Who in '52?

Sir:

It is alarming to me, after having carefully followed the Truman-MacArthur affair in TIME, and the reaction in your Letters section, that the most serious implication of this unfortunate episode has been missed . . .

Between the Truman muddle and the Republican fuddle, where are we? Nineteen forty-eight hasn't taught the G.O.P. a thing! I believe it's time for the Republican Party to clean house, and come up with a new slate; 1952 is just around the corner.

B. G. Hoos

Berlin, N.H.

Sir:

... I want to vote Republican, but I'll be damned if I'll vote for an outfit run by Taft, Wherry, McCarthy, Hickenlooper, Dewey, et al. Let's hear from Duff, Morse, Warren and other modern Republicans . . .

TOM MACHESNEY

Chino, Calif.

Sir:

... As a delegate to the Republican Washington state conventions of '46 and '48, I feel compelled to say this: the Republican Party, as represented by Taft, Wiley, Smith, Hickenlooper, Cain, McCarthy, Martin, "Bertie" McCormick and Hearst, is on mighty thin ice. The weight of sound logic lies with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the U.N. and Truman.

The very inconsistency of the arguments of these men is demonstrated by their switch from isolationists to war-on-China-now. Six months ago, with Hoover as their spokesman, they said, "Let's sit it out alone." Today, with MacArthur as their new spokesman, they say, "Let's fight it alone." What a switch! And Taft leads them all in his absurd contradiction of himself.

DAVID H. DEIHL

Ventura, Calif.

The Picket-Story

Sir:

Three loud cheers for TIME'S June 4 article on the 43rd Division at Camp Pickett, Va. My fiance is one of the thousands of draftee replacements in this division, and reading your article was like reading one of his letters . . .

JANET A. DUNCAN

Dorchester, Mass.

Sir:

[A] really terrific article ... How can there be spirit in an outfit like this? Get rid of these officers and send us some men and we'll show the Pentagon an outfit . . .

(SERVICEMAN'S NAME WITHHELD)

Camp Pickett, Va.

Sir:

. . . Camp Pickett should be investigated, as is being done, but the big problem as I see it is General Cramer . . .

(MRS.) JUNE NEFF

Toledo

Sir:

. . . The situation here has improved . . . to the extent that we feel it our duty to put TIME readers' minds at ease by informing them we're all through crying, and if ever needed as a combat division we'll go and add a few more battle streamers to our already heavily burdened regimental and battalion standards.

PFC. ANDREW GAMBARDELLA

SGT. ROBERT LARSEN

Camp Pickett, Va.

More Collective Nouns

Sir:

Re the dither in the London Times over collective nouns for animals [TIME, June 4]: Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's 14th-Century romance Sir Nigel speaks of a cete of badgers, a singular of boars, a sounder of swine (when hunted), a nye of pheasants, a badling of ducks, a fall of woodcock, a wisp of snipe.

Modern prose might use new collectives for professional people and others. I suggest an ibid of historians, a ponder of scientists, a scathe of bureaucrats.

W. W. WOODSIDE

Pittsburgh

Sir:

For once . . . we must disagree with TIME. The current term applying to a number of cats (especially domesticated cats having grown wild) is "pack"!

Having serviced some 35,000 cats during the past 13 years, and being considered authorities on the subject, we most strenuously object to the introduction of obsolete terminology from abroad . . .

ROBERT LOTHAR KENDELL

President

The American Feline Society, Inc.

New York City

City of Chicago

Sir:

. . . We are most concerned to read your May 28 reference to our S.S. City of Chicago [photographed by U.S. Navy patrol planes sent out to check on ships suspected of carrying cargoes into Siberian or Chinese ports].

The City of Chicago has at no time called at either Siberian or Chinese ports . . . This vessel, in the course of her last voyage, loaded a cargo of lumber at Otaru, Hokkaido, North Japan, for London and it may be that it was during her passage either to or from this port that the aeroplane sighted this vessel . . .

D. A. LLOYD

Director

Ellerman & Bucknall Steamship Co. Ltd.

London

Is the Cavalry Washed Up?

Sir:

. . . Our troops [in Korea] are bound to the roads because their vehicles cannot negotiate the terrain off the roads. Even the movement of our foot soldiers is restricted . .. because supplies must be brought to them by vehicles. Thus, the enemy is able to advance in other areas, infiltrating and outflanking . . . With a proper complement of mounted units, cavalry, pack artillery and pack trains, because of their great cross-country mobility, the enemy infiltration and flank attacks could have been checked or prevented.

In this kind of terrain it is almost impossible to achieve a pursuit of destruction without cavalry which can advance swiftly across country in a pursuit of interception as achieved by Field Marshal Lord Allenby [in the 1917-18 Palestine campaign] . . . General Lucian Truscott [commander, 3rd Infantry Division, Italian campaign] stated that with cavalry for pursuit, he believed he could have achieved [a faster] victory in Italy . . . The late General Patton said, "In almost any conceivable theater of operations, situations arise where the presence of horse cavalry, in a ratio of a division to an army, will be of vital moment."

Thus our cavalry generals understood clearly the necessity of having ready, mobile mounted units when the theater of war demanded their use. Unfortunately, our infantry generals in the saddle (though they will resent the allusion), their eyes fixed on the roads of Western Europe, have prematurely and unwisely destroyed our great cavalry. It must be revived.

JOHN KNOWLES HERR

Washington, D.C.

P: To Major General Herr, the U.S. Army's last Chief of Cavalry, TIME'S thanks for a spirited contribution to a timeless debate.--ED.

Down Evolution Alley with Adler

Sir:

So Mortimer Adler's at it again, trying to down [Darwinian] evolution, to make it possible for us once again to accept the idea that man is created in God's Own Image [TIME, June 4],

Is it Morty himself who is doing this, tongue in cheek, to stir up controversial interest? . . . Why blaspheme God, by attributing to Him man's hideous "image"? . . .

HARRY LEBAU

Elizabeth, NJ.

Sir:

Hurrah for Dr. Adler rustling the scientific hencoop, and for TIME for airing it ... Sure there's evolution, but no one has ever caught it in the act. . .

J. H. BARTON

Topanga, Calif.

Sir:

... I agree with you, Dr. Adler, heartily, in your contention that Darwin was wrong, and thank you for your concession that Almighty God could possibly be right.

BETTY YORKE

Wheaton, Ill.

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