Wednesday, July 7, 1926. Coolidge heads for the Adirondacks.

President Coolidge and family left for the Adirondacks, or more specifically White Pine Camp.  They'd remain there until September 18, 1926..

The resort still exists.

Last edition:

Monday, July 5, 1926. Coolidge's Sesquicentennial Address.

Labels: 1920s, 1926, Calvin Coolidge, Catholic, Christianity, Cristero War, Mexico, Philadelphia, Pope Pius XI, religion, Sesquicentennial of American Independence, the spoken word

Monday, July 5, 1926. Coolidge's Sesquicentennial Address.

President Coolidge delivered a major speech on American independence in Philadelphia.  It was delivered on this day, the holiday for the Sesquicentennial, as the prior day was Sunday.

Fellow Countrymen:

We meet to celebrate the birthday of America. That coming of a new life always excites our interest. Although we know in the case of the individual that it has been an infinite repetition reaching back beyond our vision, that only makes it more wonderful. But how our interest and wonder increase when we behold the miracle of the birth of a new nation. It is to pay our tribute of reverence and respect to those who participated in such a mighty event that we annually observe the 4th day of July. Whatever may have been the impression created by the news which went out from this city on that summer day in 1776, there can be no doubt as to the estimate which is now placed upon it. At the end of 150 years the four corners of the earth unite in coming to Philadelphia as to a holy shrine in grateful acknowledgment of a service so great, which a few inspired men here rendered to humanity, that it is still the preeminent support of free government throughout the world.

Although a century and a half measured in comparison with the length of human experience is but a short time, yet measured in the life of governments and nations it ranks as a very respectable period. Certainly enough time has elapsed to demonstrate with a great real of thoroughness the value of our institutions and their dependability as rules for the regulation of human conduct and the advancement of civilization. They have been in existence long enough to become very well seasoned. They have met, and met successfully, the test of experience

It is not so much, then, for the purpose of undertaking to proclaim new theories and principles that this annual celebration is maintained, but rather to reaffirm and reestablish those old theories and principles which time and the unerring logic of events have demonstrated to be sound. Amid all the clash of conflicting interests, amid all the welter of partisan politics, every American can turn for solace and consolation to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States with the assurance and confidence that those two great charters of freedom and justice remain firm and unshaken. Whatever perils appear, whatever dangers threaten, the Nation remains secure in the knowledge that the ultimate application of the law of the land will provide an adequate defense and protection.

It is little wonder that people at home and abroad consider Independence Hall as hallowed ground and revere the Liberty Bell as a sacred relic. That pile of bricks and mortar, that mass of metal, might appear to the uninstructed as only the outgrown meeting place and the shattered bell of a former time, useless now because of more modern conveniences, but to those who know they have become consecrated by the use which men have made of them. They have long been identified with a great cause. They are the framework of a spiritual event. The world looks upon them, because of their associations of one hundred and fifty years ago, as it looks upon the Holy Land because of what took place there nineteen hundred years ago. Through use for a righteous purpose they have become sanctified.

It is not here necessary to examine in detail the causes which led to the American Revolution. In their immediate occasion they were largely economic. The colonists objected to the navigation laws which interfered with their trade, they denied the power of Parliament to impose taxes which they were obliged to pay, and they therefore resisted the royal governors and the royal forces which were sent to secure obedience to these laws. But the conviction is inescapable that a new civilization had come, a new spirit had arisen on this side of the Atlantic more advanced and more developed in its regard for the rights of the individual than that which characterized the Old World. Life in a new and open country had aspirations which could not be realized in any subordinate position. A separate establishment was ultimately inevitable. It had been decreed by the very laws of human nature. Man everywhere has an unconquerable desire to be the master of his own destiny.

We are obliged to conclude that the Declaration of Independence represented the movement of a people. It was not, of course, a movement from the top. Revolutions do not come from that direction. It was not without the support of many of the most respectable people in the Colonies, who were entitled to all the consideration that is given to breeding, education, and possessions. It had the support of another element of great significance and importance to which I shall later refer. But the preponderance of all those who occupied a position which took on the aspect of aristocracy did not approve of the Revolution and held toward it an attitude either of neutrality or open hostility. It was in no sense a rising of the oppressed and downtrodden. It brought no scum to the surface, for the reason that colonial society had developed no scum. The great body of the people were accustomed to privations, but they were free from depravity. If they had poverty, it was not of the hopeless kind that afflicts great cities, but the inspiring kind that marks the spirit of the pioneer. The American Revolution represented the informed and mature convictions of a great mass of independent, liberty loving, God-fearing people who knew their rights, and possessed the courage to dare to maintain them.

The Continental Congress was not only composed of great men, but it represented a great people. While its Members did not fail to exercise a remarkable leadership, they were equally observant of their representative capacity. They were industrious in encouraging their constituents to instruct them to support independence. But until such instructions were given they were inclined to withhold action.

While North Carolina has the honor of first authorizing its delegates to concur with other Colonies in declaring independence, it was quickly followed by South Carolina and Georgia, which also gave general instructions broad enough to include such action. But the first instructions which unconditionally directed its delegates to declare for independence came from the great Commonwealth of Virginia. These were immediately followed by Rhode Island and Massachusetts, while the other Colonies, with the exception of New York, soon adopted a like course.

This obedience of the delegates to the wishes of their constituents, which in some cases caused them to modify their previous positions, is a matter of great significance. It reveals an orderly process of government in the first place; but more than that, it demonstrates that the Declaration of Independence was the result of the seasoned and deliberate thought of the dominant portion of the people of the Colonies. Adopted after long discussion and as the result of the duly authorized expression of the preponderance of public opinion, it did not partake of dark intrigue or hidden conspiracy. It was well advised. It had about it nothing of the lawless and disordered nature of a riotous insurrection. It was maintained on a plane which rises above the ordinary conception of rebellion. It was in no sense a radical movement but took on the dignity of a resistance to illegal usurpations. It was conservative and represented the action of the colonists to maintain their constitutional rights which from time immemorial had been guaranteed to them under the law of the land.

When we come to examine the action of the Continental Congress in adopting the Declaration of Independence in the light of what was set out in that great document and in the light of succeeding events, we can not escape the conclusion that it had a much broader and deeper significance than a mere secession if territory and the establishment of a new nation. Events of that nature have been taking place since the dawn of history. One empire after another has arisen, only to crumble away as its constituent parts separated from each other and set up independent governments of their own. Such actions long ago became commonplace. They have occurred too often to hold the attention of the world and command the administration and reverence of humanity. There is something beyond the establishment of a new nation, great as that event would be, in the Declaration of Independence which has ever since caused it to be regarded as one of the great charters that not only was to liberate America but was everywhere to ennoble humanity.

It was not because it was proposed to establish a new nation, but because it was proposed to establish a nation on new principles, that July 4, 1776, has come to be regarded as one of the greatest days in history. Great ideas do not burst upon the world unannounced. They are reached by a gradual development over a length of time usually proportionate to their importance. This is especially true of the principles laid down in the Declaration of Independence. Three very definite propositions were set out in its preamble regarding the nature of mankind and therefore of government. These were the doctrine that all men are created equal, that they are endowed with certain inalienable rights, and that therefore the source of the just powers of government must be derived from the consent of the governed.

If no one is to be accounted as born into a superior station, if there is to be no ruling class, and if all possess rights which can neither be bartered away nor taken from them by any earthly power, it follows as a matter of course that the practical authority of the Government has to rest on the consent of the governed. While these principles were not altogether new in political action, and were very far from new in political speculation, they had never been assembled before and declared in such a combination. But remarkable as this may be, it is not the chief distinction of the Declaration of Independence. The importance of political speculation is not to be underestimated, as I shall presently disclose. Until the idea is developed and the plan made there can be no action.

It was the fact that our Declaration of Independence containing these immortal truths was the political action of a duly authorized and constituted representative public body in its sovereign capacity, supported by the force of general opinion and by the armies of Washington already in the field, which makes it the most important civil document in the world. It was not only the principles declared, but the fact that therewith a new nation was born which was to be founded upon those principles and which from that time forth in its development has actually maintained those principles, that makes this pronouncement an incomparable event in the history of government. It was an assertion that a people had arisen determined to make every necessary sacrifice for the support of these truths and by their practical application bring the War of Independence to a successful conclusion and adopt the Constitution of the United States with all that it has meant to civilization.

The idea that the people have a right to choose their own rulers was not new in political history. It was the foundation of every popular attempt to depose an undesirable king. This right was set out with a good deal of detail by the Dutch when as early as July 26, 1581, they declared their independence of Philip of Spain. In their long struggle with the Stuarts the British people asserted the same principles, which finally culminated in the Bill of Rights deposing the last of that house and placing William and Mary on the throne. In each of these cases sovereignty through divine right was displaced by sovereignty through the consent of the people. Running through the same documents, though expressed in different terms, is the clear inference of inalienable rights. But we should search these charters in vain for an assertion of the doctrine of equality. This principle had not before appeared as an official political declaration of any nation. It was profoundly revolutionary. It is one of the corner stones of American institutions.

But if these truths to which the Declaration refers have not before been adopted in their combined entirely by national authority, it is a fact that they had been long pondered and often expressed in political speculation. It is generally assumed that French thought had some effect upon our public mind during Revolutionary days. This may have been true. But the principles of our Declaration had been under discussion in the Colonies for nearly two generations before the advent of the French political philosophy that characterized the middle of the eighteenth century. In fact, they come from an earlier date. A very positive echo of what the Dutch had done in 1581, and what the English were preparing to do, appears in the assertion of the Rev. Thomas Hooker, of Connecticut, as early as 1638, when he said in a sermon before the General Court that--

The foundation of authority is laid in the free consent of the people.

The choice of public magistrates belongs to the people by God's own allowance.

This doctrine found wide acceptance among the nonconformist clergy who later made up the Congregational Church. The great apostle of this movement was the Rev. John Wise, of Massachusetts. He was one of the leaders of the revolt against the royal governor Andross in 1687, for which he suffered imprisonment. He was a liberal in ecclesiastical controversies. He appears to have been familiar with the writings of the political scientist, Samuel Pufendorf, who was born in Saxony in 1632. Wise published a treatise entitled "The Church's Quarrel Espoused" in 1710, which was amplified in another publication in 1717. In it he dealt with the principles of civil government. His works were reprinted in 1772 and have been declared to have been nothing less than a textbook of liberty for our Revolutionary fathers.

While the written word was the foundation, it is apparent that the spoken word was the vehicle for convincing the people. This came with great force and wide range from the successors of Hooker and Wise. It was carried on with a missionary spirit which did not fail to reach the Scotch-Irish of North Carolina, showing its influence by significantly making that Colony the first to give instructions to its delegates looking to independence. This preaching reached the neighborhood of Thomas Jefferson, who acknowledged that his "best ideas of democracy" had been secured at church meetings.

That these ideas were prevalent in Virginia is further revealed by the Declaration of Rights, which was prepared by George Mason and presented to the general assembly on May 27, 1776. This document asserted popular sovereignty and inherent natural rights, but confined the doctrine of equality to the assertion that "All men are created equally free and independent." It can scarcely be imagined that Jefferson was unacquainted with what had been done in his own Commonwealth of Virginia when he took up the task of drafting the Declaration of Independence. But these thoughts can very largely be traced back to what John Wise was writing in 1710. He said, "Every man must be acknowledged equal to very man." Again, "The end of all good government is to cultivate humanity and promote the happiness of all and the good of every man in all his rights, his life, liberty, estate, honor, and so forth * * *."

And again, "For as they have a power every man in his natural state, so upon combination they can and do bequeath this power to others and settle it according as their united discretion shall determine." And still again, "Democracy is Christ's government in church and state." Here was the doctrine of equality, popular sovereignty, and the substance of the theory of inalienable rights clearly asserted by Wise at the opening of the eighteenth century, just as we have the principle of the consent of the governed state by Hooker as early as 1638.

When we take all these circumstances into consideration, it is but natural that the first paragraph of the Declaration of Independence should open with a reference to Nature's God and should close in the final paragraphs with an appeal to the Supreme Judge of the world and an assertion of a firm reliance on Divine Providence. Coming from these sources, having as it did this background, it is no wonder that Samuel Adams could say "The people seem to recognize this resolution as though it were a decree promulgated from heaven."

No one can examine this record and escape the conclusion that in the great outline of its principles the Declaration was the result of the religious teachings of the preceding period. The profound philosophy which Jonathan Edwards applied to theology, the popular preaching of George Whitefield, had aroused the thought and stirred the people of the Colonies in preparation for this great event. No doubt the speculations which had been going on in England, and especially on the Continent, lent their influence to the general sentiment of the times. Of course, the world is always influenced by all the experience and all the thought of the past. But when we come to a contemplation of the immediate conception of the principles of human relationship which went into the Declaration of Independence we are not required to extend our search beyond our own shores. They are found in the texts, the sermons, and the writings of the early colonial clergy who were earnestly undertaking to instruct their congregations in the great mystery of how to live. They preached equality because they believed in the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man. They justified freedom by the text that we are all created in the divine image, all partakers of the divine spirit.

Placing every man on a plane where he acknowledged no superiors, where no one possessed any right to rule over him, he must inevitably choose his own rulers through a system of self-government. This was their theory of democracy. In those days such doctrines would scarcely have been permitted to flourish and spread in any other country. This was the purpose which the fathers cherished. In order that they might have freedom to express these thoughts and opportunity to put them into action, whole congregations with their pastors had migrated to the Colonies. These great truths were in the air that our people breathed. Whatever else we may say of it, the Declaration of Independence was profoundly American.

If this apprehension of the facts be correct, and the documentary evidence would appear to verify it, then certain conclusions are bound to follow. A spring will cease to flow if its source be dried up; a tree will wither if it roots be destroyed. In its main features the Declaration of Independence is a great spiritual document. It is a declaration not of material but of spiritual conceptions. Equality, liberty, popular sovereignty, the rights of man - these are not elements which we can see and touch. They are ideals. They have their source and their roots in the religious convictions. They belong to the unseen world. Unless the faith of the American people in these religious convictions is to endure, the principles of our Declaration will perish. We can not continue to enjoy the result if we neglect and abandon the cause.

We are too prone to overlook another conclusion. Governments do not make ideals, but ideals make governments. This is both historically and logically true. Of course the government can help to sustain ideals and can create institutions through which they can be the better observed, but their source by their very nature is in the people. The people have to bear their own responsibilities. There is no method by which that burden can be shifted to the government. It is not the enactment, but the observance of laws, that creates the character of a nation.

About the Declaration there is a finality that is exceedingly restful. It is often asserted that the world has made a great deal of progress since 1776, that we have had new thoughts and new experiences which have given us a great advance over the people of that day, and that we may therefore very well discard their conclusions for something more modern. But that reasoning can not be applied to this great charter. If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final. No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backward toward the time when there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people. Those who wish to proceed in that direction can not lay claim to progress. They are reactionary. Their ideas are not more modern, but more ancient, than those of the Revolutionary fathers.

In the development of its institutions America can fairly claim that it has remained true to the principles which were declared 150 years ago. In all the essentials we have achieved an equality which was never possessed by any other people. Even in the less important matter of material possessions we have secured a wider and wider distribution of wealth. The rights of the individual are held sacred and protected by constitutional guaranties which even the Government itself is bound not to violate. If there is any one thing among us that is established beyond question, it is self-government - the right of the people to rule. If there is any failure in respect to any of these principles, it is because there is a failure on the part of individuals to observe them. We hold that the duly authorized expression of the will of the people has a divine sanction. But even in that we come back to the theory of John Wise that "Democracy is Christ's government * * *." The ultimate sanction of law rests on the righteous authority of the Almighty.

On an occasion like this great temptation exists to present evidence of the practical success of our form of democratic republic at home and the ever-broadening acceptance it is securing abroad. Although these things are well known, their frequent consideration is an encouragement and an inspiration. But it is not results and effects so much as sources and causes that I believe it is even more necessary constantly to contemplate. Ours is a government of the people. It represents their will. Its officers may sometimes go astray, but that is not a reason for criticizing the principles of our institutions. The real heart of the American Government depends upon the heart of the people. It is from that source that we must look for all genuine reform. It is to that cause that we must ascribe all our results.

It was in the contemplation of these truths that the fathers made their declaration and adopted their Constitution. It was to establish a free government, which must not be permitted to degenerate into the unrestrained authority of a mere majority or the unbridled weight of a mere influential few. They undertook to balance these interests against each other and provide the three separate independent branches, the executive, the legislative, and the judicial departments of the Government, with checks against each other in order that neither one might encroach upon the other. These are our guarantees of liberty. As a result of these methods enterprise has been duly protected from confiscation, the people have been free from oppression, and there has been an ever-broadening and deepening of the humanities of life.

Under a system of popular government there will always be those who will seek for political preferment by clamoring for reform. While there is very little of this which is not sincere, there is a large portion that is not well informed. In my opinion very little of just criticism can attach to the theories and principles of our institutions. There is far more danger of harm than there is hope of good in any radical changes. We do need a better understanding and comprehension of them and a better knowledge of the foundations of government in general Our forefathers came to certain conclusions and decided upon certain courses of action which have been a great blessing to the world. Before we can understand their conclusions we must go back and review the course which they followed. We must think the thoughts which they thought. Their intellectual life centered around the meetinghouse. They were intent upon religious worship. While there were always among them men of deep learning, and later those who had comparatively large possessions, the mind of the people was not so much engrossed in how much they knew, or how much they had, as in how they were going to live. While scantily provided with other literature, there was a wide acquaintance with the Scriptures. Over a period as great as that which measures the existence of our independence they were subject to this discipline not only in their religious life and educational training, but also in their political thought. They were a people who came under the influence of a great spiritual development and acquired a great moral power.

No other theory is adequate to explain or comprehend the Declaration of Independence. It is the product of the spiritual insight of the people. We live in an age of science and of abounding accumulation of material things. These did not create our Declaration. Our Declaration created them. The things of the spirit come first. Unless we cling to that, all our material prosperity, overwhelming though it may appear, will turn to a barren scepter in our grasp. If we are to maintain the great heritage which has been bequeathed to us, we must be like-minded as the fathers who created it. We must not sink into a pagan materialism. We must cultivate the reverence which they had for the things that are holy. We must follow the spiritual and moral leadership which they showed. We must keep replenished, that they may glow with a more compelling flame, the altar fires before which they worshiped.

 Coolidge is an underappreciated President.

 Pope Pius XI designated August 1, the feast day of St. Peter ad Vincula, as a day of special prayers for "the deliverance of Mexican Catholics from persecution and for pardon for their persecutors."

Monticello was acquired from the Estate of Jefferson Levy.  Levy had died in 1924 and had restored the structure.

Last edition:

Sunday, July 4, 1926. The Sesquicentennial.

Labels: 1920s, 1926, Battle of Little Big Horn, cavalry, Hitler Youth, Independence Day, North Platte River, Rodeo, Sesquicentennial of American Independence, Texas, Tourism, Weimar Germany, Wyoming (Casper), Wyoming National Guard

Friday, July 2, 1926. Air Corps established.

Mexican President  Plutarco Elías Calles published the vile Calles Law, effective July 31, which banned religious education, foreign priests and political commentary in religious publications, seizing church property and holding that worship could only be conducted inside of churches and under the supervision of local officials

I've written on Calles before, who in some ways got his just deserts, but the damage he did is still felt to this day.

The United States Army Air Corps was established as an expansion of the United States Army Air Service that had been created on May 24, 1918.  It was not, however, an independent service, nor did it enjoy the level of autonomy of the Navy's Marine Corps.  Nor should it have. . . even to the present day.

Canadian Governor General Julian Byng dissolved Parliament.and scheduled new elections for the House of Commons and Senate to take place on September 14, which seems like a rather long delay.

Silent Cal addressed the Press:

I am not sure just what time I shall leave, or rather what day, to go up to White Pine Camp. I can’t leave earlier than Tuesday and I should expect to get away certainly by Wednesday.

I haven’t any more information about the investigation by the Federal Trade Commission of the gasoline industry. Here is a speculative inquiry as to the effect of larger output on prices. I don’t consider myself any better qualified to discuss that than the gentleman who asked the question. I suppose it will be apparent that if the price went up undoubtedly that would stimulate production, and if it stimulates it enough an oversupply would be produced which would undoubtedly have the effect of a reduction in prices. There has been an increase in production. Whether that is taken up by an increase in consumption would be a matter that would have to be considered in order to make any estimate as to what effect the increased production would have on the price. I think there are some 3,000,000 more automobiles this year than there were last, which undoubtedly causes a larger consumption of gasoline than in past years. There aren’t any developments in the Fenning case which I have knowledge of, other than those which have been reported in the press.

Press: Could you say whether or not the Attorney General has made that report you have been looking for?

President: He hasn’t made any report. I have asked him, as I stated the other day to the conference, to keep watch of the situation and keep in contact with the Committee to see if any action is necessary on my part.

I shall go to the Capitol tomorrow to sign bills. I found after thinking it over that I recalled very clearly going up two years ago. There was some question about that in my mind that arose at a previous conference the as to whether the President went up at the interim recess of Congress, or whether he only went up when Congress adjourned on the 4th of March, or went out of existence. He goes up at each time. While it has never been decided I think by a court of last resort whether the President has authority after Congress recesses to sign bills, some bills have been signed, but it has usually been the practice not to sign bills after Congress adjourns. I recall very distinctly being up there two years ago. I know Senator Lodge was Chairman of the Committee, being the majority leader, and he came in and notified the President that the Senate was about to adjourn and inquired if there was any more business. Something occurred during his conference with me, so that the President Pro Tem adjourned Congress before the committee got back to report – adjourned the Senate.

Did you find out Mr. Sanders – did you fin d out whether any Copeland case had been sent over here from the Department of Justice?

Mr. Sanders: It has not come, Mr. President.

President: I had an inquiry as to whether any report had come over here from the Department of Justice relative to an application for a pardon for a man named Copeland in Buffalo. No such report has come here. No application has been received here for any pardon for a man by that name.

People were calling Aimee Sample McPherson's disappearance story into question.

 

Last edition:

Thursday, July 1, 1926. Sweden creates an air arm, Safeway and Skaggs merge, Canada goes back on the gold standard.

Labels: 1920s, 1926, Aircraft, Art, Canada, Corporate Capitalism, Distributism, Food, Grocery Stores, Independence Day, Swedish Air Force, Swedish Army, Swedish Navy, The Gold Standard

Friday, June 25, 1926. Milk Cow Blues

Freddie Spruell recorded the "Milk Cow Blues" in Chicago.

It was the first Delta Blues song to be recorded.

President Coolidge gave a press conference.

Press Conference, June 25, 1926

Date: June 25, 1926

Location: Washington, D.C.

I believe the program at Philadelphia for the 5th of July hasn’t been worked out. I shall send some one up there – I don’t know but what some one went up today to confer with the Mayor, is that right Mr. Sanders?

Mr. Sanders: Yes.

President: I suppose the Mayor is the head of the committee – to see just what I am to do up there. Of course in general I go there to deliver an address. Now, I expect to have an opportunity to drive around the exposition grounds or something of that kind while I am there. I suppose I am to have lunch served before the address. I don’t know just where the luncheon is to be, that being in the hands of the committee. I go up as their guest and leave such arrangements to be made by them for the time which I am to be there, as agreed upon by my messenger that I sent up there today.

I don’t think the Government has ever considered at all the sale of the bonds of foreign governments that it holds.

I haven’t any information about Secretary Kellogg’s letter in relation to the gathering at the Hague and the discussion of the codification of international law. I saw some reference to it in the press. Whether that was brought to my attention at the time that he sent it I don’t now recall. It would be in the usual course that he would do so, though I have referred several times in my messages and my addresses to the question of the codification of international law and have talked with him about it. Probably there isn’t anything in the letter other than that by which I had already made known to the Secretary my position.

I have just given out to the press a short statement in relation to farm legislation, which is the only statement that I shall make about it.

Press: Would you care to say something about any of the main features of the Fess amendment, what it was, etc?

President: Well, it is a bill that he introduced. It is a well known rule of evidence that when there is a document that the document is to be used in evidence and speaks very much better for itself than any description that might be made. I have a copy of it here I think. I would be glad to supply it to you. The main change in it is that it authorizes the President to make the appointments to the Board without getting recommendations of different farm organizations.

Last edition:

Saturday, June 19, 1926. Cadaverum cremationis.

Labels: 1920s, 1926, Art, Catholic, Christianity, Country & Western Music, Folk Music, Music, New York, Railroads, religion

Tuesday, May 25, 1926. Ukrainian assassination in Paris.

Former Ukrainian President and socialist, nationalist leader Symon Petiura was assassinated in Paris by Jewish Communist Anarchist Sholom Schwartzbard, who encountered him by happenstance.

Petiura had been head of the UNA which was responsible for the murder of thousands of Jewish Ukrainians.  He remains a controversial figure.  Schwartzbard would be acquitted of the charge of murder.  He later moved to South Africa.  He had served in World War One in the French Foreign Legion and the Russian Civil War as a Red Guard.  Following the war, he returned to France disillusioned with the outcome of the war.

President Coolidge signed the Public Buildings Act into law, providing funding for construction of federal buildings for the first time in over a decade.

Last edition:

Monday, May 24, 1926. National Parks created. Oil concessions extended. Tokachi erupts.

Labels: 1920s, 1926, 1930s, 1932, 1950s, 1958, Colonialism, Disaster, Geology, Great Smokey Mountains National Park, Iran, Iraq, Japan, Japan (Hokkaidō), Japanese national parks, Mammoth Cave National Park, Shenandoah National Park

Thursday, May 20, 1926. Trains and Planes.

President Coolidge signed the Air Commerce Act providing for the licensing of pilots and commercial aircraft.  He also signed the Railway Labor act abolishing the Railroad Labor Board.

The Air Commerce Act provided for an  Aeronautics Branch within the U.S. Department of Commerce to implement and enforce regulations and is depicted as a story element in the film The Great Waldo Pepper.  The film accurately portrays the role of the Aeronautics Branch in brining barnstorming to an end.

1930 photograph by Ernst Udet, German fighter pilot in World War One and Luftwaffe officer during World War Two, upon whom the movie character Ernst Kessler is based in the movie The Great Waldo Pepper.  Udet was a barnstormer in the 1920s.

Last edition:

Wednesday, May 19, 1926. Bad coinage idea.

Labels: 1920s, 1926, Calvin Coolidge, China, Currency, French Air Force, George Washington, Great Syrian Revolt, Kuomintang, Syria, Syria (Damascus)

Wednesday, May 19, 1926. Bad coinage idea.

The first and only US coin, so far, to feature a sitting President, the United States Sesquicentennial Half Dollar was issued.

Hopefully this break in tradition will never be repeated.

Zhang Renjie became the first Chairman of the Kuomintang.  His influence would later decline and he immigrated to the United States in 1937.

The French Air Force bombed Damascus.

Last edition:

Saturday, May 15, 1926.

Labels: 1920s, 1926, Art, children, Women

Friday, April 2, 1926. "Fianna Fáil"

Eamon de Valera proposed the name "Fianna Fáil" for his new political party which was scheduled to organize on May 16. "Fianna" (soldiers) and the Lia Fáil, the coronation stone for the ancient kings of Ireland, formed the basis of the name.

The hard to characterize republican party is still around.  It's political positions have shifted a great degree over the past century and indeed the ability to do so is a self acknowledged feature of the party.

Watts residents voted to become part of Los Angeles.

Calvin Coolidge declined an invitation to send American delegates to a League of Nations conference in Geneva to discuss America's reservations about joining the World Court.

Coolidge gave a press conference.

I think it would he very desirable to have some coal legislation at this session and my message perhaps goes into my opinions in detail. I judge that a good way to approach it would be to bring forward the Coal Commission report and have some hearings on it and bring out such a bill as the hearings and a consideration of the situation develop to be sound. There are two things that I should want to accomplish. One would be to enable the President to appoint a mediation board or something of that nature in case of a threatened strike or strike, and the other would be to set up some machinery for coal administration in ease it happened that there might be a scarcity of coal. I think those two things are quite fundamental. I don’t know just what other details might be necessary. But the way to find out about those things is to call in the parties that are interested and who are familiar with the situation on the side of those who are employed and on the side of the coal operators, and take their opinions; see what their arguments are. Congress itself very well represents the public, though I have no doubt that additional information in relation to public needs and requirements could be obtained from the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Commerce, its military aspects from the Secretary of War and the Secretary of the Navy, and its labor aspects of course from the Secretary of Labor.

I don’t know whether the regulations governing the enforcement of Mexican Land laws have been received at the State Department or not. I doubt very much if they have. I think they were promulgated only three or four days ago, and it takes some three or four days, as I recall it, to get here.

I think it has already been announced that Colonel Carmi Thompson will undertake to go to the Philippines for me. It is possible he may stop at Hawaii, and perhaps at Guam, though that hasn’t been finally determined on. It seems to me that there was a somewhat sentimental propriety in sending him. He is, as you know, the National Commander of the Spanish War Veterans. It was through their activities that we came in possession of the Philippine Islands. He also is a very warm friend of General Wood. He has known him and been associated with him, and of course it goes without saying that it is entirely a friendly mission. General Wood has been stationed there for nearly five years. He has had little opportunity to come to the States and I thought it would be a somewhat graceful thing on our part if we could send someone down there to confer with him and give him such reassurance as he may need, and indicate to him personally the desire of the Government up here to support him in every way. Then I would like to have a survey – it couldn’t be quite called an investigation – of what we are doing, what progress we are making in the Islands, what progress the Filipino people are making – because that is synonomous. I want to know how education is progressing, what is being done in the way of sanitation, policing; also the financial condition of the islands as relates to their Government and the economic condition as it relates to private enterprise there, and in general to make a survey and inspection to see what we can do to better conditions there.

Press: Do you care to tell us anything about the visit to the Philippines of the Secretary of War this year?

President: Well, that has been mentioned in the press. I think it said the Secretary of War was contemplating a trip around the world in which, incidentally, he might stop at the Philippines. I don’t think I care to comment on that. I leave that for you to get first hand information from the Secretary of War. I took it to be one of those articles that some times appear, that has no real foundation. I would like to have the Secretary of War go down there some time, but of course it is difficult for the Secretary of War to get away for that length of time to go to the Philippines, and on account of the very great uncertainty of his being able to go I want to have Colonel Thompson go. His mission isn’t political in any way – merely the objects that I have mentioned.

I have been willing to consider the needs of the Spanish War veterans. Perhaps it is appropriate in this case to speak of that I think in comparison with what is being done for those who took part in other wars. I think they are entitled to some consideration. The bill carrying $18,000,000 a year, nearly $19,000,000 is a more ambitious bill than I like to see Congress taking up. The bill presented some years ago carried some $8,000,000 or $10,000,000. I should look on that with much more favor than taking on an expenditure at this time of $18,000,000 a year. I think it provides for a service pension at the age of 60 or 62. I feel that that is quite young for a person to become a service pensioner of the United States. Merely because a person went to the Spanish War and reached the age of 60 or 62 years doesn’t seem to me quite enough to put him on a pension roll. So I think that some change ought to be made in this bill to make it more acceptable. That leads me to the reports that have been coming out from the Treasury in relation to the amount of income that we are deriving under the present law. It was anticipated I suppose by the Treasury – it certainly was by me – that this first payment would be quite large. Everyone knew that a new tax law was going into effect and that it would be a material reduction over the old tax law, and there had been an accumulation of profit s in the hands of a great many people which, had they been cashed in under the law that was in force before I became President, would have been almost confiscated by the Government. Some 50% of them would have been taken in some instances under the law as it was last year. Under the law of this year 28% I think would be the maximum, and I don’t know but what it would be a little less than that. Quite naturally, those people that have been waiting to take their profits took them. That was one thing that accounted for a considerable sale of securities. Now, of course, the sale of securities during the present year don’t go into last year’s taxes, but because it was perfectly apparent before the first of January that there was to be a reduction, a great many people took their profits. That wont occur next year because those profits have been taken. Then there was the reduction of certain things that were fairly certain, like admission taxes and the tax on capital stock, which was fairly certain, almost amounting to repeal in some instances, and the shifting from capital stocks to earnings. Earnings are always uncertain. Than another item is the fact that because their taxes were not so large this year, many people that heretofore have taken the option of making their payments quarterly, I understand are paying the entire amount in this first installment. So, before we can tell what money would actually accrue under the present law, we shall have to wait and see what the year’s experience may be. It is altogether probable that the next three quarters will not be anywhere near as large as this quarter has been. I have known all the time that where was every prospect that we would come out at the end of this year, June 30, 1926, with a small surplus. The chance of coming out with a surplus June 30, 1927 is not anywhere near so favorable, and it is for that reason that I have cautioned the Congress, through newspaper conferences, to beware of putting on permanent expenditures. We can pass some kinds of legislation and if the money wasn’t available to meet the expenditure we could delay it for a year or reduce it somewhat. We could do that with aviation legislation. We can do it with any kind of a building program. When we pass laws providing for pensions, of course that becomes fixed and has to be paid whether the income is large or small. That is why I think in my message I cautioned the Congress against additional gratuities on the part of the Government.

I think it will be necessary to have some legislation relative to the World War veterans act. If this question here refers to the amendment of the bonus bill, I have a good deal of hesitation about speaking of that, because I haven’t any accurate idea of just what it does — my general idea about it is that it calls for quite a large expenditure of money which I should think would be doubtful – of doubtful necessity.

The suggestion of the delegation from Minneapolis and St. Paul about enlarging the upper Mississippi River is under consideration at the War Dept. 1 haven’t any information about the details of it.

I have a person under consideration to be Captain of the Mayflower when Captain Andrews’ term expires. I can’t speak his name at the present time. It is some one that has been stationed in the Pacific, either on the Pacific Coast or out with the Pacific Fleet. I am not quite certain which.

I think that the invitation has been received from the League about a conference with nations to consider the reservations that we have proposed to our proposal to adhere to the statute of the Court. Of course it was a most courteous thing for the League to do, to extend that invitation to us, as it was a discussion of some matter in which we have some interest ,and quite properly they would inquire whether it was a matter that we wanted to discuss. As far as I have been able to determine, I don’t see any necessity for any discussion on our part. The reservations speak for themselves. So that I don’t expect or anticipate – unless some reason appears that I don’t expect to appear on further study – that we should consider it necessary to send any representative. We are dealing, as I have indicated before, directly with the nations concerned. We are adhering to the Protocol, which is the technical name of the Statute that created the Court and which is the action of forty-eight different nations. The League has nothing to do with it and can’t do anything with it if it wanted to. The only persons that oan make any change In it are the forty-eight nations, so that it would be out attitude that we would deal wit h them, rather than to undertake to deal through any other channel.

I haven’t made any careful study of the report of the actuaries on the cost of the various retirement proposals, except to note that it is evident that the cost to the Treasury would be very high. It has seemed to me that the proposals for retirement might be modified. I indicated a moment ago that I doubted if retirement at 60 or 62, or a pension at that age, was altogether justified, and I doubt very much if it ought to be asserted that a person who has reached the age of 60 years, because he has been in the employ of the United States Government, should thereafter draw a retirement pay. And I think the amount of $1200 proposed is rather high. Now, if they would increase the age to 70, of course that would cut down by 10 years the average length of time on which annuities would be paid, and if they would decrease the amount that would be paid, that would also make a reduction. I should think that something might be worked out in that direction that would be within the reasonable means of the Government to meet.

I am glad that some one is reading the Price of Freedom. There is a reference there to the landing of the Pilgrims which says that “As they landed a sentinel of Providence, humbler, nearer to nature than themselves, welcomed them in their own tongue.” I wouldn’t want to be held to the necessity of proving that a sentinentel stood on the shore and extended a welcome as they landed from the boat at Plymouth Rock, but it was a very curious and interesting circumstance that an Indian had been taken from this country over to England and there had learned the English language, and he became associated with the Pilgrims when they landed at Plymouth and was of very great assistance to them in interpreting between them and the Indians. Now, I am not certain what that Indian’s name was. So I wont undertake to give it. But those are the circumstances and that was the situation to which I referred. I can’t quote any particular authority for it. I think any book that deals with the landing of the Pilgrims and that general situation would mention that interesting fact.

Last edition:

Saturday, March 27, 1926.

Labels: 1920s, 1926, Art, Norman Rockwell

Friday, March 26, 1926. First tomb guard.

The first guard, during daylight hours only, was posted on the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier.

More on that:

Tomb of the Unknown Soldier Centennial: 100 Years Since the First Military Guard Posted March 26, 1926: This feature commemorates the centennial of the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier guard, marking 100 years since the first sentinel was posted March 26, 1926. The story traces the origins of the Unknown Soldier of World War I, the expansion of the tradition to honor unidentified service members from World War II, the Korean War and Vietnam, and the enduring mission of the Soldiers who maintain an unbroken vigil at Arlington National Cemetery.

Coolidge gave a press conference.

Date: March 26, 1926

Location: Washington, D.C.

I haven’t very much information about the proposal for the settlement of the Alien Property and German War Claims, or rather the return of the Alien Property and settlement of the German War Claims. I know that the Treasury is working on some plan. I think they have substantially worked out a plan and are trying to draw a bill to put it into operation. There is quite a difference between those two things. Before I can make much of any comment on it, I should want to see what the bill involved.

It is true that the United States has undertaken to extend its good offices to Chile and Peru to settle the Tacna and Arica boundry matter or disposition of the territory in those provinces. That doesn’t mean that the proceedings will be abandoned for the plebecite. It only means that they will be suspended and an attempt made to close up the matter by negotiation, rather than by carrying out for the present the provisions of the Arbitrator. I have several questions in relation to that.

I don’t know whether Captain Andrews will take part in the Geneva Conference. I think his name has been mentioned. I understood that the Navy Department would take several men with Admirals Long and Jones. Is it Jones?

Press: Yes.

I have had several conferences in relation to the dam on the Colorado River, usually known as the Bowlder Canyon project. I think that the Interior Department has worked out a plan for legislation which would give relief especially to Southern California that is very much in need of an opportunity to secure the use of the water, and which would also provide flood control for the Colorado River. The details of the hill I think are familiar to the members of the press or can be made so, if they want to read the bill that is before the Committee, so I wont undertake any analysis of it. I consider that a very important project and very much hope that some legislation can be passed at the present session of the Congress. The plan as it is contemplated will be a bill passed now, authorizing the Secretary of the Interior to negotiate with the localities interested for the sale of the water and power, subject to the approval of those contracts by the Congress. That would provide a method of financing and meeting the payments of interest and principal on the initial outlay of capital that would be necessary to complete the works.

I hadn’t thought anything about what would be done with the farm at Plymouth. I suppose I shall keep it. That isn’t the place where my grandfather’s grandfather, Captain John Coolidge, settled when he went to Plymouth, but it is one of the five farms he owned when he died and it is my understanding that he died there. It has always been in the family, ever since. I expect it will remain in my possession. I am undertaking to provide for it to be carried on as a farm for the next year. I have already spoken of the Bowlder Canyon.

I haven’t enough information about the proposal in Virginia for a National Park in the Shenandoah region to make any helpful comment about it. It is a recognized policy of our Government to establish National Parks in suitable regions. I have been interested in the project of establishing a National Park in that region, but about the details of it I haven’t enough information to give intelligent comment.

I am not familiar with the Pepper bill providing Government aid for shipping, by that designation. This is an inquiry from Mr. Montgomery. Just what is the bill?

Montgomery: That is a bill in which the Government makes refunds on the tariffs –

President: I don’t know enough about the provisions of that bill to comment on it. I should like to have legislation relative to the Shipping Board as soon as possible.

I think I have stated several times the only position that I can take in relation to retirement legislation. I thought that it was desirable to pass some legislation in relation to retirement, but I have been waiting before wanting to pass an opinion on the present pending bill to secure from the experts and the actuaries an estimate of what the expenditures would be. It has been represented to me that that would be ready in the very near future. Then we can pass some judgment on the desirability of legislation.

I haven’t any definite recollection about what Commissioner Fenning and myself said in relation to his outside activities at the time of his appointment. It was only very general, as I recall it. The salary of the Commissioner is small – what is it, $5,000?

Press: $7,500.

President: And I think something was said about that salary, and think I said that I didn’t see any reason why if a Commissioner had time that isn’t required in the discharge of his duties he couldn’t engage in some other business. I don’t know what the practice has been about that. I don’t know what the statute is. Sometimes the statute provides that when a person receives a specific appointment he shall not have any other position. I don’t know any such statute in relation to this position. My own desire in appointing Mr. Fenning was to get a very excellent man, which I thought he was, and at the same time have him make as small a personal sacrifice as would be necessary.

Last edition:

Saturday, March 20, 1926. Coup in China.

Labels: 1920s, 1926, Art, Birds, Chiang Kai-shek, hunting, Kuomintang, Republic of China, Wyoming Game & Fish Department