Letters: Dec. 5, 1927

(6 of 8)

Sirs:

Only a breeze from Boston could persuade me to rush into print in this vein, but "Brother" Rapp is due an apology for my injuring his sensibilities. . . .*

After reading thru his communication and noticing that he hails from "Bahston," I could better understand his bursting into print.

It will be my pleasure to attend the Superintendents' and Principals' National Convention in Boston on Feb. 25, 1928, and nothing would please me better than to meet "Brother" Rapp and suggest some good reading material, which his seemingly undernourished soul needs.

V.M. ROGERS

A Principal with "principles."

Gunnison, Col.

* Said Principal Rogers in a previous letter: "But for God's sake leave out the Fashion Sheet Page."

Said Subscriber Rapp: "Might I suggest two things?

1) "For 'goodness sake' TIME — leave out the 'For God's sake' stuff — even if sent by a 'High' School Principal.

2) "For 'goodness sake' V. M. Rogers, High School Principal, read more of Angelo Patri's writings, a real principal who will undoubtedly acquaint you with the first principle of being a good Principal, is not to be so crude."

Grayson's Rank

Sirs:

If "Rear Admiral" Cary Travers Grayson is "as eminent a turfman as he is a sailor" [TIME, Nov. 7] he must be one of those "turfmen" who follow the horses around the track with a broom and gocart. If Cary T.

Grayson is a sailor at all I'll eat my shirt and his chevrons. You know how he got his fancy rank, don't you? By being picked up by President Wilson, who rode roughshod over the entire Naval Board and jammed his favorite through Congress. About 200* other Navy doctors were ahead of him, in sheer ranking merit, for what was handed to Grayson on a silver platter. At that the great Wilson's puppet was almost set down hard where he belonged by the Senate.

Incidentally, if TIME will be strictly accurate about Grayson, he was made Medical Director with the rank of Rear Admiral, not a real Rear Admiral.

LEFFINGWELL ROBERTS

Washington, D. C.

Sleuthing

Sirs:

On p. 11, col. 3 (NATIONAL AFFAIRS) under the sub-caption "Fifty Cents" you say "Governor Smith accepted the customary witness fee—50 cents—which he dropped into a Roman Catholic poor-box."

Since when has a usually admirable magazine such as TIME taken up the business of sleuthing, that they are in a position or would demean themselves as to print a statement as is shown above?

It might be well for your National Affairs editor to recall the remarks of Senator Reed of Missouri concerning a man's intelligence, which appeared not so long ago in your publication. †

A CALIFORNIAN

Los Angeles, Calif.

TIME did not "sleuth." The repository chosen by Governor Smith for his 50 cents was reported casually by many a daily newspaper. But even if it had not been so reported, TIME would not have hesitated to refer to so well-known a fact as Governor Smith's Roman Catholicism—a fact about which he, at least, is not hypersensitive.—ED.

Might Consider