Republican Chairman Harrison Spangler has urged political convention fans to stay away from the party’s Chicago meeting in June. With travel and hotel accommodations what they are, the request will probably be heeded. With no cheering, booing, whistling bedlam in the packed galleries this year, the distinction between the elephant as the symbol of the GOP and the elephant as the symbol of the circus is going to be painfully apparent.
The Pittsburgh Press (April 8, 1944)
Chicago, Illinois (UP) –
Governor John W. Bricker of Ohio, Republican presidential aspirant, denounced secret diplomacy as un-American in an address here last night in which he said “the public must be advised of the facts.”
He told a Union League Club audience:
If, before the war, the people had been advised what was happening in the Pacific, the executive branch and Congress would have been forced to take adequate action.
The administration either knew or should have known what was taking place and if it had acted in time, Pearl Harbor never would have happened. It is not enough that the facts are known in Washington, but the people also must know them.
Mr. Bricker, en route to the West Coast on a campaign tour, also urged:
…the retention of strategic bases and installations throughout the world which we have built with our sweat and substance and for which we have fought with the blood and lives of our boys.
London reports that the British are concerned over Wendell Willkie’s withdrawal and its effect on the presidential election. So far, however, their officials have observed the ban against comments which could be interpreted here as foreign interference in American affairs.
Nevertheless, as long as there is no British effort to fish in our political waters, their interest is as legitimate as it is inevitable. Their future and ours are closely interrelated in war and peace. They are watching the Willkie development for the same reason we are observing reports that Anthony Eden will or will not resign as Foreign Minister, and that he is being groomed as Prime Minister Churchill’s successor.
In the Willkie case, however, the British apparently are not only interested but worried. That is unnecessary. It is based on a misunderstanding. Oversimplification, confusion of old labels with present realities, and propaganda have given the British the absurd notion that American cooperation in world affairs depends on the election of either Mr. Roosevelt or Mr. Willkie.
If they wish to read future American foreign policy in terms of personalities, a rather superficial pastime, they should get the personal record straight. Four years ago, Mr. Roosevelt and Mr. Willkie, as candidates, and Mr. Dewey and Mr. Taft, as aspirants for the nomination, all publicly favored keeping the United States out of war if possible. Since Pearl Harbor, all have favored all-out war for total victory.
On post-war policy, all favored the Senate resolution of last November, which incorporated the Moscow four-power pact for:
…establishing at the earliest practicable date a general international organization, based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all peace-loving states, and open to all such states, large and small, for the maintenance of international peace and security.
But the British overestimate the power of a President to dictate American foreign policy. The man in the White House, whatever his personality or platform or party, cannot move beyond Congressional and public opinion – as Woodrow Wilson and others have learned to their sorrow.
America’s world policy, and relations with Britain, during the next four years will be determined by American public opinion on the basis of the success or the failure of present American efforts to achieve the international organization and democratic peace pledged by the Atlantic Charter and Moscow Pact. The overwhelming passage of the Fulbright and Connally resolutions proves that both parties and the American public are committed to that policy.
The Pittsburgh Press (April 9, 1944)
Migratory workers and women wooed
Washington (UP) – (April 8)
Republican and Democratic leaders, confronted by reports of possibly light balloting in the November elections, tonight directed “get-out-the-vote” campaigns at two groups capable of influencing the outcome of the White House race – women and migratory war workers.
The importance of these groups is heightened by uncertainty among party chieftains over the soldier vote.
A GOP spokesman estimated that 85 million civilians would be eligible – but not necessarily qualified – to vote in the coming elections.
GOP woos women
In an obvious nod to the new regard with which women are regarded by the Republican Party, a special committee appointed by National Chairman Harrison E. Spangler has agreed to recommend to the party’s nominating convention – which opens in Chicago June 26 – that there be equal representation of men and women on the Resolutions Committee. The plan would place women in a position of influencing the party platform generally.
The number of migratory war workers who will cast votes is problematical and of concern to leaders of both parties. Thousands, for example, have moved from the Democratic Solid South to borderline states in the Midwest. In a close vote, their ballots would be decisive.
Difficulties faced
However, it was conceded that state laws would render some ineligible and general apathy toward registration would cut deeper into this potential vote which Democratic spokesmen say will go for President Roosevelt if he seeks a fourth term.
Republicans do not concede the possible loss of these potential voters, however, and workers in the field are actively at work in registration efforts.
It is no secret that Democratic bigwigs want as heavy a vote as possible in the presidential contest. Generally light votes are cited by the Democratic National Committee as an important reason for repeated reversals which the party has suffered at byelections since 1940.
Most candidates are lying low
By Kermit McFarland
Although the primary election is only a little more than two weeks away, there is little evidence to show that more than a handful are aware of it.
Even the professional politicians are looking beyond the April 25 date and, with a scant few exceptions, the candidates are lying low.
There are no “contests” in Allegheny County, in the sense that they have developed into active fights.
Republicans in dispute
In three of the five Congressional districts, the Republican Congressional nominations are in dispute, with five candidates in each of the three districts. But even in these “races,” activity is at a minimum.
The Republicans also present one contest for a State Senate seat and contests for legislative nominations in eight of the 13 districts.
Political attention mostly looks beyond the primary to the special session of the Legislature which will convene in Harrisburg May 1 and to the Republican National Convention which starts in Chicago June 26.
Short special session
Governor Edward Martin and legislative and political leaders in both parties are apparently in accord on a soldier vote law and both sides expect the sessions to be dispatched in a minimum of time.
Unless a snag develops, the session can be completed in less than five days. By starting the soldier vote bill through one branch of the Legislature Monday, May 1, it can be sent to the Governor’s desk shortly after midnight Friday morning.
Some effort is being made to induce Mr. Martin to include other subjects in the call for the special session, but he has insisted on limiting the call to the one issue.
Two other items asked
Rep. Thomas J. Heatherington (D-Versailles Township) yesterday urged the Governor to add two items to his call, providing for action on legislation to permit municipalities to spend “post-war surplus accumulations” wherever “local emergencies arise,” and to permit local governments to buy federal war surplus property without advertising for bids.
The main topic of debate in local political circles in the presidential nomination.
While most political leaders are confident Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York will be nominated on an early ballot, there is still some fear that Mr. Dewey may decide not to be a candidate.
Little interest in Vice President
There is little interest, at the moment, in possible candidates for the nomination of Vice President, although Chief Justice George W. Maxey of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court is reportedly active as a candidate for this nomination.
On the Democratic side, there is some evidence of support for Senator Harry S. Truman (D-MO), chairman of the committee investigating the war effort, as a running mate for President Roosevelt. Senator Truman will speak to a meeting of the Allegheny County Motor Truck Association here Friday and will return in May to address the Democratic Jackson Day dinner.
GOP blamed for raid on New Dealer’s game
By Thomas L. Stokes, Scripps-Howard staff writer
Indianapolis, Indiana – (April 8)
If you are politically minded, it’s always a delight to come into these precincts, for they take their politics between meals here as well.
They like their poker, too. And when you can mix poker and politics, that’s superfine.
That’s a concoction being served up in the gossip in the lobby of the Claypool Hotel, the political hangout.
It all has to do with a police raid here a few days ago on the Claypool apartment of John K. Jennings, a Democrat, state War Manpower Commission director, who was entertaining five friends, also local bigshots, at their weekly poker party. They were all taken to police headquarters.
Poker’s ‘patron saint’
Mr. Jennings, formerly state WPA director, was pretty indignant, particularly at the rough tactics – they bashed in the door – and at the invasion of his home. He refused bond, saying he was willing to become “the patron saint of poker.”
The police captain sent them home, and the next day the judge dismissed the case. It was all a mistake – or so it was said they were looking for a well-known confidence man who was supposed to be running a game, it was explained.
But the poker fans are making this a cause celebre, and are blaming the city Republican administrations and Mayor Robert Tyndall, a former Army officer. Some say it may react badly against Republicans.
Won’t swing election
But it’s very doubtful that even a poker revolution would be enough to swing this state Democratic this fall – at least that’s what the politically wise say.
There’s one place you can get a different opinion – and quite naturally. That’s over in the Capitol in the office of Governor Henry Schricker – “Hank” they call him. The Governor, a folksy fellow and the greatest vote-getter of modern times in this state, has a right to the extreme view.
He was the only Democrat who survived the Republican avalanche four years ago.
He is being pressed to run for Senator, with the idea that maybe his name on the ballot might help the President, and maybe some way or other add up to a Democratic victory. It’s just a chance. He hasn’t announced formally yet, but it’s pretty certain he’ll run.
President stands good chance
He spun his theory of why he thinks President Roosevelt can carry the state. Wendell Willkie, he says, would run the best race in Indiana among Republicans. Mr. Willkie now is out. He says there is no real enthusiasm for either Governor Thomas E. Dewey or Governor John Bricker among the people. In the end, he thinks the people of Indiana – or enough of them – are going to decide that President Roosevelt had better be left there to finish the war and manage the peace.
A hot contest is on for the Republican senatorial nomination, to be decided at the convention in early May, between Homer Capehart, who rolled into rich on the jukebox, and 26-year-old James M. Tucker, former Indiana Secretary of State, who was recently discharged from active service as a naval lieutenant because of a wound incurred at Salerno.
By Fred W. Perkins, Press Washington correspondent
Washington –
Some weeks ago, this writer reported conversations with Midwest labor leaders as meaning that Wendell Willkie had the best chance among Republican presidential possibilities of cracking the labor vote that has gone predominantly to President Roosevelt in three elections.
But now that Mr. Willkie is apparently extinguished as a possibility, opinions may be found among Washington leaders of the American Federation of Labor that Thomas E. Dewey is capable of winning considerable support from this part of the electorate. The same opinion has not been found among leaders of the CIO – that organization being apparently as determined as ever to go down the line for a fourth term.
A nationally known power in the AFL who declined to be quoted directly because of his organization’s policy of not becoming active in party politics, says:
I’ll not try to kid you – most of our people are likely to support Roosevelt again. But Dewey will have strong support among our membership.
This leader said Governor Dewey had won many labor friends through public opposition to certain “anti-labor” bills that were introduced in the last session of the New York Legislature – similar to laws which were enacted in nearly a dozen states. he declared it was largely due to the Governor’s influence that these bills were allowed to die in New York legislative committees.
Friendly to labor
The AFL leader said it will not be possible to hang an anti-labor tag on Mr. Dewey merely because of his prosecution of labor racketeers in New York City. The same thought apparently was in the mind of Thomas A. Murray, president of the New York State Federal of Labor, when he introduced the Governor at the convention of that organization last August.
Mr. Murray said of him:
As a federal prosecutor and as the District Attorney of New York County, he made a reputation for brilliant and fearless crusading in the cause of justice, which won for him the highest honor our state can bestow. As Governor of the State of New York, he has demonstrated a friendly and sympathetic attitude to the cause of organized labor and to the program of social and economic legislation to which we have dedicated ourselves.
Governor Dewey also addressed last year’s convention of the New York State CIO, and the two speeches now are being scanned for indication of the labor attitude of the unannounced candidate. Together they seem to furnish a more definite idea of the Dewey ideas on the labor subject than on some other important questions.
To the CIO, he said:
It is true that we still have labor organizations that are run along undemocratic lines. We still have instances of the misuse of union funds, of careless and slipshod accounting, or no accounting at all to the members of their hard-earned dues.
We still encounter instances of unjustified strikes, violent and unfair picketing and destructive raiding by one union of the membership of a rival union. But on the other hand, only a fool in management would wish to destroy the sense of security and usefulness which comes to workingmen when they are ably represented by honest labor leadership which believes in the American enterprise system.
Regimentation
The Governor’s AFL speech, which has been highly commended by AFL leaders, contained a statement which will please people outside the labor movement who contend that no strike, for whatever reason, can be justified when the country is in a great war. It was:
We know that winning the war is greater than the issue involved in any strike, yet it is too easy to let little issues become big issues which roll up and multiply into strikes.
To the AFL, Mr. Dewey also said:
Under the pressure of war, we have all willingly submitted to restraints by the national government which are foreign to our most vital principles… A multiplicity of federal regulations have been promulgated governing hours, wages and conditions of employment. In large measure these regulations supersede the functions of collective bargaining and take its place. They have superseded private management, too, and in some cases they have even take the plants away from the owners when they were admittedly without fault.
In time of war such an abridgement of the rights of everyone is probably inescapable, but it is a condition which can only be justified by the sacrifices of war. We are fighting to make sure that such totalitarian conditions cannot exist in time of peace.
Is this a kind of fighting with windmills? Some people in high places have already advocated that wartime controls be made a permanent part of government.
The Governor continued:
So that we shall truly regain and keep the vital freedoms for which we fight today. I invite you to join with all your vigor in the struggle to restore them at the end of the war. We can be neither free nor strong in a peacetime regimented economy. We can be both free and strong if we recover for labor and enterprise the dignity and unfettered strength which only free men can enjoy.
The Pittsburgh Press (April 10, 1944)
Washington (UP) –
President Roosevelt recently made a gesture of good will toward one of his strongest Democratic critics – Senator Guy M. Gillette (D-IA).
In a letter dated March 10, when Mr. Gillette was determined not to seek reelection this year, the President urged him to reconsider. He asked Mr. Gillette to run again the grounds that men like him are urgently needed in the Senate.
Mr. Gillette subsequently said he had been advised by the Iowa Democratic state organization that thousands of names had been obtained on petitions on behalf of his candidacy. For that reason, he said he would run again if the people insisted.
Mr. Gillette has been antagonistic toward the administration since 1938 when Harry L. Hopkins, the President’s adviser, tried to prevent his reelection.
Recently, Mr. Gillette said he does not favor a fourth term. He has been a frequent critic of “New Dealers.”
May limit talks to GOP platform
By Lyle C. Wilson
New York –
Wendell L. Willkie was reported today by his closest associates to believe that it is best for him to take no part in the selection of a Republican presidential nominee either before or during the party’s national convention in Chicago in June.
But he is determined to measure carefully the men, their records and the platform which emerge from that gathering. Prior to the convention, however, he probably will speak clearly on the type of platform he believes should be adopted.
To speak more freely
On the first weekend after his spectacular withdrawal from the presidential contest, associates described Mr. Willkie as feeling that he has recaptured his independence. Henceforth, he is expected to speak his mind even more freely than prior to last week’s Wisconsin primary which swamped his 1944 presidential aspirations.
Some weeks probably will pass before Mr. Willkie resumes discussion of political issues. His plans are understood to be to so a great deal of listening – especially to the men most prominently mentioned for the Republican nomination – and to undertake to measure them and their records against the issues of the day as he sees them.
Shuns ‘stop’ campaign
Mr. Willkie has told his friends that he does not intend to participate in any “stop” movements directed against any candidate nor to promote the candidacy of any man. but repeatedly in conversations with his friends, Willkie has said he intends to “say what I think.”
His friends were hopeful, but Mr. Willkie had few illusions during the latter weeks of his pre-convention campaign. Associates explained that Mr. Willkie had recognized for months that powerful forces in the Republican organization hoped to repudiate his candidacy.
Local organizations were generally uneasy over Willkie’s stand on post-war international affairs. But the Willkie camp feels that this doubt was stimulated to outright opposition by the organized effort of a group of powerful party leaders including Joseph N. Pew Jr. and Ernest T. Weir of Pennsylvania and the New York State and Illinois party organizations.
Dewey, Stassen backed
They say this opposition backed delegates pledged to New York Governor Thomas E. Dewey and delegates pledged to LtCdr. Harold Stassen, former Governor of Minnesota, particularly in those Wisconsin districts in which no Dewey delegates were entered.
Wisconsin returns were so overwhelmingly against Mr. Willkie’s candidacy that no single issue could be cited as the central factor. But the Madison, Wisconsin, speech of Senator Joseph H. Ball (R-MN) is counted by Willkie adherents among the hardest blows struck in that campaign.
Mr. Ball was Cdr. Stassen’s manager and chief campaigner. He is reported to have told a Madison audience that his man was committed to the post-war territorial integrity of Germany – that there should be no post-war political dismemberment of that country.
Chicago, Illinois (UP) –
The Chicago Tribune today endorsed Gen. Douglas MacArthur as Republican candidate for the Presidency.
Gen. MacArthur, one of the two Republican candidates entered in the Illinois presidential preference primary Tuesday, was entered in the Illinois primary by the MacArthur-for-President Club. Gen. MacArthur did not indicate his desire to be a candidate.
Gen. MacArthur’s opponent is Riley A. Bender, former Illinois state prison warden.
Talking tour through Midwest to coast has been exuberant but unimpressive
By Thomas L. Stokes, Scripps-Howard staff writer
Columbus, Ohio –
Governor John W. Bricker has become almost a stranger in this capital city.
He’s away a good deal of the time in his quest of the Republican presidential nomination. He’s just dashed off on a two-week tour that took him first to Indianapolis, then to Chicago and the West Coast.
The big, handsome fellow is working hard. He is doing on the national circuit what Wendell Willkie tried to do in Wisconsin. Thus far – and it is getting late – there is little indication that Governor Bricker is doing any better.
The Bricker campaign has all the exuberance of a campaign conducted by amateurs, which it is largely.
This is manifest, not only in their methods, but in their current reaction – or professed reaction – that the withdrawal of Wendell Willkie has helped the cause of Governor Bricker. Practical political considerations would, it seems, point in the opposite direction.
Governor Bricker was never more than a dark horse chance, in a deadlocked convention, judging from the analysis of expert politicians. The only chance for a deadlocked convention was a contest between Mr. Willkie and Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York. But Wisconsin ended Mr. Willkie’s candidacy.
Dewey, the unknown
This is not to deny that there are not still, among the GOP leaders, some who are not quite sure of young Governor Dewey. Some would like to have a nominee perhaps a little more tractable, a little less of an unknown quantity. But Governor Dewey has stepped so far out in front, not only in popularity polls but in his showing as a vote-getter in Wisconsin, that these people are hesitant to start anything.
If they were still determined to try to stop Governor Dewey, they would have to find someone to do it.
Governor Bricker doesn’t seem to have the necessary spark to set off public enthusiasm.
Taft is more likely
If the opportunity offered itself where there might be a chance to stop Governor Dewey, the candidate selected to try to job rather would be Senator Taft, runner-up to Mr. Willkie in the 1940 convention, than Governor Bricker, it is believed. He is much better grounded in national and international affairs than is Governor Bricker and enjoys more confidence for this reason.
Governor Bricker is put forward as a Midwest candidate and his appeal would be expected to lie there, to start. But in a tour which covered Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin and Nebraska, this writer failed to discover, either among the politicians, or among the rank and file, any noticeable enthusiasm for him.
Good governor, but…
In Ohio, his home state, he is well regarded as a governor, but most people here find it hard to consider him as a possible President in these times.
There’s been some talk of him getting the Willkie strength, whatever that is. But it is difficult to see how Governor Bricker would fall heir to any of whatever it is, considering the divergent views of the two men on almost every subject.
Deer Lodge, Montana (UP) –
Ohio Governor John W. Bricker, campaigning for the Republican presidential nomination, says he will “proceed to build a platform and conduct a campaign that will meet the need of America” because the American people “are determined to remain free and self-governing.”
Governor Bricker, who passed through here yesterday en route to Spokane and a campaign tour of the West, said Wendell L. Willkie’s withdrawal from the race for the GOP nomination, had not changed his plans or those of the Republican Party.
He criticized the administration for its “encroachment of government on private lives.”
By Bertram Benedict
Speculation is rife on Wendell Willkie’s future course in the Republican Party, now that he has withdrawn from the 1944 presidential nomination race. Despite his decisive repudiation by Wisconsin voters last Tuesday, Mr. Willkie still has backing from a considerable number of individuals influential in the GOP.
Sometimes a defeated presidential candidate continues to dominate party affairs, sometimes he drops out of the party picture. A President defeated for reelection is more apt to steer his party’s course than is a candidate nominated only once, for the former has had more chance than the latter to build up an organization owing him personal allegiance.
In 1936, Governor Alf Landon after his defeat withdrew for a time from politics, although later he opposed publicly some of President Roosevelt’s foreign policy, and in 1944 has done some maneuvering in regard to the Republican presidential nomination.
For a time after Mr. Hoover left the White House in 1933, the Republican Party really was without definite national leadership until the 1936 Republican Convention fell under the domination of John D. M. Hamilton, Mr. Landon’s manager.
Smith-Raskob control ousted
In 1928, the Democratic Party after its disastrous defeat under Alfred E. Smith largely repudiated his leadership, except in the East. It is true that John J. Raskob, a Smith man, continued to be head of the Democratic National Committee, but as 1932 rolled around, James A. Farley and the Rooseveltians had little trouble in putting the Raskob group to rout in most states.
In 1924, John W. Davis let his party leadership go by default after his defeat. James M. Cox was also inactive after 1920, with most Democrats recognizing ex-President Wilson as their leader until his death.
In 1916, Charles Evans Hughes made no attempt to keep a grip upon the party helm, nor did William Howard Taft after 1912.
But Theodore Roosevelt, after seceding from the Republican Party in 1912 and running for the Presidency on a third-party ticket, resumed his active interest in Republican affairs. He really dominated the GOP on the eve of the 1916 convention, and might well have been the Republican nominee again in 1920 had he lived.
William J. Bryan continued to rule the Democratic Party after his defeat in 1896, the first year he was nominated, and he easily got the nomination again in 1900. Then he lost control, anxious as he was to retain it, but he regained it before 1908, the year of his third nomination.
Bryan promoted Wilson
Even after his third defeat, he was influential in Democratic affairs, and was largely responsible for the nomination of Mr. Wilson in 1912.
On the other hand. Alton B. Parker completely surrender his leadership of the Democrats after his defeat in 1904.
Farther back, the record continues mixed. Grover Cleveland stayed in the saddle after coming out second best in 1888, and he got his third nomination – and reelection – four years later. But ex-President Benjamin Harrison gave up leadership of the Republicans on his defeat in 1892. Gen. Hancock for the Democrats did the same thing after 1880.
Blaine (Republican) and Tilden (Democrat) continued to be the outstanding leaders of their parties after their defeats in 1884 and 1876, respectively; and in each case they probably could have had renomination if they had wanted it.
In trying to get the Republican presidential nomination in 1944, Mr. Willkie no doubt kept in mind the fact that the GOP has never renominated a defeated candidate for the Presidency.
Washington (UP) –
Postal officials said today that all post offices have been advised to be vigilant in honoring the free mailing privileges for ballots mailed to and from servicemen under the new soldier vote law.
The act provides that free airmail facilities will be used, wherever practical, for transportation of ballots to servicemen in this country and abroad, the first time such a privilege has been granted anyone. Even government agencies have to pay.
The Pittsburgh Press (April 11, 1944)
Manufacturers’ head denounces theorists
Doylestown, Pennsylvania – (special)
G. Mason Owlett, president of the Pennsylvania Manufacturers Association, in a speech here last night, charged the New Deal with seeking “to gain complete domination of all industry, all enterprise and all initiative.”
He said:
We see this in the limitations being cunningly imposed on free enterprise by rattle-pated theorists who seek to make over our economic system without admitting that it’s being socialized.
Red tape curbs enterprise
Mr. Owlett is also Republican National Committeeman from Pennsylvania and a candidate at the April 25 primary for delegate-at-large to the Republican presidential convention.
He said:
When victory is finally ours, we don’t want an America where every detail of our private lives is run by government brass hats. A man has to have a little room to move around in if he’s going to do his part to build a better world. He can’t do much when he’s all tied up with regulations, red tape, restrictions and trick taxes that rob him of all chance to live his own life and plan his own adventures.
Personal initiative destroyed
Mr. Owlett said the Roosevelt administration “has destroyed personal initiative and undermined the pillars of all enterprise.”
He said:
The greatest contribution that government can make toward the steady increase in the American standard of living aside from war production, sound money, proper tariffs and fair courts, will be made if government avoids competition in industry and confines itself to the strictest protection of equality and corporate ventures into new fields.
State may elect GOP Governor, Senator
By Thomas L. Stokes, Scripps-Howard staff writer
Cleveland, Ohio –
Ohio is going to be bitter fighting territory in November’s election.
It looks Republican in complexion today, and is likely to repeat in choosing a Republican governor and U.S. Senator.
But Democrats are hopeful that the war may swing the state in President Roosevelt’s column in November, in such a mixed result as has happened in recent years. In the presidential contest, Ohio is still labeled doubtful.
The outcome will depend upon this great industrial city, upon what size Democratic majority it can piled up to offset downstate Republicanism, increasingly powerful in the rural districts and small towns.
Carried by Roosevelt
Mr. Roosevelt carried Ohio in 1940 against Wendell Willkie by 147,000. Most of the margin came from Cleveland. He carried Cuyahoga County by 138,000.
Cleveland Democrats have a prize exhibit who may help considerably in turning the trick. This is big, broad-shouldered Mayor Frank J. Lausche, twice elected by thumping majorities. He is seeking the Democratic nomination for governor in a field of six candidates. His nomination is forecast.
He should help Mr. Roosevelt in this city, especially with the war the issue.
A second-generation American, of Slovenian parentage, he has the patriotic fervor of the second-generation American, and is an effective public speaker. Enjoys favor generally because of his admittedly fine administration as mayor.
Compared with Lincoln
He is a towering and commanding figure, with a great mop of black hair that waves about when he warms up on the platform. Sincere, serious, he rather cherishes the comparison to Abraham Lincoln.
He was in the Army in World War I, though he did not get overseas. He was a semi-pro baseball player, but he resisted the temptation to go into professional baseball; instead, studied law and began practice here in Cleveland.
Vying for the Republican gubernatorial nomination are Mayor James Garfield Stewart of Cincinnati, backed by the State Republican chairman and boss, Ed Schorr; Tom Herbert, attorney general, who has the support of Senator Harold Burton, and Paul Herbert, no relation, the Lieutenant Governor.
Stewart favored
Mayor Stewart seems to be favored.
Senator Robert A. Taft is not opposed for renomination and looks a sure winner in November. William G. Pickrel of Dayton, former Lieutenant Governor, is given the edge in a three-man contest for the Democratic senatorial nomination.
One week after the Wisconsin primary, some fourth-termers and Willkie adherents are claiming that he was defeated by isolationists, as the isolationists themselves contend.
We repeat the well-known facts, which are the opposite of that myth:
Thomas E. Dewey – who won while refusing to run – four years ago was no more and no less an isolationist than Mr. Willkie and President Roosevelt, who campaigned on the pledge of keeping this country out of war if possible. Since Pearl Harbor, Mr. Dewey has gone farther than Mr. Willkie or Mr. Roosevelt in endorsing an Anglo-American alliance, which is the opposite of isolationism – not to mention Mr. Dewey’s strong international plank in his 1942 campaign for governor, and his recent repudiation of “the Gerald L. K. Smiths.”
Mr. Willkie was not the extreme internationalist candidate in the Wisconsin primary. That was Harold E. Stassen, the advocate of a world state, which neither Mr. Willkie nor Mr. Dewey supports. Mr. Stassen ran a good second, in comparison to fourth place for Mr. Willkie.
All of which is unanswerable proof that isolationism did not defeat Mr. Willkie nor account for Mr. Dewey’s large vote.
But no such evidence is needed to disprove the charge that the Republicans of Wisconsin or of the nation are isolationist. The Republican Mackinac Declaration urged American participation in international organization rather more vigorously than any Democratic Party pronouncement. Republicans were as active as Democrats in passing the Fulbright and Connally resolutions for international; cooperation – resolutions long delayed by President Roosevelt.
The truth is that isolationism is insignificant today, as the small vote against the Connally and Fulbright resolutions demonstrated. If there were many isolationists, the name would not be used for smear purposes by politicians who court votes.
But isolationism could grow into dangerous proportions. It probably will, unless the President or his successor is more successful in curbing the European trend toward another balance-of-power system. Certainly, the American people will react bitterly if the joint Allied pledges are ignored, and if our Congressional commitment to democratic international organization is rejected by the big powers in favor of a puppet setup.
If fourth-termers would spend less time smearing their opponents with an imaginary isolationism, and more time trying to remove real causes of potential isolationism, they would serve their party and their country better.
By Peter Edson
Washington –
Rush D. Holt – remember? – the boy Senator of 1935 et seq., is trying to do a political comeback in his native West Virginia. He seeks the Democratic nomination for governor in the state primary May 9.
People who can’t forget young Mr. Holt’s violent pre-Pearl Harbor isolationism are trying to make out that this is the first test of how much isolationist strength and sentiment there may be remaining in this country after two and a half years of war.
To think that West Virginians would vote for or against a gubernatorial candidate just because of his America First leanings and utterances that long ago seems at first glance to be a bit farfetched.
There are lots better tests of isolationism coming up later. Most important is Senator Gerald P. Nye’s fight for renomination in North Dakota. To a lesser degree, a contest for the seat of D. Worth Clark of Idaho, and to a still lesser degree, the races of Bennett Champ Clark of Missouri and Robert A. Taft of Ohio.
When you get this far down in the scale, it isn’t so much a case of having been isolationist as of having been opposed to many of the administration policies.
Robert R. Reynolds of North Carolina has thus far stuck to his determination not to seek reelection to the Senate, though he did smile coyly when arch-isolationist Gerald L. K. Smith picked him as likely presidential timber a few months ago. Senator Burton K. Wheeler of Montana doesn’t have to seek reelection till 1946. That will be the real test.
Senate again?
In the case of Rush Holt, some of the effort to pin the isolationist skunk cabbage on him at this time stems from the fear of where he might go from there, if he should be elected to governorship this year. Under West Virginia law, a governor does not have to resign office while seeking election to federal office, and in 1946 West Virginia elects a Senator. Mr. Holt, it is feared, has his eye on coming back to Washington as a successor to Harley M. Kilgore.
Since he last graced the capital scene, Mr. Holt has (a) been married, (b) registered for the draft, (c) been elected to the West Virginia state legislature. Otherwise, blackout.
He has kept his trap shut on all the things about which he used to rant – the New Deal, the warmongers, John L. Lewis and the CIO who helped him to election in 1934 and whom he repudiated in 1935. Maybe people have forgotten. At any rate, it will be an interesting test of the old theory that the memory of the American electorate is short.
Editorial opinion
As to Mr. Holt’s chances next month, and as to the effect which Mr. Holt’s pre-Pearl Harbor isolationism may have on the primary, opinions of three West Virginia newspaper editors queried on these points are enlightening:
Mr. Holt’s pre-Pearl Harbor actions haven’t even been mentioned, according to S. G. Damron of The Charleston Daily Mail. This editorial says observers think Mr. Holt will get a big anti-administration protest vote.
Mr. Holt is an enigma to Malcolm T. Brice, editor of The Wheeling News-Register. Mr. Holt’s traditional anti-labor stand while he was in the Senate would argue against his getting any labor support in this election, says Mr. Brice, but if John L. Lewis told the state’s 120,000 miners to support an anti-administration candidate, his chances for nomination would be favorable! This editor points out, however, that all straw ballots indicate the state is going Republican in the fall anyhow, with or without Mr. Roosevelt, so Mr. Holt doesn’t matter.
From Clyde A. Wellman, editor of The Huntington Advertiser, comes the guess that Mr. Holt will be a sure winner in the primary, the basis of his strength being the fact that his opponent, Clarence Meadows, has been tagged, rightly or wrongly, the crown prince of Governor Neely and all anti-Neelyites are rallying to Mr. Holt. Mr. Holt’s isolationism is not considered a big factor.
Republicans are hoping Mr. Holt gets the nomination so they can beat him with the isolationist label.
By Jay G. Hayden
Washington –
Wendell L. Willkie, by his sudden withdrawal from the race for presidential nomination, has stolen the headlines from his own funeral.
The first reactions in Republican circles to Mr. Willkie’s announcement reflected complete satisfaction. He had discovered in Wisconsin that he was licked, something they had known for a long time, the party wheelhorses said, and most of them added that nomination of Governor Thomas E. Dewey on the first convention ballot is now inevitable.
Then, all at once, the thought seemed to pop up that Mr. Willkie, absolved of the role of self-seeker, might exercise more influence both as to candidates and policies than he has heretofore. Particularly there was speculation as to just what Mr. Willkie meant when he said:
I honestly hope that the Republican Party will nominate a candidate who will represent the views I stand for.
The inference plainly was that Mr. Willkie might decide to intervene for or against somebody. There is the suggestion even that he might bolt if he decides that the candidate nominated does not represent his views.
Dewey repudiates ‘Firsters’
Governor Dewey himself may have designed to head off any attempt by isolationists to lay claim to his Wisconsin victory when, in a statement just as the first returns were coming in, he declared that “the Gerald L. K. Smiths and their ilk must not for one moment be permitted to pollute the stream of American life.” In the same statement, Mr. Dewey renewed his commitment to a policy of American collaboration in world affairs.
The Wisconsin primary result, in fact, tended to dim the notion that only isolationists were opposed to the renomination of Mr. Willkie. LtCdr. Harold E. Stassen, who has gone even further than Mr. Willkie in urging sacrifice of American sovereignty to a better world order, ran surprisingly well.
Isolationism in Wisconsin, to the extent that it affected the primary result, probably worked on behalf of Gen. MacArthur. Lansing Hoyt, who directed the MacArthur campaign, headed the America First organization in the state before Pearl Harbor. Also, Gen. MacArthur’s candidacy took on an isolationist tinge from the support given him by The Chicago Tribune.
There can be no mistaking that the immediate effect of the Wisconsin primary was to increase greatly the probability that Governor Dewey will be the Republican nominee.
Big margin over Willkie
Despite his unquestionably sincere effort to remove himself from the contest, the 15 candidates who persisted in running under the Dewey label all were elected by substantial pluralities, and so were two others who adopted an ”uninstructed” designation but announced themselves for Mr. Dewey.
Based on the vote cast for the leading candidate on each delegate-at-large slate, Mr. Dewey polled more than 41% of the votes cast in the four-man contest. Mr. Willkie’s vote, in contrast, was about 10%.
The fact that Mr. Dewey beat Mr. Willkie so soundly in the only official election contest in which they have run against each other obviously makes it difficult for Mr. Willkie to turn against Mr. Dewey now without inviti9ngf the charge of sour grapes.
If Mr. Willkie should base his support of a presidential candidate on international policies, it would seem that he should pick Mr. Stassen who, in addition to having been an ardent internationalist ever since 1939, was Mr. Willkie’s floor manager in 1940.
When Mr. Stassen let it be known, two weeks before the Wisconsin primary, that he would accept the presidential nomination, however, Mr. Willkie sharply criticized him.
Mr. Willkie is known to believe that, in view of their common international views, Mr. Stassen should have supported him, and that if this had happened, his [Mr. Willkie’s] chances both in Wisconsin and Nebraska would have been greatly improved.
Omaha, Nebraska (UP) –
With Wendell L. Willkie out of the race for the Republican presidential nomination, LtCdr. Harold E. Stassen had an opportunity today to pick up 15 delegates to the GOP National Convention in the Nebraskan preferential primary.
Two full slates of delegates were entered on the Republican ticket, one pledged to vote for the former Governor of Minnesota on the first ballot only, and the other pledged to the favorite son, Governor Dwight Griswold.
Although Mr. Willkie was out of the race, his name was still on the ballot, which was printed before he announced his withdrawal. Because of that fact, he was expected to draw a sizable vote.
The Nebraska primary vote means nothing in delegating authority to the convention. The delegates, once elected, may vote any way they choose. When chosen by slate, however, it is understood generally that the delegates will vote for the winner of the primary on the first ballot at least.