A402 through the War Labor Board. Expanded conciliation services of the Government, the patriotic motive, union agreements not to strike during the war, and the fact that many employers were operating on a cost- plus basis or receiving high prices for their goods, all contributed toward keeping work stoppages at a comparatively low level. That period also produced another inter- esting development in labor-management relations. Because the War Labor Board was not able to promptly deal with requests from labor, and because decisions of the Labor Board were frequently not satisfactory to the unions involved, many of the strikes during this period were directed at War Labor Board action—or lack of it—rather than the em- ployer himself. The public made comparisons between the comparatively low pay and dangerous life of the men in the armed services, and the high pay and normal life of the man working in factories. The result was violently in- creased public reaction against strikes. In 1948 public demand brought about the Smith-Connally Act which provided princi- pally for a 30-day cooling-off period, and for @ secret ballot before a strike. Again, the purpose of the bill was to reduce the number of strikes. Instead, because the bill actually provided a legalized method for striking, the number of strikes increased, until in 1945 that part of the War Labor Disputes Act was repealed. With the end of the war, rising prices, and reduced working hours, the country saw a rash of serious strikes. While the House of Representatives was debating new ‘labor leg- isiation in early 1946, the number of man- days lost as a result of labor disputes was at the highest level in our history. Again, something had to be done to diminish labor disputes. Serious work stoppages were oc- curring in practically every major industry. Production was crawling, strikes in public utilities were interfering with normal serv- ices the public expected. The difficulties of conversion to peacetime production were in- tensified. Violent remedies were proposed on both sides. Among legislators and the public alike, there was an increasing feeling of hopelessness. Almost no two people could agree as to what steps should be taken. The Government had, in general, agreed that labor could obtain whatever wage in- creases were possible without price increases, on the theory that the elimination of over- time and the down-grading of workers would in effect reduce the total wage payments. Demands for increased wages which man- agement felt it could not meet in October 1945 without increasing prices, became im- possible in 1946 because of interruptions in production and increased unit costs. During this critical time, in both the House and the Senate, new legislation was being prepared. The Seventy-ninth Con- gress thought it had found the answer in the Case bill, which wag killed hy Presidential veto. The Case bill contained two major sections. The first dealt with basic collec- tive-bargaining relationships, the second with specific abuses of union activity. Under the first category the Case bill asked for a 60-day cooling-off period during which wage and working conditions would remain as they were. A Federal Mediation Board was created in the Department of Labor, and the bill provided for a clause in all agree- ments stating that final and binding adjust- ments of all grievances arising under the agreement must be made. The second group of provisions in this bill imposed upon unions legal responsibilities and restraints believed to be equal to their economic power. These provisions were largely concerned with certain interferences with trade, restrictions on certain payments to labor organisations, joint management of welfare funds, restric- tions on the organization of foremen, re- strictions on secondary boycotts. They also make unions suable in Federal court for vio- lation of contract. Though passed by both the House and the Senate, this bill did not become law because of the Presidential veto. By election time in 1946 strikes had de- creased somewhat, and still the results of that November election are regarded by many as a mandate from the people to the Repub- lican Party to do something constructive to permanently reduce the number of strikes. The result has been that some sixty or seventy proposals have already been made in the Eightieth Congress designed to accom- plish this end. The purpose of most of these bills ts the same as that of the Wagner Act, “to diminish labor disputes.” The methods suggested are somewhat different. By and large, these proposals in one form or another cover the following points: They give the employer a degree of free speech allegedly denied him under the Wagner Act; they require that unions make their internal organizations more democratic; they require that certain types of strikes such as sympathy strikes, jurisdictional strikes, strikes in pub- lic utilities, strikes against the Government, etc., be outlawed; they narrow the base on which collective bargaining can occur by lim- iting such bargaining to individual plants, regions, or segments of industry; they re- quire cooling-off periods before work stop- page; they require compulsory arbitration; they require that unions be made legally re- sponsible by forcing them to incorporate and register basic information; or they out- law certain alleged unfair labor practices such as coercion, calling strikes without a majority vote by secret ballot, feather bed- ding, mass picketing, secondary boycotts, etc. Of course, not all are included in any one bill. On the Senate side, the principal legisla- tion proposed are the bills introduced by Senators CapeHarT and Wier in regard to portal-tc-portal pay; the Ball-Taft-Smith bill designed to provide additional facilities for mediation of labor disputes, to improve procedures for collective bargaining, and to make labor organizations legally responsible; Senator Byrerp’s bill to prohibit the closed shop in industries affecting commerce; Sena- tor Morsz's bill to provide additional facili- ties for mediation of labor disputes; Senator Batu’s bill in regard to the closed shop; a series of bills by Senator O'DANIEL concerned with amendment or repeal of the Wagner Act; Senator Bau’s bill to amend the Wagner Act to preclude alleged monopolistic prac- tices; the bill introduced by Senators Pepper, Morray, and THomas to amend the Fair La- bor Standards Act in regard to hours and wages; Senator Lucas’ resolution to direct a study of labor relations; and Senator Bran’s resolutions requiring labor organizations to incorporate in order to receive protection un- der the Wagner Act. From all these proposals undoubtedly will come one or two comprehensive labor bills. It is also probable that the House of Repre- sentatives will produce an omnibus bill. Since work stoppages are now at a com- paratively low level, we have an opportunity to carefully consider the type of legislation that will do most to accomplish the purpose so frequently given for such legislation, that of diminishing labor disputes. I should make one exception here, the damaging portal-to-portal pay suits that have arisen as a result of the indefiniteness of the Fair Labor Standards Act must be settled immediately. Except for these portal-to-portal cases, the public is probably not now so immediately concerned about labor legislation as it was in ‘1046, However, there is still a strong feeling that the majority of the people have re- quired this Congress to somehow curb labor's abuses of the freedoms recently granted. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD While, as I have said, the new legislation proposed in the Eightieth Congress gener- ally deals with a number of subjects, the methods of dealing with these subjects are quite different. The approaches vary from those which would literally bar labor's privi- lege of striking to those which would actu- ally increase the wages of labor. Generally, they limit tn one way or another the right of labor to strike at any time under any condl- tions. Many union leaders are convinced the destruction of unions is the real purpose behind any limitation of the freedom to strike. They argue that, while labor has in the strike the potent weapon, the working man cannot afford to use it indiscriminately because of the loss of wages incurred. Man- agement, on the other hand, generally con- tends that work stoppages must be reduced by methods varying from mild moral obliga- tion not to strike, to a legal prohibition of strikes in certain industries. They empha- size generally that strikes are practically always an inconvenience to the public and that they harm, directly or indirectly, inno- cent parties, There are, needless to say, arguments to be presented on each side of each specific proposal in regard to labor-management re- lations. Our tendency in the past to swing from one extreme to the other in regard to these relations has never produced a final solution to this most dificult of our prob- lems. Therefore, it seems to me that if we, as Members of our new Republican Congress, are to serve our country best, we are charged with the duty of providing the type of legis- lation and the kind of progress that will make possible greater satisfaction to the public and consequently greater national peace and greater production. In doing this, we cannot accede to the extreme demands of either side. We cannot afford to have an- other series of stop-gap measures, I am con- vinced that the Wagner Act and the Fair Labor Standards Act are not only too in- definite, but they have made possible abuses and misuses by some unions who may choose to ignore the common interest. It is my conviction that in whatever labor legislation we provide, we should maintain labor's right to organize and labor’s right to stop work. At the same time, we should make sure that the strength of labor unions cannot become so great as to make it possi- ble for any man or union to bludgeon man- agement or the Government into granting any demand through the threat of the strike weapon. We should provide machinery through which arbitration could be accom- plished, knowing full well that granting the right of bargaining between management and labor in itself will not always produce a peaceful solution. Since our common purpose is to reduce labor-management disharmony, we should make sure that labor can no longer cripple production through strikes having little or nothing to do with the immediate working conditions of the laborers involved; that labor cannot create monopolies too strategic or too powerful for even Government to con- trol; that labor cannot organize for the pur- pose of excluding other than a chosen mem- bership; and that individual members of unions are protected by increased democracy within the union. On the other hand, any legislation should protect the laboring man by making sure that management cannot through coercion or threat prevent his join- ing an organization of other laboring men; that management cannot by pitting one man against another lower the wages or increase the working hours of both, and that man- agement cannot refuse to bargain in good faith on matters concerned with working conditions, Keeping tn mind our long history of col- lective bargaining and our long history of
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD industrial strife, 1t is my earnest hope that we as legislators wMll seek to provide a fair and far-reaching solution to these difficul- ties. It is my further hope that you, the women of the Republican Party, will take an active part in making sure that we maintain the principles of our party in advancing not the interests of any segment of society, but the interests of all people in our Nation by demanding that labor disputes be diminished by fair, equitable, and far-sighted measures. Petroleum Conservation and Farm Surpluses EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KARL STEFAN OF NEBRASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr. STEFAN. Mr. Speaker, farm crops amount to one of our greatest national resources. Exceeded only by the food value of farm crops is the value of the industrial things that can be made from these crops. All through the recent war there was abundant demonstration of the great variety of uses that can be made of products synthetically created from the common farm crops. These synthetic products not only made war supplies more abundant but actually relieved shortages of the most critical nature. The war hastened the exhaustion of our great, natural resources of petroleum. As the Nation moves away from the war period the threat of agricultural sur- pluses increases. Rarely have national problems dovetailed in more convenient manner than in these two cases of ex- haustion of national petroleum supply and mounting agricultural surpluses. Rubber and motor fuel can be made in abundance and quality from the alcohol derivatives of grain crops. When rub- ber, motor fuels, and other commodities needed in volume in our national econ- omy are made from grain alcohol the use of petroleum is reduced, our national reserve is conserved, and the products of American farms are profitably used. This problem, which at the same time is an opportunity, is astutely understood by the new Governor of Nebraska, the Honorable Val Peterson. I include in these remarks copy of a telegram dis- patched by Governor Peterson to the President of the United States 2 days ago: LINCOLN, NzesR., February 3, 1947. Hon. Harry 8, TRUMAN, The President, The White House, Washington, D.C.: In recent months officials in your Depart- ments of Interior and State have indicated that our national petroleum resources would be exhausted in a relatively short period— possibly 25 years. I appreciate these state- ments are controversial. Now the Senate Oil Investigating Committee declares this coun- try could not fight another major war if it had to rely on its own petroleum resources alone. It urges bold steps to get synthetic- fuel production ready. These statements, if supported by facts, make the action of Federal agencies in switching from industrial alcohol made from farm products to a petroleum base in the manufacture of synthetic rubber absolutely indefensible in spite of the present cost dif- ferential favorable to petroleum. Alcohol is made from starch, which is air, sunshine, and water, and our farms, consistent with good soil-management practices, can produce an endless supply. The United States must never be depend- ent again on the foreign-owned rubber cartel which formerly juggled rubber prices at will. We would be paying exorbitant prices for rubber today were it not for our present syn- thetic-rubber plants. Rubber shortages nearly stalled our military efforts in the re- cent war, Further, the bane of farming, surplus pro- duction, is just around the corner, 2 or 3 years away. Scarcity production is inde- fensible by any standard and extremely costly to our taxpayers, Nebraska and the Midwest are determined that the black night of farm depression not be permitted to descend on our homes again. Our hope lies largely in the chemurgic movement and the continua- tion of operation of the Government alcohol Plants at Omaha and Muscatine, Iowa, and others is a vital part of that movement, Over 600 products are made from industrial alcohol. Had America’s rubber alone been made in the period between World Wars I and II from industrial alcohol made from grains there would not have been a single surplus bushel of grain and no farm depres- sion in the degree we experienced. Militarily we should conserve oll. Mili- tarily we must maintain adequate synthetic- rubber-production facilities. Agriculturally we must eliminate farm surpluses in a sound, constructive manner, As an example, today millions of bushels of Government-owned potatoes are being destroyed. These could easily be converted into industrial alcohol and stock-piled for future use. These objec- tives can be reached by producing synthetic rubber from industrial alcohol made from farm products. Our entire national economy would reap eventual benefit from such a pro- gram Only the foreign-owned cartel which shamelessly exploits native populations would be in any manner injured. Midwesterners look to you, as one of them, to take action that will benefit not only agriculture but the entire Nation. VAL FETERSON, Governor of Nebraska, How Roosevelt Double-Crossed the Poles EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ALVIN E. O’KONSKI OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr. O’KONSKI. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- orp, I include the following editorial from the Washington Times-Herald of Febru- ary 5, 1947: How Rooseve.t DousiE-Crossep THE Po.ss Surely by now there is nobody left in the Western World who would argue that Poland got a square deal out of World War II. The record is plain enough. In March 1939, the Poles were still in a position to sell out to Hitler with minimum losses or stand up to him and risk all for victory. They were promised unconditional full aid by Britain and France, and so defied Hitler. Late in August 1989, Hitler and Stalin stunned the whole world by making a joint military pact, promptly followed by their joint invasion of Poldnd, A403 The Poles fought them both and when they could no longer maintain a government in Warsaw they set up a government in exile. And s0 Poland became the worst battle- ground of the whole war, ravaged first by the Germans, then by the Russians, for six terrible years. But the promises of Britain and the United States, both direct and plainly implied in the Atlantic Charter and the speeches of Churchill and Roosevelt, gave the Poles every right to believe that in victory over Ger- many Poland would be restored to prewar independence. It was a false hope based on false prom- ises, as the elections just ended in Poland Plainly have demonstrated and as President Truman only yesterday acknowledged in his bitter criticism of those elections to the new ambassador of Russian-controlled Poland. The fact is that Poland has simply swapped the domination of Hitler for Stalin, and at the most ghastly price ever inflicted upon any people in the modern world. Not even the defeated Germans and Japa- nese have been punished so brutally as the Poles in “victory,” for thelr punishment in- cludes along with the loss of men, material wealth, and land, also their loss of faith in us. They were double-crossed by Roosevelt, flat out. He promised them something from the United States of America and he did not keep his word. Why did he promise that which he could not or would not deliver? ‘You will find the answer in a new book by Poland’s ex-am- bassador to the United States and ex-pas- sionate admirer of Roosevelt, Jan Ciechan- owski. The name of this book is Defeat in Vic- tory. It is 397 pages long, was published in 1947 by Doubleday & Co., and costs $3.50. WHY ROOSEVELT BETRAYED POLES It is the detailed story of Ciechanowski's experiences in this city trying to save his country from the Russians and has no equal as a dictionary and handbook on how a President of the United States can use his great office to deceive, betray. and abuse the confidence of a helpless and suffering people. Deteat in Victory should be in every pub- lic-school library for the educntion of gene erations to come concerning another piece of the truth about Roosevelt. Why did he deceive the Poles? Why did he not have the courage to tell the Poles the truth—that it was beyond his will or his power to rescue them from Stalin as well as from Hitler? Ciechanowski gives a clue: “I was frequently asked by election agents of the New Deal what I thought would be the most appropriate way to obtain the support of what they called ‘the Polish vote’ for the Democratic machine (in Roosevelt's term IV campaign of 1944). “I was ropeatedly told bluntly by the New Dealers of the Palace Guard that the appoint- ment of Ambassador Lane to replace Biddle as American Ambassador to the Polish Gov- ernment on September 2, 1944, was not only & proof of the President's ‘abiding’ interest in Poland but also a political move which they hoped would be reflected by the Polish vote.” BIDDING FOR THE POLISH VOTE IN 1944 Ciechanowski writes further that in spite of all these maneuvers the Polish-American Congress, representing most voters of Polish extraction, was still doubtful that Roosevelt was positively for a free and independent Poland until he saw Charles Rozmarek, head of their organization, at Chicago on October 18, 1944. In that interview Ciechanowski reports that Roosevelt “definitely promised” Roz- marek “to take active steps to insure Po- land’s independence.” Whereupon the main Polish-language press and the Polish-American Congress
A404 came out with a wham for Roosevelt's re- election to term IV. He was reelected. And thereafter the Poles began to dis- cover what they had bought with their votes. No need here to deacribe it all again. The record shows plainly enough that even as he was promising the Poles one thing Roosevelt ‘was assuring Stalin on the side by word and deed that it was all just campaign talk. The details of how the truth came home to Clechanowski and the Poles in general are blood-chilling to read, but worth every citizen’s attention as a lesson in Roosevelt's faithlessness and lack of character. NEW DEAL PLANS FOR F. D. R. IN 1948 Here is one fair sample, reporting a meet- ing after the election between Ciechanowski and Harry Hopkins who was even then on the way to Stalin: “Hopkins was in a jovial mood. He as- sured me that he would do his best, al- though it was no easy matter to oppose Stalin. He then added jokingly: “We have to think of other very im- portant things.’ “I asked him what things could be more imporfant at this time than to lay the foun- dations for the United Nations’ collaboration im a secure postwar world on the basis of American principles. He laughed and an- swered in his humorously cynical way: “why, we have to prepare the President's election campaign of 1948.’” Hopkins may have thought that was funny, but he certainly was not joking. The only joke was on the Poles. Those few still alive to receive Stalin’s cruel mercies, Foot-and-Mouth Disease EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. GEORGE W. GILLIE OF INDIANA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr. GILLIE. Mr. Speaker, under leave granted to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I would like to include the fol- lowing editorial from today’s Washing- ton Post: FOOT-AND-MOUTH The excellent relations existing between Mexico and this country will be fortified by President Truman's impending visit to Mexi- co City. One problem above all has arisen which should enlist the prompt and serious concern of both countries. This is the out- break of foot-and-mouth disease in Mexico. The disease has been traced to Mexico's im- port from South America of a few hundred bulls from an infected region. Mexico per- sisted in letting them in, despite the admin- istration’s representations to the government that such a course would be unwise. It was then decided on the American side to close the border as a safeguard for our Southwestern cattle. However, for some reason that Secretary Anderson may explain in his forthcoming statement on the subject, the bars were dropped for a time, only to be put up again when the dread disease broke out in northern Mexico. But, aside from this mistake, our propinquity and our good neighborliness alike require that we do everything possible to help Mexioo eradicate the epidemic. Foot-and-mouth disease is extremely diffi- cult to cope with. In one known instance occurring in California in 1929, the virus lived 845 days after a quarantine had been lifted. It was in a pile of old hay that had not been destroyed. It can be carried in the most unexpected way. An English sol- dier stationed in Germany, after visiting an infected area, apparently carried the virus on his shoes to England, and passed on the disease to his family’s dairy cattle. The Mexicans appear to be doing what they can to extirpate the disease, Eight states are affected, and in them are 600,000 head of cattle, including 200,000 dairy cows, which eupply half the entire population of Mexico with milk. Northern Mexico cattlemen have pledged 10 percent of their calf crope and @ 100 percent increase in their taxes to help pay for the cattle that must be slaughtered. The President's visit will demonstrate our common concern and combined action in re- spect of this and other matters in our rela- tions with Mexico. Exemptions From Certain Income-Tax Payments EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. ROBERT W. KEAN OF NEW JERSEY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr. KEAN. Mr. Speaker, it is high time that Congress make a study of the exemptions from certain income-tax payments which are granted under pres- ent laws and regulations to cooperatives. These exemptions were originally granted, and justly so, to help farmers in their marketing problems. During the years, however, the cooperative move- ment has invaded the territory of the taxpaying Main Street merchant, busi- ness, and industry. The result is that the private enter- prise merchant and manufacturer, who pay substantial taxes, must meet the competition of cooperative businesses which get off virtually tax-free. There is little complaint of the farmer type cooperative, nor of the theory of the cooperative movement, but these concerns should remain true coopera- tives and stick to the purpose for which they were formed. The New Jersey Taxpayers Associa- tion, one of our State’s outstanding civic organizations, has called my attention to certain editorials discussing this seri- ous and growing problem, which follow: [From the Trenton (N. J.) Evening Times] THE PRICE OF BUTTER Revelations concerning the operations of the Dairymen’s League Cooperative Associa- tion, representing 60 percent of the pro- ‘ducers in the New York milkshed, raise the question of whether there should be a change in governmental policies with respect to farmers’ cooperatives. They are granted by Jaw exemption from business taxes levied on private companies. The United States De- partment of Agriculture aids them in many ways. Their prosperity is advanced mate- rially by Government aid. Yet, the Dairymen’s League has admitted buying upward of 600,000 pounds of butter to sustain the price beyond the deadline for setting milk and butter prices in New York for the month of January. The United States Department of Agriculture has properly or- dered an investigation of what was undeni- ably a case of market rigging for selfish gain if not a criminal conspiracy against the con- sumers of New York State. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The question of why members of such an organization should be the beneficiaries of tmportant financial concessions by the Gov- ernment is one for Congress to answer. [From the Summit (N. J.) Herald of January 30, 1047) UNMASKED The mask is off. Cooperative organizations which pay little or no Federal income tax on their profits estimated at $12,000,000,000 in 1945 will have some of their extracurricular activities brought into the spotlight. The Federal Government has brought a criminal information action against the Dairymen's League Cooperative Association, operating with 26,000 dairymen in the North- eastern States, including New Jersey, on the charge of manipulating the price of butter on the New York Mercantile Exchange. The cooperative is accused of buying over 600,000 pounds of butter during a 6-day period at & cost of $561,757 to support the price of milk handled by its members. The New York Consumers League estimates the alleged price manipulation cost the public $15,000,000. It is high time that these money-bloated co-ops be compelled to toe the mark. The record now reveals that they use their huge tax-exempt profits to manipulate the butter and milk commodity markets, thus imposing @ vast economic hardship on the consuming public. This revelation of co-op commodity price manipulation will have the effect of destroy~ ing the aura of benevolence to the public which co-ops have assumed in their Nation- wide operations. Depriving the children of low-income families of price-manipulated milk is not exactly an act of philanthropy. Exposure of the hypocritical co-op game is long overdue. A long-sleeping Congress should speedily come to grips with the co-op tax and economic menace. The New Jersey Taxpayers Association says: “Recent developments should focus national attention on the co-op octopus which shifts , the income-tax load on industry and business with which it is in daily competition and now bludgeons the consumer with commod- ity-price manipulation.” The co-op masquerade party is at an end. {From the Newark (N. J.) Evening News of January 28, 1947] MILK-RIGGING FINES New York City’s milk-price scandal has resulted in the Dairymen's erative Association and four of its executive officers paying a total of $29,000 in fines for violating the Federal Commodities Exchange Act. They pleaded guilty to having bought in a 5-day period hundreds of thousands of pounds of butter for the purpose of keeping milk prices at an artificially high level. The latter are fixed monthly upon the basis pri- marily of the wholesale butter price in areas operating under the act. The defendants had attempted to justify their action on the ground of protecting producers from a drastic reduction of prices and preventing a shortage in New York City by diversion of its supply to other sections where prices were allegedly higher. The latter reason was the same that State Milk Director Foran gave in December for raising New Jersey milk prices 1 cent a quart, which increase he recently ordered rescinded, effective February 7. In short, price fixing of milk geems to have become more or less a Ying-around-a-rosy game. Its market-rigging tacticae may cost the dairymen's cooperative considerably more than the $25,000 fine imposed on it, depend- ing on how much of the butter it acquired has yet to be disposed of. The cooperative paid approximately 86 cents a pound. The Gay ite butter dealings were exposed the
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD wholesale price slumped 10 cents. Yesterday it was 63 cents a pound for 93-score. Obvi- ously a difference of 13 cents could mean quite a loss on the cooperative's “invest- ment” in 668,000 pounds. The effect of the New York episode has been to increase public dissatisfaction with price-fixing systems that are concerned only with minimum prices. It will not be allayed by elther the Federal Agriculture Depart- ment’s order reducing milk a cent a quart in, the five large northeastern milk market- ing areas or Mr. Foran’s similar action. Both systems should be abolished or else revised and coordinated, H. R. 1671, Introduced Today, an Amendment to the Robinson-Patman Act EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WRIGHT PATMAN OF TEXAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr. PATMAN. Mr. Speaker, this proposed bill is an amendment to the Robinson-Patman Act and is intended to circumvent secret deals between sell- ers and buyers, whereby only the largest operators obtain inside prices, terms, or discounts. This has proven a serious detriment to free and fair competition among the rank and file of competing manufacturers and _ distributors at wholesale and retail. The sole purpose of this amendment is to eliminate these secret transactions and to strengthen the Robinson-Patman Act, in the interest of small business. It obligates all sellers in commerce to make known to all their customers all of their prices, terms, and discounts under the Same conditions and to make them avail- able to all customers. This proposal was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary in the Seventy-ninth Congress. It was, in turn, submitted by Chairman Sumners to the Department of Justice, Federal Trade Commission, Department of Commerce, and the Bureau of the Budget. All have endorsed the measure in principle with some strengthening suggestions for changes, which have been embodied in this amendment. Its purpose is to amend section 2A, following the first proviso, in the Robin- son-Patman Act, and is as follows: Provided, however, That it shall be unlaw- ful for any seller to sell at a price, discount, or other terms, by reason of quantities sold, or seasonal order, or for any other reason, unless he has undertaken in good faith (1) to make Known to all of his customers that such price and/or discount and/or term is available to them under the same conditions to all of his customers for a reasonable period of time. The Congress must do something to safeguard small business from almost complete extinction if such enterprises shall have a free and open field to com- pete. Small business asks no special fa- vors in this respect, yet in past practices in business certain favored buyers be- cause of their size have been able to force favored concessions from suppliers due to their buying power which are denied to the general run of buyers. In effect, it means that all customers of a supplier will know exactly all the conditions of sales and shall have all the rights and privileges to purchase on an equal basis. The present act forbids these discrim- inations, but there is no provision in the Robinson-Patman Act that requires such terms, discounts, or prices be made gen- erally public to all customers. This law now provides for other ex- ceptions to prevent ‘price changes from time to time where in response to chang- ing conditions affecting the market but not limited to actual or imminent dete- rioration of perishable goods, obsoles- cence of season goods, distress sales under court process, or sales in good faith in discontinuance of business in the goods concerned.” It is my sincere hope that this present Congress will speedily enact this amend- ment to provide equal opportunities to all buyers and special privileges to none. The text of the bill is as follows: A bill relating to certain discriminatory pric- ing practices affecting commerce Be it enacted, etc., That section 2 (a) of the act entitled “An act to supplement exist- ing laws against unlawful restraints and monopolies, and for other purposes,” as amended (U. 8. C., 1940 ed., title 15, sec, 13 (a)), 18 amended by inserting imme- diately after the colon at the end of the first proviso the following: “Provided, however, That it shall be unlawful for any seller to sell at a price, discount or other terms, by reason of quantitics sold, or seasonul order, or for any other reason, unless he has under- taken in good: faith (1) to make known to all of his customers that such price and/or discount and/or term is available to them under the same conditions to all of his cus- tomers for a reasonable period of time. To Avert Waste EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. WILLIAM H. STEVENSON OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr. STEVENSON. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- orp, I include the following editorial from the La Crosse (Wis.) Tribune: TO AVERT WASTE Potatoes are all right in their place—but political hot potatoes are something else again. The Department of Agriculture must be finding that out, for it seems that its ex- perience with Irish potatoes in 1946 is some- thing of a political hot potato. Last week the Department of Agriculture authorized the dumping of at least 20,000,000 bushels of surplus potatoes out of a 45,000,- 000-bushel surplus. Under a legal commite ment to support prices to growers, the De- partment of Agriculture is removing the sure plus from commercial channels. The unhappy experience will cost the De- partment of Agriculture around $80,000,000 before it has been concluded, On the esti- mates of Secretary Anderson. A405 Some of the surplus spuds went into the manufacture of alcohol. Some more of them may wind up in the school-lunch program, Some of them have gone for livestock feed— and undoubtedly a lot of them just spoiled. The crop last year was the largest on rec- ord, amounting to around 475,000,000 bushels. It seems unfortunate, to say the least, that abundant production has such unfortunate results for the Department of Agriculture— and the Treasury—when around the world Jarge numbers of people are still undernour- ished, and when large amounts of other kinds of foodstuffs are being shipped to them, with more to go. But perhaps there’s something to be learned from the potato situation after all. One of the things demonstrated is thut it’s high time to be thinking about what can be done in case comparable situations develop in other agricultural products—and devising a remedy. As things stand today, the Government 1s committed to support prices for nearly two more years on a number of important agri- cultural articles. So there is some time left in which to reach a sojution, so far as net return to pro- ducers is concerned, and to avert the disaster which an overproduction might bring in the way of price declines, in the absence of guar- anteed prices. The price supports provide an adjustment period. With potatoes, the Department of Agricul- ture has had a demonstration of how pro- duction can get ahead of market demands— an expensive demonstration. It has read- justed its sights and trimmed previously an- nounced acreage allotments for potato growers, Nevertheless a lot of spuds went to waste. It would be wasteful in the extreme if any- thing like that is permitted to happen to other food products. Wise planning should avert any such possibility. The stability of farming may depend, in years ahead, upon the wisdom of the solution which Congress reaches with respect to agri- cultural commodities, production of which was boosted tremendously during the war years. TVA EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. ALBERT RAINS OF ALABAMA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, January 29, 1947 Mr, RAINS. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following letter addressed to the editor of the Red Pank Register, a newspaper published in Red Bank, N. J., which letter is written by Mr. W. B. West, member of Boston Society of Civil Engi- neers, with reference to TVA: Eprror, THE RED BANK REGISTER, Red Bank, N. J. Dear Sime: The editorial entitled “TVA Wants More Favors” in your November 21 issue was read with interest, and whereas I felt the urge to write you on this subject, yet it remained for a friend to also call your editorial to my attention before I resolved to write you. First, as a reader of the Register, and one of your customers, I cannot believe that, at heart, you would willfully be unfair to anyone or to anything, so these remarks are predi- cated on that thesis,
A406 Second, I must confess complete lack of knowledge of the merit (or lack of merit) of the claim of the TVA for exemption from the order of Reconversion Director John R. Steel- man curbing all nonessential contracts; nor do I wish to become involved in your gen- eral references to the bureaucratic mind at work, Third, I do wish, however, to stanchly challenge your statement that, “The Author- ity (TVA) has principally distinguished itself as an insatiable spender of tax funds.” Bee cause, through research and personal obser- vation over more than a decade, I became something of an authority on the Govern- ment’s Muscle Shoals industries (which formed the nucleus for the TVA) and wrote extensively about not only that project, but also about the TVA and its activities for pub- lications in the United States and Europe, 60 that surely I should be in a position to challenge such a statement as that quoted above. (See, for example, Scientific Ameri- can, May 7, 1921, and October 1933, and the Journal of the Boston Society of Civil Engi- neers for April 1934.) Fourth, because of other duties, J have not been able to Keep abreast of the progress of the TVA for the last few years, but have— on the other hand—been able to glean, from time to time, some information from the public press, and especially from professional and scientific publications which—so I am convinced, proves your statement, as above quoted, to be in error. For example, consider the following quo- tation from an article by Theodore B. Parker, head of the Department of Civil and Sani- tary Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, as published in the Journal of the Boston Society of Civil Engineers for January 1944: “The TVA development represents a very great investment by the people of this coun- try, who should be vitally interested in the soundness of this investment, The respon- sibility of expending such a huge sum has been from the start very keenly appreciated. Those who have been concerned with this responsibility are naturally anxious that the essential economy of the whole project be clearly understood. “As a result of the work now completcd or under construction there will be made available: “1, Six hundred and fifty miles of 9-foot navigable channel from the mouth of the river to Knoxville. “2, (a) Control of destructive floods along the Tennessee River and the lower portions of its principal tributaries, “(b) Reduction of maximum fiood crests on the Ohio below Paducah and on the Mis- sissippi River at Cairo, by at least 3 feet. “3. Total power-generating capacity of ap- proximately 2,000,000 kilowatts, capable of producing 1,400,000 kilowatts of continuous power, “This is without doubt an exceptional ex- ample of the merits of multiple-purpose de- velopment, where several benefits accrue frcm the construction of a single set of structures.” Thus, it will be seen the TVA has also distinguished itself in flood control and navigation, to mention but two of its ex- tensive beneficial activities and it would re- quire a long time and many pages of copy to enumerate all of its distinguishing accom- plishments, Again, several foreign governments have sent Agents to these shores to study the or- ganization and operations of the TVA in order that similar schemes may be applied to one or more river systems abroad. Because Modern science has come to recognize the necessity of thinking of and working on a whole river system (including tributaries) instead of just some particular point on or Portion of a stream when attacking flood control, navigation and hydroelectric power development problems. Finally, the TVA made valuable and sig- nificant contribution to the recent war ef- fort. For example, my friend who prodded me into writing this letter has pointed out the following facts which are known to him as a resident of one of the hundreds of com- munities served by the TVA: Large numbers of naval landing craft and even oceangoing vessels were constructed on a large TVA lake at Decatur, Ala., from which point they were able to pass out to sea—thanks to the TVA (and Mississippi River) navigation systems. He also says there was a great arsenal at Redstone near Huntsville, Ala., where mil- lions of rounds of ammunition were made during the recent war and that the abund- ance of TVA electric power was a contribu- tory reason for locating this plant in that area. This was, of course, in addition to tons of explosives turned out at the Muscle Shoals nitrate plants, the power supplied to alu- minum factories for airplane materials manu- facture, and even the atomic-bomb plant at Oak Ridge, Tenn. With these facts before you, surely you will agree that when problems of national interest and concern are being discussed, every possible effort should be made to be accurate and truthful and, sbove all, en- tirely free from sectional prejudice. Concerning your reference to the TVA hav- ing destroyed the privately owned power com- panies which had been operating in that area prior to the organization of the TVA, the case was settled by the United States Su- preme Court (thanks to the late Wendell Willkie), so the power companies had their day in court. In any event, what is the dif- ference, in righteousness, between drafting private property in the form of a human being for the defense of the Nation in war (with frequent resultant wrecking of his life) and taking over private property for the good of an area or the Nation in either peace or war? On the other hand, many of the private power companies which had been operating in the Tennessee Valley and con- tingent areas prior to 1933 are yet operat- ing there, some in competition with TVA, so “the fight goes on.” Very truly yours, W. B. WEsr, Member, Boston Society of Civil Engineers, America Must Recapture Zeal for Democ- racy If We Hope To Persuade Others EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. MELVIN PRICE OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr. PRICE of Illinois. Mr, Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include herewith the follow- ing editorial which appeared in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch on February 2, 1947: NOTES ON A TIRED WORD Did you, too, O friend, suppose democracy was only for elections, for politics, and for & party name? Walt Whitman asked that question in 1871, It can be asked with far greater cogency today. To Walt Whitman, democracy was not a stale and flabby word, concerning itself with outward forms, but a way of life for which men have died that other men should be free, in body and soul, to pursue happi- ness. The reason the United States is doing a Poor Job in teaching democracy to the peo- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ples of Japan and Germany—to say nothing of humanity everywhere—is that we our- selves have lost the burning, crusading epirtt of an errlier America. Speaking about Austria recently, Leland Stowe said that once the armies of occupa- tion are withdrawn, it would be easy for a right-wing Fascist dictatorship to spawn and grow out of that country's extreme misery. And he added: “If the armies of the Allied democracies had had some real conception of how to propagandize and inculcate democratic ideas and practices, the long-term political outlook for Austria would not be nearly so disturbing as it is today. * * * Germany, Austria, and Italy (the combined heart of Europe) remain serious danger spots—-very much ac- centuated by our own political ineptness.” It is not enough to blame the armies for failure to spread democratic ideals; the fault lies deeper. The whole Nation takes democ- racy for granted. We were all born under it, learned about it, often too unwillingly, at school (where it is often taught in humdrum and unimaginative fashion), mouthed ita catchwords on the Fourth of July, and accept its blessings as though they were automati- cally bestowed. Though the United States has fought in two world wars within a generation, and though we have witnessed and are still wit- neasing the brutal tyrannies of other forms of government, we still need a rebirth of the democratic epirit—that spirit which ani- mated the Jeffersons, Adamses, and Tom Paines of Revolutionary days; the John Browns, Thoreaus, and Garrisons of the slavery issue. To all these men democracy was not just a word, a static thing, but dy- namic; it was not reactionary, but, in the best sense, revolutionary. We ought to go back and refresh ourselves with the deeds and words of the men who won the liberty we so lazily enjoy today. Old Samuel Adams was not making a political speech when he said in 1771: “The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil Constitution are worth defending at all hazards; and it is our duty to defend them against all attacks.” Nor was Patrick Henry, 4 years later, when he stood at the Virginia Convention and cried: “Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death.” These were not empty platitudes. They were the prelude to blood and stench of bat- tle—for democracy. And these words of Thomas Paine’s were written not in an intel- lectua] vacuum but in the crashing arena of events: “He that would make his own liberty se- cure must guard even his enemy from oppres- sion; for if he violates this duty, he estab- lishes a precedent thet will reach to him- self.” When the famous New England minister, Theodore Parker, defined the nature of a democratic government it was not an excr- cise in rhetoric, but a statement arising out of fervent conviction. Such a government, he said, “has laws, and the aim thereof is to give justice to all men. It has officers to exe- cute these laws for the sake of justice. Such @ government founds schools for all; locks after those most who are most in need: de- fends and protects the feeblest as well as the richest and most powerful.” We do not often think of James Fenimore Cooper as a political philosopher, but he “The vulgar charge that the tendency of democracies is to levelling, meaning to drag all down to the level of the lowest, is sin- gularly untrue, its real tendency being to elevate the depressed to a condition not un- worthy of their manhood.”
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD It is our tendency, aided and abetted by uninspired school texts and the teachers who interpret them, to embalm the great thinkers and fighters for democracy in lavender and old lace. Thoreau we regard as a gentle Naturalist on the shores of Walden Pond, yet he could be as fiery as Danton or Mirabeau, John Greenleaf Whittier was more than a craftsman of rustic verse; he was capable of pouring scorn and invective on the enemies of liberty. Beneath the serenity of Ralph Waldo ,Emerson was a deep passion for freedom. The real meaning of America is not to be found—as so many people throughout the world are wont to think—in Hollywood movies, fine automobiles, electric refriger- ators and all the gadgets that make for com- fortable living. It is in that younger and more virile America that fought for and won its “independence; that abolished human slavery; that struggled against wage serf- dom and the evils of concentrated wealth. If we ever hope to persuade Germany, Japan, and other nations to our way of life, we must first recapture for ourselves the zeal, the courage, the eloquence and the inner spirit of the great men in our history who made it possible. Amend the Civil Service Retirement Act EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. THOMAS J. LANE OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr. LANE. Mr. Speaker, during the emergency preceding the war, and dur- ing the war itself, millions of Americans went to work in navy yards and for other branches of the Federal Government, Technically, they came within the juris- diction of the Civil Service Retirement Act of 1930, whereby certain amounts were automatically taken from their pay or salaries, and credited to their accounts in the retirement fund. Obviously, these millions could not hope to keep on working for the Federal Government over the long stretch of years necessary to realize a substantial pension. And yet, if they have completed 5 years of service, they cannot get a refund of the amounts which have been taken from their wages. The way the law is framed, they have become the victims of a cruel paradox. On the one hand, they cannot remain in the employ of the Federal Govern- ment for enough years to qualify for a real pension; and, on the other hand, for such employment after January 23, 1942, they cannot secure a rebate of the amounts which they have contributed in- voluntarily. At the same time, and quite apart from this issue, they have not had the bene- fit of coverage under the Social Security Act. Truly, they are caught between the devil and the deep sea. Of the many people who have visited my office during the past year, I can say that a majority of them came to con- sult me on this one question: “How can I get a refund of the deductions which were taken from my pay under the Civil Service Retirement Act?” And when I explain that, under exist- ing law, if they have worked more than 5 years for the Federal Government, there is no way in which they can get most of their money back, they counter with the protest: “But what if I need it?” With sympathetic patience I tell them this law did not anticipate the unusual conditions that would be precipitated by war, whereby many people would go to work for the Federal Government, with no intention or opportunity of continu- ing in such work for the rest of their lives. On May 3, 1945, I filed a bill to amend the law, 50 that an injustice would not be inflicted on these people, but the committee has not seen fit to report it out for a vote. As I tell them this, their expressions change from perplexity to disappoint- ment, and as they leave the office I have the feeling that they have lost some con- fidence in democratic processes. In spite of the record-breaking num- ber of people at work, and the all-time ‘high in national income, many people find themselves crowded into a corner by the double-pressure of hith prices and high taxes. They need money—not for luxuries, but for the day-to-day demands of existence. They cannot understand, and neither can I, why money withheld from thcir wages to go into a pension fund which can never be of substantial assistance to them, cannot be refunded to them now, when they need it. There is much talk of industry recon- verting from a wartime to a peacetime status, but little talk of the human be- ing’s problem of reconversion. The Civil Service Retirement Act was never intended to cover those who work for the Federal Government only during an emergency. It should be amended so as to provide upon request, for the refund of the moneys taken from these workers. To furnish this relief, the Congress should pass the bill calling for the re- turn of deductions to any employee who is separated from the Federal service or transferred to a position not within the purview of the Civil Service Retirement Act before completing 10 instead of the present 5 years of service. This is a matter of simple justice for the wartime workers in the Federal Gov- ernment’s employment, who were dis- placed when the emergency was over. It will provide not a gift or a bonus but a legitimate refund to the many who need it. The Late Admiral Mare A. Mitscher EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. EDWARD H. JENISON OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr, JENISON. Mr. Speaker, it is my desire to add further words of tribute to A407 the memory of one of the truly great heroes of World War II, the late Admiral Marc A. Mitscher, for whom military funeral services are being held at Arling- ton this afternoon. It was my great privilege to serve under him for a period at sea and again in the Navy Depart- ment at Washington. I would like to echo and affirm the deserved tribute of the Secretary of the Navy, the Honora- ble James V. Forrestal, who has observed truly that the place Admiral Miischer occupies in the hearts of those who served under him, officers and men, is a firmer basis of tribute than any that words could frame. There is tragic coincidence in the loss of Admiral Mitscher, following as it does by approximately a year the equally un- timely death of Vice Adm. John Sidney McCain, under whom it was my privilege to serve as well. These two great lead- ers were much alike in carcer, in devo- tion to duty and country, and in their contributions toward forging what might well be regarded as one of the greatest single factors in our triumph over the enemy in the Pacific for they brought to its high state of overwhelming power the deadly air-sea arm of our military might that drove the Japanese back to their very home shores. The Navy was their profession and their very life, but they were among the first to see the potential power of naval aviation and the necessity for a closely integrated striking force known now to the enemy and to history as Task Force 58 and Task Force 38. It is an obvious deduction to observe that the greatest tribute to Admiral Mitscher, and to Admiral McCain as well, might come from a study of their heroic contributions in seeking the soundest possible solution to a vital problem now confronting the Congress and the Na- tion—the question of a proper integra- tion of the Army, the Army Air Forces, the Navy and its integral naval aviation units, into the sort of defense establish- ment best calculated to defend this country under all conditions and from all quarters, and to play most effectively the role of a mighty instrument for the preservation of peace throughout the world. By unanimous consent heretofore ob- tained, I insert in the Recorp the follow- ing editorials and comment voicing de- served tribute to Admiral Mitscher and Admiral McCain. Their passing is a loss not alone to the armed forces but to the Nation and the world. [From the Washington (D. C.) Evening Star of February 4, 1947] ADMIRAL MITSCHER It is undoubtedly more than a coincidence that both members of the remarkable Mitscher-McCain team that revolutionized naval warfare with its fast carrier task force strategy and tactics failed to reach retire- ment age. Little more than a year after the death of Vice Admiral John S. McCain, com- mander of Task Force 38, Admiral Marc A. Mitscher, who commanded Task Force 68, has succumbed to a heart attack. These men were rugged fighters, as the Japanese found out, but the ruggedness and tie tempo of the daring strikes which they led in the Pacific war were enough to shorten the lives of even seemingly steel-nerved men of the Mitscher-McCain tradition.
A408 Admiral Mitscher was not a belated con- vert to aviation. He was one of the Navy's Yeal pioneer airmen. He had been out of the Naval Academy only a few years when he applied for pilot training and he be- came the thirty-second naval officer to win his wings. That was before World War I. The dream he had, in those early days, of large-scale carrier warfare between fleets out of sight of each other came to grim realization in World War II, with himself in a leading role. And, with Admiral Mc- Cain, he succeeded in perpetrating one of the great strategic hoaxes of the naval campaign against Japan. This was the alternate desig- nation of substantially the same carrier task force as No. 38 or No. 68, depending on which of the two was in command at the moment. The baffled Japs were tricked into believing that two great carrier groups were roaming the seas and the effect on their strategy and morale was devastating. But, to Admiral Mitecher’s way of think- ing, there was no trick about the individual successes of our flyers when they came to grips with the best that Japan had to offer. “Our boys are the best in the world,” he in- sisted. He was sure of it because he had helped to train them and equip them. Nor would he fall to give his boys full credit for the honors which came to him in the form of repeated decorations and citations, The “kids who do the fighting and shooting de- serve the credit,” he declared. Small won- der that Admiral Mitscher was revered by thoze who had the privilege of serving under him. The Navy in general, and naval avia- tion in particular, have lost an outstanding Officer, advocate, and friend. [From the New York Herald Tribune of February 4, 1947] ADMIRAL MITSCHER “The admiral had been sleeping quietly, but shortly after 1 a. m. he ceased breathing.” Thus the Navy bulletin reported the peaceful death yesterday of Admiral Marc A. Mitscher, one of the outstanding commanders of the Pacific war, the man who led the famous Task Force 68, whose squinted eyes gazed with assurance and capacity from under- neath the long-billed baseball cap that was familiar to all Americans in those tre- mendous years. Less than 2 years ago Admiral Mitscher was participating in the leadership of the great armada, stretched out for 200 miles, that pounded the Japanese homeland at will. The enemy fleet had been smashed long be- fore, but this must have been the great triumph, the conqueror's return after he had led the venturesome Hornet near enough in 1942 to loose the Doolittle raid on Tokyo. Between these two events Admiral Mitscher had a large and personal hand tn the opera- tions that pushed westward to victory. Admiral Mitscher was a flier. He was thirty-third among naval aviators, having been designated at Pensacola in 1916, and was pilot of the NC-1 in 1919 on the first Navy trans-Atlantic fight. These were the beginnings of the mighty test of carrier forces that proved under his leadership— early in 1944 in the Marshalls, at Truk and Tinian and Saipan—that there was no such thing as Japanese invincibility. The enemy was cracked, and Task Force 58 shoved ahead in the coordinated pattern of ruth- lessly efficient destruction. This cool-headed director of battle, a man who had the gift of seizing upon oppor- tunity and making the most of every turn, has high honor and affection in American hearts. The full stature of his naval genius remains to be assessed as the story of the Pacific war is fitted together in history, but we shall always thrill to the name of Admiral Mitccher and Tack Force 538. It would seem altogether fitting that the brief comments of the following might well be added: [From the Washington Post of February 4, 1947 | Secretary Forrestal’s statement on the ad- miral’s death satd: “The place he occupies in the hearts of those who served under him, officers and men, is a firmer basis of tribute than any that words could frame. The. United States Navy, with sorrow and pride, sends its deep sym- pathy to Mrs. Marc A. Mitscher.” Fieet Admiral Nimitz said: “The Nation has lost a great leader. I always had a sense of security and comfort when Admiral Mitscher was the leader of Task Force 58 against the Japanese. I knew that what had to be done would be done in full meas- ure. He needed no detailed instruction. All he needed was opportunity, and he made the most of every opportunity.” Said Army Air Forces Chief General Spaatz: “His death is a great loss to the Army as well as to the Navy.” Our Forty-ninth State EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WILLIAM C. COLE OF MISSOURI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr. COLE of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I wish to state that my attention has been drawn to an editorial in the St. Joseph (Mo.) Gazette of December 25, 1946, with reference to Hawaii’s request for admit- tance to the Union. It appears to me that it is time this request was granted. Hawaii has proved its value to us in many ways, commercially and otherwise, and particularly in its loyalty and service in World War II. The editorial speaks for itself and is here quoted: OUR FORTY-NINTH STATE When the Eightieth Congress convenes shortly it will be confronted with Hawall's ardent request for admittance to the Union. The last Congress dallied on this issue, but there 1s no good reason why our national Jawmakers should not grant the request speedily. For many years the people of Hawaii have sought statehood. Sixty-seven percent of the voters there favored it in 1940. The Pres- ident has given his endorsement and it has been recommended unanimously by a sub- committee of the House. All the traditional requisites for statehood are fulfilled by Hawaii. In area, it is larger than the States of Delaware, Connecticut, or Rhode Island. In population, it exceeds Nevada, Wyoming, Delaware, or Vermont. It is wealthier than many States and in 1945 it paid in €174,000,000 to the Federal Treasury— more than was paid in by any of 14 States. High standards in public works and gov- ernment services prevail in Hawaii. Its standing in education, health, and law en- forcement is better than that of some States. Financially, its government is on a sound basis, Statehood is desired by Hawaii because its people feel they have ended the “period of pupilage.” They point out they are now Americans “without representation” and that they may suffer discrimination as a result. Hawaii's young men were drafted in World War II, yet its people had no voice in the APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD draft law or the declaration of war. They pay Federal taxes but have no voice in their levy or distribution. Hawatians have no voice in laws passed in Washington that di- rectly affect their industry and agriculture. During the war, Hawaiians demonstrated they are as good and as patriotic Americans as any of us on the mainland. They want this recognized tn fact. As their Territory possesses all the other qualifications, we owe them this recognition. Polish Elections EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. CHESTER E. MERROW OF NEW HAMPSHIRE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr. MERROW. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the REc- orb, I include herein the following article from the Christian Science Monitor of February 3, 1947, entitled “Sounding Out Poland” by Dorothy Thompson: SOUNDING OUT POLAND—-I FOUND NO ONE WHO MAINTAINED THAT THE ELECTIONS WERE FREE (By Dorothy Thompson) Brruin.—The State Department’s state- ment last Tuesday expressing dissatisfaction with the Polish elections, was confirmed in an extensive tour I made in Poland following the balloting. I traveled through central, western, and southern Poland, including the new territories acquired from the Germans and the land between the Oder and the Neisse Rivers. I made the trip for the purpose of finding out first-hand the answer to the questions which had been studied in Washington and London: Does the government which just claimed such an overwhelming majority, really represent the Polish people? Was the election coerced? In Warsaw I felt many uncertainties. Any Polish Government would have profound dif- ficulties demanding strength and discipline. But the question in all authority is its legit- imacy, and today legitimacy derives from the popular will and a sense of justice. My trip convinced me that the present Polish Government intends to perpetuate it- self almost exclusively by naked force. Instead of seeking politicians in the Gov- ernment or the opposition, I asked ordinary people, sounding out their opinions, their feelings toward the regime. Accompanied by a reliable American tranalator, I entered peasant homes, picking them at random. I visited state farms converted from manorial estates; I talked with teachers, priests, sol- diers, and innkeepers, and sat in small tav-e erns picking up conversations. All this was less difficult in smaller places, for soon I discovered that everyone is in- clined to trust Americans. In addition, everyone in small communities knows who is trustworthy and who is likely to be a Govern- ment agent. I thus had personal conversations with scores of people, individually and in groups, throughout the main parts of Poland. I must report honestly I discovered exactly three enthusiastic supporters of the Government, An almost unanimous attitude was the dis- like, aversion, fear, and distrust of the Gov- ernment, which claims almost universal sup- port. This is true in peasant homes which had party slogans ostentatiously written on the walls. This is true even of people in the administration itself, who testified they wanted to serve Poland, but who hoped the
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Government and its policies would change. I found absolutely no one who maintained that the elections were free and uncoerced, and few who thought the Government itself was free and not a prisoner of Moscow. Many said they had voted for the Govern- ment list of candidates because they were compelled to vote; had been compelled in advance to sign a statement that they would vote “List 3”; had been threatened with loss of jobs, property, or other measures if the district’ went against the Government; and, finally, were convinced from experience in the June referendum that no matter how the ballots were cast the announced result would be the same. The people invariably began recounting grievances. They covered fear of the secret police, indignation at patronage which meant insecurity in any job unless enjoying party favor, disillusionment with the Government's conviction that the Government was “for- eign.” No correspondent who stays in Warsaw can grasp the atmosphere of the country. Despite terrific destruction in the city, there is much vitality, and the government ob- viously is making a successful effort to re- store and revivify its capital. In and around Warsaw are many signs of building activity. In numerous press conferences and per- sonal sucial contacts the plans described and arguments advanced by Government spokesmen present Poland as entering 8 fas- cinating New-Dealish experiment. But the country itself belies these claims. Reconstruction is backward, and the poli- cies, good on paper, have not been realized in fact. Apparently, the only public insti- tution really well organized on a nation-wide scale is the UB—the committee on public safety—whose interlocking civil and military bureaus seem designed on the pattern of Himmiler’s Gestapo. Though theoretically a semi-Socialist state, apart from the dogged work of land- owning peasants tn central Poland and cer- tain industries, the economy largely consists of speculation. In garish night clubs one sees masses of newly rich—vultures preying on the misery of the people, looted first by the Russians and Germans together, then by each singly. Also a vast migration of 4,500,000 persons from other parts of Poland into the newly ac- quired territories—being largely without plan—creates a Wild West atmosphere. It also exposes a population, which is entirely dependent upon the Government, to political manipulation and exploitation. It is impossible to describe Poland in terms of socialism or democracy. It is a sort of national bolshevism to an overwhelmingly rural, conservative, traditionally Catholic people, who, as a peasant lad put it, feel themselves less than the dirt of a fleld. Thomas Alva Edison Memorial EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. ALVIN F. WEICHEL OF OHIO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr. WEICHEL. Mr. Speaker, it is now approaching the one hundredth anniversary of the birth of Thomas Alva Edison. He was born up in my district at Milan, Ohio, near the shores of Lake Erie. At that time this village was 4& busy community and the center of the grain trade of the Middle West. Later the family moved to Michigan where he spent his boyhood days in and about Port Huron. Of course, he was best known in the mature days of his life at West Orange, N. J. This is the year of the one hundredth anniversary of his birth and the committee formed by 100 world leaders in science, education, in- dustry, and public service has been pre- paring for the centennial anniversary more than a year. The committee is headed by Charles F. Kettering, Detroit research specialist and inventor, and in- cludes the Edison pioneers—a dwindling group of men who worked with the “old man.” The day’s activities will be highlighted by a ceremony at Milan, where the United States post office will present a memorial album of the special Edison commemorative stamp to Mrs. Madeleine Edison Sloane, of West Orange, daughter of the inventor. At the same time, at Menlo Park, N. J., where Edison worked before moving to West Orange, Charles Edison will speak at ceremonies dedicating a plaque at the site of the Edison tower and perpetual light—a replica of the original bulb that was to light the world. That night, from 7 to 11:30, the sky over New York will be illuminated by six Army mobile searchlight units, with a capacity of 100,000,000 candlepower and capable of shooting a beam 12 miles up. The units were developed during the war and their use that night will be their first mass demonstration. In perhaps every community in the land, some kind of recognition of Edison’s great work will be made on the anniversary. In 30,000 public, private and parochial schools in this country and Canada, students will Study sets of postures telling in pictures of the life and achievements of the inventor. Having a special emphasis this year will be at the annual pageant of light at Fort Myers, Fla., where Edison main- tained a winter home and a laboratory in which hc experimented on the possi- bility of growing rubber in the con- tinental United States. As they have done every year since his death, the Edison Pioneers will hold their commemorative luncheon at the Hotel Astor in New York. In the evening, the American Institute of Electrical Engineers, New York section, will hold a 1,500 guest dinner at the Waldorf Astoria in cooperation with numerous other professional societies. The achievements of the inventor over the years are innumerable. His educa- tion, work and inventions laid the foundation for our modern living. The people of America want to commemorate its most distinguished son in science and invention who has contributed im- measurably to the joy of living. I am introducing the following reso- lution to provide for the erection of a memorial to the greatest modern American: Be it enacted, etc., That there is hereby established a Thomas Alva Edison Memorial Commission (hereinafter referred to as the “Commiasion”), to be composed of seven members, a8 follows: The Secretary of the Interior and six persons to be appointed by the President of the United States, two of whom shall be from the State of Ohio, two from the State of Michigan, and two from the State of New Jersey. The members of A409 the Commission shall select a chairman from among their number. No compensation shall be paid to the members of the Commission for services as such. Src. 2. The Commission shall acquire, by purchase, gift, condemnation, or otherwise, an appropriate site in Milan, Ohio, and shall contract for the construction on such site of a suitable memorial to Thomas Alva Edi- son, who was born in Milan on February 11, 1847. Sec. 3. In the executions of its functions the Commission (a) is authorized to employ and fix the compensation, without regard to the civil-service laws or the Classification Act of 1923, as amended, of such stenographic and clerical assistants, and such experts, as may be necessary; (b) may avail itself of the assistance of any department, agency, or officer of the Government, and any such department, agency, or officer is authorized to render such assistance. Src. 4. The Commission may accept from any source, public or private, sums of money to be added to the amounts which may be eppropriaten under authority of this act. Sec. 5. The Commission may make such expenditures as may be necessary in the ex- ecution of its functions. All expenditures of tre Commission (including necessary trav- eling expenses and subsistence expenses, not in excess of §— per day, incurred by mem- bers of the Commission while absent from their places of residence upon the business of the Commission, and by employees of the Commission while away from their designated posts of duty upon the business of the Com- mission) shall be allowed and paid upon the presentation of itemized vouchers therefor approved by the Chairman of the Commis- sion. Sec. 6. Such memorial, when completed, shall be under the jurisdiction of the Na- tional Park Service. Src. 7. There is authorized to be appro- priated not to exceed the sum of $1,000,000 for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this act. Violation of British Loan Agreement EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. HOWARD H. BUFFETT OF NEBRASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr. BUFFETT. Mr. Speaker, on Jan- uary 16, I advised the House of my re- quest to Secretary of the Treasury, John Snyder, for copies of correspondence with Hon. Hugh Dalton, Chancelor, British Exchequer, dealing with a re- ported violation of the British loan agreement in the _ British-Argentine trade agreement of September 1946. Today Secretary Snyder sent me copies of this correspondence, which I am inserting in the Recorp for the in- formation of the Members of the House. A preliminary examination of this correspondence indicates that the Brit- ish acknowledge the Argentine trade pact includes a provision in violation of the British loan agreement. Hugh Dal- ton, as Chancelor of the British Treas- ury, has given the American Treasury two assurances. The first assurance is that this spe- cific violation will not be repeated in future agreements about sterling bal- ances,
A410 The second assurance is Dalton’s as- sertion that it would always be Eng- land’s desire to avoid such discrimina- tion, referring, of course, to the clause in the Argentine agreement reading: If in any year the balance of payments with the sterling area be unfavorable to Ar- gentina, Argentina may furthermore dispose freely within the said area of its sterling balances for an amount equivalent to the deficit. Beyond the foregoing, Mr. Dalton stresses his contention that the proba- bility of a deficit between the Argentine and the sterling area during those 4 years is hypothetical. Ocrorsr 31, 1946. Rt. Hon. HuecH Dalton, Chancelor of the Exchequer, Treasury Chambers, London, England. Dear Mr. DALTON: In examining the agree- ment signed by representatives of the Gov- ernments of the United Kingdom and Argen- tina on September 17, 1946, I have noted that section B (6) of article I provides as fol- lows: “If in any year the balance of payments with the sterling area be unfavorable to Argentina, Argentina may furthermore dis- pose freely within the said area of its ster- ling balances for an amount equivalent to the deficit.” This provision, which appears to have the effect of making the amounts so released available for expenditure solely within the sterling area, seems to be inconsistent with section 10 (ii) December 6, 1945, which pro- vides as follows: “(il) Im consideration of the fact that an important purpose of the t line of credit ts to promote the development of multilaterial trade and facilitate its early resumption on a nondiscriminatory basis, the Government of the United Kingdom agrees that any sterling balances released or otherwise available for current payments will, not later than 1 year after the effective date of this agreement, unless in special cases a later date is agreed upon after con- sultation, be freely available for current transactions in any currency area without discrimination.” You will recall that section 10 (il!) was considered by both of our Governments to be a very significant provision, and that it was only after considerable discussion that agree- ment was reached as to its formulation. It seems clear from the discussions before your parliament and the documentation relative to the agreement that the meaning of this section and the importance attached to it by the United States were fully appreciated by your Government. In the light of these facts, I am sure you can understand the con- cern of this Government upon learning that the Government of the United Kingdom had entered into a subsequent agreement con- taining a provision apparently in conflict with section 10 (il). While I have not completed my consider- ation of the other provisions of the Anglo- Argentine agreement, the importance of the apparent conflict explained above impels me to invite your attention to it without delay. I hope it will be possible for you to consider this matter and communicate with me with respect to it at an early date. Very truly yours, JOHN W. SNYDER, Secretary of the Treasury. Treasury CHAMBERS, London, England, December 17, 1946. Mr. JoHN W. SNnrper, My Dear Mr. Snyper: Your letter of Oc- tober 31 about the agreement signed be- tween the Governments of the United King- dom and Argentina on September 17, 1946, was delivered to me personally by a member of the American Embassy in London, on November 27. I have read it carefully. I agree with you that section 10 (ii) of the Financial Agree- ment of December 6, 1945, provides that, a year after the effective date of the agree- ment, any sterling released will be freely available for current transactions tn any currency area. The agreement with the Argentine Gov- ernment carries this out in respect of cur- rent sterling as from the date of that agree- ment itself. It also provides that a certain amount of the accumulated sterling, stand- ing to the credit of the Argentine, should be released in each of the next 4 years, for use in any currency area. I suggest that it is not possible to separate the terms of any agreement we can make in this difficult field from the circumstances of the negotiations, or the facts of the trade with the country with whom the agreement is concluded, The parts of the agreement with the Argentine which relate to the treat- ment of sterling are for 4 years. The proba- bility of a deficit between the Argentine and the sterling area during those 4 years is hypothetical. At present, the Argentine is a large net earner of sterling, by reason of the supplies we are taking from her. This position has regularly marked the position of the trade between the two countries in the past, and it is not likely to be materially changed during the next 4 years. I suggest, therefore, that further consid- eration of this hypothetical question might be deferred, until events indicate that there is some reasonable probability of its becom- ing actual. In the meantime, as I have already stated, all the net sterling that the Argentine is earning will be available for cur- rent traneactions in any currency area, as well as part of the accumulated balance. I need scarcely add my personal assurance that I am very mindful of our obligation under the financial agreement. Yours sincerely, Hucn DATon. JANUARY 27, 1947. Right Honorable HucH DALTON, Chancelor of the Exchequer, Treasury Chambers, London, England. My Dear Mr. DALTON: I have read with great interest and care your letter of Decem- ber 17, 1946, in response to my letter of Octo- ber 31, 1946, with reference to the agreement signed by the Governments of the United Kingdom and Argentina on September 17, 1946. I am pleased to have assurance of your understanding that section 10 (ii) of the financial agreement of December 6, 1945, provides that 1 year after the effective date of the agreement any sterling balances re- leased will be available for current trans- actions in any currency area. May I now advert to two points in your letter which gave me especial concern. You suggest, first, that “it is not possible to separate the terms of any agreement * * * in this difficult field from the circumstances of the negotiations, or the facts of the trade with the country (concerned).” I assure you that I appreciate fully the difficulties involved in the negotiation of the sterling balance settlements. These difficulties cannot, how- ever, be regarded as justifying commitments which contravene the terms of the financial agreement. Otherwise, as I am sure you will agree, the entire agreement could be rendered meaningless. Secondly, you point out that in the past Argentina has regularly been a large net earner of sterling and that the e bropabity of a deficit between Argentina and the ster- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ling area during the next 4 years is hypo- thetical. Your letter suggests, accordingly, that the inclusion of clause I B (6) in the Anglo-Argentine agreement has little prac- tical significance. While this may prove to be the case, this argument overlooks the fact that clause I B (6) itself may furnish an in- centive to Argentina to incur a payments defi- cit vis-a-vis the sterling area. Moreover, I must confess that I am unable to reconcile with the spirit of the United States-United Kingdom agreement any commitment which under certain contingencies, even though re- mote, might require action at variance with the agreement. In the light of the not inconsiderable re- sistance that had to be overcome before we obtained congressional ratification of the financial agreement, I think you can realize our concern over this matter and the im- portance we must attach to the fulfillment of the obligations undertaken therein by your Government, I am sure you will appreciate also the difficulties which must arise if future agreements involving settlements of accu- mulated sterling balances should contain provisions similar in intent to that of clause IB (6) of the Anglo-Argentine agreement. I would therefore welcome some statement from you indicating that your Government has no intention of including such a clause in future agreements. May I also point out that if and when there is reasonable probability that Argentina will incur a current deficit with respect to the sterling area, this Government would expect the United Kingdom to make appropriate adjustments with the Argentine Government, so that no discrimination at variance with the United States-United Kingdom financial agreement would, in fact, arise. I have spoken frankly because of my fear that instances of this kind, if permitted to recur, may make more difficult the mainte- nance and further development of those close and friendly relationships between our two countries which, I am sure, both of us wish to foster. Sincerely yours, JouHN W. SNYvER, Seoretary of the Treasury. Trmasury CHAMBERS, London, February 4, 1947. The Honorable Joun W. Snypzr, Secretary of the Treasury, Washington, D.C. My Dear Mr. Snyper: Thank you for your letter of January 27 about our agreement of September 17, 1946, with Argentina. I am glad you have written frankly to me; I am replying in the same spirit, being no less anxious than yourself to maintain and de- velop the most close and friendly relations between our two countries. In your lettter, you ask me for an assur- ance that, in the future agreements about sterling balances, we have no intention of including such a clause as Clause I B (6) of the Anglo-Argentine agreement. I am happy to give you this assurance, I also note that, if and when there 1s rea- sonable probability that Argentina would in- cur a current deficit with respect to the sterling erea, the United States Government would expect the United Kingdom to make appropriate adjustments with the Argentine Government, so that no discrimination at variance with the U. 8.-U. K. financial agree- ment would in fact arise. I can readily as- sure you that it would always be our desire to avoid such discrimination, though I feel bound to say once more that I think that this is a theoretical but not a practical con- tingency. Yours sincerely, Hucm DALron.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Letter of Hon. William S. Bennet EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JACOB K. JAVITS OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr. JAVITS. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- orp, I include the following letter from Hon. William 8. Bennet, a former Mem- ber of this House: New Yor, N. Y., January 20, 1947. Hon. Jacos K. Javits, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. My Drar ConaressmaN: These are times of very serious consideration for every Ameri- can citizen and, as I once represented for 6 years a district in Congress which embraces everything within the boundaries of the Twenty-first Congressional District which you in November 1946 were elected to rep- resent; and in another Congress represented & portion of the same territory and have not lost my interest in public affairs, I feel im- pelled to express some individual views as a Republican in the form of a letter to you. The election figures in New York State give pleasure and satisfaction to life-long Repub- licans such as myself, and as well to all think- ing citizens not Republicans but interested in good government who are gratified at seeing public officials who have given ex- ceptionally good service reelected. Your own success in the Twenty-first Con- gressional District is almost without parallel. Your Democratic predecessor was elected in 1944 by a majority of 51,029. ‘You have re- versed this and are elected by a majority of over 6,000. Of course this result was brought about hy various elements, but I think it is only exact justice to say that you would not have been elected if it had not been for your own personal standing and the extremely efficient campaign which you made. With Governor Dewey reelected by the largest majority ever received by 2 guberna- torial candidate in New York State, in a sweep that carried the entire State ticket; an associate justice of the court of appeals; impressive majorities in both branches of the legislature; a United States Senator and 28 Members of the United States House of Rep- resentatives, we are quite apt to be confident that 1948, so far as New York is concerned, is already, to use the vernacular, “in the bag.” But ts it? As usual with landslides, there were several contributing causes. Governor Dewey and his team had given the State the best 4 years of administration in many years. It was both exceptional and outstanding. Thou- sands of citizens—both Democrats and in- dependents—voted the straight Republican ticket in emphatic endorsement. Getting that vote was a triumph for good State gov- ernment. Thousands more—again, Demo- crats and independents—resented either the acts or omissions of the present Congress with its helplessly divided Democratic con- trol; and thousands more were dissatisfied with President Truman, or commencing to be resentful of the results of some New Deal policies. How much these voters increased the Re- publican majority no one knows. That they did increase it, everyone knows. But 1948 will be different. It will be a national year. How many of these now Republican votes can we hold? National Committeeman Clarence Budington Kelland, after the recent national committee meeting in Washington, sald: “Now we are going home to earn the victory we have won.” Precisely. In the Congress just elected the majority is Republican in both Houses. It is Republican acts that will be scrutinized. I have read one statement that gives me pleasure. Some influential Senators say that they are not going to reject the President's appointees simply because they are Democrats. That is wise. The country is not in a mood to applaud extreme partisanship. Even the most loyal Republi- cans would dislike it. Two more steps would be profitable. Consider fairly every sugges- tion that the President makes despite his well-known Democratic partisanship, strictly avoid putting up measures to the President for the purpose primarily of putting him in a hole. The country is in the most observing frame of mind I have ever known. The education that it has been getting from editors, jour- nalists, columnists, and radio speakers—a lot of it bad, superficial or undigested, but it has at least put the country on notice. Our people want nothing but well-intentioned, patriotic, sincere, and serious action. Fire- works and flag waving are, for the moment, out. If effort is made along correct lines, and clear thinking and hard, serious work are evident, the people will tolerate both some mistakes and a record of achievement con- siderably less than 100 percent. They know that one Congress cannot conclude every- thing, but they will demand an intelligent, serious, businesslike effort. Here are a few things that cun be done: Look up the promises in the 1944 Republican platform and try to keep them all. That was what every Republican Congress did from 1860 to 1933. The country always expects more from a Republican Congress than it does from a Democratic Congress. This may not be fair, but it is fluttering. There are other things to be done—such us backing up the President’s recommendations as to the admission of additional war refugees—par- ticularly displaced persons. The religious majority of this country is Christian—Roman Catholics, Protestants, Creek Orthodox, and others—followers of Christ who gave us the rule “Do unto others as you would that others should do unto you and thus fulfill the law of God.” Can a Christian visualize Jesus barring thrse pitiable people out, even if 250,000 come? Read the parable of the Good Samaritan, get the answer, and as Christians, act accordingly. Some States are barring constitutionally qualified citizens from voting. Mississippi is the flagrant example. But there are others, The answer is in the fourteenth amendment. Pass the necessary legislation. An antidis- crimination statute is promised in the plat- form and it is imperative that this platform promise be kept. Back up the United Nations. It is far from perfect but it has proved itself work- able. While a general reduction in taxation has @ popular appeal, it is clearly true that it is highly important to reduce expenditures and also to commence the reduction of our huge debt. After World War 1, on the advice of Secretary Mellon, taxes were kept higher than they otherwise necessarily would have been, 80 that the national debt could be re- duced at the rate of $1,000,000,000 a year. That was sound finance. Pass a more certainly constitutional anti- lynching bill than the Marcantonio bill; du it early in the session and outwear a Demo- cratic filibuster in the Senate. If we do these things, the people, in 1948, will—as they did in New York State in 1946— reward good work with continuance in office and increased responsibility. Very truly yours, Wri 8. BENNET. A411 McNabb Case Again EXTENSION OF REMARKS fo) HON. LOUIS E. GRAHAM OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the REc- orp, I include the following editorial from the Washington Star: M’NABB CASE AGAIN The McNabb case continues to hamper law enforcement authorities in the District of Columbia. Latest of the many reper- cussions of the Supreme Court’s much-de- bated opinion that prisoners must be ar- raigned immediately after their arrest has just occurred in District Court. Two men who were convicted of housebreaking and larceny have been freed as a result of a ruling by the United States Court of Appeals that even a voluntary reenactment of a crime by a prisoner is of no value unless he was taken before a magistrate as soon as arrested. The new ruling was made in the case of Carl Akowsky, who, with another man, was arrested about 4 p. m. on March 29, 1944, by police investigating the theft of a large quantity of whisky from a restaurant in Southeast Washington. The men were taken direct to police headquarters and booked on an open charge. Police began to question the prisoners. About 5 or 5:30 p. m, the arresting officers telephoned the United States Commissioner's office, but re- ceived no answer to their ring. The ques- tioning continued until about midnight, when, the court stated, Akowsky made an oral confession to the robbery. This con- fession was reduced to writing and was agreed to by the second defendant. The court of appeals, in its decision, re- lated that subsequent to the confession, the pair was taken to the restaurant, where they described to the police officers and the pro- prietor “how they hud entered the premises and pointed out correctly the place from which the whisky had been taken.” On the basis of the confession and the reenactment of the crime Akowsky was convicted in Dis- trict Court. He appealed the verdict on the ground that the McNabb case ruled out not only the confession but the demonstration. since police had failed to arraign him before starting the questioning. What makes the latest interpretation of the McNabb ruling particularly disturbing to the police is the implicit contention of the appellate court that the officers should have taken the prisoners direct from the scene of arrest to the Commissioner's office or the municipal court, instead of to police head- quarters. Under this theory police would have no opportunity to develop their evi- dence, check alibis, etc., before taking a pris- oner before the magistrate to be charged. This restriction gravely hampers the police in carrying out their responsibilities to the public and gives the prisoner extraordinary advantage over the law-enforcement officer. There are times when the prompt arrest of a criminal known to be dangerous is essen- tial to protect the public, yet it would be impracticable to arraign him without some measure of preliminary investigation. This is additional evidence of the need for enactment of the Hobbs bill, which would authorize the questioning of prisoners prior to arraignment and thus end the multiply- ing absurdities of the McNabb decision. The bill has passed the House twice, but failed of
A412 enactment in the rush of closing Senate business. Congress will render an invalu- able service to the cause of law enforcement by passing this important measure. Backwash of War: The DP Problem EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WALTER H. JUDD OF MINNESOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr. JUDD. Mr. Speaker, under leave granted to extend my remarks in the REcorp, I include the following editorial from the Minneapolis Sunday Tribune of December 8, 1946: Backwash or Wak: THE DP Prosism Among the many delicate fssues raised by George Meader in his report on the American occupation in Germany to the Senate War Investigating Committee is that of the dis- placed persons who have taken refuge in the American zone. Meader estimates that there are 535,000 homeless refugees in the American zone who cost the taxpayers $109,000,.000 a year to maintain in addition to the contributions to their maintenance made through UNRRA and American private philanthropy. It takes the services of &00 American of- ficers and men to supervise these displaced persons, or DP’s as they usually are desig- nated. This supervision is not sufficient to prevent many of the DP’s from carrying on extensive black market operations with the goods supplied by UNRRA and private phi- lanthropy or from committing many crimes and depredations in the American sone. Senator CoNNALLY, according to Meader, said the United States “was the biggest sucker in the world” for permitting the au- thorities in other zones of Germany and other parts of Europe to dump their DP problems in the lap of the United States and for permitting so many other DP’s to make their way from less hospitable parta of Eu- rope to our gone. Meader has told of the low esteem in which many of the DP’s are held by the occupa- tion authorities because of their alleged re- fusal to accept useful employment, their querulousness, their political passions, and their extra-legal activities. WHO ARE THE DP's? UNRRA estimates that there are about one million of them in Europe and it is com- mitted to supervise refugee camps for them until June 30, 1947. The United Nations International Refugee Organization is sup- posed to assume responsibility for DP’s after that time, but there is such a sharp divi- sion of opinion about DP’s between Russia and the United States that IRO isn’t making much headway. Russia regards many of the inmates of UNRRA camps as renegade Russians, Poles, Yugoslava, Hungarians, and Baits who ought to be made to return to their places of origin, The United States listens sympathetically to the pleas of these DP's that they not be forced to return to Russian-dominated areas. Such action, they believe, would invite per- pecution for their political or religious be- fs. Nevertheless, a good many Poles who had been living in refugee camps have accepted UNRRA's offer to provide them with 60 days’ rations after their return to Poland. Polish Jews, however, are not returning to Poland because they fear anti-Semitism there and wish to find homes elsewhere, Zionist propaganda speaks of a million Jews being eager to go to Palestine which some- times creates the impression that the refugee problem could be solved by admission of one million refugees to Palestine. Actually, Jews constitute only about one quarter of the million DP's the . get their figure of a million by including all of the Jews in Europe and the Arab countries estimated to be desirous of exchanging their present homes for new homes in a Jewish state. The DP problem thus consists of 750,000 non-Jews, many of them Roman Catholics, plus Jews estimated from 150,000 to 350,000 in number. The United States has supported the efforts of Zionists and other Jewish agencies to try to gain admission for at least 100,000 Jews in Palestine. The British refuse to admit more than 1,500 Jews a month because of flerce Arab opposition which has intensified with increased Zionist agitation for immedi- ate atatehood. The Arabs outnumber the Jews in Pales- tine by 2 to 1 and have 30,000,000 Arab supporters in six neighboring states whose views neither Britain nor the United States can wholly disregard. Thus Palestine is not going to empty the displaced-persons camps of the American gone. In recognition of this fact, Jews in America, who devoted much of a $100,000,000 fund raised for philanthropic work to assist- ance of their coreligionists in Europe and Palestine, propose to raise $170,000,000 for the same purpose during 1947. ‘ While such a large fund will help supply the void created by the disappearance of UNRRA and the belated materialization of the IRO, so far as the Jewish minority in displaced-persons campe 1s concerned it offers no contribution toward the solution of the problem of the non-Jews. Nor does it wholly dispose of the Jewish displaced-persons Problem, Ways must be found for getting all dis- placed persons out of camps into permanent homes as quickly as possible for the camps are demoralizing to the inmates as well as @ burden on society. Some of the displaced persons are so un- desirable socially or politically because of their criminal tendencies and physical and mental] condition that they will not be wel- come anywhere. They constitute one of the insoluable problems of a war-dislocated con- tinent for which European governments must assume major responsibility. But there is good human material in the displaced-persons camps which should not be permitted to go to waste. Nor are the in- mates of the displaced-persons camps_wholly the broken in body and spirit. There are many children in these camps and the birth rate is rising. A HUMAN SALVAGE JOB Provided with a place of residence and em- ployment somewhere in the world many of the adults in these camps should become useful citizens and the children should grow into useful citizens, The problem calls for enlightened ocooper- ation on the part of all the government. President Truman is reported to be plan- ning to ask Congress to revise the immigra- tion laws so that a larger number of Euro- pean refugees may be admitted to the United States. At present the quota regulations per- mit only 89,000 DP’s to be accepted each year out of a possible 154,000 immigrants, That is a constructive approach to the prob- lem, assuming that great oare is used in screening the applicants. We do not want the biack marketeers, the Togues, or the defectives among the DP’s, We can use more of the sort of refugees who came during the Hitlerian persecutions. The scientific, mechanical, amd other skills and the oulture brought by many of those immi- grants are a permanent contribution to the national welfare and a permanent loss to the countries 80 foolish as to drive out such good citizens, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD If other countries are smart they, too, will welcome such talent and such citizenship from the DP camps of Europe. Hope in Southern Progressivism EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ESTES KEFAUVER OF TENNESSES IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr. KEFAUVER. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks I include an article of the New York Times maga- zine section of February 2, written by Ellis Arnall, distinguished and able former Governor of Georgia which is thought provoking and worthy of con- sideration by those interested in political and economic trends. The article is as follows: Liberalism in the United States is in tran- sition. Some of its fervor and enthusiasm has waned. The impact of the war upon American habits of thought was leas, perhaps, than most Ameficans believe, but the war served to focus American eyes upon goals other than domestic affairs; and because lib- eraliam is a realistic political faith, it tends to concentrate ite efforts upon the domestic front. Moreover, a great many liberals are tired men, physically, spiritually, and men- tally, and feel a little unequal to the task of combatting the increase of cynicism among the people. It seems apparent that cynicism, pervading the entire public’s attitude, will be the same menace to American welfare after World War Il as after World War I. It is discernible in the indifference of the public to the social tensions implicit in the economic chaos of postwar America. It is evidenced by the ris- ing incidence of juvenile delinquency. It is recorded politically in the trend toward a ruinous normalcy and, in foreign affairs, in the complete absence of a coherent policy. It is expressed in the rebirth of the hate- mongering organizations, some of them po- tent allies of the Axis before Pear] Harbor, when they were driven underground. The South is a paradox, whether studied economically, emotionally, or intellectually. Because it is a paradox the paradox of growth of liberalism in an era of reaction occurs there more easily than elsewhere in our com- mon country. This is true despite such de- velopments as the current dispute over the succession to the Governorship of my own State of Georgia. Liberaliam will be strength- ened there by the fight it has been compelled to make against the forces of reaction. Temporarily, as an aftermath of weariness and apathy, many liberal elements in the United States have compromised with reac- tion. The cycle’of future events in the Na- tion can be forecast with reasonable accuracy. There will be a brief interval of inaction, followed by some 8 years of reaction, cul- minating in a degree of economic collapse, which wiil act as a stimulus to liberal initia- tive. In that ence of liberalism the South will take the initiative in the Nation, simply because its liberal faith is very deeply rooted and because the economic cycle will Operate more rapidly within its borders. Tt is not a concession to the cynicism of the day to recognine the effect of economic stim- uli upon the public's political and sociel There are not many people who spend their time in an examination of moral problems. They are busy with the daily rou- tine of birth and burial, bread making and barter. But it is wholly natural to seek the cause of an effect, and the South will see the
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD results of reaction more quickly than the rest of America. For that matter, the South al- ready is seeing those results. The cotton farmer finds himeelf in distress, because the markets neither of America nor of the world are free or controlled, but a mixture of the two recklessly established for expediency without regard for the future welfare of all the people. But the fact that the South more quickly will see the results of national folly is the lesser of'the two reasons, Far stronger is the fact that the South has a tradition of liber- alism with greater continuity than any other section of the United States. Since 1796 liberalism has been the domi- nant political philosophy of the South, This was not always galvanized into political ac- tion, of course. There is a segment of the South that reserves the name of Bourbon, although its influence has never been as con- sequential as many have believed. For a comprehension of the future of lib- eral thought in the South a review of the South's contribution in the past is essential. Continuing until the present, the members of the judicial branch of the Federal Govern- ment who thought in terms of human rights were chiefly from the South, with the excep- tions of four quite recent justices—Holmes, Brandeis, Cardozo, and Stone. Within the past half century the most vigorous voice raised in the United States Senate on behalf of a moral concept of American relations with other peoples was that of Augustus O. Bacon, of Georgia, and his voice was raised at a time when even Indiana's Beveridge could delude himself with cheap sophistries as to the “manifest destiny” that justified the rape of the Philippines. The most vigorous native-radical move- ment in American history, since the Jeffer- sonian and Jacksonian revolutions, was that of the Populists, and the Ocala Platform still stands as a progressive milestone. It is not, therefore, exceptional that, more recently, while Nebraska was replacing a Norris with a WHERRY, the least vocative liberal of the deep South’s States was re- placing a “Cotton Ed” Smith with a JoHNs- TON, and the South was retaining BarK.ey, HILL, and PEPPER at their posts in spite of op- position stimulated, to a very great degree, by external influences, Because of the colonialism that has af- flicted the South, especially since 1876, when the Bourbon Brigadiers acquiesced in the electoral commission fraud in return for a restoration of self-government in the South in the form of an actual return of themselves to power, a glance is required at the relation- ship between southern reactionaries and the forces engaged in exploiting the South's hu- man and natural resources. It is readily knowledgeable that the reac- tionary uses the hate merchant as his tool. The South has more than a falr share of these merchants of hate. They are financed, in general, outside its borders. A glance at the admitted list of campaign contributors to almost any of the more easily identified demagogue-reactionary southern politicans will show that the money comes from non-residents or from lobbying repre- sentatives of non-residents. That most in- genuous of frauds, the American Democratic National Committee, founded admittedly for the purpose of defeating the expressed will of the people in a national election, ope- rated almost entirely in the South. But the men who backed its operations financially were not southern. The Ku Klux Klan, in each of its lives since it was dreamed up some 380 years ago, has known where to pass the hat. Its most effec- tive hat-passing was in 1928, in the Presiden- tial campaign. The native Fascist groups of the South always disclose, sooner or later, that their dissemination of hate is in the interest of outside exploiters, interested in retaining the South in a colonia) status and willing to utilize racial tensions for that purpose. So thorough has been this expo- sure that it needs no documentation here. But although hate-mongering is profitable alike to the fuehrers of such organizations and to the demagogic politician, it 1s almost always necessary for the latter to make a pro- fession of libera] faith in some degree, even in those Southern States that have a defin- itely conservative atmosphere, Despite cam- paigns that reeked of racial bitterness, against campaigners who were experienced and wily, in the face of enormous campaign funds, liberals won many battles in the South jn 1946. “Big Jim” Folsom, of Ala- bama, showed the way. Thurmond, of South Carolina, is definitely progressive. The reactionaries won few State House offices anywhere in the South, actually; and when they did win they usually postured as extreme liberals. Georgia is a fair example. The liberal candidates swept all the minor contests, but, although obtaining a plurality of popular votes, lost the governorship because of the electoral system peculiar to the State. Nevertheless, although vigorously fanning the flames of racial prejudice, the winning candidate made some commitments most unusual for a reactionary. He made solemn pledges to expand further Georgia's expendi- tures for education, already the highest pro- portionate to income in the Nation; to sub- sidize a public hospital in every county seat; to increase old-age and dependent-children benefits; and to provide a quarter billion dol- lars of rural post roads during the next 4 years. This does not mean that the damage that will be done to the South by reactionaries, by rabble-rousers, and by demagogs will not be considerable in the next few years. All kinds of misfits, and worse, will win the elections on occasions, in the South and elsewhere, in years to come. Indeed, although the transient national trend toward conservatism is felt in the South at the moment, and has resulted hap- pily in some instances in replacing arrant demagogs by conservatives, who at best are able and sincere and at worst only stuffed shirts, the South still has grave problems in- volving the simultaneous eradication of the personal machines of the demagogs and the election of a sound liberal movement not too narrowly parochial. . It must be granted that political liber- alism in the South places an unusual em- phasis upon the liberation of the Southern States from a colonial system. Since the South is condemned to a one-crop agricul~ ture in the main and retarded in the devel- opment of any adequate industrial estab- lishment by relentlessly enforced economic discrimination; the southern liberal is im- mediately concerned with the problem of eco- nomic equality for all sections of the Nation and for al) its citizens, There is an element of self-interest in this approach to the fundamental issue in na- tional politics, but that does not affect its validity. Economic freedom is essential to a continuation of political freedom every- where in the world. In the next upsurge of liberalism in Amer- ica, the choice inevitably will be between de- centralization of production on some rational basis and complete centralization of Gov- ernment to counterbalance central economic control. The liberals of the South will be the major spokesmen for the theory of genu- inely free competitive enterprise. The southern liberal, likewise, sees inter- national problems in better perspective than anyone else in America, except perhaps the people of the Pacific coast. While the Mid- dle West, far from the oceans, thinks de- ludedly in terms of a new isolationism, the East seems to have clutched to its busom the fetish of some new balance-of-power system, disregarding the fact that such systems ale ways result in a testing of the balance by means of war. A413 Indeed, it was hardly an accident that the outstanding American envoy of our time, Josephus Daniels, was a North Carolina edi- tor. The brilliance of his achievement in Mexico laid the real foundation for any suc- cesses we won in Latin America, and con- tributed inestimably to the winning of the war. Daniels viewed our Mexican relations from the same vantage point that Georgia's Bacon, three decades before, had examined the consequences of American imperialism. Here again, the South's advantage seems to stem from its long exclusion from the Union, which it is seeking, despite obstacles, to reenter. Southern leaders are effectively barred from national office, except in the fields of foreign affairs and the judiciary. The asserted southern effectiveness in Con- gress is a fallacy, although some southern Senators through exceptional talents have attained influence; the southern membership in the House, however, presents another pic- ture. Many Members with seniority, regret- tably, come from districts where reduced vot- ing lists and outside interference lead very frequently to the choice of men hardly rep- resentative of the section; the more vigorous, younger figures in the southern delegations have little opportunity to assume leadership. Yet, for all that, the ablest critic of legis- lative methods, who contributed most to a reorganization of congressional techniques, is Estes Kerauver, of the Tennessee dele- gation. Perhaps, paradoxically, the injustice of keeping the South remote from the main currents of American political life for 90 years may prove ultimately profitable to the country. It has developed in the South a critical approach to political problems, which the southerner can view with a cer- tain amount of detachment because nobody intends to listen to his views or will permit him to intrude upon a solution. But in the turning toward liberalism next time, some Gecade away, the southern voice will be heard, To think of liberalism exclusively in po- litical terms, however, is to do the liberal an injustice. Although the southerner might be mistaken for a political animal, in the sense that a Marxian philosopher might think of all of us as economic animals, it would be an error as egregious as thinking of the South exclusively in terms of magno- la-scented plantations or battered hovels. The southerner likes politics; it provides relaxation, barbecues, a frequent good show, and an endless topic of street-corner conver- sation; but he does not live for it entirely, any more than other inhabitants of our country. Liberalism in the South, as elsewhere, can express itself in a general attitude toward the social organism. For example, in the field of education, the South presents to the entire Nation an example of a people who act upon the premise that an educated citi- zenry is essential to a healthy democracy. Despite its poverty, the South is spending far more proportionately upon education than any other section. Georgia and North Carolina, especially, are giving the common schools an unusual measure of financial sup- port. In Georgia, the sums made available to the common schools for teachers’ salaries were increased 126 percent in the lust 4 years. In North Carolina, the budget for Negro schools in 1945 exceeded the entire budget for all schools 40 years before. Liberalism in the South has a practical, realistic economic expression, best evidenced in the widespread assistance given to the minority race in acquiring land ownership. It is a striking contradiction of mistakenly held opinions that the percentage of Negro tenant farmers is smaller than that of white tenant farmers in the Southeust. The South goes into the forthcoming era of reaction in better economic condition than in 1920, and, since the poverty of the South lies at the base of all its ills, the South will
A414 emerge from the apparently inevitable boom-and-bust era in a more wholesome con- dition than in 1929. Economic and national defense arguments are so strong in favor of decentralization that the period of colonial- ism is doomed. Industrial growth will act as a further spur upon liberalism in the South. Quietly the liberals are making progress. The neo-Fascist hired help of the exploiters are by open defiance of the law frightening natural conservatives into a libera] position. The acceleration of the economic cycle will focus southern attention upon the costliness of reaction to the social system and to the individual citizen. The southern press, in- dependent to an unusual degree and pre- ponderantly liberal, as was evidenced by its 90 percent support of liberal candidates in Georgia in 1942 and 1946, will continue its work of education. When the next testing comes, something like a decade away, the South will be the sec- tional core of American liberalism, as it was in 1800 and 1828. In the meantime; southern liberals will not only continue to fight, but to win their local battles more frequently with each passing year and each election. Helping Yourself to a Good Congress EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WRIGHT PATMAN OF TEXAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr, PATMAN. Mr. Speaker, Bert St. Clair, who is well known to many Mem- bers of Congress as a sound writer and counselor on improved relations between Government and business, recently wrote for Nation’s Business an article of out- standing interest and merit. It deals in plain language with the mutual prob- lems of Members of Congress and their constituents and especially emphasizes how business can cooperate better with the legislative branch. I do not recall ever having read an article which dealt with the Congressman’s problems with greater understanding and sympathy and I wish that every voter in the Nation might read it. It is inserted herewith: HELPING YOURSELF TO A Goop CONGRESS (By Labert St. Clair) THE NEW CONGRESS WILL BE AS GOOD OR BAD AS WE MAKE IT BY OUR OWN ATTITUDE AND EN- ERGY—AN OLD WASHINGTON HAND GIVES A FEW TIPS ON HOW TO HELP YOUR CONGRESSMAN 1. Write today: Your Congressman will get a lift out of receiving a letter from you—not asking him for anything—but letting him know that you have confidence in him. 2. Act as eyes: Help your Congressman by acting as his local eyes and ears. His chief interests are at home—and will remain there so long as he ts Representative, 8. Be prepared: Don't go on record on a pill until you are sure you know exactly what you are talking about. Best preliminary step is to get in touch with your trade association and request every available bit of current information on the subject. 4. Check up: Make certain that no one in your business group—such as an executive secretary—has put the group on record for or egainst any proposed piece of legislation without first polling the members of the organization on it. 8. Be fair: You have no right as a citizen to ask your Congressman to support any leg- islation which you, standing in his shoes, would not back youreelf. 6. Ask no favors: Don't assume that be- cause you have helped your Congressman you should be given preferece in legislative mat- ters. When your Congressman gets you @ hearing he has done a good deal for you right there. 7. Speak up: Don't hesitate to act for fear of being smeared as a “lobbyist.” Commit- tees of Congress want your views and advice on legislation. 8. Give name: Until you Know your Con- gressman well always identify yourself fully when you approach him. Suggest to your friends that they do the same thing. 9. Be brief: Don’t take too much of his time. Remember you are just one of the many persons in his district he is under ob- ligation to serve. 10. Don’t fumble: Don't let him feed you. He may, of course, protest against your pick- ing up the check. But you pick it up any- way. He is under enormous expenee, and the chances are that he has to cut financial corners to make ends meet. A gentleman in the rear of the hall sends this question to the platform: “How much may we expect to get out of the new Con- gress?” . A question, sir, that can be answered only with another: “How much will the new Congress get out of you?” Congress, which usually reflects fairly ac- curately the attitude, energy, and willing- ness to serve of the people who seat it, will be approximately as good or bad as we make It. Whether Congress moves steadily forward, stalls, or slides back depends on the whole- hearted efforts of the crews of its double- header engines. Those two crews are the Members and the voters. The Member en- gine will be out in front, puffing, smoking, and sometimes emitting loud noises. We, the voters, man the pusher or second engine and our job is to push and push hard. Espe- cially on the grades. The steeper they be- come, the greater our obligation to shovel on the coal and build up more steam. For the next few years particularly, the climb over the hump is going to be a good full two-engine job. More so than ever be- fore in our history, perhaps. The presence of many new Members in the first engine crew makes it especially impor- tant that the second engine crew not falter. Making the grade is difficult enough for old crew Members who have been over legislative hills before. It is much harder for new- comers. There is so much that is new to learn due to greatly expanded Government activities in recent years. Persons unfamil- iar with Washington scarcely can realize the Magnitude of the job confronting Senators and Members of the House. Even as a 30- year resident, long familiar with congres- sional and other Government contacts, I find it necessary to explore new avenues daily. It is to be hoped that you already have registered your willingness to serve in the second engine crew. Perhaps you did it in the campaign just past by helping your Sen- ators or Representative directly or, equally important, by promoting discussion of na- tional issues. Whether you did anything or not, it is important that you get on the crew now, Today is the time to make a contact with your Washington Representatives and ex- press your interest in their efforts to be of service to the Nation. For the sake of brev- ity, let’s refer to them hereinafter as your Congressmen. All are Members of the Con- gress whether in the House or the Senate. Write your Congressman a letter now. Maybe you doubt if you have anything of interest to say to him. But you have, and especially if he is a new Member. Whether APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD he is new or old, like every Member at the opening of a new session, his mind ts filled with doubts and perplexities. No matter how brave a front he is putting on, if he is con- scientious—and most Members are—he feels his responsibility and may be just a little bit lonely, Ever in his mind are the many folks he represents. He wants to do the popular thing, of course, for his job depends on that, but he also wants to do the right thing. That, in these hectic days, is not always easy to do because who always knows what is right? So you can do a real service to him and the Nation if you will, at the outset, just drop him a line telling him something to the effect that the people sent him to Washington be- cause they felt that he would do the best he knew how. You have no idea what a lift that alone will give him. Maybe it will strike you that this would be a heck of a weak letter to write to a statesman who down in Washington ts strug- gling with great international problems. There are two things wrong with that im- pression at this stage of the game, and he would be the firat to tell you so. First, he probably is not a statesman yet. Second, the leaders have not called him in to date to give them his ideas on a complete foreign pro- gram. Instead, he ts the same lawyer who drew that bill of sale for you last October and said $2 was all it was worth. The only problem with a foreign tinge he has grappled with so far this session is how to get rid of that spot left by a gob of Russian dressing on his blue serge suit. Of domestic problems, however, he has plenty. Where to find a place to live: how to get all of the boys whose fathers want them back on the farm out of the Army; how to find jobs for the scores of party sup- porters who are after him; how to reconcile the differences of the opposing Palestine groups that are waiting in his outer office; how to get on a good committee without ap- pearing to be hoggish; how to arrange for the daughter of one of his strongest sup- porters to meet Queen Elizabeth, and the son of another to be admitted to West Point, and so forth. You think a man who is faced with all of that and much more does not need kind words and support? Brother, O brother! Whatever you write, do not ask him for 9 job for anybody. Just about everyone asks Congressmen for jobs. There are not now, never have been and never will be enough jobs for one-hundredth part of the applicants. To ask for a job now will only embarrass him and add to his burdens. Don't take the newspaper stories about the Republicans cutting Federal pay rolls imme- diately too seriously. They may desire to, but they cannot do it, ever. Just because a million jobs are slated to be abolished does not mean that they will be. A lot of workers, it will be found, are pro- tected by civil service. Others will prove absolutely indispensable. Not a few hundred will show to the satis- faction of the most ardent political investi- gator that they have been voting the Re- publican ticket ever since the first free silver campaign. More than you would im- agine will hold tighter to their desks than the varnish on them. When you write your Congressman, give him your views on outstanding national and international problems. A lot of front- rank members of both major parties do not know all the answers to such questions to- day. There will be much pondering and some switching of opinions on these issues before the final votes on them are cast. In your letter, ask your member what the think- ing is on these issues. If he has personal opinions, he will exprees them to you. If
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD he has none as yet, he will be grateful to you for not pinning him down too definitely this early in the session. With a new party in power, Congress will be somewhat slow in passing even big bills. Of course, there is a flurry of measures of all sizes now, but passage of any of them is weeks away. If Congress this session passes a few big bills dealing with taxation, labor, and curbing of war powers, and cuts costs, it will do well. Rather than pressing your Member for solutions of all the outstanding problems of the world, help him get his feet on the Capi- tol ground by acting as local eyes and ears for him at home. There is where his im- portant interests are and will remain so long as he is a good representative of his people. If and when his principal interests move elsewhere, his constituents will sense it quickly—and make arrangements for other representation, Until then the most valu- able regular service you can render is to help keep him informed on what is going on among his voters. Contacts keep jobs Wise Members never permit their home contacts to languish. One of the smartest politicans ever to hit Washington was the late Champ Clark, onetime Speaker. He kept himself in the House for decades chiefly by maintaining close home connections. Every working morning he would devote all the time he could spare to reading news- Papers from his district and getting leads for writing letters back home. Other Congressmen still follow Clark’s plan. Go into the office of any Member of either House who has been in Washington a long time and you will see a stack of district papers neatly piled up awaiting his perusal. Most of these good Members have a stand- ing order that no home papers may be de- stroyed until they, or someone in their of- fices, have gone over them carefully. One veteran Democratic Member in a close middle western district was too ill to go home and campnign this year. Republicans in the district, pointing out the narrowness of his last majority, his current absence and the national trends, assured me that, at last, the old boy was doomed. Without surveying the district, I told them they were wrong, and they were, I knew that every year since the Member has been in Congress he has written at least 100,000 letters to his constituents and thus made his position solid. A good mailing list, carefully nurtured, has kept many a Member in office in the past and will do it again. Politics involve people You can be a great help in building up a mailing list. In your letters, mention Bill Jones and Minnie Smith by name. If you can think of something that either has said about the Member or a situation, write about it. Grains of sand? Sure, but they help make concrete blocks for solid political foundations. The average congressional district con- sists of about 250,000 persons and a Senator's constituency is his entire State population. Yet every House and Senate Member 1s sup- posed, any time after his first election, to recognize the full name of every voter and instantly know all about all the members of his family. Failure to recognize them when home often is highly embarrassing to a Member. You can help him over such hurdles. If you see him alone among strangers to him but acquaintances of yours, offer your services in helping make identifications. Until you know a Member well, always identify yourself fully when you approach him. Suggest to your friends that they do the same thing. You have no idea how much it will help him, and he will appreciate it. Sure, he will say, “Why, Bill, you don’t have to identify yourself to me.” But to himself he probably is saying, “My gosh, I didn’t know him from a side of sole leather.” It is dificult to remember everybody, even if you are a Congressman. As the big problems are disposed of in this and subsequent sessions, Congress will gradually broaden its base of operations. Some day something will arise which will be of particular interest to you or your local, Stute, or National trade, industry, or profes- sion. Then it will be your duty as a citizen and a businessman to do everything you can to help throw light on the situation for the benefit of all concerned. Don’t be scared away Do not hesitate to act because you fecl that somebody will smear you as # “lobbyist.” That is a scare term often used by persons who hope business never will express itself on legtslation, but supinely accept any sug- gested measure regardless of its possible effects. The new law defining lobbying activities certainly does not prevent you from discus- sing proposed laws with your friends, writ- ing to your Congressman or appcaring be- fore committees. The lobbying law wus de- signed largely to bring to light racketeers who solicit fat fees for so-called “influence” and render no service to either their retainers or Congress. Specifically exempted from registration are persons who only appear be- fore congressional committees. Of course, the constitutional right to communicate with your Congressmen also stands. As a matter of fact, Members of Congress rely heavily on these communications from their constituents and on the advice of the national organizations of businessmen every- where. They also think businessmen have been too hesitant about vigorously opposing in person bills which they regard as bad or about supporting those they approve. You will find your member cordial and grateful for the personal interest you have taken in his progress and eager to help you. Do not assume, however, that merely be- cause you may have aided him in his cam- paign or given him advice or tips that you should be given any great preference in leg- islative matters. Your case should be strong enough to stand on its own feet. When your Congressman gets you a hearing, he has done a good deal for you. Many persons who are eager to appear be- fore committees never reach the stand, large- ly because they never have displayed any interest in Congress until their own inter- ests Were aroused. Some come to Washing- ton determined to tell committees where to get off, and when asked the name of their Congressman are unable to give it. They do not get far. Have all the facts Thorough preparation is essential before going to the Hill and supporting or opposing any proposed legislation. Never, under any circumstance, make any move toward going on record on a bill until you are sure you know exactly what you are talking about. The best possible preliminary step is to get in touch with your national trade asso- ciation and request every available thing of current value on the subject under consid- eration, Do this regardless of how voluminous have been your mailings from State and sectional information sources. National groups are set up to render complete and current serv- ice, and they do it. Of particular value is their statistical information. Nothing is of more use in making a case before a con- gressional committee than unassailable sta- tistical material. Such are the only kind of statistics which national associations will provide. Get them to supplement your local factual matter. Whatever you do, however, do not write your national association telling it of your interest in forthcoming legislation and then sit back and expect the organization to carry A415 on from that point. Be prepared to help the organization when it asks you to. Mem- bers of Congress have respect for such offi- cial figures as these associations provide, but they want them supported by field testimony, such as you can give. A substantial fac- tual statement of one businessman from the firing line ig worth more than reams of tes- timony from a lawyer or other special pleader. Don’t ask unfair favors Common fairness also demands that the political welfare of every Congressman he considered in connection with the submis- sion of any proposed legislation. No pri- vate citizen has any right to ask his Sena- tor or Representative to support a piece of legislation which he, standing in the Mem- ber's shoes, would hesitate to back himself. Yet such unfair requests are made daily in every congressional session. Seekers after legislation always are filled with vague promises about the support they will provide for their favorite bills if the Member will only get behind them. All too frequently, however, the constituent fades out of the picture once the Member agrees to go along with a bill, and is seen no more, Then the constituent wonders, or says he wonders, why the Member did not push the bill. Businessmen have much room for im- provement of their Hill standing as witnesses and as supporters of proposed legislation. Not all of them have made bad impressions in the past, but the least that can he said about many is that they deserve no orchids for their performances. It is true that in the roaring ‘thirties, many congressional committees were loaded with business antag- onists who were not always exactly cordial in their treatment of industry witnesses, But not all. Numerous flops of business wit- nesses should not be attributed to congres- sional hostility. All too often the causes of bad impressions have becn acceptance of poor advice or failure to exercise plain horse sense. For instance, one scarcely can justly say that congressional antagonism has been re- sponsible for: 1, The attempted promotion of legislative programs through enormous cocktail parties and dinners in the ballrooms of downtown Washington hotels or large rented houses. 2. The sending by wire to congressional members of innumerable fake endorsements of pending measures signed by names copied directly from telephone books and similar lists. 3. The bombarding of Congress with thou- sands of identically worded form lettess and telegrams. 4. The appearance before busy committees of witnesses unable to do more than read pre- pared statements, and who when submitted to direct questioning demonstrate clearly that they know little or nothing about the subject under consideration. Here are some preliminary steps which should be taken by business groups prior to appearing before any congressional commit- tee: 1. Be sure that the proposal to which you are addressing your testimony is fully under- stood by witnesses. 2. Make certain that no one—such as an executive secretary—has put your group on record for or against any proposal without polling the members on it. 83. Offer only witnesses who can both read prepared statements intelligently and answer questions asked by committeemen. 4. Warn all witnesses against ad libbing extensively. Let each present his part of the picture in the most pointed possible manner and then leave the stand. 5. Make certain that you have a man at each hearing who knows the source of every statement your witnesses make and is in & position to provide instantly, or to promise
A416 to supply at a later date, additional facts and figures if they are requested by com- mittee members. A final word about good rules to observe while visting your Congressman in Wash- ington: 1, Don't take too much of his time. There never are enough hours in the day for him to get his reguiar work done. When you have finished your immediate business with him, leave his office, take a sightseeing tour, go back to your hotel, or otherwise occupy yourself so that he will not feel obligated to entertain you. No matter how good a friend you may be, you are just one of many persons in his district he is pledged to serve. 2. Don’t let him feed you and entertain you at theaters or night clubs. It’s mighty expensive. He is under enormous expenses— far beyond his Government pay—and unless he has a neat private income he has to cut financial corners to make ordinary ends meet. Of course, he may protest against your picking up the check, but you pick it up anyhow. 3. Don't stick around Washington after your business is done. If your Member has helped you, you cannot do better than make a bee line for home and spread the good word around that the district has the right man in Washington. Be sure, also, as s00n as you reach home, to write him a letter of cordial thanks, and have everyone you know who has benefited from his help do the same thing. After that, from time to time, when you don’t want a thing in the world, drop him @ note and ask him if there is anything you can do for him. When be asks you to do something, do it Just as if he were the voter and you were in Congress. He, you know, is trying to do as much for at least ® quarter of a million persons. A Serious Menace to Smaller Business in America EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HUGH D. SCOTT, JR. OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr. HUGH D. SCOTT, JR. Mr. Speaker, having an especial interest in the welfare of the small businessman and the problems and obstacles facing him, and being convinced his voice is not be- ing heard in the volume and to the ex- tent his position in our economic life merits, I requested and was granted permission to have printed in the Recorp the following speech delivered by Mr. Albert H. Redles, a charter member of the American Institute of Smaller Busi- ness, to the Fortieth and Market Streets Business Association of Philadelphia, Pa., on Thursday, January 30, 1947, on the subject, A Serious Menace to Smaller Business in America: Ladies and gentlemen of the Fortieth and Market Streets Business Association: I have come here tonight to discuss a most impor- tant subject with you—A Serious Menace to Smaller Businees in America. First of all, let me define who really is a smaller businessman. According to the Amer- ican Institute of Smaller Business it is the one-man business to the business employing up to 750 persons, and whose stock, if it is a corporation, is not listed om any stock ex- change in the United Siates. Almost overnight the words “small” or “gmaller business” whichever you care to call it, have become magic. Everyone seems to want to help it. But unfortunately, lip serv- ice is about all it has gotten so far. Unless smaller business gets down to earth, and faces the facts, and does something for itself, it may not survive in our national economy. Mr. Dewey Anderson has said: “If the small businessmen of the Nation will organize themselves in a militant, statesmaniike man- ner, they can make their concerted voice heard and heeded, not only in State legisla- tures, but in the Congress and the executive departments and agencies in Washington.” Free, private competitive enterprise is on the way out, unless small business as a whole will fight—now and hard—to be heard. Re- tailers realize an increasing consumer resist- ance to present high prices, and in some cases, manufacturers still are demanding higher prices, and prices must in some cases come down, and in others hold firm in order to get our national production ability in high gear quickly to avoid a serious busi- ness relapse. It was back in 1850, almost 100 years ago, when Daniel Webster, that great statesman and Secretary of State under President Harri- son made this, never to be forgotten, utter- ance: “God grants liberty only to those who love it, and are always ready to guard and defend it." Portal-to-portal pay suits will certainly hinder instead of help business ex- pansion and continuous strong employment. In Proverbs, twenty-ninth chapter and the elghtcenth verse, you will read these words of wisdom, written by King Suviomon: “Where there is no vision the people perish.” Large business is adequately represented in Washington and at our State capitols. Our farmers are wel] organized and represented and speak with authority. Labor employs skilled men and women to promote and de- fend their interests. But smalier business is not organized into powerful associations and has no powerful voice in Washington. It is your duty and mine, as small business- men, to see to it that this vital segment of our Nation's business (smaller business, if you please) be preserved and protected. It must stand united against all forces that threaten to overpower it. Both Houses of our Congress have had special committees created to study our problems, and they both have done a very good job, although working with very limited appropriations. Both com- mittees should be made permanent commit- tees of the Congress, and given ampie funds with which to conduct their vast and most important work. Alibis, ladies and gentlemen, pay no divi- dends. The goal of all business is profit. ambition of all business is survival. Survive, you say; why, what do you mean by that? Our business always has gotten along all right, and we expect it will in the future. Perhaps you have not seen some of the pitfalls across the path of smaller busi- ness. There are many, but just this one to which I will now refer can be disastrous. Let me tell you about it. Do you realize thet smaller business will not become one of the beneficiaries of the Government's profit-wage policy? The ob- stacles now rising in the path of small busi- ness will retard ite progress and cut its profits. These are increased wages and con- tinued high taxes. Small business especially needs some tax reductions. The recent profit-wage policy, while de- signed to prevent further inflation through increased production and higher wages, in iteelf is an inflated policy, based on the as- sumption of a continuing and inexhaustible demand for manufactured goods and service facilities, without adequate regard to their cost to the public. Will the present pent-up purchasing power of our people outlast the need for continuing this boom policy? Al- The APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ready consumers have lost a great deal of their purchasing power by price advance- ments. We think all this is a hazardous venture for government to project any such boom policy on boom psychology and inflated conditions. When forced prosperity, stalled purchasing power, and the public savings have spent themselves—and this is bound to come—smaller business will find itself still harnessed with governmental regulations and too heavily burdened with costs of opera- tion (especially increased wages) to be able to survive. Our Government has no really construc- tive policy looking toward the protection and preservation of small business beyond well wishing, and maybe an easy loan policy. Right here we could all apply very well some sound philosophy, as expressed by Judge H. H. Tye when he sald: “Work, save, and behave.” Knowledge isn't power. It is the ability to use power, to know where to find what you do not know. You cannot get to the right place on the wrong road, and you must have a place to go before you can go anywhere. About a year ago I stated that the LDcmo- cratic administration would ultimately force many American businesses into bankruptcy by recommending through the State Depart- ment lower tariffs on foreign imports. Such a move is equivalent to selling Amer- ican business down the river. The move through the State Department was an en- deavor to obtain congressicnal support for the new reciprocal trade agreements. Adoption of lower import tariff rates on a wholesale basis will mean eventually a flood- ing of American markets with foreign prod- ucts, produced more cheaply at a detriment to the welfare of American labor and indus- try. I remember only too well what Japan almost did to our business before the war. It must not happen again. EFow can the American workingman con- tinue to expect a high degree of earning if American business is not protected against a tremendous influx of foreign merchandise, directly competitive, yet manufactured and sold at a much lower cost? A lowering of the tariffs on foreign prod- ucts generally will prove a heavy blow to virtually every line of American business. Forcign manufacturers will be capable of competing in the American market with its high rate of manufacturing cost. This will ultimately be very costly to American labor and management. Among the “ultimate sufferers” if tariffs are lowered will be the textile, candy, and shoe industries, but eventually most Ameri- can manufacturers will be affected either directly or indirectly. As a few examples: China will probably replace Japan as a heavy producer of cotton goods. The United States has sent equip- ment and technical men to China to help in the growth of the industry. This is very humanitarian if for the purpose of helping that country regain confidence and establish employment. However, to highly develop its manufacturing and then authorize lower tariffe can mean, eventually, industrial bank- ruptcy to American manufacturers in this field. Keep in mind the abnormally low living standards in China, which will permit them to throw cotton goods on the American mar- ket at virtually a fraction of our production costs. Russia, too, we read, is increasing its culti- vation of cotton, and undoubtedly plans eventually to manufacture its own cotton goods. This probably will eliminate Russia some time in the future as a large purchaser of American cotton raw materials. In ad- dition, with lower tariffs, she will heip threaten our market with an influx of Rus- sian cotton goods. The Democratic administration is at- tempting to build a good-neighbor policy at the expense of American labor and industry.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD May I remind you, who are from many small businesses, that common sense is cer- tainly the needed application now, for, as Stowe defines it—let us apply it: The knack of seeing things as they are and doing things as they ought to be done. Labor and management who go to make up small and big business must realize this deadly menace of unqualified lower tariffs across the board, and we must make known to the Congress the fact that we are look- ing to them for protection, through and by a clear understanding of our problems. The lowering of tariffs, I am informed, is planned by the State Department at the 19-country trade conference, to meet in Geneva, Switzerland, in April. The number of tariff reductions will concern several thousand items. Keep in mind that objec- tions have already been registered at Wash- ington, but under the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act the President is permitted to reduce tariffs up to 50 percent. Congress could stop reductions only by repeal of the act. Of course, the State Department will say that they plan to use this reduction as a bargaining point to get other nations to reduce import quotas and many other trade restrictions. Just to give you some of the numerous items in line for reductions, let me name the following: Metals and metal products, like clocks, watches, electrical apparatus, etc.; farm products, like live cattle, spices, etc.; woolen goods, silk goods, paper goods, tobacco, glassware, furs, leather, smoking pipes, and a whole host of other items. Re- member, ladies and gentiemen, there will always be a United States of America if we do not give it away. The Members of the Eightieth Congress must be made to realize that a wholesale tariff reduction can prove to be very harmful to American business, especially small busi- ness, and that widespread unemployment will begin to appear. This disturbing fact, combined with the infiltration of Commu- nists into the ranks of labor, can result in a great part of the World War II debt being paid by the ranks of the unemployed. The debt comparison of World War I as ngainst World War I is about $260,000,000,000 against $27,000,000.000. The yearly interest of our present national debt is staggering. I am convinced that labor has not yet realized what the Communist is trying so hard to do by continuously injecting, by any means, his theory—divide and conquer, Therefore, it is so very, very important that we here in America put our own house in order and keep it in order. A Communist is nothing more than a Russian agent. It makes no difference if he or she be a soldier or a civilian, he or she is still a Russian agent. We in America do not need com- munism, and if Russia feels she does, let her keep it within her own borders. We have no desire to prevent her from following such @ course within Russia, kut by the same token she must be made to realize that Americans want democracy, which promotes our system of free private competitive en- terprise, and the rest of the world shall have the same fair opportunity of making a selection. I wonder how long it will take the American people to see what is hap- pening to them, their principles, and their way of life? Our right-wing unionists far outnumber the Communists in the union ranks, but are losing their unions in exactly the samo way that the decent American voter can lose democracy—by simply not working at it as hard as those who would change things underhandedly. In order to arrive at a solution to both important menaces, we should recommend to our Congressmen that immediate action should be taken when it gets the goods on ‘the Communists, and by all means the right XCIII—App.——27 wing of labor and management should get together in honest-to-goodness Jabor-man- agement meetings. To bring the chicken home to roost, let me sum it up in the words of Rudyard Kipling: “Nations have passed away and left no traces. And history gives the naked cause of One single, simple reason in all cases: They fell because their people were not fit.” One of Philadelphia's great men~Russcell H. Conwell—gives us a truce lesson otf life, expressed s0 Very well in Acres of Diamonds when we read: “To be great at all one must be great here, now, in Philadelphia. He who can give to this city better strects and better sidewalks, better schools, and more colleges, more hup- piness and more civilization, more of God, he will be great anywhere. Let every man or womun here, if you never hear me again, remember this, that if you wish to be great at all, you must begin where you are and what you are, in Philadelphia, now. He that can give to his city any blessing, he who can be a good citizen while he lives here, he that can make better homes, he that can be a blessing whether he works in the shop or sits behind the counter or keeps house, what- ever be his life, he who would be great any- where must first be great in his own Philadelphia.” Therefore, I appeal to you as free Amer- icans, who are members of the sume 3,000,000 or more small competitive ventures that still constitute free private enterprise in America, to dedicate yourselves to the cause of keeping your political representatives well informed of the dangera (if permitted to occur fre- quently) that can and will bring about smal] business absorptions. Mergers some Call them. A step toward helping this condition occurred the other day when the RFC an- nounced that the BPA (blanket participa- tion agreement) would expire January 22, 1947. This hurts small business. By this method, the larger and better equipped sur- vivors can take over their distressed com- petitors, and almost eliminate smaller busi- nesses, which to live must do as Edward Everett Hale has said: “Coming together means beginning; Keeping together means progress, and Working together means success.” Tonight let us rededicate ourselves to be always American tn our thinking, as well as our doing, and then we in small business can weather the storm of adjustment through 1947, and be ready for some real strong busi- ness activity in 1948, keeping in front of us those immortal final words of Abraham Lin- coln's famed Gettysburg address as a Chal- lenge to us and the world, as he said: “It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us. * * * that this Nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.” Foreign Lending EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LAWRENCE H. SMITH OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. Mr. Speak- er, under leave to extend my remarks, T include an article by Mr. Henry Hazlitt A417 which appeared in the February 3 issue of Newsweek: THE FRUITS OF FOREIGN LENDING (By Henry Hazlitt) Now that the International Monetary Fund is no longer a dream but a reality, all the problems that were so lightly set aside by the rhetoric and propaganda used to get the plun adopted by Congress are beginning to emerge in their full dimensions. The whole approach at the Bretton Wouds Monetary Conterence was unsound. The International Bank, and particularly the Fund, were set up to deal merely with the symptoms and consequences of international monetary chaos and not with its causes. The irony of the Fund its that it could work only under Practically ideal conditions, in which it would not be needed. The first ‘hing to remember fs that mone- tary chaos is uot primarily international at all. It exists basically within each nation. If each nation’s currency unit were freely convertible into a definite weight of gold, if there were no overissue of its currency, so that this convertibility could be at all times maintained, then the relationship of one cvrrency to another would necessarily be fixed and stable. If the dollar were always convertible into, say, one thirty-sixth of an ounce of gold. anc the pound into one-ninth of an ounce of gold, then pounds would always be freely convertible into dollars at a ratio of 1 to 4. But where there is no common unit of measurement there cannot be anything more than, at best, a temporary and unreliable exchange stability. The Bretton Woods arrangements ignored all these basic considerations. They tried to cure international monetary instability by hiding its symptoms or preventing its con- sequences. They provided in the Fund that when any nation’s currency started to slide downward, the nations with relatively strong currencies must use them to buy the weak currencies at par. Of course a currency can be kept at par b: doing this—as long as the strong nations are willing to throw their mon<¢y away and as long as that money holds out. United States Steel or any other stock could be Kept at par as long as someone with sufficient funds kept in u standing bid to take all the stock offered at par. But the SEC and the stock exchange would soon bring charges against such a bidder of fla- grant manipulation. Ifa private agent,more- over, used his client's money to buy stocks or anything else above the open-market price, he would be sued for breach of trust or dis- sipation of funds. But when governments do such things, they are given pleasanter names and are justified by the complex rea- soning of economic experts. The managers of the Fund are not even permitted to make their buying of currencics contingent upon interna! reforms in the na- tions whose currencies they are supporting. Insistence on such reforms is regarded as interference in the internal affairs of such nations or outside dictation of their polli- cies. The nations with sound currencies are merely permitted—in fact, obliged—to finance the inflationary polictes and all the other economic errors of the nations with sinking currencies. The only real remedy for this fantustic situation would be for the United States to withdraw entirely from the Fund. The arti- cles of agreement themselves permit it to do this at any time. At the very least, if the fund is not to end in a disastrous failure, the United States ought to insist on an amendment unequivocally authorizing the managers of the fund to withhold the use of its resources from any nation which in their opinion is following either internal or external policies not conducive to exchange stability.
A418 Among such policies the amendment should list specifically excessive deficit financing, excessive expansion of currency or bank credit, trade discrimination against other member nations, unreasonable ex- change controls, a policy of autarchy, of mili- tary or diplomatic aggression, and 80 on. When governments could no longer have their economic errors subsidized from the outside, at least major follies might be brought to a halt in time. Meanwhile, our Government continues to pour out billions of dollars of foreign loans. A great deal of these will certainly never be repaid in full, Not only ts our Government failing to get really compensating monetary and trade re- forms in exchange for these funds, but it is aggravating a domestic boom and inflation, and preparing a corresponding reaction for the future. Rural Electrification in Nebraska EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. KARL STEFAN OF NEBRASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr. STEFAN. Myr. Speaker, during the recent recess of Congress I had the privilege of traveling into every one of the 24 counties which comprise the Third Congressional District of Nebraska and which I have the honor of representing in this body. Much of my time during the 5 months that I was at home was spent in traveling into the rural sections of these counties. I had the great op- portunity, Mr. Speaker, to visit hundreds of farms which were equipped with elec- tric power as the result of extension of rural electrification. I found these farm- ers greatly appreciative of this service which has made farm life less burden- some. Thousands of other farmers, however, Mr. Speaker, are without elec- tricity and are demanding it. I feel that electric power should be made the cheapest commodity on the farm. With the improvement of farm- to-market roads making it possible for all producing farms to be connected with all-weather roads and extension of rural electrification, that kind of farm econ- omy which is absolutely necessary for future America will be brought about, in my opinion. One of the real progressive news- papers in my district is the Butler County Press. Florella Clark Owen is the editor and publisher of this news- paper. In an editorial in the Butler County Press, issue of January 30, 1947, Editor Owen has written an excellent article regarding the benefits of rural electrification. In order that the entire membership of this House may have the advantage of reading this editorial, I include it as a part of my remarks: A drive into the country after dark brings the realization to one of the advancement of rural electrification, for in every direction is seen a myriad of lights stretching as far as the eye can see. These lights bespeak for farm people a lightening of labor of all kinds—milking and later separating the milk by electricity, the grinding of grain, pump- ing of water for the livestock, as well as hav- ing running water in the home by means of an electric pump, the huge floodlights which shed their rays over the entire barnyard, and the lessening of work in the home for the farm wife with all the electrical conven- fences. Not only is the progress of REA being made in Butler County, but it is found that way in all other parts of the State and other States in the country. From Sidney, Nebr., comes word that 490 miles of rural lines are to be added to the Pine Bluffs REA district, while Dean Miller, who by the way is formerly of David City, now manager of the eastern Nebraska public power districs, states that the district expects to start soon on an expansion program intended to cost 6200,000. All of which means that the farm- er at long last is emerging from the dark and is able to avail himself of many of the comforts and luxuries which townspeople consider necessities. H. R. 1672, To Regulate Chain Store Monopoly EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. WRIGHT PATMAN OF TEXAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr. PATMAN. Mr. Speaker, this is a proposed amendment to the Internal Revenue Code, by adding section 110, which relates to the tax treatment of chain stores operated at a loss, through which they have obtained decidedly un- fair benefits. Under its provisions— In the case of any retail store which is part of a retail chain if for any taxable year the amounts which, except for this section, would be deductible on account of such store exceeds the amounts, which except for this section would be includible in gross income on account of such store, the amounts which would be so deductible shall not be allowed as deductions for such taxable year and the amounts which would be so includible shall be excluded from the gross income for such taxable year. The proposal then defines a chain store. The reason for the introduction of this amendment is that large chain corporations in different lines are able to operate stores at a loss to the injury of independent merchants and other small chains. These losses are then de- ducted from their income-tax returns. The present law, therefore, is used as a weapon to destroy competitors and at the same time reduce income-tax pay- ments at the expense of the Government, In addition, this also forces a reduction of income-tax payments by competitors whose businesses are made less profitable or they are driven out of business. This is a common practice among large chain corporations. In establish- ing stores in a city it is the practice to sell at extremely low prices to en- trench such branch stores. This has the effect of making local merchants ap- pear as profiteering. After entrenching such stores, prices are raised. To illus- trate my point, the court record in the A. & P, trial, which resulted in the con- viction of 24 individuals and corpora- tions for violation of the Sherman Anti- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD trust Act, including John A. and George L. Hartford, discloses the alarming fact that as many as 4,374 stores of this sys- tem were operated at a net loss in 1938 which was charged against the corpora- tion’s income-tax return, and an average of 2,954 stores over a period of 14 years. Other exhibits from A. & P. files in evi- dence show that at a meeting of the executive committee of the New England division at Boston, the Hartford broth- ers, who are owners of the business of this gigantic chain corporation, author- ized its operation of about 800 stores without any profit whatever. The same applies to the Atlantic division at Phila- delphia with about 800 stores, or a total of 1,600 units. This corporation made vicious price wars on the First National Stores of Bos- ton and the independent grocers in the entire New England division in its entire territory, with branches in Albany, N. Y.; Portland, Maine; New Haven, Conn.; Providence, R. I.; and Boston. Testi- mony in this case from documents in its own files, points out that the New Eng- land division adopted resolutions on two different occasions thanking the two Hartfords for their “generosity” in per- mitting the division to conduct all stores without realizing any profit on their op- erations. The court record further shows that the Government was deprived of income tax on $780,000 due to losses of the New England division, and $592,000 in the At- lantic division, or a total of $1,372,000 in 1939, according to the minutes of the divisional president’s meeting with the Hartfords, who dominate the policy of this company. In addition, $300,000 yearly was spent by the National Consumers Tax Commis- sion which disbanded after some years because it failed to function as John A. Hartford wanted it, through the ladies who were chairmen of some 600 such groups in as many cities but who were misinformed of its real purpose as an A. & P. propaganda scheme. In addi- tion, there is the $93,000 yearly fees plus expenses of Carl Byoir & Associates for lobbying and propaganda expenses. It is fair to assume that all of these items were charged off as legitimate expenses which, combined, should represent more than $2,000,000 on which the Govern- ment collected nothing in the way of in- come tax. In order to carry out this “false front” so recognized by United States District Judge Walter C. Lindley in his decision, consumers were assessed 10 points on the price of groceries to pay for this propaganda, The main dependence for profit by this concern is placed on subsidiary earnings, advertising allowances forced from man- ufacturers and stock gains commonly known in the trade as short weighting, short changing and price boosting at the check-out counters. Without these out- side earnings stores would be conducted at a distinct loss. The effect of this creates a monopoly and cripples or de- stroys the operations of competing inde- pendent merchants and small chain stores. The treasurer of the First Na- tional Stores testified at this trial that his company suffered a decrease in earn- ings of $1,421,000, or 27 percent, because
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD of these price wars. The Government, therefore, lost that income tax, too, from this corporation, while other competing food dealers were similarly affected, thus increasing the Joss to the Government. There is documentary proof in the evi- dence that its management boasted in minutes of the divisional presidents’ meeting that the aim is to operate stores on such low prices that competitors can- not make any money. Minutes of the New England division of this system show resolutions were adopted thanking John A. Hartford and his brother for the gen- erosity and privilege of operating all stores without profit. The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. has 5,700 stores, or 142 percent of the total number of all grocery stores, includ- ing other chains. Its sales are around $1,379,000,000, or about 11 percent of the total grocery business, though operating in but 42 States. This leaves the re- maining 89 percent for distribution among 345,611 independent grocery deal- ers and 34,658 other chains, or a total of 380,269. There are 125 cities in which it has from 20 to more than 50 percent of the business. On these tremendous sales, so the court record shows, it made only $4,199,347, or at the rate of less than one- third of a cent per dollar of sales, yet through its subsidiaries, allowances from manufacturers, stock gains, and so forth, it realized a net profit after taxes of $26,025,000. Again relying on the court record for the ‘acts, John A. Hartford told the presidents of the seven divisions who meet quarterly to map out the company’s policy for the ensuing 3 months and go over past results, that all the owners wanted was a net profit of 0.0022 percent from st res and that headquarters would take care of the rest. In 1941 it realized but $4,199,347 net profit on sales of $1,379,000,000. It ob- tained $u,333,000 from manufacturers’ al- lowances in violation of the Robinson- Patman Act despite decision of the Su- preme Court. In addition, it obtained $1,933,000 from stock gains explained in the testimony as any sums secured on the sale of these items over and above the price billed by the warehouse. They ar: secured by such practices in the re- tail stores as short weighting, short changing, boosting prices at the check- out counters; and so forth. These stock gains over a period of years, according to the record, totaled $42,535,000. If these stock gains in 1941 are de- ducted from the reported stores profits of $8,320,000, the company would actually have had a deficit of $4,133,667, yet its over-all profits were $26,025,000 in that year. Taking all types of chain stores into consideration, with 123,195 units out of a total of 1,770,355 stores of all kinds, the chain corporations have but 7 percent of the units, yet they controlled, according to the last census, 21.7 percent of all the retail business. Included in this total number of chain stores, it should be re- marked, are a large number of small local companies, since four stores are considered to be a chain. With these eliminated, the percentage of sales con- trol over the total retail business of every type would be materially increased, while the number of the larger chain sys- tems would be substantially reduced. Under these circumstances the pres- ent Internal Revenue Code, by virtue of passing losses on stores caused by oper- ating many of them deliberately at a loss for a period of time to establish them on a profitable basis at the expense of other retail competitors who have no such cushion, is allowing these big cor- porations to escape just income-tax pay- ments, create a monopoly, and use this loophole in the Jaw to accomplish their destructive purposes. If we are to have full employment, build up undernourished areas, provide opportunities for returning servicemen to enter business, protect small busi- nesses in general, collect all just income tax on legitimate earning operations, this amendment should be adopted by the Congress. This would assist in in- creasing income and aid to that extent in reducing the war debt. A bill relating to the tax treatment of chain stores opcrated at a loss Be it enacted, etc., That chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code is amended by in- serting after section 109 a new section rend- ing as follows: “Sec. 110. Chain Stores Operated at a Loss (a) In general. In the case of any retail store which is part of a retail chain, if for any taxable year the amounts which, except for this section, would be deductible on ac- count of such store exceed the amounts which, except for this section, would be in- cludible in gross income on account of such store, the amounts which would be so de- ductible shall not be allowed as deductions for such taxable year and the amounts which would be so includible shall be excluded from gross income for such taxable year. “(b) Definitions: As used in this section the term— “(1) ‘Retail chain’ means a group of — or more retail stores which, either directly, or through one or more persons, or by leases, contracts, or other arrangements or devices, are subject to a single common control. “(2) ‘Retail store’ means any place at which sales of merchandise, and delivery thereof, are made, or at which services are furnished, to retail customers in the ordi- nary course of business, but such term does not include any establishment or facility maintained by a common carrier as part of its transportation facilities primarily for furnishing meals or other commodities to its passengers and employees, or any branch office maintained by a newspaper for the distribution of its papers or taking subscrip- tions or advertisements therefor.” Src. 2. The amendment made by this act shall be applicable with respect to taxable years beginning after December 31, 19—, Federal Court Tenure Bill EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. LAWRENCE H. SMITH OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. Mr, Speaker, under leave to extend my re- marks, I include a news article by Mr. A419 David Lawrence, outstanding editor, which appeared in the Washington Star of February 4: New LIBERALISM SEEN IN CoURT TENURE BILL—METHOD SuGGESTED To ASK PEOPLE How To CHANGE CONSTITUTION (By David Lawrence) A new liberalism is coming back to America through the Republican Congress. Instead of sitting by and letting judicial interpretation take away fundamental rights which were reserved to the people under the Constitution, the new Congress is going to let the people decide how and when thry want to change the Constitution. At least two important constitutional amendments have been introduced—one limiting Presidential tenure to two terms of 4 years each and the other prescribing that all Federal justices shall hold office for 10 years and be subject to reappointment by the President and confirmation by the Senate. The new proposal for a change in the life tenure of justices has just been introduced by Representative LawrENcE H. SMITH, Re- publican, of Wisconsin, who has served sev- eral years in the House and is one of its able Members. It is proposed that the justices, including those of the Supreme Court, shall be checked periodically by the people after 10 years of service and that present justices shall not serve beyond 10 yeurs after they took the oath of office or not after December 31, 1948, whichever is earlier, but that they may be eligible for reappointment. PACKED WITH NEW DEALFRS Representative Smiry points out that the Federal courts have been packed with New Dealers und that the Supreme Court, partic- ularly in the portal-to-portal case, has been usurping legislative functions. It has been said erroneously by some ob- servers that the new plan proposes to do what was condemned generally when in 1937 the late President Roosevelt— indignant over the decisions of the justices then sitting because they refused to hold valid his New Deal laws— tried to enlarge and pack the Court. But what Mr. SmrrH proposes is the exact opposite. The Roosevelt scheme was to try to do by a statute what the Constitution forbade. The method suggested by Mr. SmirH is to ask the people to change the Constitution. The idea of protesting against Supreme Court decisions is not novel. Abra- ham Lincoln once said Supreme Court deci- sions were not irrevocable and that the neo- ple bad the final say. They do—that is, they can have the final say by utilizing the machinery prescribed in the Constitution itself. Thus, when the Supreme Court many years ago held that an income tax could not be levied by the Federal Treasury, the matter was submitted to the people and by consti- tutional amendment they bestowed on the Federal Government that taxing power. Despite the fact that centralized govern- ment in Washington has since 1933 taken over many powers which for decades were rights never before deleguted to the Federal Government by the people—as, for instance, control over wages and hours—not a single constitutional amendment has been submit- ted to the people since 1933. This ts because appointees who believe in restricting the power of the people and taking away their rights have been sitting on the Supreme Court Bench. And the Congress has, in ef- fect, been in collusion with the Court be- cause reactionary majorities have declined to submit vital issues of constitutional power to the people for their decision. ROOSEVELT’S WORDS RECALLED The late President Roosevelt ridiculed the idea of amending the Constitution in the way prescribed therein. In a radio address on
A420 March 9, 1937, speaking in support of his Court-packing plan, Mr. Roosevelt said: “T have thus explained to you the reasons that Me behind our efforts to secure results by legislation within the Constitution. I hope that thereby the difficult process of constitutional amendment may be rendered unnecessary. But let us examine that process. “There are many types of amendment pro- posed. Each one is radically different from the other. There is no substantial group within the Congress or outside it who are agreed on any single amendment. “It would take months or years to get sub- stantial agreement upon the type and lan- guage of an amendment. It would take months and years thereafter to get a two- thirds majority in favor of that amendment in both Houses of Congress. “Then would come the long course of rati- fication by three-fourths of all the States. No amendment which any powerful economic interests or the leaders of any powerful po- litical party have had reason to oppose has ever been ratified within anything like a rea- sonable time. And 13 States which contain only 5 percent of the voting population can block ratification even though the 35 States with 95 percent of the population are in favor of it.” Mr. Roosevelt forgot to tell the people that the eighteenth amendment was eliminated from the Constitution less than 2 years after it had been submitted to the people by two- thirds vote of both Houses of Congress. If there is serious division on any fundamental subject, of course, it is right that the matter should be delayed, but it is illiberal and reactionary to refuse to give the people a chance to amend their own Constitution and to argue that all that is needed is to change the judges. A New Year Resolve EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WALTER H. JUDD OF MINNESOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 5, 1947 Mr. JUDD. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following address by John Foster Dulles before the National Pub- lishers Association on January 17, 1947: In accordance with what now is New Year's custom, the American people welcome a new Secretary of State. In January 1044, Secre- tary Hull held that office; in January 1945, it was Secretary Stettinius; in January 1946, it was Secretary Byrnes; now in January 1947, we have Secretary Marshall. I first pay tribute to our retiring Secretary of State. Mr. Byrnes, at personal risk, gallantly carried a heavy burden. His patient determination during a critical period served this Nation well. It is unfortunate that he could not carry on. Since he could not, it is fortunate that his successor is one whose ability and character have won for him the respect not only of the American people, but of the peo- ples of all the United Nations. We can hope that his great talents which helped to fashion victory will now equally help to fashion & just and durable peace. Republicans do not yet have title to Fed- eral appointive office. That gives them at least the advantage of continuity. It may, therefore, be appropriate for a Republican, who had the privilege of close cooperation with the three preceding Secretaries of State, to take this occasion to look back in order the better to look forward. Last year had some good aspects. There receded a serious risk that the victorious war coalition might break up and its mem- bers fight among themselves. It did not end the bid of the Soviet Union for world leader- ship. That was hardly to be expected. But 1946 did see that bid deflected into channels more compatible with peace. The Soviet challenge is double-barreled. One barrel alms at social revolution through- out the world. The other barrel aims at nationalistic expansion. The war made both targets easier to hit. Economic misery, the byproduct of war, bred racial agitation throughout the world. The military position of Russia, as the great land power next to Germany and Japan, gave Soviet leadership unique opportunities to bargain for an ex- pansion of their national domain. It is the latter type of aggressiveness which was checked in 1946 when it had already gone so far that persistence would have jeopar- dized the peace. Soviet national expansion was going ahead in a big way at the end of 1945. It had be- gun under the cover of deals with Hitler. With his tacit acquiescence or explicit ap- proval, part of Finland, all of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, and large portions of Poland and Rumania were incorporated into the Soviet Union. That was the price of Soviet neutrality while Hitler was attacking in the west. When Hitler turned east to attack Russia, that made Russia an ally of Britain and the United States. It was vital that the war unity of these three should be pro- served and Soviet leadership relied on that to bargain at Tehran, Yalta, and Potsdam. As a result, Soviet land power was further extended in Europe and into the Pacific. After hostilities ended, the Soviet leaders sought to go on with their nationalistic bar- gaining. The first occasion was the first meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers at London in the fall of 1945. That confer- ence ended with no agreement. It was pub- licly proclaimed a failure. It was, indeed, a failure from the standpoint of the Soviet Union. It marked the end of the ability of the Soviet Union to expand by bargaining with great powers at the expense of the weak, American idealism had a rebirth. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that our idealism, always latent, could then safely emerge from the recesses into which it had been driven by war necessity, From then on, as Secretary Byrnes well put it, the United States might compromise within principle but it would no longer compromise principle itself. That was the spirit of 1946. It enabled the United States delegation through patient firmness to obtain peace treaties with Italy and the satellites which, while not ideal, in- volve no flagrant new injustices. More im- portant, it halted the Soviet program of ex- panding at the expense of weak neighbors. When Soviet leaders discovered, at the end of 1945, that they could no longer get our agreement to further expansion, their first Teaction had been to go it alone. At the beginning of 1946, Iran, Turkey, and Greece were threatened. The result, however, was not a Soviet success. Throughout the world public opinion reacted adversely. Soviet leaders found that they could not fire both barrels at once. Nationalistic aggression canceled out idealistic propaganda. As against that loss, there was no compensat- ing gain, for Soviet aggressiveness had pro- voked in the United States and Great Brit- ain a stronger resistance than Soviet leader- ship cared to face. In these countries pub- lic opinion quickly hardened. It supported measures to rebuild military establishments which had been allowed to disintegrate, The United States displayed naval and air power in the Mediterranean. It seemed that if the APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Soviet continued along the line upon which it had embarked that might even lead to major war. That is one thing which Soviet leadership does not now want and would not consciously risk. Economically, the nation is still weak in consequence of war devasta- tion; also, for the time being, the Soviet military establishment is completely out- matched by the mechanized weapons—par- ticularly the atomic weapons—available to the United States. So, as competent observers had thought likely, Soviet leaders drew back. That is to their credit. Soviet leadership showed itself to be intelligent and realistic rather than reckless or fanatical. That is a reassuring fact because often leaders who are dynamic and who have had great initial successes be- come overconfident. They take ever greater risks until they find to their chagrin that they have made a bad calculation and have precipitated trouble which they never want- ed or expected. The Politburo, at least in 1946, did not go down that path. The greatest credit for the 1946 result goes to the American people. They quickly cleared their minds of war romanticism which had overidealized all of the Allies and their ob- jectives. They were able to see renlities even when they were unpleasant realities, and, despite postwar weariness, they hardened their wills, There were a few who were gul- lible and who still believed, because Soviet leadership used idealism as propaganda, that that leadership itself as idenlistic. But they were only a small and ineffectual minority. The American people showed that they still possessed to a high degree the ability to see clearly and to think straight. Bipartisan cooperation played an impor- tant part in the result. Governor Dewey, during the campaign of 1944, agreed with President Roosevelt that there should be a permanent world organization. That act made logical a bipartisan delegation to the San Francisco Conference. That worked 80 well that Secretary Byrnes invited Repub- licans to participate in negotiating the first group of peace treaties and to participate in the Assembly of the United Nations. Thus Democrats and Republicans sat side by side, and we both learned, at the same time and from the same bench as it were, some of the hard facts of international life. That learn- ing together is the key to effective biparti- sanship. In this case it made it natural that Democratic leadership through Secretary Byrnes and Republican leadership through Senator VANDENBERG should speak to the American people in similar terms. That con- tributed greatly to solidifying the American attitude. If, as I believe, the November elections put a@ seal of approval on that kind of coopera- tion, it is because the American people sensed that during the preceding months it had helped to save them from grave peril. Credit also goes to the United Nations. Its open processes were what made it impracti- cable for Soviet leadership to play, at the same time, incompatible roles. It compelled choice between idealistic propaganda in noncontig- uous lands and hard-boiled militarism to- ward neighboring countries. It enabled world opinion to register and show the ex- pediency of the more peaceful course. We can look back on 1946 with some satis- faction. But it should only be satisfaction that a long, hard task has been well begun. If 1946 saw the Soviet nationalistic challenge become less aggressive, we cannot assume that even that phase is definitely over. Certainly Soviet leadership does not accept as final the present status of the Dardanelles. In its other phase—the ideological phase—the So- viet challenge became increasingly powerful. In most of the world, effective popular leader- ship is in the hands of persons who are sym- pathetic to Soviet Communist doctrines and who turn to Moscow for moral support.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ia _ Sowtet communitom exercises 0 infiuence through the interim Hindu in Caine. Tatted Seaton elects 0 aes ee growing rebellion against the white man's assumption of racial superiority. The fight- ing now going on in Dutch Indonesia and in French Indochina is symptomatic of a wide- spread condition. These revolutionary move- ments are encoutaged by Soviet leadership which pretend to a “classiess” society. The Arab world grows increasingly hostile as the strain regarding Palestine is prolonged. In Latin America Communist leaders are steadily gaining tn political power. They are effectively agitating against the so-called capitaliam and imperialism of the United States. solidarity ts precarious and the Monroe Doctrine faces its sternest test. In western furope Communist strength has grown so that in France and Italy Com- muniste now exercise a large measure of governmental power. In the United States, Soviet leaders look to “boom-bust” finally to discredit capital- ism and to Hquidate the last vestiges of our claim to economic supremacy. That collapse, they profess, is inevitable. However, they deem it prudent to help the tnevitabie, and to this end thetr followers have burrowed into the core of our economic body. At the recent “town meeting of the world,” the Soviet delegation achieved a larger mens- ure of leadership. Also, they there did an effective job tn portraying the United States as militaristic and imperialistic. They per- suaded many that this Matton ought to dis- arm itself in the interest of world peace. Soviet leaders hope thus to end the military mequality which bothered them in 1946. Those are some of the items of the 1946 heritage with which 1947 must deal. It is a heritage which ts hailed joyfulty by the New Year's press of the Soviet Union. It is, for us, a heritage to be accepted with soberness. It does not contain immediate danger, as did the heritage of 1945, but it does threaten us sumering we shall still need the ability to say “No.” We shali still need to provide same relief. But we shall need more than that. Negation . Whoever deals with Europe deals with the workd’s worst Gre hazard. Repeat- ediy tt wursts out in Sarmes. Twice within the last 80 years the edifice has virtually burned to the ground. The human and ma- tertal ‘comes have been colossal end trrepa- table. After each past confisgration, the structure hes been rebuilt substantially as befare. - _' Cam @o better than go an repeating that folly. The trouble is not hard to find. Our founders diagnosed the situa- téon mang years ago. Alexander Hamilton put it in these bistoric words: “To look for a continuation of harmony between a number of independent, uncon- nected sovereignties in the same neighbor- hood would be to disregard the uniform course of human events and to set at defiance the accumulated experience of ages.” Not only did our founders diagnose the trouble; they found, for themselves, the remedy. They placed matters of concern to be under an administration responsible to The war victors will do well to have that formula m mind. Then, when they plan the future of Germany, they will think more in terms of the economic unity of Europe and jews in terms of the Potsdam dictum that Germany shall be “a stngie economic unit.” Of course, there should be an economic uni- Roation of Germany. But the reason for that is also a reason for the economic uni- Bcation of Europe. A Europe divided into small economic compartments cannot be a healthy Eurcpe. All of Europe's economic potentialities need to be used at maximum efficiency and markets should be big enough to justify modern methods of cheap production for mass consumption. That, no doubt, is why Mr. Attiee declared some time ago that “Europe must federate or perish.” Of course, the German settlement will not of itself bring about a federation of Europe. Only the European peoples themselves can do that, and they will probably move slowly. But the German settlement may decisively determine whether the movement will be toward economic unification or toward re- building the old structure of independent, unconnected sovereignties. The Basin of the Rhine, with its coal and industrious manpower, constitutes the natu- ral economic heart Of western Europe. From that area ought to flow vitality not merely for Germans but for Germany's west- efn neighbors. If that happens, western Europe, at least, with its 200,000,000 people, could develop into a more prosperous and stable land. That, however, is not likely to happen if the German peace treaty merely reestablishes Germany as a-single economic unity subject to only German political con- trol which, even if originally decentralized, could again become highly centralized. If such dispositions are made, Germany’s west- ern netghbors—France, Belgium, and Hol- land—wili hesitate to organize their econo- mies into dependence on a source which may again be controlled by ambitious and venge- ful German rulers. That might enable Ger- mans hereafter to achieve, by economic pres- sures, a mastery of western Europe which they could not achieve by arms. Rather Surope to an unhealthy and precarious Not only is such a solution bad for Europe; it ts bad for peace. If the tndustrial poten- tal of western Germany. cannot safely be can people will not indefinitely keep in Ger- many the huge armies which would be needed A421 to repress restless people deprived of the work for which they are fitted. Also, the American people will not indefinitely provide immense charity to prevent mass starvation which threatens only because artificial con- ditions are imposed. Peace should not be made dependent upon artificial conditions which hold only so long as there te external coercion. That was the main troubie with the Treaty of Versailles. Its terms, if enforced, would have kept Ger- many impotent for a thousand years. But enforcement depended upon external coer- cion which evaporated. Peace con- ditions, to be durable, should be self-enforc- ing. What is needed in respect of Germany is decentralization. At the beginning. that can be imposed. A large measure of political autonomy can be given to German states. But that decentraitzation will not stick un- less also there develop natural forces which turn the inhabitants of Germany’s states toward their outer neighbors. The economic forces operating upon Germans should be cent: and not centripetal. Only if de- centralization is enforced by such forces can it be depended upon. When the German problem is thus analyzed, it is apparent that it calls for some application of the federal formula. Under our federal system the citizens of Pennsyl- vania share with others legislative control over the interstate movement of their coal and their steel products. The Port of New York is operated by an autonomous authority established by treaty between New Jersey and New York. The Tennessee Valley develop- ment is operated by a Federal authority, not by the State of Tennessee. We propose an international authority to own and operate atomic development everywhere so that no- where can it fall under national control which might use it for war rather than for economic welfare. Such precedents suggest that it ts not be- yond human resourcefulness to find a form of joint control which will make it possible to develop the industrial potential of western Germany in the interest of the economic life of western Europe, including Germany, and do so without making Germans the masters of Europe. Whether a solution along this line is prac- tical, and the scope to be given it, will depend primarily upon our continental allies them- selves. The non-Continental victors—Soviet Russia, Great Britian, and the United Statese—cannot impose any such solution. If, however, our Continental friends are thinking constructively—and there is evi- dence that many of them are—we Americans ought to be able to give them precious as- sistance. We possess, with Great Britain, de- cisive power in western Germany. We have, more than any other people, experience in using the federal formula and in developing its manifold possibilities, If we employ these asseta to solve the problem of Ger- many, we shall have made a good start in implementing our 1947 resolve. I have spoken particularly of Europe. But I did 80 only by way of illustration and not with any thought that we can safely con- centrate on one part of the world to the neglect of the rest. Not only in Kurope, but in Asia, South America, and the colonial areas there are vast tasks of reconstruction to be undertaken. Old societies need to be rebuilt. Sick societies need to be made weil. Societies subject to alien rule need peaceful roads to freedom. We should become again, as we once were, the source to which men turn for inspiration and guidance in the accomplishment of such tasks. We Americans believe that our individual- istic society best qualifies men for leadership. Such a society, we believe, provides the rich- ness of diversity and of experimentation and the stimulus of competition. That, I eay, is our belief. But it is no longer the belief