Judge, 1922-11-18 · page 15 of 36
Judge — November 18, 1922 — page 15: what you’re looking at
A restored page from Judge, 1922-11-18. Page through the whole issue in the reader above.
📄 Transcribed text from this page (OCR, searchable)
Machine-transcribed from the original scan — historical spelling and the odd misread are preserved.
Will forris Hi Lt. J. B. Heffernan, U. EDITORIAL Avast, Ye Lubbers! UDGE is not a naval architect—he is the only editor in J the country who is not. He finds it difficult, therefore, to discuss the relative merits of ship structure ment. But when it comes to the men of the Exhibit A is his Navy Number. One great benefit from the treaty limiting naval arma- ment, if France and Italy ever ratify it, will be the transfer of cmphasis in our thoughts of the Navy from ships to men. let us assume that complete ratification will come. Then already the number and strength of our ships are settled; the race to build the most and mightiest dreadnoughts is over. Our major concern is now with officers and gobs, where it al- ways should have been. SiN id arma- ‘y—well, “The shots that hit are the shots that count,” was one of T. R.’s little reminders that warships without well-trained and adequate crews might as well be at the bottom of Scapa Flow; much better, because there they cost the taxpayer nothing to maintain them, nor do they delude him into thinking they constitute a navy. The difficulty seems to be that too many Americans still think of our Navy in terms of ships, and too many Congressmen stand ready to take advantage of this attitude of mind to cut the Navy personnel in half and refuse money for maneuvers which they'd like to spend on pork. Rather than permit them thus to scuttle the “y may we suggest that all such Congressmen be collected in some remote fjord and quietly sunk? tot Our Representatives at Washington go florists one better. Their motto is: “Say It With Seeds.” se Time Out! T IS undoubtedly a wholesome sign that football should I ave reached such heights of popular favor in the United ates. Its fine Spartan atmosphere reflects credit. on national taste and temper. Our modern world affords no more spirited spectacle than that of two elevens in a frantie battle between banks of normally decorous partisans gone berserk, the whole scene keyed up with sentiment, with the frosty air, with the autumn setting, to a two-hour orgy of youth. Yet each man kills the thing he loves. Hence, no one should be surprised to read the followin a random dispatch from Cambridge to the New York World: “There will be no football at all on Soldiers Field to-morrow, except for the Freshmen. All the varsity. players, with the substitutes, have been given a holiday until Tue: A holiday! « taking this use of the word too seriously. But its naiveté is worth a pause. How long have holidays from sport been considered welcome? We are re- minded of the theory behind organized cheering that the s require encouragement to continue their effort. and sacrifice for Alma Mater; of those battle hymns of Academe, “I'd die for dear old Rutgers,” “For God, for Coun- Perhaps w« 13 and for Yale,” ete., which imply that the end and aim of football is not sport for the players, but some sort of pres(s)tige for the institution. President Meiklejohn, of Amherst, in a discussion of college sport in the current Atlantic Monthly, makes admission of this point of view, even on the part of faculties. If it really prevails then football becomes a serious pursuit and not only are holi days for the players in order, but the institutions they adver- tise by dint of their extra-hazardous grind should pay them handsomely for value received. Why not a national union of football players to insist upon just wages from their employers and at least a forty-four hour week? Followed possibly Murder! by the appointment of a Landis? The Tiger UDGE wishes to welcome orges Benjamin Euge Clemenceau to the land that more than fifty years ago knew him as a starveling tutor. He comes here, we are told, to receive the homage that France withholds, to find sup- port for his policies at the seat of world power. But we like to fancy there is also lurking rian bosom a strong element of curiosity. in his octog Not a romantic curiosity such a mated Conrs rch of his Youth. A man, e one is not given to hunting up his old loves in an effort to recon- struct the fond fabric of memory. It is hard to believe that the ferocious Clemenceau was ever inclined to such indulgences. But not every man is permitted to revisit in transcendent triumph the scene of his early struggles. It is an opportunity not lightly to be ignored. He will find the old place changed, and not more so than in the warmth of its welcome. As a starter JupGE offers three cheers, and a Tiger! Frenchman, of ¢ A Theory Pies the most appalling thing about the Hall-Mills murder is the behavior of the crowds that have infested the scene of the crime. Of the crab apple tree under which the bodies were found there is left now only a stingy little stump gnawed close to the ground by souvenir hunters. The empty Phillips farmhouse beside it is being devoured piece by piece in the same manner. It is hard to account for a mania of this sort unless on the theory that man’s remote ancestors were not monkeys at all but insects and these people who would deface the Holy Sepulcher itself are victims of atavism. Some one page Mr. Bryan. ttt Why doesn’t Bryan confound his enemies by alluding to them as baboon companions? ey Franklin Speaking HAT prohibition has done to America,” by Fabian Franklin, is the title of alittle book whose importance is in inverse ratio to its size. We give our readers one guess as to its general purport. But don’t assume because you h ziven the subject the benefit of much thought and indigestion that ranklin has no fuel to add to your flames. The value of his book lies in its disregard of the usual material of such discussion in favor of the more fundamental aspects of national prohibition as measure of government. The question whether the drinkin of liquor is good or bad for the race, even the question wheth prohibition can be made to prohibit, nd beside the infinitely greater question whether American institutions can survive the centralized despotism that prohibition has set up in Washington. a is dw But there! We had made up our mind to mention this topic with as little passion as characterizes the book. However, if the reader thinks that’s an easy thing to do, let him read the book and try it himself. comicbooks.com