(2 of 3)
With reference to letter in your No. 22 of the 27th November regarding TIME'S 1933 Man of the Year; how about the President of this Republic for the 1933 honor? On the 19th inst. President Gomez completes 25 years of service to his country in that position, and on the day mentioned there is going to be national rejoicing, and in fact everywhere where Venezuelans and others who know this beautiful country gather together.
To enumerate all of President Gomez's accomplishments since he has occupied the Presidency of this country would be too lengthy a task. . . .
The wagering in the letter I refer to above makes me laff, as if the accomplishments of the President of this country were widely known and thoroughly realized, the betting in his favor would probably exceed a million to one!
S. W. L'ESTRANGE
Caracas, Venezuela
For an account of the Venezuela candidate see p. 15.—ED. James Rolph. v. Charles Lynch Sirs:
In your issue of Dec. n: "Charles Francis Potter suggested to The First Humanist Society of Manhattan that 'lynching' be changed to 'Rolphing.' " "
In the Dec. 18 issue you twice used the word ''rolphing" to designate what formerly was called lynching. I appreciate your prompt adoption of my suggestion. . . .
It is possible that readers of the Dec. 18 issue may question the use of the word "rolphing" to take the place of the word "lynching." and you might wish to give them the historical back-ground as I summarized it.
CHARLES FRANCIS POTTER
The First Humanist Society of New York. New York City.
To Preacher Potter, praise for neat nomenclature. Extracts from his "rolph" speech follow:
Now is an excellent time to rename the crime of lawless execution, for who better deserves to have his name attached to that crime than Governor James Rolph? He defended the crime; he condoned it. He even praised it. ...
Never before in American history has such a high official taken such a stand. He deserves to have his name attached to it hereafter. . . .
The taking of human life without due process of law should never have been called "lynching" anyway.
Charles Lynch of Virginia deserves the eternal gratitude of all Americans, for he was . . . largely responsible for the instructions given the Virginian delegates to the colonial congress whereby the Declaration of Independence came into being.
In 1780, when he was colonel of a cavalry regiment, and about to lead his men to repel the British, he stopped long enough to arrest the leaders of a Tory conspiracy and, as justice of the peace, to sentence them to jail. . . .
Thereafter, emergency acts of justice without court procedure were referred to as "Lynch law." In early California days and in the South just after the Civil War, Lynch law was carried so far that men, both white and Negro, were summarily executed without benefit of fair trial.
But Colonel Charles Lynch of Virginia does not deserve to have his name coupled with such lawless procedure as the taking of men's lives by crazed mobs today.
To Governor James Rolph, who praises such acts, should go the honor of having his name attached to them. —ED. Thankful Maybelline
Sirs: