Pressure

Sirs:

Re: FORTUNE

Answering your letter of Oct. 7, I am inclosing conditional subscription to the new publication, FORTUNE, with this qualification, however, that owing to extreme pressure of business on the Court, I may not be able to make up my mind within a month after the first issue, whether I will continue to be a subscriber or not. Two months will be sufficient. Please advise.

J. M. GRIMM

Supreme Court Des Moines, Iowa

Justices of Supreme Courts will be given two months in which to decide. All others must hazard a snap judgment.--ED. Dividends Sirs:

Enclosed herewith find check for $10 in payment for subscription to FORTUNE. If I enjoy this magazine to the same degree as I do TIME my investment will bring large dividends. . . .

With best wishes. . . .

Sincerely yours,

O. MAX GARDNER

State of North Carolina Governor's Office Raleigh, N. C.

For a Governor's prompt subscription and good wishes, all thanks.--ED. Chisolm Sirs: It is with great pleasure that I enclose herewith the card sent to me for my signature in connection with your new monthly volume. . . . You may enter me as an Original Subscriber and send me a bill for ten dollars. Whatever TIME gets out is bound to be worth while. My name is spelled CHISOLM--not CHISHOLM. B. OGDEN CHISOLM

Ridgefield, Conn.

Passing

Sirs:

I have your favor of Oct. 7 containing the announcement of the new magazine FORTUNE and I do not feel like returning the postcard as I can easily purchase a copy at the newsstands when passing. . . .

HENRY A. B. PEEKHAM

Boston, Mass.

FORTUNE will be found on few newsstands, if any.--ED. 76 Sirs:

Your favor of the 7th announcing FORTUNE just received suggests a forthcoming publication which should prove to be most acceptable to the intelligent reading public. However, I am nearing my seventy-sixth birthday and while I hope to continue TIME, I am cutting off magazines. ... I wish you every success and regret that

I am not starting out life instead of ending it. O. A. COLEMAN The Georgia Loan and Trust Co. Macon, Ga.

Price

Sirs:

Enclosed find my check for $10 for one years subscription to FORTUNE. If it's one half as good as TIME it will be worth the price.

W. B. BENNETT

Frederick, Md.

But the price of TIME will not be raised to $20.--ED.

Do Not

Sirs:

I received your letter concerning the new publication named FORTUNE.

I do not care to subscribe for it.

MRS. C. H. DURGIN

Manchester, N. H.

Type

Sirs:

. . . Moreover, I do not think we need another journal of the type you describe.

WARREN K. MOOREHEAD

Phillips Academy Andover, Mass.

FORTUNE aims to be a type unto itself.--ED.

Red or Pink Run Loose Sirs: . . . frankly I doubt very much if I would care to invest the sum of $10 for a subscription, for you say "It all depends upon whether you agree with Philosopher John Dewey." Most assuredly I do not agree with John Dewey in some of his ideas. I knew him when he lived in Burlington and was in the University of Vermont, where I also graduated a few years later; I knew his brothers who were good fellows, but John Dewey, while a brilliant man in his line I am sure, does not appeal to me after the stand he took in the Sacco-Vanzetti matter not long ago, and he with a lot of other theoretical high brows, Heywood Broun, for instance, always wanting some Red or Pink communist to be allowed to run loose, defame the government. . . . I cannot understand a man born and raised in a New England state like Vermont where there are no such things as radicals and Pinks and long haired agitators, upholding this sort of thing and I have no patience with such things. I was glad when even the N. Y. World, I think it was, threw Heywood Broun out of its writing staff and if more radicals were bundled together and shipped back to Russia . . . what a blessing it would be, but like Emma Goldman and her running mate, when they were deported, they . . . have been since trying to get back. Not on your life do I agree with John Dewey or any man however brilliant he may be in spots when it comes to upholding the radical and communist ideas. E. A. BRODIE

Citizens Coal Company Burlington, Vt.

Not Philosopher Dewey and all his works but simply one of Philosopher Dewey's points was suggested as a criterion whereby TIME readers might judge whether they wanted FORTUNE. The point: that "business" (or what Philosopher Dewey calls "technological industry") is the dominant characteristic of the present age. As authority for this quasi-philosophical observation, FORTUNE chose the man who has most frequently been called "greatest U. S. philosopher" although many another might have been used, as for example Rev. Henry Sloane Coffin who said (TIME, Oct. 14): "The entire globe is being embraced in a commercial order determined by physical science. . . ."--ED. Scheme Sirs:

On the face of it, FORTUNE promises to be a meritorious scheme, to which I would gladly subscribe. But if it is on the lines of TIME as now conducted, I will not subscribe at present.

TIME has recently announced that it will limit itself to 80 pages until 1931; thereafter I suppose "the sky will be the limit" to advertising. I am one of those who is overfed with advertising and have cancelled my subscription to a number of magazines and publications which force advertising into the reading pages and insist that the reader must take this meretricious hash, whether he wants to or not. I have already written once before protesting against what I consider an insufferable impertinence on the part of modern publishers, to whom the advertiser is the commanding force and who treat the convenience of the readers with contempt. I recognize, of course, that the income from advertisements is necessary in meeting expenses, but it could be done in a decent way, so that the advertisements would be detachable and the reading matter remain preservable. But this suggestion, I have found, is treated with derision.

I would rather wait a year, and if FORTUNE is then what it promised to be, I shall gladly subscribe.

GUSTAV LINDENTHAL Jersey City, N. J.

999 Will Not

Sirs:

I sent my subscription to TIME before the first issue appeared, responding to the letter which was quoted in your communication of Oct. 7.

Having been so eminently satisfied with TIME, I certainly will take a chance with FORTUNE, and have mailed the card enclosed with your letter.

You have a thousand people to please before one of them will tell you so I write this letter to give expression of what's in the minds of the nine hundred and ninety-nine who will not write.

GEORGE A. BOISSARD

President

National Guardian Life Insurance Co, Madison, Wis.

Cat

Fortune

Sirs:

We have our cat, our dog, our wife and TIME, a quartet which is always true and faithful.

Your letter announcing FORTUNE is a masterpiece, and if FORTUNE is anything like TIME in so far as brevity, fearlessness and accuracy is concerned, we want it.

W. C. MCGAFFIN

Buffalo Tank Corp.

Buffalo, N. Y.

Enthused

Sirs:

Your letter of Oct. 7 enthused me and I am now anxiously waiting for the first issue of FORTUNE to arrive.

E. S. EKSTROM

Mechanics Universal Joint Co. Rockford, Ill.

Doolittle v. Pedley

Sirs:

You are correct (TIME, Sept. 30) in saying that Jimmy Doolittle held his own and a little more than his own in boxing Eric Pedley in his undergraduate days. But that's not all--Doolittle administered a knockout with the first blow struck after the boxers had touched gloves. It was amazing because it was so quick. Pedley was stretched flat before any of the spectators realized it. It was all the more remarkable because Doolittle was boxing out of his class in weight--a light heavyweight in the heavyweight group. The incident, which is local legend hereabouts, and much retold, was an early proof of the quick-thinking faculty Doolittle has so often exhibited in flying. A friend of mine who saw him "sail out" at Cleveland says that many a pilot near the hangars said "Even if he is a caterpillar, he's still the greatest in the air." The hearsay evidence may not be admitted-- but I saw the knockout myself. W. A. BREWER JR.

Berkeley, Calif.

Israel v. Islam

Sirs: In TIME Sept. 30, one Maj. Critchell-Bullock has opinions to express anent the recent massacres of Jews by Arabs in Palestine. The nub of his doctrine, judiciously concealed in diplomatic circumlocution and innuendo, seems to amount to this: that the Arab, being a congenital fighter, is a MAN, whereas the Jew, being congenially peaceable, is no man; that accordingly the Arab has a right to Palestine and has a right to enforce that right by any means in his power, including murder. Here are a few (rhetorical) questions for him, and others who may share his view, to reflect upon: 1) Why did the noble and manly Arabs aim their most determined and successful attacks against Jewish hospitals, orphan asylums, and schools? 2) How could Jews, who had been systematically disarmed in advance by British and Arab police, defend themselves against attack? 3) How can the Major account for the fact that in Tel Aviv, the only 100% Jewish city in the world, where the police happen to be Jews, the Arab attack was ignominiously routed? He also wonders where all the Jews were during the war. Well, my experience was just the reverse of his; I met literally thousands of Jewish soldiers but only one Arab, and that one was temperamentally not a man but a child. The 77th Division, including the heroic "lost battalion," was very largely Jewish. The Zion Corps, which aided materially in the capture of Palestine from the Turks, the Jewish Legion which held that land against recapture, were entirely recruited from among the Jewish population. Every synagog on the continent and many in England and the U. S. contain tablets in memory of members killed in action. One of my friends--a Jew--was decorated for distinguished valor as a combatant flyer. And there were many, many more including numerous volunteers. Of course, all this does not touch the rights of the Arab-Jewish question, which is a complicated one, requiring more than a letter to unravel it. Nor do I suggest that it is as fighters that the Jews seek to distinguish themselves. We are a people of anciently established civilized habits. We do not like to fight. But if your correspondent or anyone else thinks that Jews lack the courage to fight when the situation demands that sort of treatment, let him find the answers to the above questions and ponder the facts I have cited. J. DRACHMAN

New York City