APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD not have these facilities. Surely we must have faith enough in the future of our lower Columbia River area and its tributary in- land empire to provide those facilities with- out further delay and thus accelerate the Arwen ons of inbound tonnages. There : substantial bulk tonnage moving to this area, which undoubtedly could be transported by water at a saving if we had medern bulk unloading facilities. The es- tablishment of such facilities would be a very strong competitive talking point with industries now casting about for possible lo- cations on the west coast In all of this, and particularly with re- spect to the Portland-Vancouver area, our intermediate future cannot be viewed with- in any concept less than that of a major world seaport and industrial center. This calls for a consolidation as well as an exten-~ sion of our port and industrial facilities into a homogeneous and integrated structure to handle, warehouse, process, and manufac- ture inbound outbound cargoes. That is to say, no single isolated facility—whether it be an industrial site, a rail siding, or a bulk handling dock—can do the job alone. It requires an effective combination of all of these—and more—to bring maximum re- sults. For such a unit the physical location and character of present and future facilities will require careful consideration. Any emerging well-knit system of docks, cargo handling, aceess to land transport, ware- housing, and industrial plart sites must recognize the peculiar requirements of heavy and light industry. For example, it would appear that the downstream portion of the St. Johns Peninsula is ideally situ- ated for heavy industrial development and hence heavy maritime commerce, The por- tion of the Peninsula and its adjacent areas on both shores of the Willamette lying clos- er to the center of Portland are decidedly more favorable for lighter manufacturing, warehousing, and the like. In a very real sense, such a segregation is taking place. The question is whether it is occurring in the manner most conducive to the long term well-being of oUr community, or whether it is merely happening. Is there not need for a caréfully conceived set of blueprints and program of consequent ac- tion to facilitate our building a greater port, a greater industrial center, the Portland of the future? There is another ingredient which is nec- essary if our area is to reap the full benefits of its potentials. Itis that intangible known as aggressiveness. Purely as an observa- tion and not as a criticism, I have a feeling that we lack the kind of aggressiveness which is building up Gulf and California ports. This is not a matter which reflects upon the ship~= ping men of the area, but I think it does re= flect somewhat on the attitude of the gen- eral community which ultimately can gain so much from maritime activity. What ag- gressiveness we have—and we have demon- strated it in numerous instances—is spas- modic rather than continuous, After reach- ing a partial objective we are too often prone to sit back and relax with a feeling of satisfaction. Perhaps in a sense we have not always raised and maintained our sights high enough as to the magnitude of our po- tentials and of the things we must do. To day we cannot afford not to be expansionist- minded in this expanding west coast of ours—a west coast with a forecast population of 25,000,000 by 1975—an increase of 66 per- cent as against an estimated 82 percent for the United States as a whole. We cannot afford to be timid about the planning and building of facilities the use of which will eventually bring us returns in jobs and in taxable wealth amounting to several times the original investment. One thing is cer- tain: looking at the past is not going to tell us where we are going. Even the conditions of our amazing growth of the past 10 years are No guide as to the conditions of the next decade. Thus Our task ahead is a clear-cut one. Kilowatts mean cargoes, and cargoes mean the use of kilowatts. Both mean pay rolls and increasing wealth. We cannot falter in supporting an aggressive program of power development, of waterways development, of port develnr~om+ We owe this ta ourselves andi. ‘.: 4: are coming from all parts of the United States to live and work with us. The stakes are high. The opportunities are great. Our effort must match the vision of the near future. Compensatory Spending EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. DANIEL A. REED OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, April 18, 1950 Mr. REED of New York. Mr. Speaker, I regard it a very great privilege and a distinct public service to insert a master- ly speech delivered by Mr. George E. Stringfellow in his capacity as vice pres- ident of the Thomas Edison, Inc., before the Purchasing Agents dinner at the Builders Exchange Club, New York City, on April 18, 1950. The vital issues before the country are clearly and forcefully expressed by this distinguished gentleman, and should be read with interest and profit by all those who are interested in the preservation of our Government. The socialistic trend is now obvious to everybody and they should be supplied with all pertinent facts relating to this national danger. Under leave to extend, heretofore granted, I am inserting Mr. Stringfel- low’s address: CoMPENSATORY SPENDING Some years ago Lenin, the chief architect of communism, said, “Some day we will force the United States to spend herself to destruc- tion.” Eighteen years ago the annual cost of Fed~ eral Government was under 5 billion dol- lars and the national debt was slightly under 20 billion. The cost of Federal Government for the fiscal year ending June 30 next will exceed 46 billion dollars. The Federal debt is now approximately 260 billion, not including some bad loans which will have to be charged off. In order to understand the enormous in- crease in the cost of our Government, let me make a few comparisons: During President Roosevelt’s three terms, the average yearly spending of the Federal Government was $31,000,000,000, including most of the military cost of World War If and F. D. R., as you recall, was no miser in spending public funds. In the four post-war years of Truman’s administration, the av- erage yearly spending jumped from $31,000,- 000,000 to $45,000,000,000—~an increase of al- most 50 percent. The ‘Truman administration collected an average of $42,000,000,000 per year in taxes, or three times the average collected by Roosevelt. It would, therefore, appear that we are well on the way to making Lenin’s prediction a grim reality. In 19382 the Democratic Party pledged all candidates who ran on its platform to reduce the cost: of government at least 25 percent by abolishing useless commissions and offices, consolidating departments and bureaus and AS287 eliminating extravagance. “That platform,” said candidate Roosevelt, “Is a covenant with the people and when I’m elected,” he continued, “I shall put it into effect in every detail.” In the words of a former governor of this State, “Let us look at the record”. Immediately following his inauguration to the presidency, Franklin Roosevelt set out to implement the promises set forth in the Democratic platform which, in my opinion, Was one of the greatest documents ever sub- mitted by any political party 1n the history of our country. The Republican Party would do well to adopt it in 1952 unless it wants to continue to be a “me too” party. During the first 4 months of Roosevelt’s first administration he did a remarkable job of cutting the cost of Government. It has been estimated that as a result of this almost unprecedented service to the people, at least PN nerceant nf the neople of this Republic Tews ery, Test 27" supporting the Presi- dent at the time of his first fireside chat. Almost immediately afterwards he showed a complete reversal in his policy on cost of Government and Federal debt. How can candidate and President Roosevelt’s right- about-face on cost of Government and debt be reconciled with his advocacy of economy during his campaign and the first 4 months of his first term? Here, I think, is the an- swer to that question. He embraced the philosophy—compensatory spending—of Lord John Maynard Keynes, British Socialist economist, who visited President Roosevelt in 1983. According to the British press, Keynes’ ideas “captivated President Roose- velt.” Those who are in a position to know say that Roosevelt’s about-face stemmed from this “captivation.” The Keynes phi- losophy—the more you spend the more you have—has been practiced in this country in an increasing degree since Roosevelt em~= braced it in 1983. It has infiltrated the States and munici- palities of our Nation; it is largely responsible for our inflated debt, unbalanced budget, and general extravagance. Let us follow its destructive effects: In 1932 there were 30 major Federal agen- cies. There are today 62 major Federal agencies, an increase of 110 percent. On December 31, 1932, there were 564,103 Federal employees. On Decemher $1, 1949, there were 1,981,156—an increase of 252 per- cent. When he first took office, President Roose- velt was terribly disturbed about the size of our debt, which was less than. $20,000,000,000. Five years later, when that debt had reached $38,000,000,000, he said, “Our national debt, after all, is an internal debt owed not only by the Nation but tothe Nation. If our chil- aren have to pay interest on it, they will be paying interest to themselves.’ In a short span of 5 years after taking office, President Roosevelt was looking upon an increased Gebt as a national asset. Keynes’ philosophy of “compensatory” spending has about bankrupted Britain. That philosophy destroyed Rome. Keynes’ philosophy is advocated by the Communists for our destruction and is certainly taking root here to the gratification of Joe Stalin, whom President Truman referred to in the last presidential campaign as “good old Joe.” Rome fell because her rulers gained and retained power through false promises and the use of taxpayers’ money with which to corrupt the electorate, a procedure not differ~ ent from that which our British brethren and our American politicians have been em- ploying. Our politiclans appear to be more in- terested in balancing the budgets of foreign countries than they are in balancing our own. Let me give you a couple of examples. Within a week, Dean Acheson, Secretary of State, rebuked the Government of Korea for not bala:cing her budget, Acheson said the
A3288 Korean unbalanced budget is bringing about an inflationary crisis in that country. He told them in effect that if they didn’t cut expenses and balance their budget, our Gov- ernment might stop giving the Koreans American taxpayers’ money. Acheson also instructed our Ambassador in Greece to in- form the government there that it must balance its budget to avoid inflation, other- wise we might withdraw our subsidies. Yet, President Truman budgeted a deficit this year of $900,000,000. That deficit will exceed $7,000,000,000. He is budgeting a deficit for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1951, of $5,000,000,000 which could easily ex- ceed 10 billions since he is notorious for overestimating Government income and un- derestimating Government expenditures. If we continue to spend more than we take in, inflation in this country is as certain as night follows day. And, it was inflation that made Mussolini; it was inflation that made Hitler; it was inflation that made Stalin, and inflation will produce a dictator in America. Let us not delude ourselves into believing that an American dictator would be more benevolent, more generous, or more decent than Mussolini, Hitler, or Stalin. Much has been said in recent years about Britain's dollar shortage, but very little has been said about the cause of that shortage. Britain’s dollar shortage is caused by in- efficient management, confiscatory taxes, and the chloroforming of incentives by the So- cialist government. We are doing the same thing in this country in a measure. We, too, have a dollar shortage. Our dollar shortage doesn’t seem to disturb our Government Officials. Our budget has been balanced but twice in 20 years, and then by accident. Our dollar shortage is the result of our spending more than we can afford. It stems from the same trouble that Korea is having; it stems from the same trouble the Greeks are having—both have been told by our Secretary of State that they must reduce their outgo to meet their income. It never dawns on our poli- ticians that if we do not reduce our outgo to meet our income that we, too, will have inflation from which chaos and communism grow. In pleading for a balanced budget and a reduction in Federal cost of government, as well as a reduction in Federal dept, Can- didate Roosevelt in 1932 said that a gov- ernment, like a family, can spend more than it takes in for a year or two, but any gov- ernment or any family that becomes a spend- thrift and spends more than it takes in for more than a year or so is headed for the poorhouse. I think he was right. Our Government has been spending more than it has been taking in, not for a year or s0, but for 18 years, and there is no prospect for a balanced budget until we discard the Keynes’ theory of compensatory spending, which is another way of saying “until we get rid of Truman.” When a corporation gets into financial difficulties the courts appoint a receiver who either liquidates the corporation’s assets or reorganizes and staffs it with new manage- ment. In either case, the stockholders lose most of their investment. Wh’ 1 a government gets into financial difficulties there is no court to appoint a receiver. <A self-appointed dictator arises who takes over, not as a receiver responsible to a court of law, not as an elected public official responsible to the people, but as a dictator responsible only to his whim. He prescribes their way of life. The people become his subjects. There is still clamor in this country for aid to Socialist Britain and other nations at the expense of the sorely pressed Ameri- can taxpayer. It seems to me that we might give thought to the fact that since World War I our Government aided Britain to the tune of approximately $44,000,000,000. This is equal to the cash-in value of all life-in- surance policies in the United States. Since World War II we have aided Britain and other nations, by grants, exceeding $33,000,- 000,000—grants which have kept socialism alive in Britain. Had the British Socialist government not been subsidized with Ameri- can taxpayers’ money, Britain’s socialism would have died on the vine long, long ago. The Socialists in Britain tell us that Amer- ican capitalism and free enterprise are on their last legs. Indeed, they will be if we continue to subsidize the various segments of the peoples of the world in idleness. Much of the American taxpayers’ money is used both to fight and to support com~ munism. Let me give you an example. Since World War II we have given the Greek Government around $600,000,000 with which to fight communism. Since World War II we have given Communist’ Russia, through lend-lease and other grants, $440,000,000 of our taxpayers’ money and we have given her satellite, Poland, more than $480,000,000, and until recently we were buying rye from Poland which aided her economy. Even morons know that we have a great surplus of rye in this country. I Know that this aid to the Communists, amounting to more than $920,000,000 since World War II, is hard to believe but I would have you understand that the United States Department of Com- merce and Senator Harry Froop Brrd, of Vir- ginia, are my authority for this statement. It is obvious, therefore, that we are fighting communism on the fringe and wooing and feeding it at the core. It is clear from Truman’s record that he, like his immediate predecessor and his So- cialist-minded British brethren, has em- braced the Keynes’ philosophy of compensa- tory spending and not unlike former Presi- dent Roosevelt, he seems to look upon a mounting debt as an asset. “We owe it to ourselves” is perhaps his philosophy too. On his return from a month’s vacation in Florida, at the taxpayers’ expense, President Truman was quoted in the press as having said, “The country is in fine shape.” There would be some justification for such enthu- siasm if the income of the Government was in excess of our outgo and our national debt and annual cost were being systematically reduced, If we cannot balance our budget when the country is in fine shape what will happen to ‘us when we run into the next tailspin? That is something that never dawns on Fair Dealers, liberals, or pinks, If anyone ever supposed that the Truman administration was interested in economy, a look at a recent report of the armed services committee of the House would correct the impression. It mentions the following five items: A budget request is pending for a new $18,000,000 veterans’ hospital in the Los Angeles area, while the Navy is closing the 1,500-bed Long Branch Naval Hospital in the same area. A 500~-bed veterans’ hospital is being built in Philadelphia, while the Army is closing the 2,000-bed Valley Forge Hospital 20 miles away. The veterans’ agency plans to build 1,000- bed hospitals in Boston and Brockton, Mass., while the Army is closing the Murphy Gen-~ eral Hospital at Waltham, Mass. The Veterans’ Administration wants to build a 500-bed hospital in Atlanta, while the Army is closing the Oliver General Hos-~ pital at Augusta, Ga. A 600-bed veterans’ hospital is planned at Ann Arbor, Mich., while the Army is closing the 1,600-bed Jones Hospital at Battle Creek, There won’t be any Government economy until there is another and a different kind of man in the White House. During the last 18 years a Roman holiday has been declared by and for our spendthrift and muddling politicians, Governmental extravagance has been the order of the day. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The national debt has increased from $20,- 000,000,000 to $260,000,000,000—an increase of 1,200 percent. The annual cost of Govern- ment has increased from $5,000,C00,000 to Close to $46,000,000,000, an increase of over 800 percent. How long will it take the American people to learn the lesson of the collapse of the Roman Empire and understand why Britain is tottering? How long will it take them to realize that the Keynes philosophy of com- pensatory spending will lead to ruin if we don’t put a stop to it soon? I conceive it to be the duty of the men in our segment of the human family to become Paul Reveres. We owe it to our founding ~ fathers; we owe it to the present generation; and we owe it to posterity to do our part in saving our way of life—a way of life which has given us a higher living standard and greater liberty in 160 years than any peoples have experienced in 6,000 years. Those businessmen who are unwilling to risk their necks in the defense of a great, cause will likely lose their souls. Those wha by their inaction are saying to the selfish politicians, whose greed for gold and lust for power is rapidly consuming us, “Go ahead, we will do nothing to block your way to our destruction” are aiding and abetting our destruction. If America fails, it will be from extrava- gance, internal decay, and cowardice. We see these three adversaries around us con- stantly. America will not follow the Roman road to ruin if we and millions of others like us discharge our duty as citizens and thus prove that we are worthy of our great heri- tage. The times call for the election of men to public office of; “Strong minds, great hearts, true faith, and willing hands; Men whom the lust of office does not Kill; Men whom the spoils of office cannot buy; Men who possess opinions and a will; Men who have honor, men who will not lie; Men who stand before a demagogue and damn his treacherous flatteries with- out winking; Tall men, suncrowned, who live above the fog, In public duty and in private thinking.” Two such men, who reflect the philosophy of our founding fathers and place principles above patronage and principles above party loyalty are the senior United States Senator from Ohio [Roserr A. Tarr], and the senior United States Senator from Virginia [Harry F. Byrp|. They, in my opinion, constitute a symbol of our way of life. These men are constantly belng smeared by New Dealers, Fair Dealers, pinks, professional liberals, and Communists. When you find where Bos Tarr and Harry Byrp stand, there is where those of us who would preserve our liberties and be worthy of our heritage should also stand. These two men will not take us down the Roman road to ruin, These two men know the fallacy of compensatory spending. Will you get behind them with your voices, with your influence, and with your sub- stance? Report of Petroleum Imports Committee EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. E. H. HEDRICK OF WEST VIRGINIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, May 5, 1950 Mr. HEDRICK. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent I include in the Ap- pendix of the Recorp the report of petro-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD leum imports committee to the National Bituminous Coal Advisory Council, dated March 1, 1950, adopted by the council, March 8, 1950: REPORT OF PETROLEUM IMPORTS COMMITTEE TO NATIONAL BITUMINOUS Coal ApvISORY CoUN= CIL, MarcH 1, 1950 1. FUEL SUPPLY The development of oil imports since World War II has caused significant shifts in the American fuel structure. Continua- tion of current imports, much less further increases as are prospective, will have far- reaching effects. Eventually the country’s pattern of fuel supply will be revamped such as few today may realize. Energy availability is the foundation upon which the American economy has been built. Its source has been almost entirely in fuels— coal, petroleum, and natural gas—which have been abundant in the country’s natural re- sources. Had there been less energy avail- able, the American economy would not have grown as it has. Hence, the fuel structure as changed because of oil imports is of great consequence, and its final appearance, no matter the form, is of national concern, Progress of the economy with its expand- ing mechanization has required a multitude of fuel products. The tendency has been for an increasing need of petroleum products such as gasoline and other refined oils to power a variety of machines. Advancing technology likewise has promoted the use of natural gas for special purposes. It, too, has given coal added opportunities by im- proved methods for converting into electric power, coke, and additional products. Coal, as yet, does not have the advantages that petroleum and gas enjoy in the production of products that much of new technology needs. Nevertheless, it has the essentials for steam-raising and other power needs which still represent a sizable place in the energy pattern, and eventually, since it can be con- verted into oil products and technological advancement will make this feasible, coal with its huge reserves will be a substitute in- definitely for petroleum as so required. Pres- ently, however, to satisfy all of the economy’s fuel requirements efficiently, it takes a com- bined use of petroleum, natural gas, and coal, Of the three, no one or two can do the job, Growth of the economy will demand larger amounts of petroleum for gasoline and many refined oils. It will give natural gas a vast special-purpose market. Coal in the course of this trend will lose in relative importance as a solid fuel, although the area it now serves will need a greater volume of energy. In the aggregate, total fuel requirements will Increase. But what about oil imports? «Companies financially interested in foreign oil claim that imports are essential if future fuel re- quirements are to be met. In other words, American petroleum reserves are not going to be adequate forever. Few will disagree on this long-term out- look for petroleum reserves. It is getting harder to find and produce American petro- leum. The country will have petroleum out- put indefinitely, but its natural reserves are fixed and sometime a point is going to be reached where the production rate cannot be bettered and probably not maintained. American production deficits in terms of an expanding market will have to be made up by synthetics or oll imports. The latter pro- vide advantages according to proponents of foreign petroleum development. The country’s proved reserves of petro- leum are equivalent to a dozen years’ supply at their present depletion rate. New oil will have to be found.continually and in sub- stantial volume to maintain this relative position of reserves. Companies promoting foreign petroleum question that this can be done for very long. In comparison, proved reserves of natural gas have a life exceeding 25 years. Their life is figured, however, on a lower production rate than petroleum. Gas reserves are not much larger than those of petroleum on a B, t u. basis. On the other hand, coal reserves are far greater than those of petroleum and natural gas, meas- ured in terms of centuries, although esti- mates vary as to how great they actually are. One fact is clear: As fuels are now used, American petroleum supply is in the weakest position and coal supply is in the strongest over the distant period. Yet, while general agreement can be found for the principle that American interests should be active on foreign oil, there is wide disagreement about the way foreign oil de- velopment has been handled. It has been demonstrated that oil imports increase as American interests advance their develop- ment in foreign fields. Stated in another way, production of American fuels must be decreased to allow foreign petroleum output to grow; nor is there general agreement that the development of foreign ol should over- shadow that of American synthetic output. The pushing of foreign oil into the American fuel market in a volume not re- quired for supply reasons obviously is dis~ turbing. This has been the case during the last year. Effects have been adverse to coal and even to the oil industry itself. Imme- diately ahead, oil imports are scheduled to increase and a further shake-up of the fuel structure is expected. The question is prompted:. What will be the outcome of the import program as conducted in terms of national welfare? 2. DEVELOPMENT OF IMPORTS American development of foreign petro- leum production and the importation of oil are not something of recent origin. After World War I, when it appeared that the country’s petroleum output might soon be inadequate, both the Government and the oil industry emphasized the necessity of find- ing outside sources of supply. Proposals in Congress to enter the Government as a part- ner with industry in foreign ventures were rejected, but American companies supported oil exploration in many parts of the world. During the twenties, great progress was made in the development of foreign oil, particu- larly in Latin America. Large reserves were discovered in the United States in the meanwhile. This plus the depression in the early thirties discour- aged foreign development. From then until World War II, there was a problem of excess supply in the American fields. In 19382, an excise tax of 21 cents per barrel on crude, and $1.05 on gasoline was authorized. These duties were reduced in 1939, but a quota on imports was reached by agreement. How- ever, it was in 1933 and 1934 that American companies secured large concessions in Arabia. Changes in oil supply that have taken place during the last 8 decades are indicated by the trend in imports. Between 1920 and 1922, when the adequacy of American re- serves was in serious question, imports ranged from 297,000 to 373,000 barrels daily, 19 to 21 percent of the country’s new supply. Thereafter and until World War II, imports declined, averaging from 144,000 to 162,000 barrels daily by the 1935-89 period, or from 4 to 5 percent of new supply. They aver- aged 266,000 barrels in 1941 when American oil supply started to tighten but 252,000 barrels in 1944 was the peak during a full 1See Arabian Oil (1949), by R. F. Mikesell and H. B. Chenery, ch. 1; also United States Crude Petroleum Reserve Productive Capac- ity (1950), report of National Petroleum Council, A3289 war year when oil was short and after im- port quota restrictions had been removed. Following World War II, fuels of all kinds were in tight supply. American business had shifted rapidly to a record level of peace- time activity and was consuming fuels in vast volume. Foreign countries battered during the war needed fuel help from the outside as they started on the reconstruction of their economies and they looked mainly to the United States. In the comparatively cold 1947-48 winter, fuel oils were short in various markets. This situation led to a series of developments. Inadequacy of American petroleum reserves were again featured particularly since in- ternational conditions were unsettled. Elaborate plans were proposed for synthetic oil production. In the meanwhile, the oil industry made preparations to avoid any oil shortage the next year, by pushing American production, and the companies with foreign interests also began to see additional oil in imports. During World War II, petroleum production was hit hard in certain countries like Ru- mania and the Netherlands East Indies, but expanded in others like Latin America and the Middle East through military necessity. Development in the Middle East was to open fields with tremendous reserves. The war- time expansion in Latin America and the Middle East gave the impetus for rapid post- war growth of foreign production. In turn, what appeared to be an oil scarcity in early 1948 gave evidence of a ready market for the foreign output. Thus, while plans on syn- thetic oil were being given general consid- eration in America and there was still worry about petroleum supply immediately ahead, foreign refineries representing a sizable ca- pacity were nearing completion. Also, in each succeeding month, some of the strain was disappearing from international rela- tions. Following is a table that shows trends in American oil market and supply, and the part played by imports. Between 1945 and 1949, the volume of imports has more than doubled. It is interesting to mote in the table the extent to which the American oil market has grown since 1940 and the sub- stantial increase in American petroleum pro- duction. Moreover, in 1949 as against 1948, while total demand increased slightly, Amer- ican production was reduced in order to make room for additional imports. The country went on a net import basis in 1947 for the first time since the early twenties. United States petroleum market and supply (Thousand barrels daily] ° Total . Total +,| United domes- domestic Btates To Total tic de- produc- | por export ; supply mand | gomand tion 1940_....] 3,625 3, 981 3, 858 229 4, 087 1941.2... 4,071 4, 369 4, 078 4, 339 1942... 02. 3, 972 4, 298 4, 034 99 4, 133 1943_.... 4,168 4,579 4,372 174 4, 546 1944. .-.. 566 5,134 4, 864 252 5,116 1945_..-. 4, 857 5, 358 5, 010 311 5, 321 1946... . 912 5, 331 5, 074 377 5,451 1947... 9 452 5, 903 5, 452 437 5, 889 1948... 5, 775 6, 143 5, 922 514 6, 436 1949... 5, 792 6, 119 5, 470 642 6, 112 Source: U. 8. Bureau of Mines. The world supply of petroleum rests on a complex framework. A number of countries have small or no reserves and a few countries have the greater part of the reserves. Currently, the United States could meet its own requirements by stretching facilities. Canada is developing what may be sizable reserves, and Latin America has an excess in production. Hence, the Western Hemi- sphere can more than take care of its wants.
A3290 Europe, the Far East, Africa, and Oceania, have production deficits. The Middle East is the only area in the Eastern Hemisphere that has potential excess oil in quantity, but its development still is in the 7rcrv stages. In a matter of a few years, the Middle East can be in a position to add enough oil so that the Eastern Hemisphere will be self sufficient. As a consequence the Western Hemisphere would lose one of its large out- lets and, in turn, have excess capacity. Over a longer time, with an increasing market, there would be a period of years when both hemispheres would be seli-suffi- cient in petroleum from a physical stand- point, But if the Middle Hast continues its remarkable development and features cost advantages as now claimed for it, it could gain a strong foothold in the Western Hemi- sphere market. If this proves to be the case, petroleum development as well as that of other fuels in the Western Hemisphere will be retarded. Events of the last year point in this direction. 3, IMPORTS VERSUS FOREIGN PRODUCTION Oil imports since World War II take on an appearance different to the one they had previously. They evidently are part of a long range program that schedules almost continual increases in their volume. Siz able expansion that has taken place in the Jast few years is to be followed by additional growth which, in a few years, will make im- ports a relatively large segment in the Amer- ican fuel structure. In 1949, imports of 642,000 barrels daily, were more than twice the volume necessary to supplement prevailing domestic capacity in order to assure a full supply for consump- tion and export requirements. In other words, what had been American petroleum production in 1948 was cut over 400,000 bar~ rels daily because of the foreign oil. Indica- tions are that imports will continue to in- crease at a much faster rate than needed to supplement American production. A number of reasons may be listed as to why imports have and may continue to be developed on a scale much larger than re- quired to take care of deficits in American production. American companies that have invested heavily in foreign oil expect to real- ize a return to cover their capital outlay by enlarging their market, which includes movements to the United States. Foreign exploration and production costs are much lower than those in the United States, and can offer competitive advantages. Royalties from oil provide a major source of income to governments of countries where foreign oll is produced. To keep royalty income at a satisfactory level to protect concessions sometimes means that foreign production must be kept at a full rate, if not increased. Foreign oil controlled by American interests has been limited in the world markets more recently as other countries, partly financed by United States funds, have increased their oil output. Its disposal will depend more upon an American market. Finally, Ameri- can investment in foreign countries and the expansion of foreign trade, as to which the development of oil imports is attached, ex- press a policy strongly supported in import- ant parts of the United States Government. Moreover, the Government has long encour- aged American activity in foreign oil flelds.* Development of oil production in the Mid= dle Hast area since World War II has been at a faster rate than many had expected. Changes taking place in supply as a result are shown in the following: 2 Mote: The Effect of Oil Imports on Inde-~ pendent Domestic Producers (Jan. 26, 1950) a report sent to President Truman by Repre=- sentative Wrickr Parman, chairman of the Select Committee on Small Business of the House of Representatives, Crude-oil production in select countries [Thousands of barrels] First 6 First 6 Percent months of | months of 1948 ig49 | Change Tv Tt bes. 988, 011 931, 144 —5. 76 Vu ee wees 238, 355 223, 761 6.12 Total, United States and Venezuela..| 1,226,366 | 1,154, 905 —5, 83 88, 217 101, 254 +14, 78 60, 283 92, 036 +52 67 14, 589 9, 701 +33. 50 15, 103 44,823 | +296. 78 5, 605 5, 463 ~ 7 183, 697 258, 277 +87. 88 Grand total..} 1, 410, 063 1, 408, 182 ~. 18 Source U.S, Bureau of Mines, United States imports of crude petroleum and r companies, 1948, 1949, and company es Importing company (in order of estimated imports for first 6 months of 1950) Average year 1048 nn oe Stor to 184, 300 G Ce 88, 000 rot 16, 900 i 57, 200 JS 9, 700 a 24, 500 $ 25, 500 “ 18, 800 - 24, 600 ae 5, 000 Goose 1s, 400 Total 11 companies... ---------enneeenennnee 463, 800 All other imports... neeee ewan ene neem ene e mewn nenne 48, 200 Total imports... -- 2-22 en nee neeenn nen enn anne 512, 000 APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD In the above table it will be seen that the combined crude~-o1l production changed little between the two periods. But the output decreased in both the United States and Venezuela in 1949 as compared to 1948, the difference being made up by the increased production in the Middle East. The latter passed Venezuela from 4& production stand- point, although its growth has barely started. American holdings in the Middle East are of great magnitude, said to be over 40 per- cent of the area’s known petroleum reserves. They include concessions having proved re- serves that appear as large as those in the United States, and with far grealer poten- tialities. Refining capacity and transporta- tion facilities have hardly been started in terms of crude oil available. The larger American companies dominate Middle East, luke other foreign development, as might be expected because of the tremendous invest- ment and great risks involved. Barrels daily ne nae Average Averaga first. 6 second 6 months months 10949 1919 192, 700 211, 600 $5, SIX) 104, 700 40, 00 59, 100 60, 200 69, 700 19, 900 45, 400 38, 000 37, 300 26, 100 36, £00 §, 800 20, 400 2t, 300 27, G00 16, 800 21,300 7, 7) 4), 800 626, 700 643, 800 76, 300 57, 100 608, OOK) 700, 900 Average first 6 months 1950 Costimated) 933, 200 115, 000 BO, QU) 7h, 800 61, GOO 42, 500 35, 600 20, 700 23, G00 17,4) 10, 200 722, 110) 68, 600 7), 700 efined products by 11 principal importing timates for first 6 months of 1950 Poreont change first G months 1950 over year 1048 25 “430 +371 31 4-520 2 “+40 hI —4 +195 45 +56 43 54 Source: Figures for individual companies submitted by companies to Subcommittee of tha House Small Business Committee. Total import figures from UV, Figures for (4" ot* ar fe renter? for first imonths of 1 a an re ae S. Department of Commons, SO included at sarie rate as average ofnetual of these imports facne ‘ise? 1049 are based primarily on actual imports but partially estimated for last 2 months whore actual imports aro not available. Not +—“ines ite ther: si Os Source: ILouso Select Committee on Small Business. 4. ORIGIN OF IMPORTS In 1949, imports consisted of 66 percent crude oil and 32 percent residual oil, the remaining 2 percent being largely distillate fuel oil, Imports other than crude and residual have been on the decrease in recent years, Of the crude oil imported, one-fourth came from the Middle East, the rest from Latin, America, principally Venezuela. As against 1948, the proportion originating in the Middle East was more than twice as great. Crude-oll imports were entirely from the Western Hemisphere until 1947. Nearly all of the imported residual fuel oll has been from refineries in the Nether- Janda West Indies located off the Venezuelan coast. Part of the crude imported from Latin America is of a heavy grade and used mainly for the making of residual. It is tanta- mount to the importation of residual. According to the National Petroleum Coun- cil’s import study, this particular crude averaged approximately 16,000 barrels daily during the first half of 1949. Moreover, the total crude imported from Latin America and the Middle East, averaging nearly one- half million barrels daily, is said to give a larger yield of residual than comes from American crude under ordinary refining con-~ arddes: of (hose tables, the Tesas Co. and the Standard Oil Co, (New Jersey) have reduced Sosttr onths of 1950 by approximately 17 and 7 pereont, respectively. ditions but figures evidently are not pub- shed in this regard. It is clear, however, that residual fuel oll is the major product derived from imports. Imports of petroleum products [Thousands of barrels) Crude ofl 1940, year. 43, O35 1043, year 129, 098 1049, year... 1h4, #22 1049, daily av- pi Source: U. 8. Bureau of Mines, can petroleum production. shrunken the coal market. OF ARG. nan nweee 0 Resid» ual Other | Total 2,306 | 11,182 | 83, 013 83,200 | 8, 7H2 | 18H, 084 74,056 | 4,054 | 234, 131 204 13 642 5. IMPORTS AND THE FUEL MARKET Effects of oil imports since 1948 have been felt throughout the American structure. They have had a depressing effect om Amerl- They have Aspects of the latter are of special concern in this report. The major product furnished by the im- ports, as indicated above,” has been residual fuel oll, which can compete directly with It is sometimes called the waste prod- uct of refining, The annual proportion or coal.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD yield of residual resulting from the manufac- ture of oils has been on the decline in the United States because of advancements in refining methods. It is now around 20 per- cent where it was nearer 30 percent in the early thirties. However, because of the great increase in refining volume, the amount of residual has grown substantially although its re"**""3 “3i-re “mong petroleum products has Go Tea. ‘. 1s pertinent since the market 1t serves is on the decrease unlike the markets for gasoline and other refined prod- ucts which are on the rise. The market residual served during 1947 and most of 1848 was mainly noncompetitive from a practical viewpoint. It included consump- tion for ship bunkers for which another fuel could not be easily used, plants located near oil fields or in congested areas where coal or gas could not be distributed except at a dis- advantage and for special purposes. In 1948, in New York City, for example, the average price for residual was approximately $3 per barrel; 50 percent higher than coal on a heat basis. This was at a time when extra coal was available to take over residual ac- counts, had consumers wanted to switch for price reasons. As late as 1946, railroads were the major buyers of residual. Carriers in the South- west and on the Pacific coast used this oil as their main fuel for steam locomotives. In recent years, rapid dieselization of the car- riers has decreased the use of residual as it has coal. The railroads could be entirely dieselized and would burn only about the same volume of oil represented in the 90,- 000,000 barrels of residual that fueled but one-sixth of the railway system in 1948, While switching largely to Diesel oil, the car- riers are adding nothing to total petroleum consumption because of technological ad- vancements. Sales of residual fuel oil, 1947-48 Pereent Thousand total, barrels United Uses States 1947 1048 | 1947 | 1048 Meets Lk 97,500 | 89,588 | 18.8] 17.8 Voss yee tt ts 2 101,900 | 95,763 | 19.6] 19.1 pien te_ --' 60,964} 56,812] 11.7} 113 fais F u-| 115,108 | 117,780 | 22.1 | 23.5 56,402 | 58,639 | 10.8 | 11.7 19, 147 20, 209 | 3.7 4.0 62, 649 66,637 | 12.0] 11.3 ' 6,859 6,623 | 1.3 1.3 520,529 | 502,051 100.0 | 100.0 Exports. penne ene n ee nenn 10,623 | 12,539 }_-_-..}---.2- Grand total_.....| 531,274 | 512, 590 |..---.|.--... Source: U. 8, Bureau of Mines. Current large uses of residual are as vessel fuel and in the general category of smelters, mines and manufacturing. Vessel tuel is dropping because of a slackening in shipping and also with the growth of the Diesel engine for marine purposes. During 1949, the sale of residual was pushed in the manufacturing field, among utilities, and larger amounts were burned as company fuel. Data are not available yet to give the complete picture of the 1949 residual market. In 1948, the total demand for residual amounted to 518,000,000 barrels, of which 18,000,000 barrels or less than 3 percent was export. Residual production has been in- creased and imports about maintained com- pared to 1947. This resulted in a new supply of 543,000,000 barrels, 30,000,000 above market requirements. Stocks which had been re- latively low were built to 64,000,000 barrels by the end of 1948. Allowing for improve-~ ment in stocks, residual was in excess prob- ably 20,000,000 barrels—4 percent of total re- quirements at that time. This comparatively small excess was to start the dumping of residual, a practice that gained momentum in 1949 and reached sig- nificant proportions. Residual prices were cut in half in a matter of months to invade markets of other fuels, The year 1949 was a hard one for fuel like residual and coal suitable for heating and steam generation. The winter and fall were extremely mild. Business activity dropped. Shifts were taking place among fuels such as brought by dieselization. These were the conditions under which an attempt was made to increase the sales of residual. It is not startling that residual prices had to be cut drastically and generally—at least a dollar a barrel on the average over the year, a subtsantial sum figured on a half- billion barrels, and a loss not to be offset by price advances on gasoline and other prod- ucts although that was tried. Nor is it sur- prising that coal, along with railroad trans- portation that depends heavily on coal for Tevenue, was squeezed in the process. Supply and market of residual fuel oil [Thousands of barrels] 1949 1947 1948 desti- mated) Production, including transfers from. crude..... 474, 886 | 490,164 | 429, 579 Imports. 54, 244 53, 269 74, 555 529, 130 | 543,433 | 504, 134 Exports 10,623 | 13, 011 12, 641 Stocks, end year. 1 64, 021 60, 193 Domestic deman 518, 510 | 500, 543 | 495, 321 Daily average. 1, 421 1, 368 1, 356 1 Not available on basis comparable with figures for 1948 and 1949. Source: U.S. Bureau of Mines. Why should this happen? Why should the oil industry lose so much money? Why should coal and transportation be depressed? On the face, these questions lack a satisfac- tory answer. Residual excess did not average more than 50,000,000 barrels during 1949, less than imports and approximately 10 percent of a normal market. United States produc- tion of residual was lowered more in that year. But here is where imports enter. The imports of residual were increased along with the imports of crude, some of which gives a high yield of residual. In the circumstances, the new supply of residual could not be kept within appropriate limits. If the volume of residual imports could have been adjusted to remain as a supplemental source to domestic supply, the fuel disturbance of the last year could have been avoided. But apparently the volume of imports is not subject to fluctua- tions in the American market. Instead, it must be increased. Dumping has caused residual to be widely disturbing to coal, and to invade coal’s eastern coastal market with success. A large number of coal consumers located in the New England, Middle Atlantic, and South Atlantic States, have switched to residual oil after re- ceiving attractive price offers. As an illustration, most of the electric utilities located on or near the eastern sea- coast have shifted from coal to oil in part or whole within the last year. A check of 15 utility plants in New England which con- verted showed that 6 were entirely fueled by oil, and 7 were from 50 to 100 percent on oil. Similar changes have taken place in New York and south. The table following, taken from Federal power records, measures the displacement of coal at 26 plants between September ' 1948-49, which amounts to over 6,000,000 A$291 tons, as o11 consumption increased five times. Additional oil imports will mean that resid- ual will widen its attack, and further depress American fuel production. Coal and oil consumption by select electric utilities Coal] consump- tion (thousand Oil consumption tons) (thousand tons) Sep- Sep- Sep- Sep- tember | tember | tem ber tember 1948 1949 1948 1649 Ne Bosland (19 nts)...---------- 293 79 373 | 1,176 middie Atlantic (7 plants).....-----.-- 680 363 58 908 Total_.---.---- 973 442 431 2,079 Source: Federal Power Commission, 6. EFFECTS OF THE IMPORT PROGRAM The case for oil imports rests upon the contention that the country will need out- side petroleum sources in the years ahead to supplement its own production. Otherwise, the imports proponents say, the United States will have inadequate fuel in terms of what is available 1n volume and costs to the world and thus to other countries, and will be at a disadvantage to that extent. Oil imports also receive support in the promotion of foreign trade. This is im- portant but not the controvir= economic factor. Fuel supply is:.c.. ui .9 the econ- omy’s operation to be secondary to foreign trade per se. Imports, where essential, fit nicely into foreign market development. But the country cannot let trade promotion alone interfere with a sound fuel policy. One weak point in the argument for oil import is the time aspect. When will Ameri- can petroleum production be inadequate? Oil companies without foreign interests claim there can be plenty of American production. for years to come. The National Petroleum Council has a similar view. Certainly, the growth of foreign production controlled by American interests has been at a faster rate than indicated by needs. Another point not clear is the loss of in- terest in synthetic output with the develop- ment of foreign oll. Preliminary reports by the Government and industry contain fa- vorable statements on the making of syn- thetic oil. From a long-range view: Might not synthetics be advanced to a position comparable to oll dependent upon foreign supply? Technologists say there is no physical prob- lem in converting coal to oil, They admit that their exploratory research has shown that costs for synthetics are higher than those for oils gained from petroleum refining. But synthetic production costs would be bettered with further research and experi- ence, Even if higher they might tax the economy less than it would to provide pro- tection for foreign oil supply. When reference is made to an adequate oil supply in the future: What is the meaning? In brief, the answer covers a satisfactory volume of gasoline to run planes, automobiles, trucks, and similarly fueled vehicles. It includes diesel oil for locomo- tives, marine engines, and other equipment. It also includes additional light oils, Iubri- cants, and various refined products, that serve numerous uses. More and more of these products will be consumed as the economy progresses with the benefits of additional technology. Without gasoline, diesel oil and other refined output, the economy would be paralyzed. If needed, obviously ‘imports should be developed to assure that such re- fined products will be in ready volume.
A3292 However, this is not the way imports have been handled. The main product from for- eign countries has been residual fuel oil. This product has certain special uses for which there is no convenient substitute but which aggregate into an amount that could be supplied by the country’s ordinary re- fining operations. A given amount of resid- ual will be required in the future but the volume will tend to decline unless it proves more profitable than gasoline and other re- fined products which 1s unlikely in view of technological trends. But the umports pro- gram has been mainly to bring residual into the country, pushing supply above normal requirements and dump the excess, largely into coal markets. The effect has been to develop oil imports principally to displace coal as to which we have vast reserves. American financing of coal development in some foreign country that features immedi- ate cost advantages could have given the same results as has the oil-import program. Coal then could be -~~7"**¢ *3 displace ton- mage minedinthe .” * “itu: Benefiting would be particular coal consumers while nothing would be gained by milhons of other fuel users. Nothing would be added to strengthen fuel supply ahead. American interests in foreign oil may hold that the present import program is a neces- sary step In securing later benefits. Depress- ing domestic oil and coal production—dis- placing the country’s labor with foreign—are only temporary expedients for developing 1m- ports as to be essential in the future. But how far is the future? Oil imports now make for an excess oil supply and still are on the increase. Their impact has been seriously felt within only a matter of a single year. Their prospective development can remodel the fuel structure within a few years. The manner in which the oil-imports pro- gram discourages the continuation of a sound coal industry may be briefly sum- marized. Coal is an essentia! energy source for the economy. Suddenly stop coal supply and American industry will come to a standstill and civilians will face severe hardship. Dur- ing the peak war and postwar years, bitumi- nous and anthracite coal was produced at an annual rate of between six hundred and eighty to six hundred and ninety million tons. In 1949, the e~n~~r~*ie~ and export of coal amounted to .2'¢ «°1 tons, nearly 25 percent below peak levels but yet the most important source of energy among the fuels. Coal as a solid fuel will continue to he es- sential and will take on extra importance should there be a war. The basic structure of the coal industry consists of equipped mines which, today, have mining capacity to meet requirements. It has a heavy investment in plant and equip- ment, is geared to produce and prepare the numerous coal products needed. Mines are depleted from day to day and new operations must be brought into service to maintain capacity. It sometimes takes several years to reach full production in a new mine. Both existing and prospective mines reflect the trend in improved mechanization. Besides the equipped mines, marginal op- erations are developed during peak periods. They mine out crops and other deposits easily reachable which, though generally of poor quality, help supplement supply in periods of heavy demand. The marginals ordinarily have little capital outlay. A good deal of the coal suitable for marginal mining has been depleted since the start of World War IL. A requisite for coal mining is an experi- enced labor force. Miners have to acquire considerable training before they can under- take responsible assignments. Approximate- ly 500,000 men are engaged in mining at the present time. Capacity at a coal mine is of no value un- less there is transportation. Tonnage must be moved in great volume and over long dis- tances to service consumers, Coal is the largest source of revenue for the railroads, and it is important tonnage in trucking and water movement. A rough measure of the place of coal in transportation is one railroad employee for each miner. Now as to the importation of residual fuel oil. It takes about four barrels of this oll to supyert a ton of coal. On the average, Culn 1 Hon barrels of residual displaces 250,000 coal tons, 250 miners and the same number of railroad employees, and 5,000 cars of coal that would provide a frech* revenue of $750,C00. The dumping o. 1c..diian’ takes part of coal’s market and puts a downward pressure on prices as to the remainder. With 75,000,000 barrels of residual imported in 1949 and apparently larger amounts to be brought in during the succeeding years, it is easy to understand how the coal industry has been and will be squeezed. Coal confronted with the import situation will be unattractive to the miner, to the investor, and to the rau- road. Its employment will decrease, its plant will deplete without replacement, its trans- portation facilities will shrink, In conclusion, there is the question: Why does the country neéd a sound coal in- dustry? Imports that permit oil to displace coal because of advantages and an assured supply would benefit the economy. This seems logical but nothing has been put for~ ward to make it practical. The country is never sure of imports. It failed to main- tain its movement from Latin America dur- ing World War II when 1t desperately needed oil, Imports from the Middle East would be even harder to protect. In addition, the oil industry admits that less residual will be made in the more distant future as re- fineries must concentrate on gasoline, Diesel oul, and other products, in order to meet re- quirements. Thus, by shifting from coal to residual the country would depend upon a foreign fuel with a possible interrupted sup-~ ply as well as a declining supply in the Jong run. But some contend, if the import movement is cut and residual is short, consumers again. can turn to coal. The trouble with this thinking is that coal may not be available. Take the extreme case, a war declared several years hence after residual has taken a good part of the coal market. Imports stop and consumers like the eastern utilities place orders for millions of tons of coal, deliveries to start in a few days. Coal’s plant capac- ity, employment, and transportation, having been depressed, already is overloaded be- cause of war activity. Where is additional coal 10 be obtained immediately? This would be difficult to answer, especially if at that time it is decided to rush the establish- ment of a coal-to-oil industry that will use millions of tons of coal per year. Without war, the problem of fuel supply would appear gradually rather than sud- denly. Late in the fifties, as an example, it may be found that residual is short. World activity places heavy demands on refining capacity for gasoline and light oils, and the volume of residual falls. Again, coal is called upon 10 supply energy. But like in Great Britain after World War II, coal would be unable to meet demands adequately and operations of the economy would be re-~ stricted. You cannot build mines, increase employment, and supplement transportation on 4 short-term, basis. True, coal as a solid does not have the in- creasing market that oll enjoys. But the country must have a coal supply in the future as it does presently. And the coun- | try is entitled to receive this supply upon an efficlent basis such as can be expected from @ well-run coal industry with reasonable competitive opportunities, In conclusion, it appears that the current oll imports program is going to result in a development opposite to the one declared to be ils objective. The program will tend to APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD weaken instead of strengthen the country’s fuel structure of the future. Its effects will be to depress American petroleum and Coal sr-d-ict-o1 and to discourage advancement ae oy tre. 2 ofl output. What it will do is make America unnecessarily dependent on foreign fuel supply and, at the same time, without proper safeguards in case import flow is blocked or reduced. If this is a proper conclusion, then the country is mov- ing in the direction of fuel shortages, not a pleasant prospect for an economy that should expand, and remain powerful for security purposes. The Hydrogen Bomb EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. CARL HINSHAW OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, April 21, 1950 Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rac- orp, I include the following talk given by Dr. Robert F. Bacher, former member of the Atomic Energy Commission, now of the California Institute of Technol- ogy, at Town Hall, Los Angeles, March 27, 1950, entitled “The Hydrogen Bomb”: On January 31 President Truman issued a short and momentous statement about the hydrogen bomb. Quoting the central part of his statement, he said: “I have directed the Atomic Energy Commission to continue its work on all forms of atomic weapons, in- cluding the so-called hydrogen or super- bomb. Like all other work in the fleld of atomic weapons, it is being and will be car~ ried forward on a@ basis consistent with the over-all objectives of our program for peace and security.” There has been no amplification of this statement. During the weeks before the President 1s- sued his statement and in the following weeks there have heen many conflicting state- ments about hydrogen bombs and what we should do about them. Some of these state- ments have become distorted in repctition, Others, while clearly stating physical possi- bilities, concern events which are so improb- able as not to warrant serious consideration at the moment. Some of the statements made by scientists, whether intentionally or otherwise, have been very frightening to our citizens. Back of such statemonts seems to be the idea expressed by some that if the United States citizen will just become suffi- ciently frightened somehow, we will not have any war in the future. There is no question that the hydrogen bomb has terrifying possibilities, and a Mttle later I shall try to give some estimate of what such a bomb might be like. It is our very deep obligation, however, as citizens in a democratic country, to consider this whole question objectively, dispassionately, and as carefully as we can under the circumstances to decide just what our country should be doing. It will not improve the judgment of the citizen to scare him to death first. This is a very serlous time for the United States. We cannot afford any irrational or purely emotional action. Our future safety and se- curity depend today on keeping our heads and using wise Judgment. Many people in considering the national policy on the hydrogen bomb have been able to formulate their opinions of this weapon very quickly on moral grounds alone. They say, and with justice, that the hydrogen bomb is a weapon of tremendous mass de-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD struction and that accordingly no civilized country should consider its possible de- velopment and use. This is a comfortable position and one very easy to take, but where do we stop? Atomic bombs are also weapons of mass destruction. Are they moral or im- moral? Nothing could be more gruesome or immoral than the reports which many of us have heard of some of the hand-to-hand conflicts during the past war. Nothing could be more uncivilized than some of the torture to which war, conflict, and slave states have led. There is no question about it. War in- evitably leads to many acts which are im-~ moral. The relative immorality of various weapons and acts of war becomes difficult to distinguish. The hydrogen bomb, being a@ weapon of tremendous destruction, is more to be condemned than lesser weapons on these grounds if used for needless mass de~ struction. Indeed, no one can argue that the moral position of the United States will be improved by the possession or use of this bomb. Immoral as war is, war consumes @ large part of the efforts of the people of the world. Situations arise in which war seems to be the lesser of two evils. The moral problem is therefore a much deeper one. The real question is: “What should the United States do in order to diminish the probability of world conflict and to increase world peace and international accord?” To this question many answers are given. One man will say that the only approach is pacifism. Another man will say that the only approach is to be fully and completely prepared to act against any aggressor imme- diately and effectively. The problem seems to be much more subtle. No such simple solution has been found in the past to be effective. I have no complete answer to this question for you today. But what we do about the hydrogen bomb in the future may affect world peace, and is directly related to this basic question. One man says that to make the ‘hydrogen bomb starts us on a weapons race which will inevitably lead us to war. Another man says that we can only maintain our security if we make hydrogen bombs and thus are able to hold an aggressor at bay. Which one is right? Many of our citizens have lost all faith in the United Nations and believe that there are no possibilities at all for international agreements which will have any meaning. Others feel that we have not made the right approach to the Russians as yet. Certainly there is little reason from our experiences in the United Nations and particularly from our experiences and efforts toward the in- ternational control of atomic energy, to be very hopeful. While yielding no tangible results these discussions of the control of atomic energy have been very useful in point- ing out where the difficulties lie. Our Secretary of State, Dean Acheson, stoutly maintains that if Russia will face the real needs for international agreement on vital issues and will show a desire to reach agreement, then it would be possible to lessen the tension which grips the world today. While he is not optimistic on Russian will- ingness to decrease that tension, he believes that accord on the international control of atomic energy is one of the vital issues. If international accord seems so unlikely, we should be interested in whether a vigorous development and production of the hydro- gen. bomb will increase or diminish the prob- ability of war. Of course, there will be some who will argue that any weapon development at all leads to war and therefore we should make no development of any kind. Though this is In agreement with some of our most deeply rooted Christian ideas it cannot be followed. There is no question at all in my mind, that for our Nation to pursue such a policy in XCVI~App.—— 208 the present world would be for us greatly to increase the probability of a world holo- caust and a national calamity. Throwing aside then such a pacifist view, let us ask the questions: “What weapon de- velopment is important to the national se~ curity? How important is the hydrogen bomb to national security? Will hydrogen bombs increase our chance of winning a war with minimum. loss?” Before trying to answer these questions, let us look briefly at some of the technical background of the hydrogen bomb. It has been known for a great many years that if one could somehow find a way of putting light atomic nuclei together to make heavier nuclei, it would be possible to extract en- ergy. It has also been known for a long time that if one could take the heaviest nuclei and split them apart, one would be able to obtain energy. The first indication that either of these processes might be important to us as a source of energy came from the suggestion by Hans Bethe that the fusion of the light elements was our fundamental source of energy in the sun and stars. Dr. Bethe worked his ideas out in some detail and scientists now believe that this is the origin of solar energy. These ideas were well de- veloped before the fission of uranium was discovered. The discovery of the fission of uranium in 1938 was immediately recog- nized as a possible source of energy for man. Released gradually he could use this energy for power. Releasea suddenly this energy could provide an explosion. Two fundamental scientific discoveries which followed soon after the discovery of fission were of far-reaching importance, The first of these was that in the fis- sion of uranium caused by the absorption of. low-energy neutrons, additional neutrons were released in the process. The importance of this fact is that the fission of uranium could produce neutrons which could then produce another fission, hence the term chain reaction. These neutrons released in fission could make the reaction self-perpetuating. The second discovery was that some of these neutrons were emitted some time after the fission took place. It was this fact that made the controlled chain reaction or nu- clear reactor a possibility. Without these delayed neutrons we would have no way of controlling a nuclear reactor. With the fusion of the light elements the situation is entirely different. Here the basic nuclear reactions which lead to the release of relatively large quantities of energy are those which occur when the nuclear par- ticles collide at high velocity or high relative kinetic energy. At the center of the stars the temperature is many millions of degrees centigrade and the particles of matter are moving at such high speeds that these nu- clear reactions may take place. Even then, only a few nuclear reactions are possible. There is no possibility that the energy re- lease from this type of reaction can be con- trolled on the earth. In the stars the reac- tion is controlled because of their great size, On the earth these self-sustaining thermo- nuclear reactions will either give an explo- sion or nothing at atl. Whether or not a hydrogen bomb can be made depends upon whether it is possible to create on earth, an assembly of materials which will produce a nuclear reaction if heated to a sufficiently high temperature and then to devise a way to raise these materials to that temperature. The temperature required is comparable to that reached in the interior of the sun which is more than 10,000,000 degrees centigrade. The only way that we know to reach such a temperature today is an atomic bomb where the sudden release of energy causes the ma- terials of the bomb to be heated to an ex- tremely high temperature. A3293 The main light element, of course, to which I have been referring is hydrogen. Now ordinary hydrogen just won’t work, The scientific evidence for this seems to be quite clear. But hydrogen as it is found in nature has two forms or isotopes, The heavy hydrogen discovered by Urey nearly 20 years ago, is a possibility. In recent years heavy hydrogen, as contained in water, has been separated in relatively large quantities. There is another possibility. For more than 15 years it has been known that another isotope of hydrogen called tritium because it has mass three, is produced in nuclear re- actions. This material is radioactive and or- Ginarily does not exist in nature. It has a half life of 12 years but its nuclear prop- erties are such that it is of basic interest in the release of energy by fusion, It has been known for many years that tritium could be produced in a nuclear reac- tion in which neutrons are absorbed. As you all know the big nuclear reactors which are now in operation, do produce neutrons in large quantity. These neutrons are ordi- narily used in the production of plutonium. But they could be used just as well to pro- duce quantities of tritium. Any nuclear physicist can sit down and figure out the theoretical limit of the amount of tritium that can be produced with a given number of- neutrons. He would quickly recognize that since you need neutrons to produce plutonium and neutrons to produce tritium, a-‘nuclear reactor could be used to produce one or the other at will. It would be neces- sary, of course, to know a great deal about the actual workings of a nuclear reactor in order to say just how much tritium could be produced in that reactor if one were willing to forego the production of a certain amount of plutonium. It sounds as if the production of tritium in quantity is at least a fairly ex- pensive if not formidable process. That these two isotopes of hydrogen can possibly play a fundamental role in the re- lease of nuclear energy by fusion is well known. Just exactly what relative role they play and how they might play it, is not asub- ject for open discussion today. These ques- tions are secret and we can have no discus= sion of them. But any nuclear physicist will quickly grasp the basic science requirements even though the bomb technology is much more complicated. The real problem in developing and con- structing a hydrogen bomb is: “How do you get it going?” The heavy hydrogens, deu- terium and tritium, are suitable substances if somehow they could be heated hot enough and kept hot. This problem is a little bit like the job of making a fire at 20 degrees below zero in the mountains with green wood which is covered with ice and with very little kindling. Today, scientists tell us that such a fire can probably be kindled. Once you get the fire going, of course, you can pile on the wood and make a very siz- able conflagration. In the same way with the hydrogen bomb, more heavy hydrogen can be used and a bigger explosion obtained. It has been called an open ended weapon, meaning that more materials can be added and a bigger explosion cbtained. Let us look for a moment at what sort of an explosion is imagined. Here I shall take the figures which have been commonly re- ported in the press and stick to round num- bers. I believe that these are quite adequate for you to obtain some general idea of what such an explosion is like. In 1945 President Truman stated that the atomic bomb was equivalent to 20,000 tons of TNT. In talking about the hydrogen bomb it has commonly been speculated that such a bomb would be one thousand times as powerful as the bomb dropped on Hiroshima. If it is 1,000 times as powerful this would mean that it would have an explosive effect equivalent to about 20,000,000 tons of TNT.
A3294 Now it happens that the radius of damage from a big explosion increases as the cube root of the energy is released. With a bomb a thousand times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb the radius of damage will be 10 times greater. Since the radius for almost complete destruction f-om blast was approximately 1 mile at Hiroshima, the cor- responding radius for a hydrogen bomb 1,000 times as large would be approximately 10 miles, Such a hydrogen bomb would be sufficiently great to cause almost complete destruction of any metropolitan area known today. In Los Angeles, for example, a circle of 10 miles radius would cover most but not all of the metropolitan area. Outlying communities would not be included but would still suffer damage. There are other damage effects from atomic weapons. At Hiroshima people who were in the open and exposed directly to the light of the bomb were seriously burned. With a hydrogen bomb these effects will be much greater and may extend to an even greater radius than the blast affects. On the other hand, the radiation which produces these purns is very easily absorbed. It is very mucb like the radiation from the sun and a shadow or a blanket of smog is a great pro- tection. The same evil smelling smog blanket which cuts off our sun may after all be some protection. Generally speaking one would expect the flash burn effects to increase as the square root of the power of the bomb. In other words, for a bomb a thousand times greater than Hiroshima the effects would be ex- pected to extend roughly 30 times as far. At Hiroshima flash burns were severe out to two-thirds of a mile and without smog ab- sorption or shadows similar burns might be expected out to 20 miles for a hydrogen bomb. Except for a hydrogen bomb exploded at extraordinarily high altitude, such a dam- age radius would mean that shadows of puildings, trees, bushes, and other objects would be very important in cutting down the ° direct effect of flash burn. If you couldn’t see the bomb directly you would expect no effect of flash burn. For a bomb exploded at an elevation of 2 miles it would be rather like trying to see Mount Baldy from 20 miles away. Even without atmospheric absorp- tion there would be relatively few spots where come building or other structure would not be in the way. Atomic bombs and hydrogen bombs as well, may be expected to release neutrons and penetrating gamma radiation. These particles and rays, however, are absorbed fairly easily in air and will not have an ap- preciably greater radius of action for a hy- drogen bomb than for an ordinary atomic bomb. People who are sufficiently close to be killed by penetrating radiation would very likely be killed by blast effects either direct or indirect in any event, Among those in- jJured, some will definitely show effects of radiation damage. There has been a great deal of speculation about the radioactive products produced by a hydrogen bomb. The disintegration prod- ucts produced in the explosion are them- selves not radioactive as are the fission prod- ucts from an atomic bomb. But since an atomic bomb would be needed in order to get the conflagration going, some fission products from that bomb would doubtless be present. But large quantities of radioactiv- lty may be produced from the neutrons waren are released in the nuclear conflagra- tion. If the neutrons released in the hydrogen 2omb explosion are absorbed in some mate- tlal which becomes artificially radioactive, shen a very large quantity of this radioactive naterial will be produced in a big explosion. Dn the other hand, many of these neutrons night be absorbed in material which would de inactive and the effects of the radioactiy- ity at least in part avoided. If the neutrons ° escaped into the air, many of them would be absorbed by nitrogen and, by a nuclear reac- tion, produce radioactive carbon, This ma- terial is most disagreeable as a radioactive contaminant since it has a half life of many thousands of years. If such a bomb were exploded under water, however, very few of the neutrons would es- cape and most of them would be used to produce radioactive sodium or to activate other elements in sea water, or to produce heavy hydrogen by neutron capture in or- dinary hydrogen. The radioactivity effects of a hydrogen bomb are thus difficult to estimate, since they depend very much on where the bomb is exploded and what material surrounds it. Under conditions in which the largest amount of radioactivity is formed it would be a dangerous hazard. One of the real scare stories about the effects of radioactivity, has postulated the complete explosion of 500 tons of deuterium, which’, while not impossible as far as anyone can say, is stretching probabili- ties a long way. From our brief analysis of well-known sci- entific information it appears that a hy- drogen bomb would require a considerable quantity of heavy hydrogen, both deuterium and tritium perhaps, as well as an atomic bomb to set it off and raise the temperature sufficiently so that a nuclear conflagration can exist. Technically the problem is to fig- ure out how a sizable fraction of the energy of the heavy hydrogen can be released before the material is cooled too much by emitted radiation or dispersed by the explosion. In the stars the radiation is retained because the steller atmosphere is relatively opaque and there is an enormous temperature dif- ference between the center and the outside of the star. In a hydrogen bomb there is no such protective layer and the central problem is to get a large fraction of the energy re- leased while the temperature is still high enough. Whether this can be done will of course not be certain until it has been done. There are many opinions as to how difficult it may be. Since the President has directed the Atomic Energy Commission to continue with the development, we can assume that this development is regarded as both possible and feasible. So much for the technical problems which must be solved in order to develop a hydrogen bomb. While it seems possible that these problems may be solved, whether or not a hydrogen bomb can be developed will be fully determined only when a bomb has been made and exploded. But let us for the moment, assume that the development can be com- pleted. In order that we may try to de- termine whether or not hydrogen bombs will add materially to our national security, let ‘us try to summarize briefly their effective- ness as military weapons and compare them with atomic borabs already in existence, If we assume that the hydrogen bomb is a thousand times as powerful as the Hiroshima bomb, it will have a radius for blast damage which is 10 times as great. For severe blast damage that means a radius of about 10 miles. For flash-burn damage, the radius will be theoretically 30 times as great as for the Hiroshima bomb. Absorption and shadow effects will cut this down greatly at the larger distances, so that an effective radius for flash burns for those in the open might be roughly the same as for severe blast damage. Effects of neutrons and hard gam-~ ma radiation from the hydrogen bomb, would not be expected to extend very much further than they would for an atomic bomb. The effects of radioactivity would depend very greatly on where and how the bomb ‘was exploded. Exploded in the air, the effects of radioactivity from a hydrogen bomb would be quickly dispersed and for long-lived activ- ity, the effects would be almost the same for APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD all parts of the world unless brought down by rain. It might be possible to enhance these radioactive effects by surrounding the bomb with the proper materials and to arrange it so that the active material is deposited near the point of explosion. How successful such an unpleasant operation might be, would again depend upon where the bomb was exploded and upon the general climatic conditions which existed at the time. Whether or not our Nation would ever want to use radioac- tive poisons or a bomb so designed that it would produce them in quantity, is very doubtful. Without trying to answer this question, we see that the effectiveness of radioactive contamination from a hydrogen bomb designed and exploded to enhance that effect seems to be somewhat uncertain and at least in part unpredictable. We can easily see that a hydrogen bomb is eapable of destroying any major city, with the exception perhaps of some of the outlying districts. How does this compare with what could be done with atomic bombs? We have been comparing the hydrogen bomb with the atomic bomb used at Hiroshima but it has been stated that since the war there have peen significant improvements in atomic bombs. These improvements have resulted in more powerful bombs and in a more effi- cient use of the valuable fissionable material, Most large metropolitan areas include many areas covered by water or otherwise unsettled so that a hydrogen bomb would include many square miles whose destruc- tion would contribute in no way to the ef- fectiveness of the komb. Atomic bombs could presumably be dropped so as to avoid these areas. Furthermore, it was found in the last war that a saturation raid which greatly hampered fire fighting caused dam- age far beyond the areas of immediate blast effects. Considering all these factors, it seems likely that there is no metropolitan area which could not be thoroughly destroyed With 25 atomic bombs. It is more likely that less than 10 atomic bombs would be needed to destroy major metropolitan arens and that two bombs would completely paralyze even large cities. Except for the psychological effects and for the most unpleasant and somewhat un- predictable effects of the radioactivity pro-~ duced, it appears that a hydrogen bomb which is a thousand times more powerful than an atomic bomb might cause more destruction but would probably not be much more effective than 10 atomic bombs. For smaller industrial targets it would not be much more effective than a single atomic bomb. One begins to wonder just how powerful & military weapon the hydrogen bomb would be. There does not seem to be very much to the statement which has been made by some, that the hydrogen bomb is such a tre- mendous new weapon that it can com- pletely revolutionize warfare. The hydrogen bomb seems to be a terrible weapon and certainly large numbers of these bombs could cause untold destruction. Even a relatively small number could be a major blow to any highly industrialized and centralized country. But what about the atomic bomb and the damage which might be infilcted with a siz- able stock pile of these weapons? Suppose, just to take a round number, that the United States possessed 1,000 atomic bombs of the improved variety. If they could be delivered to military objectives at all, they would go a long way at the rate of 10 for a major metropolitan area and perhaps an even smaller number for major cities. With a thousand bombs, there would be a great many for relatively minor military objectives and I imagine that the military commanders charged with the responsibility of the prose~- cution of a war would have a hard time figur- ing out what to do with the last hundred. Tt appears that if any nation has as many as a thousand atomic bombs, that the world
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD is already in the position where any nation could be blasted thoroughly and completely insofar as bombing alone can be effective. If this is the case, just what additional muli- tary use is a hydrogen bomb? For the most part it just seems that everyone is fascinated by the idea of “the bigger the better.” There are a few examples in the history of the world that should lead us to question this view and not accept it, at least not without argument. We should not forget the dino- saur nor the dodo. We should not forget the battleship, now almost extinct. Of course it might turn out in a war that it would not be possible to deliver atomic bombs or any big bombs, to the targets which the military commanders might want to de- stroy. If this is the case and if atomic bombs or any big bombs are any major part of our military preparation, then from the military standpoint, the solution of this problem is vastly more important than ex- actly what kind of bombs would be carried if they could be delivered. If hydrogen bombs would not add very much to the military effectiveness of the United States we might ask whether they would add much to Russia’s military poten- tial. Here, of course, one gets involved in even more speculation. One is not able to judge very well whether the Russians have an appreciable chance of delivering the hydrogen bomb by air against the radar de- fense of the country which is now being constructed. But even if such a defense is constructed and is reasonably effective and even if the Russians do not have the same strength of long-range bombers which the United States has, still there is another method of delivery which for them would be perhaps quite effective. Many of the big metropolitan areas of the United States are located on the seacoast. Into these harbors, or at least reasonably close to them, a hydrogen bomb might easily be brought in the hold of a tramp steamer. While this might not be the most effective place to detonate a hydrogen bomb, it would be a simple method of delivery for a surprise attack. On the other hand, there are prac~ tically no Russian cities which coulda be reached using a similar method of delivery by the United States. Another variation might involve the use of relatively small unmanned craft which would run ashore with a hydrogen bomb aboard. It would thus appear that while the poten- tial effectiveness of a hydrogen bomb in the interior of either the United States or Russia would be about the same for both countries, the hydrogen bomb would be a more effec- tive weapon used against seacoast cities. This means that the hydrogen bomb would be a more effective weapon for the Russians than for the United States. . Some people have argued that if we de- velop the hydrogen bomb and can really keep its details secret, the Russians will never be able to develop it. There is abso- lutely no reason at all to believe that this would be the case. Recent experience has shown that the Russians have an atomic energy enterprise adequately developed to mak. a sizable atomic explosion. In addi- tion they probably have fairly detailed in- formation on our atomic weapons work and at least some of the early thoughts on the possibility of a hydrogen bomb as a result of well-known scientific information com- bined with the blundering indiscretions of some months ago and also from their espio- nage activity. Given adequate time, they can most surely make a hydrogen bomb if it is possible at all. From these arguments it appears that hy- drogen bombs will not add greatly to the military effectiveness of the United States, How much they would add to Russia’s ef- fectiveness against the United States is not exactly clear, but probably somewhat more than they would add to ours. The Presi- dent’s decision to go ahead with the develop- ment of the hydrogen bomb 6 weeks ago cre- ated a tremendous stir in the Nation. Viewed only from the standpoint of its military ef- fectiveness there seems to be little reason to attach such great significance to the hy- drogen bomb. While it is a terrible weapon, its military effectiveness seems to have been grossly overrated in the mind of the layman. What is probably much more serious about the hush hush subject of the hydrogen bomb is that here is a weapon about which the average citizen is so ill-informed that he thinks 1t can save the country from attack. Pumped full of hysteria from Red scares and aggravated by political mud slinging, the average citizen is easily convinced that he can find some security and relief from all of this in the hydrogen bomb which will protect him. The most tragic part is that the hydrogen bomb won’t save us and it isn’t even a very good addition to our military potential. Here we have the outcome of what can happen in a democracy when decisions of far- reaching national significance are made with~« out public scrutiny of pertinent information. While most of the pertinent information is not secret at all, some of the information which the citizen should have in order to judge whether a national policy is sound, is secret. One of the most important facts which the citizen should have to make a reasonable Judgment is the approximate number of bombs in the United States stock pile. It would be quite surprising if the Rus- slans from the information which they ob- tained could not figure this out. Senator Mc- Manon raised the question of making the number of atomic weapons available gen- erally. He was vigorously criticized. As of last spring, not even the members of the Joint Congressional Committee on Atomic Energy knew how many atomic bombs the United States had. Additional information which would help the citizen to appreciate the relative cost of hydrogen bombs and atomic bombs would be the fissionable material needed to get the hydrogen reaction started and the plutonium equivalent of the tritium to be used. Since neutrons are required to produce either plu- tonium or tritium, the neutron cost of a hy- drogen bomb may be larger than it first ap- pears. These neutrons could, of course, be ‘used to produce additional plutonium so that there is avery real sacrifice of potential atomic bombs in order to obtain the ingre-~ dients for hydrogen bombs. There have been such wide discrepancies in the estimated dol- Jar costs of the hydrogen bomb that the citi- zen cannot make any sensible conclusion about the money costs at all. It is most important in our democracy that our Government be frank and open with the citizens. In a democracy it is only possible to have good government when the citizens are well informed. It is difficult enough for them to become well informed when the in- formation is easily available. When that in- formation is not available, it is impossible. While there may be some cases in which the information which the citizen needs in or- der to make an intelligent judgment of na- tional policy, must be kept secret so that military potential will not be jeopardized, the present use of secrecy far exceeds this minimum limit. These are the methods of an authoritarian government and should be vigorously opposed in our democracy. The hydrogen bomb and its potential use- fulness to the United States as a military weapon is a subject on which the citizens should be much more fully informed. It is a subject of national inmportance, not only because it is a weapon whose effectiveness has been grossly exaggerated but it is also one in which we can place relatively little reliance for the future, Quantities of hydro- gen bombs will not contribute very much to A3295 the security of the United States. Unfortu- nately the citizen today believes that they will. If the development of the hydrogen bomb will probably not do much to increase na- tional security, what then might be done which would have importance in this direc- tion? There are probably many answers to this question but let me just make one sug- gestion that I am sure is clear to anyone who has thought seriously about the problem. If the Russians should decide to move into western Europe, we would immediately be faced with the prospect of fighting a war. Presumably, we could use atomic hombs. It would not be long, however, before we would need a big United States Army and supplies not only for that Army but also for our allies in Hurope. We would have to send these supplies from the United States. But just how would we get those supplies to Europe? During the past war on at least two occasions, the Germans came danger- ously close to shutting off our supplies to England. This was before the development of the schnorkel-type of submarine which We are told the Russians now have in quan~ tity. It is well known that the schnorkel submarine, while not absolutely impervious to detection by radar, is most difficult to run down. No method of detection of subma- rines has been developed which can locate them at any great distance under water. At the moment there is no good solution to the problem of hunting down the schnorkel sub- marine and it appears that a determined enemy with adequate bases and submarines could go a long way toward preventing us from delivering men and supplies to Europe. We could presumably deliver a certain amount of material by air, but when it comes to delivering millions of tons, our experience with the Berlin air lift should show us that this is not a feasible solution. Here is a problem whose solution would contribute greatly to our military strength and, therefore, to our security. Its solution might even deter the Russians from overrun- ning western Europe if they had planned to do so. On this ground it seems to be much more important than the more spectacular hydrogen bomb development. There are probably a great many more developments which are almost as important as the solution of the problem of antisub- marine warfare. For example, there are the problems of the development of long-range guided missiles. This development is clearly important to military strength. During the Jast war both the Germans and the Russians were very successful in the tactical use of airplanes with ground troops. New techni- cal developments might be made which might greatly increase the effectiveness of airplanes in tactical use. It seems very likely that there are many developments related to military strength which may be important for us to pursue. For some of these, as in the case of the de- velopment of atomic energy, we may need to choose between weapons and other develop- ments of nuclear power which may have long-range, peacetime significance. This long-range, peacetime significance may add to our increased industrial strength and thereby make a greater contribution to our Jong-range strength than the more immedi- ate development of weapons themselves. At the present time it is most difficult to ascertain how our Government decides what policies to follow regarding national security. High Government officials find themselves with advice to pursue this or that develop- ment and construct this or that weapon without being very sure how one weapon compares with another. Where the develop- ment of a weapon may compete with a long- range industrial development the problem is still more difficult. The real way to make sure that a reasonable policy is followed, is to have those policies and the information
A3296 on which they are based open for public scrutiny. Furthermore, although the United States is a rich country, we are not in the position of being able to follow every recommendation that anyone believes will increase our na- tional security. The citizen must choose insofar as that is possible. Today if he tries to come to some conclusion about what should be done to in- crease the national security, the citizen runs up against a high wall of secrecy. He can, of course, take the easy solution and say that these are questions which should be left to the upper echelons of the Military Estab- lishments to decide. But these questions are so important today, that to leave them to the military men to decide is for the citizen es~- sentially to abrogate his basic responsibility. If in time of peace, questions on which the future of our country depend, are left to any small group not representative of the people to decide, we have gone a long way toward authoritarian government. The United States has grown to be a strong Nation under a Constitution which wisely has laid great emphasis upon the importance of free and open discussion. Urged by a@ large number of people who have fallen for the fallacy that in secrecy there is security and, I regret, encouraged by many including eminent scientists who prophesy doom just around the corner, we are dangerously close +o abandoning those principles of free speech and open discussion which have made our country great. The democratic system de- pends on making intelligent decisions by the electorate. Our democratic heritage can only be carried on if the citizen has the in- formation with which to make an intelligent decision. Another President Comes EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HOMER D. ANGELL OF OREGON IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, May 5, 1950 Mr. ANGELL. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following article from the Oregon Journal of April 30, 1950: . ANOTHER PRESIDENT COMES President Truman’s schedule has been partly announced. He is to “dedicate” Grand Coulee Dam on May 11. <A week later, such political implications as his visit con- tains will be transferred to Spokane and a speech by Vice President ALBEN BaRKLEY who never thinks he needs to pull his punches on whether his subject is politics. It always is. The President’s coming starts all kinds of agitation. Will he stand in the presence of the Nation’s greatest hydroelectric plant and propose, “Turn it over’? Turn it over, that is, to CVA? Or will he put the Presidential weight back of the present development program stimu- lated by a new form of coordination? FDR PLAYS PROPHET Will HST, when he departs, leave as mem-~= orable a phrase as did his predecessor, FDR, who came at the outset of Columbia River power development and said: _ “More power to you.” Franklin D. Roosevelt had come into the Pacific Northwest in 1920. In Spokane he madeaspeech. Pointing toward the Colum- bia River basin, he said: “Great stretches of physical territory now practically untouched are destined some day to contain the homes of thousands and hun- dreds of thousands of citizens like ours, to be developed by the Nation and for the Nation. * & * We have made beginnings with reclamation projects, but I like to think they are only beginnings and that in our lifetime, yes, in the immediate years to come, we are going to see with our own eyes these problems taken up on vastly larger scale. ‘We have got to have a national policy that will put in not $100,000,000 in 10 years, but $100,000,000 every year for 10 years.” This was Roosevelt playing prophet to himself. Thirty years ago, the idea of Grand Coulee was not born. The idea, so far as it had been formed, was of a diversion dam near Albeni Falls on Coeur d’Alene River in Idaho. Its purpose was to divert enough water to make five Spokane Rivers, carry it 1380 miles to the head of the Columbia Basin, thence to distribute it over 2,000,000 acres of arid lands and make them smile with abundance. Years were to pass before the campaign for Bonneville Dam was more than an iso- lated effort. The organized drive was for Umatilla Rapids (now McNary) Dam, and the goals were navigation and reclamation with power the incident. Economic depression was to be the rough key that unlocked the power of the Colum- bia. Roosevelt admitted reclamation to the recovery program in response to western ap- peal. A pressure that mounted and found its focus in the late Senator Charles L. Mc- Nary and Representative Charles H. Martin in Washington led the President to authorize initial construction of Bonneville. Even then it was a struggle to secure authority for a power development or for a dam of more than navigation height, due not to the reluctance of FDR, but to the notion of Harold L. Ickes, then head of PWA, that the low dam was enough. President Roosevelt, in 1984, stood at the site of Bonneville Dam to say, “More power to you.” Ten months before he had au- thorized the first money allocation. “I think we have gone a long way in less than a year,” he commented with pride, gazing at the busy scene of construction. He went on to Grand Coulee, following by motor the route of the ancient and enor- mous channel of the Columbia. On August 5, 1984, he pledged himself to a high dam. He was confident against a lot of pessimists that the power could be marketed. He ex- plained why Western States were getting what seemed a disproportionate amount of public-work funds. The money was not only for those now in the West, but for the many who would come from regions of blight and limited opportunity. Here again Roosevelt was playing prophet to himself. The people had begun to come before he passed away. They are coming in ever-increasing numbers. But did FDR prevision all that was to come and how swiftly? ‘WAR USE AT FIRST With Bonneville and Grand Coulee there was power in new dimensions for new cal- culations. Big reclamation, such as that in Malheur County, Oreg., came into fruitful- ness. . War caught us napping in armament, but there was power for shipyards, for aluminum, for many other war-connected industries. It had been like whistling in a graveyard at first to say all the power would be marketed, The problem became how to develop power fast enough to meet demand. That continues to be the problem, al- though the shooting war ended in 1945, And one of the greatest consumers of hy= droelectric power was the mysterious indus- try at Hanford which had contributed to the atom bomb. But the changes were not to be limited to the evolution from power to war industry to the most frightful of all weapons and to the recovery program, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD There was also coming, unseen, the play of new things upon our own way of life in the Oregon country. We had seen the power policies of the New Deal linked to a plan for wider distribution of population as a means of checking the overgrowth of the great east- ern industrial districts. A longer time was necessary to see how the collectivism we abhorred in older, dictator- governed parts of the world was creeping in upon us in the form of new schemes of gov- ernment and new controls by government upon the individual. The veteran who had dreamed of his own home for his own family on his own land in a Columbia Basin rec- lamation project began to feel the push of a proposed collectivist valley authority stand- ing between him and his smiling Uncle 3am. INDIVIDUAL SUBMERGED? Obscurely, it is true, but with increasing light it could be seen that the individual himself might become only a unit of a planned economy that dealt with men in the same terms as machinery and land and sought to control all in the same way. That’s a pretty bad fate for the American individual. James B, Conant, president of Harvard, writes in Foreign Affairs: “The American public is quite uncertain as to the relation of the physical and natural sciences to the set of moral and spiritual values by which the average individual guides his daily life.” REALITY OF FREEDOM Maybe it reads here like mere “highfalutin’ talk” to insist that the set of factors to be applied to the people concerned in the de- velopment of tne Columbia Basin will have a lot to do with their moral and spiritual values in the years to come. And a lot to do with the reality of their freedom. To repeat, President Truman is coming to dedicate Grand Coulee on May 11, about 10 years after the big dam began producing power. When President Roosevelt came, he set in motion a train of events that bear upon the interests of every one of us living in the Pacific Northwest. We have no doubt that President Truman's coming to Grand Coulee was originally planned to lend strength to the CVA cam- paign. Some insist that his big immediate purpose is to lend strength to the candidacy of his friend, Senator Warren Macnuson, whatever may happen to CVA. However, the President, while committing himself to the valley authority program, has also supported the plan for coordinated development evolved by the big construction agencies of the Government. Since these big agencies, such as the Army engineers and the Reclamation Bureau, have done the building and created the prop- erties that now make the Federal interest in the Columbia Basin such a rich political and ideological plum, the President has been. no more than just in allowing them to go ahead. “EEP AMERICA FREE” Likewise, it saves the Columbia Basin pro- gram. from debacle. The train of events will move more swiftly. If what has happened since was incompre- hensible to the beginnings of Bonneville and Grand Coulee, but is the accepted order to- day, what is to happen in the next few years will be as much greater as momentum and change are greater. Compare jet propulsion with the Columbia voyageur in his bateau. In the past we've kept the American way and compelled the American kind of progress because we had an instinct for the right choice. We'll have to stick tenaciously to the simple old maxim that America is the sum of its free individuals. Another President comer
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Japanese Competition Threatening Industry EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDITH NOURSE ROGERS OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, May 5, 1950 Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts, Mr, Speaker, under leave to extend my re-~ marks in the Recorp, I include the fol- lowing editorial from the Southern Tex- tile News. JAPANESE COMPETITION THREATENING INDUS- TRY—PLAN DRIVE IN ConcREsS To Prorecr MILLS (By Charles Sampas) Lowett, Mass.—Representative Epire Nourse Rocers is spearheading an all-out drive in Congress to preserve northern and southern textile industries from foreign competition which is today threatening the entire industry. A number of foreign factors are threaten- ing the textile manufacturers of America and their competition and actions are re- sponsible for the fact that thousands upon thousands of New England woglen mill em-~ ployees are currently out of wOTrk. The factors: All-out Japanese competition, the Rus- sians’ bidding in the Australian wool market, British devaluation, the rise of the Italian textile industry, among ethers. Is is pointed out that Japanese mills were once the biggest exporters of textiles in the world. The war reduced Japan’s exports of cotton goods by 2,000,000,000 yards. The mumber of spindles in operation were cut from, 12,000,000 to something under 3,000,000. This resulted in a gain for American cotton mills, whose exports increased from 3.6 per- cent of the world’s total in 1934-38 to 26.8 percent 2 years ago—in 1948. MORE SPINDLES Now, however, Japanese mills expect to have at least 4,000,000 spindles in operation by the end of this year and to add 500,000 spindles every year thereafter. This year, the Japanese expect to export about 1,000,000,000 yards of cotton cloth. This would be 25 percent over the Nipponese figure of last year—and marks 60 percent of her total production. New England experts point out that Japan is already shipping gray goods to England and Italy for finishing and reexport—more competition for New England and Dixie. It is also emphasized that the Japanese are selling even finished cotton to Great Britain and Holland. Last year, 35,000,000 yards of fabric silk were exported to the United States of America from Japan. The Boston Globe’s business editor, “T. G. M.,” reports that last week in New York he got as much as possible of this postwar story of Japanese textiles from two Japanese im- porters. He writes: “It ls of necessity a fragmentary story in which the segments do not entirely fit. But it holds interest both because of its possible effect on the domestic textile industry and the broad question of Japanese recovery.” He points out that Japanese looms and spindles before the war carried the economic threads ypon which the country’s whole ex- porting insular economy depended, providing the foreign exchange with which Japan pur- chased the food and raw materials by which she lived. This, he stresses, brings the United States face to face with a rather uncomfortable di- lemma. We must have an economically strong Japan as a bulwark against commu- nism in Asia, yet the sole means to such economic strength lies in allowing Japan to rehabilitate a textile export trade with which we cannot help but find it difficult to compete. Wages in Japan are low, 7,000 yen ($16.19 a month) for a 48-hour week, and while pro- ductivity is as yet below this country, efforts are being made to increase it. (A new wrin- kle, for instance, is the equipping of female workers with roller skates for greater speed in moving between machines.) TARIFF BARRIERS The Ministry of International Trade, how- ever, which regulates the industry, has set export prices at a figure which will not allow Japanese cotton entry into this country over freight and tariff barriers. Eighty square percale, for instance, is quoted at 17 cents f. 0. b. Japan. With a 35 percent tariff and three-quarters of a cent freight, however, the cloth comes to an American cutter at 24 cents a yard as against a 22 cent price for cloth of like quality and domestic manufacture. Thus the competition in cottons is not in our domestic markets, but in foreign trade. In silks and certain specialties, according to the Globe writer, however, the story is different. Take pinwale corduroys, Japanese corduroys, for instance, may be imported for 78 cents a yard as against a price for the do~ mestic product at 87% cents. If we have so far felt no very serious com- petition in the domestic market in these lines, it is because a shortage of vat dyes has kept down Japanese production, a sit- uation that may soon be expected to change. Indeed, the pressure of Japanese textiles on our own and the world markets may soon force our whole Asiatic economic policy to a head. CHINA IS CRUX The crux of the matter, the Japanese say, is China. This nation was once Japan’s great source of raw material and her principal out- Jet for manufactured goods, accounting for roughly 25 percent of all Japan’s foreign trade, We have now cut that trade to only a trickle, with the result that we have created a distortion of the normal trade pattern. Japanese goods now press for markets to the west, which inevitably works to our own dis- advantage by forcing upon ourselves a com- petition we are bound to find increasingly hard to meet. The cold war, on the other side of the world, is cutting the heart out of New Eng- Jand’s woolen industries. The price of wool is being boosted by Russia’s bidding in the Australian market and it is estimated that 88,000 woolen workers are out because of this. Freedom and Petroleum Geology EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HERBERT A. MEYER OF KANSAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, May 5, 1950 Mr. MEYER. Mr. Speaker, on April 25, at the annual convention in Chicago of the American Association of Petro- leum Geologists, Mr. C. W. Tomlinson, of Ardmore, Okla., retiring president of that large and highly important organi- zation, expressed most eloquently certain truths which are basic to our entire so- cial and economic system. A3297 These are days of planning for con- trols of industry, of business and of the intellectual resources of our country. It is most timely that one who has been a leader for many years in the application of a science that has brought great good to all the people should have spoken frankly and fearlessly on the reasons why the efforts of his profession have met with a high degree of success. What he has said concerning petroleum geol- ogy applies with full and equal force to all sciences, professions, and occupa- tions. Under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrcorp, I quote Mr. Tomlinson’s ad-= dress herewith: FREEDOM AND PETROLEUM GEOLOGY What part fas freedom played in the development of petroleum geology in the United States? To a degree never before equaled on so great a scale, we have hon- ored here in America the principles of na~ tional and personal freedom balanced by a personal responsibility; of local self-govern~= ment and individual ownership of property; of competitive private enterprise under rules of fair play to all. Have these been influ- ential in the progress of our science? If so, have they been an obstacle or a stimulant? Unquestionably, a tremendous stimulant. Though the achievements of petroleum geol- ogy, geophysics, and paleontology in the twentieth century have not so greatly altered basic scientific concepts as have those of physics, chemistry, and astronomy, no science or profession except medicine can claim a greater share of credit for increasing the com- forts and the happiness of men, By the use of petroleum, millions of people have moved from the slums to the suburbs. The entire American people has been put on wheels or wings, and given the pleasure of distant vaca- tions and the even more cherished privilege of week-end outings many miles from home, conferring freedom in return for freedom. The range of effective action in many lines, including our own, has been multiplied, and individual accomplishment correspondingly increased. Oil and gas have supplied the fuel for most of the vast upsurge in the use of power, with its prized and manifold appli- cations not only in domestic comfort and convenience, in better food and sanitation, but in the industries which make the use- ful gadgets that achieve those ends: gadgets whose use is fortunately spreading now throughout all countries where the individ= ual may buy what he wishes and has oppor- tunity to earn it. As they are acquired, these tools and comforts of modern life in- crease the productivity of men, make possible more leisure for them, and open opportuni- ties to other men. The beneficent circle widens to assist all people. In this half century annual production and use of oil in the United States has been multiplied by 30, and that of natural gas has had a parallel growth. Though proud of their profession and intensely interested in their work, petroleum geologists are so mod~ est that few have dared, at any time in those 50 years, to predict such growth for more than a few years ahead. Which of us now would be more daring? For in any branch of science, who can be sure of the undiscovered? Less than 3 years ago predictions were heard that little, if any, increase in productive capacity could be expected in this country, even with higher prices for crude oil. But, as bas happened often before, the law of supply and demand did not fail us—nor did you. The increased pace of exploration made possible by good prices, and by the postwar flood of well-trained young geologists and geophysicists, engineers, and paleontologists, has more than kept pace with demand;
A3298 resulting in an excess capacity to produce oil here in North America, which is one of the hemisphere’s most essential assets in event of war. The excess is perhaps not yet large enough for safety. But with vigorous competition, both international and domes- tic, it helped to bring a shrinkage in allow~ able yields per well and in profits, and a lull in the expansion of exploration; though de- mand still grows. At the first new hint of even prospective shortage there will be an- other forward surge in exploration. In this record of achievement for human- ity we must acknowledge that our explora- tory sciences have been but one of many factors. The chemists in the refining indus- try have played an outstanding role. Nearly ell branches of science have assisted. They can take pride that their studies have been put to useful service for mankind. And perhaps even greater credit should go to the investors who have taken the risks we recom~ mended; to the engineers, inventors, and in~ dustrialists who have developed and mar- kKeted our equipment and that which em-~ ploys our products; to the consumers who use them in ever-increasing volume; to those who have taught in our schools and colleges; and to the efficient workmen in our indus- try and in those which use our products or facilitate their use. Those who guard our health have had a part of it; and the churches which have kept us conscious of the Golden Rule—of the responsibilties that go with liberty. In fact, every constructive element in American life has helped make our achievement possible. And they have prospered with us. But what part has freedom played in this great progress? It has been the lifeblood of the industry. Freedom of any man to search for oil in the United States and Can- ada. Freedom for any savings, foreign or domestic, to be invested here. Freedom of every farmer or even town~-lot owner to ob- tain the best trade he can from anyone will- ing to pay for the privilege of exploring for oil on hisland. Freedom of each of our many thousands of oil and gas producers to risk their savings in projects of exploration or development chosen on their own judgment or on that of their scientific employees. Free- dom to advance, to grow, so long as one plays fair and does not trespass on another’s rights. Freedom of the scientist to use to the limit his own imagination and ingenuity, to differ with others of his ilk. And how we do differ! And what great resources are found as a result! There is hardly an oil or gas producer in the United States who has not had the pleasing experi- ence of succeeding in a venture which had been rejected by others in the light of differ- ing Judgment. Some of them make quite a habit of it. And yet practically every pro- ducer has also rejected or overlooked ven- tures he had equal opportunity to make, in which another took the risk and won. Ours is still an inexact science, in which failure comes more often than success. What old oil district has not seen new- comers arrive : nd find oil not found by those who knew the region best? In that free play of thought and of competition, and in widely disseminated ownership of subsoil rights, lies the chief key to the success of the United States in producing for nearly a century far more than its share of the world’s oil. We have not had greater resources than some other equal segments of the world. But we have found a larger part of what we had. We have developed them and put them to use, because we have kept open the doors of op- portunity to every man who had the vision and the energy to walk through. The rapid growth of our domestic market has been pos- sible because the same freedom to seize op- portunity existed for those who devised new ways to use our product; and because Ameri- can devotjon to freedom and to equality of opportunity, reflected for example in ever- rising levels of public education, gave our whole economy a dynamic power of expan- sion unknown under monopolistic or totali- tarian regimes. And Americans were free to buy what they wished with their increasing purchasing power. Our growth in service has not been the re- sult of central planning, but a tribute to the lack of it. It is the fruit of freedom. No central planning body, no State monopoly or private cartel, could have accomplished half as much. Not even with the same per- sonnel. For their freedom in choosing ex- ploratory and development projects and methods would have been restricted to con- form to a single policy centrally determined. A single office would have controlled it all, in contrast to the many thousands which do not choose such projects independently of all the rest. When you mix an acid and an alkali in a test tube, no central planner (save God him- self) lays out or coordinates the action which takes place. Hach molecule seeks out its own opportunity for combination with another; and when it finds it, acts. There may be left a surplus of one type, but not of both. Every single possibility of action is utilized. Individual, chaotic action achieves the maxi- mum result. We have considered the fruits of freedom in discovery and development of resources, in industrial production, in human productivity and comfort. Has it borne good fruit in science itself also? The answer lies partly in technical pro- grams such as that of this convention. More fully, it is told on the shelves of our libraries and in those of universities throughout the world. Perhaps in no other branch of sci- ence do the publications of a single society comprise so large a fraction of the total literature of that sclence, as those of the American Association of Petroleum Geolo- gists constitute in the literature of petroleum geology. Consider also the publications of our friends the geophysicists, who have co- operated so helpfully with us through the years in the work of exploration and in these annual programs; the Journals of Paleon= tology and of Sedimentary Petrology; and the guidebooks, structural and stratigraphic sections and periodicals made available to the science by our 80 affiliated local geologi- cal societies, largely composed of Our own members. Taken together, they contain the most inclusive and complete assemblage of subsurface geological and geophysical data, of geology in three observed dimensions, that ever has been published; together with both comprehensive and detailed interpretations of those data in terms of structure, statig- raphy, geologic history, geologic processes, the evolution of living things, and the genesis of oil and of oilfields. They record also a great part of the incisive and imaginative thinking on basic and theoretical problems which has been vital to the progress of our science. The value of these publications lies in their usefulness to you and to all geologists. Per- haps no comparable set of volumes has been more fully used, or is more actively in use today. Testimony to that lies in every vol- ume we have had to reprint to meet de- mand in later years; and in the constantly increasing number of copies required of everything we print. The Bulletin and our many special volumes are an enduring monu- ment to our profession: to the authors who have contributed, to the thousands who have helped them, to the editors who have checked their work; to our skilled, hard-working, loyal personnel at headquarters, and to our printers. We owe a deep debt too to the far-sighted and public-spirited employers and executives who have encouraged the members of their scientific staffs to publish studies that would be useful to all the industry. For that we truly thank them. Companies active in all APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD parts of the world where Americans may operate, contribute to our annual reviews of development. Many companies and in- dividuals have participated in preparing the symposiums of fact and thought that you will hear at this convention. They are free to withhold if they wish their own modicum of information; but they have far mcre to gain than to lose from free exchange of fac- tual data. Some of the greatest as well as some of the smallest units in the industry have been most generous with it. Those who have most encouraged independent study and research. and publication, have fared at least as well as the few who have been more cautious in this matter. The former deserve special credit for having been most helpful to our science, to the oil indus- try as a whole, and to the public. It is recognized that in competitive private enterprise there is a commercial value in some types of newly acquired data or ideas, which one is fully justified in first apply- ing to his own advantage if he can. The ability to do just that is the prime incentive and motive power in a free economy—one which many magnanimous employers of geologists have found it profitable to pre- serve to some extent to their employees as well as themselves. Incentives are effective only through individuals. But in the great masses of information accumulated at pri- vate expense in our industry, there is little of real scientific value and of general in- terest which is not ultimately made availatsle to all. Voluntary cooperation for the com- mon good is typical rather than exceptional among us. And if we keep that spirit, and continue to cherish freedom and falr play at the threshold of its greatest service to mankind. We have just begun, 1949 Report of the Newton County, Ark., . PMA EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. JAMES W. TRIMBLE OF ARKANSAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRISENTATIVES Thursday, May 4, 1950 Mr. TRIMBLE, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Wil- liam J. Nanney, county administrative officer of the Production and Marketing Administration of Newton County, Ark., has just sent me the report for Newton County for 1949, In each of the counties which I repre- sent, the Production and Marketing Ad- ministration is doing an outstanding job in soil conservation. This is being done by terracing, check dams, crop rotation, pasture development, and applying pot- ash and lime. A fine feature of the pro- gram is that it is controlled by the local people as all farm programs should be. I insert this report as a part of my re- marks: ANNUAL Report, NEwTon Country (ARH.) PMA, 1949 INTRODUCTION This report has been prepared by the New- ton County PMA Committee to give the gen- eral public of Newton County, as well as the farmer himself, a better understanding of just what was accomplished by the PMA here in this county in 1949. Until only a few years ago very little had been done by the general public, or the farmer, to encourage conservation of the Nation’s most natural resource, the soll. If
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD we will only stop to think and review the agricultural situation as it was only a few years back we can readily see that at the alarming rate we are going it would not have been many years until our productive land would have been so depleted it would not have been humanly possible to maintain our present high standard of, living. It is the aim of the Production and Marketing Ad- ministration to conserve the topsoil we have left and to restore that which already is de- pleted of the necessary minerals for a pros- perous agriculture, to a productive basis, Since people from all walks of life depend upon the soil for their food and fiber and the prosperity of the Nation depends upon a strong and prosperous agriculture we feel it is the public’s responsibility to help the farmer in paying the cost in this tremendous job of conserving our Nation’s soil. Through the Production and Marketing Administra- tion, farmers receive assistance for about one-third the cost of approved soil-conserva-~ tion practices and without this assistance many of our farmers would not be financially able to carry out these needed practices. Oscar VILLINES, . Chairman, J. T. SEXTON, Vice Chairman, GARLAND BALAN, Regular Member, MINERALS In 1949 those farmers who participated in the program applied 1,478,255 pounds of superphosphate, 4,019 pounds of potash and 822 tons of limestone to meadows and pas~ ture land. We, as your county committee, realize this is a very small amount of min- erals applied, compared with the actual needs, but in checking through the records we find that approximately 42 percent more phosphate was applied to meadows and pastures in 1949 than any previous year. The county office personnel and the county com- mittee received many requests from farmers for potash and limestone that they were unable to fill. The vendors could not get enough potash to take care of the demand. Due to road conditions and the distance limestone would have to be hauled, most farmers were not able to pay the cost of get- ting the material delivered and spread. But according to the records on phosphate and the increased demands for potash and lime- stone we feel that the farmers in Newton County are realizing more than ever before the necessity of applying these minerals that they may have a better protective cover from wind and water erosion, as well as a more productive cover, which is the making of a strong and prosperous agriculture. PASTURE DEVELOPMENT In 1949 the farmers in this county im- proved or established an estimated 7,313 acres of pasture land by seeding 87,757 pounds of approved pasture grasses and legumes. In addition to the estimated 7,313 acres seeded, these farmers sodded 208 acres of bermuda grass for permanent pasture. Bermuda grass makes an excellent pasture, and at the same time provides one of our best protective covers against soil erosion. Farmers are beginning to realize that con- trolling weeds on permanent pasture by mowing is about the r2st method we have in maintaining a good pasture after it has been established. They have found, through this method, that in a short period of time they can just ahout eliminate all competitive plants and receive approxi- mately one-third more pasture from the same acreage. ENGINEERING PRACTICES Thirty dams were constructed and five springs or seeps developed in 1949 in order that a year-round supply of water for live- stock purposes would be available on these farms. Dams constructed in the proper lo- cation always serve a twofold purpose. However, a dam qualifies for payment for only one purpose, and that is to collect a year-round supply of stock water, but if constructed in the right location, these dams aid greatly in conserving the topsoil. In 1949 there were 20,049 feet of terraces constructed in Newton County. Where we find fields that have been terraced, we not only find the soil protected from water ero- sion but we also find a more fertile soil with better yields per acre. PRODUCTION GOALS Each year the PMA committees are in- formed of the supply and market conditions of all the farm commodities with suggested State and National goals for each commodity. After reviewing these State and National goals, the committees then set up county goals to meet the estimated needs for the county. In previous years these production goals have proven to be very beneficial in helping to adjust the production of certain crops to meet the demand. PRICE SUPPORT - The price-support program is another part of the Production and Marketing Admini- stration and is administered by farmer- elected PMA committeemen. In reality, price supports is a form of insurance and without it the farmers would have to sell the entire year’s production on a market that’s glutted with a surplus of such commodity. None of the agricultural commodities produced in Newton County in 1949 were directly affected by the price-support program, However, some of our commodities, such as dairy, poultry, and meat products were affected in- directly. MARKETING QUOTAS AND ALLOTMENTS Acreage allotments were not established in 1949 for any of the commodities produced in Newton County. However, cotton allot- ments have been established for the 1950 crop. These allotments were worked out.on the cropland basis and past history of the crop on the farm. Marketing quotas are put into effect only when approved by two-thirds of the number of eligible voters taking part in a referendum. When acreage allotments and marketing quotas are in effect a producer is guaranteed full parity price for all of the commodities. produced on his farm, if he planted within the allotment established for the farm. COMMITTEEMEN In November of 1948 an election was held in each of the 15 communities in Newton County at which time a community commit- teeman and delegate to the county conven-~ tion was elected by the farmers in each com-~ munity to serve during the 1949 program year. In December of 1948 the delegates that had been elected in November, gathered to- gether on county convention day and elected three farmer county committeemen to serve during the year 1949, A committeeman’s term of office runs for one calendar year and expires December 31 of the year for which elected. But he may be reelected in the next election or at the next county convention. Contrary to some thinking, committeemen do not receive a salary and are reimbursed only for time actu- ally spent in connection with the program. In many instances these committeemen are not reimbursed enough to pay for a hired hand to take their place on the farm, that the necessary activities may be carried on during their absence. Following are the names and addresses, by communities, of the community committee- men that were elected by their farmer friends in November of 1949, to serve as their PMA representatives during the 1950 program year, ‘ A3299 A. Lurton: Ernest Daniels, Stanley Smith, J.L. Awbrey, Lurton, Ark. B. Bass: Ben Dickey, Cave Creek, Ark.; Ira Dodson, Verble Manns, Bass, Ark. Cc. Mount Judea: Frank Cheatham, Ralph Kent, Elmer Campbell, Mount Judea, Ark. D. Vendor: W. H. Flood, Garland Smith, Claude Smith, Vendor, Ark. E. Hasty: Alvie Hoppis, Richard Hancock, Marion Gipbson, Hasty, Ark. F, Yardelle: Veatle Waters, Mose Hill, Yar- delle, Ark; A. B. Jones, Western Grove, Ark. G. Marble Falls: Mirl Neighbors, Marble Falls, Ark.; Arlin Tinsley, Erbie, Ark.: James Shore, Marble Falls, Ark. H. Limestone: J. A. Curtis, Ira Spradley, J.S. Norton, Limestone, Ark. I, Deer: Joe Wylie, Deer, Ark.; George Essex, Jasper, Ark.; Grover Breedlove, Deer, Ark. J. Parthenon: W. J. Brasel, Jasper, Ark.; I. G. Snow, Wayton, Ark.; Lawrence Vaughn, Parthenon, Ark. K. Jasper: J. A. Harrison, W. C. Struck, Wayne Harrison, Jasper, Ark. L. Compvon: J. H. McFerrin, Lex Burge, Alpha Sims, Compton, Ark. M. Fallsville: Walter Cowan, Paul M, Smith, Fallsville, Ark.; Virgil Wyatt, Red Star, Ark. N. Boxley: Troy Fowler, Boxley Ark.; George Petree, Waymon Villines, Ponca, Ark. O. Swain: Harley Berry, Alpha Weston, Wal- nut, Ark.; Alvin Ashlock, Fallsville, Ark. At the county convention in December of 1949 the following county committeemen were elected to serve during the 1950 pro- gram year: Chairman: Albert H. Raney, Marble Falls, Ark. Vice chairman: Oscar Villines, Parthenon, Ark. Member: J. T. Sexton, Mount Judea, Ark. :First alternate: Garland Bolin, Bass, Ark, Second alternate: Mose Hill, Yardelle, Ark. On January 20, 1950, Mr. Albert H. Raney resigned as chairman of the county commit- tee. Mr. Raney had served as chairman on this committee for the past 5 years, and we regret losing his services, but he stated that due to more and more pressing business in farming activities and other matters around his home and community he felt that he should spend more of his time there. COUNTY OFFICE PERSONNEL William J. Nanney, county administrative Officer; Mary Jo Spencer, clerk; Eva Isen- berger, clerk. Two part-time clerks were employed dur- ing-the spring of 1949 to help with tabulat- ing crop-acreage data for all commodities produced in the county since 1941. COOPERATION There were 887 farmers on 869 farms that reported one or more soil-conservation prac- tices for assistance in 1949. The 869 farms participating in the program shows an in- crease of 10.4 percent over the 1948 partici- pating farms. Using the payment rates of- fered under the 1949 program for carrying out these various conservation practices these 887 farmers earned $29,635.79. This is ap- proximately one-third the total cost of these practices, so the farmers themselves invested an estimated $59,371.58. CONCLUSION The Newton County PMA program worked with 1,769 farms during the 1949 program year. The funds allocated to this county each year, to help the farmers pay a part of the total cost in carrying out approved soil- conservation practices, is available to every farmer in the county, and all are urged to participate in the program. It is the aim of the PMA program to get all active farmers within the county to take part in this tre- mendous battle we now have under way against wind and water erosion and the res- toration of depleted minerals to the soil. We, as your present PMA county committeemen,
A3300 are very proud of the accomplishments made in the 1949 program year and want to take this opportunity to express our grateful ap- preciation to the editors of our two county newspapers for the space given to this pro- gram throughout the year and all others who assisted us in making our PMA program @ success in the year 1949. Oscar VILLINES, Chairman. J. T. SEXTON, Vice Chairman, GARLAND BOLIN, Member. Wir1uM J. Nanner, Secretary and Treasurer, Czechoslovak Imports EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WILLIAM H. BATES OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, May 5, 1950 Mr. BATES of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, the newspaper editorial below, from the Newburyport News, of New- buryport, Mass., indicates, in my opin- ion, the American approach to the problems that now face us in regard to international trade. The paradox of spending billions of dollars in Europe to stem communism and at the same time purchasing goods from behind the iron curtain to the de- -triment of our own industries is ex- tremely difficult to understand and should not be tolerated, and unless ac- tion is taken immediately, thousands of our American workmen will be thrown out of their jobs. The editorial follows: Tue Oxp Hicw Tarirr-Free TRADE DEBATE Our younger readers don’t remember when the home market question was the dividing issue between American political parties. The Republican in general wanted a high tariff on goods imported into the United States so that our own factories could keep our markets, and high wages could be paid their workers. The Democrats pleaded for tariffs for revenue only; just tax on them to support our then not-very-expensive Gov~ ernment. As the world has grown smaller and more closely knit together these party planks have been more or less shuffled about, though possibly Democrats and Republicans still stand more vaguely in their old positions. One new issue that has confused the old one arises from the war weakness and debts into which many countries which have been our allies and are our natural friends have fallen. We want to help them get on their feet, and are in general disposed to let them sell us goods, and thereby get money, with- out a too high tariff barrier. We have always recognized, however, that such cooperation must not be extended to such a point as to wipe out one of our own fndustries. And two instances, of particular importance to us about here, have lately arisen where there is no question of what stand the United States ought to take. Imports of two lines of manufactured ar- ticles, hats, and shoes, both from the same European country are threatening our own neighbors who make such goods here. And these imports come from one and the same country, and a country that is now the vassal of the Communists: namely, Czechoslovakia. Congressman Bares has brought onto the floor of the House at Washington the ques- tion of stopping this attack on our means of support. We here cannot make shoes in competition with the cheap Czechoslovakian labor. Mr. Bares recalled how such com- petition—from the Czech manufacturer Bata—drove much of Haverhill to the wall 10 or 15 years ago. The same thing is hap- pening now. Connecticut hat makers have told the same story about their products, which is made hereabouts, too. There seems no question that the Gov- ernment should clamp down on these im- ports by a sufficient tariff. The problem is simple. We might make a sacrifice for a friendly country. But the present Czecho~ slovakia is, if only by a sad necessity, the tool of Russia. No argument exists for our letting it build up Stalin by Killing our prosperity here. AAA Pulitzer Prize to St. Louis Post-Dispatch EXTENSION OF REMARKS iy HON. FRANK M. KARSTEN OF MISSOURI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, May 5, 1950 Mr.KARSTEN. Mr. Speaker, I should like to congratulate the St. Louis Post- Dispatch on its receipt of a Pulitzer prize for 1949 for the most disinterested and meritorious public service by an American newspaper. This prize was shared with the Chi- cago Daily News for last year’s exposure of the fact that more than 50 Tlinois newspaper editors and publishers were on the State pay rolls. In accepting this money, these men compromised them- selves to such an extent that they could no longer be regarded as capable of ful- filling their obligation to present their readers with news of graft and corruption. A distinct service to the newspaper profession was rendered by Roy J. Har- ris, of the Post-Dispatch, and George Thiem, of the Daily News, the reporters who worked for weeks to dig out the names of the editors and publishers in the pay of the State. This latest prize to be won by the Post-Dispatch is proof that the principles of crusading journalism established by Joseph Pulitzer, founder of the Post- Dispatch, are still a vital force in Amer- ica. I should like to include the Post- Dispatch platform as a part of my remarks: Tu Post-DisparcH PLATFORM I know that my retirement will make no difference in its cardinal principles; that it will always fight for progress and reform, never tolerate injustice or corruption, al- ways fight demagogues of all parties, never belong to any party, always oppose privileged classes and public plunderers, never lack sympathy with the poor, always remain de- voted to the public welfare; never be satis- fled with merely printing news; always be drastically independent; never be afraid to attack wrong, whether by predatory plu- tocracy or predatory poverty. JOSEPH, PULITZER. Aprit 10, 1907. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD American Zionist Council Denounces Arms Sales to Arabs EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ARTHUR G. KLEIN OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, April 28, 1950 Mr. KLEIN. Mr. Speaker, under leave, T am inserting a news story from the New York Times of May 4, 1959, report- ing the public denunciation of British sale and delivery of arms to the Arab: States. Text of the story follows: lursky Denouncss Arms Arp To ARAnS—Ac- CUSES BRITAIN OF TRYING To ExcLuDz UNITED Srates INTERESTS From THE MIppLE East Louis Lipsky, chairman of the American Zionist Council, spokesman for all major Zi- onist groups in this country, strongly de- nounced yesterday the British sale of arms to the Arab states and maintained that Great Britain was attempting to control the Middle East and exclude American interests from that territory. At the same time, Mr. Lipsky, at the coun- cil’s offices, 844 Madison Avenue, announced that the council would convene a national conference of its affiliated members in Wash- ington on June 4 and 5 in protest of the arms shipment and also of the State Depart- ment’s refusal to permit Israel to purchase arms for cash in this country. About 600 delegates are expected to attend. The sending of arms to the Arab states, par- ticularly Jordan and Egypt, Mr. Lipsky as< serted, “was a double-barreled threat to Is- rael which can be used in che first place to pressure a peace disadvantageors to Israel and in the second place which can be used to attack Israel.” Mr. Lipsky declared that “the leaders of our foreign policy have been maneuvered into a position of giving Britain the lead in middle eastern affairs and of backing to the hilt, without reservation, the anti-Israel policy of the foreign secretary of the British Govern- ment.” The Zionist official held that “the forces Jn Britain who are interested in prolonging chaos and confusion in the Middle East— and unfortunately these forces seem to have gained the upper hand in our State Depart- ment—are bent on the resumption of war- fare between Israel and her neighbors.” Sadist’s Holiday EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. SIDNEY R. YATES OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, May §, 1950 Mr. YATES. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following newspaper article by Leo A. Lerner: Tes Firesr Conumn (By Leo A. Lerner) SADIST’S HOLIDAY A Chicago real estate lobbyist, whose opin. ion I suppose I must respect because he is a@ man of property or at least a representutive thereof, has made the statement that within
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD 6 months after rent control is abandoned rents will be lower than they are now. This is a shining promise, so encouraging and apocalyptic, that it ought to be set in neon lights and carried around the streets on the top of an elephant, perhaps with the promiser’s signature attached thereto. A signature is a very good thing to have on a promissory note. If those who are pushing for rent control to be dropped are doing it for the gocd of the renters, they might prove their good intentions by sign- ing the promise which was so cheerfully made by the gentleman from the real estate board, They should contract to make good on a possible forfeit by putting up some- thing substantial and valuable to guarantee to the public that the result will be as san- guine as promised. I would be satisfied, for instance, if the fellow who made that promise would come forward and offer to put up $5,000 cash that his prediction will come true. Then, at least, I would believe that he is willing to back his predictions with that neatly en- graved green stuff which is so widely cher- ished elsewhere, but scorned by landlords. As they say in the bleachers out at Cubs park, Jet the gentleman put up or shut up. I wonder if the people who are likely to believe that rents will go down remember the promises of the American Meat Institute. The American Meat Institute is a charitable organization run for the benefit of indigent meat packers. Before the lids were lifted on meat prices they promised us that meat prices would go down as a result of ending the OPA. Well, they didn’t. Guess what happened. The prices went up. And meat prices are still far away and above what they ought to be, 4 years after that Juicy promise was made. The farmers who feed grain to beef cattle are being broken in two by high grain prices and low-market prices. The spread between the average price paid for cattle on the hoof and the retail price of meat is worse today than it has been at any time since 1940. But the Meat Institute spent millions to sell the idea that lifting controls would mean lower prices. The only trouble is, they didn’t offer to pay a forfeit, and they could well have afforded it, as you will agree if you have seen the 1949 profit statements of the big meat packers. Now let’s look at areas where rent control was lifted. Dallas, Tex., had an average in-~ crease of 36 percent. Lincoln, Nebr., which does not have a housing shortage as bad as Chicago’s, had a nearly 30-percent increase. The only rents that went down slightly were in the high brackets, above $100 a month. The rest went up, and that wasn’t all. Evic- tions were heavy and many people were thrown out on the street with no place to go. In Chicago, this situation would be much worse because there are at least 300,000 fami- lies which are inadequately housed. Lack of controls would be a sadist’s holiday. To come down to saying the thing plain, it would be suicidal to lift rent controls in Chicago. There are not enough places to live, and the resulting chaos would be a se- ricus blow to the whole city. Add 30 to 40 percent to Chicago’s total rent bill and then ask yourself where that money would come from. In New York, the State legislature has already passed a rent- control act in case Congress fails to renew rent controls after June 30. In Illinois we haven’t done a thing except fret, Businessmen have a big stake in this prob- lem because billions of dollars of national income would be diverted in the mad scram- ble for housing in the shortage districts. Sales and employment would surely go down. Variety magazine has just finished a sur- vey showing that business has been seriously injured in areas where rents have been de- controlled. But, of course, if that fellow who says rents will go down is right, there’s nothing to worry about. In fact, if rents are sure to go down, why are they pushing so hard to kill rent control? Maybe the real estate lobby is on the wrong side. Award to Maj. Frederick Sullens for Best Editorial of the Year EXTENSION OF REMARES OF HON. JAMES 0. EASTLAND OF MISSISSIPPI IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, May 5 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. EASTLAND. Mr. President, at the annual meeting of the Education Writers Institute, sponsored by the National Edu- cation Association, held in this city last night, the capital award for the best editorial of the year was awarded to Maj. Frederick Sullens, editor of the Jackson, Miss., Daily News. It was one of a series of editorials from the pen of Maj. Sullens which inspired the Mississippi legislature at its recent session to make the largest appropriation for education in the State’s history, and to make more liberal provi- sions for- the education of Negroes and general betterment of Negro schools. I ask unanimous consent to have the edi- torial printed in the Appendix of the REcorRD. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Ovr DISGRACEFUL NEGRO SCHOOLS Whether we like it or not, the Supreme Court of the United States has declared that Mississippi, in common with other Southern States, must provide equal educa~ tional opportunities for Negroes. No use fussing, cussing or fuming about it. That decision is the law of the land and we have no alternative save to obey. It is far better to obey promptly, cheer- fully, and in our own way, than to be forced to do so. Moreover, that decision embodies justice and common sense. In the matter of education we have for many years been treating Negroes most out- rageously. The type of education we have been pro- viding for them is nothing short of a dis- grace. It might well be called a public scandal. Let us face a few of the ugly facts—not all the ugly facts, for it would take too long to tell the whole story. Statements that follow are based on official reports in our State department of education. The estimated value today of all school property in Mississippi being used for white children is $57,000,000. The estimated value of all school property being used for colored children is only $11,- 000,000. According to the latest survey there are today in our State 3,700 Negro schoolhouses, but not all of them are school property. About 2,300 of these buildings are owned by counties and communities, and many of them are the old Julius Rosenwald school buildings constructed at the time when that _ A38301 great philanthropist was spending money freely in Mississippi—and a goodly part of it being stolen and diverted to other uses. Over 1,400 of the buildings now being used to house Negro schools belong to churches and Negro fraternal bodies. Some of them are tenant cabins, used where no other structures are available. As a matter of fact, Negro churches and fraternal organizations in our State are furnishing nearly one-half what little Negro children get in the way of educational facili- ties. It is a shame and a disgrace that such should be the case. Our white rural schools, as a rule, are fairly well maintained, but Negro schools are poorly equipped, shabby, dilapidated, and unsightly. Go into any rural school building for Ne- groes and see for yourself how things are. Almost without exception they are one-room structures, rickety stoves are propped up on brickbats, blackboards are absent or worn to the point of uselessness, sanitation is sadly lacking and the common drinking cup is still in use. In many hundreds of instances it will be found that ome Negro teacher is struggling along trying to teach children in all the grammar school grades. . Here in the county of Hinds, wealthiest in the Commonwealth, our school facilities for Negroes are so poor and shabby that churches and lodges are furnishing 18 of the buildings in which Negro schools are housed, Moreover, in recent years we have not had official honesty in the matter of providing for Negro schools. During the administration of Gov. Thomas L. Bailey a legislative survey committee headed by Senator John Kyle, studied our public school system and submitted a re- port to the lawmaking body—a report that should have made our people blush for shame. It fully revealed the appalling con- ditions in our Negro schools and gave the legislature such a shock that it was decided to vote an appropriation of $3,000,000 for the purpose of aiding communities in the con- struction of new school buildings. It was a sort of gentleman’s agreement, fully understood among lawmakers who vot- ed for the appropriation, that this money would be used for the improvement of Ne- gro schools. But it didn’t happen that way. The fund was administered by the State pbuilding commission. Due to political pres- sure, and other causes, most of that $3,000,- 000 was spent on white schools. It was ex- plained by the commission that in most ru- ral areas the Negro schools had no way of raising funds to supplement State allowances and they received practically no help what- soever from boards of supervisors. In other words, that $3,000,000 appropria- tion—a sum wholly inadequate for the pur- pose—was a good gesture, a noble experi- ment, and all that sort of thing, but the Negro schools for which it was intended didn’t get the benefit. And it has been that way for so long that the mind of man runneth not to the contrary. It has been that way quite too long, and it must quit being that way. Our educational theory of all for the white folks and nothing for the Negro must be abandoned. The Daily News here and now serves notice that when the next legislative session is con~ vened this newspaper, aided and supported by a large majority of the newspapers in Mis- sissippi, Is going to wage a fight to see to it that a good portion of that treasury surplus, about which there has been so much boasting and on which so many avaricious eyes have been cast, is used to provide a decent educa= tional system for Negroes.
A3302 It is well-nigh unbelievable, but it hap- pens to be a fact that in an area nearly 2 miles square in great and growing Jackson, Miss., biggest, best, and most progres- sive city, there is not a single Negro school building. It happens to be a fact throughout the State that in some Negro school buildings there is not even standing room for pupils. In many cases hard-working teachers are trying to do the best possible with a deplor- able condition by teaching Negro children in two or three shifts each day. Under such conditions the children get little or nothing in the way of education. The United States Supreme Court has de- creed equal educational opportunity for the races. That's the law of the land. It must be obeyed. It is up to our lawmaking body to handle this question intelligently, to meet all phases fairly and squarely. Whatever may exist in the way of race prejudice must be thrust aside and a program prepared that will deal justly with the Negro race. West Coast Statue Proposed EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. HOMER D. ANGELL OF OREGON IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, May 5, 1950 Mr. ANGELL. Mr. Speaker, on Sep- tember 22, 1949, I had placed in the Ap- pendix of the CoNnGRESSIONAL RECORD, page A5847, a proposal for a monument on Mount Tamalpais which was made by a resident in my congressional district, Miss Alma Schulmerich. Under leave to extend my remarks I am placing in the Appendix today a letter from Miss Schulmerich which appeared in the Port- Jand Oregonian on April 10, 1950, en- titled “West Coast Statue Proposed” which contains interesting observations on the proposal made by Miss Schul- merich: West Coasr STArvz PRoPosEp To the Editor: The world is suffering from “atomitis.” It is true there has been an atomic seare, but in reality we should feel more secure in the knowledge that Russia has a bomb. Didn’t both sides have germ and chemical warfare during World War II and refrain from using these im- plements of destruction because of fear of retribution? Why, then, must we talk un- constructively about world war III? Can- not we so conduct ourselves that other na- tions will be able to work with us for peace and the one world about which Wendell Willkie spoke? Unele Sam is pouring mililons into Eu- rope which we know will not be returned— we do not intend that they should be. Why, then, cannot a few dollars be advanced to- ward a memorial to honor our boys who have paid with their lives, and those who continue to pay, though they still live, in our hospitals? ‘ As @ member of the secretariat of the United Nations conference at San Francisco in 1945, it was my pleasure to visit Mount Tamalpais, just across the Golden Gate Bridge from that city. From the summit it is possible to view the entire bay area, as well as far out to sea. Nearby stand those solitary sentinels, the Muir Woods. Many UN delegates visited Mount Tamal- pais to get away from man-made things and ponder their problems and the effect of their decisions on future generations in the clear, fresh air atop the mountain, where one seems 2 bit closer to the infinite, Franklin Roosevelt found it necessary to go to the mountain top to think things out and get a clearer picture and a broader horizon for the problems before him. So must we have time to meditate. While I watched from the mountain, for- mations of bombers thundered by on their way to the Pacific theater. Far below, ships, with capacity loads of our finest young men, were threading their way through the Gold- en Gate and on out to sea and distant combat areas. Those boys didn’t know what was in store for them. Many of their buddies had passed on. Many of their numbers would not return. Therefore, as they stood on deck watching the Golden Gate and the familiar landmarks disappear from view, I am sure they felt they were leaving behind everything that stood for America and the things they were fighting for. I, too, once stood on the deck of the Queen Mary and watched the Statue of Liberty dis- appear from view, and I will always remem- ber the picture she made as she lighted the way through the fog on our return journey. Therefore, as I watched the procession over~ head and the ships far below, I earnestly wished that there had been erected on top of Mount Tamalpais, as our Pacific coast Statue of Liberty, an illuminated sign of the cross which would he visible far out to sea—the ‘last thing those boys would see when they left America, and the first thing that would greet those who returned. This cross would serve as a beacon for all who travel, be it by land, sea, or the air. It would be a constant reminder that those who gave their lives did not die in vain and that if we are to remain the strong world power we now are we must work together for peace with the same energy we expended in war. In this respect you will recall the words of Jan Masaryk, of Czechoslovakia, on the clos- ing day of the San Francisco Conference: “Please stop talking of the next war. The language one hears in certain places is lamentably unconstructive; it arouses sus- picions at a moment when mutual confi- dence is all-important. Not one of these selfless children of ours, whose graves are scattered as sacred mementos all over the face of the scarred earth—none of us want these children to die in another war in an- other generation—we want them back to live and work for their respective countries in peace and security in a socially Just and safe world. That’s why we assembled here, that’s why we drafted the Charter. It contains all the necessary safeguards against future wars. Let us see to it that our lofty alms are carried into deeds worthy of the memory of our heroic beloved youngsters.” Miss ALMA SCHULMERICH. Mr. Truman on Power EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CLARENCE E. KILBURN OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, May 5, 1950 Mr. KILBURN. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I include an editorial appearing in the Watertown Daily Times of May 3, 1950: Mr. TRUMAN ON POWER President Truman knows, as so many of us do, especially here in the north country, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD that the United States is short of hydro- electric power. He now urges the Senate to ratify a United States-Canada treaty to de= velop power in the Niagara River. The Niagara Treaty certainly seems to have caught on in Washington. Senator Hzrprrr H. LewMan’s joyous declarations when the treaty was proposed are not easily forgotten. And there is much to be said for the Niagara development, for it is recognized that the St. Lawrence River project alone will not be able to supply all power needs either here or in Canada. But, and it is an important but, the St. Lawrence project would not only produce more power, it would also be more economi- eal to construct. In view of the testimony now piling up before the House Public Works Committee in Washington, we may well won- der why the hold-up on the St. Lawrence, and why the sudden eagerness over Niagara. The State power authority’s annual report this year was clear enough. Both projects are needed. First, the St. Lawrence; sec- ond, the Niagara. Another crucial consideration is public or private handling of the development. Presi- dent Truman’s message reiterates his stand for public construction of the additional power facilities in order that the bencfits of the hydroelectric power produced there can be passed on to the people at the lowest possible cost to them. All well and good, put construction of the facilities is one thing, and the people’s getting the electricity is another. In between is the little matter of distribution. Who is going to do it? Private power sources are angered over the treaty, presumably because the Federal Gov- ernment is going to build facilities. That anger would fade in the twinkling of an eye jf distribution rights were handed over to them. Things look pretty good for the Niagara Treaty. Senator Tom Connaty, the Foreign Relations Committee chairman, thinks chances for passage at this congressional ses- sion rate high. We appreciate these efforts to satisfy the need for power in the Northeast. The danger lies in two directions, forgetting the St. Lawrence once the Niagara Treaty iaas been signed and turning over publicly constructed power facilities to private com-= panies for distribution of the current. Admiral Thomas Cassin Kinkaid EXTENSION OF REMARES or HON. ANTONI N. SADLAK OF CONNECTICUT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, May 5, 1950 Mr. SADLAK. Mr. Speaker, the last of the wartime four-star admirals of World War II went into retirement on April 30. Of course, I have reference to Admiral Thomas Cassin Kinkaid, com- mander of the Eastern Sea Frontier and of the Atlantic Reserve Fleet. Admiral Kinkaid is a veteran of most of the major naval engagements in the Pacific in World War II and with his retirement, he will conclude a 46-year career, ex- tending back to 1904 when he was ap- pointed to the Naval Academy by Presi- dent Theodore Roosevelt. During my service as a@ communications watch off- cer and top secret officer on the staff of the command of the Seventh Fleeters, I was privileged, through these duties, to have association and contact with Ad- miral Kinkaid, who was then the com-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD mander of the Seventh Fleet. Today I look back upon that association with a most pleasant memory because I always found Admiral Kinkaid to be a gentle- man, 2 great patriot, and a man of out- standing character, devoted to the high- est traditions of the Navy. I deem it a great privilege to incorporate with the good wishes I extend to my former com- mander on the occasion of his retire- ment, the history of his career: ADMIRAL THOMAS CASSIN KINKAID, UNITED Srares Navy Admiral Kinkaid, born in Hanover, N. H, on April 3, 1888, the son of Thomas Wright Kinkaid, late rear admiral, United States Navy, attended Western High School in Washington, D. C., before his evncintrrert to the United States Naval c:.demr by President Theodore Roosevelt in 1904. While a@ midshipman he won his red N and was stroke of the varsity crew as a first classman. Graduated in June 1908, he served the 2 years at sea then required by law before he was commissioned ensign in June 1910. He subsequently progressed in grade until his promotion to admiral, to rank from April 3, 1945. After graduation from the Naval Academy in 1908, Admiral Kinkaid served consecu- tively on the U.S. S. Nebraska and the U. 8. S. Minnesota until September 1913, when he reported to the postgraduate school, An- napolis, Md., for instruction in ordnance engineering. He continued this course at the Navy Yard, Washington, D. C., and var- ious other places until May 1916, with time out for a period of duty from April 1914 to January 1915 on the U. S. S. Machias, op- erating in Mexican waters. From May 1916 until April 1918 he was attached to the U.S. S. Pennsylvania, with duty during the latter part of that period with the British Admiralty. Admiral Kinkaid served as gunnery officer of the U. S. S. Arizona from May 1918 until July 1919, while she operated in the Chesa- peake Bay area during the last months of ‘World War I; when on November 18, 1918, she sailed from Hampton Roads, Va., to Port- land, England, for duty in company with other battleships to meet and escort the U.S. S. George Washington, with President Woodrow Wilson aboard, en route to the Peace Conference at Versailles, into Brest, France; and when, as part of the Atlantic Fleet, she was reviewed on December 26, 1918, in the North River, N. ¥., by Secretary of the Navy Josephus Daniels, other members of the Cab- inet, and fleet commanders. He continued to serve in the Arizona dur-= ing operations in Cuban waters early in 1919, and was aboard when she made a cruise to France, thence to Smyrna, Asia Minor, in connection with the occupation of that city by the Greeks. Returning by way of Con- stantinople, Turkey, and Gibraltar, on June 30, 1920, he was detached with orders to the Bureau of Ordnance, Navy Department, where he served until June 1922. From August 1922 until July 1924, Admiral Kinkaid was Assistant Chief of Staff to Rear Adm. Mark L. Bristol, United States Navy, Commander, United States Naval Detachment in Turkish waters (U. S. S. Scorpion, flag~ ship), and after his return to the United States commanded the U. S. S. Isherwood from November 1924 until the summer of 1925, when he reported for duty at the Naval Gun Factory, Navy Yard, Washington, D. C. Detached from that assignment in October 1927, he served as fleet gunnery officer and aide on the staff of Admiral Henry A. Wiley, United States Navy, Commander in Chief, United States Fleet, of which the U. S. S. Texas was flagship, until May 1929. After completing the senior course at the Naval War College, Newport, R. I., a year later, he was secretary of the General Board, Navy Department, Washington, D. C., from June 1930 until November 1931, with additional duty during that period as naval adviser to American members of the Preparatory Com~ mission for the Disarmament Conference, Geneva, Switzerland, in November and De- cember 1980. Returning to Washington, he had further duty in connection with the Disarmament Conference, and in 1932 was technical adviser at the Geneva Conference. Admiral Kinkaid was executive officer of the U. S. S, Colorado from January 1933 until October 1934, and after duty in, and later as head of the Detail Section, Officer Personnel Division, Bureau of Navigation, Wavy Department, Washington, D. C., until May 1937, he commanded the heavy cruiser Indianapolis from June of that year until August 1938. He was naval attaché and naval attaché for air at the American Embassy, Rome, Italy, from November 1938 until March 1941, with additional duty from March 1939 as Naval Attaché and Naval Attaché for Air at Belgrade, Yugoslavia. He was serving in the assignment at Rome when Italy declared war on France. Return- ing to the Navy Department, he was on duty in the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations from March to December 1941, Upon the outbreak of war with Japan, he left immediately for the Pacific theater where on December 30, 1941, he assumed ccom- mand of Cruiser Division 6. He commanded that Division until October 29, 1942, when he became commander, cruisers, Pacific Fleet. During those commands, which extended to December 6, 1942, Admiral Kinkaid par- ticipated in many of the major engagements in the Pacific. He commanded a task force in the Battle of the Coral Sea, May 48, 1942, which marked an’end to the pericd our forces were totally on the defensive, He was commander of cruisers, one of the two task forces which in the Battle of Midway, June 4-6, 1942, inflicted on the Japanese Navy the first decisive defeat suf- fered in 350 years, put an end to the long period of Japanese offensive action, and restored the balance of naval power in the Pacific. He commanded a task force pre= ceding and during the Battle of the Solomon Islands in August 1942, and in October of that year, in the Battie of Santa Cruz Islands when a big Japanese battle fleet was turned back from Guadalcanal, he commanded one of two task forces, with two carriers, one of them the Enterprise, 1 battleship, 3 heavy cruisers, 3 antiaircraft light cruisers, and 14 destroyers comprising his force. In the Battle of Guadalcanal (third Savo), No- vember 12-15, 1942, he commanded a task force, built around the Enterprise Air Sup- port Group and battleships, in support of Rear Adm. (now admiral) Richmond K. Turner, USN. In spite of heavy losses sustained in battle, it was a decisive vic- tory for United States forces as it assured that our positions in the southern Solomons would not be threatened seriously again by the Japanese. For his services in command of a task force during the Battle of the Coral Sea, and for the period preceding and during the Battle of Solomon Islands, Admiral Kin.~ kKaid was awarded the Distinguished Service Medal, and Gold Star in lieu of the second Distinguished Service Medal. He also re- ceived a facsimile of, and is entitled to wear the ribbon for, the Presidental Unit Citation awarded the U. S. S. Enterprise, which was his flagship during part of the Pacific opera- tions. The citations follow: Distinguished Service Medal: “For exceptionally meritorious and distin- guished service to the Government of the United States in a position of great re- sponsibility as commander of a task force in the Battle of the Coral Sea, May 4-8, 1942, A3303 and specifically on May 8, 1942. Due to Rear Admiral Kinkaid’s aggressive leadership and determined action, and through the skill and courageous devotion to duty of the units under his command, heavy losses were in- fiicted on attacking enemy Japanese air groups, thereby contributing immeasurably to the ultimate success of our forces in these notable engagements.” Gold Star in lieu of second Distinguished Service Medal: “For exceptionally meritorious service to the Government of the United States in a duty of great responsibility as commander, Task Force 16, prior to and during the Battle of the Solomon Islands on August 24, 1942; the Battle of Santa Cruz on October 26, 1942; and during the naval action to the southward of Guadalcanal on the night of November 14-15, 1942. With flag in the U. S. S. Enterprise throughout these three major engagements, Admiral (then Rear Admiral) Kinkaid conducted the operations of his command with superb tactical skill, striking repeated blows at Japanese supply jines, naval strength, and air power during this early critical period of hostilities. Cool and decisive, he effectively coordinated the units under his direction to repel and de- stroy a massed air attack by Japanese planes during the Battle of the Solomon Islands, retiring from the action with but minimum damage to his own ships; he hurled the full fighting power of his forces against the ene- my’s sea and air strength at Santa Cruz to blast more than half the Japanese planes from the sky and knock out two large car- riers; he reached out with his search and attack planes to track down and hit Jap- anese warships, troop transports, and cargo vessels off Guadalcanal, with Enterprise air- craft shooting down several Zeros in addi- tion to inflicting heavy damage upon the enemy’s surface vessels. Unwavering in his devotion to the fulfillment of the obligations of his command, Admiral Kinkaid contrih- uted esscntially to the success of the deter- mined offensive in the South Pacific. Mis dauniless leadership and sustained agegres~ siveness throughout reflect the highest credit upon himself and upon the United States naval service.” Presidential Unit Citation, U. S. S. Enter= prise: “For consistently outstanding performance and distinguished achievement during re- peated action against enemy Japanese forces in the Pacific war area, December 7, 1941, to November 15, 1942. Participating in nearly every major engagement in the first year of the war, the Enterprise and her air group exclusive of her far-flung destruction of hostile shore installation throughout the battle area, did sink or damage, on her own a total of 35 Japanese vessels and shoot down a total of 185 Japanese aircraft. Her aggres- sive fighting spirit and superb combat effi- ciency are fitting tribute to the officers and men who so gallantly established her as a solid bulwark in defense of the American Nation.” Gilbert and Marshall Islands raid, Febru- ary 1, 1942. Wake Island raid, February 24, 1942, Marcus Island raid, March 4, 1942. Battle of Midway, June 4-6, 1942. Occupation of Guadalcanal, August 7-8, 1942. Battle of Stewart Islands, August 24, 1942. 1 Battle of Santa Cruz Islands, October 26, 942, Battle of Solomon Islands, November 14-15, 1942, From January to October 1948, Admiral Kinkaid was Commander, North Pacific Fleet, and in that capacity was Aleutians Area Com- mander, with the over-all responsibility of coordinating and implementing the various forces involved in the Aleutians operations, Army, Navy, Air, and Canadian Air Forces,
A3304 His was the responsibility of transporting troops to points of attack; of air attacks be- fore and after landings; of cooperation with Army forces, and with pilots of the Royal Canadian Air Force. During his command, Amchitak was occupied in January 1943, and in February good progress had been made in establishing and equipping the base on Adak. Meanwhile, Kiska was attacked by planes almost daily, and in March when the Japa- nese attempted to support their garrisons at Kiska and Attu, there ensued the Battle of the Komandorski Islands in which a superior enemy force was driven off with slight dam-~- age to our force. On May 11, 1948, landings at Attu, Massacre Bay and Holtz Bay were made, covered by our naval forces, and in the bitter fighting which followed, various naval units assisted Army troops by furnish- ing fire support and air cover. By May 31 the Island of Attu had been captured from the enemy. During July and August, Kiska had been heavily bombed by our planes and on numerous occasions bombed by our naval forces. When assault troops landed on the island on August 15, 1943, it was found to have been evacuated by the Japanese under cover of fog. Thus with the occupation of Kiska, the Aleutian campaign was ended with our forces once more in possession of the entire chain of islands. For carrying out these joint military opera- tions in the Aleutians in the face of adverse weather conditions, fog, cold, and high seas, Admiral Kinkaid was awarded a Gold Star in lieu of the third Distinguished Service Medal with the following citation: Gold Star in lieu of the third Distinguished Service Medal: “Ror exceptionally meritorious and distin- guished service to the Government of the United States in a position of great responsi- pility as commander, North Pacific Force, United States Pacific Fleet, from January 6 to October 12, 19438. In cooperation with the Army, Vice Adm. Kinkaid. planned offensive operations and established advance bases while our forces moved steadily westward in the Aleutians. Exercising his command of all naval forces and certain Army amphibious and air forces with sound judgment and tact, he conducted a determined and success~ ful offensive drive in this strategic area which resulted in the occupation of enemy~held Attu and Kiska and in the final expulsion of the Japanese from the Aleutians.” Following the conclusion of the Aleutians campaign, Admiral Kinkaid returned to the operations on the opposite side of the Pacific and on November 26, 1948, reported for duty as commander, Southwest Pacific Force, and commander, Seventh Fleet. As commander of the Seventh Fleet, he was under the com- mand of General of the Army Douglas Mac- Arthur, commander in chief of the South- west Pacific area. In December 1943, as area naval commander, Admiral Kinkaid partici- pated in the Bismarck Archipelago opera- tions, and when in May 1944, Biak Island, off the New Guinea coast, was invaded by United States Army units under the command of General MacArthur, Admiral Kinkaid's Seventh Fleet supported the operations with bombing and naval bombardment. In October 1944 when forces under General MacArthur carried out the landings in the Philippine Islands, Admiral Kinkaid com- manded the central Philippine attack force, composed of Seventh Fleet units greatly augmented by temporarily transferred Pacific Fleet forces. This force comprised more than 650 ships, including battleships, cruisers, destroyers, escorts, escort carriers, transports, cargo ships, landing craft, mine craft, and supply vessels. The landing on Leyte on October 20, which established our troops in the central Philippines, where challenged by Japanese naval forces determined to drive us from the area. Between October 23 and 26 a series of major surface and air engage- ments took place with far-reaching effect. These engagements, designated the Battle for Leyte Gulf, culminated in three almost simultaneous naval actions, the Battle of Surigao Strait, the battle off Samar, and the battle off Cape Engano, involving ships of the Third as well as the Seventh Fleet. At the successful conclusion of the battle for Leyte Gulf, the three enemy forces which had attacked were either destroyed or in full retreat, the major Japanese threat to our initial Philippine landing was averted, and the enemy’s total surface power was severely crippled. Following the carrier strikes on Manila Bay in mid-December 1944, Admiral Kinkaid was placed in command of the Luzon attack force, composed of the augmented Seventh Fleet and comprising more than 850 ships. Early in January 1945 that force transported, put ashore, and sup- ported elements of the Sixth United States Army, Lt. Gen. Walter Kreuger, commanding, and assisted in the successful seizure and development of the Lingayen area of Luzon, largest island in the Philippines. For his services in that command, Admiral Kinkaid was awarded a gold star, in lieu of the fourth Distinguished Service Medal with the following citation: Gold star in lieu of fourth Distinguished Service Medal: “For exceptionally meritorious service to the Government of the United States in a duty of great responsibility as commander, Seventh Fleet, and commander, Allied naval forces in the southwest Pacific area, during the Leyte operation of the Philippine Islands campaign, from October through December 1944. A master of naval warfare, Admiral Kinkaid planned and carried out the naval phases of this operation which made pos- sible the liberation of the Philippines. Weld- ing the diverse and limited forces available to him into a highly effective fighting or-~- ganization, he directed the offensive with outstanding strategic skill, as evidenced by the annihilation of powerful Japanese fleet units in the battle or Surigao Straits phase of the battle for Leyte Gulf. As a result of his aggressive leadership and brilliant over- all strategic control, his determined forces repulsed and decisively defeated two major task groups of the Japanese fleet which had seriously threatened the operations for the capture of Leyte and the entire Philippine campaign. His indomitable courage, inspir- ing leadership, keen foresight and exceptional professional skill were primarily responsible for the complete success of all naval opera~ tions under his cognizance in the southwest Pacific areas during this period and reflect great credit upon Admiral Kinkaid and the United States naval service.” In November 1945, after the capitulation of the Japanese in August of that year, Ad-~ miral Kinkaid was relieved of command of the Seventh Fleet by Vice Adm. Danlel E. Barbey, United States Navy, and ordered to duty as commander, eastern sea frontier. In January 1946 he was assigned additional duty as commander, gulf sea frontier. In Feb- ruary 1946 he was relieved of the additional duty, and in June of that year was assigned additional duty as commander, Sixteenth Fleet (the inactive Atlantic fleet). The operating forces of the Navy were re~ organized as announced on January 1, 1947, and all numbered fleets abolished except for one fleet in each ocean. Admiral Kinkaid became commander, eastern sea frontier, with additional duty in command of the Atlantic Reserve Fleet, composed of ships in and out of commission. In addition to the Distinguished Service Medal with three gold stars, and the Presiden~ tial Unit Citation Ribbon, Admiral Kinkaid has the Mexican Service Medal (U. S. S. Ma-~ chias), the Victory Medal, Atlantic Fleet Clasp (U. S, S. Arizona), and is entitled to the American Defense Service Medal, the Asiatic-Pacific Area Campaign Medal, and the World War IT Victory Medal, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Senator McCarthy’s Charges EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HARRY P. CAIN OF WASHINGTON IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, May 5 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. CAIN. Mr. President, a great many things, some unkind and others complimentary, have recently been said about the junior Senator from Wiscon- sin [Mr. McCarruy]. Without discuss- ing the merits of the case which the Senator from Wisconsin has placed he- fore the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, I wish to point out that the Senator from Wisconsin is not without those supporters who believe in fair play and who believe that the Senator from Wisconsin is right in having brought the issue of communism to the attention of the Nation. I ask unanimous consent that a col- umn by John Fisher from the Times- Herald of May 5, an editorial from the Dubuque Witness of May 4, and an arti- cle by Father William H. Rowan from the Dubuque Witness of May 4 be print- ed in the Appendix of the Recorp, where they may provide the Senator from Wis- consin with some encouragement and stimulate the determination of the Sen- ate committee to determine the truth regardless of who may be found to be in the way. There being no objection, the matters were ordered to be printed in the Recorn, as follows: [From the Witness, Dubuque, Iowa, May 4, 1950} Tue Trorn Dorsn'r Have a Crrance We are well aware that it is up to the courts to decide whether Owen Lattimore is, or has been, a Communist spy. We don’t intend to make any accusations about him that would make us lable to libel suits, But we can’t help but ask what to us is an obvious question, Why is there so much effort being put forth to clear Lattimore of the charges made against him by Senator JoszPgx McCarrry? Louis Budenz, former editor of the Dally Worker, has testified in Congress that Latti- more had been a member of 9 Communist cell. The ex-Communist also testified, among other things, that Lattimore had organized Red writers in behalf of the Soviet policy in the Far East. Now why is the testimony of Budenz being questioned? He was one of the key witnesses who named Alger Hiss a Communist. Budenz’ testi- mony was not questioned then—except per- haps by the Communists. He exposed Gerhart Eisler as the Soviet’s top espionage agent in this country. Bu- denz’ word was accepted as true—except per- haps by the Communists. He was used by the Government as a star witness in the trial of 11 Communist leaders in New York. He was regarded as a highly reliable witness by the Government then, Why should his reliability be open to ques~ tion now? Or why shouldn’t Budenzg be telling the truth? First of all, he has proved himself to be an authority on Communist activities and a trustworthy witmess. Sec- ondly, he has nothing to gain by falling to tell the truth. Senator McCartay has named Lattimore, a one-time State Department employee, a Communist agent. Budenzg, in turn, backed
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD up the Senator’s charge by stating Latti- more had been the member of a Commu- mist cell. That should be as worthy of belief as Budenz’ testimony in the trials of convicted Communists. Butno. Other wit- messes are brought in and they contradict Budenz. Consequently the public is con- fused, The truth doesn’t have a chance, [From the Witness, Dubuque, Iowa, May 4, 1950) Tue Nore Book—QUOTATIONS AND CoMMENT (By Father William H. Rowan) THE LATTIMORE-M’CARTHY CASE To hear and read your ordinary columnist and broadcaster, one would imagine that Senator JosePH McCarTHY was the villain of the piece; the scoundrel and traitor that had betrayed 500,000,000 Chinese (who con- trol Asia where most of the human race reside) into Soviet slavery; that had de- stroyed the great traditional American policy of a strong and independent China and brought the country thereby into dire peril; that had betrayed American interests and security and liberty and the world’s; that had betrayed freedom and civilization and Christianity to their sworn and mortal enemy, the accursed antifreedom, anti- civilization, and anti-God Soviet. To listen and read the unprincipled parti< sans, concealed Communists, fellow travelers, one would think that Senator McCartuy were on trial instead of the guilty wretches and Benedict Arnolds and Judas Iscariots who have betrayed civilization and liberty, God and country to the vile Soviet. To the foregoing nefarious line there are honorable exceptions like the Hearst chain and the Chicago Tribune among publica- tions and Sokolsky among the columnists. We are leaving to the Senate investigation the establishment of Lattimore’s connec- tion—if any—with the Kremlin. Truth of the matter is that Senator Mc- Cartmy has undertaken a job that needed to be done and should have been done long ago. So doing, as that excellent columnist Sokolsky, who is @ real Chinese expert, re- marks, McCarry has already rendered sig- nal public service by flushing out many a foul bird, and Sokolsky recites a long list of the services of McCartny in this con- nection. He forced out, for example, the ex- istence of a foul moral perversion in the State Department. Only McCartuy had the courage to face the inevitable smearing, abuse, blackguard- ing, consequent on all that. The impressive Budenz testimony cannot be sneered off nor smeared off nor laughed off. Fact of the matter is that the Soviet propaganda and line to the effect namely; that the Chinese Soviet agents were agrar- jan reformers, then nationalists and pa- triots, now Titoists ready to break with Stalin was sold to the State Department; and that line has lost us China and bids fair to lose us all Asia; that that line coincided with the Snow-Lattimore line; that Lattimore was quoted constantly and gleefully by Pravda and Isvestia, as Dallin shows in his book on the Soviet ad- vance in Asia; that Lattimore was most in- fluential in urging that line (a book of his to effect was observed on the President’s table); that nowhere in his multitudinous books and articles—(he had access to pub- licity of widest circulation) on China is there aught hurtful to the Soviet advance in China until it was lost to the Soviet. “You would not be far Wrong in saying that a ‘stable’ of left wing, pro-Communist writers exists to which the editors of the pook review sections can turn for the par- ticular job at hand,” asserted one writer on the wide prevalence of the Soviet line in the American press, ‘ Another writer said on examination of the review sections in recent years shows what amounts to a sort of interlocking director« ate among reviewers of books on China. “Go back through the reviews and y-u will find that Edgar Snow reviewed a bcuk. by Owen Lattimore and that Lattimore got the assignment to review a book by Snow,” he continued. ‘They do a good job of back scratching. “John Fairbank, a Harvard history teacher, who reviewed Chiang Kail-shek’s book with notes and comment by Philip Jaffe, made no mention of Jaffe’s known bias against Nationalist China. Nor did he mention that Jaffe pleaded guilty to a charge of conspiracy to steal State Department documents and paid a $2,500 fine.” That was the Amerasia Communist spying case that was hushed up. Recall in this connection: China’s Mao Tse-tung who is currently being sold to the United States as the Tito of Asia by Authors Edgar Snow, Owen Lattimore, and others who until recently used to peddle the disastrous line that China’s Communists were mainly “agrarian reformers.” Time: April 18, 1949; Page 29. [So this column for years.] “That review [Fairbank’s] apparently qualified Fairbank to review the book ‘Thun- der Out of China,’ by Theodore White and Annalee Jacoby, and Mrs. Jacoby, no lover to Nationalist China, was assigned to review the late John Powell’s ‘My Twenty five Years in China.’ Mrs. Jacoby took Powell to task for calling Chinese Communists ‘bandits’ and seeing a Red menace in their activities ” Colossal impudence on her part in con.« nection with Powell, a great Chinese and Far Eastern expert unlike the salesmen and sales- ladies who sold the catastrophic party, Soviet, Stalin line for which they were handsomely paid in publications (mostly on the Eastern seaboard) of vast circulation, wide influence, potent prestige; while real Far Eastern ex- perts were excluded from their pages and the facts and the books written by genuine Far Eastern authorities were sneered, smeared, ignored. Snow is still an editor of the Satur- day Evening Post. Lattimore only recently had an article in the Atlantic in which there was nothing really hurtful to the Soviet line. Atlantic used to be our leading quality pub= lication. Here is a sane comment on the whole ca~ tastrophic affair: As for Lattimore and his alleged connec-~ tion with the Kremlin, we must necessarily wait for the proper legal decision. But it can be said now that his activities, shown by his published documents, have consistently fol- lowed a line that has cost us tremendous de- feat in China. He is the so-called architect of the doctrine that the Chinese Communists were not really Kremlin stooges at all, but “democratic agrarian reformers.” That false doctrine apparently had compelling influence on our conduct of foreign affairs in China. He should have been discredited long ago— not as a spy—but as an “authority” on for- eign policy in China. Editorial in the Tele- graph-Herald, Dubuque, Iowa, April 23, 1950. [From the Washington Times-Herald of May 5, 1950] Americans SHOWER McCarTHy WiTH PraisE FOR COMMIE FicHT~-50,000 Mrssacrs or ENCOURAGEMENT Pour IN From Aut Sxrc- TIONS OF NaTIon (By John Fisher) From. all walks of life, from all sections of the Nation, the people are standing solidly behind Senator McCarruy, Republican, of Wisconsin, in his demand for exposure of Communists in the State Department. “A random examination of the estimated 50,000 letters, cards, and telegrams received by McCarrHy since he made his charges of Communists in the Department reveals a spontaneous upsurge of public sentiment in his behalf. A3305 Most of the writers had no other wish than to give McCartHy encouragement in facing tremendous odds. They told of praying for him. They inquired if there is anything ordinary citizens can do to help. MANY CONTRIBUTE MONEY Many, hearing that McCarTtuyr was hard- pressed to finance his part of the investiga- tion, and forced to cut his investigating staff, contributed money. The donations aren’t large, usually a dollar or 2, sometimes 10. They said they gave what they could afford to help him carry on the fight. McCarTtHy has acknowledged spending about $7,500 of his personal funds to date on expenses incurred in connection with his search for evidence to be furnished the Sen- ate investigating committee, which has a staff and $25,000 for probing McCartuy’s charges. Although McCartuy has made no appeal for help, he has accepted the donations in the spirit in which they were given. Following are some of the explanations given by the people who contributed. DISABLED VET HELPS A disabled veteran of World War I, de- scribed himself as a pauper, sent a money order for $1 from Liberty, Mo., saying “the Democrats are leading us to war,” and he would have sent McCarTHy more money if not so poor, From Mount Vernon, N. Y.: “I’m a Demo- crat but I’m for you 100 percent in this effort. The present Democratic leaders don’t seem to realize that what’s bad for the country is bad for the party. Enclosed please find check for $10 to help in defraying the expense of this very urgent patriotic effort.” From a Chicago couple describing them- selves as “Mr. and Mrs. Democrat” came $10 with the wish, “hope you have a million more converts to your cause.” Enclosed in a United Nations envelope, McCarthy received $2 with the explanation: “This is the best I can do at this time; will repeat again in 2 weeks.” “YANKEE GREEN BUCK” “Here is a Yankee green buck to lick a Communist Red buck,” declared a donor from Aberdeen, Md. A Government employee in Washington sent a dollar with an unsigned letter, saying, “If my name were signed, and through any reason it would become known, my means of making a living would be abruptly termin- ated.” But the letter said; “In my opinion you and the few on your side of the aisle who have the guts to assist you are per- forming one of the greatest services to the country ever performed. Keep at it! It is way past time for America to wake up, s0 keep the alarm ringing.” Twenty-three other persons signed a joint letter, enclosing 23 crumpled dollar bills, “which we hasten to send today, realizing that under Truman’s profligacy they may be worth less tomorrow.” The letter continued: “The undersigned, realizing the pressure under which you as a loyal, patriotic Ameri- can, are laboring to bring to light the sub- versive activities of traitors and spies on our Government pay rolls, consider it a privilege to be able to make this small contribution to help you carry on the fight.” TOKEN OF APPRECIATION One of the most unusual letters came from Chicago, and read: ‘I am sending you herewith $5 for your personal use—some good cigars, a box of candy, or anything your pleasure desires. No acknowledgment is necessary, “IT am a poor man, 65 years old today, and since my social-security benefits start today, I feel I can afford this little token of appre- ciation of your splendid service to our coun- try. Your unseen friend.”