(4 of 4)
New Dealers made a great point of the necessity of keeping the Army out of civilian politics, of shushing an officer who steps across the line. With equal vehemence anti-New Dealers accused the Roosevelt Administration of being unable to take criticism, of exhibiting a vengeful spirit against General Hagood. Bitterest comment along this line came from Cartoonist Jay ("Ding") Darling, who lately retired from the New Deal as the disillusioned Chief of the Bureau of Biological Survey. For the New York Herald Tribune syndicate he drew a picture entitled "The New Deal Administration Welcomes Constructive Criticism," and below, "X marks the spot where the last critic tried it." The X was in a shell hole, around which lay a head, a body, a severed hand, two severed legs and, on a shattered tree, a fragment of shirt labelled "Gen. Hagood." (See cut.)
Another ex-New Dealer, General Hugh Johnson, whose own words are none too mild, wrote: "Freedom of speech, like trial by Jury, is a constitutional right—but not for Army officers. . . . The Army is for defense and not for dialectic. The minute it becomes a debating association in the public Press, it is no good for fighting."
A different opinion of General Hagood's offense was strongly put forward last week by Pundit Walter Lippmann: "He was testifying, remember, by invitation of Congress; he was testifying, remember too, at what he thought was a private meeting. He was making no public speech. He was conducting no propaganda. He was speaking solely to the body that under the Constitution originates money bills. Nearly two months later the committee published his remarks. General Hagood did not publish them. . . .
"The events that have happened in Japan (see p. 23) are not likely to make any one wish to encourage the political activity of Army officers. . . . But what has happened in Japan merely put into high relief the utter unreality of General Hagood's offense. He was not conducting an agitation. He was not forcing his opinions on Congress. On the contrary, he was speaking in private and by invitation to the very civil authorities from whom an officer ought to conceal none of his opinions."
*All Army officers are forbidden to recommend any appropriations not provided in the budget. At the time of General Hagood's testimony the budget had not, however, been prepared.