, or advise me, the sequel to Dean Hill's wager re Corbus (Letters. TIME, Dec. 11). I want to know if he pays the bill for 23 TIME subscriptions and what his Comments are, unexpurgated.
THOS. G. STALEY
Oakland, Calif.
Sirs:
Several TIME readers are interested to know whether Reader Hill, TIME, Dec. 11, p. 7. has made good the bet he lost with you. Figuring it out 23 subscriptions to the Princeton team, including Coach Gorman, would cost $115, but at the special rate only $86.25.
Long live TIME!
JESSE GORDON
New York City
Sirs:
My admiration for your rebuke of the tone of Dean Hill's letter in Letters, Dec. 11.
But especially my admiration for your willingness to publish in Letters any reasonable proof of your errors in reporting, thereby correcting the impressions remaining in readers' minds.
TIME and FORTUNE are the Gog & Magog of today.
H. LYNE COMELY-COMBE
Vancouver, B. C.
As a reader of your magazine I have grown respectful of your newsgathering ability but, at the same time, I greatly deplore your deliberate use of repugnant adjectives when writing of persons.
My letter in reference to Bill Corbus being named on Grantland Rice's 1932 Ail-American football team was written in a manner to cover the real point of issue. The point is technical but no more so than some of the technical points at which TIME grasps.
I felt that you had offered a splendid opportunity to bring the matter of use of adjectives to the front when you spoke of Mr. Rice's team as an ''All-American football team."
Neither Walter Camp nor Grantland Rice ever picked an Ail-American football team. Their selections starting with Walter Camp's in 1889 have always been entitled "All-America Football Team" (Collier's Weekly, Dec. 24, 1932).
Believing that I have won the wager and hoping that it will be just a little lesson to you in the use of adjectives, I have written Johnny Gorman for the names of 22 men who have played on this year's undefeated and untied Princeton freshman football team.
Of course, you will want your readers to know that you lost the wager and that 22 students and a lawyer (Johnny Gorman) were the gainers.
Bill Corbus is a grand football player and he should be named on Grantland Rice's All America football team again this year.
DEAN HILL
Bronxville, N. Y.
In his betting letter, Bettor Hill said: "Your muchly touted Bill Corbus TIME entitled 'Stanford's All-American guard' never was named for any position on Grantland Rice's All-American, much less for the position of right guard." In the plain meaning of this sentence, Bettor Hill was wrong. Bill Corbus was an "All-American guard" on Grantland Rice's 1932 team. Now Bettor Hill says he meant that TIME'S error lay not in placing Bill Corbus but in using the phrase "All-American." Even granting that this is what he meant, Bettor Hill errs. For Collier's magazine certifies as correct the adjectival form "All-American." To Bettor Hill a bill for $86.25. In his own words, "There is a penalty for crawling. . . ."--ED. Irish Whiskey
Sirs: I had occasion to read with interest your journal published today (TIME, Dec. 4), and on reading through, I came across a statement which is absolutely incorrect and which will be resented by every Irishman in Ireland. The statement to which I refer is-- 'Irish starts with barley but particular Irishmen always drink Scotch. Scotch also starts with barley but the ingredients are better, notably its water." As Chairman of the Board of Directors of one of the large Irish Free State distilleries, and one of the Board of Directors of another Irish Free State distillery, who incidentally are the largest Pot Still distillers in the world, I would like to state that there is no unbiased whiskey expert in the world who will agree with the latter statement, and that there is no Irishman in Ireland who will agree with the former. In the first place, it might interest you to know that in the Irish Free State 95% of the whiskey sold is of Irish Free State origin. The Scotch that is sold there is sold mainly on account of its being cheaper in price. So far as northern Ireland is concerned, the proportionate amount of Scotch consumed is admittedly greater than in southern Ireland, but since this is the smaller section of Ireland, and since even there the majority consume Irish whiskey, you will see that it is absolutely incorrect to claim that the discerning Irishman drinks Scotch, as equally do the discerning whiskey connoisseurs in other countries. . .
So far as the actual quality is concerned, the water in Ireland is equally as good for the purpose of distillation of whiskies as anywhere else. . . . Any whiskey expert in the United States of America will confirm this statement. . . .
I shall be pleased to substantiate any of the statements in this letter. LIONEL MARKS
New York City
Far be it from TIME to dispute so eminent an authority. But Chairman Marks is rash to rely on "any whiskey expert in the U. S."; for TIME'S own eminent consultant pronounces that Irish whiskies, being heavier, are less delicate. Question of taste.--ED. Danner Christmas Sirs: . . . Nowhere is the true spirit of Christmas more clearly shown than among the 3,000,000 lepers of the world--sick, homeless, many of them blind, and crippled as well. At 170 lonely leper outposts around this old world there are men and women and little children asking ''Will there be any Christmas this year?" Not the kind of Christmas that means extra comforts and luxuries; but just the supplying of the moat desperate wants of the most needy and helpless people on the face of the earth. A warm blanket for a grandmother shaking with cold and fever ($2); sandals for bleeding feet (50-c-); milk for the little children and the very ill; garden seeds for a leper man so that he may raise his own vegetables--perhaps with a hoe strapped to his stumps of arms; medicines ($5 a year) so that those just developing the dreaded malady may never reach the hopeless mutilated stage; a Christmas dinner of hot meat and vegetables for an entire colony of lepers ($20)--many of whom have had no other amply satisfying meal since last Christmas. That is the kind of Christmas gift that will have real meaning, that will alleviate suffering unspeakable and will bring you a reflection of the good cheer you have given to people who cannot possibly do anything for you. People who want to have this kind of Christmas are sending their gifts to the American Mission to Lepers, 156 Fifth Avenue, New York, where they will be officially receipted and gratefully acknowledged. W. M. BANNER
General Secretary The American Mission to Lepers New York City
This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.