• Share
  • Read Later

(2 of 3)

Let Reader Morris bone up on Bechuanaland. — ED.

Whose Depression?


In your story "Watching the Ball Game" [TIME, July 11], it looks like some people have free tickets to the game and are not even contributing when the hat is passed.

The Boyles, Horns and Howes may stabilize the economy at a reasonable level if they don't wait too long to release their buying power, though they are certainly going to cause some sort of a depression, the degree of which is up to them. Waiting may get to be a game to see which can hold out the longer ... Let's hope they don't hold their money until they are buying bankrupt goods, or set on it until it hatches into a real "depression" — Dog Patch or Lower Slobbovian style ...


Little Rock, Ark.

Postgraduate Shmoo


... I should think that for something as phenomenal as "wingless chickens" [TIME, July 11], you would include a few pictures ...


Syracuse, N.Y.

They still look like chickens (see cut) — ED.


... There have never been enough drumsticks to go 'round. Let pseudo-geneticist Baumann complete the work so nobly begun — give us a bird with four drumsticks. For postgraduate exercise, let's have two wishbones — veritably a super shmoo.

WILLIAM NOYES Manchester, N.H.

Help Wanted


Re "To Improve the Breed" [TIME, July 14] ...

Among our small group of professional friends [many] are in the same boat as us; we deeply desire to have children, but have none. My Ph.D.-candidate husband and I have had assurances ... after complete scientific investigation into our case, that we would have children ... and still I have never been pregnant.

It is one thing for statisticians to report that professional couples do not reproduce themselves as readily as the lower-income group, but saying "tsk, tsk" to us isn't the answer. What we and our friends need are scientists who can tell us why we don't reproduce and help us to do so. I can assure your eugenic statisticians that it isn't because we don't want them that we "better educateds" don't have children.


Edinburgh, Scotland



You refer to ... "Redbook's lag" [TIME, July 11] in comparison with Cosmopolitan [circ. 2,101,842] and American [circ. 2,602,873] ... You correctly give Redbook's circulation, for the first quarter of this year, as 1,969,172. You failed to state that 22 years ago, just before I became editor of Redbook, the total circulation of the magazine was 752,211, so Redbook's gain in 22 years is 1,216,961 copies, more than three times that of American and not far from three times that of Cosmopolitan.

In my dictionary the definition of the noun lag is "retardation of movement for any cause." Now which of the three magazines has been the most retarded? ...


  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3