APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Arizona’s Water Grab EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. PATRICK J. HILLINGS OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 14, 1951 Mr. HILLINGS. Mr. Speaker, it is essential that California receive her proper shere of the Colorado River water in order to provide this vital necessity of life to many millions of people in a State rapidly increasing in population. The population of California has doubled during the past 10 years and it is expected to double again in the next decade. Despite these facts, certain Arizona land speculators are endeavoring to di- vert a great portion of the Colorado River to enrich themselves at a time when the Nation's efforts must be di- rected for national] defense. These land speculators are sponsoring the central Arizona project and legislation has been introduced in the Congress to carry out their schemes. This project would not only cut off a vital supply of water to the people of California, but it would also add an additional and nonessential burden upon our Nation’s taxpayers at this hour of national emergency. I am including in my remarks an edi- torial from the Pasadena Star-News of February 4, 1951, which calls attention to the position taken in this matter by the land speculators of Arizona: Caturornia Must Renew Evrorts To THwart Azizona's River WaTeR PLAN Californians with a clear eye to the future welfare of this State must gird themselves for another stiff fight in the Congress of the United States against an Arizona water grab at the Colorado River. That Arizona-backed bill authorizing the Federal Government to construct the central Arizona water and irrigation project at a cost of $700,000,000 has been favorably re- ported by the Interior Committee of the Senate. This reporting out of the bill makes a very Ive measure indeed for Senate con- sideration. The bill was approved in Senate committee last year, but California opposi- tion succeeded in blocking !t in the Public Lands Committee of the House. Action by the Senate committe indtoates that the California delegation in both Houses of Congress must renew their efforts to stop the bill, California Senators and Repre- sentatives will need all the help they can get from groups, like the Colorado River Association in this State, and individual Californians. Since the California delegation will exert all ite own energy the best way for other Californians to help is to engender friendliness for the California position with Representatives and citizens of other States. Many California citizens have connections in other States where the cage for California can be fairly presented. Arizontans like to picture California as a huge hog that wants more then its share of Colotado River water and ts seeking to rob Ariszons of water. This is Arizona, bias, and flagrant misrepresentation, and far from the truth. The truth is that California seeks only to protect rights to its share of the water as inherent in the Colorado River treaties. ‘Yet in all fairness to Arizona and all the basin States California does not ask to be the arbiter of what ite own rights are; on the contrary, it proposes that a resolue tton by Congress ask the United States Supreme Court to interpret the river treaties and expresses complete willingness to abide by the high Court's opinion. This reasonable proposal hag been determinedly opposed by Arizona. California believes that the central Arizona project would infringe upon the rights of Nevada and California to waters of the lower Colorado, and, furthermore, that the project would exact a cost from all taxpayers out of all proportion to the benefits to Ari- gona lands. That is the proposition, with Arizona still ignoring the Supreme Court suggestion, clamoring for the central Arizona project and shouting charges that California is try- ing to rob Arizona of water. Arizona has reversed the true status of the controversy. When Relief Is a Racket EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. TOM STEED OF OKLAHOMA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 14, 1951 Mr. STEED. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent, I include the fol- lowing editorial from the Tulsa (Okla.) Tribune in the Recorp because it con- tains some information that must com- mand the attention of Congress, and the sooner the better. I have introduced a bill, H. R. 1403, which would deal with part of the problem of growing abuses to the aid to dependent children pro- gram. This bill is now before the Com- mittee on the Judiciary. I understand several other Members also have similar bills pending. It should now be obvious to everyone that the Federal Security Agency has no intention or desire or authority, which- ever you choose to accept, to cope with this growing menace to a fine program, And since the original fault lies with Congress, I think the only solution that can ever be obtained will have to be pro- vided by Congress, We hear many Members these days talking about cutting unnecessary Fed- eral expenditures. Here is one way a substantial sum can be saved for the Federal Treasury, and at the same time @ great contribution will have been made to make this a more moral and decent America. I suggest that all Members who sincerely want economy to give my bill and this problem more than a sec- ond glance. The newspaper editorial follows: WHEN ReLmy Is a RACKET The Tribune has begun o series of articles on the type of people who get dependent children’s aid in Oklahoma. Our reporter went directly where the relief checks are golng—to the homes. He talked to the par~ ents, particularly to the mothers. What he found in many casea is disgusting. Many of the children who qualify for these checks are illegitimate. Many of the women who are supposed to be helped by this money to give their children a decent upbringing are promiscuous slatterns whose “boy friends” wander in and out at all hours. The welfare checks encourage this conceiving and bearing of illegitimate children. If the children are starved sufficiently the parents can even make a little profit out of them, (ATIT ‘This ten't what Oklahomans had in mind at all when they voted to participate in the children’s ald program. We wanted to re- duce the number of unhappy children, not increase it. But our good intentions have gone sour, ‘The chief reason why they have gone sour ie the secrecy that surrounds these pay~ ments. The taxpayers are not permitted to know who gets their money. The theory is that the feelings of the recipients should not be hurt by letting it be known that they are living in part on public charity. It is algo an engraved invitation to grafters. As long as these records are hidden, as long as the citizen who is tapped for taxes cannot learn whether hia next door neighbor has his hand in his pocket or not these evils aro going to grow. Politically-appointed case workers show that in many instances they cannot or will not rehabilitate people who demand and receive relief, Yet without re- habilitation this money is wasted. Paying women to add to our population of miserable, illegitimate children is worse than bad sociology. It is bad Christianity. It 1s bad charity. It doesn’t eliminate want. It compounds it. For it raises new generations of twisted, subnormal people, bred in the foulest environment, who are candidates for our swelling ranks of unemployables, crim- inale, and ingane, The people Oklahoma never intended to make laziness profitable or promiscuous liv- ing attractive. Yet what have we done? Read these case historics by our Investi- gator X. The hard-working citizen, who labors to support his own family in these inflation- riiden and tax-loaded years, cannot long continue to share his paycheck with large groups of people who have no intention of taking care of themselves, The time ia com- ing when we are going to have to stop culti- vating weeds and thistles in our fields. The cure is squarely up to the Federal Congress and State and county officials. First of all, we must make public relief records public. As long as they are hidden dishonest men and women will succeed in taking money from the people without fear of detection, and dishonest politicians will build political machines by putting unde- serving people on relief. Secondly, the State should force the fath- ers of illegitimate children to support them, or these men should be thrown in fail for bastardy. The idea of these fathers loafing and looking at their television sets while the postman pads up to the door with a public baby-bonus is senseless and intolerable. Thirdly, women who have had Illegitimate children should not be permitted to draw Checks on these children. If they can sup- port these youngsters well and good, but these mothers have no right to ask the State to hand over money for them to spend as they see fit. Oklahomans supplied dependent children’s relief checks to keep families to- gether on the assumption that these would be families in which children could be prop- erly reared. The chronic unwed baby-breeder is an enemy of the people. She’s not a mother; she's a racketeer. Her children should be taken from her and put in orphanages. That’s expensive, but not nearly as expensive as the present situation in which she can actually qualify for a free living if she bears enough of these children. It’s time we quit treating such people with sentimentality. It’s time we charged a few of them with State vagrancy. Fourthly, we've got t. make {t dangerous for fathers to abandon their legitimate chil- dren, This has been ridiculously easy in most counties, There have been few prose- cutions of the men who walked off, and the burden of caring for their families has been quietiy—and, of course, secretly—~<, shifted to the taxpayers. Child abandons ment costs the people much more than the
A778 average burglary. County attorneys and judges should put it in the same class. Oklahoma has the second highest per cap- ita public welfare burden in the Nation. It’s not because we have the second highest percentage of people in need, It is because sloppy administration, poor case work, and laginess among our county attorneys have all combined to make relief chiseling easy and table. There will be a lot more money available for helping children of decent families that have suffered unavoidable hardship if we wipe the racketeers off our rolls, When are we going to start? Edwin Arthur Hall, Prognosticator EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWIN ARTHUR HALL OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 14, 1951 Mr. EDWIN ARTHUR HALL. Mr. Speaker, over a period of years I have been right many more times than wrong in predicting certain political events. I believe I am right today when I state that the next congressional district of which Broome will be a part will consist of Broome, Chenango, Delaware, Otsego, and Tioga Counties. Do not ask me how I found out, There is a never-failing source which always supplies me with the most valuable in- formation. The incident which gives most cre- dence to such a set-up was the recent appearance in Binghamton of “Big Jim” MacDuff, wealthy country banker, and ruler of Otsego County’s Republican machine. “Big Jim” was pictured in the annual Lincoln Day huddle at the Arlington with some of the group we always see at those feasts. To my knowledge, this is MacDuff’s first fraternal get-together with the Binghamton boys since Otsego County left the district 9 years ago. There is one sure thing. I have a host of friends up in that county and I have never failed to keep in touch with them. I have already received a nice lot of as- surances from former supporters in that bailiwick that they will take their coats off and go to work for me just as soon a3 they know for sure that Otsego is coming back into the Broome fold. Otsego is a wonderful county and I hope I get it back. The Item Veto in Appropriation Bills EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KENNETH B. KEATING OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 13, 1952 Mr. KEATING, Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I include the following editorial from the De- catur (Ill) Herald: UNWANTED WEAPON A New York Republican Congressman has offered a bill and a constitutional amend- ment which would provide a weapon against pork-barre] projects in the House and Senate, Representative KennetTH B. KeaTino’s pro- posals would allow the President to veto specific items in the annual omnibus appro- priations bills. As matters stand now, the whole bill must either be vetoed or approved. The rivers and harbors and fiood-control sections of the appropriations measures traditionally contain a great many pork-bar- rel projects, Representative Keating be- Neves that allowing a specific-item veto would enable the President to get rid of a lot of nondefense, nonessential spending. The New Yorker's idea is a good one, but its future looks doubtful. Neither the House nor the Senate has shown any inclination to interfere with this political spending. Even amid cries of economy in Government there is constant logrolling for these pet projects, Economy is always for somebody else. And any President is going to think twice about making his party members mad. As long as politics remains the ruling force of Government, there will be useless and wasteful political spending. Lithuanian Independence Day EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ARTHUR G. KLEIN OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 1951 Mr. KLEIN, Mr. Speaker, Friday, February 16, is being observed in the United States by Lithuanians who have never abandoned the national dream of freedom under a democratic independent government for Lithuania. It has been 12 long years since the lights went out in the Baltic States. I do not defend those Lithuanian quislings who had placed their own economic wel- fare above that of the nation in secretly allying themselves to the Nazi conquer- ors; nor to those other quislings who had entered into equally secret and traitorous allegiance to Soviet Russia. The fact remains that the overwhelm- ing majority of the people of Lithuania and of the other Baltic Republics were, like the Czechoslovakians, dedi¢éated to the same democratic ideals and form of government which has endured in these United States for almost two centuries, Lithuania was one of those sturdy, free countries of Europe which was demon- strating the capacity of small nations to lift themselves by their own bootstraps without resort to the desperation of com- munism or fascism. Many of them now lie prostrate, captives of Russian im- perlalism, Our sympathy goes out, not only to those who are still in the home- land but to those who in the United States keep alive the patriotic ideals of freedom and the democratic way of life. I am happy to salute the American people of Lithuanian birth or descent and to join with them in observance of February 16 as the Lithuanian day of independence, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Where America Stands Today Se cemtnanamunaaed EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. CLYDE R. HOEY OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 15 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. HOEY. Mr. President, the dis- tinguished majority leader of the Sen- ate, the Senator from Arizona [Mr, McFarianp) delivered a very states- manlike address at the Jefferson-Jack- son Day dinner at Raleigh, N. C., on Feb- ruary 10. I ask unanimous consent to have this address printed in the Ap- pendix of the Recorp. It is the first speech of a major character which he has made outside the Senate since he became majority leader, and it is well worth perusing. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: WHERE AMERICA STANDS ToDAY (By Hon, Ernest W. McFar.anp) Mr. Chairman, distinguished guests, and fellow Democrats. Your kind words of wel- come and the friendly enthusiasm of this fine audience emphasizes the honor you have paid me in inviting my participation in your Jefferson-Jackson Day gathering. Your cordiality and friendship is warmly recipro- cated. I know that the spirit expressed by you is also an inspiration to the members of your great congressional delegation. Senator Crype Hory is no ordinary public servant, He is an adornment to the Senate of the United States, not merely an able legislator but a distinguished Senator and so acknowl- edged by his peers, Senator Wiuuis Smirn is a recent addition to our body but his ability and public record are well known and already he has won the admiration of his colleagues. I am proud that I can count these men @&8 my personal friends, just as I am proud that I have the friendship of your 12 dis- tinguished Congressmen. All of them— Messrs. Cooter, BONNER, Kerr, Baaven, CuatHam, DuRHAM, CARLYLE, Deane, HAMIL- TON JONES, Wooprow JoNEs, my good friend Mownrog Renven, of Hendersonville, and that great patriarch of the House, Bos DouGcHToN, have the high regard of their colleagues. We meet here tonight in a noble tradition. Andrew Jackson—the man who breathed life into our great Democratic Party, the man who put into practice the principle of a peo- ple’s government, was a guest 121 years ago at the first dinner honoring the birthday of Thomas Jefferson. It is altogether Atting and appropriate that we who attempt to fol- low in the paths of these two men honor them. Both fought for human rights, for justice, for equality and freedom of mankind. Jefferson and Jackson were traduced in their time just as Wilson and Roosevelt were in theirs, Jackson was called an illiterate, a liar, an atheist, a dictator, and worse. Today the epithets continue, varying only to sult the times. All of us have seen per- sonal friends reviled because they held stead- fagtly to ideals which we ourselves cherish. * Always those who fight entrenched greed and oppression, whether at home or abroad, are ridiculed, castigated, and maligned. But we can take comfort from the fact that domesti- cally and internationally our party has never deviated from the basic principle of estab- Mashing here a better land for all the people
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD and encouraging that pol hr world. ng policy throughout the Those who differ with us in political faith like to pass these affairs off as mere Political dinners. They are more than that—they are the warp and woof of ow governmental history; at these dinners polictes are ex- pounded and affirmations made which help set our course in national and international affairs. Today, as in the past, we not only draw inspiration from what our forebears aid, but we can and must affirm that the principles which guided them, guide us. Is there a continulty of purpose and ac- tion by our Government? Of course, there Are we following any different policy today than Jefferson and Jackson followed? Of course not. The fundamental policy is as simple and clear today as it ever was. We believe in the right of man to be free; to choose his own form of government, hia religion, and his way of life. We demand it for ourselves and we favor it for mankind everywhere, free of aggression and subversion. Our tactics may change from generation to generation, from year to year, even from day to day, but our basic strategy—never. We have shed blood and spent our substance to achieve and maintain freedom here and to help bring it about elsewhere in the world on the very simple premise that wherever the bell of tyranny tolls it also tolls for us. Let ug analyze briefly the current situa- tion and see if we are deviating from our basic American policy. Where does America stand in the world today? We are told over and over again—by some statesmen who have been wrong in all their prophecies of doom for the last 20 years— that we are in terrible shape. These sad souls who weep for us on the radio and turn gloomy faces to our televison screens tell us that we have very few friends anywhere on earth. Some of the experts who hailed our action in Korea last summer now are ready to write off our struggle against Communist aggres- sion there as a total failure. These summer soldiers are not willing to Aight in January ag they were In June. Other self-appointed statesmen of the air waves and the press are urging us to wash our hands of the United Nations. These petulant pundits want us to pull away and sulk behind our oceans, if the other members of the UN will not do exactly what we say at the exact moment when we call for action. Now iet us take up these points one by one—let us see whether the gloom peddlers and the defeatiste are right or wrong. Are we really in terrible shape—or is it possible that certain people are trying to make us think so for their own special interests? The truth is that our country has never been stronger in its entire history than it is today—and it ls growing stronger hourly. The truth is that we have many millions of firm friends around the globe. The truth 1s that an overwhelming major- ity of the United Nations have joined with us in every step we have taken to stop aggres- ston and to restore peace with honor in the world. Look at the power and prosperity of America at this very moment, and do not permit the weepers and the wailers to con- fuse or dismay you. All Americans who want to work now have good jobs at good wages. Farmers are re- ceiving the highest incomes in history. Busi- nessmen are making the largest profits they have ever enjoyed. Everywhere you go in America today, you see new homes and new automobiles—the solid signs of prosperity. You see factories operating at full capacity. You see great mills turning out record quantities of steel. You eee ofl wells producing tremendous streams of fuel. You see long lines of freight cars and trucks moving scross the land, car- rying the producte of American farms and American industry. The banners of smoke flying from our fac- tory chimneys are signels of our strength of determination to uphold the rule of jus- tice. The sound of jet engines in the sky is a warning to all aggressors that the might- fest air force on earth serves the cause of Mberty. Our ships upon the seven seas re- mind mankind that the most powerful navy in history moves upon the oceans for America and the free world. This great Nation is throbbing with energy, bursting with strength, and filled with in- dustrious and intelligent neople who have never accepted the tdea that America could ever fail in any task, So IT say to you that the captious critics, the defeatiste, the fearful men who urge us to abandon our leadership of the free world do not represent America today. We did not seek the position of power we now hold, We did not force our way into the forefront of the free nations, Because of our strength and high ideals, the eyes of freedom-loving nations have turned to us for leadership. If we have been misled and misruled as these critics cry, let the defeatists explain how America has gone from triumph to triumph. Where is the confusion they shout about? Is there confusion in the minds of the President and the bipartisan leaders of Con~ gress who created the Marshall plan? Can a program which aided 270,000,000 people in Western Europe to throw off the poisons of communism be called a product of con- fusion? Was the Berlin airlift, which raised the morale of Western Germany and frustrated the Communists, an example of confusion? Was it confusion to sponsor the North Atlantic Pact which bound 12 free nations together against aggressors? Was our aid to the Greeks which enabled them to throw out the Communists an evi- dence of confusion? Are the encouragement and assistance we are giving nations everywhere to resist So- viet imperialism examples of confusion? When we stop to think, my friends, we know that all these important steps of the last few years were entirely consistent Every one of these bold and resolute actions checked and confounded the evil forces of communism. Every one of these decisive actions heartened and strengthened the forces of our side~the forces of decency and respect for law, the forces of humant- tartan civilization and human honor. After the Second World War, we Americans resolved that we would not fall back into the folly of isolationism which had led us to the disaster of Pearl Harbor. In the Senate we ratified the United Na- tions Charter In June of 1945 by a vote of 89 to 2. That vote was a tremendous revela- tion of how many Americans Jooked to the United Nations as a great instrument of hope—a noble institution which might en- able us to free ourselves and our children from the senseless scourge of war. Our faith in the UN was fully justified last June when the Security Council acted swiftly to condemn the aggression of the North Koreans, We all remember the strong surge of approval which went through America and all over the world when the President heeded the call of the Security Council to meet the brutal challenge of the Communists. As free Americans, we have never howed to aggressors. Acting as our Commander in Chief, our great President, Harry Truman, met the isue last June as Jackson and Jef< a. A779 feraon would have met it—without filnching, Without fear. Let us remember that we went into Korea to stop the forces of aggression before thase forces engulfed the whole world in a total war Let us remember that Communist aggrea- ston 1s no academic issue; it is a live, dan- gerous, spitting serpent. Always it moves forward; always we must be on the alert to keep it from threatening the life of America. Is there any question—tis there any doubt in any American's mind that sometime, some place, sooner or later the United Nations ‘would have to call a halt to this gobbling up of the world, this suppression of free people? Haven't we learned the folly of ap- peasement? Have we forgotten Hitler and Munich 80 soon? It is the masters in the Kremlin who choose the time and the place for attack. Had we been fully prepared in Korea, the assault would have come in Iran, Iraq, Indo- china, Western Germany, or some other Place. Some may say we should have waited, asilowed Korea to be overrun, and chosen a different time and place to meet the Soviet challenge. But none can deny that the challenge eventually had to he met. Let us remember that appeasement has never bought peace. By acting as we did in Korea, we brought the monster of Communist aggression tnto the open. We proved to the free world thet we would spill our blood and spend our treasure to halt Soviet aggression before it devoured more nations, before it brought the horror of wer to the shores of America. The firm determination and the fighting spirit we have shown in Koren may have disrupted the plans of the Kremlin for world conquest. That was our purpose. I feel deeply the cost in Hves in Korea, Certainly, all of us Want that cruel carnage to end as soon as possible. We believe that every American life la very precious. But we have learned in the blood and sorrow of two great ware that we cannot have peace ‘unless we are willing to fight for it. The courage of our men and our UN allies there may have spared millions of Americans, millions of free men in other countries, from death or mutilation in a global conflict. Let us remember that a single atom bomb Gropped here in Raloigh would snuff out the lives of several times our fatalities In Korea. It is true that we have borne the brunt of the battle. France and Britain and our other allies have not contributed as many troops as we hoped they would. But they have lived under the grim necessity of bulld- ing up their forces in Europe to prevent the onslaught of Soviet armies there. We must always remember how much our allies endured in World War If. We must remember that they were bombed by enemy planes week after week, year after year. We must remember that many thousands of Englishmen saw their homes go up in flames. We must remember that Belgium and Hol~ land were overrun by ruthless armies, and France wae crushed by military occupation for four long years. The horrors of war, devastation of homes, imprisonment, concentration camps, execu- tion of loved ones—these destroy the will to. resiat, the urge to fight, breed despair and 0 sense of futility. If we think of these things we will not be Impatient with our friends in Europe. We will understand why they are not able to summon up strong’ forces as rapidly as we desire. It will take time for them to restore themselves, ma- terlally, and spiritually. But they are mak- ing great progress. General Eisenhower has just returned from Europe. He conferred with responsible leaders; he asked questions; he saw facts at first hand. He dealt with men who were his companions in arms a few short years ago,
A780 He knows them and they know him. does General Hisenhower tell us? Our friends in Europe will fight—they will resist the tide of Communist aggression. Their spirit has been revived by our example; by our own determination to rearm and checkmate the Kremlin at every turn. They belleve in us, and Eisenhower assures us that we can believe in them. In fact, they are now not nearly so concerned about our troops as they are about arms—the muni- tions of war. They know, as we know, that the test, if it comes, will come in Europe. They face up boldly to the fact that their homes and their lands may again be the first battleground. Whom are we going to follow—General Eisenhower or the men who one day advocate that we isolate ourselves in this hemisphere and forget the rest of the world and the next day admit that perhaps it would be better to give Europe limited aid? Are we going to follow Eisenhower or the men who argue with each other about mathematical for- mulae on troops? Who knows the military situation and the facts in Europe better—the great soldier who served as supreme commander in Europe or the timid men suddenly become military strategists? Whom are you willing to believe? I prefer to believe General Eisenhower when he says quietly and plainly that we can count on the support of millions of free- dom-loving people in Europe. I prefer to follow Eisenhower when he insists that he can, with our aid, build up a European fight- ing force which can deter Russia. I prefer to take Eisenhower's valuation that the gov- ernments in Europe are alive to the threat from the Kremlin and will fight to the death against it. We cannot fail to build a better future for ourselves and all mankind—if we stand by the simple, straightforward ideals we have supported throughout our history. We have maintained one fundamental principle in the east and in the west, in the Pacific regions and in the Atlantic areas, in North America and in South America—in the whole wide world. Our basis principle has been the principle of devotion to the rights of man—the right of nations to be free and independent, the right of small nations to live without fear of big nations, the right of men to choose their own forms of government without threats of subversion or aggression. This great principle can never be destroyed, as long as there are men who are willing to offer their lives to cherish and protect it. There will never be a shortage of such men in America. While the spirit of honor and brotherhood lives in our hearts and the hearts of free men everywhere, our cause must inevitably be victorious. We have met every test in the past; we will do so in the future. We are now well launched upon the tre- mendous task of arming ourselves and our allies to prevent the spread of war. We are not resigned to the idea that the terrible ngedy of a world conflagration is inevit- le. What We are girding ourselves to make a mighty ° effort for the maintenance of peace with honor in the world. In this noble cause, we are on the side of the angels. The world wants peace. The world wants hope, The world is ready to respond to cheerful, courageous leadership. And we can give it, if we rise now to the heights of heroism reached by our gallant fighters in Korea. We can win the battle for peace—if we work and pray for the good of suffering humanity while we prepare to defend the Tamparts of freedom, Let us go forward together, united as Americans, united as free men under the banner of the United Nations. Let us guide ourselves calmly and confidently, with the wisdom of Thomas Jefferson and the fearless heritage of Andrew Jackson, Then we will have no reason for fear. Then we will never be touched again by the cold fingers of despair. With the help of God, we will carry the flag of freedom to our coming victory. Lincoln Day Address by Hon. Alexander Wiley, of Wisconsin, Before Mont- gomery County Republicans EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ALEXANDER WILEY OF WISCONSIN IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 15 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. WILEY. Mr. President, on Mon- day, February 12, it-was my pleasure to address the Montgomery County Re- publicans at the Manor Club on the subject of the meaning in our times of Abraham Lincoln’s birthday. I ask unanimous consent that the text of my address be printed in the Appendix of the REcorp. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: LINCOLN’S MEANING IN THE ATOMIC AGE Iam delighted to be back once again before your splendid Republican organization. It is &@ particular privilege to be among those who did such a tremendous job in the November 1950 election. The resounding victory of the Republican cause in your great State of Maryland was a tremendous tonic to the entire country, It showed in particular that folks who work in our Nation’s Capital and who are close in every other way to Washington itself clearly recognize the fact that there are grave defi- ciencles in the present administration. The fact that you are near to the scene has in no way blinded your eyes to the errors of the Fair Deal. The celebration of Lincoln’s birthday is more, of course, than just an occasion for our get-together as Republicans. You and I know that Abraham Lincoln was bigger than any political party. He was a Republican, but basically he was an American—a great and humble American. FOUR MEANINGS OF LINCOLN’S LIFE To us of our time there are many meanings of Lincoln's birthday, and I, for one, should like to spell out four such meanings to you today: 1. The political meaning. 1. The international meaning. 8. The national meaning. 4. The great spiritual meaning of Abraham Lincoln. GOP IS PERFECT CHOICE FOR 1952 Now, frst, my friends, we, as Republicans, know that Abraham Lincoln serves as a tre- mendous inspiration to our entire party. Just as the Republican Party came upon tho American acene at exactly the right mo- ment in our history, so, in November 1952, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the Republican Party will once more emerge as exactly the right choice for the American people—a people tired of administration “bungling, burdens, and baloney.” DEMOCRATS IN POWER FOR TOO LONG You and I know that the excessively long period which the present Democratic ad- ministration has held in office presents a grave danger to the future liberties of our country. I, for one, do not believe that any party is so wise, its leadership so sound, that it can be trusted with power virtually un- broken for 20 years. On the contrary, we have seen the danger of such long durations of power in the long succession of shocking scandals—the scandal of Democratic tie-ups with organized crime in Illinois and else- where, the scandal of Democratic meddling in the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, the scandal of administration tie-ups with the “five percenters,” the scandal of Com- munists and other suspects in Government— the Hisses, the Coplons, the Remingtons, the Bentleys. We have seen on the basis of all of these scandals that the Democratic Party has outlived its usefulness as a majority party, if indeed it ever had such usefulness. THE RIGHT IDEA AT THE RIGHT TIME Abraham Lincoln came to the fore in the year 1860 as President of the United States. He and the newly born Republican Party had the answer to the great need of the hour, the need for preservation of the Union, We recall the words of Victor Hugo “that there is nothing more powerful in the world than an idea whose time has come.” Abra- ham Lincoln had the right idea, and there was no human power on earth that could triumph over his indomitable will to preserve this Union. I should like to quote now and a bit later on from some of Lincoln’s own words, In 1864 he said: “This Government must be preserved in spite of the acts of any man or set of men. It is worthy of your every effort. * * * I have admonished you not to be turned from the stern purpose of defending our beloved country and its free institutions by any argu- ments urged by ambitious and designing men, but stand fast to the Union and the old flag.” THE RED MENACE FROM WITHIN It was Abraham Lincoln who warned the American people of the danger from within. The Democratic Party has virtually ignored that danger. It has coddled a whole genera- tion of traitorous individuals whose loyalty was not to our country, but rather to a vi- cious foreign ideology—an ideology that claims there is no God, that claims man is a materialist brute, that there must be a per- petual conflict between classes and nations until communism triumphs. Now, friends, to summarize this point, the political meaning of Abraham Lincoln in our time is that we of the Republican Party are charged with a great mission to bring about Republican victory in 1952. We should not presume that the accumu- lated blunders of the Democratic adrminis- tration will automatically bring it down. On the contrary, we know that the Democratic Party, feeding on patronage (particularly on the basis of tens of thousands of defense jobs in Government and industry), we know that this Democratic Party is in many re- spects tremendously strong. It will take an invincible determination on our part to wrest control from it, FRIENSGHIP TO ALL PEOPLES Now, my friends, there {s a second meaning of Abraham Lincoln in our time, and I refer to his meaning on the international scene. The man who spoke on March 4, 1865, in his
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD second inaugural address, said: “With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firm- ness in the right as God gives us to see the right,” that men was not simply a citizen of America, rather he was a citizen of the world, What finer attitude could you and I have toward all peoples than to hold no malice to- ward them, to seek justice for them; yos, justice even for those who were our bitter enemies during World War IT. Moreover, we hold no malice even for the enslaved people of Soviet Russia and the satellite states under it. We know that if these humble peoples were given their free- dom, they would eradicate the tyrannous group of men in the Kremlin, which has set them on a course of international aggression. AMERICA MUST LEAD THE WEST We know, however, that we must not be weak or timid in facing the leaders of the Kremlin, If we are to preserve that “gov- ernment of the people, by the people and for the people” of which Abraham Lincoln spoke, we must In our international policy recognize our responsibilities to ourselves and to the world. Whether we like 1t or not, we are the leaders of western civilization—the economic, military, political, and spiritual leaders. We have inherited the legacy of other great coun- tries whose prestige had previously dominat- ed the globe. Each of our three great branches of Government must accordingly play its part, each neither exceeding its pow- ers nor failing to exercise them. As Lincoln said in his second annual mes- sage to Congress on December 1, 1862: “Fel- low citizens, we cannot escape history.” I repeat, my friends, we of this generation cannot escape the responsibility of our times. We cannot stick our heads in the sand like ostriches, we cannot tell the world to go “hang”—-(it 1s we who will go “hang” with it). We know that we are living in a con- tracted world in which man’s ingenuity and inventiveness have practically annihilated space and time. We are every nation’s neigh- bor. We are indeed our brothers’ keeper. But to be adequate, there must be no more secret agreements, no more blundering Yaltas, Tehrans, Potsdams, no more sell- outs of the right of free peoples. LIMITING GOVERNMENT'S ROLE Abraham Lincoln had a message for the world, but also he had a message for our own country insofar as our future national policy should be concerned. We come, there- fore, to the third great meaning of Lincoln's life, the national meaning. During this present era of crisis, we know that Government is unfortunately going to have to play an increasing role in the lives of all of our citizens. The controls which we are already experiencing are but the token of even more comprehensive controls which may come in the future, controls over etra- tegic materials, over prices, over wages, and so forth. We do not, however, want to allow these temporary controls to be used by the Admin- istration as 4 cloak 80 as to cover up soclalis- tic designs which would regiment our entire economy. The American people are willing to submit to a temporary system of Federal dictation, but they are not going to lose their great and lasting veal for liberty. BOCIALIATIC ITEMS MUST BE ELIMINATED FROM BUDGET We know that in President Truman's $71,- 000,000,000 budget, there were a vast number ‘of soctalistic items that have absolutely no business being there. I refer, for example, to his proposal for socialized medicine, for socialized farming, and so forth, Those items in his budget must be completely eliminated. What then, ts the standard that we should pursue in evaluating proposals for new action by our Governmentn? I think that there is no better standard than that which Lincoln himself recom- mended almost a hundred years ago. On July 1, 1854, he stated: “The legitimate object of government !s to do for a community of people whatever they need to have done but cennot do at all or cannot 80 well do for themselves in their separate and individual capacities. “In all that the people can individually do as well for themselves, government ought not to interfere.” Would that Mr. Trumen and his associates around him might remember that phrase: “In all that the people can individually do as well for themselves, government ought not to interfere.” DANGER OF LEANING ON GOVERNMENT We know that if the people get into the habit of relying upon government, eventu- ally they would not be in a position to do anything for themselves and government would have to do everything. Listen to the words of another great American President: “Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want bread. * * ©* When all government in little as in great things shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will become venal and oppressive.” The man who spoke these words was Pres- ident Thomas Jefferson, 2 man with whom the Democratic Party nominally claims great friendship. But surely those words of Jeffer- son indicate what we fecl to be a profound Republican view. In fact, Lincoln in his second inaugural address on March 4, 1865, sald: “The principles of Jefferson sare the definitions and axtoms of free society.” SEEKING DIVINE GUIDANCE Now, my friends, we have reviewed three of the great meanings of Abraham Lincoln's Ufe. I refer to the political meaning, to us as Republicans, the international meaning, and the national meaning. The fourth great meaning comes to each of us, to you and to me, as children of God. And I refer, of course, to the spiritual mean- ing of Lincoln's life. We all know that he freely told us that “when I have no other place to go, I go to my Knees tn prayer” We know that Lincoin utilized divine power to master the problems around him. He did not have a college education. He was self-educated in the school of hard knocks, There was probably not a singlo member of his Cabinet who did not have more education than he did. And yet those Cabinet Members could not hold a candle to his great spirit which rose above the prob- lems which his Cabinet members could not master. “Lincoln, you see, had three great tech- niques which he fully utilized: (1) The pow- er of prayer, to which I have referred; (2) a wonderful sense of humor; his ability to tell & wholesome yarn that would release taut nerves and tense minds; (3) a deep and abid- ing love of the Republic to which he gave his all. In your life and mine, whether we are pri- vate citizens or public officers, we, too, can utilise these three great approaches, CONCLUSION We have viewed, then, the four meanings of Abraham Lincoln's life. As the years go on, the shadow of his greatness lengthens and we see even more that his words, his thoughts, and his actions were worthy of the ages. He wrote himself large into the consctence of all mankind and into the his- tory of western civilization. May we be as worthy of the challenges of 1951 as he was of those of 1861. Thank you. A781 Lincoln Day Address by Governor Dewey EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. IRVING M. IVES or EW YORK IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 15 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. IVES. Mr. President, I ask unan- imous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp the text of the address delivered by Gov. Thomas §. Dewey, of New York, at the Lincoln Day dinner of the National Republican Club on the evening of last Monday, Febru- ary 12, 1951, at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York City. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Texr oy Dewey's ADpress aT LINCOLN Day DINNER IN THE WALDORF As we join tonight to honor the memory of Abraham Lincoln, we are facing an issue that may decide the very existence of our country. As in Lincoln's day, it again in- volves the age-old issue of freedom or slavery. This time we are deciding whether we will all be slaves or whether we shall all be free. Some progress has been made in the 2 months since I called in this room for a swift build-up of the Armed Forces of our country, for immediate all-out production for defense against aggression abroad and for a real ight against inflation at home. At least, 8 months after Korea, our Govern. ment has actually begun to get orders out to industry for some of the weapons we needed before Korea. We finally have in that job the leadership of a really able man—and, I might add, a good Republican—Defense Mobilizer Charles E. Wilson. But the fight against inflation is still a sham battle, accompanied by much sound and fury, strong regulations and weak ad- ministration, a slow freeze and a quick thaw. It appears that our wage and price controle are being run by Annie Oakley. The Wash- ington regulators toss up an order, shoot it full of holes, and then give somebody a free ride. Meanwhile the Treasury is, in effect, pumping Government bonds into the Federal Reserve at low interest rates, creating the most powerful engine of inflation this country has ever seen. “Yaving looked over some of the people run- ning wage and price controls, I came to the conclusion that they are there, not for the purpose of fighting inflation, but to provide jobs for undeserving Democrats at the ex- pense of the people. Meanwhile, as every American bends his back to bear the new load of taxes, the Presi- dent’s budget includes every political spend- ing device anybody has been able to think of to catch votes and wreck our defense pro- gram. It even includes that moth-eaten socialized medicine scheme that would wreck the health of our people, and the Brannan plan, which the farmers themselves don't want. GET DOWN TO BUSINESS If the national administration really wante to defend America, I suggest it quit politics as usual and get down to business. Our country is the core of opposition to the spread of Russian barbarism and Communist slavery throughout the world. We are now engaged in a great debate over that issue of human slavery, even as in Lincoin’s time, and as before it splits the members of the two great political parties,
A782 The debate has hammered out agreement on many potnts and the issue has narrowed down to the simple question: How shall we meet the challenge and with what kind of force? On one side is the group which contends that America’s welfare and the defeat of communism requires that we inspire and strengthen our allies with arms and troops to preserve their freedom. This group holds that without united action by the free na- tions, acting within the United Nations, we ourselves are in great peril. These Ameri- cans believe we should make every sacrifice to mobilize swiftly to repel any new invasion of the free world in Europe, Asia, or Africa. The other side, which also includes mem- bers of both political parties, says we cannot afford to undertake this great obligation. They say we would be spreading ourselves ton thin. They say Europe js unwilling to defend itself, that it ts riddled with soctal- jem, weak economically, threatened with in- ternal revolution by Communists, and does not even pay its debts. They say the free areas of Asia are too disorganized to avoid collapse whatever happens. These Americans conclude that we should send only a few, if any, additional troops to Europe or Asia, and that we should concen- trate on making the Western Hemisphere invincible; that we should keep our money and our boys at home, building our own strength. They say the Western Hemisphere ig self-sufficient and unconquerable and we should not dissipate our treasure and risk the blood of our youth for lost causes all over the earth. CITES LATIN AMERICA This is a most appealing argument. I wish with all my heart and soul that I could believe in if. I have two sons who are going to be involved and I would gladly give my life to avoid sending them to far-away lands to risk being wounded or killed. But in all honesty I am compelled totally to reject the idea that America can live alone, I say to you: We could not survive in a Communist world. First of all, how long do you think we would have South America with us? With all Europe in Russia’s hands, to whom would South America sell all the essential exports she now sends to Europe? Many of South America's exports are farm products that we do not need and cannot absorb. Without a market for her exports, how long could we, in this country, make up the difference to keep South America on our side? Clearly, we would very soon be isolated, here in North America. We would be the loneliest people on earth. What would we do, an island of freedom in a Communist world, outnumbered 14 to 1, with oceans which would no longer be our protecting moat but a broad highway to our front door? We produce leas than half our wool, only @ portion of our sugar and none of our coffee and tea. We can survive without these things. But with what would we defend our- selves? We are short 50 basic metals. We might get along without tungsten or chro- mium or even without natural rubber or tin, though it would be tough. But some things are life and death. To make steel you need manganese—and where @oes our manganese come from? From over- seas. For years Russta provided 50 percent of all our manganese. Today the largest sources are in Africa; the next largest is— where do you think? In Indla—halfway around the world. Steel makes automobiles, trucks, tractors, plows, new buildings, new highways, new bridges, and machine tools. We might get along, perhaps, without all these—but only at a stone-age level of existence. Meanwhile, what happens to Fortress America? Where do we get the steel to make guns and planes and tanks, or atom bombs? Without these, Fortress America ts lost, It is perfectly clear that Russia does not wish to challenge the United States in all- out war until she catches up with us on the atom bomb. The bomb had kept this shaky peace, and {t has kept it because we had bases in Great Britain, Africa, and the Medt- terranean from which to deliver the bomh. But how do we make the atom bomb? With uranium—and our principal source of uranium is again in Africa, in the Belgian Congo. Suppose the Russians took Europe, including Belgium. Who gets the Belgian Congo and its uranium? The Russians. I suspect we would overnight find ourselves fighting a land war in Africa for the defense of the crucial uranium for the atom bomb. And we would be fighting that war thou- sands of miles from home, with no allies, against a triumphant enemy. OPERATION SUICIDE I do not need to labor the point. We can- not protect ourselves by withdrawing from the rest of the world. Operation withdrawal ts Operation Suicide. The simple fact is that the front Ine of defense of our very existence—the only line of defense we have—is overseas, thousands of miles away, where lie the raw materials without which our country could not survive. Now suppose a miracle occurred overnight and we suddenly discovered all these essen- tial materials right here in the United States. Then how long would we survive, isolated and surrounded, with only 54 miles separat- ing Soviet Russia from Alaska? Last December I called for 100 divisions, or about 1,800,000 ground troops. That works out at about 85 combat divisions plus be- hind-the-lines organization. Isolated and alone, we would need not 35 but 100 combat divisions to have a ghost of a chance of defending our shores from Alaska to south- ern California to the Gulf of Mexico and from Florida to Maine, and this in addition to the enormous Navy and Air Force it would take to patrol the Pacific Canal—if we still had it~—and then on down to Cape Horn. And still, with all the colossal industrial ca- pacity of Russia, Japan, Germany, and the rest of Western Europe, the Russians could take their own sweet time and bomb us out. No, ladies and gentlemen; I would rather see my country do its share as a part of a great free world than to see us isolated, suf- focated and exterminated. I do not want to see my country shrink- ing timidly from its obvious destiny and waiting for destruction. I want to see my country act with courage and honesty. I want it to stand up for the right and live in freedom. Let me confess immediately that I do not relish entrusting the fate of freedom to the shifting whims and demonstrated incompe- tencies of the present national administra- tion. I did my best to throw them out a couple of years ago. And I’m sure some- body else will succeed in that effort next year. But the inexorable march of human history does not wait for nations to settle their internal differences, The day of decision is upon us. The issue should be decided upon the real facts which have been much ignored. For example, those who argue that we ought not to de- fend Western Europe forget that we have already decided that question. Twice in this country we have chosen to go to war because our freedom was imperiled by the armed conquests of a dictator in Europe. Those who argue that we should not send an American Army to Europe forget that we already have an American Army in Europe— 112,000 American troops who are performing APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD their duties in the occupation of Germany. ‘We have American troops in Austria, in Britain, Trieste, North Africa, and the Medi- terranean. Those American boys would be at war the instant the Red Czar moved into Europe. They are our own flesh and blood, and who denies that America would send them everything we had in the air, on the sea and on the land? I say we should rein- force them now while Europe can still rearm and prevent a war, SAYS UNITED STATES WILL WIN Once and for all let's stop this business of waiting for wars and crises and then frantically improvising, going through the agonies each time of too little and too late. However much we would like to dream of doing things the easy way, we have abso- lutely no choice if we wish to stay free and keep our freedom without a war. Freedom was never bought in a bargain basement. Freedom was never saved by tim- idity, selfishness, half-way measures, or ap- peasement. America is not going to close her eyes to the cause of freedom in this world. We are going to stand by our com- mitments; we are going to shore up the cause of freedom. We are going to win, The fave of the world has changed much in the last 2 months and other nations are beginning to know we will win, too. In Europe the frozen spirit of despair has given way to a new spirit of deflance. The people see that America has again taken firm hold of freedom’s sword and will not put it down while tyranny its on the march. The peoples of Europe and their govern- ments have been rallied to their own defense by the inspiring leadership of General Eisen- hower. Everywhere he has gone his presence has dismayed the Communists and fired the courage of freemen. Yugoslavia, once a Russian satellite, has become the greatest thorn in Stalin’s side. Titoism threatens to spread behind the iron curtain. The former Red Foreign Minister of Czechoslovakia is reported to have escaped and Stalin has had to send a marshal of the Red army to hold down the Czech people. Just last week key leaders of Italian commu- nism deserted the Russian cause. The British have won successes in thelr fight against Communist guerrillas in Malaya and there is new hope of French victory over communism in Indochina. RECALLS ATOMIC TESTS One of the greatest triumphs of recent months has been the abandonment by our own Government of the frightful follies of its appeasement of the Reds in China. For four long years I demanded and pleaded that we should back up the recognized Govern- ment of China. It took a war by Red China to wake up our administration but at last they are acting as though they are seeing the light and will start backing up the forces for a free China, Another thrill of hope went around the world this last week as a result of those atomic tests in Nevada. Every one of those explosions said to freemen everywhere: “Take courage. America is arming. Be strong; you can remain free.” Each of the explosions said in thundering words to those 14 men darkly conspiring in the Kremlin: ‘Beware. Stop your plans of bloody conquest. America is strong and she means to be stronger. She has hundreds of bombs where those came from.” No, my friends, this is no time for us to follow the counsel of despair. It is a time to be strong. It is a time for boldness, This is a time for greatness, We tried the other course. We tried iso- lationism twice and each time we were drawn into a bloody confiict, sttil unarmed and un- prepared. We fought two wars for freedom in Europe and we won no peace,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD . Tole time let us win the peace without This time let us make sure that no dictator thinks he can pick off one nation after another and then swallow the world. It is time—long since time—that we drew the line. Let us decide as a nation that we can win this peace through strength. We must also let the rest of the world know what we will do and what we don’t do. There is grave doubt that Stalin would ever have launched the attack in Korea if he had known America would respond. In fact the Government of the United States had officially taken the position that we would not defend Korea. We created a vacuum and dictators move into vacuums. Let us not repeat that blunder. We officially announced we would not help Chiang Kai-shek, Again we ourselves cre- ated the vacuum. Again Red satellites moved in and won domination over 450,- 000,000 Chinese who are right this minute killing American boys. Let us stop handing armies and nattons over to the Russians. The only way to stop it is to draw the line. All the world knows what nations we will defend for sure and as a result no attack has been made on a single one of them. Now let us go to the rest of the way. We should say where we stand as to the rest of the world. Let there be no more blunder- ing into little wars or big wars. The United States with her allies should mako clear their common purpose. Greece and Turkey should be brought tnto the North Atlantic Treaty immediately. Then we should settle other questions. Will we move into war if the Red czar in- vades Iran? If not, will we let him take all of Iran’s ofl and then take Iraq and Israel and ther perhaps march down into Saudl- Arabia? Will we allow that crucial oil supply to fall into Russia’s hands? Or would we bomb it out? Nobody knows. It is a vacuum and dictators move into vacuums. There is strong reason to believe Russia intends to move on Yugoslavia this year. If she does so through satellites what will hap- pen? Nobody knows. If Bulgaria and Ru- mania invade Yugoslavia will atom bombs fall on Sofia and Bucharest? Nobody knows. If Yugoslavia should fall, how long then would Greece remain free. With Greece and the Dardanelles gone, the eastern Mediter- ranean would become a Red sea and our bombing bases there for the defense of America would be gone. WANTS TO WARN WORLD Let's make up our minds and then let's tel: the world the answers, so nobody will ever have an excuse to drag us into an accidental war. And let’s make sure of our friends— all of them. The Turks have 25 divisions. The heroic conduct of their troops in Korea reminds us that the Moslem world contains great force and great courage. More than 200,000,000 Mohammedans have a devout religtous fervor and they have no affinity for godless commu- nism. Thetr world spreads from Egypt all the way to India and tnto China. In the last vote in the United Nations on the China issue & number of Moslem nations abstained from voting. It is time we brought the full power of Islam more securely to our side. Spain has 22 divisions and Yugoslavia 30. I want them on our side. Brave little Greece which has already won one war in the last 5 years is stoutly prepared to do her share again, Greece can produce and is willing to produce 10 divisions right now. And yet there are some in this country who haggle over whether we should produce 35. The memory of Lincoln reminds us that there have been dark days throughout all our history. When we lost battles in the War Between the States, the Copperheads de- manded that Lincoln abandon his effort to preserve the Union and compromise. Fortu- nately for us and for the world Lincoln was no weakling, no appeaser. In the darkest hour he stood more steadfast than ever. Let us remember our great history. Let us not atart running for cover every time things go badiy in Korea or some place else. Above all, we must have faith in ourselves. Prepared, we can out-produce, out-think, and out-fight the hordes of communism every day in the week. Free American industry can keep ahead of slave Russians forever and the Kremlin should never forget it. BAYB ALL SEEK FREEDOM We have the winning cause because every man On earth wants to be free. The world is discovering that communism 1s slavery, Let’s help them diecover it faster. Every dictator is a craven, selfish bully, ex- ploiting millions of others just to keep his job. Dictatorship ts a rotten thing and there are millions of people who would rise in revolt even with the odds 100 to 1 against them if they thought they had a chance, Let's give them a chance. Let's give them arms and money and hope. Once again the cause of freedom ts rising in the world. We struck bottom in the last few months but nothing on earth can stop us now—that 1s, nothing except our own follies. If we will resolve our doubts tn favor of courage and action, I can see the day com- ing when Stalin will have too much trouble at home to think about tackling somebody else. I can see the day coming when Europe will be united and her scattered forces will be welded into an unconquerable power which Russia will never dare attack. I can see the day coming when a new emancipation proclamation will free the So- viet slaves in Czechoslovakia and Poland and Hungary and Bulgaria and Romania and China, even in Russia itself, and when that Gay comes the Kremlin will no longer be a safe place for dictators. If we in America choose to live in Lincoln's tradition, we will keep our freedom because we have earned it. We will inspire others to do likewise. I have no doubt ag to the out- come. America will always chose the path of freedom. We will make that choice be- cause brave men and women, fearing God, can make no other, Ours is an abiding faith in the cause of human freedom. We know 1t ls God's cause. Lithuanian Independence Day EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KENNETH B. KEATING Or NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. KEATING. Mr. Speaker, tomor- row, February 16, marks the thirty-third anniversary of the independence of Lith- uania. Although in this proud and free- dom-loving land independence is only a cherished legend today, the respect and admiration which its brief career as a sovereign nation engendered among its friends in the rest of the free world have continued and grown stronger during this period of domination. Before 1918, its history had been a bleak, but inspiring record of a 900-year fight against the oppressive and dicta- A783 torial rule of the Russian czars. When the opportune moment presented itself during World War I, Lithuania courage- ously proclaimed its independence which was then acknowledged by all the world. During the all-too-brief lifespan of free Lithuania, its citizens prospered and lived happily as members of a modern, progressive society. The Government functioned smoothly in the new nation. Trade flourished, agrarian reforms were instituted, and the future seemed as- sured, Now, there can only be a blind, des- perate hope that the future will not be as horrible as the present, that the iron curtain cannot last forever. The enormity of Russian crimes against the small country of 3,000,000 people can be approximated by the fact that the estimates of persons murdered, starved, and tortured to death, or deported to a lingering death in Arctic work camps range from half a million to one million. Genocide is being ruthlessly practiced as a matter of national Russian policy, since the rulers know that the flerce desire for freedom will persist as long as there is breath in a native Lithuanian’s body. We can only be amazed and humbled at the accounts of the astonishing cour- age and personal integrity of these peo- ple. Here, in our warm clothes and comfortable homes, we can only ask our- selves if we would be a fraction as brave if confronted with the horrible prospect of the fate that faces a guerrilla cap- tured by the Russians. Yet the resist- ance movement survives and with it the hope and spirit of these brave, pitiable people. We as a Nation cannot escape the judg- ment of history that we must share the responsibility for their fate by our blind- ness and gullibility during the period of World War II, when we allowed the Rus- sians to regain control over the fate of the Baltic Nations. The time must come when Lithuania and her sister nations along the North Sea will be free to enjoy & well-earned independence day once more. Let us hope and pray that that time will not be too long in arriving, that it will not be too late for the heroes of the present resistance. An Anniversary Message to the Lithuanian People EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JAMES T. PATTERSON OF CONNECTICUT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. PATTERSON, Mr. Speaker, in these days of tenuous peace—when a United Nations force is repelling aggres- sion in Asia—the fate of the free world hangs in the balance. The combined efforts of all freedom- loving people are required to combat the insidious flow of Communist aggression, Whether it be by infiltration or by vio- lence, the end result remains the same,
A784 The course of Communist domination is evident in Lithuania today, A people noted through history for their love of liberty have been crushed by a godless dictatorship. All is not lost, however, as the flame of freedom still] burns brightly in the hearts of Lithuanians everywhere. Those who have come to America and have contributed so greatly to our way of life still fight on and offer encouragement to those under Communist domination. Freedom will and must once again come to the crushed nations of the world; the task is great, but the example of the Lithuanians is a beacon for all to follow in attaining our goal. The celebration of Lithuania’s thirty- third anniversary of independence on February 16 is a mark of the will to survive as a free people. Lithuanian Independence Day, February 16, 1951 EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ADOLPH J. SABATH or ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 14, 1951 Mr. SABATH. Mr. Speaker, another year of enslavement has passed for the struggling peoples of Lithuania-——under the domination of the ruthless leadership of the Kremlin. February 16 marks the thirty-third anniversary of the declara- tion of independence by this brave little land, peopled by 3,000,000 souls, hun- dreds of thousands of whom have been deported in abject slavery to the frozen wastes of Russia. How many of them are still alive no one knows. On February 16, 1918, Lithuania de- clared its independence after 160 years of Russian rule. The liberty for which generation after generation had yearned and longed for, had fought and died for, had become a reality at last. There was great rejoicing throughout the land. The nightmare of serfdom had vanished. Hopes for the future were bright indeed. Its independence had been recognized, not only by all the free nations of the world, but by the Russian Government itself. This was 4 months prior to the fall of the czarist regime in Russia. ( This freedom and liberty was to be all too short-lived however, for in 1940 the present rulers of Russia, in violation of a solemn treaty with the Lithuanian people again overran its countryside, imposing a tyranny more frightful than that of the czars. The world is well aware of the torture, persecution, imprisonment, and liquidation of the clergy, both Protestant and Catholic; the shocking fate of Car- dinal Mindszenty; the treacherous effort to stamp out all religion. These actions are repulsive to freedom-loving peoples everywhere. All liberties enjoyed in the brief span of years from 1918 to 1940 were obliterated. Again terror and subjuga- tion ruled the land. | On February 16 Americans of Lithu- anian extraction, together with their fel- jow men throughout the world will gather together, heavy of heart and sad- dened by the thoughts of the plight of their homeland, to recall the more pleas- ant moments of the joy and exultation of their relatives, friends, and neighbors in the homeland on that day 33 years ago when liberty and freedom was theirs. They will offer anew their prayers and hopes for the speedy return of the new day of liberation which must and will come to oppressed peoples of all lands, including theirs, All history has proven that the spirit of a brave people cannot die; that it can- not be crushed by ruthless dictators, by slavery, by despotism. The flame of liberty, ingrained in the hearts and sou!s of people by the God of love and justice is eternal in humankind; it is the eternal, unquenchable light. It burns today in the souls of all the inhabitants of this brave little land. It may be dimmed; it may seem to have been obliterated by those who never believed in light, but it will flare anew ere long, brighter and more enduring than ever. I join with all Lithuanian-Americans on this occasion in the fervent hope and prayer that the day of the new liberation will soon, again, bring joy and happiness to the hearts of Lithuanians wherever they may be, and that the right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness will become a reality to them. Hon. Will M. Whittington EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CLIFFORD DAVIS OF TENNESSEE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. DAVIS of Tennessee. Mr. Speak- er, under leave to extend my remarks, I am privileged to include the resolution passed unanimously by the American Association of State Highway Officials at their thirty-sixth annual meeting, held in Miami, Fla., on December 7 last, which gives high praise to the valued services of the Honorable Will M. Whit- tington, chairman of the Committee on Public Works in the House. Many tributes have been paid to our distinguished colleague who voluntarily leaves service in the House of Repre- sentatives at the conclusion of this ses- sion of the Congress. From all over the Jand high tribute has been paid him, and while all of us knew his fine character, his strict application to duty, his loyalty to country, his enormous capacity for work, and his fine leadership, I am glad to include in these remarks this fine ex- pression from those who know how well he handled all of the affairs of the com- mittee, and in this instance, particu- larly, the wise and efficient handling of highway legislation. The resolution follows: Resolution 7 Resolution in appreciation of the services of the Honorable Will M. Whittington Whereas the Honorable Will M. Whitting- ton, Representative from Mississippi in the APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Congress of the United States, is retiring this year after 26 years of outstanding service in the House of Representatives, and nearly as many years of service on the Committee on Roads and as chairman of the Public Works Committee since 1948; and Whereas in his championship of the cause of an adequate highway system, Representa- tive Whittington made an outstanding con- tribution to good roads throughout the Na- tion; and Whereas Mr. Whittington has at all times given wise counsel and advice and has coop- erated to the greatcst extent in furthering the objectives of the American Association of State Highway Officials: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That this association in conven- tion assembled in Miami, Fla., on December 4-7, 1950, conveys to Mr, Whittington its sincere appreciation and best wishes, Address of Chief Justice Benjamin C. Hil- liard, of the Supreme Court of Colorado EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. BYRON G. ROGERS OF COLORADO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have inserted in the Appendix of the ReEcorp, an address by the Honorable Benjamin C. Hilliard, member of the Supreme Court of the State of Colorado and twice chief justice thereof, and an honored member of this body serving from March 4, 1915, to March 4, 1919, and to include the introduction made by Mr. Roy G. Munroe, president of the Colorado Society of the Sons of the American Revolution, which is as fol- lows: For many years it has been the great privi- lege of the Colorado Society of the Sons of the American Revolution to have a promi- nent part in the annual celebration of the adoption of the Bill of Rights. It is, of course, a natural thing that the Sons of the American Revolution should be active in this celebration. Our great ancestors, of whose deeds we are so justly proud, were those men who by their bravery and their sacrifices made America a Nation, From their number came the men who met in Philadelphia and drafted the Constitution of the United States. And from their number came the leadership of the group who saw to it that the Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution almost immediately after its adoption. This year it is our purpose, through the use of the radio and through the use of transcriptions, to bring to as many of Colo- rado’s adults and school children as may be reached by these methods, a reminder of the great heritage we have and of the great part the Bill of Rights plays in our heritage. We have asked one of our own members, a distinguished citizen of Colorado, and one of the Nation's outstanding jurists, to speak to us on the Bill of Rights. He brings to his discussion a lifetime of service to the people of Colorado and the United States, an inti- mate and almost exhaustive knowledge of the subject, and a gift of phrase which, J am sure, you will find most enjoyable. I take great pleasure in presenting to you, to speak to us on the Bill of Rights, Mr, Ohiet Justice Benjamin ©, Hilliard, of the Supreme Court of Colorado.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Chief Justice Hmuzarp, It 18, of course, a Brent privilege to be allowed to speak on this subject in behalf of the Sons of the Ameri- can Revolution. As do all of our members, I have pride in knowing that my ancastors were among those immortals who, against almost insuperable difficulties, wrested free- dom from the then most powerful nation on this earth. A bare handful of men, scattered thinly along the fringes of the Atlantic, 4ll- housed, ill-fed, and ill-clothed, fought and vanquished the best that Europa could send against them. Through their prowess, their perserverance, and their faith, they estab- lished that the principles which had been laid down ‘in the Declaration of Independence were \. rth all that it had cost to sustain them. As Mr. Munroe has very well said, it was from our revolutionary ancestors that we obtained the freedom, the privileges, and the blessings which are our portion. From their ranks came the men who wrote the documents which proclaimed and have pre- served those freedoms, privileges, and bless- ings. From their minds, steeped in knowl- edge of the evils that must be guarded against 1f men are to be free, came the great American charters: The Declaration of Inde- pendence, the Northwest Ordinance, the Constitution of the United States, and the Bill of Rights. And of these, the greatest 1s the Bill of Rights. As we all know, when the final draft of the Constitution of the United States hud been signed, on September 17, 1787, by George Washington, and the representatives of all the former colonies, save Rhode Island, it was definitely understood that safeguarding amendments were immediately to be pro- posed. Indeed, had it not been for the pledge that these amendments would be proposed and adopted, the Constitution would never have been ratified. The reason for this is not far to seek. It was born out of the knowledge of the leaders in the colonies that unless certain things should be forbidden the new government, it would, no matter how high might be the ideals cf its sponsors, fall into the evil courses which the Revolution had been fought to avoid. It will be remembered that the Declara- tion of Independence had proclalmed that certain rights are inalienable. Recall the words, the most eloquent ever penned by man: “We hold these truths to be self-evi- dent—that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with cer- tain inalienable rights; that among these are Hfe, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” It was widely feared throughout all the colonies that unless the new Government, set up by the Constitution should be Imited in its powers, that in time it would assume, and would be held to have, the power to trespass upon the rights which the Declara- tion of Independence had said should be inalienable. This fear came out of the les- son of history, that governments, unless they are circumscribed, will encroach upon and deny the rights which free men ought to have. Hence, we find in a few short months after the Constitution was adopted the addition to it of the first ten amendments, which have come to be called, and rightly so, the Bill of Rights, Let us examine them in such detail as time will allow, Let us look at the evils they were designed to avoid. And let ‘us look at the quaintness of their language, An established church supported by taxa- tion levied upon those who did not sub- scribe to its doctrines, was a crying evil, The firat amendment forbade an established church but at the same time extended to every man the right to worship as he saw fit. Remembering the suppression of news- papers, the imprisonment of men for their opinions, the refusal of the English over- lords to permit the people to assemble or to XCVIT—App.——50 petition for redress of their grievances, the first amendment forbade the Gavernment to abridge the freedom of the press, the freedom of speech, the right peacefully to assemble, and the right of petition. So accustomed are we to these privileges that we have for- gotten where these rights come from. We should remind ourselves and, as we look about the world, consider how little of these freedoms are vouchsafed to other nations. The right of the people to bear arms as a way of putting in the people’s hands the means of resisting oppression is guaranteed by the second amendment. Quaint to our ears and strange to our present customs is the interdiction laid down in the third amendment, against the quartering of sol- diers in a citizen’s house. But in its time the quartering of soldiers on the citizenry was as great an evil as could be imagined. The third amendment made it an impossi- bility in the United States, In many places in this world today and in the times before the American Revolution, no man was safe in his house, his effects, or his papers. In the dead of night, the dread knock on the door, and the king's officers marched in without warrant, arrested the innocent, searched his premises, destroyed his effects, and carried off his papers and his property. Since the adoption of the fourth amendment no American has had to fear those things. And, as was said of the Englishman after American example had taught the English Government what free- dom means, “The wind may enter an Eng- lUshman’s poor cottage, and the rain may come in, but the king cannot.” Again we are forced to remind ourselves that what we consider our natural rights fre really rights hard won from oppressive governments and oppressive men. How often do we recall that before the American Revo- lution men were held for crimes without in- formation or indictment; that men were tried again and again for the same offense until a conviction could be had; that men could be compelled to be witnesses against themselves; that men's property could be taken from them for governmental use with- out compensation; and that men could be tried for acts which were made criminal by laws passed after the acts had been com- mitted. The fifth amendment put an end to such abuses. Is it not fitting that we should at least annually, reexamine the source of our blessings? In times not far gone, as history goes, a man accused of crime was not entitled to a jury; he could be taken hundreds of miles from his home and friends for trial; he was not entitled to be informed of the charges made against him, nor was he permitted to have counsel; and he could not have process to compel the attendance of witnesses in his behalf. Those monstrous abuses were abolished for all time for Americans by the sixth amendment, The right of trial by jury in civil matters is the privilege which the seventh amend- ment gives to Americans. How important that right is. And how little do we remem- ber whence came that right. It is not long ago elther when men could be imprisoned without the right of hail, tried unfairly and unjustly, fined excessively, and punished in cruel and unusual ways, Under the eighth amendment such things cannot—and do not—happen in the United States of America. And finally the Bill of Rights contains the ninth and tenth amendments. Some writers have endeavored to say that the Bill of Rights is composed of only the first eight amendments. In a narrow sense, in the sense that the first eight deal with the rights of individuals, something may be sald for that view. In the larger, and more accurate sense, however, the last two amendments are as important as the others and do confer A785 and preserve rights which otherwise would not be ours, Says the ninth amendment, “The enu- meration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” That is a rule of construction. Tt was in- tended to—and 1t does—discourage the usur- pation of rights which the people reserved to themselves. And, finally, the tenth amendment provides that powers not dele- gated to the United States, nor prohibited by the Constitution to the States, are re served to the States or the people. Again, & rule of construction, ao that the general Government may not usurp that which be- jongs to the States or the people. The great blessing which has come to the American people is not the fact that our rights and privilegea are set forth in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It is the fact that we have the courage and the tenacity to uphold those privileges. A con- stitution means nothing, a bill of rights means nothing, if the people do not demand and receive the rights which those docu. ments provide. There is no doubt that in the United States the people do demand and do receive their rights. That they do, if, considering my office, properly I may say, I think is due in great measure to the American courts, ‘The courts of this country have been stead. fast in preserving the sanctity of the Cone stitution and the Bill of Rights. Many at- tempts have been made to thwart, to over- ride, to evade the Constitution, but the courts have turned these efforts aside. That these attempts always arise in cases of great emergency makes the refusal of the courts to permit them a further tribute to the American judiciary. It can be summed up very fairly by a quotation from a decision of the Colorado Supreme Court handed down during the dark days of the great depres- sion of the 1930's. The court said: i “s * © We must declare without hesi- tation that which our function demands, ‘We pronounce as the most certain of law that there has never been, and can never be,' an emergency confronting the State that will warrant the servants of the Constitution watving so much az a word of its provisions, Armed men may destroy the Government, Military rule, or the rule of the mob, may replace the orderly processes that have been our fortune since sovereignty was granted us by the United States. But no species of reasoning, no ingenuity of construction, no degree of emergency can persuade us that the Constitution is without potency or dissuade us from performing our duty as its sworn officers.” , So long as there are American courts and American judges, the liberties, the Ives, and the happiness of the American people will be sustained, for the Bill of Rights will be safe and will be enforced. Conservation Paying Off EXTENSION OF REMARKS i | HON. CLARK W. THOMPSON OF TEXAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. THOMPSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the critical emergency which faces the United States and all of the free world, awakens us to the need for conservation. It applies to industrial production, manpower, money, energy, and natural resources,
AT Sven before the present emergency we were hearing stern warnings that we were using up the Nation's productive soil aim that unless we practiced sound conservation measures the time was not too far distant when the Nation would be forced to turn elsewhere for part of its food supply. In our own Ninth Dis- trict of Texas we have seen the initiation of sound soil-conservation practices. A recent report from one of the dis tricts inspired an editorial in the Rosen- berg Herald, a stass-roots weekly pub- lished in Fort Bend County. Because it points out how well the soil-conservation program works, J take pleasure in insert- ing it is the ConcressronaL Recorp for the information and enlightenment of every Member of Congress: ConeenvaTion Parine Orr The old adage that “the proof of the pud- ding is in the eating” is proving to be very true in the case of the Coastal Plains Soil Caneervation District. Organized in the early part of 1941, the 1960 report, just released, reveals very clearly that soil-conservation trict state that they feel that they are mak- ing and will continue to make steady prog- ress toward the ultimate goal of improving the land and the productivity of the soil. They have the proof, such as the 30-bushel- per-ecre increase in corn production by Louis after applying phosphate and planting legumes; the 186-percent increase in cotton production in 5 years after completing con- servation plans on the J, E. Junker farm; the inoreased and dairy production reported by the ones who have taken thelr conserva- tton work seriously; the 800,000 increase in Income to the cooperators of the district; and many other things outlined in their lengthy i Soil conservation and all the various prac. tiess connected with it are paying off in Fort Benti County, and we predict that in future years Fort Bend will be a more prosperous and have a more stable economy as reguit of the splendid work that has done ie Speaker Sam Rayburn EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HOMER THORNBERRY or TEXAS 4 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, great honor to a man {is never so deeply felt, nor so long remembered, as when it is bestowed upon him by the people of his own State. . Speaker Sam RAYsuRN, who now has presided over this Congress longer than any other man, won at an early age the love ard respect of the people of Texas, Now the whole Nation honors him, in contained in a magnificent document for ali to see, This document is House Con- current Resolution 22, adopted by the Texas House of Representatives on Feb- ruary 5, 1951, and concurred in by the Texas Senate on February 6, 1951. The document referred to voices the feeling of the great State of Texas for its dis- tinguished son. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent, I place in the Recorp a copy of that resolution of the Texas Legislature: House Concurrent Resolution 22 Whereas Hon. Sam Raysurn, of Bonham, broke an historic American record of 100 years’ standing established by Henry Clay when he sat for the three thousand and ffty- seventh day as Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States; and Whereas he is admired and respected in the Congress by Democrats and Republjicans alike for his patience, fairness, forthright- ness, and ability as the presiding officer of the United States House of Representatives; and Whereas he is one of the greatest states men of modern times, using wisely and effec- tively the powers and prerogatives of the high and honorable office he holds; and Whereas he is not simply the holder of the Speakership tenure record, but is warm-hearted, gracious gentleman, second in line of Presidential succession; and Whereas Hon. Sam RaAYBURN served as a member of the house of representatives of the State of Texas with honor and distince tion in the thirtieth, thirty-first, and thirty- second legislatures and was elevated to the coveted speakership by his colleaguea in the thirty-second legislature, 1911; and Whereas Texans everywhere are justly proud of SAM Raysugn and his unparalleled record of unselfiah and devoted public serv. tee: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the house of representatives of the State of Teras (the senate concur- ring), That the legislature join with the citi- zens of Texas and all true Americans in con- gratulating Sam Raysugn on the occasion of his three thousand and fifty-seventh day as Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States of America and in com- mending his great devotion and service to the principles of Americanism; and be it further Resolved, That the chief clerk of the hotise of representatives be directed to send a copy of this resolution to the Honorable Sam RAYBURN. Bex Ramsry, President of the Senate, Rvuesen FE, SEnvreerirr, ‘ Speaker of the House. T hereby certify that House Concurrent Resolution 22 was adopted by the House on February 6, 1951. (sxa.] Crarence Jones, Chie} Clerk of the House. I hereby certify that House Concurrent % " Resolution 22 was adopted by the Senate on February 6, 1951. Loycer M. Bewt, Secretary of the Senate. A Hard Decision EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. ROBERT E. JONES, JR. ‘a OP ALABAMA Sam Ravzurn cherishes his home folks .' Texas. ; Wheat Texas thinks of Sam Rarsvan is IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 18, 1951 Mr. JONES of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I wish to include an editorial which appeared in the Alabama Courier on February 1, 1951. Mr. Steele McGrew, editor of this progressive and outstanding weekly newspaper, has written this splendid and APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD pertinent editorial, and I wish to bring it to the attention of the Members: A Harp Drcrsron No parent wants the blood of an 18-year- old son shed on a far-flung battlefield. No person wants boys’ lives snuffed out in war, whatever the age of the boy, unless that pergon ta besttal. The world’s majority of people want peace, but peace they do not have, nor does it seem likely that peace is likely to come in the immediate future. Authorities say, therefore, that it becomes necessary to build an army of such strength, that the 18-year-olds, their younger and older broth- ers, their parents and neighbors, may bs safe from the enemy. Lack of preparation now may lead to de- feat later, should full war come to us. And, a defeated nation not only counts the ter- rifle loss of Hfe of those in battle, but also the infants, women, and old in the over- run land, as well as the principles for which it fought. Also, when a country is faced with defeat, it drafts into service manpower that goes much below the 18-year-olds, as a last, des- perate stand. This would be intolerable, but possible, It is not an emotional battle we must fight with ourselves as much as one that concerns our depth of thinking for the safety of everyone. If we shudder at the fate of drafting 16-year-olds, would we not rather, through contemplating deeply the over-all conditions, have such an armed force in this country that the fate might not be possible due to our power? if it is necessary, in order to insure our success, perhaps these boys should be drafted so that they may be well trained and able to hold their own, more safely and surely, and ready to meet an emergency. None of us like to see them drafted, but it might be the wiser course in the final outcome, Lincola—Truman EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ROBERT L. RAMSAY OF WEST VIRGINIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. RAMSAY. Mr. Speaker, under leave to revise and extend my remarks, I include therein an excerpt from the col- umn, Taylor Made, published in the Grafton News, of Grafton, W. Va. This very popular feature is written by Mr. Charles W. T. Lockard, publisher of the Grafton News, and one of the finest weekly newspapermen in West Virginia, follows: The current observance of the birthday of the now admittedly great Abraham Lincoln causes us to reflect and call the attention of our Republican friends on the similarities of Iincoln and President Truman. Both are men of the people; both were of humble birth; both received meager education; both failed in private business; both were or are the object of bitter ridicule; both were or are unpopular with the majority of the press of their day; both are said to be men of atrong will; both are known champions of human lUberty and freedom, regardless of race, color, or religion; both suffered an- tagonists within and without their parties; both had assassin’s shote directed at them by fanatics (Lincoln was 8 shot victim, but Truman's would-be assassin was a poor
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD shot); Lincoln fought a dogged and deter- mined battle to bring peace and freedom to all the people of this Nation and engaged in a war to accomplish this end; President Truman is now fighting a dogged and deter. mined battle to bring peace and freedom to all the peoples of the world through the United Nations and is sending our fighting men to war to accomplish this aim; the fiscal policies of both were or are under attack; the administrations of both men are or were accused of committing great blunders. But today, Lincoln, who was hated in his day, was honored some generations later now has a great national shrine in his honor on the banks of the Potomac. Truman, fighting the same battle as Lincoln fought— but on a larger scale—is today getting the same treatment from his people as Lincoln did some 80-odd years ago. Many of us will live to see Truman honored as Lincoln now is. So think it over boys. Lincoln, a be- rated man in his time, is a great man in the eyes of posterity. Truman, too, is an equally great man and history will prove it. Just you wait and see. Founding the Government EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. NOAH M. MASON OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. MASON. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- orp, I include the following address by Col. Robert R. McCormick, editor and publisher of the Chicago Tribune and president of the Washington Times- Herald, Inc., delivered last night on the Chicago Theater of the Air over WEAM and the Mutual Broadcasting System: [From the Washington Times-Herald of February 11, 1951] FOUNDING THE GOVERNMENT (By Col. Robert R. McCormick) How our country was formed is certainly the most interesting and important story in the world. It is also the most important be- cause it shows the unique conditions which made this particular United States possible. The beginning of the movement was, of course, the departures from England—not only the original settlements of the individ- ual colonies but the later migrations. The English settlements were predominantly made under charters of the Stuart kings. There were also Dutch and Swedish settle- ments, and French in Maine and South Carolina, abutting on Spanish colonies. The charters varied from the fantastic feudal ones of the Carolinas to the near republics of Connecticut and Rhode Island. The first settlement, of course, was Vir- ginia, which started out as an adventure in quest of gold and the subjugation of the natives. To this came a number of English- men ranking as gentlemen. In the absence of a nobility, they developed into a self- conscious aristocracy wearing, at the time of the Revolution, silk clothes and lace cuffs, The great political philosopher, Mason, preacher of equality, would have the sheriff summon the common people to listen to him. The self-made aristocrats of Virginia were the first to resent airs of superiority from England. The New Englanders were tradesmen, peo- ple of the middle class. They gladly elected Bradford, the only gentleman among them, governor, Development of a merchant ma- rine gave to them a hierarchial structure and a sense of discipline not shared by the New England farmers. New York had English and Dutch aristoc- racies, composed of the recipients of large land grants; the former, grateful for their given wealth, became Tories and their de- scendants are still Tories. Maryland was founded as a refuge for Catholics, and Pennsylvania as a home for Quakers and all other dissenters. A special character was imparted to western Pennsyl- vania and western Virginia by Scotch-Irish @escending from the clan system rather than the feudal system of England. In Pennsylva- nia they quarreled with the Quakers over representation in the ‘egislature. In Vir- ginia they practiced their religion tn defiance of the law of the Colony. As we know, there were 13 colonies planted by England. A fourteenth, Nova Scotia, was planted by Scotland. It is not so generally known that they were inhabited by 14 na- tionalities: English, Scotch, Scotch-Irish, Irish, Welsh, Dutch, Swedish, Jews, Pala- tines, Swiss, French, Spanish, Russians, and Portuguese. Governor Oglethorpe brought with him to Georgia a guard of German mer- cenaries, They readily became assimilated. Among all of these people, the only ones well disposed toward the mother country were some members of the Church of Eng- land. The others were all indifferent, cold, or hostile. There was considerable migration from the West Indies and between the Colo- nies. Puritans from New England imparted to the Church of England in Virginia a puritanism nonexistent at home. Though there was Httle love of England, the different races, religions, and Colonies were slow to combine. The New England Colonies formed the New England Confedera- tion to fight the Dutch and French, and later to fight the Indians, but it did not last. Plans of colonial union were presented by Penn in 1698, Franklin in 1754, and Galloway in 1774 on the verge of the Revolution, but none of them was adopted, although Gallo- way's received only one vote less than a ma- jority in the Continental Congress. At different times, every Colony except Georgia was in revolt, beginning with Ba- con's rebellion in Virginia in 1676. New England and New York rebelled against Gov. ernor Andros. Puritans in New Jersey re- volted against the proprietors. The Scotch- Irish in Pennsylvania made an unofficial war on the Indians. There were the revolts against the Calverts in Maryland and, just before the Revolution, the Regulators of North Carolina fought a losing battle against the governor. The Colonies were held to England in their fear of France and Spain, and England used them in her plans for further conquest. Only the northern Colonies from Massachu- setts to Virginia fought the French. Only the southern Colontes fought the Spaniards, and South Carolina built a navy and fought the pirates. In the absence of a nobility owning almost all property, the Colonies had a tendency to follow Pennsylvania in mitigating the harsh British criminal laws and laws against debtors. After the defeat of France and Spain in 1768, neither Colonies nor mother country had the same need of each other. The King and Parliament took an increasingly over- bearing attitude while the Colonies became more and more independent. Governor Dun- more, in his colonial victory over the In- dians at Point Pleasant, had opened the way across the Appalachian Mountains, Settle- ments were made in the West and land spec- ulation became common, At the same time that the Parliament be- gan to interfere more and more with colonial trade and taxes, the king proclaimed that the land west of the height of land was part of Quebec and not to be settled by the Eng- AT87 lish-speaking colonials, while a revival of Church of England domination threatened to force conformity upon the Lutherans, Catholics, and the Calvinists of different degree of Calvinism who were thus driven together. The first serious infringement upon colo- nial rights was the tax on molasses. This ‘was passed before the defeat of France and was not enforced partly because of the need of conciliating the Colonies during the French war. It was followed by the stamp tax, including a tax on newspapers. This led to the first step toward union, the stamp- tax congress, participated in by nine Colonies, and prevented the appointed officials from operating. After its repeal, the Townsend acts were passed, claiming the right and power of Parliament to tax the Colonies. The decisive act was the taxon tea. The killing of various citizens in a collision between the soldiers and a moh, called the Boston Massacre, added fuel to the flames. Later came the destruc- tion of the British warship Gaspee in Rhode Isiand and the Boston Tea Party. The association was created by the firat Continental Congress, attended by 12 Col- onies and a representative of one Georgia county, to prevent intercourse with England and to prevent the purchase of tea tn the Colonies. Nonintercourse at this time, as again be- fore the War of 1812, was much more harm- ful to British than to American interests, in that it acted as a protective tariff under which American industries were started, Washington’s militia saved the British reg- ulars after Braddock’s defeat. Colonial troops prevented Montcalm from pursuing the regulars after his victory at Ticonderoga. Washington took Fort Duquesne after Major Grant was beaten by the French and Indians Jon Bradstreet made the decisive capture of Fort Frontenac, while, as we have seen be- fore, Sir William Johnson took Fort Niagara and was decisive in the capture of Montreal. The war against Spain was carried on en- tirely by Colonials, although some of the time under the leadership of Governor Ogle- thorpe. In spite of these facts, upon which the British Government had acted during the crises, after the victory was won the British conceived a wholesale contempt and hatred for colonial soldiers. Even the defeated Major Grant said in Parliament: “That they were not soldiers, and never could be made a0, being naturally pusillanimous and inca- pable of discipline; that a very slight force would be more than sufficient for their com- plete reduction.” The capture of Burgoyne and Cornwallis and all of the British guard regiments at Yorktown falled to change this attitude. The naval victories of 1812 and Jackson's defeat of Wellington's peninsular veterans at New Orleans are ignored. After the Civil War, Lord Wolesley said one Reguiar Army corps could have ended the war in a few months. Our winning of World War I and World War II has not changed it. Deroga- tory remarks have been heard within the last few weeks. After Lexington and Concord, there was a wave of independence sentiment which forced the British governors to take refuge in warships or become prisoners. The siege of Boston compelled the appoint- ment of a commander in chief by the Second Continental Congress, which, however, was only arrived at after much hesitation. The actual conduct of war, necessitating foreign loans and foreign alliances, again made inde- pendence necessary and occasioned our first great document, the Declaration of Inde- pendence. Conduct of the war under the Continental Congress led to the next step— the Confederation—which, as I have said before, was not the week instrument it has been called but one under which the country
A788 might have been ruled if Washington, Jeffer~- #on, Madison, and Hamilton had been in that Government. The Confederation passed the ordinance for the Northwest Territory, pro- viding for the admission of more States into the Federation and these to be free States. Moreover, it called the Constitutional Con- vention and the Constitution was followed by the Bill of Rights, thus making our free and independent Republic. Even then it took a great Civil War to free the alaves. This is the long, hard history of our Gov- ernment not paralleled by any other in the world. No other country wants to copy it. On the contrary, all countries want to draw us into a world government, modeled on their own evil institutions, and American Tories are plotting to that end in this country. A Way Must Be Worked Ont To Teach More Doctors EXTENSION OF REMARKS o HON. CARL D. PERKINS OF KENTUCKY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. PERKINS. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the REc- orp, I include the following editcrial from the Courier-Journal of Monday, February 12, 1951: A Way Must BE Worxep Out To Tzacrz More Bocrors Financial necessity has forced toe MWntiver- sity of Louisville medical school to increase its tuition fees to $800 a year for Kentucky students, and 61,200 a year for students from out of State. From any aspect, this is disturbing news. Raising tultion rates may save the school from financial collapse, but it will not serve the purpose for which medl- cal schools are established. It will not in- creaso enrollment or help to ease Kentucky's doctor shortage. It will give the son of wealthy parents an unfair advantage over the boy of ambition and ability. Indeed, it will make it practically impossible for the son of the average Kentucky family to be- come a doctor. This situation is not, of couree, confined to Kentucky. The same thing is happening to medical schools all over the country. And unless medicine is to become the private province of the privileged few, something must be done soon to help the medical schools meet higher operating costs and still enlarge their enrollments. Por the second time within the past 2 years a bill hes been introduced in the Sen- ate to establish a Federal-aid program to train more doctors, dentists, and nurses, The men who framed the bill have wisely avoided any mention of health insurance or any of the other controversial measures which the medical profession has -epeatedly condemned as leading to socialized medicine. Instead, the bill seeks merely to help exist- ing medical schools remedy the national shortage of medical personnel. It would grant $10,000,000 a year to medical schools for expansion of training facilities and ¢41,- 000,000 a year for scholarships and financial aid to achools, Like ite predecessor, this measure was in- spired by experiences during World War It, when it became painfully obvious that we did not have enough doctors, dentists, and nuraes to protect the health both of the civilian population and an expanded military force. And chances for the bill's passage are undoubtedly improved by the difficulty the Armed Forces are having now in recruit- ing enough medical personnel, This shortage is nothing new. In 1945 an official of the American Medical Association testified before a Senate subcommittee that we would need an additional 35,000 doctors by 1960 to supply civilian needs. Many medi- cal authorities have contended this figure was too low. At any rate, we have not in- creased our output of doctors. On the con- trary, enrollment has been cut back in many medical schools because of Inflated operating costs. As a result, the Federal Security Ad- ministration has estimated that by 1060 we will have a shortage of at least 27,000 doctors, 28,000 dentists, and 163,000 nurses. If 20 per- cent of medica) personnel is required for military service, the shortage will be com- mensurately worse, It ig doubtful that the limited Federal aid bill proposed can correct this deficiency. Two years ago the chairman of the American Medical Association’s Council] on Education testified that American medical schools need- ed an additional $15,000,000 annually to op- erate at the 1948 rate of production, and that they were desperately in need af €200,000,000 for enlargements. Since then, of course, these needs have grown with the increased costs of bullding ond operation. But this is a situation accumulated over 50 years, and cannot be remedied overnight. The bill pro- posed will make a positive and vigorous atart. It will be interesting to see how the AMA reacts to the challenge. Dootors, of course, will benefit from the bill as much 4s will the American people. But you may recall that the AMA lobby managed to defeat a similar bill In 1949 on the excuse that, while the bill itself wos innocuous it might lead to greater Government participation in the medical scene. Since then our shortage of doctors has led the American people to wonder whether Gov- ernment participation, to the extent of en- larging medical schools, is not essential. Such conservative voices as those of Senators Tarr and DoNnrLi have spoken for the Fed- cral aid program. Herbert Hoover has warned that “our medical educational system is woe- fully inadequate for the conduct of national defense * * * and is doubly inadequate for the needs of our people generally.” Deans of both public and private medical schools have endorsed the program almost unanl- mously, and even the AMA has recognized the need for action by voting $500,000 for a medical school fund. Its conduct concerning this latest bill will be revealing, The Military Manpower Program EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LYNDON B. JOHNSON Or TEXas IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 15 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi- dent, this week, after more than 5 weeks of intensive study and hearings, the Senate Armed Services Committee or- dered reported by unanimous vote, 13 to 0, a bill to provide the Nation with a realistic program for raising and main- taining the military manpower strength required for the naticnal defense, I ask unanimous consent to have printed {In the Appendix of the Rrcoxp editorials from the leading papers of the Nation re regarding the manpower hearings an . APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD There being no objection, the edi- torials were ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: {From the New ‘Yor mee of February 11, For THe Narion's Sarery A Senate subcommittee has rounded out a month's hearings on the proposal to set up a program of untversal military service and training. The group's findings now give sub- stantial support to the plan as submitted by Defense Secretary Marshall. Some mtnor modifications have been recommended, and there may be further changes before the plan takes form in legislation, but thus far it has remained relatively tntact. It calls for the induction of young men at 18 years for a pe- riod of training and service of about 2 years. After that they will peas into an available re- serve. A small group, wita especial qualifica- tions, will recelve advanced technical train- ing and be available for specialized services. The Benate group has opened ite doors to & wide range of opinion and judgment. The hearings have not been hasty, and there has been no evidence of predisposition or bias. Secretary Marshall aod his assistant, Mrs. Rosenberg, have been questioned closely and at length on various aspecta and implica- tions of the program. There has been an ob- vious and highly commendable attitude of taking this very serious problem seriously. If the ultimate finding anc the action based on it bring this plan into operation, we be- Neve that the cause of the Nation's safety will have been well and thoughtfully served. It should be borne in mind that this is not in itself an emergency program, although the circumstances that haye brought it to this stage may be critical. It js not the purpose of this plan suddenly to raise a huge army to meet an instant need. That emergent Character belongs rather to such operations as the Selective Service Act, whore purpose has been to deliver a required volume of manpower at a given moment. The univer- sal service plan, in contrast, proposes to as- sure a steady flow of available manpower over a considerable period of time. It stems from the realization that we face a long- range as well as an immediate threat and must plan accordingly. Two fears have been expressed in regard to this planning. The first is the feeling that the 18-year age level may be too low. The second is that @ program of universal service may in some way undermine the cemocratic character of our atate and our society. In our view, both of these fears are sufficiently groundless to be outweighed by the necessity for action. The 18-year level 1s not an innovation. It ig the age at which young men have been made liable for military service in each of the world wars. If our young men at that age were able to be soldiers in the time of combat they are able to become soldiers now in the time of peril. Thetr older brothers who were inducted at 18 have the right to expect that this group of young Americans can be called upon for service as readily as were its predecessors. The 28-year level ia a logical dividing place in our society and in our educational pattern. It marka the point at which an interruption can be made with the least likelihood of permanent dislocation. Our colleges and universities ere prepared to make required adaptations to this program, and our soctety as 2 whole can likewlse meet this required change in the normal course of civiltan lie. ‘We believe, moreover, that our democratic society can well meet any threat to its sur- vival posed by a system of universal militery training. There is no tendency to glorify a military caste or clique. There ts no destro to perpetuate a system of training for one moment longer than it is imperative. The threat to our survival is from without rather
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD than from within and we must be strong to meet that threat. We may hope that the strength thus created may help to avoid the necessity for using that strength in battle. We know that we cannot hope for peace if We are weak, We may be able to keep the peace if we are sufficiently strong. Finally, the essential idea of truly uni- versal service {s more democratic than a pro- gram of selection to raise an emergency army. Universal training and service can spread the physical burden of defense on the broadest possible base. It can do that, also, if the idea now being applied to the Armed Forces is applied, in spirit, to the whole of the body politic. The duty of defense is uni- versal, just as the privileges that accrue from the liberties defended are universal. The plan for the armed services should be a symbol, in one fleld, of a state of mind and spirit that applies to all fields and to every citizen, of whatever age, {From the Washington Evening Star of February 15, 1951] Tux Tres DEMAND IT In both an immediate and long-term sense, the military manpower bill just approved by the Senate Armed Services Committee is so well tailored to these dangerously uncertain and explosive times that Congress as a whole should feel impelled to adopt it, or something very much like it, by an overwhelming vote. Formally entitled “The Universal Military Training and Service Act,” the bill is the end- result of more than a month of intensive and painstaLing effort by the committee’s pre- paredness subcommittee headed by Senator Jounson of Texas. Although its authors do not claim perfection for it, its critics will be hard put to show how any of its essentials can be cut away without leaving the security of the Nation on a woefully weak foundation. For the bill, as explained in an admirably lucid and convincing statement by Senator JoHNSON, provides for two things that are absolutely indispensable to the safety of the United States in the kind of world we have now and the kind of world we are likely to have for years tocome. The firat is the man- power that is needed immediately to cope with the present crisis. And the second is the reservoir of trained strength that we must build up if we are to be adequately prepared to avert grave perils in the future, Accordingly, to meet the immediate need for a minimum of 3,500,000 men In the Armed Forces by next June, the bill would lower the present induction age and authorize Selective Service to take 18-year-olds, but with this important proviso: That they would be called after, and only after, the manpower supply in the older groups had been exhausted. The first to go would be all the unmarried and physically fit, aged 19 through 25. Next in line would be all the 19-through-25 single youths with physical defects not serious enough to disqualify them from limited duty, Finally, before any 18-year-olds were drafted, all married individuals in the eligible bracket would be called, except fathers and veterans, As for the long-range security objective, the bill would provide aa follows: (1) Upon completing his tour of active duty (26 months, including 2 months of leave), each man trained for service would move into the Reserve for 6 years—an arrangement insuring the retention of soldierly skills and creating what Senator JoHNSON has called a predictable, dependable, constant, ever-ready force of militarily seasoned manpower serv- ing as a base for strategic planning against future dangers. And (2) when the need for rapid mobilization ceases (in which case authority would exist to end the draft and shorten the 26-month service period), there would be established # program of universal training to guarantee the continued mainte- nance of adequate Reserves—a system which we should have long since put into operation. Everything considered, the major provi- sions of this bill——under which most of the men affected would serve in the Army, bee cause the Navy and Air Force are built on long-term enlistees—seem definitely to he quite as sound and as fair as they are essen- tial. As far as the current situation is con~ cerned, who can doubt that prompt affirma- tive action on just such legislation is sorely needed? After all, in Senator JoHNSON’s words, we have suffered about 50,000 cas- ualties in Korea, we have only one ready divi- sion available for the defense of our country, and we are engaged in an inescapable strug- gle for survival—a struggle whose end 1s not in sight. And so—whether we like it or not—we must build up our military man- power, and we must do it as quickly as we can. Of course, there is always the possibility that world tensions will suddenly ease and that the size of our Armed Forces in being will be out of proportion to our security needs. At the moment, however, no possi- bility could seem more remote than that, and what we must keep in mind, in any event, is that the sooner we develop mili- tary strength of the sort envisioned in the proposed bill, the better chance there will be to avert new Koreas and the catastrophe of a global war. Clearly, this is no time for half measures, As Senator JoHNSON has said, “It is better for a prudent nation to have and not need, than to need and not have. Too often, the strength of American arms has been paper strength. Our greatest peril has been our own lack of preparation for hours of peril.” Let us profit therefore from our past mistakes and do all that the present hour requires, [From the Washington Daily News of February 14, 1961] So.ip CoRNERSTONE The military manpower bill which, among other things, lowers the draft age to 18, is now before the Senate Armed Services Com- mittee, In a notably clear statement on reporting the bill, Senator Lynpon JoHNsoN (Demo- crat, Texas), chairman of the Preparedness Subcommittee, which heard more than 100 witnesses, summarized: “The choice is before us: We muat have the men. Shall we call again upon our gen- eration of veterans or shall we ask of the 18-year-olds the service which, in all mo- ments of peril, our men have traditionally provided at age 18? “will you face the veteran father, his wife and family, and tell him he must again enter service because you are unwilling to require service of the unmarried 18-year-olds? That is the choice. “T believe this is a good bill, an enduring bill, a wholly fair piece of legislation which can be a solid cornerstone to a half century of American strength.” The weight of evidence and testimony, in this newspaper’s opinion, strongly supports these conclusions. The bill for universal military service and training, beginning at 18, should be passed. [From the Chicago News of January 10, 1951] FUTURE LEADERS Congress will be called to referee a contest for the 18-year-old boys, and decide whether they shall go into colleges, into the armed services, into industry, or into some form of military training exempted from immediate combat. It is a knotty problem and there will be no unanimity on the solution, But one thing we could learn from Russia is that an abundant supply of new engineers and technicians of all kinds should be a pri- mary consideration. The Soviets are train- ing 100,000 a year, several times the out- put of our own technical schools, A789 In time of war, the claim of the Armed Forces to the 18-year-olde is soundly based. At that age they have the resilience, the adaptability, the quick reflexes that—with proper training—-make the ideal soldier. A proposal for a year of compulsory mifli- tary training for 18-year-olds 1s already be- fore Congress. The bill calls for 4 months of active training and & months of academic courses. Thereafter, if need arose, the train- ees would be expected to volunteer, or be drafted. Any program of universal training runs up against the problem of finding instructors and housing. With the Armed Forces in the process of expanding to a total of 3,500,000 men and women, neither camps nor instruc- tors enough to do the job properly will be available. Representative Vinson, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, has crit- icized the present practice of deferring col- lege students. He contends that this amounts to an exemption for the sole reason that a youth can afford to continue his schooling. A proposal which answers many of these objections ts for a revival of something like the Students Army Training Corps of World War lI. If the million youths turning 18 each year were given college aptitude tests, the top fifth, say, could be given deferments to enter college—with scholarships when neces- sary—for technical or professional training. Those who failed to make the grade would take their places with the noncollege group, subject to military service or to such defer- ment as essential industry might dictate, Graduates would be subject either to mill- tary call, or to civilian service where needed. None of these proposals is free from ob- Jections, and some injustice is doubtless in- herent in all. Nevertheless, consideration of our long-range manpower problems makes it essential to come to grips with the problem. Any system will probably give some breaks to the more talented. But that is the way of the world, and those who get the advantages may be expected to return the favor by their services to society in the future, tee {From the Chicago Sun-Times of January 12, 1951) Everysopy’s OBLIGATION Everyone who is aware of America’s tradi- tion as a nonmilitary Nation will contem- plate with regret the proposal for compul- sory military service for cvery physically fit American boy of 18. Nevertheless no one can doubt what De- fense Secretary Marshall told the Senate Preparedness Subcommittee when he out- lned the proposal; “The tensions that un- settle the world may persist through the lifetime of many of us." That argues strongly for a permanent pro- gram. Along with it must go arrangements for everyone to bear his share of the job of making the Nation strong. There are mili- tary desk jobs that the physically unfit can do, Looking back at the lessons taught by ‘World War I, President Harding said in his inaugural address that: “There is something inherently wrong, something out of accord with the ideals of representative democracy when one portion of our citizenship turns its activity to private gain amid defensive war, while another is fighting, sacrificing, or dying for national preservation.” Before the Senate subcommittee, Assistant Defense Secretary Anna Rosenberg asserted that the proposal “embodies the concept of universal participation and equal obliga- tion.” Congress, when it writes a universal mili- tary service law, must steadfastly uphold that concept,
A790 [From the Des Moines Register of January 12, 1051] GenrnaL MarsHaty's Drarr PLAN There is no doubt that if we must main- tain a high level of military preparedness in the years immediately ahead the fairest dis- tribution of this burden upon our popula- tion can be achieved by the automatic draft of young men at a specified age. General Marshall, Secretary of Defense, thinks the proper age is 18, and his Assist- ant Secretary for Manpower 1s therefore in- troducing in Congress a universal training and service program toward this end. Under it the draftees would be liable, at present, for 24% years of service. Those physically unfit for military duty would not neces- sarily be exempted, but assigned to service jobs compatible with their physical condi- tion. And because the Defense Department would be taking over young men at the age when normally many would be entering col- lege, the plan is to send up to 60,000 of those on active duty into univeraities and colleges for special training. Eligible men already in higher education would be deferred in some cases or embraced in an expanded ROTO program, and the Federal Government would undertake to provide more scholarships for talented young men than in the past. It ts perfectly obvious that this kind of program would spread access to college edu- cation over a much wider cross-section of the American population in the long run. It would make the avatlability of higher edu- cation hinge more nearly on merit and less on economic circumstances. And this ts a thing that some of our leading educators, including President Conant, of Harvard, have been driving at for a long time. There are going to be a lot of us who dislike the prospect of universal military training, even for this extended emergency period. But if we are agreed that we must have the trained manpower, then the real problem is to get it in the way which will be most just to the whole population. Under the Marshall proposal, the Presi- dent would be authorized to reduce the serv- ice period to 6 months as soon as circum- stances permit. Naturally, we will all hope, for every reason, that such a stite of the world develops—the sooner the better. {From the Minneapolis Tribune of January 15, 1961] To Survive in Paeepom Wz'Lt Neep UMB If the United States is to survive in free- dom its young men will have to devote some of the best years of their young manhood to its defense. This will be true whether the Communists limit their attacks to a series of local wars or plunge the whole world into a war to the death. The American people cannot hope to pre- serve their free institutions in the critical years ahead unless at least several million men at all times are ready to go into action at a moment’s notice and at least several million more constantly will be fit for active service on very short notice. Those responsible for national defense feel they must have at least 3,462,000 men in active service by June 30, Marked deteriora- tion in our relations with the Soviet power would require considerably larger Armed Forces. That size military establishment cannot be wholly manned by professionals, It cannot be staffed by volunteers. The only sound and equitable system of ratsing sufficient men for the Armed Forces in such @ ettustion !s compulsory universal military service. The Tribune did not favor the sort of uni- versal military which was proposed before the crisis took such a grave turn, The training proposed under such schemes would not have produced saldiers fit for combat. The system would have been wasteful of the time of the youth being thus trained. It would have wasted the time of the men re- quired t> give such half-baked training. It would have wasted taxpayers’ money without giving the Nation a dependable supply of well-trained troops available for service wherever needed. The plan for universal military service drafted by Defense Secretary Marshall and Assistant Defense Secretary Rosenberg, which is now being considered by the Senate Armed Services Committee, is quite another matter. It ts prosented in quite a different world climate. Without undertaking to say at this time whether the plan is correct in every particu- lar we do not hesitate to endorse its broad concepts and recommend ite speedy adoption in substanttally ite present form. We are open to conviction as to whether our young men should become Hable for mili- tary service at 18, as the committee proposes, or 18%, as many Members of Congress seem to favor; whether the period of active service should be 27 months, as the plan now pro- poses, or could safely be fixed at 24 months. We are open to conviction as to whether the plan sufficiently provides for a continu- ing supply of men trained to serve the Nation as physicians, scientists, engineers, technicians, and in other skills which can be acquired only through prolonged training. Such phases are subject to revision in the Ught of expert advice and experience. What the citizen needs most to bear in mind is that the plan is a well-considered effort to provide the Nation with the sol- diera it needs in a manner fairest to all and least likely to dislocate the lives of indi- viduals or society in general. It is hard for most American youths to leave home to serve in the Armed Forces at any age. It ts hard for their parents, girl friends, schools, or employers to seo them go away at any time. But it is imperative henceforth that millions of them go and go regularly. The age being considered is the one at which the going should cause least hardship and the Armed Forces can be pro- vided with the sort of men they most need. The plan is designed to avoid an aristoc- racy of either education or wealth. It en- visages sound defense now and in the future at a price the Nation can afford to pay by providing a beginning rate of pay of $80 a month, Most of the nations of the world have had such systems (with much lower compensation) for many generations. Neu- tral countries such as Switzerland and Sweden require such service of their youth. The world's foremost democracy can ask no less of ite youth in time of peril. [From the New York Herald Tribune of January 12, 1961) No Cxuear SOLUTION This country at last seems on the point of adopting a sound and senatble draft policy, The propasal set forth in Washington by Secretary of Defense George C. Marshall for 4 draft of 450,000 18-year-olds not only offers an effective means of meeting our present military requirements, it alzo provides a solid basis for a continuing system of service which outside pressures may force this country to retain for many years to come. The prospect of sending all our young men into the armed services is essentially 20 re- pugnant to American hopes and ideals that we have deferred confronting it until the last possible moment. Homes which 10 years ago sent their children into un{form-—for the last time, they hoped—are once again oalied upon to undergo pain and sacrifice, Secretary Marahall himself summarized the situation succinctly when he said: “I do not present it as a cheap solution, but there is no cheap or easy solution to our present se curity problems.” Once we accept this hard fact, there is nothing left to do but see to it that the draft syatem is adequate, equi- table, and honest. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The new Marshall plan meets all these re- quirements, It largely followa the recom- mendations set forth by the Committee on the Present Danger, headed by President James’ B, Conent, of Harvard Untversity. Service is to be univereal. Provision is made for deferment of those research workers and sotentists currently working on vital proj- ects. Interference with education is held to the minimunr commensurate with establish- ment of an army well fortified in man power and brain power. This means that students now in college will be able to complete their academic year: that up to 60,000 men in service can be sent to college for special training; that 75,000 men a year can be de- ferred for scientific studies after first under- going a 4-month basic military training course, Even these arrangements will make things difficult for many educational inati- tutions, particularly the smaller colleges, but this simply is one more adjustment that will have to be added to a steadily growing list which all Americans are being called upon to make. Speedy enactment of the Marshall propo- sals into law will constitute a key victory in our struggle for survival. Like all victories, it demands a heavy price, but there is no alternative to paying it. Addresses at Reception of the Demo- cratic National Committee EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ABRAHAM J. MULTER OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. MULTER. Mr. Speaker, on Jan- uary 11, 1951, the Democratic National Committee gave a reception at the Shoreham Hotel to the Democratic Members of Congress. The guests of honor were President Harry S. Truman, Vice President Alben W. Barkicy, and our own genial and highly respected Speaker, Sam Rayburn. Our national chairman, William M. Boyle, Jr., presided. I am pleased to place in the Con- GRESSIONAL Recorp their remarks on that occasion. I commend them to the at- tention of all: Chairman Boyte. First on behalf of the Democratic National Committee and for myself personally I wish to express our deep- est appreciation for your attendance here to- night, We are here tonight as Democrats to honor and to show by our presence here that we revere and back with our minds and our full strength, and our loyalty, three great Americans, three of the greatest Ameri- cans of our times, three of the greatest Americans of all times—the President of the United States, the Vice President, and the Speaker of the House. ‘ This great gathering tonight of the leader- ship of the Democratic Party, of the Mem- bers of the House of Representatives, the United States Senate, members of the Crbi- net, heads of the Government departments, shows to the world and to the United States a determined effort on the part of the Demo- cratic Party to band together, to bring to America the security that she needs now In this time of stress, Today we are Americans before we belong to any political party. For the Government to function we must have a strong, vigorous party behind the Adminis- tration in power to make it effective. You by your nce here tonight indicate that backing t 18 sO necessary for the
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD President to be able to function in the ex- ecutive department properly and algo to back up the leadership that you have under Vice President BagKLEY, ERNEST MCFARLAND, and LyNnvon JoHNsON in the Senate, Speaker Ray~ BURN, JOHN McCorMacx, Pexcy Prizst in the House of Representatives, In 1918 two great Americans came to Wash- ington to represent two great States. One of those men went on to become the Vice President of the United States. Ladies and gentlemen, Vice President of the United States BaRKLer: Vice President BARKLEY, Mr. President, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Speaker, and fellow statemen, Bill Boyle was supposed to present the Speak- er at this time and give me an opportunity to answer him. Now he's twisted it around so that Sam can take my measure. And I want to say to you, Sam, in advance that I’m going to be awfully easy on you. Now I'm going to say just a word more or less seriously. I deeply appreciate the com~- pliment paid to Sam Raysurn and me by the chairman when he gaid that in 1913 two great statesmen arrived in Washington—one of them from Texas and the other one from Kentucky. That was our opinion of ourselves when we arrived, and neither of us has had any occasion to change our viewpoint since. Well, it’s been a great pleasure for me to parallel! Sam RaysurNn here for the last 38 years. I dare say that no two men in the history of Congress ever had such parallel careers and Sam and I have had. We came in at the same time, were sworn in on the same day, were assigned to the same com- mitte—Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce—and it being a major committee we could only have that one place. I out- ranked him because my name began with B and his with R, and then when I got off of the committee and went to the Senate, that made him ranking member. I got out of his way. He quit tramping on my heels—I thought for good. Well, he became chairman when the Democrats came into control of the committee. He became the majority leader of the House and I became majority leader of the Senate, and we worked together— when we were Members of the House to- gether in the Wlison administration—so that Sam and I arrived at the same time, went on the same committee, cooperated closely during our membership in the House, which was 14 years in my case and has been 88 years in his. During my period in the Senate we were majority leaders of the two respective bodies at the same time under 4 Democratic administration, fighting for the same things. And now he is the Speaker of the House of Representatives and on the goth of January will have been Speaker longer than any other man in the history of the country. And I am the Presiding Officer of the Senate of the United States. I dare say that no two men who ever came to Con- gress in the history of the country have parallel records of that sort. I’m very happy and very proud of my association with the Speaker of the House of Representatives, not only as Speaker but as just plain old Sam Raysurn as he was when he came here from Texas in 1913. I’m not only proud of our association legislatively but proud of our friendship, our intimacy during all those years. We have pretty much thought alike and worked alike and acted alike in our approach to and our efforts to solve the tre- mendous probiems that have faced this coun- try since the 4th of March 1913. Now, when he and I came here, I dare say that neither of us could have foreseen that this country would have faced and would be facing today the great problems that con~ front our people and confront the world. We used to debate questions of domestic policy 50 years ago. I remember as a school- boy in s debating society debating the ques- tion over and over again, “Resolved that the signs of the times point to the downfall of the Republic.” Politicians used to come to the courthouse in the town where I lived back in that time and discuss the downfall of this Republic because of the maldistribu- tlon of wealth and because of the growing riches of some people and the growing pov- erty of others and so on, Well, since those days we have progressed in every sense of the word, in wealth and in population, and in power, in production, in the enjoyment of the things that make life worth while. And notwithstanding the assertions some- times made by the critics that we are losing or have lost our liberties, or some of them, I'd say that in view of the complexity of our lives, the interdependence of all of our people upon all of the rest—the interdependence of every community on every other communty and every State on every other State and every group on every other group, we are en- joying more liberty today in the real sense of the world than we enjoyed 50 years ago, When we talked 60 years ago in our schools and colleges about signs of the times indi- cating the downfall of the Republic, which was the subject for debate, we were talking about internal conditions. We were not talk. ing about any danger that threatened us from without. There wasn’t any. But now, we are subject to a danger but it is not a domestic danger. It’s a danger that threat- ens us from without. It’s one that in those days we didn’t imagine could ever exist and it's one that Sam Rarsurn and I did not by any stretch of the imagination foresee, when 88 years ago we entered the House of Rep- resentatives as young, green, awkward Mem. bers from our States. But we are threatened, my friends, by a greater danger than any that was ever con- * cocted by any debating society on our do~ mestic issues, or any accumulation of wealth in our country. We're threatened now by a danger that Js more sinister, more powerful, and more determined—a danger that in order that we may avert it will require the sacifice, the determination, the toll, and the unity of our people. As the President said in his message the other day, he didn't ask for unanimity— you can’t ask 150,000,000 people to think the same thing about everything—but they may think different things about different ques- tions that arise in this country. But there is only one thing they can think in regard to the danger that faces this country now, from without, and it faces {t on both sides of the ocean, And that ts the determination of our peo- ple and of all the free peoples of the world, under our leadership, that these liberties which we have enjoyed and our forefathers won for us and handed down to us, and which we desire to hand down to our chil« dren and their children for a thousand years, these liberties cannot afford to be allowed to go down in this great world-wide contest. I have been tn the countries where these lib- erties have been destroyed. I have within 2 years been in all the tron-curtain countries, except Yugoslavia and Russia. I saw what had happened and what is now happening in Poland, in Ozechoslovakia, in Bulgaria, in Hungary, in Rumanta. . I saw all these liberties—freedom of re- ligion, freedom to educate your children, freedom to own your home, freedom to choose your own occupation, freedom to speak, freedom to have a free press, freedom to worship, freedom to do anything—de- stroyed—not by the will of the people but by their inability to prevent a strong power from without from overwhelming their coun- try and destroying their liberties, That’s the fight that the world js up against, And it is therefore necessary that we give to the world, not merely a semblance, but the reality of unity here among the people of the United States. The unity of purpose among all the free nations and all the peo- ples who want to be free and are not free but who would relish the opportunity in my judgment to help make the fight for freedom. We have been given the leadership of the world, not by any connivance of ours, not A791 by any desire to exercise power, but in the very nature of things, we have been given the scepter of leadership. And that carries with it responsibility. And that carries with it not only a group responsibility among Members of the Congress of the United States but it carries with it individual responsibil- ties among the Members of the Congress of the United States and all public officers and all peopie who believe these things ought to be preserved. Therefore, as we meet in this Highty-sec- ond Congress, facing these dangers, and these grim times, recognizing that if we are not united behind our leader whom the paople chose in a free election in 1948, 1f by any cir~ cumstances we are divided among ourselves, ‘we will infinitely damage our own cause, and our own prestige in the world. We will have difficulties—we'll have sad days probably before the thing is over, in the long run. But we must stand together and we must stand behind our authorized spokesman, the President of the United States, and those whom he has chosen or will choose to help him work out these ter- rific problems that face our country and face the world. I didn't intend to say all that when I got up here but I just had it in me and I wanted to do it. You see as Vice President, I don't get much chance any more to make a speech. I’m happy to be here, to be able to see so many Members of the House and the Senate and to he in this trio so beautifully complimented a while ago by Bill Boyle. Chairman Bovrte. Thank you, Mr. Vice President. I think the Speaker used some strong minded mental telepathy on me 80 he would speak last, after the Vice President tonight. So, ladies and gentlemen, I have the honor to present to you the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Sam RayBuRN. Speaker RAYBURN, Mr, President, Mr. Vice President, Mr. Boyle, my fellow countrymen, and Democrats. I don’t know whether Bill Boyle intended to be exceedingly kind to me this evening or not, but he was. Two years ago I was called on first, and I started out with the year 1913 and talked about Barg.uey slightly, or slightingly, and he told how I was tramping on his heels and he finally had to get out of the way. And I had a lot of fun out of him, I thought, and then he came on, and did he do a job on me. It was gruesomely funny—funny to him—but I want to say this in all seriousness, our 4880- ciation for 38 years has been fine. He has been as kind to me as anyone could be and frankly, there has never been any jealousy between Barkley and me. I chose to tread one path and he chose to tread another. I think he’s pretty well satisfied at this turn in the road that he's reached. And by his getting out of my way several years ago I achieved the ambition of my life, and that was to be the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives. And on the 30th of this month I will have achieved another distinction, and that is to have ser“ed longer as Speaker of the House of Representatives than any other man in the history of this Republic. That's enough, I am one man in public life who's satis- fled, who has achieved every ambition of his youth. And so Iam glad. But I want to say this about the Vice President of the United Btates. In my opinion, he ts the greatest public speaker in America today. And he is one of the great good men that this country has produced. And, Mr, President, it's mighty fine for you to rome here and associate with us this evening. We know that you're glad to come, because you're one sian that station and position does not change. No man that station or position changes is big enough for the position that he changes to. And so I’m giad to be here, Mr. President, Mr. Vice President, Mr. Boyle, and with you, and meet and greet my associates in the House of Representatives, and I think, Mr. Presi- dent, that most of the Senators that I greet
A792 here this evening graduated from our school over in the House of Representatives. I’m glad to be an American tonight, as I've been glad to be every day of my life. I’m glad to be a Democrat tonight, aa I've heen. glad to be one every day of my life, You know, we've been accused of a lot of things, and as the Vice President so well said, there have been moaners and groaners from Jeffer- son to now; thet at every step in progress some people sat back and sald, “You're de~ stroying the liberties of the people.” I. don't know of a single so-called liberty in all of my lifetime that I have given up that haen't benefited me. I own some cotton acres down in Texas. I know if they let me plant all the acres that I want to plant in cotton and all of my neighbors in that State and in the other States that produce cotton, we'd have ao much cotton that we'd return to Hoover days and 41%4-cent cotton. I'd rather plant a third as much cotton and get three times as much for that third of cotton than I used to get for 100 percent of cotton. I’m better off, And they want to tell us that we've spent the country into bankruptcy. When we came into power in 1933 the national income of the United States was the paltry sum of $39,000,000,000. Fourteen million people were unemployed. If the breadwinner in the family had a wife and one child—that made 42,000,000 Americans that had no buying power, And farmers—33,000,000 of us—who were selling the price of our product so far below the cost of production that our buying power had been reduced to the very vanish- ing point, 75,000,000 Americans that had no buying power or practically none. We started out on a program of putting people to work, giving them a buying power, and before the war our income had been raised from thirty-nine billions a year to nearly ninety billions. Then the war came on and our income went up and up and up. And the moaners and the groaners said there'd never been a war that we didn’t have & depression after. Our national income would go down and down and down. It would have unlesa there had been some statesman- ship employed, unless there had been some vision and some planning. But 1946 wasn't a war year. And our na- tional income mounted to @176,000,000,000. Nineteen forty-seven wasn't & war year and our national tncome went to more than $200,000,000,000. Nineteen forty-eight was not a war year, but it was In the aftermath of the war and our income went to above $220,000,000,000. In 1950 I understand our income will run somewhere from $250,000,- 000,000 to $280,000,000,000. That's how this socialistic, this communistic, Democratic Party has spent the United States into bankruptcy. Instead of 14,000,000 unemployed, more than 62,500,000 people are employed at good wages, at decent hours, and under decent working conditions. This is the way we have destroyed the liberties of the people. This is the way we've spent the country into bank- ruptcy. Our liberties have been destroyed? Do you know how free every man, woman, and child in America ig? In this land of de- mocracy everybody can say what they want to say, write what they want to write, speak what they want to speak as long as in the doing of that we do not take away from the other fellow the same rights, the same pre- Trogatives, and the same privileges to exercise the same rights. That’s how free we are. That's how our democracy has been de- stroyed. That's how we've been spent into bankruptcy, We live in the most dangerous time—as I said to my colleagues in the House of Rep- resentatives the other day—that in my opinion any man or woman or child living in the United States of America today—has ever known. The time has come when we must Speak and act together in the face of these dangers if we are to retain this matchless and marvelous liberty, and these great free- domes that we enjoy today. Under the President's leadership America has been challenged. We must under his leadership lead this world, if it's to be a fit place for any people to live in decency. And so I care not and I've said this to audiences from one end of the country to the other, I care not whether people love or hate Harry Truman. He is our President in these terrible times and he will be until January 20, 1958, at least, He is our leader or we have none. He is the leader of the democracies of the world or the democracies of the world have no leader. What are we going to do about it? Are we with carping criticlam going to try to tear down that leadership: Democrats, Republi- cans or what not, jet me warn you, again we must speak and we must act together or the civilization that our fathers knew, that we know, may vanish from the face of the earth. 8o let’s join under the leadership that we have, that is grand, I know Harry Truman as not many of you do. For 10 of the 11 years he was in the Senate of the United States he and I were warm personal friends. When he moved into the Vice Presidency, as head of the Senate, while I was Speaker and the titular head of the other body, we were friends. I know his great heart; I know that every impulse of his being is to serve his day and generation well. And if we, in our positions, charged with responsibility, will stand with him, then we will one day look forward to the sunshine of @ better day, of peace in the world that every good man and every good woman in the United States and throughout the world is praying for tonight. Then we may do our job in our day and generation as our fathers did 163 years ago when they brought forth in Philadelphia from May until September that great charter known as the Constitu- tion of the United States—representative democracy where the people spoke, where they chose their President each ¢ years; their representatives in the Senate each 6 years, and their Representatives in the House each 2 years, a responsive Government. Nobody's been smart enough yet to change that fundamental. Our fundamentals are the same as they were in 1787 and thank God I believe we have men and women in America today to preserve those funda- mentals, and pass them on to the genera- tions that are to come after us. Mr. President, I greet you as our leader, I’m proud to follow you. Your announce- ment in the House of Representatives the other day was one of the greatest that it has ever been my privilege to listen to. You chartered our course and I am pleased to follow. Chairman Boris. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, And now, ladies and gentlemen, the Presi- dent of the United States. President Tauman. Thank you very much, I would like to know what chance e country- man from Missouri has after “that” and “that” (pointing to Vice President Barkiry and Speaker Sam Raysvuan). I heard the Vice President say that he and Sam considered themselves statesmen when they came into the Congress in 1918. I have an old definition for q statesman, a beet old one: A statesman is a dead politi«~ ofan, I have no desire yet to be in that class. 2 don't want to see my friend the Vice President or my friend the Speaker in that class, either. But they are living states- men, They have done a job for their coun- try that is unequaled in its history, As President of the United States, I am one of the luckiest of the Presidents to have a Vice President and a Speaker such eas Mr. Barney and Mr. Rayvsuam. There have becn Vice Presidents and Vice Presidente, and APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD there have been Speakers and Speakers, but I don't think there has ever been a team as cloge togther and es anxious to do the country the best job possible as is now pre- aiding over the £enate and presiding over the House of Representatives. T have just received an engraving of 4 pic- ture presented to Henry Clay in 1821, and they were presenting that picture to Henry Clay on account of the fact that he had suc- ceeded tn having # resolution passed in the House of Representatives, authorizing the then President of the United States to rec- ognize the provinces of Bouth America, when in his judgment they had become independ- ant republics. Just a short time before that, M>. Clay had been responsible for the Mis-. sourt Compromise which made Missourl a State along with Maine on a compromise basis—Maine got in first, Missouri almost never did. But in 1850 Mr. Clay agreed to another compromise, which in the middle fifties he changed into the Kansas-Nebraskn bill, and brought on the War Between the States. In golng over these various things, and the people who have occupied these posi-« tions, you will remember that Andrew Jack- so2 hac about as much trouble as any Presi- dent that was ever in office. He had a Vice President from South Carolina, and his name was Calhoun, And when Jackson was on his deathbed, someone asked him what were tho two things he had left undone that he wished he had done while he was President; and he said one was that he should have hanged John ©, Calhoun and shot Henry Clay. Well now, there is no such parallel here. But you know, the Presidents of the United, Btates who have apparently had the most trouble, and who have heen most viciously attacked in the public print., are those whom Ww? Class as the great Presidents. There never Wis any man as bitterly attacked as George Washington. You should go down to the Library of Congress some time and get cut the papers from New York and New Orleans, and other places around all over the country, and read the things that were said about George Washington. They were terrific and terrible. The same thing was said about Jefferson. Of course, nobody has been as bitterly attacked as old Jackson was, and he didn't care—and neither do I. And, one of the most misrepresented Presi- Genta in the public prints was Abraham Lin« coln. We went to Gettysburg one time, and made about a four-paragraph speech. And there was a gentleman there who spoke for 2 hours, and I’ll bet there is hardly a man here who can name who thet gentleman was who was the main speaker at the celebration. On that day, when Lincoln made that Zamous speech, old Horace Greeley, and Dana and Medill in Chicago, said Lincoln had disgraced the country by the terrible speech he made on that day. There isn’t ® man here who has not at one time or another memorised that Gettysburg Address. Til bet you can't say a word of what the other gentieman said, and I'l. bet you can't name him—Edward Everett. Well, another man who was viclously mis treated while he was President was Grover Cleveland. You should read some of the things they said about Grover while he wag President of the United States. And they hounded Wilson to his grave. But those men made the {mpression on the country that has made the country great, i don’t think I can make any such impres- sion, but I want to aay to you that I have the responsibitity which belongs to the Presi- dent of the United States. I am exercising that responsibility to the best of my ability, and I axpect to do the very best I can for the United States of America, and for the world. That's all I can do.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD In order to accomplish the purpose which I think Almighty God intended this country to carry out, we must, as the Government of the United States—and you are just as much a part of it as Iam, and you are elected for that purpose—we must work together, not only for the welfare of the United States itself, but for the welfare of the whole world. Since Mr. Raypurn and Mr. Barker ha've deemed it wise to go back into history, I am going back a little further than they did and draw analogies to the situation we face now. All of you remember what happened to Xerxes when he attempted to pulverize the Greek republics. You all remember what a terrible time the Roman republic had when Hannibal was winning victories for 21 years in Italy. I don’t know whether you remem- ber it, but if tt had not been for Charles Martel there would have been no Christian Europe. He prevented the downfall of Chris- tian Europe at Tours. Then along about 600 years after that, there was a certain Mon- gol—and we are troubled with Mongols right now—who got as far west as Vienna; but he was stopped at Vienna and never got any fur- ther. The Christian world survived. We are faced now with those people who believe in the individual, and who believe in a moral code based on the Sermon on the Mount—which is the best exposition of what @ man ought to be that has ever been enunci- ated; and on the other side we are faced with those people who do not believe in a moral code, who only make commitments to bre..k them. They are—I can’t say they are im- moral, because that has a definite meaning in our language—but they sare unmoral. They believe in the material things and not the spiritual. Now this country, and the free countries of Europe and Asia, must band together to make an effort to put morals above materials. That’s all I am striving for. I want peace in the world. But I don’t want peace at any price, I want peace with freedom and justice. I don't think there 1s a citizen in this country of ours who does not bélieve that, if he has been raised right—had the right sort of mother, and most of us have. I hope—I sincerely hope—that this great organization, the Congress of the United States, will remember that honor and jus- tice are greater for the welfare of your chile dren and mine—and I hope my grandchil. dren—~than fat and ease. Resistance to Communism EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ROBERT C. HENDRICKSON OF NEW JERSEY IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 15 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. HENDRICKSON. Mr. President, on January 28 the New York Times pub- lished a letter to its editor, written by Josiah E. DuBois, Jr., Esq., under the caption “To resist communism.” Mr. DuBois, a prominent member of the New Jersey bar, was raised in my own community, so I know something of his talents and his ability. Because he treats in this letter with a vital subject upon which he is well quali- fled to speak, as the letter itself will in- dicate, I hope that the Members of the Senate will make appropriate use of his able counsel and advice. To this end I ask unanimous consent that the entire article be printed in the Appendix of the REcorp, There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: To Resist CoMMUNISM—PoLICY MEETING ASPIRATIONS AND NEEDS OF PEOPLES Urcrp (The writer of the following letter, formerly general counsel to the War Refugee Board and chief prosecutor of the I. G. Farben trials, was counsel to Ambassador Edwin W. Pauley, whom he accompanied on reparations missions to Germany and the Far East) CAMDEN, N. J., January 25, 1951. To the Evrror oF THE NEW YorK TIMES: During the last 5 years we have lost one- half of Europe and a large part of Asia, Why? It 1s the judgment of this writer that the reason lies in large measure in our own fail- ures and not in the affirmative successes of the other side, The failures of our statesmen in the diplo- matic skirmishes of the last year are merely symbolic of more fundamental failures in our foreign policy during the last 5 years, The pattern of our actions in both Asia and Europe during this period demonstrates a complete unawareness on the part of our leaders of what has been actually occurring in these parts of the world during the last generation; and a concomitant fallure to un- derstand the wishes, hopes, and dreams of the over 1,000,000,000 people living in those parts of the world. STRANGLED ECONOMIES Before the end of World War II the peoples of China, Korea, and the Philippines had suffered for years under the Japanese New Order for Asia. The Japanese industrial cartels commonly known as the Zaibatsu had obtained a stranglehold over the economies of China and Korea and the Japanese had for a long time drained the life-blood of the economies of these countries. All of our talk and our declarations at the end of World War II were to the effect that we would proceed to wipe out the domina- tion of Asia by the Japanese and would re- habilitate and strengthen China, Korea, and other Astatic countries. In December 1945, I worked in Japan on a program which was submitted to President Truman whereby the great excessive indus- trial capacity built up in Japan for war pur- poses and for conquest would be distributed as quickly as possible to other countries in the Far East, particularly China, Korea, and the Philtppines. This program, combined with other programs, was designed to rebulld the economic strength of China, Korea, and the other far eastern countries as quickly as possible, It was the purpose of these pro- grams to wipe out the domination of these countries by Japan, particularly the eco- nomic domination of China and Korea by the Japanese industrialists, The program submitted to President Tru- man by Ambassador Edwin Pauley specifi- cally warned that unless China was strength- ened economically and strengthened quickly China might well fall to the Communists, The President and our State Department issued declarations of policy in line with these recommended programs, specifically emphasizing this country’s strengthen China, Korea and other areas of Asia. DEPARTURE FROM PROGRAM Instead of following this program designed to rebuild China, Korea and the Far East generally as quickly as possible, our Govern- ment concentrated on keeping and rebuild- ing Japan as the industrial heart of the Far East. We permitted the Japanese cartelists desire to’ A793 to continue to maintain a stranglehold on certain key industries in the Far East vital to the well-being of China and South Korea. In China we formally backed Chiang Kal- shek. In South Korea, Syngman Rhee and a few large land owners and cotton millers, former collaborators with the Japanese and their New Order, became the leaders of the Korean people with our blessing. In Indo- china we gave ald to the French-backed Bao Dai. Should we be surprised that we have lost large parts of Asia? In Europe a similar pattern of talk and declarations of policy was the order of the day in 1045. As a member of the American delegation to the Potsdam Oonference in July 1945, I saw this Government formally endorse a program designed to insure that Germany would no longer be the dominant power in Europe. The program agreed upon at Potsdam was designed to insure the an- nounced purpose of this Government to give priority to the rebuilding of Germany’s vice tims over the rebuilding of Germany itself, In the words of our leaders in 1945, “Last time we rebuilt Germany. This time any re- building that is done will be applied to Germany's victims.” AGREEMENT ON GERMANY Actually there was no real meeting of minds at Potsdam, and the agreement which was eventually signed was worth no more than the paper it was written on. No sooner was the ink dry on the Potsdam agreement than both sides, the east and the west, began playing the old game of power politics and began bidding for the favor of Germany, paying only such attention to the actual provisions of the Potsdam agreement as seemed in their own best interests at the time. This policy of bidding for the favor of Germany reached its initial climax in 1946. Our policy in Germany has justifiably in- creased the fear of the average European to the point where he feels insecure. This feel- ing of insecurity has played into the hands of the Russians and their stooges since April 1945. I was in Czechoslovakia twice during 1947——before the Russians took over. The Czech people to whom I talked were gravely disturbed about our policy in Germany. They emphasized the feeling of insecurity which it gave to the Czechs and how this fact played into the hands of the Commu- nists. I have been in France several times since the war and can vouch for the fact that, if Iam any judge at all, the average Frenchman has the same feeling. I do not condone in any way the Russian rape of Czechoslovakia, It was nothing short of criminal aggression. However, I do believe that the will of the Czech people to resist such criminal aggression was greatly lessened, and the ability of the Russians to conquer Czechoslovakia from the inside was greatly strengthened, by the fact that our policy in Germany had caused such a feeling of inse- curity among the Czech people. Even in the case of Poland it is not at all clear to me that the Poles embrace Russia with open arms. In fact, the reverse is prob- ably true. But our policy in Germany, as I see it, leaves them no choice, The gigantic struggle being waged today for the hearts and souls of men will be won by deeds, not by words. The Voice of Amer- ica must sound rather weak to the peoples of Asia and Europe who are forced by the actions of America to face the possibility of reliving the dark area before the end of World War IT or choosing communism, The will of these peoples to resist communism 1s seriously weakened by our actions in fac- ing them with such a black choice as the only alternative. We cannot afford to turn the clock back to the period preceding the end of World War I, The world cannot sur- vive its repetition, Jostan E. DuBorw, Jr.
A794 Growing of Guayule in the United States EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LYNDON B. JOHNSON or TEXAS IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 15 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi- dent, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Rrcorp, a statement I recently made to the press regarding the growing of guayule in the United States. There being no objection, the state- ment was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: The first step has been taken tn what might woll make possible the growing of natural rubber within the United States, The Department of Agriculture has agreed to undertake a project for growing guayule, a@ desert shrub successfully grown in the Southwest, and from which natural rubber may be obtained. Additionally, the program contemplates expanding the production of guayule seed In California, where the shrub flowers and seeds rapidly. More than 90 percent of the world’s supply of natural rubber is now grown in the Far East. This dangerous position of our source of supply has been a paramount concern of the Senate Armed Services Preparedness Subcommittee since it was formed. If the eastern nations crumble and communism chokes off our supply of natural rubber, the industrial might of this Nation would have its muscles slashed. In ite published reports the preparedness subcommittee has called attention to the perilous shortages. The committee's first report called for reactivation of the synthetic rubber program, and since that time plants have been reactivated which will add about 400 thousand long tons to our present supply of synthetic rubber. The committee in that initial report also urged an immediate study of the possibilites of growing rubber in the United States. The necessary durability of the rubber needed for many products can be assured only by an adequate blending of the natural and synthetic products. We need all the natural rubber we can get. This program which the Department of Agriculture has undertaken bears promise of getting that supply. Not tomorrow, since only 1,600 acres in the Winter Garden area of Texas will be devoted to the first seedlings. But today’s problems would not be with us had we been sufficiently farsighted yesterday. We are looking to the future—we are looking at the long range picture when it is not beyond reason that all of the eastern sources of supply could be cut off. The 1,600 acres for the nursery seedling program will at first require irrigation to provide seedlings, transplanting on dry land areas which will be selected west and south of San Antonio, Tex. Transplanting could begin this fall and if the world situation requires it, funds may be requested to put about 50,000 acres of dry land into cultiva- tion. The Department of Agriculture proposes to contract with private individuals, using existing farm equipment to the greatest ex- tent possible. Small acreages will be used in order to experiment with diversified grow- ing conditions and to give regional farmers experience in guayule cultivation. Areas selected for seedling nurseries are in the Texas counties of Zavala, Maverick, Dimmit, and Pecos and possibly in Reeves County. The Texas seedling will be under the direction of the Production and Market- ing Administration, with the various agen- cies of the Department of Agriculture sup~ plying needed services, Control Order Disrupts Marketing of Cotton EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. E. C. GATHINGS OF ARKANSAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. GATHINGS. Mr. Speaker, when the Director of Price Stabilization Grafted general ceiling price regulations, it had the effect of closing every cotton exchange in the Nation. Cotton mills, cotton merchants, and others, who have at all times used the exchange to hedge with their sales or their purchases, are powerless to remove or place a hedge, a necessity in their regular business oper- ations. The exchanges have long been performing such hedging operations. All cotton interests are united in their efforts to modify this order, which freezes the price of cotton at all levels except that of the producer. The pro- ducer is interested in having the order rescinded, since it has the effect of de- pressing the price of cotton at a time when production costs are mounting. Labor costs are expected to be higher during 1951. Farm machinery prices have increased appreciably in the past few months, as well as the price of fer- tilizers and insecticides. It all adds up to a much shorter production of vitally needed cotton for the year 1951. The Government has asked the farm- er to increase his acreage from approxi- mately twenty million acres to twenty- eight or thirty million acres in order to produce a 16,000,000-bale crop. Un- less a modification of this ruling is made before the planting season, a much smaller acreage than is proposed will be planted this year. I do not recall any action or lack of action on the part of the Federal Gov- ernment that has created such wide- spread unrest among the people of the midsouth area as this general price con- trol order has. Hundreds of telegrams have poured into the offices of the Sen- ators and Representatives, urging the reopening of the cotton exchanges and & modification of the order. It would be much simpler and more plausible to place ceilings on cotton goods rather than to attempt to control the price of raw cotton, as there are hundreds of various grades and staples of cotton which would make it very diffi- cult to successfully operate a program of this kind. During World War 1 it was a simple matter to place ceilings on manufactured cotton goods. The ex- perience gained in applying ceilings on the finished product could readily be utilized at this time. Only a few em- ployees would be required to do this job. It would be disastrous if regulations of the Office of Price Stabilization should APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD result in the direct cause of the Nation’s lasing the increased production of cot- ton which is so badly needed this year. To get the large production this year is the only answer to the whole problem. Abundant production of any commodity is anti-inflationary and sets to work the time-honored law of supply and demand. The cotton farmer wants to know at an early date what action will be taken in connection with this dilemma, as he is now engaged in preparations for the crop year 1951. It is necessary that he have absolute assurances from his Gov- ernment that he will not only have ade- quate farm labor for cultivating and harvesting his crop, but also the neces- sary machinery, fertilizer, insecticide, and most of all a good price. Justice Department: Prosecutor and Judge EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LAWRENCE H. SMITH © OF WISCONSIN IN THE "“IOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 8, 1951 Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my re- marks, I am including an article that appeared in the Barrons on February 12 entitled “Whither Justice?’’ It points out the predicament of the Justice De- partment in trying to be on all sides of all questions. It is nothing short of a fantastic position. The article follows: WHITHER JUsTICE?—THE DEpARTMEN’T'S PREDICAMENT Pornts AN IssuE About 2 years ago the Department of Jus- tice filed a civil antitrust suit seeking the dissolution of the Big Four meat packers— Armour, Swift, Cudahy, and Wilson. The sult charged these firms with suppressing competition in the sale of meat and meat products by controlling the supply, by adopt- ing uniform cost formulas, and by quoting identical prices, Last week the same Department of Jus- tice took upon itself the legal enforcement of price control. One of the first orders of the Office of Price Stabilization Justice will have to enforce concerns meat, The order establishes quotas limiting meat processors to slaughtering the same percentage of the total kill as they did In 1950. The idea is to combat black markets in meat by “keep- ing profiteering newoomers out of the busi- ness.” Put riore bluntly the Department of Justice will now try to enforce on the meat tndustry the very practices which it claimed the big four were illegally using back in 1048. Instead of trying to expand competi- tion in this field by letting new slaughterers into the business, the Department will try to limit competition by keeping them out and maintaining the status quo. THE DOG CATCHER This ts a strange about-face for the Jus- tice Department to have to make. If it were confined to the case of meat, one might let it go without comment. But the case of meat is only indicative of a larger reversal. The fact is that the Justice Department, for GO years the guardian of the spirit of the Sherman Act, will now play dog-catcher for Mosars. DiSelie and Johnston. And in the process one cannot doubt that a great Amer- iean tradition as well as a great institution find themselves in jeopardy.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The situation is the more ominous, as well as the more ironic, because it appears that Justice sought out its new role. In the last war the enforcement of price control was handled by the OPA—a good precedent since it at least emphasized that price control would be temporary. The Defense Act of 1950 is somewhat ambiguous on the ques- tion of enforcement. It states in one sec- tion that all litigation arising out of the Act shall be handled by the Attorney Gen- eral. But another section states that agen- cles created under the Act cannot delegate authority to other agencies and departments, Had Attorney General McGrath been anx- fous to keep his Department out of the whole price control imbroglio, he might well have urged the administration to go back to Con- gress for clarification on what the Defense Act meant, or at least let the matter be settled in the courts. But Mr. McGrath, like Mr. DiSalle himself, is a man in a hurry. He was apparently delighted when the Presi- dent ruled Justice should take on the job of enforcement, and if now he burns his fingers in trying to hold down the vibrating price lid, he will have only himself to thank, PITY ANTITRUST Meanwhile, our sympathy goes out in par- ticular to Mr. McGrath’s Heutenant, Mr. H, Graham Morrison, head of the department's antitrust division, who only a few weeks ago in a speech before the New York Bar Association, evidenced considerable enthu- slasm for his job. It was Mr. Morrison's contention then that, while the war effort might present his division with some special problems, it would still have plenty to do. Antitrust, according to Mr. Morrison, would press to see that small business got its due share of war orders. It would work for the dispersion of industry not only in the name of defense, but to foster competition. Above all, it would not, except in rare cases, give up any of its pending suits. Said the enthusiastic Mr. Morrison: “Many of the cases now pending and many of those which will be filed will substantially aid our war effort. For example, cases involving price-fixing, limitation of production, with- holding from the market, unauthorized mar- ket, and customer allocation.” We wonder how Mr. Morrison feels about those brave words today. For, as the case of meat indicates, the Department of Jus- tice as agency for the price stabilizers must now be on the side of both price-fixing and market allocation. The Department may talk about warring on monopoly and re- straint of trade, but this war has little meaning where prices are frozen, The es- sence of free enterprise is the free market, where prices are allowed to fluctuate up or down and where capital, materials and man- power, respond to such fluctuation. Against this, Mr. DiSalle and Mr. Johnston are com- mitted for the duration. And if the Justice Department takes on not only the enforce~ ment of price ceilings, but also some future controlled materials plan, its dilemma will be the more pronounced. . That dilemma, of course, goes beyond the Department of Justice. While the Depart- ment was foolhardy in plunging into the rice-control mess, the mess itself derives From trying to wrap up the economy in a straitjacket of direct controls, If this sac- rifice of enterprise were really necessary in the cause of rearming America, this publi. cation would be the first to argue it should be made. Given the world situation, as Mr. Hoover himself pointed out last week, the United States must rearm, and we shall not save the enterprise system by abandoning that attempt and retreating into a new form of isolationism. TIME FOR CHANGE But does the present rearmament effort really need the battery of direct controls which Washington is imposing? On that point we remaifi unconvinced. Surely, as Jong as the administration fails to cut down on nonessential spending, and continues tecklessly to inflate credit, the case for di- rect controls remains highly dubious and the case for a decent monetary and fiscal policy gains ground. If the fix in which the Justice Department now finds itself dramatizes the need for a reversal of Wash- ington’s domestic policies, it may still yield a certain amount of good. For it may hasten the day when the United States really at- tempts to maintain its flexible and dynamic economy while at the same time playing out its role as a world power. True Patriotism EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JACK Z. ANDERSON OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. ANDERSON of California. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my re- marks in the Recorp, I am including a thoughtful and encouraging letter re- cently circulated by the HQZ Co. in San Jose, Calif, If more industries would adopt the attitude followed by this particular or- ganization, this country would be a bet- ter place in which to live. I commend this communication to the attention of my colleagues: Wuy Tuere Wii Bre No Price INCREASE IN HQZ Propucts HQZ Co., San Jose, Calif. Our costs are climbing too—just like yours and everyone else’s. We could justify a re- tail price increase very easily before any ac- countant—and without a price increase we're going to have to watch every penny. However, there will be no change in HQZ products, HQZ packages, or HQZ prices. First, we think any further move toward in- flation is un-American. Second, we know the consumer is extremely sensitive to and resentful of climbing prices. Third, even if the consumer were to accept the price in- crease, the tax collector would relieve us of a good share of it anyway, so we have de- cided to hold the line, counting on hard work and added volume to provide the neces- sary revenues. We think that is the Amert- can way, and if this sounds like flag waving, perhaps you will agree, there 1s considerable room for idealism in America today. This policy of voluntary price restraint gives HQ@Z products a very favorable position in your competitive consumer picture. Self- merchandising stores report a strong con- sumer response, with accelerated purchases of HQZ hair of] and HQZ castile shampoo. It looks like a buying trend is on the way which will make continuation of our price policy possible through added volume. When a@ merchant gets a chance to ride a healthy trend, if he is wise, he does all he can to en- courage it and take full advantage of its benefits. In the present case, this is partic- ularly gratifying because it is in a good cause for our country in general, and for your customers and neighbors in particular, ‘Won't you do what you legitimately can in the way of display and suggestive selling to promote HQZ sales so we can continue to hold the present price line? Cordially yours, HQZ Distatsvtors, INc., R. W. Conwety, President. A795 Forum of Public Opinion at Sunray, Tex. EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. LYNDON B. JOHNSON oF TEXAS IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 15 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Myr. Presi- dent, on Thursday evening, January 18, 202 citizens of the small town of Sunray, Tex., met together for the purpose of obtaining a cross-section of public opin- ion on national and international prob- lems. I have commended the Sunray citizens for their patriotism and public spirited- ness in conducting this meeting, and in order that the conclusions reached may be available to all Members of Congress, I request permission to have printed in the ConaressionaL Recorp a letter from Mr. W. E. Simpson, chairman of the meeting, and report as to the consensus of local opinion there on a number of vital issues, ‘ Oy There being no objection, the letter and accompanying statement were or- dered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Crry or Sunray, Sunray, Tez., January 23, 1951. Hon. Lynpon JOHNSON, United States Senator, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. Dear Mr. JOHNSON: We sincerely hope that you find time to read the enclosure personally. Too, we should ao much appre- chate an acknowledgment of receipt, if pos- sible, Thursday evening, January 18, 1951, group of 202 voting citizens of this commu- nity met for the purpose of obtaining a cross section of public opinion upon some of the current problems facing our country today, and forwarding the findings to some of our more influential representatives in Washington. Upon the enclosures we list the group reactions which were taken with- put any attempt at swaying anyone's opin- on, Trusting that this communication will be received in the same spirit in which it ts offered, viz: honest patriotism and love for America and anxiety for the welfare of our great country. Very truly yours, W. E. S1mPson, Chairman. Tabulations by: Messrs. John Worst, Hor. ace Tompkins, and Paul Hamby. —— Group OPINIons Poutep at Sunray, TEX., Mass Meztine Herp THURSDAY, JANUARY 18, 1951, FOR DISTRIBUTION TO PUBLIC OFFICIALS In WasHinoton, D, C. Question. Shall we withdraw from Korea? Answer. No; unanimously. Question. Should full-scale-war support be furnished there? Answer, Use only as much of our resources as is necessary. Question. Despite Atlantic Pact Treaty, should the United States of America furnish the major portion of defense aid to indiffer- ent or lukewarm European nations? Answer. No; help only those disposed to help themselves. Question. As appears presently, do you favor the United States of America being made subservient to and its military polictes being dictated by the UNO?
A796 Answer. Positively no. Kick the Commu. nist nations out and get down to business. Question. Should President Truman or any other individual have the authority to com- mit troops and supplies to any foreign coun- try without the sanction of the American Congress? Anewer. Absolutely not. We prefer con- gressional action upon all phases of national defense. Question. Would changing men in key po- sitions, such as Cabinet members, Supreme Court Justices, military and economic ad- visors, etc., weaken or strengthen our defense effort? Answer. Definitely strengthen it. could it be weakened? Question. Do you favor full mobilization of all needed industry as well as manpower at this time? Answer. Mobilize anything and everything needed to protect the United States of America. Question. With full mobilization in effect, would some system of controls upon com- modity prices, wages, and finances be necessary? Answer. Majority of 170 believed that con- trols would be necessary while the minority believed controls should be effected only when needs artse. Question. Should power to control and regulate our defense efforts be retained to Congreas or delegated to individuals or small groups? Answer. Too much power by individuals is extremely dangerous. Let Congress control all phases of American defense. Question. Presently which branch or branches of our Armed Forces should be exe panded most rapidly? Answer. The armed services are a team, but apparently greatest need appears to be naval and Air Corps expansion. Question. Do you believe wages and prices should be frozen during a full-scale war? Answer. Unqualified yes. Question, In case of all-out war, do you favor the Government letting cost-plus con- tracts, with thelr accompanying waste, or limiting war-contract profits to a maximum vate of not to exceed 10 percent? Answer. No nation can long survive the waste of cost-plus deals. Question, What should be done with ad- mitted or proved Communists in the United Btates? Answer. Either executed or removed from any contact with Americans. Question. Do you think that our laws should be changed, if present laws do not cover the cases, so that known Communists eculd be refused job privileges, right to peaceful assembly, freedom to spread their doctrines, or appeal bonds upon conviction of subversive activities and other free rights? Answer. Yes; treat them exactly as we would any other traitors. Question. Should we use the atomic bomb in Korea, now? Answer. No; save it for Russia or any na- tion who attacks America. Queation. Should our Air Force be allowed to attack military targets in Communist China? Answer. Definitely, if Communist planes continue attacking our forces in Korea. Question. Do you consider our watch- wait-prepare defense program sufficient to cope with our present crisis, or should we go into a highly accelerated program of pre- paredness? Answer, Not adequate; get ready and fast. Question. Measures to increase taxes to meet the emergency should or should not be repealed after the emergency ceases to exist. Answer. End immediately upon ending of the emergency. Question. Do you think that saboteurs should be tried and punished as traitors, How even to assessing the death penalty in case sabotage causes someone's death? ; Answer. Unqualified yes. ' Question. Despite various , do you believe Russia has an atomic b equiva- lent to or possibly superior to ours? Answer. No; they might possibly have an fnferlor one, and could eventually develop an effective one. Question. Do you favor drafting 18-year- olds for training and after 6 months’ or 9 months’ training put them into combat? Answer. For training, yes. For combat service, no. Two Schools of Thought EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDGAR A. JONAS OY ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. JONAS. Mr, Speaker, there are presently two schools of thought in the United States on the very vital and im- portant subject relating to our over-all foreign policy. Ex-President Hoover and Senator Roserr A. Tarr seem to speak for that group which is opposed to an all-out program of supplying foreign countries with unlimited troops which necessarily would require extensive drafting of American boys, and which armies are to be equipped and sustained at the expense of the American taxpayer. Both gentlemen subscribe to a policy of providing the United States with a sub- stantial ground force: of materially adding to the strength of our Navy; and that we have at our disposal an air armada second to none in the world. In this respect, their views are di- ametrically opposed to the foreign policy now being exploited by the Truman ad- ministration; conceding that the Presi- dent’s policy advocates strengthening our own military forces, nevertheless it advocates aggressive warfare in China and Korea, and that of sending large troop segments to Europe and Asia as a deterrent to Soviet aggression and at- tack. In the furtherance of this policy, the Truman administration has the sup- port of such officials as Governor Dewey and General Eisenhower. Both of these gentlemen have expressed definite dis- approval of the Hoover-Taft policy. Therefore, an all-out program of aid to foreign nations calls for drafting Ameri- can boys from 18 years up, to be molded into a large armed force in order to pro- vide Europe with an army of occupation ready and fully equipped to instantly meet Soviet aggression and attacks by Russia on her home territory if, and when, that should come to pass. The Hoover-Taft policy is definitely confined to making America an impreg- nable fortress, and opposed to frittering away our American substance in man- power and material by participating and meddling in the many quarrels that now prevail in European and Asiatic sectors. The latter group, for which Dewey and Eisenhower seem to speak, is espous- ing a program that is in full accord with _. the present policy promulgated by Sec- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD retary of Btate Acheson, and obviously by and with the consent of the President of the United States. These men are the mouthpieces for the international- date, and represent the global aggressive policy. In the not-too-distant future the people of the United States will have an opportunity to decide which, policy is ultimately to prevail, The editorial published in the Chicago Herald-Ameri- can on February 11, 1950, entitled “An American Policy,” follows: AN Ammnrcan POLICY (By E. F. Tompkins) Once again Mr. Herbert Hoover has indi- cated the dangers confronting the Republic in our undertakings abroad, and has chart- ed a sane course for survival and security. The title of the former President’s lateat radio address expressed a fundamental fact, “We should revise our foreign policy.” From this basic , Mr. Hoover an- anlyzed the misjudgments that placed us in an unsupportable poaition, the ruinous error of pursuing further a mistaken direction, and the line of action that is now necessary to avert military defeat and economic catas- trophe. The primary blunder, Mr. Hoover noted, was the New Deal’s recognition of Soviet Russia—a boon to bolshevism which four preceding administrations had wisely with- held. Out of this fatuous relationship came our wartime alliance with Stalin, Involving enor- mous bounties in money and munitions, and our secret surrenders of principle at Tehran, Yalta, and Potsdam—a purblind set of pro- cedures which “won for Stalin the grip of communism on Russia and more opportunity for it to extend in the world.” Consequently, occidental civilization is now threatened by the specter of world con- quest and world communism. And we, as the only remaining strong non- Communist power, are seeking to repe] the menace by measures that are insufftcient and extremely hazardous. We are already fighting a United Nations war in Korea, in which victory would be useless to us and which may engulf us in an Astan war. The administration is preparing—by un- constitutional methods—to send American land troops across the Atlantic to defend re- luctant nations in Europe from the hordes of the Orient. This is a foolhardy venture for which we have not the population, hence the man- power. To attempt to sustain such an effort would probably cost us millions of casualties and exhaust our material and financial resources. The Hoover program, to call it such, would rectify that which is wrong and conserve, as well ag mobilize, the invincible forces at our disposal. . First, we should abandon the pretense of friendly relations with Russia while the So- viete wage proxy war upon us. Second, we should make the Western Hem- isphere our base, immune from invasion— with Japan, Formosa, and the Philippines ag outposts in the Pacific, and with the Medi- terranean and Indian Ocean available to us in the East. As Mr. Hoover said: “This hemisphere can be made self-contained in critical raw ma- terials.” Third, if we are to arm the North Atlantic alliance, !t should include Spain and the bastion of the Pyreness, as well as Greece and Turkey. Fourth, our main reliance should be upon naval power to keep the sea lanes open, and air power for pulverizing attack and con- tinental protection,