Like Janus, the two-faced god of the Romans, the Crimson is looking in both directions during the period preceeding its straw vote. On Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays, until October fourteenth, editorials will appear by Helianthus and Mulus, two Crimson editorial writers of opposing political views. The former tends to look in the general direction of Kansas; the latter veers toward Washington.

Loudly hailing his reciprocal trade treaties as the biggest break yet in the "economic log jam", Secretary Hull displayed in Minneapolis last week a naive and childlike conception of the havoc which Roosevelt policies have brought to our foreign trade. The combined effects of AAA crop reduction and the reciprocal agreements have closed foreign markets to many of our vital crops like cotton, and at the same time opened the gates wide for the importation from abroad of products much better produced at home. Clearly a policy which calls for slaughtering cattle in the north-west and then importing more from Canada cannot appeal to the vote of any pocket-wise consumer.

Indeed the principle of the agreements threatens one of the salient points of the American constitutional scheme, for its takes from Congress the power to control tariff matters and gives it over to the whims of the executive branch. As Mr. Hull's treaties were published one by one, people whose interests had been vitally affected found themselves pushed out the door, denied hearings, and treated generally like unruly schoolboys if they voiced legitimate protests. Such dictatorial tactics may be acceptable in times of emergency but should never be allowed to get a foothold in the long-run system of American governmental practice.

As far as bettering conditions go, Mr. Hull's statistics knock the props from his contention that the treaties revived world trade, admitting that only $13,000,000 worth of last years increase is due directly to the agreements.

For the Secretary of State to have delusions of grandeur about such a paltry percentage of the annual flow of goods is typical of the muddle-headed thinking that pervades every nook and cranny of the New Deal. And for the promotion of peace, a cause which goes hand in hand with reciprocal treaties in the Secretary's mind, one should bear in mind that all the free trade leanings of the last Democratic administration with its Underwood tariff schedules, did not suffice to keep the country out of the most disastrous war in world history. Altogether, Mr. Hull has claimed the moon for his pet policy, and, as is always the case under the New Deal, the American public, producer and consumer alike, pays the piper.