Letters, Dec. 15, 1941

(2 of 4)

BURTON K. WHEELER

United States Senate

Washington, D.C.

> TIME obtained its account of the V incident from a reliable correspondent and later received confirmation from two other sources. Senator Wheeler must know, but TIME cannot account for the flat contradiction.

The Hi-Way News poll to which he refers shows 34,000 votes for him to 12,000 against. It is apparently about as reliable as the earlier poll which TIME once mentioned, but neither seems to be taken very seriously in Montana.

In the 1940 campaign Senator Wheeler was elected by an unparalleled majority over a weak Republican candidate, E. K. Cheadle Jr., who was away serving in the Army at Camp Murray, Wash., and whose campaign, such as it was, was made by his wife. Most informed opinion in Montana seems to be that the Senator has lost strength in the past year but that if he had to stand for election today against any other candidate now in sight he would almost certainly win: the State is not too fond of his isolationism but he has a proved capacity for getting votes on other issues (farm aid, silver, labor legislation, etc.) and a strong political organization.—ED.

Gas at Changsha

Sirs:

Re your footnote in the Nov. 10 issue on last confirmed use of gas, by Italians in Ethiopia, following the story of Jack Belden, a fellow correspondent in the Far East who encountered Japanese use of gas in the battle of Ichang:

One of the six points on which I was jailed by the Japanese police last year was a story on the use of gas by their troops at the first battle of Changsha [1939]. The Japanese were trapped and, in their haste to retreat, used some gas, but buried most of the cylinders, which the Chinese captured.

The Japanese militarists thought, perhaps, they were far away from foreign eyes, but a number of foreign military attaches and correspondents went to Changsha. There they were shown the captured materials. . . .

JAMES R. YOUNG

Pittsburgh, Pa.

No Seizure

Sirs:

May I call gravely to your attention the astounding wording on the first page of your news section in your Dec. 1 issue?

You state, following a description of the well-being of President Roosevelt and as though it were a concomitant thereof, the following: ". . . He had seized a country—Dutch Guiana (Surinam)."

My knowledge of English may be limited, but the dictionaries do not deny my assumption that to "seize" is to take by force.

May I respectfully call to your attention that the sending of American troops to Surinam came about as the result of friendly negotiations between The Netherlands Government and the United States; that the sovereignty of the Kingdom of The Netherlands over Surinam never was and is not now questioned; that the agreement . . . is merely for the period of the emergency; that the American troops are to be withdrawn the moment hostilities are ended, etc., etc. . . .

DR. A. LOUDON

Netherlands Minister Royal Netherlands Legation Washington,. D.C.

> "Seize" was an unfortunate word, but TIME'S story went on to explain clearly and at some length that the occupation was made with full Netherlands consent—not as an invasion.—ED.

Origin of Ogontz

Sirs: