Monday, Sep. 09, 1935
Swinging Carter
Sirs:
TIME rarely betrays its incredible youthfulness. But anyone over forty would recall that it was not Minnie Aladdern Fiske (TIME, Aug 19) but Mrs. Leslie Carter who in 1895 swung herself and David Belasco to fame in The Heart of Maryland.
FRED B. MILLETT
Chicago, Ill.
Sirs: . . . Did Mrs. Fiske, as well as Mrs. Leslie Carter, appear in The Heart of Maryland which was the play based on the poem referred to? Mrs. Carter acted in that play during the early part of her theatrical career, and I recall seeing her in a film version. It seems extremely unlikely that both ladies should have played the same role.
A. M. MITCHELL
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Sirs:
Wasn't it Mrs. Leslie Carter (now trying a Hollywood comeback) rather than Mrs. Minnie Maddern Fiske (deceased) who "transposed the scene from Britain's Civil War to that of the U. S., and swung to theatrical fame on the clapper of a cardboard bell"? . . . Does TIME deliberately make such errors to discover how many readers will detect them?
AUBREY STARKE
Centralia, Ill.
It was Mrs. Leslie Carter who swung to fame in The Heart of Maryland, a Civil War spy melodrama, in which the heroine, Maryland, clutches the tongue of the belfry bell to silence the news that her prisoner-lover has escaped. In the play, her first success, Mrs. Carter let down her bright red hair and swung 229 times in Manhattan in 1895, 96 times in London in 1898. In Mrs. Carter's later plays, David Belasco always arranged a scene in which she could undo her hair. Hence the favorite remark of the 1890's: "Let's go to the new Belasco play and see Mrs. Carter let her hair down."--ED.
Rhode Island Election
Sirs:
In TIME, Aug. 19, under Political Note, your comment on the Rhode Island Congressional election is very amusing to us Democrats. I can't for the life of me understand how the election of a Republican Congressman in a State which up until six months ago was run by Republicans is a plebiscite on the New Deal. Maybe the GOP's don't know that the area in question represents less than 1% of the area and population of the U.S. They also forget to mention that the people in Rhode Island have never tried to make a living by growing cotton and then selling it for 6-c- per Ib. As for the New Deal spending money, it would probably be interesting for them to know that there are more unemployed people in New York City than there are people in the whole State of Rhode Island and these people cannot be kept hungry. President Roosevelt was given a vote of confidence in the 1934 general election when an overwhelming majority of Democrats were elected to the various Federal and State offices. During that same election, Republican Congressmen were elected from California, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York and many other States. Nobody made the preposterous suggestion at that time that the New Deal was waning because a Republican Congressman was elected in California. Why this sudden change of thought? Maybe the reactionary, diehard, GOP Tories expect us to carry every State in the Union for Roosevelt in 1936, elect 435 Democratic Representatives, and 32 Democratic Senators before they finally admit defeat.
LEO M. KALLEJIAN
Hollywood, Calif.
Sirs:
. . . The results in Rhode Island show that the man in the street is thinking. He is visualizing the terrible strain of taxation under which he, his children and their children will be laboring for the next 50 years. The man in the street elects Presidents during times of stress. His ideas are apt to remain dormant during times of plenty but during these trying times he whets up his thinker and does something about it at the polls. It was exactly this condition which defeated Mr. Hoover and which would have defeated any other Republican candidate. . . .
So for the Democrats under President Roosevelt it means "curtains" in 1936. . . .
PAUL R. PINKHAM
Bridgeport, Conn.
Conservation
Sirs:
Your article on the 1935 hunting regulations for migratory waterfowl, in TIME, Aug. 12, is an able piece of reporting a significant governmental regulation. It is a source of gratification to our organization to note the increasing attention TIME is paying in its columns to the mighty problems of Conservation which confront this country. . . .
Our organization has full confidence in and undying respect for ''Ding'' Darling and we shall cooperate with him to the limit in his announced regulations and we hope, with him, that these regulations will prove successful enough to stop the decrease of ducks and geese on the North American continent.
KARL E. MUNDT Extension Director
Izaak Walton League of America, Inc.
Chicago, Ill.
Handsome Brain Surgeons
Sirs:
... I note the comment of the editor about the curious fact of so many brain surgeons being handsome [TIME, Aug. 26]. This, incidentally, is true of those I know. Is not the following an explanation?
Personality, grace, charm and a bedside manner are important in the medical profession. Actual ugliness is a terrible handicap to success in this field. This applies not only to the reaction of women but is a conscious or subconscious attitude of all of us.
In neurology, and particularly where ills are not pathological, the emphasis upon the doctor's personality is even greater. Was not physical deformity a bar to the priesthood in Biblical times? And is not charm (and poise) invaluable to success in all personal relationships? . . . BARNIE F. WINKELMAN
Attorney Philadelphia, Pa.
Salute to Rogers
Sirs:
. . . Your treatment of the Rogers-Post tragedy invokes this letter. As must thousands of other families, my wife and I waited impatiently all week for the Aug. 26 issue of TIME. We have come to expect from TIME'S account of any major world event a report far surpassing that of the newspapers and we are seldom disappointed.
After reading your feeble attempt to cover the lives and dramatic death of these two great men, I feel that you not only failed to do justice to Rogers and Post, but you failed to live up to your own excellent reputation and worst of all failed miserably your thousands of readers, who have come to expect the best of you.
Not a single photograph appeared in the single-column article, spread over three pages crowded and interspersed with advertising.
C. E. WADDIXGHAM
President
Waddingham Tractor Co., Inc. Bradford, Pa.
Sirs:
If one did not see newspapers and relied on TIME, as many do, your article "Death in the Arctic'' [TIME, Aug. 26] is most unsatisfactory. I felt TIME would be one publication to sense what Rogers meant to the U. S. as its most important private citizen, unique in annals. He certainly represented success in more ways than any other American and at the same time was considered a more ideal American than any other of the 120 million. . . . Modest, humble, truthful, great, he possessed every fine trait of all times combined with every modern interest and appreciation of our age. In my lifetime no individual has been so honestly and deservedly mourned by the people. I suggest TIME do its duty to its readers.
WALTER WAXGER
Los Angeles, Calif.
It is TIME'S job to present facts, not to eulogize. But to the extent that its report of the death of Will Rogers and Wiley Post did not fully reflect the enormous public emotion at this tragedy, TIME failed in its purpose. TIME had no better public friend, no more generous booster, no more enthusiastic reader, than Will Rogers.
Therefore it takes this occasion to salute him posthumously.--ED.
Play Table
Sirs:
The picture on p. 9 of TIME, Aug. 12, raises the question in my mind as to whether it was taken in the President's executive office or whether he happened to be sitting at the play table of his grandchildren.
WARD WILLIAMS
Warren, Ohio
On the President's executive desk: one clock in the shape of a ship's wheel; five ash trays; four donkeys (one of twisted colored wire; one of japanned tin; one of black felt; one of grey felt, with sign FERA); one small white rubber elephant; one green stone rooster; one desk calendar; one paper cutter; one two-pen desk set; one desk cigaret lighter. A Blue Eagle made of pine cones has been discarded.--ED.
Driving Skill
Sirs:
Allow me to congratulate you on the space you give in TIME, Aug. 26, to the discussion of the investigation of driving skill conducted by Professor DeSilva at Massachusetts State College. . . .
It would be a fine thing if you could send marked copies of this issue of TIME to all of the motor vehicle commissioners in the country. . . .
FRANK A. GOODWIN
Registrar of Motor Vehicles Department of Public Works The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Boston, Mass.
Sirs:
Project XS-F2-U25 acknowledges its appreciation of TIME'S accurate and interesting story about its accomplishments. . . .
HARRY R. DESILVA BERNARD C. KILEY LARRY JACOBSON LEWIS J. FARRELL HOWARD J. WHITING EUGENE N. FROST LYMAN CHANDLER JR. ARTHUR M. KINGSBURY CARLETON E. BEARSE JOHN A. GEPELY PHILLIP ROBINSON FRANCIS J. NEWMAN WILLIAM NOBLE ROBERT T. SARTWELL Amherst Public Research Project,
Motor Vehicles Massachusetts State College Amherst, Mass.
Mobilization v. Odds
Sirs:
Re: Cinemarch of TIME No. V. Was the 15 minutes devoted to pictures of U. S. Army defense plans war propaganda or were the editors sincere in wishing to point out the futility and colossal stupidness of such extravagant expenditures by the flash at the end showing "Lloyd's" --500-to-1 odds against invasion? If the latter, your editors should remember that the movie public is larger and more impressionable than the magazine's public and doubtless missed the point entirely. Change the accompanying music score to Grieg's Ase's Death instead of the typical Stars and Stripes Forever ditties and your March of Time will accomplish something. On the other hand if your answer is--you take no sides but show both sides--my answer is 15 minutes to 1 is hardly equal representation.
ALFRED E. F. COPP
Jewett City, Conn.
Like TIME, The March of Time aims to take no sides, to state important facts objectively. Obviously it takes longer to show how an Army mobilizes than it does to state the betting odds against its going into action.--ED.
This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.