Herewith are excerpts from letters come to the desks of the editors during the past week. They are selected primarily for the information they contain, either supplementary to, or corrective of, news previously published in TIME.
A Fair Request
Fort Bragg, N. C.
Jan. 31, 1925. TIME
New York, N. Y.
Gentlemen:
I subscribed to TIME over a year ago and have just renewed my subscription for two more years. I have recommended it to my friends. These facts indicate very clearly my opinion of your paper.
I have, however, one request to make. Please do not publish under the caption ARMY AND NAVY any more of the Veteran Bureau scandal. The Bureau is not a part of the Army and Navy. Although certain officials connected with it have carried military titles, they were not Army officers at the time of their connection with the Bureau. They were, in fact, officers who held temporary commissions during the War.
At times, news of this scandal was the only item appearing under the caption. In the minds of those uninformed, it might create an unjust prejudice against the military service.
JOHN C. WYETH.
Subscriber Wyeth is a Major in the Second Field Artillery. His not unreasonable suggestion will go into effect.--ED.
Norwitchcraft
Northfield, Vt.
Jan. 31, 1925.
TIME
New York, N. Y.
Gentlemen:
If I may take of your time, and possibly your space, might I add to the list of colleges formerly known by other names (EDUCATION, TIME, Jan. 26) the unique case of Norwich University in this town?
In 1880, some 60 years after its founding, the University was confronted with financial ruin. An appeal for aid was sent to an alumnus, Charles H. Lewis of Boston, a successful business man. On the stipulation that Norwich University became Lewis College, the Bostonian offered financial assistance to the poverty-stricken institution. This was accepted. It served to tide the school over the most trying period in its existence. Two years later, Mr. Lewis met business reverses. Fulfillment of his agreement in whole became impossible. In 1884, Lewis College again became Norwich University.
JOHN E. MAZUZAN.
Harlot
Indo-American Information Bureau.
Temporary Address
Clark University
Worcester, Mass.
Feb. 1, 1925.
TIME
New York, N. Y.
Gentlemen:
I have been reading your magazine for over a year and a half. I have no hesitation to say that I think it to be one of the best weeklies. In fact, I value it as much as the N. Y. Nation. ...
There is one thing to which I cannot reconcile myself. I have been thinking of writing this for a long time, but when I read your recent issue, which I liked so much, I thought the time had come to put forth my "protest," if I may use the word.
With the knowledge you have, how can you with any safe conscience put India in the British Commonwealth of Nations, when it is a fact that India is a harlot of the British Empire? I am certain that you will persist in calling the British Empire by the rosy name of "Commonwealth of Nations" and so oh and put India in it as one of the commonwealths. Well, I cannot prevent you from doing it, but I owe it to my conscience to protest against the prostitution of this word.
With best wishes to you and to the magazine, I remain,
V. V. OAK.
Despite Subscriber Oak's protest, India is a member of the British Commonwealth of Nations, which term is used in a strictly correct, logical and extra-legal sense.--ED.
Broad, Tolerant
Department of Geology,
Rutgers University
New Brunswick, N.J.
Feb. 2, 1925.
TIME
New York, N.Y.
Gentlemen:
We all have our pet aversions, I suppose. I welcome most heartily the broad outlook and tolerant spirit that finds room for the Pope, K. K. K., Rockefeller and the subway gumchewers; but it is literally painful to observe now and then such crimes against the King's English as the following:
"would have liked to have followed" (Jan. 26, page 3, col. 2)
"a prison mate whom they declared was an agent" (Jan. 26, page 13, col. 1)
"different than" (Jan. 19, page 10, col. 3)
Please, Mr. Editor, when you have a million subscribers, won't you hire a man with a big blue pencil to curb the untamed exuberance of some of these writers?
I believe you will as soon as you can get around to it; so here's my subscription, not for a year, but for two years.
J. VOLNEY LEWIS.
Feels Inclined
Amsterdam, N.Y.
Feb. 2, 1925.
TIME
New York, N.Y.
Gentlemen:
Having been a subscriber to TIME for about one year, I feel the inclination to express myself in print. . . .
I should blue-pencil about one-half of the stuff that's headed LETTERS. There is no editor ever born who could please everybody. For a subscriber to consume 45 words in explaining a line that had a wrong grammatical twist makes me long to tell him the error of his ways. These letters should be for the interchange of ideas on public affairs rather than criticism of TIME.
WILLIAM E. SLEEPER.
An Offensive Remark
Chicago, 111.
Feb. 4, 1925.
TIME
New York, N.Y.
Gentlemen:
I am an old man. The years which are left to me on earth are numbered as are the hairs on my head. I have not time to wade through the mass of poppycock that is printed in the daily press. I look to TIME to give me the week's facts and I get them.
It seems to me that such a spirited, exact, original, cantless magazine should have its advertising on equally high-grade plane; but, unfortunately, this is not so. Bad grammar, verbosity, repetition, lack of originality, exaggeration and bad taste are the hallmarks of your advertising. Take, for example, Meredith Nicholson's eternal remark: "I couldn't keep house without it." Every time I read it (and it seems to me that I have read it for months on end) my nerves become so frayed that my life is needlessly jeopardized. Won't you please defenestrate that offensive remark?
JAMES MACKENZIE JONES.
"Department of Humor"
Burlington Junction, Mo.
Feb. 2, 1925.
TIME
New York, N.Y.
Gentlemen:
Several weeks ago I made the acquaintance of your excellent magazine and have not missed a copy of it since.
I was somewhat surprised to find that you had opened a department of humor in the Jan. 26 issue, page 22. (I refer to the comical letter penned by Howard K. James of Alameda, Calif.)
I was genuinely pleased to note that he had paid his subscription. That is something in his favor, at any rate. He does not seem to like Mr. Hearst, neither does he seem to have any great love for the Roman Catholics.
Please continue "Mr. Coolidge's Week," referred to by Mr. F. L. Darrow in his letter on the same page. No doubt a number of your readers are, like myself, small-town people and enjoy the human touch contained in this intimate picture of a great man.
LOREN E. SMITH.
Feels Educated
Silverton, Col.
Jan. 31, 1925.
TIME
New York, N.Y.
Gentlemen:
A Christmas present put my name on your subscription list; it was a happy thought for everyone concerned.
This place is two miles and a half above sea level and has 18 feet of snow on the level --but there isn't any level; the continental divide hides the sun in the mornings until nine o'clock.
I just finished reading the Jan. 19 issue-- and feel quite "educated"--at least the re-action is a decreased desire to be somewhere else. Your pithy resume of what is happening in the world of Things is like a drink of ice water in August. And this in spite of the curmudgeons and antimacassars.
Let me extend you sincerest wishes for happiness in your enterprise.
PAUL H. KEATING.
Boomerang
Augusta, Maine
Feb. 1, 1925.
TIME
New York, N.Y.
Gentlemen:
Every week I peruse unhappily the unpleasant letters about you which you publish with such cheerful and highly commendable honesty. Every week I am inspired anew to rush hotfoot to your defense. But I decide that it is quite unnecessary; for these letters, far from being reflections upon you, merely expose admirably the prejudice and the questionable taste of their authors.
ANNA Y. FENN.
Pray Daily
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Jan. 31, 1925.
New York. N.Y.
Gentlemen:
Your magazine is fine. I wouldn't give it up for anything, but am beginning to feel a little concerned over a faint trace (perhaps it is my imagination) of smug superiority which I sometimes think is creeping in, particularly in your stage and cinema reviews. I have had occasion to drop in on several of the pictures and plays concerning which you wrote in a decidedly uncomplimentary manner and found more than once, to my surprise and in spite of myself, I obtained no small amount of entertainment from them.
More power to the staff; let them write as they feel. I would not have it otherwise, but ask them to pray daily that they may be kept humble.
CHAS. E. CLAY.