A8872 country as well as in Egypt, Palestine, and the territories all along the eastern coast of Africa. A good many of the survivors of this tragic journey eventually were able to take up arms in the cause of the Allies by joining the Polish Army reorganized under the command of General Anders. In the meantime, with the German occu- pation of western Poland, there began the mass deportation of people to Germany for slave labor purposes. No able-bodied per- son between the ages of 14 and 60 was con~ sidered exempt and thus lived in constant fear of being seized in the middle of the night and deported to Germany. By mutual agreement between Nazi Ger- many and Soviet Russia and Baltic States of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania were occupied by the Soviet military forces. This military invasion was done under the guise of giving protection to these Baltic states. This ac- tion brought about additional thousands of refugees who were forced to flee their home- lands. The third phase developed when Nazi Ger- many invaded and conquered france, Bel- gium, Holland, Denmark, and Luxemburg. The occupation of these countries was also characterized by the mass deportation of natives of those countries to Nazi Germany for slave labor purposes. The political dis- sidents were also rounded up and taken to concentration camps. The fourth stage came when the alliance between Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia broke down and the Soviet Union was in- vaded. As the German military forces ad- vanced eastward hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians and White Russians were de- ported westward for slave-labor purposes. The superior-race theory held that only those of German blood were worthy to be part of the conquering armies and all other people were to be treated as inferiors but required to labor for the war machine. The fifth stree develoned when the tide was turned  :.0 . Ne? Cormany. The repid and wo: ro": + advances of the western allies made possible, in turn, the advance westward of the Soviet military forces. As the Soviet military forces ad- vanced toward the Baltic states, Poland, Hungary, and Rumania, larpe segments of the civilian population still remaining in those countries fled westward. Being aware of what it meant to be under Soviet rule and domination they took to the roads in an effort to reach the territories liberated by the western allies. Those who reached the western parts of Germany and Austria were afforded haven by the military forces of the United States, the United Kingdom, and France and were put in the displaced-per~ sons camps with millions of other unfortu- nates like themsclves. As a result of these events the western allies were faced with the problem of caring for approximately 8,000,000 persons immedi- ately utter vic surrender of Gormany. These 8,000,000 people were made up of those liber~ ‘ated from concentration camps, forced la- borers brought into Germany, refugees who fled westward before the Russian armies, and prisoners of war. The first requirement was that of providing immediate care and main- tenance to sustain life, This task was ac~ complished in a most commendable manner. The next requirement was to arrange for the repatriation of these uprooted people to their native lands, Some were returned un- der plans established by the allied armies, while still others, impatient to rejoin their families and relatives, took to the roads in a seemingly unending stream of people with their few remaining earthly possessions strapped to thelr backs or carted in small wagons and baby carriages. This impatient movement of Auicans was for the most part headed weslward toward France, the low countries, and Italy. The natural impa- tience to return home which characterized the western Europeans was not found in those whose homes were to the east. After long months of tedious efforts to bring about the voluntary repatriation of all the displaced persons to their native lands in June 1946, there still remained approxi- mately 1,200,000 who refused to repatriate. It is interesting to note that those who re- fused came from Pcland, Czechoslovakia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, the Ukraine, Hun- gary, Rumania, and Yugoslavia. They gave as their reasons for not returning, fear of their lives and liberties because of race, re- ligion, or political beliefs, A solution to the problem of the displaced persons had to be found. The following alternatives were offered: 1. Forced repatriation. This would have required the western allies to use phycical force in bringing about their repatriation. This was rejected as thoroughly alien to the basic tenets of western civilization. 2. To remove them from the camps and assembly centers and throw them upon the economies of Germany, Austria, and Italy. This was rejected because those countries could not take care of their own natives who were faced with near starvation diets and wilh industry and commerce at a complete standstill. 8. They could be maintained indefinitely in the camps and assembly centers. This was rejected because the cost was prohibitive and it offered a most unnatural solution. 4. New homelands could be found for these people in countries willing and able to accept them. The fourth alternative was recognized as the on’'y privier! sciu‘ine to this vast human pr Dior. Cot y the Interna- tional Powe. Ono crue tot, to which the United States gave real leaclership in its for- mation, was established within the United seen ony a Nations. It is significant to note that the International Refuges Gr ov. wlan. ILGe ils inception been sippociee atoc br ha countries of the wee vie. we la wee Tene found it necessary to bind themselves to- gether for common security against the latest world aggressor. Neither the Soviet Union nor any of her satellites have played an active part in oe cera ic.s of this organization, On the ¢ :. u::v, uke: opposed its establish- ment and continue to oppose its humani- tarian and charitable function. The United States has to date offered haven to 174,862 displaced persons. Other cconerating nations of the world have taken in a tou cf 548,968. The solution to the problem of displaced persons is in sight. The Congress of the United States has extended and liberalized the original Displaced Persons Act. This legislation is at present in conference and is expected to be brought before both Houses of Congress for final action in the immediate future. The provisions of this new legisla- tion together with the continuing coopera- tion of the other nations of good will gives high hope that this problem will, for the most part, be resolved by June of 1951, The story of the displaced persons does not complete the analysis of Europe’s up- rooted millions. There remains two impor- tant phases of this problem which merit the serious attention and concern of the Ameri- can. people. Shortly after the surrender of Germany, the Soviet Union began the forced deporta- tion of all persons of German ethnic origin from the countries their military forces oc- cupied. All persons of German ethnic origin were thus expelled from Estonia, Latvia, Lith uania, the Ukraine, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Rumania, and Yugloslavia. The forebears of a great number of these people settled in those countries as long as 400 years ago. Nevertheless their land and all their posses- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD sions were expropriatcu and they were exe pelled to Germany and Austria as paupers A special subcommittee of the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representa- tives made an extensive study during 1949 of the problem of expellees and refugees of German ethnic origin. This cnucompassed approximately 2 months’ field study in Ger- many and Austria together with the ecxami- nation of all available official documents and the taking of extensive expert testimony, The outstanding conclusions reached by this tive ft cm eoeeeittee are: To.‘ ow pt to. facets clearly show the fallacy s.i.¢% 2 ty ¢ American co-responsi- bility for the uprooting of millions of Ger- man expellees and refurees. The Sovict Union without consultation or advance no- tice began the mass expulsion of these peo- ple long before the Potsdam Conference. 2. That the United States delegation to the Potsdam Conference, led by the Presi- dent of the United States, was faced with what amounted to a fait accompli in this matter. The efforts of the United States deleration, therefore, were directed toward doing eve.yihine possible to make more or- derly and humane the inevitable expulsion of these people and to open occupied Ger- many to those who would otherwise be faced by deportation to remote sub-Arctic terri- tories of Soviet Russia, an equivalent to an- nihilation, 3. That it is highly improbable under ex- isting conditions that the German exnecliees and refugees may be peacefully revurned to their former residence. 4, That efforts must be made to establish an economy in Germany which will absorb approximately 7,000,000 of the cxpellees and refugees. 5. That it will be necessary to develop im- migration cpnortuntiies fer over 1,000,000 of these exnellees ord relurees In the amended displaced-persons Jaw passed by the Senate on April 6, 1080, two special provisions were added which relate to the problem of expellees and refugees of German ethnic origin. The tirst amendment ealls for the admission into the United states of 64,744 expellees for whom home and job assurance are to be provided by American citizens. The second amendment authorizes the partletpation of representatives of the Government of the United States in an ing ternational conference, the pirpere of which is to study this problem and bo develup prac- tical means for Its solution. Some idea of the importance and relation of this problem to the establLshment of an economically sound western Burope may be gathered from the fact that it was given special recognition at the meeting of the foreign ministers of the United States, Great Britain, and France, held in London last week. The communiqué issued by this con ference indicated that the respeetive Cov. ernments were cppolntine represontat ves who were to finmedlatcly beet a itudy of the problem with a view to tt. solution. The last phase of the refugee problem arises from the events which have taken place in the so-called satellite countries nince the end of active hostilities. Despite ayreement sol- emniy entered into by the Soviet Union that the wover: ments of these countries would bo truly representative of the freely expressed wishes of their people, we find the opposite to be the case today. The leaders of pariia- mentary povernment in each of those eoun~ tries together with their active supporters have been forced to flee and to take haven in the western zones of Germany, Austria, and in Italy. In each of those countries par- Mamentary government was climinated by a coup backed by the ever-present military might of the Soviet Union. These people have been forced to flee their homelands b2~ cause of religious and political persecution. They are as homeless and dispussessed as the
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD original displaced persons and the expellees and refugees of German ethnic origin, They have little left but their faith in western civilization and the hope that one day in the not-too-distant future the basic freedoms for which the last war was fought will be enjoyed by all people in every country of the world. In summarizing these events which had led to the brutal uprooting of more than 25,C00,000 people, I believe several valid con- clusions can be made. The first is that the creation of this tremendous problem must be placed fairly and squarely at the hands of the dictators, those who brought about World War II, and those who now stand in the way of peace with justice and freedom for all. It was a ruthless dictator who initiated this problem just as it is a ruthless dictator who enlarged it and today continues its existence, The second is that the problem of Europe’s upreoted millions is an integral part of the desperate struggle which we are now engaged in to strengthen and preserve western civili- zation. If we are to win the struggle, we must guard against the development of any malignant growth or development within western civilization itself. We must see to it that all persons regardless of their race, religion, or ethnic origin are afforded the op- portunity to a decent and self-respecting way of life. The attainment of this goal will give concrete expression to our belief in the worth and dignity of man. Only by establishing this essential dignity for all mankind may we attain a peaceful world. In commemorating the Tricentennial of the Marinist Order we can learn many funda- mental lessons from the 100 years of service which have been completed. There is, I feel, one especially noteworthy event in this glorious history. Father Meyer, accompanied by Brother Schultz, arrived in Cincinnati on July 16, 1849. Upon arrival they found an epidemic of cholera raging in Cincinnati and in the surrounding towns as far as Dayton. At the request of Bishop Purcell, Father Meyer and Brother Schultz journeyed to Dayton to ad- minister to the victims of this epidemic. There they met a Mr. Stuart, a descendent of the Stuarts of Scotland. It so happened that Mr. Stuart owned 125 acres of land known then as Duberry Farm, which he was offering for sale. Father Meyer considered this tract of land ideal for the purpose of establishing a headquarters for the Marinist Fathers in the New World. A sum of $12,000 was being asked for the property which, while reasonable, was far beyond the resources of Father Meyer, who had arrived here with but a few dollars left in his pocket. On March 19, 1850, the Feast of St. Joseph, Father Meyer had a most important conver- sation with his newly acquired friend, Mr. Stuart. He told him of his great dream of acquiring the 125 acres of land and of his confidence that St. Joseph and the Blessed Mother would bless and prosper the work of the Marinist Fathers in the New World. When Mr. Stuart asked Father Meyer what collateral or other security he had to offer for the purchase of this land, Father Meyer offered a medal of St. Joseph. Mr. Stuart accepted the medal of St. Joseph as security and immediately turned over the deed to the property to Father Meyer. In this little story we find the lesson of faith, that virtue which is basic to the establishment of mutual trust:and confl- dence. There can be no lasting or peaceful relations between men without mutual trust and confidence. It is equally true that there can be no lasting or peaceful relations be- tween nations without mutual trust and con- fidence. Let us hope and pray that soon all nations will return to the faith in God-given principles so that peace with justice for all may prevail in the world. Contribution of My Generation to Democracy EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. JAMES E. NOLAND OF INDIANA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, May 22, 1950 Mr. NOLAND. Mr. Speaker, the fol- lowing essay was written by Sara Sue Phegley, 16-year-old junior in the Car- lisle-Hadden School. As winner of this essay contest which I sponsored in the Seventh Congressional District of Indi- ana, Miss Phegley showed real insight into the background of the democratic processes. With the youth of this Na- tion rededicated to the maintenance of democracy, we need not fear for the fu- ture of America. I am very proud of the response of Seventh District high schools in partici- pating in this essay contest on the Con- tribution of My Generation to Democ- racy. Sara Sue Phegley is to be highly congratulated for her fine essay. THe CONTRIBUTION oF My GENERATION To Democracy The future of democracy and the happli- ness of the world depend upon the contri- bution of my generation to democracy. Our parents have given us first-hand in- formation of a depression and its demolaliz- ing effects. They have lived in a period when some communities were dominated by intolerant groups. We know the cost of war in life and money and the fallacy of be- lieving any good can be derived from the use of force. We have seen people unfit for office elected and dominated by undemo- cratic groups. All these problems are to fall upon my generation. We must conscientiously and intelligently understand these issues of our times to preserve the freedom without which there can be no security in any nation. I believe my generaiton will profit by the mistakes of our predecessors. We bring with us confidence and intelligence, Our many youth organizations—Scouts, 4-H Clubs, Hi~Y, Y-Teens, and others—train in citizenship and leadership. We are not afraid to stand and express our convictions without being swayed by the opinions of others. We know that the primary princi- ples of freedom are self-development and self-expression. I believe we are intelligent enough to recognize the fact that no group, no individual, or branch of government should dictate our lives. It behooves us to secure a good govern- ment by carefully exercising the rights of the ballot. We must see that only those who put personal and political gains sec- ond to our best national interests and the welfare of their fellow men may gain office. Wo must maintain an active interest In gov- ernment and support our leaders, yet at the same time make them aware of our opinions on public issues. We should not hesitate to fill public offices if we are qualified; more- over, none of us must shrink from such pub- lic duties as serving as witmesses or on juries. Many of the trying questions now facing this Nation such as the atomic and hydrogen bomb, mercy killing, and the prevention of crime, will confront my generation. We must not let the many communistic leaders of our time weaken the democratic ideals our forefathers have handed down to us. A3873 We will bring with us deep religious con- victions. Only God-loving, God-fearing peo- ple can deal justly with their fellow men. We must have a known code of morals. God forbid that ve trade the freedom of opportunity, freedom of speech, freedom of press, and freedom of religion for false se- curity, force, and dictatorship. May God help us to preserve the democratic govern- ment our ancestors have fought for and are iw putting into our hands for safe keep- ng. All Pretense Lost . EXTENSION OF REMARKS fo) HON. HOMER E. CAPEHART OF INDIANA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, May 22 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. CAPEHART. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Rrcorp an editorial entitled ‘All Pretense Lost,” published in the Wall Street Journal of May 1%, There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Rrecorp, as follows: ALL PRETENSE Lost If candor is a commendable quality, Mr. Leon Keyserling merits a medal for some of his comments the other day on the admin- istration’s spending policy. He does not countenance the wishful thinking that present deficits are just to meet emergencies. He says quite frankly that the administration plans to Keep spend~ ing for spending’s sake and will diligently search out all opportunities for so doing. He puts at rest any fears that the administra- tion might return to any such old-fashioned thing as economy in government. Since Mr. Keyserling is the chairman of the council that advises the President on economic policy, and has lately demonstrated that he has Mr. Truman’s confidence, what he says is worth listening to. For instance, we have heard it said—by the President himself, among others—that the reason the budget cannot now be balanced is that there are extraordinary demands for for- eign aid and the cold war. We have been told that as soon as these temporary demands are ended there can be a return to economy. Foolish promising, says Mr. Keyserling. When the costs of the cold war and foreign ald can be safely reduced there will be no cuts in spending. The administration will just take this saving and use it to expand its domestic programs. Anyone who hopes for economy then is simply deluded. Indeed, Mr. Keyserling is honest enough to prophesy that the administration is never going to cut its spending and frank enough to argue it ought not to even dream of it. The liberal spending of the Roosevelt and Truman administrations is basically right, in his opinion. Armament spending is not an undesirable burden undertaken out of necessity and with prayers that it may some- day be reduced; it is economically essential and saves the trouble of thinking up some other spending outlet. The same is true, he argues, of the Government's spending for veterans, for farmers or for other groups. Mr. Keyserling also explains quite plainly that if the administration ever does balance the budget it will be done only by increasing tax revenues. The formula he cffers is to gepsnd our way to economy.
A8874 A few people have long felt that this ad- ministration had no intention whatever of cutting the Government’s spending, that spending itself was the goal and the par- ticular projects merely excuses. But 1t was dificult to combat the protestations that all would be well tomorrow. Now the thing is plainly spoken. Spend- ing is good; economy is bad. The adminis- tration will work industriously at the first and avoid the last like the plague. Mr. Keyserling’s candor, at any rate, ought to be welcome. The meritorious thing about it is that it strirs pretense from the admin- istration’s iii tueuts ed leaves no room for illusion. Louis Budenz EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. NOAH M. MASON OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, May 19, 1950 Mr. MASON. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- orp, I include George Sokolsky’s column, These Days, which appeared in the Washington Times-Herald. It is an ex- cellent defense of Louis Budenz and a complete answer to Senator CHAvEz’ crit- icism of Budenz: TuHEsE DAYs (By George Sokoisky) Senator DENNIS CHAVEZ, United States Senate, Washington, D.C. My Dear Senator CHavez: I have for sev- eral days pondered your speech in the Senate concerning Louis Budenz. From a psycho- logical standpoint, it was interesting because you involved yourself not in politics but in canon law. I have never met Louis Budenz. When he was editor of the Daily Worker, he used to write excoriating articles about me, calling me a reactionary, a Fascist, and a tool of the National Association of Manufacturers. I did not mind the name-calling, because, Senator, the record always shows what the facts are. Of course, I could have called names back, as you have done, but that strikes me as childish. You and I and Louis Budenz and Joe Mc- Carthy will soon enough go our way to eternity, but the struggle between Marxism and Christianity will continue as the struggle between good and evil, between God and the devil will continue. I refer you to the Book of Job on the subject—it was written long before anyone thought of us. However, when Louis Budenz was recon- verted to the Roman Catholic church, I sat back and waited. I wanted to be sure that that conversion was not false. As a Com- munist is, by definition, an atheist, his oath can never be accepted per se. I felt that I had to be sure of the sincerity of Louis Bu- denz. His conversion was effected by Monsignor Sheen, a cherished friend, but I have never once spoken to Monsignor Sheen about it. For a year, Louis Budenz was at Notre Dame struggling with his soul. I am an alumnus of Notre Dame (by the back door of an hon- orary degree), but I have never spoken to President Cavanaugh about it. I wanted to see what practical application Louis Budenz made of his conversion. I wanted to see a test made of his sincerity. You say that you are a Roman Catholic and that for the first time in 19 years, you arose in Congress to speak as a Catholic. I take it that that was a rhetorical expression. A man of God is a man of God all the time, not once in 19 years. Furthermore, yours is a hierarchical church, and therefore you could not speak as a Catholic, ex cathedra. Only the Pope can do that in a matter of faith and morals. Yet you do try to give the impression that you also have aright to do that. You impugn the confessional; you deny repentance and peni- tence; you deprive a man of absolution. You go too far, if you go as a Catholic. If you had said that, man to man, you would never believe Budenz, that is your right. When, however, you said that you, as a Catholic, rejected his conversion, you invaded a realm which, as a Catholic, you know is not yours. Your church denies that there are gods on earth, even in the United States Senate. Now, by what yardstick do I conclude that Louis Budenz is sincere—utterly, completely, totally sincere? By his acts since his con- version, Senator CHAVEZ. Budenz was the first man to name Ger- hart Fisler as the No. 1 Communist agent in America. His exposure of Eisler was justi- fied by the course of events. Eisler is today the top Communist in east Germany and our greatest enemy in Europe, next to Sta- lin. Budenz identified ©. Santo and J. Peters as Communist agents. Both voluntarily left the United States, which they should not have been permitted to do. Budenz testified 1n the two trials of Har- old Christoffel. Both trials resulted in con-= viction. Budenz was a witness before the House Committee on Un-American Activities in the Alger Hiss case. Budenz was the Government’s chief wit- ness for 10 days in the trial of the 11 Com- munists before Judge Medina. They were all convicted. Budenz was the witness before the House Labor Committee five times concerning the United Electrical Workers, which was ex- pelled from the C, I. O., confirming Budenz’ testimony. Budenz has spent more than 100 hours in giving data to the F. B. I., which they have used advantageously. He could have been silent, teaching eco- nomics at Fordham University. Instead he risks just such attacks as yours. By his deeds you shall know him. Sincerely yours, Grorce E. SoKOLSEKY. The Railroad Strike EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FORREST C. DONNELL OF MISSOURI IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, May 22 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. DONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an article entitled “That’s That,” written by Bruce Gustin and published in the Denver Post of April 27, 1950. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: THat’s THar (By Bruce Gustin) Union leaders acted wisely and with regard for the public interest in postponing the rail- road and telephone strikes which had been called for Wednesday. Such interference with transportation and communications as APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD was threatened by these strikes should not be tolerated, Walk-outs of this nature should be outiawed., The fact that the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen agreed to a 2=weeks’ truce, postponing the railroad strike, and the CIO Communica- tions Workers ree*~*~ ct indefinitely the tel- ephone strike *..44% . deter Congress from taking action to protect the public interest. Senator DoNNELL, of Missouri, has intro- duced an amendment to the Railway Labor Act to outlaw any strike, slow-down or other concerted ivn*crw3ticn of operations by em- ployees, or 2 “i. by a carrier, result- ing from any dispute falling within the pur- view of the Railway Labor Act. This amend- ment is based upon the sound theory an- nounced by the late Calvin Coolidge, former President of the United States, that “there is no right to strike against the public safety by anybody, any time, anywhere.” The amendment proposed by Senator Don= WELL is fine, as far as it goes. But it doesn’t go far enough. Any strike or lock-out which seriously interferes with either transporta- tion or communications should be banned. Those are two services which vitally affect the whole Nation. It is Senator DONNELL’s con- tention that there is no absolute right to strike. And in support of that he quotes from the United States Supreme Court deci- sion in the case of Dorchy v. Kansas (272 U.S. 806), that “neither the common law, nor the fourteenth amendment, confers the ab- solute right to strike.” Old Man of the Sea? EXTENSION OF REMARKS F HON. ROY 0. WOODRUFF OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, May 22, 1950 Mr. WOODRUFF. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the R&c- orp, I include the following editorial from the Washington Times-Herald of April 29, 1950: Oxp MAN oF THE SEA? Are we never going to stop playing sucker to European come-on schemes? At first, right after the war, our yearly multibillion foreign-aid program was sold to the country on the plea that other nations needed our help to rebuild their production. This they proceeded to do. Now, according to administration figures, Europe’s industrial production is 20 percent higher than before the war, her food pro~ duction is back to prewar levels, and her export trade is greater than before 1939. So what about more Marshall-plan aid? Can it be cut off? PRODUCTION IS AT PEAK Certainly not, administration master- minds now tell us. Because in the course of supplying other countries we have built up our own production so much that if Marshall plan operations were cut off, we would be stranded with huge stockpiles of farm produce—our markets would be glut- ted—there would be unemployment, depres- sion, collapse. So, say they, the ECA program must have another $3,400,000,000 for next year. They are right, of course, in saying that s0 many surpluses exist—as every sad tax- payer who has read of our production of surplus potatoes knows. But they are as wrong as wrong, these mas- terminds, in their bland assumption that this situation is necessary and must be continued,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD CUT THE CLOTH TO FIT THE PATTERN We don’t have to keep producing surpluses to give away. We can, and should, cut farm supports to fit our own needs only. If we did this, then the weird business of dodging @ depression Er de~ordiv> on other people to accept our er':.: %.%. i very soon cease, And everybody, including those charity patients, would be better off. For our farm- ers could then turn to growing more of the things we want—and as for Europe, “poor sick Eurcpe,” without our everlasting crutch that wobbly old lady would learn to walk a sight faster, we’re thinking. SINBAD WAS A PIKER The whole thing reminds us of the story of Sinbad and the Old Man of the Sea. You remember how that old man asked Sinbad to take him piggy-back across a river—and then nearly sirangled Sinbad and rode around on his neck for years. Well, they saddled us with the Marshall plan on the plea that it was needed to get Europe over the immediate war-caused eco- nomic crisis. And now that we’ve toted it across, will it get off? Ha, move over, Sin- bad—you were only a piker. We not only have to carry our old man around, we have to feed him and listen to his blather, Budget for Germany EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HERMAN P. EBERHARTER OF FENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, May 22, 1950 Mr. EBERHARTER. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the REcorD, I include the following from the New York Times of April 23, 1950: Buscert For GERMAaNY—SUPPORT URGED FOR Funp Reguest To ContTINUVE EpucaTIon PROGRAM (Of the signatories to the following letter, Mr. Taylor was formerly Chief of Counsel for War Crimes at Nuremberg; Mr. Brett, con- sultant to General Clay, Germany, 1948; Mr. Greenstein, former adviser to General Clay on Jewish Affairs; Mr. Mayer, former Chief of the Motion Picture Branch of Military Government in Germany; Mr. Padover, au- thor of Experiment in Germany.) To THE Eprror oF THE New York TIMES: The recent testimony of John J. McCloy (United States High Commissioner for Ger- many) before the House Appropriations Committee lays commendable emphasis on the vital significance of our occupational “program of education designed to assist, advise and persuade the German Govern- ment and people to take the democratic road.” ‘This official recognition of the reedu- cation program’s overriding importance, which received all too little attention in press accounts of Mr. McCloy’s statement, will be welcomed by many who have served in the occupation and who have been dismayed at the relegation of educational activities to a back seat. For, as Mr. McCloy declared, “everything depends, the whole concept of Western Europe depends, upon” the establishment of stable democracy in Germany: PURPOSE OF PROGRAM “If we have a free Europe the German people themselves must individually accept the way of life that is the solid basis of western Germany. A Germany whose citi- zens have not demonstrated their acceptance of these values can never be a strong link in the association of western nations. A Germany whose citizens have learned to understand and accept these democratic values will be a bulwark of peace and strength against the Communist menace from the east. It is therefore of great im- portance to help the Germans come to such an understanding and acceptance. It is not something which can be imposed or some~ thing which can be compelled, but it is something which can be nurtured by help= ful exposure and example. This 1s the pur- pose of our public affairs, of our education and information programs. “I wish to emphasize that we cannot put over this program by fiat or decree. We are seeking to develop it in a spirit of friend- ship and understanding. We are giving our advice and assistance wherever it is sought. We are providing materials and opportuni- ties. “We are helping the German schools and universities, the German church and com- munity groups, to regain the best in the German tradition, and to learn the new and the good in American, British, and French civilization ” These words, buried in a 600-page volume of testimony, penetrate to the core of the “German problem” Their far-reaching imi-~ plications, and the magnitude of the edu- cational undertaking, are most inadequately reflected in the occupational budget for 1951 which Mr. McCoy himself presented. ACTIVITIES COVERED Less than $2,500,000 for all press, radio, and motion-picture activities; about the same amount for information centers such as the “Amerika Hauser.” A few mullicns for the student and ‘‘leader” exchange pro- gram. Less than $1,500,000 for direct aid to German schools and universities; this 1s about 50 cents for each of the 3,000,000 school children in the American zone, ex- cluding the universities entirely. The en- tire proposed appropriation for educational, cultural and informational activities is just under $12,650,000. Even with a generous additional allowance for administration and other overhead ex- penses, this is less than $1 per capita in the American zone. By way of comparison, the same volume of hearings contained the testi- mony of Paul Hoffman in sus o7* of an ERP subsidy to Germany of 409?,00) JLO. Disappointingly inadequate as Mr. Mc~< Cloy’s educational budget for 1951 is, it rep- resents an imcrease over that for the current year. Nor can Mr. McCloy be justly saddled with much of the blame for its shortcomings. At least he has officially and publicly estab= lished the primacy of the educational pro- gram, and no doubt his estimate took into account the probability of unfavorable con- gressional reaction to a larger request, as appears between the lines of his later testi- mony that “it is quite possible that the money we seek may not be enough. * * * I am sure that I could effectively spend more.” RELUCTANCE TOWARD APPROVAL In the light of the prevailing congres- sional temper, his caution is understandable, The reaction of the Congressmen before whom he appeared was at times perfunctory, at other times suspicious or hostile, but never enthusiastic. Rumor hath it that Mr. McCloy’s presentation encountered even rougher going before the Senate Appropria- tions Committee, under the far from benign aegis of Senator MCKELLAR. In short, unless Mr. McCloy’s budget re- ceives timely and effective support, there is no assurance that even this sadly circum- scribed program will be approved. This is not the stuff of which sensational headlines are made, but it is the cornerstone of our German policy. It is a crucial phase of the campaign to win the peace. We urge prompt and vigorous representations to all Congress~ A3875 men and Senators in aid of the McCloy budget for Germany. TELYORD TAYLOR, Georcse P. Brett, Jr. Harry GREENSTEIN, ARTHUR L. MAYER, Saunt K. Papover. New Yor, April 21, 1950. Misleading Publicity From the Defense Department EXTENSION OF REMARKS fo) HON. JOHN F. SHELLEY OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, May 22, 1950 Mr. SHELLEY. Mr. Speaker, I wish to call the attention of the House to an editorial printed in the American Aero- naut under the date of April 18, 1950. The American Aeronaut is the official union paper of Aeronautical Industrial District Lodge, No. 727, International Association cf Machinists, at North Hol- lywood, Calif. This editorial very properly criticizes a recent announcement to the press indi- cating that new orders for several mil- lions of dollars’ worth of airframes had been placed with California aircraft fac- tories. Investigation following this an- nouncement disclosed that the orders had actually been placed several months previously, and that there was in reality no new work involved. The editorial, which I include in the Recorp accompa- nying these remarks, points out the harmful effects to labor and the aircraft industry of such misleading publicity. I suggest that those responsible give seri- ous consideration to timing and content of future releases in order that the con- fusion resulting from the false hopss aroused be avoided. The editorial follows: WHo’s Kippine WHom? We have stated before, and we repeat, “You ean’t fool all of the people all of the time, but you can try.” The most recent glaring attempt to pull the wool over the eyes of the aircraft workers and the public, generally in the vicinity of the airframe factories on the west coast, is the announcement relative to the placing of orders by the Navy for planes with Lockheed, Douglas, and other factories in California. When some 10 days or 2 weeks ago, the daily press all carried the news that Lock- heed had received orders for some $25,000,000 and Douglas something over $30,0000,000 for aircraft, the workers employed in the in- dustry and those who have been laid off dur- ing the last few months all were enthused as they foresaw continued work and em- ployment. When union officials began to inquire about these so-called new orders they learned that they do not exist, that they are merely repeat announcements of orders for planes that they have been working on since last fall. It is our understanding that much of the work on these planes has been completed and some of them may already be in the air, That the orders for these planes were in- cluded in the backlogs of work reported in the first of the year statements by the vari- ous companies, We ask, “Who is kidding whom?” ‘We note that none of the airframe companies have
A3876 taken it upon themselves to correct the erro- neous idea that the plants would be busy with work, but we find them making out surplus lists, preparing for large lay-offs. And when we hear the claim that the an- nouncements were not made for security reasons, we again ask, “Who’s kidding whom?” Any potential enemy of the United States (and we have only one) no doubt knows more abouy the number and type of planes being manufactured in our factories than do many of the workers in the plants. When we consider the subject from all angles, we are inclined to look upon the in- cident as a further attempt on the part of the forces who are back of the plant dispersal and work removal programs, to sabotage the fight that is being made to keep our Cali- fornia aircraft plants busy and the economy of our craftsmen and the district on a stable basis. The public, having read the mislead- ing reports in the papers, have seen no con- tradiction and assume a rather indifferent attitude to the campaign of the Council of Aircraft Unions to keep the west coast air- craft industry intact and functioning rather than its removal to Government-owned plants in the Midwest, which is looked upon by many as the first step toward the na- tionalization of the industry. Another evil of such untrue publicity is the fact that the reports of the contracts, or plane orders, that do not exist are read by the unemployed in other sections of the country and these workers rush in here seek~ ing employment only to be met with lay~ offs where they expected jobs. Many are without funds and become subjects of charity and the many other circumstances brought about by widespread unemploy-~ ment. One man who was dealing for a house had the price raised 10 percent. When he asked about the raise he was told that it was due to the fact that Lockheed had received all those new plane orders. Merchants believ~ ing what they have read are inclined to overstock and make investments they would not haye made had they known the truth. We ask, “Who’s kidding whom?” Is it the procurement agencies of the Armed Forces? Is it the airframe factories, who apparently seem wishy-washy in their op~ position to plant dispersal? We cannot blame the newspapers as these releases were furnished them. However, when the union called a press conference to give them the real facts none sent representatives and it may be they have had their orders of hands Consolidated Vultee at San Diego received an order for some work that it is claimed will put about 3,000 men to work but it is the only aircraft concern on the west coast that has been given anything that could be construed as a worth-while order. We repeat, “Who’s kidding whom?” and why? As we go to press, the Daily News an- nounces that the Army has given orders for $120,000,000 for F-94 night fighters and $26,~ 900,000 for T-~833 jet trainers. We ask, “Are these not orders for the same ships upon which we have been work- ing since last fall?” The Railway Strike EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. FORREST C. DONNELL OF MISSOURI IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, May 22 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. DONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Rrcorp an editorial entitled “Railway Strike,” published in the Albuquerque Journal of May 11, 1950. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the REcoRD, as follows: Rai.way STRIKE Five great railway systems, including the Santa Fe, are paralyzed by the strike of lo- comotive firemen and enginemen. This strike can but have an immediate and disastrous effect on the public interest. Mediation has failed. The dispute is a long one. For years now the controversy has raged over the demand of the brotherhood for an additional fireman on multiple unit Diesel engines; also demand that a fireman be placed on switch engines and electrically operated locomotives, The railroads charge the demand comes wholly under the heading of feather bed- ding, the practice of creating jobs where there is no necessary work to be done. Or in others words, job padding. The fact-finding boards have held that the extra fireman is not needed as a safety measure. The rail strike, if it continues for any length of time, will still almost every train in America. Thousands and thousands of railway workers and other thousands and thousands of workers in related industries Will be idle. The loss to property and production will be enormous. A great many people, including Congress- men, believe that strikes and lockouts in such vital industries as the railroads should be outlawed. It is certain that the strike will see de- mands for legislation in Congress that calls for compulsory arbitration as a last resort in rail disputes. Such legislation would be approved by a large segment of the public. It is clear that this Nation in such cold war and perilous times as these cannot tolerate for long strikes that affect the Nation’s very existence, Defense of Western Europe EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. ROY 0. WOODRUFF OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, May 22, 1950 Mr. WOODRUFF. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following article by Arthur Sears Henning from the Wash- ington Times-Herald of May 22, 1950: ACHESON PLAN To ARM EUROPE Faczs Bia Fient In CONGRESS—INTEGRATION OF MILI- TARY Forces, HicH Costs or ScHEME BRING OPPOSITION (By Arthur Sears Henning) The undertaking to defend and pension western Europe indefinitely, to which Secre- tary of State Acheson committed the United States at the London Conference last week, will meet with tremendous opposition in Congress, it was learned yesterday. Many Democrats, as well as Republicans, are aroused over the plan to integrate the American Army, Navy, and Air Force with European forces in an international army entailing a surrender of American sov= ereignty. The creation of a governing council, headed by an outstanding American, to direct the military and economic arrangements, which has been hailed by the internationalists as APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the nucleus of a world state, will come under the fire of the nationalists as a step toward the extinction of the United States as an in- dependent nation. COST WOULD BE COLOSSAL Even stronger and more widespread oppo- sition will be evoked by the colossal cost of the undertaking to American taxpayers. Acheson committed the country to a contin- uation of economic aid to Britain, France, and other nations of western Europe after the termination of the Marshall plan in 1952, This presumably would cost the United States about €3,000,000,000 a year. Acheson also committed Uncle Sam to pick up the check for the cost of rearming and defending western Europe against possible aggression by Russia. American surplus air- craft, ships, tanks, artillery, and other arms are now being furnished to Britain, France, and other Atlantic pact nations under an initial $1,750,000,000 program of military aid, It was estimated at the London Conference that it would be necessary for America to step this outlay up to three or four billions @ year if western Europe is to be adequately prepared for war. Altogether, therefore, the Acheson come mitment means six or seven billions a year indefinitely in the American budget, which is now in the red to the extent of about 14 billions for 1950 and 1951. TAX INCREASE NECESSARY Military authorities estimate that it would cost the United States not less than $50,000,- 000,000 to make western Europe invulnerable to attack. This would be exclusive of for~ eign economic aid on which the United States already has poured out 35 billions since the end of the war. Any notion of reducing taxes to stimulate business has gone glimmering under this colossal foreign aid program. It will be necessary to increase taxes, unless President Truman intends to continue deficit financing. “The whole program that has come out of the London Conference is utterly fan- tastic,” said Representative Wooorurr, Re- publican of Michigan, a member of the House Ways anc. Means Committee now framing the tax bill. “It merely will hasten the day when the United States will go on the financial rocks. We'll go down into the depths and I doubt that we will ever straighten out our affairs until that event takes place.” Indications are not wanting that the Nationalists in their opposition to the Lon-~ don program will receive the support of numerous internationalists who are no longer @ unit on the Truman doctrine of American protection of every nation from Russian ag- gression. The hostilities will begin when Acheson ar-= rives home and makes his report on the Lon-~ don Conference to the President and, pre- sumably, a radio broadcast to the public. He is now aboard ship writing his report. Fate of Railroad Labor Act Hangs in Balance EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FORREST C. DONNELL OF MISSOURI IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, May 22 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. DONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an editorial entitled “Fate of Railroad Labor Act
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Hangs in Balance,” published in the Sala- manca (N. Y.) Republican-Press of May §, 1959. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Rrcorp, as follows: Fate oF RAILROAD LaBor Act HANGs IN BALANCE The heart of the problem of assuring the American public of uninterrupted service cn the great transportation lines—a_ service which cannot be stopped without national disaster—was exposed in testimony Monday before a Senate labor subcommittee. The committee is holding hearings on a bill by Senator DONNELL, of Missouri, to make strikes and lockouts illegal in railway labor disputes. When the Railway Labor Act was passed many years ago, and for some years after its enactment, belief was widespread that the danger of great railroad strikes had been eliminated. This act often was cited as fur- nishing a pattern that well could be fol- lowed in the case of other industries. When the Taft-Hartley law was propused and be- ing debated in Congress, one of the argu- ments against it was that there was no need for such legislation—that all that was re- quired to prevent disastrous strikes in indus- try was to provide for all industrial disputes @ procedure like that set up for the railroads and their employees in the Railway Labor Act. The Railway Labor Act provides that if and when other efforts to settle disputes be- tween the carriers and their employees fail, the President shall appoint a fact-finding board, and that pending the report of this board railroad service shall not be inter- rupted. The public’s faith in this law was based on belief that neither the railroads on the one hand nor their employees on the other would refuse to abide by the report of such a fact-finding board. Both railroad management and labor leaders must realize, the argument ran, that in the last analysis public opinion wculd be the decisive factor in a labor dispute involving the transportation lines. Hence, it was argued, neither would dare risk the defeat that would surely fol- low for the side that refused to accept the decision of a fact-finding board. For several years nothing occurred toa change this belief on the part of the Ameri- can public in the efficacy of the Railway Labor Act. Railroad employees shared in this confidence that there never would be another great rail strike. The public, the railroads, and the workers all believed that a great transportation tie-up was unthink- able. This confidence, however, has been com- pletely shattered by events of the past few years. Three times, rail-labor unions have refused to abide by the decisions of fact- finding boards, and afier such refusal the threat of a tie-up has been used as a club to win concessions denied by the fact-finding boards. The imminence of such a tie-up on the most recent occasion led President Tru- man to threaten to draft railroad workers into the Army. In the current dispute the basic issue once again is whether the decision of a Presiden- tial fact-finding board shall be accepted by both sides. The railroads have always ac- cepted the findings of these boards. A walk- out has been called against several major roads by the Brotherhood of Firemen and Enginemen over the question of forced em- ployment of a third man on Diesel locomo- tives. The unions demanded that a third man be employed. Two Presidential fact- finding boards have held that there is no need for a third man. The brotherhood has refused to abide by the report of the board in the present case and has called a strike, scheduled for tomorrow, on several lines, The presidents of these railroads, pointing to firemen’s action, told the Senate commit- tee that railroad labor organizations no longer accept the recommendations of fact- finding boards, but threaten walk-outs in the expectation of winning greater benefits. Hence, they argue, there is need for legisla~ tion to make strikes and lock-outs illegal. The brotherhoods have given the railroads their strongest argument for such a law. Mr. Truman, Just Who Are the Isolationists ? EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. KARL E. MUNDT OF SOUTH DAKOTA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, May 22 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. MUNDT. Myr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Rrcorp a statement prepared by me on the foreign policy, to- gether with an editorial from the Daily Plainsman, published in Huron, S. Dak. There being no objection, the state- ment and editorial were ordered to be printed in the REcorp, as follows: STATEMENT BY SENATOR MUNDT Mr. President, under leave granted me by the Senate, I am submitting for printing in the CONGRESSIONAL Recorp at this point a thought-provoking and realistic editorial from the Daily Plainsman, published in Huron, 3. Dak. It is an editorial every American should read. In his recent stump-~speaking tour of the United States, President Truman cccasion- ally—in Fargo, N. Dak, for example—at- tempted to discuss foreign affairs. As this editorial suggests, he really should leave such a@ discussion to more talented and success- ful spokesmen, Since a good foreign policy is one which preserves the peace, protects the strength and security of a nation, creates in- ternational good will and unity, and aids a country to stay solvent and contented, 1t would seem that the foreign policies of the Roosevelt-Truman era have failed dismally and woefully on every count. Whatever else historians may say about the Roosevelt-Tru- man era, it appears clear they must record it as an era of backing and twisting, of ap- peasing and reacting, of much war and little peace, insofar as leadership in foreign policy is concerned. Even waiving all consideration of such sordid incidents as the case of Alger Hiss, of Henry Julian Wadleigh, of Carl Aldo Marzani, of Yalta, and of Potsdam, the fact that American foreign policy since 1932 has failed to keep us out of either a hot war or a cold war and has failed to procure even an offi- cial peace up to this late date, indicates that in foreign affairs Presidents Roosevelt and Truman have most completely failed. For Truman now to try to cover his cur~ rent miscalculations and misplaced con- fidences by attacking those who expose or criticize him, is consequently scarcely likely to delude any but the most gullible or to silence more than the most timid. As the Daily Plainsman so effectively points out, the time has come for straight taiking on matters of foreign affairs if the ghastly blunders in cur foreign policy are not again going to plunge us into the blood bath of an- other global war. Certainly there is noth= ing in the record of our current adminis-= trative spokesmen on foreign policy to give Americans assurance that their judgments are infallible or their programs so sound that they dare not be questioned or examined. A3877 [From the Daily Plainsman, Huron, S. Dak.] Just WHo ARE THE ISOLATIONISTS? In Fargo, N. Dak., on May 12, President Truman said that persons criticizing and oppesing the administration’s foreign poli- cies and other policies were “isolationists” who would “let the Communists take over other nations and run the world.” To anyone who has compared maps of the world as of 1944 and then as of 1950, who has seen the steady march of communism abroad helped by the treaties of Yalta and Potsdam and seen the court proof as in the Hiss case of Communist influence working in the State Department, the Fargo speech of the President is completely baffling. For the President is the man who was the United States representative at Potsdam, where the United States was put behind the eight ball in Berlin, where agreements were made which resulted eventually in all of Europe east of Germany coming under Com- munist control. He is the man who said the Hiss case was simply a red herring, and the Chief Executive of an administration which refused to prosecute the Hiss case until the House un-American Activities Committee dug up microfilmed evidence, evidence which the administration already knew about but which it had not acted upon because no one else knew about it at first. He is the man who accepted the recom- mendations of State Department emissaries that the United States let China fall un- supported, and who rejected the recommen- dation of Gen. Albert Wedemeyer that the United States take the same action in China—at a time when it was possible—that it actually did take in Greece. He is the same man who has headed the Government of the United States which in the past 5 years has found itself crowded, shoved, and forcibly ejected from country after country; which has found its embassies closed in 1ron-curtain countries; which has found the world of its activity constantly growing smaller and smaller and that of communism larger and larger. His administration has fashioned the for- eign policy which has shrunk the sphere of United States activity to a point where the United States is almost brought to the point of making itself a garrison state for conti- nental defense and that surely is nothing more nor less than isolationism. It is an iso- lationism, however brought close only he- cause of the Truman administration’s foreign policy. So when the same old man who has been responsible for bringing a once invincible America to that point says in Fargo that isolationists are endangering his program ‘and that his opponents would let commu- nism take over other nations and run the world only one of two conclusions is possible. Either he and his advisers do not or will not face what has happened because of United States foreign policy; or He is trying to pull one of the most mag- nificent switcheroos and hoaxes in political history by blaming his opponents for the very evils his administration has created. The Railroad Strike EXTENSION OF REMARKS | HON. FORREST C. DONNELL OF MISSOURI IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, May 22 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. DONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in
A3878 the Appendix of the Recorp an editorial entitled “The Railroad Strike,” pub- lished in the Lancaster (Pa.) Intelli- gencer-Journal of May 11, 1950. There being no objection, the editorial was crdered to be printed in the Recorn, as follews: THE RarLRosD STRIKE The railroad strike 1s on. Firemen, disgruntled because the rail- roads refuse to put another fireman on Diesel engines, have walked off the job on four major systems. The entire national economy is affected, and the situation will become critical in a short time. It is nothing short of a crime. But it is the old, old story. So long as strikes against the public wel- fare are permitted, situations such as we are now experiencing will continue. There will always be those who will go to any extreme to try to win their point. There is only one way to handle the matter and that is to outlaw strikes against the public weifare. It can be done. It must be done. And what is more, it must be done on the national, State and local level, if it is to be 100 percent effective. The Lady With the Lamp EXTENSION OF REMARES HON. HERBERT H. LEHMAN OF NEW YORK IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, May 22 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. LEHMAN. Mr. President, last Thursday, May 11, was National Hospital Day, which is the anniversary of the birth of Florence Nightingale. My good friend, Harry Schlacht, made Hospital Day the occasion for an interesting col- umn in the New York Journal-American. I ask unanimous consent to insert this column celebrating Hospital Day in the Appendix of the REcorpD. There being no objection, the poem was ordered to be printed in the REecorp, as follows: “Tur Lapy WITH THE Lamp” (By Harry H. Schlacht) “Lo! in that house of misery A lady with a lamp I see Pass through the glimmering gloom, And flit from room to room. “And slow, as in a dream of bliss, The speechless sufferer turns to kiss Her shadow, as it falls Upon the darkening walls.” —Longfellow’s Tribute to Florence Nightingale. Today is National Hospital Day. Today is the anniversary of the birth of Florence Nightingale. She was born 130 years ago in Florence, Italy. She was educated in the nursing standards of her time. She was hailed as the ministering angel during the Crimean War when she afforded comfort to wounded soldiers. Florence Nightingale has been portrayed in history and poetry, in art and literature, as “The Lady with the Lamp.” The lamp became a symbol for the light which she shed. Her life became the ideal and the inspira~ tion to the profession of nursing and to hospital services everywhere. She gave of her heart, she gave of her soul, she gave of her life to this cause. Well may the speechless sufferer turn “to kiss her shadow as it falls upon the darken- ing walls.” Eer work illuminates the path of the voluntary hospitals. It glows on the records of these great institutions. History will record no finer accomplish- ment than that of the voluntary hospital services during the last half century. They serve humanity without regard to race, color or creed. They recognize no re- ligious sect. They recognize no economic position. White man and colored man, millionaire and pauper, all find refuge and health within their portals. The American people are the owners of the voluntary hospitals. It is not a product of Government subsi- dies. It is the product of magnificent phi- Janthropies. It is the product of free Amer- ican citizens. It is the product of free Amer~ ican enterprise. The voluntary hospitals have been out- standing in maintaining our democratic spirit. The strength of the American system stems from the character of the American people. It is a character born in freedom, nur- tured by American initiative, developed by American incentive, which blossomed into full fruition under an American system which assures the dignity of the individual. The Greater New York Hospital Associa= tion today in tribute to Florence Nightin- gale’s birthday seeks to arouse public atten= tion in the work of the hospitals and similar institutions. May the life of that God-loving soul be an inspiration in quickening within us a fixed determination that voluntary hospitals shall prosper and hold out the green branch to every despairing heart. Let us all aid the voluntary hospitals. They need our support. They need our help. With the memories of yesterday fresh in our minds, with tomorrow challenging us at every turn, we can look forward to a day for health in which voluntary hospitals will en- joy the full recognition commensurate with the need for their great services. The hospital is everybody’s business. problem belongs to you and me. A strong America is a healthy America. The The Railroad Strike Hits National Defense EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FORREST C. DONNELL OF MISSOURI IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, May 22 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. DONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp, an article entitled “Strike Hits Defense, Says Mu- nitions Chief,” published in the New York Times of May 13, 1950. There being no objection the article was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Strixe Hirg Derense, Says MUNITIONS CHIEF PITTSBURGH, May 12-—The railroad strike was cited as a blow to national defense by Hubert E. Howard. chairman of the United APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD tates Munitions Board, in a speech today before 8GO industrial executives of the Pitts- purgh area in the Duquesne Club, It was the first major utterance of Mr. Howard’s 5- month tenure in office as head of the muni- tions beard. “Russia has foretold a world conflict but she has also taught that capitalism will fall of its own weight and own sins,” he said, “She cares not how she accomplishes world dcmination and our economic collapse would be a safer and far less dangerous course for her. “From this point, therefore, as far as we can see, we walk an economic tightrope faced with the fateful decision of spending suifi- cient moneys on armament to deter an at- tack and yet not spend so much that we make our economic collapse inevitable.” Mr. Howard then went on to mention the railroad strike. Elaborating a point he had made at an earlier press conference, he said: “Two dangers loom, First we must scrut- inize more closely than ever before all Gov= ernment expenditures to see that we do not waste our substance on nonessentials and second, capital and labor must place loyalty to their country above selfish interest by avoiding all costly strikes and interruptions to production.” “We can no longer afford the economic waste and loss resulting from strikes,” Mr. Howard added, “nor can we risk the possible misunderstanding of unwarranted conclu- sions therefrom.” American Bowlers Discard Segregation EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ABRAHAM J. MULTER OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, May 22, 1950 Mr. MULTER. Mr. Speaker, I was greatly heartened to read in the press the other day that the American Bowling Congress had decided to discard its policy of segregation and will no longer restrict its membership to “white males” only. This is another important step in the direction of attaining equal rights for American citizens of all races and creeds. The next, and one of our major steps, should be the enactment of FEPC legis- lation to eliminate all forms of discrimi- nation in employment and keep this country the finest democracy on the face of the earth—one for the whole world to emulate. I am placing in the Recorp a brief editorial from the New York Herald Tribune of May 14, 1950, regarding the action taken by the bowling congress: THE BOWLERS CaTcH UP It took considerable shoving, but the American Bowling Congress finally stepped in line. The restriction of membership to “white males,” dating back to 1916, has been dropped. The action was taken voluntarily by the ABC convention at Columbus, but the bowlers were under heavy pressure. Pub- lic opinion was against them; the ideal of fair play in all sports, generated by the Negro example in baseball, has taken root. Legal actions in New York, Illinois, Ohio, and Wisconsin were breathing hard on the ABC’s neck, and it was clearly only a matter of brief time before the national organization actu- ally would have been pushed out of busi- ness. The heat was on, and the bowling congress had to relent with the best possible grace.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The underlying force was sccial pressure, but it took an organized kick in the pants to accomplish reform. Here we have an ex- ample of what can be done by compulsion. Education prepared the ground for accept- ance, but the final push came by force. When the law stepped in, and prosecutors and judges ruled that public policy was vio- lated by this callous infringement on fair play, the battle was at last won. In bowing to the inevitable, the ABC lawyer, Michael J. Dunn, commented that in the years before 1916 “there was no ‘white male’ in our rule book, and we got along fine.” From now on the American Eowling Congress will get along even ketter. Every time that another bar is knocked down in the senseless division of Americans and refusal to grant equal rights to all races the whole country can feel that it is stepping forward. Full Employment EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HERBERT H. LEHMAN OF NEW YORK IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, May 22 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr, LEHMAN. Mr. President, on Thursday, May 18, I was privileged to speak before the annual convention of the Amalgamated Clothing ‘Workers Union, in Cleveland, Ohio. My subject was full employment, and the dangers we faced from creeping unemployment. 1 also outlined a program of action to avert this danger. I ask unanimous consent to insert my speech in the Ap- pendix of the Rrcorp. This morning the New York Times published on page 1 an article reporting, from official sources, on the trends in unemployment. I ask unanimous con- sent that this article be printed in the Appendix of the Recorp, at the conclu- sion of the speech to which I have just referred. There being no objection, the address and the newspaper article were ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: ADDRESS BY SENATOR HERBERT H. LEHMAN In standing on this platform with the offi- cers and leaders of the Amalgamated Cloth- ing Workers Union, and facing the delegates and guests of that union, I recognize that I am among old and true friends. I have been associated in one capacity or another with the leaders of the Amalgamated, and with your union, itself, for more years than I need to count. We have fought many good fights side by side, and have won our share of them. On occasion, we have had our de- feats. But you and I have always been on the same side. At this convention, you have already heard speeches by many distinguished Americans. This afternoon you will have the privilege of listening to my good friend and yours, and my presiding officer, Vice President ALBEN W. BaRKLEY. I can scarcely hope to compete with him in the speech-making field. So this morning, ny remarks will be more in the nature of a talk with old friends and co- workers, We will talk about a few of our mutual problems and define a few of our mutual goals. . Speaking of goals, it sometimes seems strange that the further we proceed on the road of progress, the wider the horizons grow, and the greater the number of new gcais which stretch out before us. The explana- tion of this paradox is simple. We—you and I—subscribe to a dynamic faith and to a dynamic concept of society. We believe that in a swiftly changing world, we, the human beings who inhabit that world, must adapt ourselves to those changes instead of trying to restrain them. We do not seek to achieve the millennium in a day. We co not seek to uproot estab- lished institutions. But neither do we cling to every custom, mode, and tradition which may have been sufficient for a previous gen- eration but is clearly outdated for this. We try to adapt our institutions, through the methods provided by our Constitution, to modern-day conditions and circumstances. And, thus, moving steadily forward, we keep pace with the times. This is the way of progress. This is the way of evolution to meet the chalienge of revolution. This is the way of the Amalga- mated Clothing Workers Union and it is also my way. It is the philosophy of the Dem- ocratic Party, both under President Franklin D. Roosevelt and under President Harry 8. Truman. One of the goals toward which we have been working for many years is the achieve- ment of what we have called full employ- ment. The opposite side of this coin is the abolition of general unemployment. To this goal you and I are firmly committed. You and I were thrilled when, in 1944, one of the greatest Americans who ever lived sent to Congress an economic bill of rights which began with the declaration that “Every American has the right to a useful and re- munerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the Nation.” For this, if for no other reason, the people of America will never forget the name of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. You and I were delighted when one of the great legislators of American history took the leadership, as chairman of the Senate Committee on Banking and Currency, in the fight for full employment legislation. For this, if for no other reason, the working men and women of our country will never forget the name of Robert F. Wagner. You and I Know that it was an important step forward when the President signed the Employment Act of 1946, which com. mitted the Federal Government to coordi- nate and utilize all its plans, functions, and resources for the purpose of creating and maintaining useful employment opportuni- ties for those able, willing, and seeking to work. We had hoped that the legislation would have been more comprehensive. But we knew that the real strength of the Em- ployment Act of 1946 would depend on the courage and vision of those responsible for its administration. And we have seen in re. cent years how, under this act, there has developed an historic and unprecedented program of legislative proposals designed to promcte an expanding economy that would provide jobs for all. This program will go down in history to the credit of our great leader and President, Harry S. Truman. But there are those in this country—hap- pily no longer great in number—who do not believe in jobs for all. They prefer jobs for some. They think that the women of America should go back to the kitchen. They would consign our elder citizens to the poorhouse. They like the prospect of a floating pool of unemployed, so that they can frighten the workers into working harder for less wages and hold the threat of lay-offs as a club over the heads of the unions and their leaders. I am afraid that this prospect is slowly becoming a reality. Iam afraid that we are A3879 seeing today the gradual formation of a floating pool of unemployed. It is not coming dramatically. If it were, it would be easier to deal with. It is coming slowly, creeping upon us stealthily, a little at a time. It is not even coming steadily. One month there is more unemployment, another month a little less. But a general trend is none- theless there—a slow and dangerous trend toward increased unemployment. Judging by all the standards of the past, the state of the American economy today is good. The latest estimates of the Council of Eco- nomic Advisers indicate that for the first 3 months of 1950 the market value of the Nation’s output of goods and _ services reached the annual rate of more than $262,- 000,000,000. This represented a substantial increase over the rate of economic activity during the last 9 months of 1949 and a full return—plus a little more—to the high levels of activity of the first quarter of 1949. Employment, too, has reached high levels. The figures for April of this year showed 58,700,000 people at work. This contrasts with only 57,800,000 at work in April of last year. But while employment has risen, unem- ployment has also risen. In April 1949, with @ Million less people employed, there were only 3,000,000 people unemployed. In April of this year, there were 3,500,000 unem- ployed. I have seen many learned experts shake their heads in wonder at this seeming para- dcx. But you men and women from the shops know why it is happening. You and I both know that the reason for this creeping danger is the fact that our entire economy has not quite kept pace with either the growing productivity of our work- ers or with the addition to the Nation’s labor force of new workers who are coming out of the schools and into the labor market. In the first quarter of this year total out- put of goods and services should have run ata rate of $270,000,000,000 rather than $260,- 060,000,000. In April of this year we should have had not merely 58,700,000 jobs but 60,~ 000,000 jobs. This is the number of jobs which should be available today. Next year the number needed will be even greater. And unless we take steps, unless we act with all the vigor and all the resources at our command, this small shadow of unemploy- ment which now overcasts our prosperity may grow to critical and even disastrous proportions, During recent weeks in the same period when unemployment was crawling up past the 4,000,000 mark, the press carried reports showing record-making profits by our great corporations engaged in many different in- dustries. To cite one instance, Senator JoszpH C. O’Manoner, chairman of the Joint Congres- sional Committee on the Economic Report recently disclosed that in the steel industry, profits have continued to increase despite increased wages and that employment costs in that industry actually constituted in 1949 & smaller fraction of the sales dollar than at any time in the past 30 years. All these factors clearly indicate that the national economy is running in high gear at its pro- ductive end and at its profit end, Our econ- omy is producing more than ever, and pro- viding higher profits than ever. Yet unem- ployment hangs on. I know of several areas in my own home State of New York, and I know of areas in Connecticut and Rhode Island, where un- employment is of critical proportions. I cannot reassure these people and their rep- resentatives who come asking for assistance from the Federal Government, by citing the fact that there are 58,700,000 people already
AB889 employed in America. I cannot tell these unemployed that they should not feel badly about being unempioyed in New York or Connecticut because things are booming in Oregon or Oklahoma, No, for those who are unemployed, for those who live in areas of critical unem- ployment, the personal effects are almost as serious and as demoralizing as if unemploy- ment were a general instead of an isolated situation. ‘There are the same effects on the individual, on the family, and on the community—efiects like ripples from a stone thrown into a pond. We cannot afford this wastage in human resources. We cannot afford the consequent decrease in purchasing power and in con- sumer demand. I have seen figures showing that in several States of the Union, including my own, the amount of money that is being paid out for unemployment benefits is considerably great- er than the amount of money coming into these funds in the form of payroll contri- putions. In New York in 1949, $2.13 was paid out for every dollar received. In Rhode Island the ratio was $3.79 paid out in unem- ployment benefits for every dollar received. In very few States of the Union, in 1949, was more money collected than was paid out. The situation was exactly the reverse in 1948. ‘We need not take fright from these figures, but we should be concerned. I do not think that this country can afford any avoidable unemployment. The halimark of a dynamic economy is labor shortage and not labor surplus. We must move constant- ly in the direction of more jobs. In an ex- panding economy, there should be more jobs than people to fill them and not vice versa. While you and I recognize this fact, there are many who do not. There are many who feel that unemployment is a natural phe- nomenon which, while unfortunate for the individuals concerned, should not call for government action. Of course, this is the same point of view which was prevalent in 1929. Even a depression is a natural devel- opment, according to these people. They consider a depression as an essential adjust- ment in the cycle of boom and bust, and hence to be accepted like the weather. Years ago the Mississippi used to overflow its banks almost every year, causing damage to farms and homes throughout a great part of our country. Many of you will remember the annual pictures in the newsreels, as reg- ular as the seasons themselves, showing houses and barns floating down the raging rivers. But today we have learned to control these floods. Along all the rivers where the Federal Government has established great reclamation and flood control works, floods no longer menace the lives of people. Only along those rivers where such projects have not been undertaken do these floods persist. The inference is obvious. If we can build successful defenses against the forces of nature, we can certainly build defense against economic forces. We can and must provide precautions against the overflow of our economic system. To wait until the flood tide of depression hits us is both stupid and wasteful. We cannot afford it. When I say we cannot afford it, Iam think- ing not only in terms of our domestic econ- omy but also in terms of the world situation. The totalitarians are telling the under- privileged peoples of the world that the free- enterprise system is a system for the benefit of the few and the exploitation of the many, that this system carries within itself the seeds of its own disintegration, and that unemployment is as essential a part of that system as profits. You and I are determined to prove that these reactionaries of the left are as wrong as the reactionaries of the right. We must and can prove that we can retain the individual-enterprise system without tolerating unemployment. All this, I be= lieve, can be achieved through the particle pation of Government in the planned co- operation of all sectors of our economy. One country in Europe today which typifies the extremes of what we wish to avoid is Germany. In the Soviet zone of eastern Germany there is no unemployment, put forced labor exists. We do not wish full employment of that kind. In western Ger- many, under the so-called free-enterprise system, unemployment is widespread. We in America must show that full employment may be achieved without the incredible evil of forced labor and that free enterprise may be preserved without the tragic incidence of unemployment. I have described, from its most important aspects, the problem we face. It is necessary to know the problem in order to understand the importance of doing something about it now-~—today—before it is too late. But what are we to do, and why have we done so little to date? The answer is simple. We have actually done a great deal. But many proposals for essential action still he dormant in congressional committees. What we have done—what the Roosevelt administration accomplished in rectifying our economic system before the war, and what the Truman administration has achieved since the war—has been largely effective in preventing the disastrous post- war depression which so many people prophesied. But what has been left undone is responsi- _ ble for the great dangers which we face to- day. There are many undefended and vul- nerable areas in our economy today. We are today spending a vast amount of money on the cold war. But, of course, we must continue to do so until the threat to our security ceases—any other course would be disastrous. Should the necessity for that spending suddenly stop, as I hope with all my heart it will, we would face a real eco- nomic crisis unless we were prepared—as we must be prepared--for concerted eco- nomic action to meet this or any other emergency. . I should like to refer briefly to some of the programs which the administration has pro. posed in the recent past for meeting the problem of economic expansion and unem- ployment—programs which are still awaiting congressional action and approval. And then I shall refer to steps which must be taken, even beyond these administration pro- posals, if we are to meet the challenge of this dangerous period. The administration has long been propos- ing the development of our great river val- leys—the Columbia and the Missouri, to name only two. These developments would be similar to the TVA. If these proposals had been written into law, the effect would have been to stimulate economic activity through. out the country, and to give new strength, balance, and resourcefulness to our national economy, President Truman proposed a program of cooperative housing for persons of middle in- come. If this had been acted upon favorably, a new stimulus would have been provided for the entire construction industry. President Truman has urged—as you and I have, too—the repeal of the Taft-Hartley Act. One of the effects of this act has been to slow down the organization of the unor- ganized, particularly in the South, and to hamper the process of collective bargaining throughout the country. In economic terms . this has meant a smaller share of the na- tional income for working men and women and a lower level of purchasing power for lhe Nation’s chief consumers. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD I repeat a pledge I have frequently made, to do my best, along with you, to secure the total repeal of the Taft-Hartlcy Act. There are, of course, many other pending administration proposals which have not been acted upon or are still under consid.- eration by the Congress. But there is no point or purpose in reviewing whet might have been done or what should have been done. We who are gathered here today must take counsel on what must be done. t We must study and review very carefully our entire tax structure. During the Hight- ieth Congress, an ill-timed and ill-advised change was made in our tax laws. That change was a windfall for the rich and a mere sop to those of small and medium in~ come. The result was a great saving for a few, but provided very little added buying power for the many. Iam not criticizing cor- porate profits. What does alarm me is the fact that take-home pay of American farmers and workers has not kept pace. Today we must correct that situation. We must eliminate or drastically reduce excise taxes which are a burden on the lower- income groups. We must enact into law a reasonable ex- cess-profits tax, which will yield compensa~ tory revenues but which will not be injuri- ous to business incentive. Ir We must expand our social-security pro- gram and increase old-age benefits. With adequate old-age pensions, the aged group in our population will continue to be cus- tomers for the products of farm and factory instead of living wretched and minimum existences on public relief or charity. qII We must launch a vigorous program of en~ couraging and supporting small business along the lines recently recommended by the President. v We must develop a large reserve shelf of public-works projects which will allow us to do better long-range public-works planning and permit us to meet emergency situations in special local areas where unemployment develops. v We must promote and expand our program of water-power development so that cheap power in increasing quantities will be avail. able to lower the production costs of in= dustry and provide higher wages for workers and lower prices for consumers. VI We must continue to search for an im- proved formula for agriculture, so that the prosperity of our farmers will be preserved and increased, maintaining their purchasing power but finding some way to link increased farm production with lower costs to the consumers. vir We must expand our public housing pro- gram, and must promote through coopera- tives and other measures, the provision of adequate housing at reasonable rentals for the vast middle-income sector of our popu- lation. We must eliminate slums, wherever they are found. VIIr We must adopt a scientific approach to our budgetary problems. We must econ- omize wherever possible on wasteful and inefficient operations of Government, but we must be strictly selective in our economies. We must avoid reckless and indiscriminate slashes in our budget, with consequent re- percussions in the entire national economy. We are not in a normal economic period.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The advocates of indiscriminate slashing cite the fact that World War II has been over for 5 years and that the budget must get back to normal. But €3.60 out of every 85 that our Government spends today 1s de- voted either to paying for previous wars or for preparing against future ones In such a situation, we dare not economize at the expense of either cur national cecurity or cur national economy. To do either would lead to disaster both at home and abroad. Ix On the international front we must take all necessary measures to draw the entire worid—or as great a part of it as possible— into a cooperative effort to raise the general level of production everywhere. In this en- deavor, more than in any other, our eco- nomic skills and capacities can find an out- let. In this endeavor, we can give a dynamic cast to our economy and provide an almost unlimited horizon for its expansion. The immediate program which has been recommended by the President to achieve this latter purpose is popularly called the point 4 program. It 1s included in the Foreign Assistance Act which is expected to be finally approved by the Congress and signed by the President in the course of the next 2 weeks. This program, for which only $35,000,000 is authorized in the pending legislation— considerably less than it should be in my oets ~—~c*te- for technological assist- inet ccs countries cones: oe to un- developed areas, for the 1. ocrs of their economic and productive efforts. Tam ve s'-* 7s" in favor of this pro- gram. I - i om the productive de- velopment of the undeveloped areas of the earth will come a vastly increased and mu- tually profitable trade which may, I hope, pave the way for that peace which the diplo- mats have thus far failed to win, but which the ordinary men and women of the world may yet cecure, x Finally, we must develop all our unde- veloped resources, but conserve the expend- able ones. Our greatest resource and our least expendable must be considered our hu- man resources—the lives, energies, and hap- piness of our people. And although I have not referred to it in detail, or as a separate program, this means carrying through a full and undiluted civil-rights and human-rights program. This is my program not only for full em- ployment and for the control of unemploy- ment, but for a dynamic future for America. It is the same philosophy which President Truman, in a speech at Butte, Mont., last week described as “the way to the highest level of well-being for all the peoples of the earth.” It is the way to that freedom from fear and want of which President Roosevelt spoke so eloquently 10 years ago. As I stand here on this platform, in the good company of friends, and as I define this program and this philosophy, which I know you share, I can almost hear the ap- proving voice of my o:d friends and your great leader, whose living monument is this mighty union of 400,000 working men and women. But Sidney Hillman’s monument is much more than just the Amalgamated Clothing Workers Union—as noble a monu-= ment as it is. Sidney Hillman’s true me- morial is in the impetus he gave to liberal causes and principles in this entire Nation of ours. He stands in that Valhalla of mighty men who enabled our country to emerge from a chaos of despair into a new era of strength and vigor. That strength and vigor brought us victory in war. The greatest monument that waits still to be erected to Sidney Hillman is the use of that strength and vigor to bring peace and justice and well-being to all mankind. [From the ew York Times of May 22, 1950} Jos OPENINGS Tram Risk In Lasor FoRce— ANNUaL InNcrrAs= cr 800,030 ro 1,100,000 Workers Poses Prosiom, Says R2sERvE Bopyr WaSHINCTON, May 21.—Important questions of economic policy are posed by the failure of employment opportunities to keep pace with the 860,600 to 1,100,000 persons added to the Nation’s labor force each year, the Federal Reserve Board said today. The Reserve Board’s monthly bulletin said an increase of 1,000,000 was expected in the labor force this year. At cvrrent high levels of activity, the prob- Jem of reducing unemployment is difficult partly because the programs appropriate for treating large-scale cyclical unemployment appear to be largely inappropriate for dealing with the present siiuation, it was added. The unemployment problem so far has not been sufficiently acute to require broad Fed- eral action, but 1t has been serious for some areas and, of course, for the workers af- fected, the bulletin said. Unemployment increased in the first quar- ter of this year to the highest levels since before the war. The high point was reached in February when the total unemployed was 4,700,000 persons. By last month the total had declined to 8,500,000, partly as a result of seasonal factors. Rising productivity due to the record amounts of money spent by industry in re- cent years on “new machinery and equip-~ gment of highly efficient design” accounts largely for the fact that production has in- creased more than employment since last summer, the Board said. The recess:on early last year intensified competitive pressure on management to re- duce costs, partly by curtailing employment and by utihzing those employees more effi- ciently. The Nation had a total labor force last year of 68,600,000, or 58 percent of the popu- lation 14 years of age and over. This was 7,600,000 more than in 1940 when 56 percent of the population of working age was in the labor force. The bulletin reported that although em- ployment generally was below the 1948 peak there was one outstanding group in which it was higher—Government workers. The mumber of Federal civilian employees has declined somewhat since mid-1949 but State and local government employment, after ris- ing until the end of 1949, has shown little further change. Two other categories also showed slight increases—employment in finance and in domestic service. More than 7,000,000 workers received unem- ployment compensation benefits last year, About 2,000,000 exhausted their benefit rights (averaging 12 weeks’ duration), compared with 1,000,000 in 1948. AVERAGE WEEKLY BENEFIT $21 The average weekly benefit for those re~ ceiving unemployment compensation was $21 a week, or about one-third the average weekly wage in covered employment, it was added. Because earnings have risen more rapidly than benefits allotted, however, the percentage of wage loss covered by unem- ployment was held to be smaller than in prewar days. Payments out of the unemployment trust fund since early last year have exceeded re= ceipts. For the year 1949 more than $1,- 700,000,000 were paid out in unemployment benefits under State programs, while tax receipts and interest earned totaled only $1,000,000,000, with the result that the bal~ ance in State accounts in the trust fund was reduced from the high level of $7,600,000,000 at the end of 1948 to $6,900,000,000 at the close of 1949. A3881 In the first quarter of this year unem- ployment benefits averaged $2,200,000,000 at an annual rate and were about double the receipts. The disparity between receipts and claims has compelled a number of States to increase tax rates on employers. Railway Strike Ban EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FORREST C. DONNELL OF MISSOURI IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, May 22 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. DONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an editorial entitled ‘Railway Strike Ban,” published in the Los Angeles Times of May 10, 1950. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Rainway Stren Ban Let us hope that common sense leads the Senate Labor subcommittee to approve the bill of Senator LoNNELL, of Missourl, which will outlaw railroad strikes once and for all. DoNNELL’s measure would make strikes and lockcuts in railway disputes illegal and force the contending parties to compulsory arbi- tration, The Donnell bill follows general accept- ance that the Railway Labor Act, once re- garded as a model measure for labor dis- putes, has failed adequately to protect the public interest. As testimony before the committee showed, the unions have refused to accept decisions of fact-finding boards, using these decisions as a line of departure from which to pursue their demands. Obviously, new legislation must replace the Railway Labor Act. Because railroads operate in the public interest and the movement of their trains is absolutely necessary for the protection of the public health and safety, very rigid con- trol was established over them years ago by governmental agencies. Railroad pres- idents may not arbitrarily close down their lines as a shopkeeper may roll up his shutters. Therefore it seems logical that railway labor may not flout its obligations to the public and arbitrarily strand trains. But such is the present case in the matter of four major systems where the firemen de- manded an extra fireman on Diesel locomo- tives to help the regular fireman look out the window—or else. This line of reasoning applies equally to public utilities on which the Nation relies for its transportation, communication, light, heat, and power. Prepare, America! EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. CHARLES E. BENNETT OF FLORIDA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, May 22, 1950 Mr. BENNETT of Florida. Mr. Speaker, on my recent trip to Florida a number of people asked that I sub- mit for publication in the ConGRESSIONAL
A3882 Recorp the following able speech by Hon. John F, Selle, of Gainesville, Fla. I think that its contents will be valuable to the readers of the REcorD: PREPARE, AMERICA! (By Lt. John F. Selle, United States Naval Reserve) The people of the United States have added a new day to their list of national observ~ ances. The President has designated Satur~ day, May 20, as Armed Forces Day, and for the first time in history the Nation has been called to pay tribute to all its armed forces on the same day. ‘This concept of unifica- tion is further symbolized by the slogan for the first Armed Forces Day—Teamed for Defense. By the recent unification of our land, sea, and air forces into one integrated defense or- ganization we have done much to strengthen the teamwork and cooperation so vital to the protection of our national security. But the team which must accept this tremendous responsibility cannot be composed of only our Army, our Navy, and our Air Force. You and I and every other loyal and re- sponsible citizen of these United States must, of necessity, be members of that team. In a sense, even though we are civilians, we are thc tert ie noarter+ element in our defense 2: ow) .11 Vetts.e we call the sig- nals for the Military Establishment. By our election of public officials, by our ex- pressed attitudes and through the actions of those officials, we determine the extent of the military program. Whether our Armed Forces are to consist of a half million, a mil- lion, or five million men is for us to say. Whether they will be properly equipped with the latest developments of modern warfare, or armed with obsolete and ineffective equip- ment depends upon our decisions. And since we hold the responsibility for making these extremely important decisions it is absolutely essential that we make them after careful and intelligent consideration of many diverse factors. In the past we have been prone to confuse our potential capacity for waging a war with our current military strength. We felt that we were strong simply because we knew that we could become strong, It might be argued that we were right in this confusion because we won our wars, This is true. But it is equally true that we could have avoided those wars completely and won them without fighting had we been a little strong- er all the time. In 1914 Kaiser Wilhelm took the calcu- lated risk that the United States shockingly unprepared, could not muster her potential military might quickly enough to interfere with his program of conquest. It should be small comfort to us that we proved him wrong. By being a little stronger in 1914 ourselves, he would not have been tempted by what seemed to be such favorable odds. If we had had an army of 3,000,000 men in 1939 efficiently trained and properly equipped, would Adolf Hitler have taken his calculated risk? It is a shameful thing to have to admit that we placed such a tempta-~ tion before him. At a time when manpower, and the industrial plant necessary to equip that manpower were rotting in idleness we watched the war clouds gather in Europe and did almost nothing about it until we were caught in the deluge ourselves. True, we proved that Hitler was not in- fallible when it came to predicting the skill with which we could convert potential strength into strength in being. But we had to fight a terrible war to prove it. Today, in 1950, history is repeating itself. A powerful aggressor, having repeatedly ex- pressed its intention to destroy our demo- cratic way of life, is arming itself at a fan- tastic rate. For what purpose—national de- fense? Are the Russians seriously afraid that the United States with its mothhall fleet, its pitifully few modern planes, and its haif-million-man army is planning a war of aggression against such a well insulated enemy? There is only one conclusion which can be reached by any man willing to face up to unpleasant facts. Russia is ~~e~-~i-~ for war. War against whom? [* +... of where and against whom the .....0 18 fired or the first bomb dropped, the war will be directed against us. Without our active assistance no single nation or group of na- tions could resist the Russian onslaught. And since we cannot tolerate the loss of any of our few allies, we would have to fight at their side and win or lose together. If history were to repeat its full cycle we would hoid our defers procz~-~ to a min- imum; sacrifice our  “" 4 wrming our~= selves, and after a bloody struggle emerge once more victorious to face the task of once more rebuilding a shattered world. It would cost us many millions of human lives, un~ told suffering, and countless billions of dol- lars. And at best we would have proved that the Russian high command had again, like Kaiser Wilhelm and Adolf Hitler, underesti- mated our capacity for converting our econ- omy and manpower to a war basis. But can we dare assume that the whole cycle will repeat itself mm toto? It 1s not impossible that just this one time our enemy might have calculated his risks a littler more accu- rately than we did our own. Today we have peace, an uncertain and tenuous peace, but nonetheless peace. If war comes to snatch peace away from us we will fight desperately to regain it. We will sacrifice our wealth, our natural re- sources, Our very lives to restablish peace. And the peace we have today is infinitely more desireable than the best peace that could possibly result from another war even if We won our victory—and can we be so sure of that victory? Why not fight for that peace while we have it so that we can keep it, instead of waiting until we lose it. Our fight to keep our peace cannot be won by negative measures, by too little, too late. It must be an aggressive and mighty effort. Its first step must be military pre- paredness on such a scale that an aggressor will not dare take the calculated risk of effectively winning a war before we can muster our latent strength. Admitting that such a military program is wasteful and costly, it is still less wasteful and less costly than war. And it costs nothing in lives and bloody agony. Whatever it costs, if Russia can afford her scale of military might we can afford to come near enough in matching it to prevent an armed test. We must rebuild our moral strength and become real Ameri- cans who are willing to pay the cost of peace and freedom. The whole free world depends on us today. If we cut the odds too fine in our calculated risk the free people of the world suffer defeat with us. We must prepare our defenses on such a scale that we will not only be able to win any war forced on us, but will be able to make our strength so apparent that no one, no matter how optimistic, no matter how blind, can mistake it for anything else than an invincible force. There is no such thing as too much preparedness. The better pre- pared the better we have won our war for peace. Military preparedness is costly, and the more effective it is the more wasteful it is because we will never have to use it. The costs are high but the stakes are higher. What is it worth to you, as you listen to this radio program, to know that the United States is safe against war? So strong that war is unlikely to occur, and so strong that victory is assured if a foolhardly aggressor chooses to test that strength, During this fiscal year we are spending about 7 percent of our national income on our defense program. It is reported that APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Russia is devoting about 25 percent of her national effort to mulitary programs. Can we afford to match such a schedule? Let’s ask ourselves instead—can we afford not to match it? In 1942 we did not say how much war can we afford. We asked ourselves, what must we do to win the war—and then did it. We are at war today, fighting to keep something we value highly and we must ask ourselves the same question. The natural odds are with an aggressor nation which can choose the time and place for the beginning of a shooting war. It is not enough therefore that we match our mili- tary potential. In every field we must be superior, on land, on sea, and in the air, There are those who say that such an effort would bankrupt us. Is it bankrupting Rus- sia? If it is, it would seem wise to force her to even greater efforts and thus hasten the process. And if 1t is not, we can afford more than Russia. We must use care and judgment in our defense program, of course, so that we do not waste our irreplaceable natural resources, but we must not be- grudge our labor, our time, and our man- power. Our reserve progams should be en- couraged and expanded. Last hight as a Naval Reserve officer I spent an evening with nearly two hundred other young men of Gainesville in our new training center. The young men of this Nation can perform no better national service than participa. tion in such programs as conducted by each of the three services. But it is up to us as tax- payers and citizens to see that they have the equipment and facilities they need. When war comes, if it does come, and as it surely will if we gamble with our national defenses, it will come swiftly. We owe it to the young men who must fight it, that we prepare them for the risks they must then take. Let history never record that the United States of America, once the greatest among the nations of the earth, risked an atomic war and lost it, or even risked it and won it be- cause it was soft and loved its pleasures, its leisure, and its comfortable way of life so much that it failed to prepare for a conflict which was inevitable in the face of such fail- ure to prepare. As I close, ask yourself this question: Am I confident in my own own mind that the United States has taken ade- quate measures to prevent war, or to win it if all means of prevention fail? Am TI certain of victory in the war for peace, either to keep it or to restore it? and if you cannot answer with a confidently “Yes’—do something about it. Exercise your prerogatives as a gutizen. Let your legislators know how you eel. We call the plays. lLet’s back up our Armed Forces, effectively and unstintingly. Let’s show them—and for that matter the whole world—our friends to encourage them, our enemies to discourage them—that we, the people of the United States are teamed for defense. Amendment of Railway Labor Act EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FORREST C. DONNELL OF MISSOURI IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, May 22 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. DONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the REcorpD an editorial entitled “To Amend Railway Labor Act,” published in the Beaumont (Tex.) En- terprise of May 3, 1950.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the REcorp, as follows: ‘ To AMEND RAtLwAy LAzOR AcT For years the Railway Labor Act was pointed to as a movel piece of legislation, effective in preventing strikes in the rail transportation industry. This is true no longer. The Railway Age, which speaks for the Nation’s railroads, says: “The only practi- cable solution of the present dangerous drift in industrial relations on the railroads lies in substantial amendment of the Railway Labor Act.” To accomplish this purpose, Senator DoNn-~ NELL of Missouri has introduced a bill in the Senate which would outlaw railroad strikes or lock-outs called in defiance of the awards made by Presidential boards. When the device of anvoirtirg Presidential boards was incorporated im tbe Raive: Labor Act it was assumed that the Board’s findings would be respected by the railroad industry. Here of late the American people have learned that the Railway Labor Act, with its provi- sions to delay strikes until a settlement can ke reached, no longer protects them from Gicruptiors in transportation which in turn iffov. larce segments of the Nation’s industry and business. Whether or not it is true, as charged, that the railroad workers are no longer afraid a strike will jeopardize their jobs or their sen- iority, it is a fact that the “mobilization of public opinion” by the President and the authority of the President himself no longer can prevent strikes. The Railway Labor Act was satisfactory up to ahout 9 years ago. It is rather signifi- cant that since a threatened walk-out in 1941 caused Mr. Roosevelt to ask his “Emergency Board” to favor the railroad workers, the raulread unicns have shown unwillingness to abide by the provisions of the Railway Labor Act. In 1946 there was a Nation-wide strike of enginemen and trainmen. Another strike of these workers is threatened over the issue of three men on a Diesel locomotive, probably one of the most unreasonable demands rail- road workers have ever made on railroad management and pronounced by two impar- tial Presidential boards as without merit. The railroads have established a good rec- ord for accepting decisions of the boards in major disputes. This the railroad unions have not done. As a result legislative action is now threatened which will, if enacted, deprive union leaders of the power they have misused. Ninety-sixth Birthday Anniversary of An- drew Furuseth, March 12, 1950 EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWARD J. HART OF NEW JERSEY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, May 22, 1950 Mr. HART. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I submit here- with the address delivered on Radio Sta- tion WNYC, New York, N. Y¥., oa the occasion of the celebration of the ninety- sixth anniversary of Andrew Furuseth, March 12, 1950, and certain excerpts from an article appearing in the Na- tional Association of Claimants’ Com- pensation Attorneys Law Journal, by Silas B. Axtell, one of its editors: ANNoUNCER. The first speaker is Mr. Willy Dorchain, seasoned labor leader and the rep- resentative in the United States of America of the International Transport Workers Federation of the World, with which the maritime unions of the United States are affliated. Mr. Dorchain himself has been @ seaman. Aside from his duties as repre~ sentative of the International Transport Workers Federation he is manager of the seafarer’s section of the Belgian Transport Workers. Mr. DorcHain. I feel honored by this op- portunity to pay tribute to the memory of a great man and union leader, Andrew Furuseth. He devoted the greatest part of his life to the emancipation of the seafarers With tenacity and great courage. His only happiness and pleasures were the successes he achieved. The disappointments and faile ures were only greater incentives for fur- ther striving to attain his goal, the freeing from bondage of the seamen from all over the world. Many fantastic stories have been written about the men of the sea but what actually happened to many of them in the so-called good old days of iron men and wooden ships surpasses the imagination of the most in- spired of writers. Ordinary slavery ashore was sometimes a paradise compared to the treatment received by the sailors at the hands of some inhuman and brutal ship masters of the old days. It is because of men like Furuseth and the seafarers’ trade unions that those inhuman conditions have been swept away and that seafarers now find comparatively easy living and working conditions on board of most ships. National and international laws have been changed and adopted to protect the rights and freedoms of the seafarers obtained at such a high cost and much sacrifice. In the achievement of these laws a number of able and inspired attorneys of several maritime countries have devoted themselves to the cause of seamen by assisting the trade-union leaders in legal matters and new legislation. The late Andrew Furuseth, with his logical mind, saw the necessity of advantage of such assistance and found an able and faithful collaborator and stanch friend in the per- son of the then youthful Mr. Silas Axtell, who still now spares no effort to Keep the memory of his lifelong friend in the honored place it deserves. The seafarers of today, although much bet- ter off than in the old days of bondage should not forget the lessons of the past and those that are taught us from day to day. Our freedom that we all cherish so much, if not closely and constantly watched and pro- tected, is much easier lost than regained. If, in one section of this world, be it large or small, freedom and economic well-being for the workers is being suppressed or is non- existent, the people of the rest of the world are in constant danger of losing theirs. In this advanced mechanical and scientific age this danger is more real than ever before. The seafarers, through the nature of their trade, are perhaps more vulnerable than workers ashore, they feel the effects of change in other parts of the world sooner, They are not yet fully protected internationally. A large number of adopted international con- ventions have not yet been ratified by a suffil- cient number of governments of maritime nations to make them effective. National and international laws are being flouted and evaded by certain shipowners in search of easy wealth, disregarding thereby the responsibilities and duties that entail such a privileged position in the society of man in democratic countries where free enterprise still exists. Many countries still lag behind in their maritime laws or the enforcement of the existing ones. A number of shipowners from different countries take advantage of this sorry situation to register their ships under the flag of these countries, in order to exploit the seafarers’ labor at inferior conditions, and are gradually trying A3883 to swing back the time to 50 years ago, against the interest of their own countries and against the interest of democracy and free-~- dom. At great expense, they transport com- plete crews from countries where they can hire seamen cheaply while unemployment of seafarers continues to increase in the very harbors where those ships are manned. Crews are especially sought from those coun- tries where dictators have suppressed the free trade-unions for many years, or where trade-unions are still in their infancy, Many of these seamen have never, or only for a very short time, known real democratic freedom and the kind of free trade-unions that Andrew Furuseth fought so hard to maintain. We cannot permit the great sacrifices and struggles of Andrew Furuseth and thousands of true men of the seas to be fruitless. Sea- farers from all over the world organized in their free national trade-unions, united in- ternationally through their affilation with the International Transport Workers Feder- ation, will back their representatives to the limit to continue the fight until the fulfill- ment of their aims on a world-wide scale. Unfair competition carried out on the backs of the seafarers, slave labor, bad food, and accommodations will not k3 allowed to take root again on the high seas. Be it by inde- pendent international shipowners or groups of shipowners, be it by dictator government or feudal lords, it will be fought wherever it is found. Freedom and economic well-being is a powerful.incentive for any human being to join in this struggle. Support for changes and additions in the maritime laws of coun- tries where such laws are outmoded or lack= ing, strict vigilance in the application of existing international laws and the ratifica- tion of new international conventions, de-~ nunciation of evaders and, if necessary, jot economic action for the protection of sea- farers’ right will be our main strength for achievement. Organizing the unorganized, helping the laymen and the weak, should be our motto. The hard lessons of the past shall not be forgotten and we should profit from them, The examples set by Andrew Furuseth should be our inspiration, the International Transport Workers Federation our appropriate tool, and, if necessary, our effective weapon, I thank you. Anwouncer. The next speaker is Mr. Ho- mer H. Bishop, president of the National Association of Claimant’s Compensation At- torneys, of Seminole, Okla. Mr. BisHor. The personal sacrifice of An- drew Furuseth, with its resultant service to the seaman, the individual, the Nation and the world is at once an inspiration and a challenge. The testimony of Silas Blake - Axtell and others who worked with him, strikes with terrific impact against all forms of oppression. It is well for us today to pay tribute to him, who on March 12, 1854, was born in Norway. When the future historian comes to write the story of Andrew Furuseth he will find his character rising like a huge mountain above the level of average human- ity; and he will be compelled to look upward toward the stars to catch its summit, For 14 years, as a sailor under the flags of 6 nations, he personally suffered the appall- ing mental and physical brutalities meted out to those who sailed the ships of the seas. Motivated by love for mankind and hatred of tyranny he resolved to strike the shackles of slavery from the sailors of tne world. His resolution was transformed into action. We see him as he goes forward into this battle. A crusader of righteousness he entered the arena. Arrayed against hin were the crimps, the organized ship owners and the minions of wealth and power. For 19 years, with unfailing courage, he presented the cause of the enslaved sailor to the Cons gress of the United States. Victory, freedom and reward were attained when on March 4, 1915, Woodrow Wilson, President of the
A38é4 United States, signed the bill of emancipa- tion. Thus it is evident that equality before the law did uot follow the surrender at York- town. To this day man has not yet fully se- cured economic freedom from the industrial master. True, in some portions of the world, political freedom and equality of religion exist. Only at the price of death in Nero’s gardens were such victories obtained. Along the centuries thousands died that others yet unborn might live. Today the third and last battle in the execution of the marching order of democ- racy is approaching its climax. The eco- nomic freedom of all the world must be se- cured in order that the equality of man be achieved. The feudal lords and kings have been swept away by the political revo~ jution. Yet in this age great corporations control more employee subjects in the pro- duction of goods than the feudal lords of the medieval ages. At the machines of in~ dustry each year millions of workers are the victims of occupational disease and indus- trial accidents. These wrecked bodies are the byproducts of industry. Lawyers have always been the champions and legal advocates of the oppressed and injured. The Magna Carta, the Declaration of Independence, and the four freedoms were the product of legal minds motivated by the spirit of equality and justice. In order to defend the penniless, the sick, and the in-~ jured, the attorneys of the United States are permitted to do so upon & contingent~ fee contract. It is impossible for the in~ jured worker whose savings, if any, are ex~ hausted by medical and hospital bilis and in payment for the bare necessities of life, to pay retainer fees to attorneys. It is tragic that in any part of this world, legal bar- riers, regulations, and cades of ethics pro~ hibit the attorney from extending his serv~ ice to those who need it; to those unable to pay for it. Such a condition leaves the injured worker solely at the mercy of the claim agent, skilled attorneys for the cor- porations, the casualty~insurance companies, and the lords of industry. This is just an- other barrier which bars the way against the equality of man, These barriers must be swept away. Such appalling injustice is a challenge to the law- yers of the world, dedicated to the principle of freedom. Let us as lawyers answer the ery of the oppressed. Let us unite to strike down this instrument of economic slavery. The contingent-fee contract must be put into world-wide practice. In unity, under this contract, the lawyer and the client work to- gether in close personal harmony and friendship. It is a contract of partnership. United they battle in the courts. Together they secure compensation for the injured worker and his family. The contongent-fee contract in the United States has secured for the orphans of industry fair compensa- tion. It has relieved the widow of industry from the fear of poverty. It has been the instrument by which the education of orphan children has been secured. An enlightened civilization cannot permit the industrial master to employ attorneys by advanced retainers and at the same time deny to these byproducts of industry, his orphan and widow, the right of counsel. In no other way can these helpless ones secure legal protection. This kind of contract is a stepping stone toward victory in the struggle for the economic equality of man. Inspired by the example of Andrew Furu- seth let us carry on the work by him so nobly performed, for the way, the truth, and the life are in this service, written, ANNOUNCER. Mr. Samuel B. Horovitz, noted attorney of Boston and editor in chief of the NACCA Law Journal, has requested us to announce that in addition to the Gleason lectures on workmen’s compensation, this organization has arranged for the delivery of Furuseth lectures on admiralty law by a professor of one of our leading law schools. Norr.—Since both speakers refer to the im portance of the contingent fee attorney in the enforcement of seaman’s rights, we quote from pages, 245, 246, 247, 248, and 249 of an article by one of the editors of the NACCA Law Journal, Mr. Silas Blake Axtell, 15 Moore Street, New York City: “The framers of the Bill of Rights con~ templated equal law enforcement, based on truth that justice be accorded to all citizens, seamen included. “The contingent fee made it possible for the pauper, the penniless seaman, as he usu- ally was, then, to obtain a fair trial and usually justice. You know, in the begin~ ning, our Federal courts were not open to seamen without the prepayment of fees and costs, as they are today. No, indeed, the sea~ man who entered the Federal court had to take a pauper’s oath, and his lawyer also had to swear that he was to receive no compen~ sation at all for his services. “Until the Seaman’s Act was passed, the Legal Aid Society lawyer had a monopoly of seaman’s cases. The doctors and surgeons who do a certain amount of clinical surgery and diagnosis, work without any compensa-~ tion, and make up for it, I suppose, by charg~ ing their well-to-do patients higher fees. The lawyers, or some of them, paid dues to the Legal Aid Society, and thus made some contribution to the ideal of our Bill of Rights—‘Equality of all men before the law.’ The decision, Abdu v. Nigretia, (247 U.S. 27), led to the opening of our Federal courts to seamen without the prepayment of fees and costs. Justices Brandeis and Clark dissented, and that decision helped us to get the words ‘appellate courts’ added by Congress on July 1, 1918 (ch. lle, sec. 1, 40 Stat. 683), so that section 837 United States Code Annotated, now reads: “‘Courts of the United States, including appellate courts hereafter shall be open to seamen without furnishing bonds, or pre- payment of, or making deposit to secure fees or costs, for the purpose of entering and prosecuting suits in their own name, and for their own benefit, for wages or salvage, and to enforce laws made for their health and safety.’ (June 12, 1917, ch. 27, sec. 1, 40 Stat, 157; July 1, 1918, ch. 113, sec. 1, 40 Stat. 683). “Our seamen, including delegates and union officials of those days, had heen trained in foreign vessels where they had been subject to arrest and imprisonment for desertion. They were and really had been wage slaves, and they were glad to recom~ mend counsel who had helped to make the Seamen’s Act effective. Since the last war, with the upsurge in shipping, and the terrific increases in wages of merchant seamen and officers, the law is taken for granted, and the new seamen have experienced little of the hardship of the old days. “The trend here and abroad is for the union to hire lawyers to do their bidding as to law enforcement. Of course, no fighting lawyer can or does divide his fees with a lay~ man-—much less employ runners or touts to steer cases, and thousands of seamen in our hospitals can be brought as witnesses to prove that they are not advised or interfered with by anyone, in the choice of counsel. They can and do write to any lawyer they desire to see. Adjusters of insurance com~ panies are not permitted to contact the in- Jured or sick seamen while they are in hos~ pitals. All orderlies and hospital attend-~ ants, and ambulance drivers and nurses are strictly forbidden to advise seamen to retain any particular lawyer. The fact that the in- surance carriers have for years maintained a@ secret service, and have been able to con~ trol the demands of attorneys who might transgress, has resulted in more and larger verdicts. All this is due, I think, to the con~ tingent fee, and the opening of the Federal APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD courts to seamen without prepayment of fees. “Due to the Seamen’s Act, the seaman not only has rights and remedies and a jury trial, but he has the means of effective enforce~ ment. “The United Nations already have a bill of rights—these rights are of course, the rights of individuals. I have already directed the attention of those leaders of world govern-~ ment in the free countries—Engiand, France, Benelux, and Scandinavia (who wiil lead no doubt in the building of Western Union) —of the need of modifying the ban on the con- tingent fee, prevalent in British and conti- nental jurisdictions. Most American law- yers of this era accept the contingent fee as a matter of course, but an English solicitor is forbidden to make any such contract, “A client who retains a lawyer on a con- tingent basis reposes great and complete confidence 1n his lawyer. I rejoice that the instances are very rare indeed, where there has been an occasion for complaint by a client or regret by the lawyer. “andrew Furuseth believed that the public interest would be served by the enactment of the Jones Act, which made the Railway Safety Act applicable to seamen by reference. Only by this means, he contended, under the profit system, could safe conditions be created in hazardous industries. He said: ‘Make negligence expensive, and care will pay dividends. The burden of the taxpayer will be lighter because there will be fewer cripples to be supported at public expense, fewer widews on pensions, and fewer chil- dren left as public charges.’ “QConsidering that the rights of men, or individuals for their equality of opportunity before the law, must depend upon the exist- ence of independent lawyers, considering the tendency of collective groups of employers and of employees to want to control lawyers by annual retainers, would it not be a good ideas to give workingmen in all industries in all our States the right to elect and pur- sue remedies under ‘Jones Acts,’ or elect to take compensation under the State compen- sation act, if it was to their interest to do 80? “If the reports of the National Safety Council are accurate, this is the best way to discourage negligence under our free enterprise system. The mere fact that this would increase the insurance premiums need not be a bar. One advantage would be to create and maintain a group of independent lawyers, who would by their very freedom and independence, be a tremendous influence for better government in town, the city, the State, in Washington, and in the seat of world government when that place is lo- cated. Only by law can we abolish war; ony by lawyers can that law be made effec- ve. “The crying need today is leadership in public affairs by lawyers who can be econom- ically independent. Lawyers to be independ- ent must have work to do. The right of workers to sue for damages—the common law defenses being removed—would with the use of juries help to keep Government in the hands of the people.” Railroad Strike Peril EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. FORREST C. DONNELL ; OF MISSOURI IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, May 22 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. DONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Rrcorp an editorial
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD entitled “Railroad Strike Peril,” pub- lished in the Oregonian of April 21, 1950. There being no objection, the edito. rial was ordered to be printed in the ReEcorD, as follows: [From the Portland Oregonian of April 21, 1950] RAILROAD STRIKE PERIL Railroad firemen and enginemen might win the strike they have called for next Wednesday by paralyzing rail transpor- tation and causing unemployment and busi- ness recession throughout the Nation. But it might prove to be a costly victory for the union. Congressional response probably would be to tighten the National Railway Labor Act, forbidding strikes, making arbi- tration binding on both parties, and provid- ing penalties for flagrant violations which could bankrupt and destroy stubborn unions. The railroads are public utilities. If the extreme step of nationalization is to be avoided, it is necessary that these lifelines of the economy be kept operating at all times by regulatory means. Under the present act, the union has the right to strike since it went through all the preliminary stages of negotiation and arbi- tration. The main issue is the demand of the firemen and of the engineers’ union that an extra man be employed on multiple-unit Diesel locomotives. Two fact-finding boards appointed by the President under the act have ruled with the railroads that an extra man is not needed, and would constitute union make-work or feather-bedding. Since the unions failed to prove their case before impartial boards, there will be no pub- lic sympathy for the strike. Rather, there will be a demand that Congress enact legisla- tion to prevent such interruptions over is- sues which can be settled by arbitration. [From the Denver (Colo.) Post of April 22, 1950] Tratr’s THat, Sarvs Bruce Gustin It is very much to the credit of the Broth- ° erhood of Locomotive Engineers that their President Johnston has announced they “will continue to work, and can cross picket lines, if set up,” in the event the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen carry out the threat to strike four major railroads next Wednesday. That should make it pos- sible to keep trains running. If the firemen strike in an attempt to force the railroads to put an extra fireman on big Diesel loco- motives, they may learn that these locomo- tives can be operated without any fireman. Report About President Truman’s May 8, 1950, Speech at Grand Island, Nebr., as Related by the Grand Island Daily Independent EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. EUGENE D. O’SULLIVAN OF NEBRASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, May 22, 1950 Mr. O’SULLIVAN. Mr. Speaker, I re- ceived today through the courtesy of Ed- itor Arch W. Jarrell, two newspaper ac- counts and an editorial which ap- peared respectively in the May 9 and May 10, 1950, issues of the Grand Island Daily Independent, which newspaper serves not only the city of Grand Island, Nebr., but.also a large part of surround- ing territory. wor Ann OAR The news accounts are as follows: Spurs StmL REcaLLED Bry 'TROUMAN—PRESI- DENT SPEAKS DurInG 10-MinutTs Stor in Ciry President Truman still remembers that he was given a pair of spurs in Grand Island 2 years ago. “I promised,” he said last night during a 10-minute stop at the Burlington station, “to make good use of them. AndI did. I rode the Eightieth Congress to a second term in the Presidency of the United States. I will keep them as long as I live.” Estimates of the crowd that greeted the Chief Executive of the Nation last night varied from one guess of about 8,000 down- ward to as low as 3,000: Anyhow, it was large crowd to whom he spoke and to whom, afterward, he introduced Mrs. Truman and Miss Margaret Truman. RAIN LET UP A heavy rain, which totaled .70 inch during the afternoon and early evening, stopped only a short time before the special Presidential train arrived. There was an occasional light sprirkie but nothing hke the downpour ™m Ii~coin, of which the President said “I got as wet as a drowned rat.” A welcoming committee, wearing large “Welcome Mr. Truman” badges, was at the trainside when it arrived. Stanley Long, Democratic county chairman, introduced the President, and Mrs. Charles G. Ryan, for many years Democratic national com- mitteewoman, presented Mrs. Truman and Miss Truman with bouquets. Just before the train left, at 8 o’clock, the welcoming committee boarded the rear platform and shook hands with the Tru- mans. The municipal band was on hand to provide a musical welcome. The young-~ est welcomer was 2-year-old Gregory Long, son of Mr. and Mrs. Jack Long and grandson of the county chairman. Yesterday was Mr. Truman’s sixty-~sixth birthday, and several shouts of “Happy birthday!” were heard. No one, however, gave him a birthday cake, which probably pleased him as he had been given birthday cakes all along the line. The 10-car train was filled with secret- service men, newspaper reporters, radiomen, and members of the President’s personal entourage. It pulled into the station at 7:45, about 5 minutes ahead of schedule. Fifth National Guard men, commanded by Capt. John F. Cleary, as well as members of the city police force, were on duty. Mr. Truman called attention to his Lin- coln speech about the Brannan farm plan, and said that the administration’s program had four principles: To maintain farm in- come, to expand farm markets, to conserve and improve soil and water resources, and to preserve the American tradition of the family-size farm. “One of the objects of the program,” he said, “is to give the consumer more food at lower prices.” Production payments must be used to give the farmer an incentive to raise more of what the country needs and less of what we do not need. SPEAKS OF OPPOSITION The President did not mention the Repub- lican party by name, but spoke of the opposi- tion. The trip is ostensibly ‘“nonpolitical.” “Regimentation and socialism are words always used by the opposition,” he declared, “on every piece of legislation for the benefit of the people. But whatever scare words the opposition uses, we intend to move forward with a progressive program. ‘I am trying to obtain world peace, keep the farmers prosperous, Keep labor on a fair basis, and business going as it should. I think I have been successful over the last 6 years. “Two years ago I came out to Grand Island seeking your votes. This year I am mak- A3885. ing my report. There is no change in me since you saw me in 1948. I am still work- ing for you and the welfare of the country.” Truman Says He Witt Puss DEVELOPMENT or West Despire Fors—Traror Doms DEan AmeD By TRUMAN—PREsIDENT Comrs Out AGAIN IN FAvoR OF BRANNAN PLAN (By Ernest B. Vaccaro) Apoarp TRUMAN TRAIN, May 9.—President Truman declared today his administration will push the development of the West over the opposition of reactionary forces of privilege and greed with their philosophy of Teapot Dome. The President carried his day and night cross-country stumping tour into Wyoming after telling an agricultural crowd at Ne- braska enactment of the controversial Bran- nan farm plan would help assure peace and prosperity for ourselves and the world. In a speech prepared for an audience today as Casper, Wyo., the Chief Executive de- scribed the new Kortes Dam, 50 miles away, as a source of wealth and strength for the people of the world. And he scoffed at those who cry socialism, regimentation, or boondoggle at Government water and land resource development. As the day proceeded he continued to talk to large and apparently happy crowds who jammed the tracks around his private car in the chatty, neighborly fashion that was his vote appeal in 1948. Like at Pacific Junction, Iowa, yesterday where he told them he wanted them to look at their hired man to see if he is the same fellow who came out looking for votes 2 years ago. He added he was 66 even if they thought he didn’t look it. Mr. Truman revived the old Teapot Dome oil scandal at Casper, contrasting the phi- losophy of Teapot Dome with that behind the construction of the Kortes Dam. The solemn note he sounded in speeches yesterday in Illinois and Iowa, where he warned the Midwest that a return to isola- tionism could bring on a third world war, crept into his Casper talk. “We are engaged in a world-wide struggle to bring lasting peace to the world,” he said. “In that struggle we are being opposed by a cynical imperialism which asserts that free- dom and democracy are soft and incapable of strong action.” By developing projects like the Kortes Dam, Mr. Truman continued, this country “can prove how false, how hollow, are the claims of communism.” In the Democratic tradition, he added, “we shall move forward on the path of freedom and peace.” In the same vein, Mr. Truman told his farm audience at Lincoln last night that the production payment plan sponsored by Sec- retary of Agriculture Brannan “is the best plan yet proposed for getting an abundant production of perishable crops consumed without knocking the bottom out of the farmer’s income. Under it the Government would pay the farmers the difference between what they receive at the market for perishable crops and a predetermined fair return. In Washington, Senator WHErry, Republi- ean of Nebraska, denounced the Brannan plan as “that economic monstrosity carrying fines and jail sentences for farmers who re- fuse to goose-step upon command of Wash- ington bureaucrats. “The President is obviously playing poli- tics with the farmers’ problems,” WHERRY said, “trying to please CIO bosses and Ameri- cans for Democratic Action with dirt cheap prices for food and win the farmers’ vote with offers of bribery from the Public Treasury.” Mr. Truman assured the Casper audience today that the Highty-first Democratic-con- trolled Congress has been moving forward—~ not backward. :
A3886 “The contrast between the enlightened, Democratic approach to the use of our nat~ ‘ural resources, and the selfish, anti-Demo- cratic approach, is plain here in Wyoming,” he said. “About 50 miles north of Casper lies Teapot Dome. About 50 miles southwest is the new Kortes Dam. “The name Teapot Dome stands as an everlasting symbol of the greed and privi- lege that underplay one philosophy about the West.” He said under his own philosophy the Kortes Bam will add 36,000 kilowatts of elec- tricity to our national store of energy when its three turbines go into operation. Mr. Truman said that soil and forest con- servation, flood control, and the development of power, navigation, and irrigation in the Missouri Valley ‘must ail be tackled and solved together.” He did not say whether this should be done by a Missouri Valley Authority or under what set-up, but he added: “We have learned that a great river valley cannot be developed in piecemeal fashion.” Speaking of the serious aspects of the water problem, he referred to the huge re- serves of oi] shale in Colorado. “In the years to come, we may well need to obtain oll from that shale.’ Mr. Truman warned. “It will take a lot of water to do so, however. And there is a real question whether there is enough water for that pur~ ose.” ® He said that is one of the problems being looked into by the Water Resources Commis- sion he appointed earlier in the year. He said the United States must forge ahead with water and land development. “There are still reactionary forces that oppose every forward-looking proposal to de- velop the resources and increase the pros- perity of the West,” the President went on. “The philosophy that produced Teapot Dome is not dead.” The editorial is as follows: Tur PRESIDENT’s VIsiIvT A 10-minute speech, such as Harry Tru- man delivered at the Burlington station Monday night, isn’t intended to set the world on fire or start a controversy. He hasn't time to develop 4 serious theme. . So we shouldn’t be critical of the talk given here by the President. He came out firmly for prosperity, soil conservation, and peace. Because his trip is nonpolitical, he didn't mention the hated Republicans by name. He only called them the opposition. And he said he would work for the welfare of the people, a promise with which no one can quarrel. Mr. Truman appeared healthy and rugged. He looks as if the Presidency agreed with him, and as if he liked the job which at first he accepted so hesitantly. The surprise election of 1948 had a definite effect upon his personality. He has developed the “I did it” philosophy which success in winning politi- cal elections so often givesa man. No longer does he question his capacity to be the President. Mr. Truman knows he’s good, and admits it, Dr. Clanton W. Williams Proposes a Pos- sible Way of Avoiding World War III EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CARL ELLIOTT OF ALABAMA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, May 19, 1950 Mr. ELLIOTT. Mr, Speaker, we all realize that the heart of America yearns for a peaceful world. We want a world in which our children can grow up with an opportunity to reasonably reach the fulfillment of their dreams. The bravery and ability of our armed forces, backed by the great resources and industrial ingenuity of our people en- abled us to win two great World Wars. Five year after the close of World War Tl we have seen many of the fruits of victory slip as sand through our fingers. Time is running out. Dr. Clanton W. Williams, professor of history at the University of Alabama, in a bold and thoughit-provoking approach has outlined a possible way of avoiding world war III. Dr. Williams is widely recognized as an outstanding historian and philosopher. He is a thorough scholar and a great teacher. I include a recent address of his en- titled “A Possible Way of Avoiding World War ITI’: A Possisue Way or Avomwinc Wortp War III (By Clanton W. Williams, professor of his- tory, University of Alabama) Mr. President, fellow Kiwanians, ladies and gentlemen of the radio audience, your pro- gram committee has asked a historian to talk to you at this time—to offer some thoughts on the possibilities of avoiding war with Russia. No historian should engage in predicting. Our business has to do with the past. But I dare say that most students of man’s affairs would hold that constantly recurring warfare is part of the pattern of all animal life and that it is a decree of nature that the human species shall continue to fight more or less devastating wars. That wars are becoming increasingly devastating is incidental. It is but a part of the general upward curve of everything in this particular era. Having reached a high point of destructiveness, the curve of destructiveness will likely then de- scend until man has recuperated sufficiently to start once more the increase in devasta- tion. That thesis, it seems to this historian, is subject to debate. But I admit that I see only one area of refutation to that fatalistic pessimism. It lies in this fact: While the curve of destructiveness of warfare is ascend- ing, so too there is an increasing determina- tion among human beings to put an end to this viclous recurrence. The general rise in the curve of democracy now approaching international democracy offers great possi- bility, it seems to me, that the so-called de- cree of nature just mentioned may be coun- tered, may be proved to have been only osten- sible. Man has triumphed over nature in other fields. Why should he not find the means of doing so here? The chances of permanent peace, I ad- mit, are not great. The odds are greatly in favor of the continued recurrence of war. But it so happens that the good Lord has al- lowed to emerge in this pin point of time a Nation which in physical prowess com- pletely overshadows all others—a Nation with a generally high moral code, a Nation whose economic influence is far out of pro- portion to its numerical strength, a Nation with a political philosophy of high order. Whether or not this Nation can muster the requisite intelligence and crusading spirit to perform its wonted mission remains to be seen. I am speaking to an intelligent patriotic segment of our people. The very fact that they are leaders in this community throws upon them a heavy responsibility to keep themselves informed and to develop among themselves and their fellows the crusading APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD spirit required. Toward that end the fol- lowing facts are presented: World War I cost $100,000,000,000, not counting interest and veterans’ care. World War II saw expended about $1,500,000,000,- 000, or about 50 times as much money as the total gold reserves of all the nations on earth. Florida’s share of this was $7,183,- 609,404. Bay County’s portion was $79,506,- 000. This is some four times the assessed value of all your real estate. This still does not include interest on the debt nor expend- itures for veterans. In fiscal 1950, a year of peace, the Federal, State, and local governments expect to col- lect about $%55,000,000,000. This is about $1,447 per family. Eight hundred and thirty dollars of that will go for wars, past and prospective, or possibly avoidable. To this point I have talked only in terms of money—money which itself actually did not disappear, did not even leave this coun- try—money which is registered, nevertheless, as the major portion of our national debt. There were only 27 nations engaged in World War I and only 8,500,000 people were killed. Seventy nations fought in World War II and some 22 millions were killed. World War I saw the development of machine guns, long-range cannon, poison gas, light tanks, and submarines. World War II saw these weapons become many times more ef- fective, while on the sea this latter war saw the coming of aircraft carriers. Moreover, in the air, long-range bombers and other air- craft grew in awesome numbers as the hell they rained on earth grew proportionately. World War I came to a close with the air- plane’s just beginning to be recognized as a@ weapon of offense. So World War II came to a close just as jet propulsion and guided missiles and electronics began to astound laymen with their potentialities. World War JI came to a screeching conclusion as the scientists of the victorious side suddenly pre- sented to human beings a new gift—the atomic bomb. Although the expression “push-button warfare’ was already being bandied about in military and scientific circles before’ World War II had ended, there had not then been developed the science of combining the prin- ciples of guided missiles and atomic fission and biologicals. But by the middle of the twentieth century God’s little bugs on earth are making nice progress toward this end. Is it trite here to interject the thought that the physical sciences are outstripping the social sciences and that the social sci- ences dictate the use of the products of the physical sciences? Here, parenthetically, I must mention again the figure $830 per fam- ily in 1950 for war. I should like to mention also the proposed figure, $7.50 for Federal aid to education. Of course, there are State and local funds for education, all pathetically inadequate, but I am speaking here spe- cifically of national responsibilities. That $7.50 will probably not even be appropriated at this session of Congress. This is inci- dental; but it is an indication of where we are putting our national emphases. Eight hundred and thirty dollars to $7.50 in Amer- ica—in gold-rich America—the Nation whose public opinion reflected in Washington con- trols the destiny of mankind! The cost of World War II to the peoples of Europe and Asia was nearly two times the $530,000,000,000 we spent on war from 1940 to 1946. That’s the cash cost—not the cost in sorrow over their twenty-one and a half mil- lion dead loved ones, nor the cost in destruc- tion of buildings, homes, churches, and schools, and of business establishments, nor the cost in the attendant warping of mind and body and spirit of those who lived. The decrease in culture and mental development was matched only by the increase in im- morality and in inability to judge values— values in everyday associations, values in political philosophies and propaganda.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD It may seem superfluous here to review these facts—the cost of war in money and plood and sorrow and in general degeneration, Yet it seems to be in order to note the his- torical tendency wherein wars are becoming greater, more all-embracing, increasingly menacing to all higher values. It needs to be noted again and again, especially by parents and teachers, that new generations are coming along continuously—young peo- ple who lack this historical perspective, wha did not know 1861-65, 1870-71, 1898, 1914-18, 1939-45. It needs to be noted again and again, too, that the wartime good resolu~ tions: “to make the world safe for democ- racy”; “to institute the four freedoms”; ‘‘to win the peace’’—these great resolutions fade as we move each year a bit further from the periods in which we held them most intently. Man’s forgetfulness, indeed, his fickleness here, is in effect tragic. The educator’s responsibility here is apparent. It is good to note, I repeat, that with each successive war in recent decades the accom~ panying determination to end warfare has grown in proportion approaching the inten. sity of war itself. International organiza~ tion for preservation of peace is no new concept. Its roots go back to Pax Romana, The medieval Roman Catholic Church with its peace of God and its truce of God; the nebulous Holy Roman Empire; the 15-nation Christian republic of France’s Henry IV and his Minister Sully in 1610; the law of na~ tions for a society of states as written by the great Dutch lawyer, Grotius, during and after the tragic Thirty Years’ War; Alexan~ der of Russia’s Holy Alliance and Castlereagh of England’s European concert and his con- ference of ambassador with its permanent secretariat, all following the convulsions of 1789 to 1815—these are manifestations of a basic knowledge among men that wars must be prevented. Toward the end of the nine- teenth century came the Hague Conference and the Permanent Court of Arbitration. Here it is to be observed that arbitration in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries prevented the outbreak of war some 200 times. Then came the explosion of 1914-18, It was followed by creation of the League of Nations. But the League died, struck by three mighty blows: (1) it had no police power, (2) American irresnonsibility, and (38) the general unwillingness to apply the eco- nomic boycott during the great depression. It is difficult to think of Franklin D. Roose- velt as a timid man. Yet his audacity left him at a crucial moment of history. Fear- ful of a repetition of Wilsonian defeat at the hands of isolationist Senators, he failed to advocate the surrender-of a large portion of American national sovereignty to the prospective United Nations. Doubtless Brit- ain, too, and surely the U. S. 5S. R. would not have surrendered the requisite amount of national sovereignty to make of the United Nations an effective world government. Per- haps Roosevelt knew this and decided to try to make the most of what he could get. At any rate, the UN was born crippled, crippled by the rule of unanimity among the per~ manent Big Five of the Security Council. There would be no international police power now; there would be continuous sabotage by that power which had vowed death to bourgeois democracy; if there were to be internationalism it would not be democracy international. Internationalism in general is no new concept. Alexander set out to conquer and to Hellenize the world. Rome conquered and Romanized the western and near eastern world. The term Caesar was in time imi- tated in the titles of Tsar and Czar of all the Russias. It is still alive in Shar of Iran. Then there were the Kaisers of the Ger- mans who sang songs about “Deutschland uber alles.” includes “King of Kings.” There have been others: besides royalty who entertained am= bitions to unify the world under their per= ‘sive attitude. Even Haile Salassie’s title . sonal dictatorship and interestingly enough each had some ideological urge. Napoleon rode the wave of “Liberte, Fraternite, Egalite.’” Mussolini talked of reestablish- ment of the Roman Empire as an all em- bracing “corporate state.” Hitler and his “Herrenfolk,” “master race,” still sang “Deutschland uber alles” as they talked of a “new order in Europe.” The Russians today have a stirring anthem which they sing with deep reverent fervor: “Tis the final conflict Let each stand in his place. The International Party Shall be the human race.” The fact that no king or dictator since the Romans has brought internationalism to fruition does not gainsay the possibility of some such temporary success, I say temporary because men cannot be held in bondage indefinitely. Individual~ ism, freedom, and justice are age old. In- deed, they are coexistent with the laws of nature. It follows that if permanent inter- nationalism is to be realized it will not be brought about by conquest or intimidation or coercion, nor through wholesale violation of the natural laws inherent in the terms individualism, freedom, and justice, and cer- tainly not when there is applied the un- moral principle that the end justifies the means and other materialistic dogmas. Rus- sian communism hasn’t a chance of more than temporary success, but it does have that chance, and temporary could mean several centuries. But international democracy does have a chance of permanent success. Indeed, the realization of world republicanism appears to be fairly close at hand. I think I might say flatly that if this great Nation had by now developed a crusading spirit for such, that it could be realized in our own day— and quite likely without world war III. Unfortunately, there is no great leader- ship at our helm, and, equally unfortunate, there is a timidity among strategically placed persons who do understand the gigantic prob- lem. When I say strategically placed per- sons, I mean not only the State Department and the Congress but also all molders of pub- lic opinion and creators of public enlighten- ment. It was painful for me last year, as I took part in a Washington conference on the “zeal for democracy” program, to note that the atmosphere was permeated by a defen- Mind you, these conferees were educators from all levels of education brought together by the Commissioner of Education. They agreed that the school should fight communism and by contrasting it with democracy. But there was hesitancy about showing it up as the loathesome thing it is. This might lead to the accusation of a lack of objectivity. This, to me, is asinine. There was zeal for democracy, to be sure, but only for democracy at home. Practically nothing was said about international democ- racy. Oh, there should be taught the struc- ture and functions of the United Nations, but its weaknesses were to be ignored or excused as shortcomings of its youth. There was nothing said about its deformity at birth. In short, there is no purposeful advocacy of an educational program whereby our children may be taught the stark facts, and our adults made more conscious of the yawning gulf in the United Nations between its ideals and the practical constitutional progresses where- by the realization of those ideals might be pursued. Our educators, like our politicians, are grossly guilty of ostrich-like evasion of the greatest issue of our age, while the rest of humanity waits for American leadership, And apparently .few of our ministers know their responsibility here. But if there is no grass-roots program, aimed toward re-~ vamping the United Nations, to make it what, it is wont to be—a powerful world gov- ernment—and international democracy, the A3887 greater shame lies in Washington. Mr. Mar- shall, we remember, turned down as prema- ture the idea of elimination of the veto. To be sure, he realized that Russia would veto any move to remove the veto and he was afraid that if he should push such a move Russia and her satellites and at that time maybe also the Arab states would withdraw from the UN. Then, too, there was no assurance that the United States Senate would approve such a surrender of our national sovereignty, and so we drift along the familiar road, so well known to historians—simple rearmament. Trygve Lie was irked last April when the signing of the North Atlantic Pact stole the headlines from the opening of the spring session of the UN General Assembly. Why? Because it was all too eyident that though the pact was within the letter of the UN Charter it was an instrument completely outside the functions of that organization which was supposedly designed to win the peace. But the United Nations as now con- stituted cannot preserve the peace, and we know it, and therefore ratified the Atlantic Pact. We based our whole national and for- eign policy on the principle that the Polit- buro could not be deferred in their program except by their fear of the atom bomb. And so we approve of huge appropriations for war or for the prevention of war, we don’t know which. In effect we have fallen back upon the first law of nature, self-pres- ervation, and its corollary, survival of the fittest, and I for one must concur. I ap- prove of the fact that we have told the Rus- sians in effect that we will blast their cities with atom bombs should their armies invade any of the signatory powers to the North Atlantic Pact. What our attitude will be when we know that the Russians, too, have the atom bomb remains to be seen. Mean-= time, I suppose we may say that we are cre- ating world understanding of a sort, a sort which the Kaiser lacked when he believed the statement of his advisers that he need not fear American participation in World War I, because at the moment the United States should declare war, then Texas would secede and go back to Mexico. It is a sort of world understanding which Hitler lacked, though Ambassador William E, Dodd did tell him in 1938 that he had better study some history. He had studied one phase of his- tory; Frederick IIT was his idol, Frederick with his philosophy that that whatever suc- ceeds is right, a materialistic philosophy, incidentally, which Frederick’s fellow Prus- sian Karl Marx shared. It needs to be added that the Jap militarist did understand that we would fight when we had our face slapped. But it is hard to believe that they understood the war potential of an aroused America. It is now difficult to believe that the Russians with all their spies in our midst do not understand that potential. Shall we tell them, too, that we will fight if they invade Greece or Turkey or any of the Middle East? Shall we have also a Pa- cific alliance? What I am trying to say here is that while I approve of this policy of firm containment, it is in the long run only a stop gap pro- gram. It can only defer war. But look, having stopped Russian armies by threat of war, this shall not have stopped the indirect conquest. Witness the demise of Nationalist China now transpiring. It is painful indeed to see 450,000,000 Chinese peo- ple added to the 300,000,000 already brought under the control, as far as concerns inter- national affairs, of those 12 or 13 Bolsheviks, several of whom started out just 32 years ago with but 30,000 followers—but a well indoctrinated and coordinated 30,000. It is painful to note the inconsistency in our pol- icy of firm containment. We are containing the expansion of Russo-communism in Bu- rope and the Mediterranean through the ‘Truman doctrine, the Marshall plan, and the North Atlantic Pact. Not so elsewhere. Not
A3888 in China. Not in Indochina or Burma or Malaya or Indonesia or Siam (where the sub- capital of the Communist International is the Russian Embassy at Bangkok). Com- munists today are working nicely in the Phil- ippines, in the Middle East (the subcapital is the Russian Embassy at Beirut, Syria) , in the heart of Africa, and far up the Amazon. The recent pronouncements of Communists evelywhere, including Paul Robeson, that they would fight for Russia in event of war between their own nations and the citadel of the International were not made unadvis- edly, nor as a result of any frustration. It has long been a policy of the revolutionists to purge their ranks, to keep their organiza- tion stern and sinewy, and with raised fist to let the world know that sooner or later they were going to win. Just when is not important. Marx’s pronouncements about “economic” and “historical determinism,” whereby it was foreordained that bourgeois democracy should fall before his dictatorship of the proletariat, was not idle chatter. He sincerely believed it, and so do his fol- lowers today. Lenin’s law of ebb and flow has been reiterated by word and action of Joseph Stalin and by his minions. They expect to meet temporary defeats, even to make strategic retreats here and there. But there is no doubt in their minds that sooner or later “the international party shall be the human race.” This shall come to pass even if Russia as a nation should suffer military defeat. I am afraid that most of our people do not even know the simple fact that the self-perpeiuating Politouro is not a part of the Government of Russia, that it is the “central authority,” as Marx put it, of the International, the policy- making body of all Communist groups, the Russian being only one of them. And so the Kremlin is a dual capital—and perhaps a temporary one. Since the First Interna- tional was formed in 1864 there have been five capitals: London, The Hague, New York, Philadelphia, Paris, and now Moscow. It may very well be moved back to Paris before the century is done. It could eventually be moved to the new United Nations Building in New York. Right now, though, it is in Moscow and the poor Russian people are being made its immediate tools. Russian nationalism, plus American repugnance for war, plus our igno- rance of the fundamentals, plus the awful fact that we have already garnered 73.4 per- cent of the world’s gold reserve and don’t know that the poker game has almost been proken up, plus the deformity of the United Nations—those five things have given Marx- ism-Leninism-Stalinism a series of breaks such as to make old Karl grin through his rotting beard and hiss, “I told you so. See, it’s inevitable.’ And we wonder why some half-baked intellectuals are Jumping on the pandwagon. I submit, my fellow Americans, my fellow bourgeois Democrats, that it is not a ques- tion simply of stopping Russia. That is put the first of a series of steps long over- due. Sure, we are meeting the U. S. S. R. as a nation head-on and stopping her mili- tary expansion to the west. We are not meeting the International “ipse”’ save where the stop-gap Marshall plan has been insti- tuted. And how long do we intend to continue this stop-gap ERP, just giving people dollars so that we can prolong the one-sided poker game—a desperate game for them and for us? There must be an answer somewhere, But the failure to find that answer is cer- tainly one primary reason we refused to let China stay in the game, only we used an- other analogy about pouring money down a rat hole. Hight hundred and thirty dollars per fam- ily per year indefinitely. That’s an ugly thought, But still uglier is the thought of what that bill may be when Canada and the Australians and the Latin Americans and 400,000,000 Indians have run completely out of chips. Some say the trouble is that Englishmen are living beyond their means, that they have got to lower their standard of living. These people should be consistent and say that this is true also of Frenchmen and all western Europeans and Canadians and Mexicans and also those 400,000,000 half- starved Indians. What sweet music to these old Bolsheviks sitting in their temporary Kremlin citadel. Bight hundred and thirty dollars per family, this year, we should say. That’s bad enough. Mind you, I am not con- sidering the rest of our tax bill, just that part having to do with foreign affairs and this year. Did I say ‘“‘per family’? What families? Need I say what we all know, that the vast load here is being borne by people who might otherwise invest this money in bourgeois enterprises which would produce for the masses in greater abundance and at even lower cost per man- hour worked the good things all men want and would buy if they had purchasing power? Here I could quote directly from Marx’ Address of the Central Authority to the Communist League, April 1850, or from writ- ings of his apostle Lenin on how to force democratic nations to tax capitalism to death. I will quote Marx here. This 1s fundamental. It was written from London 100 years ago: “We have seen how in the coming move- ment the democrats will come to power (that’s not a capital “D”). * * * if the democrats themselves move for a moderated progressive taxation (Communists), must insist upon. a tax whose rates are so steeply graduated as to bring ruin to big capital.” Need I say, my fellow Americans, that with the failure of this Nation to face squarely the issues, to examine honestly its tremen-. dous role in international economics, to note frankly wherein its own selfishness, its tariff policy, its refusal to allow even an equal palance of trade, its asinine gold-purchase policy, its refusal to surrender an iota of its national sovereignty to the United Nations— that all these things are to be taken into equal account along with the dynamic cru- sading drive of Communists bent on de- struction of our system. Need I add that many an athletic contest, many @ war has been lost because one side was intellectually inferior, or was conscience stricken, or lacked a dynamic spirit of its own? May I add that the United States to- day not only has no crusading spirit for its own ideology but apparently even lacks a grand strategy? Are we sauntering non- chalantly along in blissful overconfidence because we have the atom bomb and $23,- 000,000,000 in gold when the economic and political world stands on the verge of crash- ing about our ears? If we are going to think this thing through, if we are going to de- velop any grand strategy and crusading spirit before it is too late, here are some fundamental things which must be con- sidered—deep underlying things: 1. This bourgeois democratic system with its emphasis on the individual and his free- doms and its mass production industry gush- ing forth its good things, this bourgeois sys- tem, with all its faults, is by far the finest politico-economic system so far achieved. It is worthy of preservation and perfection and expansion. 2. It is in danger of destruction—not by Russia, even with the atom bomb—but pri- marily because our people do not under. stand the great issues, do not understand the nature of the opposing ideology, do not understand our awful responsibility in the realm of international economics, do not understand that when the purchasing power of the other 93 percent of the human race has been wrenched from them. by our eco- nomic electromagnet that the others will in- evitably turn on this irresponsible crea- ture—Marxism or no Marxism, Lenin-Stal~ inism or no Lenin-Stalinism. But Marxism- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Leninism-Stalinism will be ready. The Kremlin is already Offering itself as a rally~ ing point, an enthusiastic leader bent upon achieving its avowed end—an end already being avidly pursued. 3. This great Nation has already reached the sight of the end of the road it is travel- ing. With all its wealth, the prospective taxation of its investing element to ward off economic stagnation throughout the world, pius more taxation to carry its own and others’ huge military burden (past, present, and prospective), is an ever-widening malig- nant cancer bent upon death not just to free enterprise but to all that democracy in- volves. 4. World war III would have to be financed almost entirely by that nation which has the capital, and its capitalists as such would pe dcomed whether or not we won it. My subject was how to avoid world war III. Obviously avoidance of that war is but one of the problems before us. The little recession from which we are apparently now emergeing may well have been a red beacon flashing—fiashing. Should this rich Nation have a real depression what do you think the others would have? What do you think they are already having? They are grateful that we are making it possible for them to stay in the game, but they know who has garnered all their chips. Some of them are proud people and resent very much the po- sition they are in, but they dread the ar- rival of the moment when Uncle Sam him- self should become critically ill and say, “That’s all, boys.” Need I add that Uncle Sam might share that dread, for that mo- ment may not be far removed? Have you read what Stalin has been writing since 1925 about the spread of the International through “a series of ebbings and flowings,” “a wave-like rhythm” after each war and after each financial panic? Well, read it, translated for you in the January, 1949, issue of Foreign Affairs. It is presumptous for me, a historian, to offer a program of action at this late hour. I do so with the hope that you will carry on from here in your thinking—in your molding of public opinon—public opinion in the gigantic democracy which at this hour’ controls the destiny of mankind. _How to avoid world war III? ‘Yes, that and much more. I offer a seven-point program, part of which is already in opera- tion, part of which our State Department and the President apparently are contem~ plating but to this moment have done little or nothing about, because they fear Con- gress: . 1. Continue to keep ourselves militarily strong while letting the Kremlin masters know through a chain of defense alliances that any further military aggression on the part of Russia or any of her satellites will mean war in which the United States would participate and would not hesitate to use the atom bomb and other horrible weapons atourcommand. This is a.stop-gap measure. 2. A vigorous and proud launching of a bold new program to encourage investment of private capital and to bring to the under- developed areas of the world, as Mr. Truman put it in his inaugural address, the capital- istic technology which to this point has made of us the most powerful, prosperous people in history. Mr. Truman’s puny request for $40,000,000 ($1 per family) hardly falls in the category of relative boldness. This would be no stop-gap measure. This should be our long-awaited answer to the challenge of communism, This is where our $830 should be going. : 4, Acomplete revision of the Charter of the United Nations—-such revision to be based upon the tried and proved principles of democracy—a bicameral system and ma- jority or large majority rule. Should Russia veto this move to make the UN a real “Democracy International,” and she would,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD then call a new world constitutional as~ sembly, draw a new constitution, and upon ratification by the United States Senate, theh secede from the United Nations with invi- tation to others to follow us in the estab- lishment of an effective world republic. Membership would be restricted to those nations whose local governments are operat- ing under the principles of democracy as de-= fined in the English Bill of Rights, or in the French Declaration of the Rights of Man, or in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. There must repose in that World Re- public real powers which all governments must have—legislative power, even includ- ing a limited power of taxation; judiciary power; and executive power, including full investigative and police powers. 6. In that World Republic there would be not only the present World Bank with capi- tal vastly expanded, but a strong treasury department—the depository of gold reserves. Let it buy gold and issue currency, and more and more of it as it acquired gold. This, I think, is essential. There can never be any circulation of an International currency nor may we logically hope for economic stability without some such drastic move. Then, in that World Republic, there must be a world department of commerce with powers to act. The socio-economic aim of this World Re- public would be a repudiation of totalitarian- ism in all forms and a substitution therefore of a dynamic bourgeois capitalism to bring about an increasing mass consumption of the good things all men want purposefully being mass produced in regulated quantity. There is no end to potential markets. Distribution of purchasing power can be stimulated. Sure, this cannot be done except through planned economy—planned as any grand strategy must be planned, as any board of directors must plan. Let those who despise centralized planning think of the alterna- tives and of the red beacon right down the road flashing—flashing. 7. Meantime, a revolution must be pro- ‘duced in the minds of men. In Europe, in Asia, in America. Truth and morality must become paramount or democracy will die as it died in Germany, as it has died in eastern and now is dying in central Europe, as it is dying elsewhere. Two world wars and a spreading economic cancer have dominated this century. The cutthroat practices, the flood of falsehoods, the scheming and plotting of Fascists, Nazis, Communists, and others has left a deep imprint upon our age. Men must understand that tyranny and war and depression can be eliminated. They and their children can be taught the funda- mentals of political science and economics, We must reverse the trend wherein the phy- sical sciences are.outstripping the social sci- ences. American children must be well taught for they will control man’s destiny. But before that may be approached, Ameri- can fathers must somehow get it through their thick skulls that good teaching cannot be bought in bargain basements. Eight hun- dred and thirty dollars for wars—and Con- gress falls between stools over the proposi- tion that $7.50 ought ta be spent to assist in educating the Nation’s youth. It is quite possible to teach the propa- ganda-ridden people of the earth that bour- geois democracy is not the evil thing it ap- pears to many to be. But it means a drastic departure from our present course, and time is running out. The poker game is already artificial, and we have moved into the atomic age. Does this seven-point program shock you? Does it shock you to know that 8 out of every @ dollars of Federal appropriation this year is being spent for war purposes and that the chances are that this amount must be in- creased until Marx’s predictions come true? Does it shock you to realize that with the Communist conquest of China that the self< perpetuating Politburo within 82 years shall have established its system over one-third of mankind, whereas with all the progress of the centuries, since long before Magna Carta, only one-fifth of humanity today lives under the rules of democracy, and that most of these democratic peoples plus the other 45 percent, now vacillating, are being bled white by their leaders—a leader which even neglects the education of its children? It is shocking, isn’t it, my fellow Ki- wanians, my fellow Americans? Rail Labor Law Failure EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FORREST C. DONNELL OF MISSOURI IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, May 22 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. DONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an editorial entitled “Rail Labor Law Failure,” pub- lished in the Los Angeles (Calif.) Times of April 21, 1950. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Rrcorp, as follows: Ram Lasor Law Faure Every time the railway labor law has been amended it has been hailed as the model labor law, setting a pattern for all manage= ment-labor relationships. SANTA FE IS LISTED That it is not this perfect model is again being demonstrated by the strike call of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen against a list of selected rail- roads. Though the Santa Fe is the only one in the list which serves this territory, either the UP or the SP or both may be involved later. First, it should be said that this is a pure featherbedding strike; it is not for any legit- imate end. What the union demands is that a third fireman be employed on Diesel- electric multiple-unit driving systems, which actually use no firemen at all. Diesel-electric drives have been success- fully operated with only one man in the cab. That engine crews should have two men, though nothing is required of the second but that he be ready to take over in an emergency, is reasonable enough. The pub- lic safety calls for such a precaution, so that the lives of passengers may be protected if one man becomes disabled. The second man should be provided for the same reason that a passenger airplane has a copilot. UNION CASE IS WEAK But there is no good reason for having three men; and a Presidential fact-finding board has so declared, after a careful ex. amination, Since 1933, all such fact-finding boards have been loaded in favor of labor organizations, so that when one rejects a un- fon’s contentions the union must have a weak case indeed. But the second consideration in connec- tion with this strike deals with a really basi¢ matter; this is a strike against a public util- ity, and a strike against a public utility is intolerable. It is at this point that the law 1s weakest. The law will continue to be fatally at fault until it is amended to’ provide for some form of compulsory arbitration, Men working for A3889 a@ public utility cannot be permitted to strike, though they must, of course, have the ad- vantage of proper machinery for the redress of grievances. To argue that compulsory arbitration sets up a form of “forced labor” or “involuntary servitude” is to argue nonsense. No man has to take a job in a public utility; nor, having taken such a job, does he have to keep on working. He can quit. But the members of the BLFE do not wish to quit; they want to hold their Jobs and they would object stren. uously if anybody was put to work in their place. EVADING SEIZURE Is it too much. to ask that if they, as public utility employees, do not want to quit, they submit their disputes with management to impartial judgment so that the public will no be put to great loss and inconvenience? In this particular case, the impartial judg- ment has already been given, and it is against the union. The fact-finding board says there is no merit in the union contention that a third man should be hired, to help a second man do nothing nine-tenths or more of the time. The union is attacking a few railroads at a time so it can avoid, if possible, government seizure on the plea of national emergency. But the threat is to all railroads and to the public. The Railway Labor Law has fallen down before. Its object is to provide a rule of reason and avoidance of strikes in rail trans« portation. But instead of a rule of reason it has proved to the unions in the past that, no matter how unreasonable they are, the Government will force a settlement in their favor rather than permit a strike. It’s time it was changed. Concerning President Truman’s Speech at Lincoln, Nebr., May 8, 1950 EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. EUGENE D. O’SULLIVAN OF NEBRASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, May 22, 1950 Mr. O’SULLIVAN. Mr. Speaker, If wish to call attention to an article which appeared in the May 12, 1950, issue of the Unionist, a weekly newspaper which has been in existence for over 26 years, and which is the only official newspaper of the Nebraska Federation of Labor, and the only official American Federation of Labor newspaper in either Omaha or Lincoln, Nebr. This article is indeed a splendid one, and is as follows: THOUSANDS Har Truman’s SPEECH—DRIVING Rarmn Fars To DamMPen ENTHUSIASM OF CHEERING THRONG IN LINCOLN (By Kenneth Lewis) All in all it was quite an occasion when the President came to town. For several hours before his train pulled in the Lincoln Hotel was a scene of great activity. The FBI had long before checked those who were to be admitted beyond the guard rope. Democratic big-wigs were everywhere. It was fun to meet people who had been only names in the papers up to that time. A lot of the labor boys were on hand. John Frahm had been running errands and work- ing for the good of the cause since about noon, Bill Noble came in ahout 3:30 and
A3890 had no difficulty getting one of those exclu- sive badges pinned on him. Al Witzling came later, and there were several from rail- road (including Fred Chapelle, Anton Munch, Ed Lafferty, and others) and other organizations. Lots of old friends. WANT EXCLUSIVE BADGES I guess Democrats are just like others, in some ways. Some of the gentlemen about the hotel were moaning long and loud be- cause they didn’t have one of the exclusive badges, denoting a member of the Presiden- tial reception party. But eventually most of them were satisfied, or at least quieted. This preliminary part was much like a convention—you just met people, and intro- duced those you knew to others. It was a pleasure to introduce Al to Mayor Miles, but they soon discovered they had been on the same program in opposing the repeal of rent controls. Judge Quigley wasn’t at all like Thad imagined—but don’t know what I really had in mind. Then came the call for the parade—and “exciusive”’ badge wearers were loaded into cars according to prearranged schedule, ° Then to the platform to await the President. Bill had left his raincoat in the car. Didn’t think he’d need it. How wrong he was. After we'd met a lot more people, and just before the President came, it started to rain. The bands came marching in, their various colcred uniforms adding color to the occa-~ sion, Their music lifting those spirits that may have sagged because of the rain. THRILL TO SEE PRESIDENT The band played the national anthem, and made you tingle a bit with the pride of the thing. It was quite a thrill to see the President coming from the railroad yards, just below us, then up into the stand. He wasn’t just a@ name in the papers, er an actor in a news- ree]—he was a real live man. Somehow it’s hard to make real people out of some of the names we read. But there he was—just like the rest of us—getting rained on. There was Mrs. 'Truinan, and Margaret. They were real, too. Here was the Truman family—a family just like yours and mine. Funny, isn’t it—some things you know are true, aie a little different after you see proof. Then the introduction by mayor of the town shielding his manuscript from the rain. The thunder interfered. The noise of the rain interrupted. But out in the rain, with no protection, about four thousand stayed of the many thousands who came and went— Just to see the President—then get out of the rain, “REALLY HAS SOMETHING” I tried to listen carefully to his speech. It dealt with the farm program of the ad- ministration. He plugged for the so-called Brannan plan. To me it sounded logical. He sounded honest. I liked what I heard, But I don’t know much about farming pro- grams. So I asked an expert—Stan Matzke farm editor of the Journal—what he thought of the speech. “Excellent,” said Stan. “The old boy really has something. I would like to see such a program tried. If eggs dropped to 5 or 10 cents a dozen, I think a lot more people would eat eggs. Then the price would naturally come back up to a level to make them equal with other commodities. Meanwhile food would be cheaper, and the farmer would still be getting a fair price. I'd like to see a pro- gram based on production payments tried out.” Stan rates pretty high in my book in the matter of judgment. So this reaction from a Republican farm editor confirms my uninformed opinion that it was a good speech. After he finished speaking, the President and his family were hurried to the train to get them out of the rain, and give them a chance to get into dry things. One of the most interesting features of the afternoon was the steps taken to safe- guard the President. From where we sat on the stand, you could see police or secret service men all around. In the railroad yards, on every building for two blocks, on fire escapes two blocks away, and closer, in strategic windows. They overlooked no bets. PAND PLAYS IN RAIN Then uptown to catch a bus. Crowded with people soaked, but glad to have seen the President. Most of them glad about being part of the crowd that listened while the University band, in a driving rain, played, paraphrased and sang, “We knew you were coming, so we baked a cake.” Then the whole crowd joined them in singing “Happy Birthday.” The fellow next to me, hanging on to the streetcar rail, was the engineer who had brought in the President’s train. He told about things that happened along the way, and the people who were out to get a glimpse of the President. All in all, it was a great occasion, when the President came to Lincoln. Public a Third Party in Any Rail Dispute EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FORREST C. DONNELL OF MISSOURI IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, May 22 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. DONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an editorial entitled “The Public’s a Third Party in Any Rail Dispute,” published in the Louisville Times of May 9, 1950. There being no objection, the edito- rial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Tre Pusriic’s a THIRD Party In ANy Rain DISPUTE A bill to ban railroad strikes has made a timely appearance in Congress, coming as it does in the face of a threatened walk-out by firemen on four major lines. Offered by Senator DonNELL, of Missouri, as an amend- ment to the Railway Labor Act, it would substitute compulsory arbitration as a final means of settlement if collective bargaining and mediation failed to end a dispute. How it fares before the lawmakers may be determined to a large extent by what course the firemen’s dispute takes during the next 2 weeks. By then the last-minute truce agreement, postponing a strike originally set for today, will have expired. If the firemen’s long- pending demand for an extra man on multi- ple-unit Diesel engines is settled amicably in the meantime, Senator DonneEtL’s bill probably will lie forgotten in a committee pigeonhole. On the other hand, if a strike is called, the measure may become a matter of immediate concern to lawmakers, much as some of them would like to avoid such a political hot potato in an election year. (Senator Donnetu, incidentally, is among those up for reelection this fall.) The idea of compulsory arbitration as a preventer of strikes and lock-outs in vital industries is not new. It was proposed for APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD railroad workers when the 1920 transporta- tion bill, forerunner of the present railway labor law, was before Congress. The Senate was for writing a strike ban into the 1920 law, but the House objected. As finally passed, the measure required that deadlocked disputes be submitted to a railroad labor board, but the board was given no means of enforcing its decisions. The present law was enacted in 1926. As amended in 1934, it provides machinery for arbitrating disputes over interpretations of existing labor contracts. Within this re- stricted field, arbitration is compulsory to the extent that either party to a dispute may invoke its provisions with the understanding that, even if the other party does not agree, the awards of the arbitration board become binding on both parties and enforceable by court orders. For disputes involving issues other than contract interpretation, settlement is sought by mediation. If these efforts fail, the Na- tional Mediation Board attempts to induce the two sides to submit their differences to voluntary arbitration. If this offer is re- jected by either or both, the President names an emergency board to investigate and make recommendations for settlement. This has the effect of delaying any strike action at least 60 days, with the Board required to report within the first 30 days of the waiting period. This 1926 act was long regarded as model labor legislation. In the first 15 years of its operation no serious threat of a rail strike developed. Since 1941, however, there have been three such threats, not counting the present one, and one actual tie-up. Plainly the law leaves something to be desired. Never was this more evident than in 1946 when a walk-out by engineers and trainmen created such an emergency that President Truman was moved to ask Congress for the power to draft railroad workers. A draft bill was rushed through the House, 306 to 13, but the Senate, after a week end to think things over, displayed calmer Judgment and killed the measure. The incident is illustrative of Congress’ sensitiveness to current happenings in the matter of labor legislation. When no storm is brewing it isn’t interested in putting a roof on the house. When a storm breaks it is likely to rush to any extreme to get in out of the rain. If the threatened firemen’s strike, now set for May 10, comes off, we wouldn’t want to see lawmakers rush to any extreme. We would, strike or no strike, like to see them give serious thought to the problem which the strike threat poses. The Donnell bill affords an opportunity for discussion. If it is not the best answer, at least it is a starting point toward finding a proper solution—if not for this dispute, for future ones. To be sure, the President has the author- ity under still existing wartime emergency powers to seize the railroads if that becomes necessary to protect the public interest. But this is not an ideal solution, nor is it one that can be counted upon to last unless we are to assume that the emergency will go on indefinitely. Moreover, a rail strike can be injurious to a large segment of the population without actually creating a national emergency—or what the President might readily recognize as a national emergency. Remember how long it took Mr. Truman to recognize the recent coal strike as an emergency deserving his official action? . The strategy in the threatened strike is to limit it to selected lines, instead of making it general, in the hope of avoiding Govern- ment seizure. That does not mean, however, that it would not injure a large number of innocent bystanders who have a right to expect protection.