Letters: Aug. 1, 1927

(3 of 4)

Will you kindly give space to this letter, and courteously answer the charge of my friends. Are you or not interested in promoting Atheism ?

MRS. LILLIAN L. HUGULEY

Atlanta, Ga.

TIME is not interested in promoting Atheism. ED.

Congratulations

Sirs:

Congratulations upon not surrendering to mediocrity, to mass-thinking. Your printed sentiments concerning Colonel Lindbergh's great achievement, his splendid personal qualities, were noble, and clearly expressed [TIME, May 23, 30; June 6, 20, 27]. You have paid your tribute. To publish his photograph, added to ten thousand others, would be merely banal.

The sentimental letters urging you to do this are but another example of that fundamentally tyrannical spirit distressingly on the increase in our country which would have a man eat, drink, sleep, think, wear a blue band on his straw hat, exactly as his neighbors. . . . Vast waves of mechanical thinking. . . . There is no need to "square yourselves," as has been suggested. Your motives are clear, perfectly decent, and justified to those who will take a little trouble to think.

ARTHUR TUCKERMAN

Kennebunkport, Me.

"Fear Not"

Sirs:

I was amused at the railings of Bessie M. Hollis over your article [TIME, July 4] which referred to the Lindbergh-signed stories. Her indictment of TIME is absolutely unfounded, positively silly. And to think that she is a high-school teacher whose office involves the molding of youth into fairminded, liberal, charitable men and women. She may be able to pound mathematics or whatever she teaches into the heads of her unfortunate pupils, but I dare say that she leaves them totally devoid of inspiration resulting from the radiation of those fine and noble purposes which should actuate every schoolteacher and college professor. I cannot conceive of a woman threatening boycott even on such illusive provocation. But fear not. Her veiled threat that she will make enemies for TIME throughout her limited sphere of influence will, if put into effect, produce results which will react contrary to her expectations and very much to your advantage.

I agree heartily with Mrs. L. A. Redpath when she wrote [TIME, July 18] : "Those touchy, holier-than-thou critics are funny enough."

A. 0. AMBROZ

Cedar Rapids, Iowa

Mr. Stewart of Phila.

Sirs:

Permit me to call your attention to an error which evidently escaped your notice.

In TIME, issue of July 11, 1927, p. 24, under heading INTERNATIONAL ADVERTISERS ; officers "reelected with President Woodbridge were Secretary Rowe Stewart and Treasurer Francis Hinckley Sisson, both of Manhattan."

It so happens, however, that Mr. Rowe Stewart is President of the Record Publishing Co., publishers since 1870 of the Philadelphia Record, 917 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia.

I am not at all surprised that New York City, which I presume you mean by "Manhattan," should want to claim as a resident, such an estimable citizen as Mr. Rowe Stewart of Philadelphia.

C. W. SUMMERFIELD

Philadelphia, Pa.

Trap v. Crap