A4C4E about the relationship of the endocrine glands, such as adrenai, thyroid, gonadal, to mental illness. Surprisingly, it was Freud the pioneer detector of the psychic causes of mental disturbances, who indicated that work in the endocrine glands would reveal tne physical causes of some forms of mental disease. In the summer of 1927, Freud told Dr. Johan H. W. van Ophuijsen, the well- known nevehoaretwet, “T am sure that within the nea a wes . i: . 7 disorders which we treat with psychoanalysis will be cured by endocrine treatment.” While various groups of doctors have been trying to unravel the relationship of each of the numerous endocrine glands to mental disease, some of the most recent and exten- sive research efforts point to histamine as a promising worker in the psychoses. Hista- mine is not a drug but an easily synthesized body substance derived from the amino acid, histidine. It is found in every tissue in the body, with concentrations in the lungs and white blood cells, and is one of the protein- building blocks of the body. Sporadic efforts to use histamine have been going on for years. The first attempts failed. But in 1938, Dr. Wallace Marshall and Dr. J. S. Tarwater, working at the University of Alabama Medical College in Tuscaloosa, found histamine injections improved the 35 psychotic patients on whom they tried it. That same year, in England, Dr. Horace Hill, medical superintendent of a British mental home, reported that combined histamine and insulin injections improved over half the schizophrenics he treated. In 1940, Drs. Rob- ert W. Robb, Benjamin Kovitz, and David Rapport injected a group of long-hospital- ized schizophrenics with histamine and noted slight improvements. Last year Dr. E. O. Niver, of Hau Claire, Wis., found histamine helpful in relaxing patients. A group of doctors working at the Creed- moor State Hospital at Queens Village, N. ¥., recently announced the results of the longest, most extensive experiments with histamine ever made. In 5 years they developed a his- tamine treatment which doubled the num- ber of patients who could be released. It particularly benefited schizophrenics, and in treating neurotics with histamine, they found that in states of acute anxiety and tension, it gave immediate relief. In the journal of Clinical Psychopathology they advanced the controversial theory that some forms of insanity are physical diseases resuiting from the unbalanced output of the tiny endocrine glands. In their medical lan- guage it is caused by a “disruption of the cerebral metabolism due possibiy to a dis- turbed pituitary-adrenal-gonadal relation ship.” HISTAMINE FOR SCHIZOPHRENIC CASES They use histamine and other agents, such as the sex hormones, to achieve a balance in the relationship of the output of the en- docrine glands. In another series of papers in the Journal of Nervous and Mental Dis- ease they described how they had used hista« mime to arrest the relentless psychotic proc- esses which cause the brain of the schizo-« phrenic to deteriorate. These doctors—three of whom are broth- ers—are Drs. Arthur, Mortimer, and Ray- mond Sackler, and the psychiatrist, Dr. van Ophuijsen. Working with them were Dr. Co Tui, renowned for his work on peptic ulcers, and Dr. Harry A. LaBurt, senior di- rector of the Creedmoor Hospital. However controversial the Sackler-Van Ophuijsen theory of insanity, there is little question that they have opened up a broad avenue leading toward more successful re- habilitation of the mentally disturbed. In addition to many neurotics, more than 300 schizophrenics have undergone their hista- mune therapy. Not all improved, but the percentage who did reveals that histamine is a valuable addition to what psychiatrists call their “armentarium”’—their arsenal of weapons against mental disease. Histamine 1s no cure-all. It works best on certain schizophrenic types. It does not help psychotics suffering from cerebral ar- teriorclerosis. It helps some manic depres- sives and involutional psychotics. When patients who did not respond to histamine alone had electric-shock treatments added to their therapy, many who had not been helped by histamme did respond; some did not. One great advantage in histamine therapy is that while patients come out of electric-shock convulsions in a state of great confusion and suffer temporary memory Ge- fects, those responding to histamine do not. Among those who have encouraged the Sackler-Van Ophuijsen work is Dr. Frederick MacCurdy, former commissioner of the New York State Department of Mental Hygiene. To carry on their work the Sackler-Van Cphuijsen group has been assigned a large building, to be called the Creedmoor Insti- tute for Psychobiologic Studies, on the Creed- moor State -Hospital grounds, where the medical men will specialize in clinical re- search in histamine, steroid, and insulin therapy. The most successful use of histamine has been in the treatment of schizophrenics who have so long been regarded as virtually in- curable. Typical of those who have been helped by histamine is the 23-year-old woman described in the opening paragraph, a catatonic schizophrenic. Here 1s her story, based on actual case records, interviews, re~ cordings of fantasies and hallucinations and medical research. We shall call her Marion Enders; besides her name other identifying details have been fictionized. Doctors warn that everyone, to some extent, has at some time suffered some of the symptoms of the schizophrenic and that you should not, upon reading such ma- terial as follows, either identify yourself with the patient or attempt to diagnose any per-~ sonality difficulties of your friends or chil- dren. Marion Enders was born to a well-known couple residing in a well-to-do New York sub- urb. They already had two boys and were especially delighted over the birth of a daugh- ter. Both parents had college educations and her father had inherited a small but solidly established business, She developed rapidly as a baby, talking and walking at an earlier age than other children in the neigh- borhood. ‘“She’s a perfect baby,” her mother was fond of saying. A CHILD UNMOVED BY DEATH When Marion was 4 years old, her paternal grandmother, to whom she was especially at- tached, died. Her mother, comforting her husband during his grief, noticed that Marion was not upset by the death. When it came time for her to go to school, she took the necessary separation from her home and mother quite easily and her mother was proud of the fact that she did not cry when left in the strange schoolroom, as other chil- dren did. She made a few friends in the class almost immediately and seemed to en- joy school. She was sensitive, especially if her father or brothers yelled at her, but not easily upset. Her worst trait was stubborn-~ ness, Which her mother often said showed she was just like her father. Occasionally she had a temper tantrum or a fit of stubbornness, but on the whole she was a quiet, extremely well-behaved child, When she was 11, her mother noticed that, unlike her boisterous brothers who were ac- tive members of groups outside the home, Marion spent most of her time alone. She had no particular girl friends or confidante. The following year, when other girls in her class began flirting with boys and dressing to attract their attention, Marion did not. In- stead of primping, she grew sloppy. In school a teacher complained that Marion did APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD not pay attention to the work. She day-~ dreamed and dawdled over her meals, seldom brushed her hair, and was likely to come out with odd and startling bits of information at the dinner table, items she had picked up during her incessant reading. She frequent-~ ly overslept and was late for school. One of her teachers, noticing that Marion did not mix with other pupils, never joining in group play, called Marion’s mother and suggested she seek psychiatric help. CRACIZPOT TEACHERS BLAMED Alarmed and needlessly feeling guilty, her mother took up the problem with her hus- band that night. He pooh-poched the warn- ing, vehemently denouncing those crackpot teachers. He said, “All she is suffering from is plain ole growin’ pains.” But he was dis- turbed when he discovered Marion talking to herself and noticed that she sometimes had difficulty in recognizing him. He said noth-~ ing to her mother, though, about his secret worries. Thus passed what doctors later said was an ideal time for psychiatric diagnosis and treatment. When Marion was 15, her menses finally began. In the following months she seemed to undergo distinct change for the better. Her school marks im-< proved and she regained her position on the honor roll. Neat and clean, she spent hours brushing her hair before a mirror. But she continued her aloof detachment from group activities and took no interest in boys; her brother took her to her junior and senior proms. Under her picture in her high-school year book, the inscription read: “The girl we'd like to get to know.” After high school she took a brief course at @ secretarial school, refusing—out of stub- borness, her family said—to go to college. At the secretarial school she won top honors and immediately after graduation she got a job as a secretary in a branch plant of a na- tionally known company. Pretty, well dressed, efficient, she was advanced rapidly by hard-working executives who found that she was discreet, could be given major re- sponsibilities and handle ticklish problems with tact. She did not mix with the other girls, and won the reputation for being ma- ture beyond her years. During her early days at the office her family found her bright and cheerful. But once she had reached the tcp, she became no-~ ticeably more irritable. Her brothers were away at college and because she often worked late, she had little to do with her parents. Almost her only pleasure was going to the movies alone. One young man phoned her occasionally. When her mother commented on this, Marion snapped that he meant nothing to her. The next time he called she refused to see him. She was often critical of her father be- cause he sometimes prowled about the house in his underwear. “You look so disgusting,” she said. She also criticized his habit of taking his shoes off downstairs. On one oc- casion she complained that he had been smoking his pipe in her room. He had not, but nothing would convince her of that. She spent more and more of her time alone, and when her father once jokingly said some- thing about her getting married she flew from the table and afterward always insisted on eating alone. To her mother she com- plained that the girls in the office talked about her and were jealous of her job as secretary to the boss. At about this time, Marion’s irritability be- gan to carry over into her working ‘hours. She would snap at the other girls when they questioned her about the office work. When one of the girls got married, she churlishly refused an invitation to her shower. She began to show up late for work. She com- plained to her boss that the other girls were spreading wild stories about her. Gradually she displayed less interest in being neat. She dawdled at her work and
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD would make errors. In typing a letter one day she wrote, “I do wish—” leaving out a most important “not.” Her boss caught the mistake and reprimanded her. She snapped back angrily, denying the error, shouting he didn’t know what he was talking about, and then burst into tears. Afterward he noticed that she often sat daydreaming at her type- writer and that she seemed sad. Sometimes she would enter his office and sit down, saying he had rung for her. When he said he hadn’t, she seemed bewildered. One week end her boss was to go on an im- portant trip, for which she was to prepare a number of briefs. She completely forgot them and he was forced to go without them. A week later she did not show up for work. Meanwhile at home she had developed in- somnia, often going the entire night with- out sleep. During one of these sieges of insomnia she took up the making of colored pictures, using a lipstick at first and then an old childhood paintbox. She left her room in a mess and often went unwashed. Her paintings, which absorbed more and more of her attention, were bizarre night scenes, heavy with blacks and purples, pic~ turing tombstones and skeletons and other symbols of death. One morning she went downstairs all dressed up and told her mother, “I’m ready to go to Aunt Mabel’s.” Her mother said, “But Marion, Aunt Mabel has been dead for 6 years.” A SUDDEN OUTBURST OF ANGER “You just told me to get ready to go to’ Aunt Mabel’s,” she cried in a rage. When her mother denied it, Marion hurled her purse at her, ran upstairs, and locked herself in her room. She refused to come out despite her mother’s entreaties. That evening, when her father returned, they persuaded Marion to open her door. When they entered the messy room, Marion threw herself on the bed, complaining of pains in the abdomen. They called the family physician. He was busy with another case and could not see the girl immediately. Because of the par- ents’ fear that Marion had appendicitis, he suggested that they take her to a general hos- pital. At the hospital she became hysterical in the examination room, began to scream and to fight with the doctors and nurses. One of the doctors, after taking her blood count arfd observing her lack of fever or any other appendicitis symptoms, questioned the mother about Mazion’s general behavior. He recommended that she be removed to @ psychiatric hospital, gave her a stiff seda-~ tive, and had her placed in restraint in case she awoke and started fighting again. Her parents were stunned. They could not accept the doctor’s recommendation. They believed she was “just upset.” But after their family doctor had concurred with the hospital doctor, they agreed to her trans- fer to a psychiatric hospital. When they visited her there she made mistakes in recog~ nition, talked in a low monotone, seemed dazed, and would break off sentences in the middle. Usually the sentences made no sense. When her parents next visited her, she attacked them physically, badly clawing her mother. Left alone, she was quiet, unseeing. In the wardroom she would stand by herself and if anyone approached her, she would move off into the corner, sometimes crouch- ing. She would hold her arms rigidly in an unnatural position for hours. ABSURD ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS Though unresponsive much of the time, she would sometimes answer questions with absurdities. Once asked her name by the doctor, she said, “See, he’s looking into my eyes, he is falling in love with me.” Then she sighed sadly. “Iam dead. My ears are clogged up. I have no blood. My face is gone, my legs are dead. I have no blood.” Occasionally she would respond to her name, but she was usually uncooperative and sometimes resisted the nurses. “I have no name,” she once said, “Call me mice, cat, dog. I have no husband, I’m all alone in this world. Ladies and gentlemen, you are all invited to my funeral. I am dying because my blood is poison and everyone 1s crying over me, looking at the mess and the way it is made.” But mainly, her responses to questions were incoherent mumbles. When the doctors first recommended elec- tric convulsive therapy, the father said “No.” After the assault episode, however, he agreed to it. During the next 3 weeks she received a course of electric shock treatments and showed signs of improvement. She was able to visit quietly with her family and was more cooperative. She took some interest in her personal hygiene. But she refused to take any occupational therapy, had diffi- culty in remembering anything abott com- ing to the hospital, and begged constantly for permission to go home. When her family visited her, she would endlessly entreat them to take her home. They were overjoyed by the progress she had made. After a while she was allowed to go home. She lhved quietly and occupied herself with small tasks about the house. The family was very happy to have her home and when she broke off sentences or looked around bewildered, they waited patiently for her to resume. However, after 3 months, she be- came markedly more confused and absent- minded. Her insomnia returned. One night her mother, hearing her moving about, got up and went to her room. She found Marion sitting on her bed with a strange, dreamy look on her face. When her mother asked how she felt, she smiled beatifically and said, “Last night I married God.” ‘ Her parents returned her to the hospital the next day. During the trip she fre- quently grimaced grotesquely and addressed her father and mother by strange names. As they approached the hospital she became mute. When the doctors saw her she was in a kind of stupor. Then, during her ex- amination, she became so violent that she had to be placed in restraint. Her father, still worried about electric shock treat- ments, asked if there were any other form of therapy which would help her. Told of histamine injections but warned that they were purely experimental, he asked that they be tried on Marion. The next day Marion had a glazed, un- seeking look in her eyes. She did not re- spond to questioning. Nor was there any response during her first histamine in- jection. A histamine injection causes swift dila- tion of the vessels of the brain and skin of the upper body. All the patient feels is @ metallic taste in the mouth and a flushing of the face and neck, followed occasionally by a mild headache or nasal congestion. It also greatly inereases the amount of hydro- chloric acid in the stomach. Before the in- jection the patients are checked for al- lergies, ulcers, and hardening of the arteries, The only physical observations made dur- ing the injections are those of pulse, blood pressure, and breathing. A, small initial dosage of histamine is gradually increased until the top amount that can be tolerated is found. The Sacklers and Van Ophuijsen have found that psy- chotics can take large amounts of histamine while psychoneurotics can take very little of it. The patient is given two injections a day, the second following the disappear- ance of symptoms created by the first shot. For 3 days, during each of which she ré- ceived two histamine injections, Marion re- mained mute, moying her arms in an un- natural fashion. On the third day her face A447, lost its stupefied look and showed anger. A second later she laughed. Asked why, she said, “I don’t know. The peppermint cup. I don’t know. I don’t like anything.” The following day, during the injections, she said, “To hell with him. Keep away from me.” She started singing, “And not for just an hour, not for just a month,” and then said, “I’ll kill these, you, too. Revenge will be sweet. Whoever comes, I chose death. You’ll never get a word cut of me, and if you do, you’ll wish you didn’t. Whisky, poisons why. She’s a rat. I hope she dies on the ocean. I drowned in the ocean. I am ready for the casket, She stinks on ice, oatmeal, potatoes. I have chosen death. That will make an end of it. On account of one or two dollars. Black hair, black eyes, and tweezers, coffee with milk, oatmeal, potatoes, hamburgers, and snakes. Death is nearer than you think. I don’t believe in anything, I don’t believe in oatmeal. Get out of my life. I’ll kill you the first chance I get. Teeth or tongue, an eye for an eye and a toothless time. Don’t look at me in that tone. Comb, shoes, one sheet, one mattress, and never will you say simple puss to me. Rather death. ‘ That’s what I invented and a harmonica to kill you in your face and cake. I was only a mouth, teeth, and tongue.” This response, typical of the schizophrenic in that little of it made sense, was none- theless a step ahead. The following day her appetite increased. She also looked more alert and called out suddenly, “Please, Doctor, may I have a glass of water?” Then a silly expression returned, but disappeared when she was asked who she was. “Marion,” she replied. Asked where she was, she said, “Hospital.” She knew the month and year. Asked why she was in the hospital, she said, “Because I came here.” SHE HEARD THE VOICE OF GOD For 8 days after that she was mute and uncooperative, never responding, but follow- ing injections of histamine on the tenth day, she appeared restless, somewhat cooperative. She answered questions but was easily dis- tracted by outside noises. Asked if she heard voices, she said, “Yes, I did—a long time ago.” Whose voice? ‘“God’s voice—I was Mary and Joseph.” Man's voice or woman’s? “A baby’s voice.” What did it say? “I don’t know. It kind of stared.” See a vision? “Yes~—in the sky.” then broke into a silly laugh. Why laugh? “Because I kiss you, I don’t know.” Any vision today? ‘No.” When did you see a vision? ago.” Can you save the world? Do you think so now? faint voice. After that session she was more respon~ sive and more cooperative, her contact with reality steadily improving. She no longer had to be spoon-fed, but took care of herself and helped around the ward. She begged for a key so she could come and go as she pleased. She wanted to be trusted. During the next injection period she de- scribed the physical effects of the histamine. “My heart is beating faster. I feel like I'm blushing, very warm and funny.” She smiled absently, saying, “It seems very strange,” and then covered her eyes. Asked why she covered her eyes, she replied, “I'm not sure. I don’t know why. It’s not funny. I wonder what I’ll be like tomorrow.” The following day she reported. “My pulse seems to be going faster than yester- day. Warm from the waist up.” After a while she complained of a slight headache and the flush became intensified, but she said, “I feel as if I have more control over what I will say and do. I don’t think I shall cover my eyes any more.” Asked if she She “A long time “T thought so.” “Yes,” in a very
A4048 wanted to cover her eyes, she said, “Now?— no.’ A few minutes later she bantered with the doctor. “It’s so ridiculous,” she said. “Look,” and she mocked her old habit of covering her eyes. “It’s ridiculous. Peo- ple’s souls become so scientific.” AWARE OF HER RETURNING EGO During the next injection period she said she felt warmer than ever, Asked what she was thinking of, she said, “I think my ego is returning. I thought it had withered away. I thought it had gone forever. Some- times I thought I might turn into a babbling child the next minute.” When she smiled, she was asked why. “I was thinking of a mountain I once went to. We had a picnic on it and you could see the entire valley for miles.” She also reported an improvement in her ability to concentrate. “I can take care of things better, and generally I feel less depressed and more at ease. Things don’t look as bleak.” In the days that followed she improved steadily. One day she volunteered what she meant by being depressed—being complete- ly withdrawn and not caring, not doing any- thing, feeling dead. “There is something,” she said, “more secure about being depressed than about not being depressed. I am afraid of not being depressed.” Shortly after this, she was allowed to go home but the histamine injections were con- tinued on an out-patient basis. She now took care of her room at home and was more friendly with the family. She got a part- time job and began going to evening art classes. At times she would report sudden seizures of anxiety. “Things are sometimes very frightening in every way,” she said. “I can’t be specific. But it always happens when there are people around. I become very restless. I had to leave art class last night. I couldn’t concentrate.” But her “depres- sion” continued to diminish and her family noticed that she now spoke more directly and expressed herself more forcibly. She reported last month that she can con- centrate much better, is looking for a full- time job. She has become quite friendly with a group of fellow art students, some- times eats supper with them before class. DANCING-—~AND A YOUNG MAN Her family reports she is much easier to live with. She went with some members of her art class to a folk-dancing center one night and learned to square-dance. She now goes dancing once a week and at the dance one night she met a young man from the gas company who took a special interest in her. Though she still has a tendency to look away from strangers upon meeting them, she thinks she can overcome that. She says she is learning to laugh at herself and get into the spirit of things. She now invites her parents to her room and on her father’s birthday she bought him a pipe. She continues to receive an cccasional series of histamine injections. Although she now seems to be making a very good adjustment to the real world, this does not mean histamine has completely cured Marion of her schizophrenia. She can, however, look forward to leading a happier and more neariy normal life. She will need histamine in much the same way that the diabetic needs insulin. Had her symptoms been recognized earlier, her stay in the hospital would have been shorter and her recovery more nearly complete. The treat- ment will help prevent further psychotic scarring of brain tissue, but it cannot undo damage already done. The recovery of Marion through hista- mine therapy holds new hope for thousands of victims of mental disorders and their families. Histamine promises to become one of our most valuable weapons in check- ing mental disease. Because it is cheap and easily administered it can cut cur vast out- lay for mental institutions, many of whose patients could be treated on an out-patient basis. Apart from the help it can give longsuf- fering patients, its great importance to psy- chiatry lies in the discovery that histamine is one of the keys to the long-locked secret, physical causes of mental disease. But its miracles, as in Marion’s case, depend on early diagnosis and treatment. The Peril in the Ruhr EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. GEORGE G. SADOWSKI OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES + Thursday, May 25, 1950 Mr. SADOWSKI. Mr. Speaker, un- der leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I wish to include an article by Dr. Jean Pajus. Dr. Pajus, a graduate of the University of Dijon, formerly taught international economic and political re- lations at the University of California, at Berkeley, and during the war he was adviser on economic warfare to the For- eign Economic Administration in Wash- ington. Later he served as adviser in Germany to the United States Treasury Mission and the Division of Investiga- tion of Cartels and External Assets of the United States Military Government. He is now an economic consultant in New York City. The article follows: [From the New Republic of May 29, 1950] Tre PERIL IN THE RuHR (By Jean Pajus) _ The dramatic proposal of French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman to pool the coal and steel interests of France and Germany, in the interests of peace and recovery, is in fact a move to establish a Franco-German combine which, in the long run, will mostly benefit Germany. Under the Schuman plan the German, French, and Rhine-basin coal and steel interests would fix markets, pro- auction, prices, abolish customs duties, and equalize wages and social-security benefits. In defense of the plan it can be said that if it banished France’s fear of German ag- gression it would be a contribution to the peace of western Europe. It would enable the French to obtain coal on equal terms with the Germans. And it would equalize the social-security benefits of French and German workers. In practice, the Schuman plan would mean the revival of the prewar internation- al-cartel system under government aegis. The French plan is not an answer to secu- rity from German aggression. It is not the kind of economic integration repeatedly de- manded of ECA Administrator Paul Hoffman and the United States. It would not mean the internationalization of the Rhine. The real victors in Europe, if the French plan is adopted, will be the steel and coal barons of the Ruhr. The political gain of Germany’s change in status would be more than offset by the elimination of all present safeguards against the rebuilding of the Ruhr potential, which the plan would put under the con- trol of those interests which stood behind the Kaiser and Hitler. Although Schuman’s plan came as a sur- prise, negotiations looking toward it have been going on for more than a year. Early in November 1949 Chancellor Adenauer, the widely heralded champion of free enterprise, sent a Message to his neighbors urging them APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD to establish an international steel cartel em~ bracing the Ruhr, France, Luxemburg, and the Saar. These negotiations recall grimly the era just after World War I. France’s dead were scarcely buried when Louis Leucheur, the late French Minister of Reconstruction, began bargaining with the Germans to form an in- ternational cartel. The reasons that prompt- ed the French to shake hands with the for- mer enemy were given by a prominent French senator and industrialist, Gaston Japy, who said frankly that an effort must be made to solve the metallurgical crisis by making “an association with our enemies, authors of many murders and so much ruin in our country.” Then, as now, the Germans were quite willing; they had already laid plans to circumvent the Treaty of Versailles. These Germans consisted of a small group of in- dustrialists deriving their power from the ownership of coal mines, steel works, and chemical plants in the Ruhr. Their purpose was to avoid the economic consequences of defeat and to regain their industrial power in preparation for a second bid for world domination. The current French-German negotiations would seem to indicate that nothing has changed since those days. Note the coinci- dence; the Frenchman Japy proposed a French-German cartel agreement in 1923—4 years after World War I; Chancellor Ade- nauer made a similar proposal 4 years after World War II. Twenty-seven years ago Eu- rope faced a crisis in the metallurgical in- dustry and needed “consolidation.” A few years after World War II Europe is faced with the problem of “economic integration.” After World War I the French complained bitterly that the Germans were in a position, despite the tremendous losses sustained un- der the Treaty of Versailles, to control the French iron and steel industries by with- holding coal. Another complaint was that the Germans were in 2 position to manipu- late the price of French pig iron. However, despite these complaints, there was an inter- dependence between Lorraine and the Ruhr, involving the dominant groups on both sides of the Rhine. Both sides saw eye to eye on labor policy and social legislation, and par- ticipated in each other’s national armament programs. The industrialists of both coun- tries were members of the same cartels and directors of jointly owned enterprises. The basic conditions have not changed in the past 30 years. Neither have the leaders of the heavy industries in France, Belgium, Luxemfurg, and the Saar, despite the tre- mendous damage their countries have suf- fered. If the present plans materialize, the world will witness the spectacle of the former members of the international cartel joining hands again. The Schwedes and the Maulicks on the one hand, the Schneider- Creusot on the other, will try to integrate Europe economically. The German efforts to seck out their former cartel friends began soon after VE- day. In May 1945, the ashes in Diisseldorf were still smoldering, and German indus- trialists, bewildered, did not know whether they had any friends left. They soon found out. Walter Rohland, a trusted Nazi indus- trialist who had been appointed in 1943 to head the Vereinigte Stahlwerke, told the story in a letter to a friend in which he described a visit of the United States Stra- tegic Bombing Survey immediately after the liberation of Diisseldorf: “The United States Strategic Bombing Sur- vey, after 10 days, left feeling very satisfied, and also with the Englishmen Hannan and Temple, everything developed perfectly. In both cases mutual friends in the United States and England respectively formed a good bridge.” Strengthened by this foreign solicitude, the German industrialists began their campaign to renew their former cartel connections.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Walter Schwede, the German representative of the Luxemburg International Steel Cartel, tells of it in a letter dated June 9, 1945, addressed to his former boss, Ernst Poensgen, the father. of the International Steel Cartel: “T learned from Rohland, who as you know visited you in Kitzbtihl, that you had in- tended to come to Dusseldorf in order to use the weight of the authoritative position you hoid with the international cartels and especially with the English group.” That was the turning point for the Ger- man industrialists. Poensgen, of course, came back to power (he died last year). The rest of his friends also came back— Wihelm Zangen, to head the Mannesmann Trust; Rohland, who has been right-hand man for Albert Speer, Hitler’s minister in charge of armaments and production, to the Vereinigte Stahlwerke; Gunter Sohl, also of Vereinigte Stahlwerke, and Schwede. Hugo Stinnes won his fight with the Brit- ish and has been active behind the scenes. Hermann Reusch has emerged with en- hanced prestige from his battles with the labor unions. Gunther Henle, of Klockner, is a power in the board of trustees and, with Robert von Pferdmenges, has been defend- ing the interests of the cartels in the German Ministry of Economics. A few must be singled out. In October, 1946, Heinrich Dinkelbach, the financial brains of the biggest German steel combine, was appointed supermanager of the Rhine industry by the British authorities. He was @ heavy contributor to the Nazi Party. Today, Dinkelbach is the head of the 12 German trustees appointed under law 75 (November 10, 1948) to control the Ruhr in- dustries. Ostensibly this prohibits exces- sive concentration of economic power. Un- der it the Ruhr industry is managed by cor- porations, supervised by German trustees who exercise, with few exceptions, the nor- mal duties of ownership pending a final set- tlement of the ownership question. Yet a close analysis of this law shows that apply- ing it literally will result in a great concen- tration of industrial power in the Ruhr in the hands of a single powerful group, the very same forces which backed Hitler in his adventures. Indeed these trustees can create an even greater concentration of in- dustrial power than existed under Hitler. (A new regulation was made public by the Allied High Commission, May 17, supersed- ing law 75. While paying lip service to the principle of decartelization, it left the ques- tion of the ultimate ownership of Ruhr in- dustries to the West German Government.) German labor has expressed apprehension about the efforts by influential sources to prevent the liquidation of the Rubr cartels. Following the promulgation of law 75, a combined steel control board was appointed to supervise the activities of Dinkelbach and his group. The Allied members of this control board—Ronald Clark, of the United States Steel Corp.; W. Harris Burland, of Britain; and Albert Bureau, of France—are supposed to control the Ruhr industry. Actually, however, they have done little or * nothing. A similar situation obtains in coal. On De- cember 16, 1947, Heinrich Kost was appointed to the position of general manager of the German coal board. He had been a prom- inent member of the Nazi Party years before Hitler came to power in 1933. The vital sig- nificance of Kost’s position is apparent. By virtue of his position, he can and does con- trol western Europe’s economy, since it de- pends on an adequate supply of coal. Mod~ ern west European blast furnaces need metallurgical coke, which only the Germans can supply. Overshadowing Dinkelhach and Kost is the figure of Hermann Abs, whose official post is chairman of the Reconstruction Loan Cor- poration, the purpose of which is to rebuild the economy of Germany. Under the Nazi regime, Abs was the head of the foreign de- partment of the Deutsche Bank, which played a key role in looting invaded Euro- pean countries. He was on the board of di- rectors of some of the most important in- dustrial and financial organizations in Ger many and in the Nazi-occupied countries; he held more than 40 directorships in major German corporations. The role played by Abs’ bank in the German economy was de- scribed (p. 79) in the report on the Deutsche Bank issued by the office of military gov- ernment. The Deutsche Bank voted the largest blocks of shares of the giant companies of Germany, some of them the largest in the world. It voted 38 percent of the total stock voted in I. G. Farben, the largest chemical combine in the world; 19 percent in Verein- igte Stahlwerke, the largest iron and steel concern in Europe; 28 percent in AEG; well over 20 percent in Siemens Halske, the sec- ond largest electrical cartel in Germany, and sizable blocks in the Rhenish Westphalian Electrical Works, one of the largest public- utility trusts. Abs played an important role behind the scenes during the meeting of the foreign ministers in Paris in November 1949. This conference was called by Bevin to discuss the German problem, particularly the German demands that dismantling of surplus plants be stopped. Adenauer won. Emboldened by his success, he made a special plea on behalf of Germany’s biggest steel combine, 19 percent of which is controlled by Abs’ bank. Recalling that the Vereinigte Stahlwerke was established with more than $100,000,000 of American money—inciden- tally never repaid—Adenauer demanded that the United States make a new loan of 225,000,000 marks, while Belgium, France, and Luxemburg lend 175,000,000 marks to this combine. The latter sum was to come indirectly from the United States, too. To carry out this plan, Abs came to the United States in November 1949. Thanks to the vigilance of Senator Guy M. Grtzerrse (Demo- crat, Iowa), he failed in his efforts and left the United States on December 7, 1949. Germany badly needs foreign-capital in- vestments, recent attempts to raise capital for investment purposes having been un-~ successful. The only source is the funds made available through the Marshall plan. Abs can decide where the counterpart funds should go, and it is a safe guess that the big corporations will be the beneficiaries of our bounty. The latest figures provided by ECA show the following appropriations earmarked for 1950-51; Britain, approximately $900,000,- 000; Germany, approximately $724,000,000, and France, approximately $670,000.000. Abs knows that all western Europe faces an economic depression and is caught in a political dilemma. The situation was sum- med up by France’s former Prime Minister Paul Reynaud, on March $1, 1950: “Europe must unite for defense. * * * The At- lantic forces should include German troops. * * * Germany must be ad- mitted to the Council of Europe. * * * The British must become part of the union because without them, Germany, With her economic strength, would dominate the union.” From the German point of view one of the most serious obstacles to the proposed econ- omic union has been the International Ruhr Authority, promulgated by the three Allied powers on September 28, 1948, its avowed purpose being to control the German war ‘potential. Abs and the German Ruhr magnates have always been opposed to it because, so long as it existed, the Germans were in no position to bargain effectively with their neighbors. They did everything possible to render it ineffective, and they have succeeded. On January 24, 1950, Thomas Dehler, Minister of Justice in the Bonn cabinet, gleefully pronounced it hol- lowed out and outstripped, The Authority, ‘A4049 heralded as one of the most important events since VE day, has been perhaps the greatest hoax perpetrated upon the democratic world which sincerely believed that the German war potential must and could be controlled. Thanks to the machinations of Abs and his friends, the Authority never functioned and never even concerned itself with devel- opments in the Ruhr. It is a matter of record that it was never given adequate funds or personnel. The reason for this failure is not hard to find. Its main purpose was to reassure France against new German aggression. The French now seem to feel there 1s no longer any need to fear Germany, since the latter has been invited to become a@ member of the council of Europe. The British seem to agree with this thesis too. On March 21, the Daily Mail wrote: “The Ruhr Authority, which was slated to become the Allied instrument of control of German industry, has become superfluous.” In this connection, Michael Hoffman, in his dispatch from Geneva to the New York Times (November 20, 1949), reported the following significant development: “The latest and most important moves has been made by German and French steel interests that have been having discussions with the knowledge—and some high French sources say the approval and even the sponsorship— of André Frangois-Poncet, French High Com- missioner in Germany.” The ground work for the establishment of the steel cartel had been prepared early last year by Abs’ friend, Herman Reusch, of the Gttehoffnungshtitte. On February 23, 1949, Joseph Alsop reported from Berlin that Reusch was warmly received in the highest French circles because he came to make a deal. The deal was to offer the French heavy industry—the Comité des Forges—a 30-per- cent stock interest in the Ruhr. “The Ruhr industry would then be established with no nonsense about socialization, and the new Franco-German joint ownership in the Ruhr would be accepted as a substitute for the internationalization the French talk so much about,” Alsop wrote. Wilhelm Zangen, of the Mannesmann Tube Cartel, made a similar proposition to the French last sum- mer. And in fact during the past year num- erous meetings have been held by the repre- sentatives of the western European steel in~ dustries for the purpose of concluding a cartel agreement. One of the main obstacles, it appears, has been the British attitude. The British Iron and Steel Federation has had ample experi- ence with the prewar international steel car- tel; it was invited to join as a charter mem- ber but declined because of the traditional British policy of free trade. Hight years later the federation became a member; but it was then too late to check Germany’s domi- nation of the European steel industry. Can the British afford to make the same mistake again? The answer depends on whether Britain can continue to produce steel more cheaply than its competitors, and on whether the prospective members can agree on production quotas. Aspects of this problem were discussed in the Statistical Bulletin of the British Iron and Steel Fed- eration, on the even of the British elections last February. According to the Bulletin, Europe will consume 58,000,000 tons of steel in 1953. The members of the Organization for Euro- pean Economic Cooperation are slated to produce sixty-eight to seventy million tons, or @ surplus of ten to twelve million tons. Markets must be found for this surplus. The Bulletin points out, however, that the “figures quoted were based on calculations made by ECA in Geneva before the devalua- tion of the pound. Since then, devaluation has given the British steel producers some comparative advantage over their competi- tors. Britain now produces at lower cost than any of the European countries, and Germany is a close second. How long will
A4958 Britain maintain this advantage? After discussing the postwar increase in steel pro- duction as compared to 1937, the Bulletin makes a significant recommendation: “In order to avoid a sudden contraction of de- mand it is necessary to coordinate the efforts to increase consumption. * * * To ac- complish this purpose it is essential that investments and steel-production programs be coordinated.” Thus it is clear that the British steelmas- ters agree 1n principle that a cartel agree- ment is necessary; and there is no doubt about the French, Belgian, and German atti- tudes. The only question is how to recon- cile the various conflicting interests. Can Germany ke brought into this eco- nomic agreement while the other members are protected from German domination? Judging from Germany’s past practices, the future is full of risk. The history of the first international steel cartel of 1926 justifies forebodings. The cartel agreement covered the production for both domestic and export markets and pro- vided a system of deposits and fines to com- pel adherence. To cover administrative costs there was a basic charge of $1 for every ton of crude steel produced. If a country exceeded its quota, it paid a penalty of ¢4 per ton. If a country failed to reach its quota, it received compensation of $2 per ton. Since Germany was anxious to establish the cartel, it deliberately asked for a smaller quota than it was entitled to, and this bait vas eagerly seized by France, Belgium, and Luxemburg. One year later these countries discovered why Germany had asked for a small quota. During the first year of its existence, the Germans paid $10,381,000, or 95 percent of the total fines imposed upon the overproducing cartel members. They had seized the initiative, and they kept it until World War II. Various meetings havé been held in Paris, London, and Brussels. The stumbling bleck has been Dinkelbach’s demand to raise the level of steel production to 16,000,000 tons. Can the British agree to this? They are afraid to grant the Germans parity in steel production, and would like to prevent this as long as possible. This is why the Allied Commission told Adenauer on March 80 that the 11,100,000-ton ceiling would not be raised. The British did not think they could afford to pay the price at present. But consider- ing the tremendous concessions the Germans have been able to extract during the past i2 months, there is little doubt that in the long run they will win out. Therefore, Schuman’'s proposal, which was greeted en- thusiastically by the Ruhr industrialists, satisfies the German demands. Even should the Germans fail to obtain an immediate revision of their level of in- dustry, they can afford to wait; in the long run, their economic strength is in their favor, because the German industrial econ~ omy is by all odds the mightiest in Europe. Their steel capacity today—more than 20,- 030,000 tons—is higher than that of Britain. This capacity was not materially reduced through reparations, which in any case prac- tically came to a halt last November. The huge industrial potential Germany built up before and during the war is still substan- tially intact and will be improved with Mar- shall-plan money. The dye industry is larger than that of the United States; the prewar nitrogen capacity is largely intact; the coal-tar industry is larger than it was in 1947. The synthetic-fiber industry is still there, not to mention the I. G. Farben com- bine. second largest in the world. The French are now evidently convinced that they can become strong enough to offset Germany’s economic power in an integrated Europe. But consider what happened to the French after the formation of the first car- tel. In 1936 Germany’s production of crude The machine-tool inventory is the. steel was only 2.5 percent greater than that of France. In 1938 production by one Ger- man steel combine alone—Dinkelbach’s Vereinigte Stahlwerke—was greater than the combined production of all the French steel mills. So long as we live in two worlds instead of one, the economic and political integra- tion of western Europe is essential. So, too, is Germany’s admission to the council of Europe. Eut an integration based on re- cartelization cannot solve the economic problems of western Europe, nor can it pro- vide the necessary safeguards against Ger- many’s economic expansion. The Schuman plan would fall short in both respects. It contains no answer to the ever-growing surplus of steel production in western Europe which in 1958, according to Economic Committee for Europe estimates, will amount to 12,000,00 tons more than can be consumed. Paradoxically, the Schuman proposal would help the Russians since the only available market for this surplus would lie behind the iron curtain. Contrary to French claims, the probable result, under the plan, would be the elimination of the safeguards against German aggression such as the International Ruhr Authority and the level of industry ceiling. The Germans have already made arrogant demands to be given a free hand to sell their goods to the iron curtain countries. (As a matter of fact, they have been selling large quantities of steel to the eastern bloc for some time—contrary to the dictates of our cold-war policy.) No doubt the next step will be to demand the right to rearm, which will be bolstered by the arguments, that (1) rearmament is essential to the defense of western Europe; and (2) greater production will assist in solving the growing unemploy- ment problem. Since it is extremely diffi- cult to believe that Russia will remain in- different to the rearmament of the Ruhr, the situation is extremely dangerous and may even make war inevitable. The most important questions that arise are: Will the people of Europe benefit from this deal? What voice will labor have in the planning, distribution, and pricing of prod- ucts? How can this scheme succeed without a thorough overhaul of all western European tariff barriers or without the abolition of currency controls? How can it work with- out a payments-union plan? Will the de- cartelization program in Germany be the victim? What is really needed to bring about a true integration of western Europe is a true in- ternationalization of the Rhine Basin. There is a solution, and the means to implement it are available: decartelize Germany as pro- vided for under law 56 and ordinance 78 of our occupation statutes; revitalize the In- ternational Ruhr Authority, established De- cember 28, 1948; change the Schuman idea— which is actually another Franco-German cartel—into a real attempt at international control of the Rhine Basin; give to the UN, and especially the ECE, which has had ample experience in international economics, the responsibility for guiding the project. Or else it will be, as the French themselves say, “Plus ga change, plus c’est la méme chose.” The Island of Manhattan: A Bit of Earth EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. LOUIS B. HELLER ‘ OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 11, 1950 Mr. HELLER. Mr. Speaker, Peter H. Brandt, Esq., is an attorney in New APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD York City, specializing in real-estate law. His reputation as a lawyer’s lawyer in realty litigation is well known throughout the State. Recently while browsing through some old papers he came upon an interesting article written in 1890 by one Felix Oldboy, which he reprinied and sent to his friends. I was fortunate enough to receive a copy. The treatise is most interesting, espe- cially, as Mr. Brandt points out, since it translates the real-estate situation in 1890 to current conditions noting that the tentative assessed valuation of the Borough of Manhattan for the tax year 1949-50 of ordinary real estate was fixed at $7,228,635,125, which was the land purchased by Peter Minuit for $24; while the tentative assessed valuation for the . same year for the entire city of New York was fixed at $15,942,389,350. I found this article most interesting, and com-~ mend it to the reading of my colleagues: THE ISLAND oF MANHATTAN: A Bit oF EarTH When Peter Minuit, Lord Director General of the Colony of New Netherlands, bought the island of Manhattan from its aboriginal owners for 60 guilders, or $24, he was satis- fied that he had driven an excellent bargain, The place of sale was the rocky point of land since known as the Battery, and the time was a May morning in the year 1626, when the primeval forest, that then shut in the waters-of the bay and the little clear- ing on which the settlers had erected a score of huts, was decked in its most beautiful garb. The brusque, energetic, gray-haired Dutch Governor cared less for the beauties of nature than for pelts and furs, and the eyes of the red men found nothing within their horizon half so attractive as the beads, buttons, and hatchets which they received in place of money in exchange for their lands. Guileless children of the forest as they seemed, however, these red representatives of the Manhattoes and Wickquaskeeks proved to be as wily as they were warlike. They re- served to themselves the right to hunt for game in the woods of the birch-bark coun- try, the section of the island now known ag Inwood; and it took two wars and a mas- sacre which depopulated the Bowery farms and the little hamlet of Haarlem to persuade the Dutch magistrates to recognize their claims in equity and buy them off at a con- siderable advance on their original figures. Governor Minuit, though a devout believer in the future of New Netherlands, made a better bargain than he ever dreamed, when he invested $24 in the purchase of the island of Manhattan for the Dutch West India Co. Sixty years later, in 1686, when Cornelis Steenwyck, burgomaster of New Amsterdam and mayor of New York, died, the house in which he had lived, a double stone mansion on the present southeast corner of White- hall and Bridge Streets, was inventoried at £700, and the rest of his real estate in pro- . portion. It would have surpassed the wild- est imagination of those worthy men, if they could have looked forward to our times and have seen the assessed valuation of the real estate on this island of 11,000 Dutch morgens, of 22,000 English acres, set down officially for 1890 at $1,353,893,473, and the first ward, which comprises all of the Little city that the Dutch burgomasters knew, as- sessed at $84,844,538. Even those figures do not tell the entire truth, startling though they are. The market value of the property is fully one-third more than the assessed valuation, and the bit of earth which is bounded by the North and East Rivers, Spuy- ten Duyvil Creek and the Harlem, is today worth, as men phrase it, more than $2,000,- 000,000,000. There is comparatively little of the soil of Manhattan left untouched by the hand
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD of improvement. Yet in spite of the march of bricks and mortar over green fields that have been blotted out, hills that have been leveled and babbling brooks that have been Killed, the land has not lost its beauty. The roar of traffic, the din of whistling trains, the dust raised by multitudes afoot, have not abated the natural loveliness of its situation or dimmed the superb setting of its sur- roundings. As I grew up I learned to think this the garden spot of all the earth. I used to think that if God did not look upon this island of Manhattan when He “saw everything that He had made, and behold, it was very good,” He might have done so. Geologists say that the trap rock under our streets and homes is the oldest part of ter- restrial creation, and that it made its appear-~ ance above the face of the waters enveloping the globe thousands of eons before Adam walked under the trees of Eden. The old navigators who first sailed into the bays and rivers of the New World were a reverent race of men, and something of the spirit of which I speak must have prompted Henry Hudson when, standing on the prow of his adven- turous little galliot, the Half Moon, then at anchor in Harlem Cove, he looked up through the valley of the Spuyten Duyvil and out upon the emerald meadows fringed with wooded heights that have been yester- day, and will be again tomorrow, the center of a specu’ation and strife in real estate as momentous as was the Battle of Harlem Plains on the same territory; for he wrote, in his report to the directors of the West India Co., not only that “the land was of the finest kind for tillage,” but that it was “as beautiful as the foot of man ever trod upon.” Someday New York will remember the good words and great deeds of the man who uncovered to the world the site of an im- perial city and who spoke prophetically of her coming grandeur and will erect a shaft to the honor of Henry Hudson. Three pictures in his life are presented to me as I write, and they are in keeping with the vein of poetry and romance which crops up through the log of the rough, courageous sailor. We see him on a Sunday morning, in the sum~ mer of 1607, in the church of St. Ethelburge, Bishopsgate Street, London, kneeling rever- ently with his crew at the altar railing to receive the sacrament and a blessing at the hands of God’s minister before starting on a voyage to Asia by way of the North Pole. Two years later, in 1609, he is sailing under a September sun past the beautiful hills of the Neversink, through the Narrows, and into the bay, until on the 11th of that month he anchored in full view of the Island of Manhattan, filled with wonder at the marvels of “the great river’ which, little as he dreamed it, was to bear his name. A year has passed, and we see the heroic navigator beating about the vast inland sea now known as Hudson’s Bay in an English ship manned by a crew of adventurers who rose in mutiny against their heroic commander, and the mists of night fall around him as he drifts away in the little boat into which he has been thrust, to be seen of man no more forever. Heart of oak, he paid for the romance and poetry of his nature with his life. In 1826, two centuries subsequent to the treaty of Governor Minuit, the total assessed value of real estate in the city of New York ‘was $64,806,050; in 1886 it had risen to $233,- 732,308; in 1846, it had decreased to $181, 480,584; in 1856, it had reached the large sum of $340,972,098, and now, after a generation has passed, it has become almost quadrupled, There are those who object to dry statistics, and say there is no poetry in figures, I main-~ tain that the man who says there is no ro- mance in the vagaries of arithmetic does not know what he is talking about. Is there no poetry in the statistics of Thermopylae, whose 300 men kept 800,000 at bay until the homes of Sparta were safe? Is there mo romance in the record of the three score minute men of Lexington who, in defiance of the rules of arithmetic, stood up against 12 times their number and emphasized with the bullet their protest against British tyranny? So, running through the dry sta-~ tistics of annual assessments just quoted, there is e ~-1-z-s*ien to gray-haired men of business - “) among us of a wild speculation in Harlem real estate which cre- ated millionaires of a day to make them paupers on the morrow. In 1836 Anthony J. Bleecker, renowned among the men of his day for his wit, scholarship, and magnificent manhood, without mention of whom none would dare touch the theme of Manhattan real estate, sold lots in the far outlying village of Harlem for $1,000 each, which 2 years later, were sold for $9 each, over and above encumbrances, enriching only the lawyers as they passed rapidly from hand to hand. The dry record of these transactions is indeed the romance of the Island of Man~ hattan. Clothed in flesh and blood it will quiver with animated life and speak the story of the men and women whose homes, like their bodies, are now dust. When An- thony L. Bleecker, grandfather of Anthony J. Bleecker, whom sO many survivors re= member so well, was in business in this city more than a century ago, he lived on Queen Street, over his store, and far out of town he had a farm which reached from the Bowery to Minetta Brook, hard by the present Sixth Avenue. Its value was a trifle, but it was a pleasant spot for the recreation of his 13 children, 9 stalwart sons and 4 daughters, and to their graves they carried pleasant re~ membrance of the pink and white apple blossoms in the old orchard. When it was first proposed to lay out the present Bleecker Street through the farm the children ob- jected, and one of the daughters insisted as @ compromise that a 50-foot road would be sufficient, instead of a 60-foot street that was projected. If the old farm had remained in the family, they would have been able to lead the 400 in wealth as well as blood, but what was a man to do with 13 children, and how could he have dreamed of the treasure hidden in those 86 acres. His descendants have seen the merest fragment of those acres—a bit of earth—the lot at the south- west corner of Bleecker Street and Broadway, sold 9 years ago for $185,000. Some estates, like those of the Stuyvesant, Rhinelander, Lenox, Astor, and Goelet fam- ilies remain largely intact, but the lands that went by the name of De Lancey, Bayard, Bleecker, Herring, De Peyster, Warren and Hamilton have passed into the hands of strangers and lost their inherited distinction. As a boy I remember when Union Square was considered far uptown and fashion lin- gered in Bond and Bleeker Streets and about Washington Square, loath to obey the com- mand of that inevitable policeman, time, and “move on.” Indeed, my earliest remem- brance is of the days when the neighborhood of St. John’s Park was considered the most aristocratic of localities, and there was not a family living in one of the plain but stately houses which faced that lovely oasis, whose members did not pride themselves on the blueness of their blood. Above Union Square stretched a delightful region of farm houses and fertile fields, country villas and green paddocks, bits of woodland, wastes of com~ mon lands, rocky gorges, silvery brooks, and ponds famous for perch and sunfish. Nest- ling down by the East River on one side, and along the Bloomingdale Road on the other, were country seats which were famous for their cheer and hospitality, and visits made beneath their roofs were like trips to fairy- land, Often as I am whirled on the elevated trains through miles of streets that have taken the place of the rustic lanes and dusty highways that I once knew, I find myself try- eos _not buy it today. A4051 ing to imagine where a house long since fa~ miliar to me used to stand, or a wooded knoll was located, and I turn to see only an aged and solitary tree standing desolate on a brand-new sidewalk, the last relic of the vanished homestead. Even the graveyards have disappeared and a newly imported citi- zen, lessee of a still newer saloon, draws beer on the spot where the family vault was dug and the ancestral bones were deposited with solemn pomp. A French savant formulated the law that, in estimating real-estate values, prices must be gaged by the number of persons passing a given locality. The accuracy of this axiom has been tested and proved by the experience of London, Paris, and Berlin. Applying the same rule to New York, which finds it physi- cally impossible to expand except in the di- rection of Albany and the sky, hemmed in as it is by rivers and a bay, it is evident that fabulous figures must be reached in the near future for property lying below the post office. Indeed, in no other city in the world has real estate in small and ex-~ cosa iets reached as high a figure as rl NeW Vous. The highest price ever paid for real estate on the island of Manhattan was given in 1882 for a bit of earth—only 508 feet—at the southwest corner of Broad and Wall Streets. The large sum of $330.70 per foot was paid for this little plot, but it was purchased to square the adjoining prop- erty and the price may therefore be consid- ered exceptional. On the 14th of March 1890, the property at 149 Broadway, corner of Liberty Street, 3,006.6 square feet, was sold for $544,500, or $181.12 per foot. No. 7 Wall Street brought $157.37 per foot in 1882. The Equitable Life Insurance Co. paid $155.75 a@ foot for the property at the northeast cor- ner of Pine Street and Broadway, and in 1887, the Niagara Fire Insurance Co. paid at the rate of $141.10 per square foot for the property No. 137 Broadway. There is no doubt that the region covered by these fig- ures is destined to contain a larger business population than any equal area of ground on earth, and the multiplication of vast of- fice buildings is at once the proof and effect of the costliness of real estate in this section. London has plenty of room in which to spread and the best property there commands but $63 per square foot, with no rapid increase. In New York, on the other hand, real estate is a living and immediate issue and its care and guardianship demand the most engross- ing, capable, and concentrated business management. It is curious and interesting to watch the advance in values on Wall Street, from the time when, in 1682 John Pound, laborer, bought a lot 23 by 60 feet for about $25 (the price named was 300 guilders in wampum), to the purchase in 1773 of three lots on the north side between Nassau and William Streets, by Samuel Verplanck, for $1,350, thence to the sale in 1816 of the old City Hall lots (adjoining the Verplanck residence) for an average of $8,000 each, and so down to the purchase of No. 12 Wall Street, in 1882, by John Jacob Astor, for $800,000. Re- membering the City Hotel in its maturity, I find it interesting to see it assessed on the tax roll of 1815 at $90,000 and to wonder what old Ezra Weeks would think of the val- uation now put upon the Boreel Building. At that time, No. 149 Broadway was owned by Nathaniel Smith, perfumer, and assessed at $13,000, to be sold in 1890 for $544,500. Governor Dongan owned the block bounded by the present Park Row, Beekman, Nassau and Ann Streets, and being thriftily inclined, he laid it out in a garden and for half a century or more it was a pleasure resort, The first lot sold was in 1773, when Andrew Hopper purchased the premises now known as No. 1 Park Row, where he kept store for many years. He paid $1,640 for the lot, and in 1796 he was taxed on a valuation of $4,000 for the property. Fifty times that sum would Like all other estates,
A4052 when once disintegrated, the Dongan prop- erty passed into a number of hands, and this process probably in the end proved to be of the greatest good to the greatest number, The city of New York went into a some-. what extensive real-estate speculation 30 years ago and purchased more than a square mie of territory in the heart of the Island of Manhattan, embracing a desolate region known as the Wilderness, a variety of swamps, miserable specimens of Shantytown, any number of rocks, and several ponds fed by springs and equipped with sunfish and minnows, to which it afterward added the wiid, rocky defile known as McGowman’s Pass, which had historic interest as the scene of a desperate skirmish during the War for Independence. Many prudent men shook their heads sagely and ventured their repu- tations as prophets that the city would not grow up to Fifty-ninth Street in half a cen- tury and that its population would have no use for Central Park until the twentieta century had dawned. If they could read of the park commissioners’ voting to run rail- Ways across this somewhat artificial “dream of landscape loveliness,” it might make their dust rub uneasily against the restraining sod. The city, in 1853 and 1859, spent nearly $7,000,000 for the eight hundred-and-odd acres in Central Park, and in 1871 the land was appraised by a special commission at something over seventy millions. The first tract, taken under the act of 1853, cost about 87,800 an acre. For the second tract, ex- tending from One Hundred and Sixth to One Hundred and Tenth Streets, which could have been purchased for $4,000 an acre, the city was compelled to pay $20,000 per acre. It proved an excellent investment, for, in spite of the enormous outlay needed to pre- pare it for public use, the increased taxes not only paid thé interest on the bonds but wiped out the principal as well and left the city with a balance of $15,000,000 in its favor. An era of speculation followed the enact- ment of the law creating Central Park. The tract bounded by Fifth and Madison Ave- nues and Seventy-eighth and Seventy-ninth Streets, which in 1852 was sold for $3,000, brought $40,000 at a sale in 1857. Twelve years later Mr. William H. Vanderbilt offered $1,250,000 for this plot, but his offer was refused. When the city came to purchase the 120 acres of rocky ledge and ribbons of land that made up the area of Morningside and Riverside Parks, it was compelled to pay at the rate of $60,000 per acre for land it should have had the foresight to acquire at one-tenth of that sum. But foresight is a gift which few possess, while hindsight is the boast of every prosy fiend of the button- hole who shouts into his neighbor’s ear “I told you so.” When, in 1811, Gouverneur Morris, Simeon De Witt, and John Rutherford, commissioners appointed by act of the legislature for laying out streets and roads in the city of New York, made their report to Mayor De Witt Clinton, they appended some “remarks” which seem odd to the present generation of city folk. They said: “To some it may be a matter of surprise that the whole island has not been laid out as a city. To others it may be a subject of merriment that the commissioners have provided space for a greater population than is collected at any spot this side of China. They have in this respect been governed by the shape of the ground. It is not improbable that consid- erable numbers may be collected at Harlem before the high hills to the southward of it shall be built upon as a city; and it is im- probable that (for centuries to come) the grounds north of Harlem Flat will be cov= ered with houses.” Then they added this quaint apology with a moral: “To have come short of the extent laid out (One Hundred and Fifty-fifth Street) might, therefore, have defeated just expectations; and to have gone further might have furnished ma- terlals to the pernicious spirit of specula- ’ eheeks like a crab apple. tion.” ‘Those were wise men in their gen~ eration, and De Witt Clinton, father of the Erie Canal, was the most far-sighted states- man of his age, yet they have placed on record their belief that centuries would pass before the growing city would leap across the Harlem River and begin the erection of a new city on the broad acres that then made up the homestead and estate of one of their own number, Gouverneur Morris. I did not start out to write the story of real estate in the island of Manhattan, but merely to point a moral from the investment made by the first Dutch Governor, and the earliest and most extensive purchase of land at the junction of the two great rivers. The money which “His Tigh Mightiness the Lord Director General” paid for the entire area of the island would not now purchase space for a grave within its limits. Yet in spite of the rapid rise in values, the real estate of the island and the city is more generally dis- tributed than ever before, and held by fewer individuals, corporations, and families. This is a decided advantage to the community, for it not only adds to the number of those who have a permanent stake in the general peace and prosperity, but it swells the volume of business through frequent transfers, contin- ual rebuilding, and speculative changes in _ land. To own and hold a single lot of real estate in the city of New York is also apt to add several inches to the stature of the average man, A few years ago I sat under a spreading apple tree in the dooryard in front of a low rambling stone house that was built in the last century up in Westchester County, and talked with the owner, a hale old farmer of 87 winters, white as to his hair, but with He told me that his grandfather had built the house, on land which had been purchased from the Indians, and that he himself had set out the apple " tree 60 summers before, to make a shade for his young bride, when she came out there to cdo her washing. The girl wife had grown wrinkled and bent and then had died, but the tree still was flourishing and the grass that had scarcely bent to her young feet had outlived her in age. A wealthy neighbor wanted to purchase half a dozen acres of wood and swamp land which he owned apart from his farm, and had offered a generous price for it. The old man asked my advice, as a matter of courtesy, but he had evidently made up his mind, for he did not wait a reply. He shook his head and continued after this fashion: “I donno. It’s a big price and mebbe 1t would be safe in the bank. But I like the land. It’s always there. It’s been there these 87 years, right before my eyes, while the money comes and goes, and I don’t know where it is. The land can’t run away, and I guess I’d better stick to it as long as it will stick to me.” Why Was Low-Rent Housing Rejected? EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WALTER NORBLAD OF OREGON IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, May 9, 1950 Mr. NORBLAD. Mr. Speaker, it is in- teresting to note that the Federal Gov- ernment under the provisions of the Low Rent Housing Act, offered a number of units to both the cities of Portland and Astoria, Oreg. In both cases the city council placed the question of acceptance of this hous- ie before the voters in the recent elec= on, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Despite the fact that the city of Port- Jand has a preponderant Democratic registration the voters rejected this housing by about 10,000 votes. The city of Astoria has a number of very heavy labor Democratic precincts and there it was rejected in every single precinct. The following editorial by Mr. Fred Andrus in the Astorian Budget may throw some light on the outcome of this vote: [From the Astorian Budget of May 23, 1950] Wuy Was Low-Renr Hovusine ResECTED? How dces one interpret the adverse vote in Astoria, and in Portland, too, against the adoption of the federally financed !ow-rent housing program? Did the voters oppose low-rent housing as an invasion by the Federal Government into a new field, a step toward greater paternal- ism? Were the voters actually rejecting Santa Claus? Or were they fearful that low-rent housing would cost them something in the way of local expenses for streets, sewers, and other necessary accompaniments to the housing projects? We suspect it was a combination of both factors. The average taxpayer hates to vote new burdens upon himseif. This-has been ex- emplified in Astoria, as in other communities, by rejection of new taxes on which the people vote directly. It was exemplified on a State basis at the 1948 elections when people voted for a new pension plan, but voted down the money to pay for it. There is probably a more widespread dis- like on the part of people to vote for things that cost them money than Congress realizes when it passes bills, such as the new housing act, which involves new Federal expenses. The people would probably vote down a lot of expensive welfare legislation passed by Congress if the people had a chance to vote directly. People could see where the low-rent hous- ing plan might cost them something in local taxes, as in addition to the money the pro- gram costs the Federal taxpayers, and they voted against it for those reasons. Some of them also undoubtedly voted against it because they don’t consider the Federal Government should get into the paternalistic business of providing houses to the communities. It might be well for Congressmen and Senators, when under pressure from this group or that for this or that exnensive new project or paternalism, to consider the large Silent mass of taxpayers who are tearful of the mounting burden of governmental costs. The city or State government is close enough to hear something of the murmur from the taxpayers; but Washington, D. C., is too far from the grass roots. The murmur is unheard there. City Council of Chicago and Civic, Labor, and Church Groups Demand Extension of Rent Control EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. BARRATT O'HARA OF ILLINOIS . IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES : Wednesday, May 24, 1950 ' Mr. O’HARA of Illinois, Mr. Speaker, on a number of previous occasions I have sought to alert the House to the grave situation that we would face in
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the city of Chicago were rent control abruptly to end on June 36 of this year. The plain fact is that partly because of the high cost of construction in our area it has been impossible to furnish new housing within the reach of thou- sands of our Chicago families. The re- sult is that there is m Chicago a con- tinuing housing shortage which has been little, if any, eased off. The end of rent control in June of this year would im- mediately be followed by demands for rent increases impossible for our people to meet. Iam extending my remarks to include a resolution passed by the City Council of Chicago and a letter from Leo A, Lerner, chairman of the Citizens Com- mittee for Rent Control, enclosing the resolution adopted by affiliated organi- zations, also a letter from Dr. Jacob J. Weinstein, rabbi of KAM Temple. The resolution of the City Council of Chicago follows: CONTINUATION OF FEDERAL RENT CONTROL Whereas on May 9, 1950, Mayor Martin H. Kennelly addressed a telegram to the Honor-~ able Brent SPENCE, chairman of the House Committee on Banking and Currency, as follows: “The Honorable Brent SPENCE, “Chairman, Committee on Banking and Currency, House Office Building, Washington, D. C.: “As mayor of Chicago I would like to pre- sent my views concerning the question of continuation of Federal rent control which is now being considered by your committee. “In Chicago at present there is less than one-half of 1 percent vacancy in housing units except those renting for $100 a month or more. This affects more than 95 percent of Chicago’s rental families. “It is obvious and certainly should need little argument that removal of rent controls at this time and in such a market, would result in severe hardship to a large segment of this community. “There have been practically no housing units built in the moderate rental classifica~ tion during the past 10 years. So renting families will have no choice if controls are lifted. Of course, not all owners are un-~ scrupulous, but there are some who would take advantage of such a situation, and this would result in severe hardship to many of our citizens. “It would be less than fair if I did not at the same time point out to you the financial difficulties under which many small property owners have been operating during the past few years, Statistics show that many thou~ sands of small property owners have not been able to secure equitable adjustments in the rentals of their housing units. This should be corrected. “Large property owners, through their ac~ countants and lawyers have obtained the ad~ justments to which they were entitled by law. But of the small property owners in the two- and three-apartment-building class, many are still receiving the same rental which they received in 1942. “So, in urging continuation of Federal rent control I would also like to urge that the legislation adopted and its administration as well should take into consideration the equi- ties on both sides of the question. - “MarRTIN H. KENNELLY, “Mayor.” Whereas the House Committee on Bank- ing and Currency has approved a bill to con~ tinue rent controls to June 30, 1951, where such continuance is deemed necessary by the local authorities or the electorate: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the City Council of the City of Chicago concurs in the views expressed by the mayor in the aforesaid telegram of May 9, 1950, to the chairman of the House Com- mittee on Banking and Currency; and be it further Resolved, That copies of this resolution be immediately forwarded by air mail to the President of the United States and Members of Congress from Tllinois. The letter from Mr. Lerner with reso- lution adopted by the labor, civic, and religious organizations affiliated with the Citizens Commuttee for Rent Control follows: CrrizENs COMMITTEE FoR RENT CONTROL, Chicago, Iil., May 24, 1950. DEAR CONGRESSMAN: The Citizens Commit. tee for Rent Control is composed of labor, religious, and civic organizations who are gravely concerned with the crisis facing Chi- cago if rent controls are removed. The prob-~ lem of housing in this city is well known to you. Chicago lags far behind other eities in the construction of both private and pub- lic dwellings. There is less than one-half of 1 percent vacancy in housing units rent- ing under $100 a month. Chief Justice Ed- ward Scheffler, of the Chicago Municipal Court, which handles most eviction cases, warned that if controls are ended “there will be mass protests and perhaps some vio- lence.’ In this great underhoused city with thousands of families doubled up, and other thousands existing in substandard housing, the abolition of controls would bring sky- rocketing rents to those very persons who can least afford to pay. The Democratic delegation from Chicago is to be congratulated on the excellent fight they are making. This committee would like to be of service to you. If there are any facts or figures needed from this area please call upon us. Be assured that the great majority of per- sons in Chicago—the tenants—are behind you in this crisis. We enclose the resolu- tion adopted by the affiliated organizations. We urge our representatives to take this ex- pression to the floor of Congress as a state- ment from the leaders of this city as to the true need of Federal protection for Chicago citizens. Sincerely, Lzo A. LERNER, RESOLUTION For RENT CONTROL We, the undersigned persons and organiza- tions, gravely concerned about our own wel- fare and that of our fellow citizens, urge the Congress of the United States to enact promptly an act to extend rent control under Federal authority. We urge that the act include these provi- sions: 1. Effective controls over rents to be paid. 2. Effective controls over evictions. 8. Authority for the National Administra- tor of Rents to control or recontrol areas. 4. Adequate provisions for administration and enforcement of all provisions. We believe that Federal rent controls should be extended after June 30, 1950, since the facts that caused Congress to enact the 1949 act still prevail in most rent-controlled areas. The letter from Dr. Weinstein follows: May 24, 1950. Congressman Barrarr O’Hara, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. Dear CONGRESSMAN: I strongly urge you to keep fighting for the Spence bill for rent control, I am close to the pulse of many families in this neighborhood, and I am certain that there will be great injustice and intense hardship should controls be removed. I know how strong the pressures are for their A4053 removal. I believe, however, that you will win the enduring gratitude of the over- whelming majority of your constituents if you keep up the fight. As ever, Sincerely, Jacos J. WEINSTSIN, Rabbi, KAM Temple. Which Will Be More Dangerous and Costly to the United States: To Help the Chinese Hold Formosa or To Lose Formosa? EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WALTER H. JUDD OF MINNESOTA. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 25, 1950 Mr. JUDD. Mr. Speatzer, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following pertinent article from Time of May 22, 1950. For 5 years the United States has vacillated from one defeat to another in the dealings with its avowed enemy, Chinese com- munism. There is not much more time left: CHINA INVASION SEASON May, June, July, and August are the best months for an invasion of Formosa, During the rest of the year weather conditions, in- cluding typhoons, protect the island. This summer, then, may bring an event to which the United States has already officially re- signed itself—the Communist conquest of Formosa. When the Reds attack, there will undoubtedly be a great clatter in the United States, a sudden recognition that Formosa’s fall may touch off a chain of reactions throughout Asia and change basically the United States position in the cold war. Big strategic decisions, such as the one to abandon Formosa, are the responsibility of the President of the United States. To ad- vise him on these matters, the President has the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the National Security Council composed of the Vice Presi- dent, Secretaries of State and Defense, and the Chairman of the National Security Re- sources Board. Last year when the Commu- nists had conquered all of the Chinese main-~ land, the Joint Chiefs of Staff decided that the United States should not help the Chi-~ nese Government hold Formosa. Later, per= suaded by the views of General MacArthur, the Joint Chiefs reversed themselves, decided. that the United States should at least send a military mission to advise the Chinese Na- tionalists. Secretary of State Dean Acheson objected to this position and the matter was put on the agenda of a National Security Council meeting December 29, 1949. Gen. Omar Bradley stated the case for holding Formosa. He made a bad job of it. Acheson dominated the meeting with a few well-chosen ques- tions. Example: Were the armed forces ready and willing to commit the necessary forces to hold Formosa? Representatives of the Armed Forces an- swered that they were not willing to com- mit major portions of United States strength to the island. Nobody asked the pertinent question: Would it cost the United States more in terms of commitment of armed strength to hold Formosa, or to lose Formosa? ‘The discussion degenerated into fuzzy agree- ment with Acheson that nothing could or should be done. When Truman looked
A4054 around the room for dissenters to the Ache- son view, he did not hear any, although sev- eral of the officials went away muttering that the wrong policy had been adopted. In Washington today, responsible people will agree on the following points: (1) The United States could hold Formosa; (2) the Chinese Nationalists cannot hold Formosa without United States help; (3) the fall of Formosa will make much less difficult the Communist conquest of Indochina and the Philippines; (4) a Communist Formosa may call for a 20 to 40 percent increase of United States strength in the Pacific; (5) this in- crease will cost a great deal more than the cost of holding Formosa, In spite of the implications of these five propositions, there is mo serious move in Washington to reverse the December For- mosa decision. Any effort to revive the issue gets lost in the old argument about whether the United States can cooperate with Chiang Kai-shek. Chiang said last week that he would be willing to see General MacArthur assume responsibility for the integrity of Formosa. If the United States through Mac- Arthur did assume responsibility, such ques- tions as Chiang’s personality would recede into proper perspective. Formosa could then be weighed in terms of future peril to the free world rather than in terms of past United States and Chinese mistakes. So weighed, Formosa could and would ke de- fended. BACKS TO THE WALL As chief of Time’s Shanghai Bureau from 1945 to 1948, William Gray watched the dis- integration of Nationalist China at first hand, came home doubtful that the Nationalists would ever be able to wage effective war against the Chinese Communists. Recently Gray, now a Life editor, visited Formosa, Nationalist China’s last outpost. His cabled report: Formosa represents the greatest frony in Asia today. Here, in its last refuge, Chiang Kai-shek’s Government has shed the chaos and despair of the mainland, and, at least temporarily, appears to be leading an al- most serene and even well-managed exist- ence. Nobody expects that this favorable state of affairs can last indefinitely, but for the present it must be regarded as a major phenomenon in the struggle for Asia. This rich, green, formerly Japanese-ruled island is a spot of unaccustomed order. The Nation- alist Government has pulled itself into pre- sentable shape. Chiang’s Government has come to a work- ing peace with Formosa’s people, 50 well that about 4,500 young Formosans are willingly training to help fight the Communists when the expected invasion attempt comes, prob- ably this summer. No beggars A young United States diplomat in For- mosa’s capital of Taipei remarked the other day: “This is a situation that China has not seen in years.” It is a situation in which trains run on time, the island countryside is peaceful, the currency is gold backed and for months has been stable. There are no ragged refugees or beggars on the streets, no agitators inflaming the students, no discern- ible great abuses of economic power of large- scale corruption. The prime minister, gray, smiling little General Chen Cheng, claims with evident pleasure that “in the whole of Asia, For- mosa is perhaps the most stable and pros- perous area.” It is at least equally impor- tant, as the island’s Princeton-educated Gov- ernor K. C. Wu points out, that Formosa “is the only place in the Far East that has no serious Communist menace from within.” The exact strength of Nationalist troops on Formosa is a military secret, but includ- ing some 60,000 to 80,000 troops who arrived last week after the abandonment of Hainan Island, the island’s defensive force probably numbers around 400,000. There is some in- dication that this force, like the latest gov- ernment on Formosa, is a better force than the dispirited armies that lost the mainland. The recent abandonment of Hainan Island, the Nationalists point out, was a tactical decision taken 2 months before by General- issimo Chiang and his staff. The evacuation of Hainan, it was ob- served, came off without the mass defec- tions to the Communists which had marked similar Nationalist retreats during the cam- paign on the mainiand. At a south For- raosan port where Hainan evacuees were dis- embarking, I asked a wounded young cap- tain: “Could you have defeated the Com- munists on Hainan if you had not been ordered to withdraw?” “Without question,” he snapped back. His answer was probably a@ fair indication of the spirit of Hainan’s five defending armies. What do the Nationalists now ask of the United States? First of all, further eco- nomic aid: a $30,000,000 currency stabiliza- tion fund, which would release their own gold for economic development, and another $20,000,000 worth of economic assistance up to June 80, when the present ECA program ends. After that, Governor Wu has a sim- ple formula: $10,000,000 a month in Amer- ican economic aid until Formosa can get on its feet. But the Nationalists on Formosa are also renewing their hope of military aid. Chiang Kai-shek’s formula: “The United States should match the forms of aid given to the Communists by Soviet Russia. We do not expect more than what the Soviet is giv- ing.” This would imply everything up to jet planes manned by American pilots, since the Russians now provide them for the Chinese Communists. No denial What about this durable and much-de- pated personality, the Generalissimo, now that he has taken back the presidency? Chiang has done nothing at all to revive himself as a hero; if he is a reviving force, it is because the Communists, Chinese and Russian, have made him so. Chiang neither ducks the sorry facts of his government’s failures on the mainland nor denies that much past aid was dissi- pated in those disasters. Chiang suggests a military ECA, in effect an effort similar to that directed by United States Lt. Gen. James A. Van Fleet in Greece. Who would direct such an undertaking in Formosa? The Generalissimo would consider it “rea- sonable” for General MacArthur, as Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers, to assume responsibility for Formosa’s integrity pend- ing the signing of a Japanese peace treaty. But Chiang insists that there be no infringe- ments of China’s sovereignty or administra- tive integrity. Such a move, of course, would take the Nationalists off the hook, and place a United States guaranty on the retention of Formosa, . No doubt It seems clear that the defenders of For- mosa, fighting a 5,000,000-man army drawn from the cheap and endless manpower of China’s mainland, are almost hopelessly doomed by sheer numbers if the Reds are ready to waste Chinese lives freely, as no doubt they are. Further, remembering the past, I think it is still easy to wonder whether or not the Nationalist high command seri- ously wants to stage a last-ditch fight to save Formosa. But I am impressed by the earnestness of younger men far beneath the stature of Chiang—Chinese who still seem to want to gave their people from communism. They are the men who cannot escape; they have no place else to go, They include the troops ‘APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD trained by VMI-educated Gen. Sun Li-jen with United States Army methods, and they include United States trained Navy men whose destroyer escorts are running out of 83-inch shells. Somewhere along the ragged route of failure the United States rightly or wrongly assumed a moral obligation to these younger Chinese. The look of a hungry friend is in their eyes now. The moral question of America’s right to supply arms in a civil war seems to have van- ished when the Russians moved in wholesale on the other side. The Russians are now supplying the Chinese Red army not only with jet planes and Soviet advisers but with highly modern artillery and other weapons. In this situation, as long as there are anti- Communist forces on Formosa who say they want to resist, the morality of renewed United States aid is hard to challenge. Is This Also a Truman Red Herring? EXTENSION OF REMARES HON. DANIEL A. REED OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 24, 1950 Mr. REED of New York. Mr. Speaker, I am inserting an editorial from the New York Herald Tribune, published under date of May 26, 1950, entitled “The Hid- den Treason’: THE HIDDEN TREASON ’ The small, stocky figure of Harry Gold, propelled suddenly from a colorless ano- nymity into world notoriety, is a portent of a deeply disturbing kind. There was noth- ing about Mr. Gold to distinguish him from hundreds of thousands of other Americans in minor technical or professional jobs. Of comparatively recent immigrant stock, in modest circumstances, with a good mind which had made excellent use of the great educational opportunities offered to all in this country, he was a hospital biochemist living in a quiet obscurity and apparently absorbed in his work. To find him at all the Federal Bureau of Investigation had to dredge painstakingly through a list of some 1,200 names. But once found, he has been arrested, charged with being the interme- diary in the Soviet espionage system through whom the British Dr. Klaus Fuchs passed to the Kremlin the most precious and the most elaborately guarded secrets in history. It is his utter obscurity, his completely protective coloration, which is frightening. His own family and associates never remote- ly suspected, they declare, that he had any Communist leanings or connections. He re- ceived his science degree from a Catholic university. He was not a rebel or @ fighter, he was not a victim of persecution, there was nothing to mark him as even a possible mem- ber of the vast Communist conspiracy against our western civilization. Yet if the FBI is to be believed, that conspiracy some- how managed to reach out, to pluck him from the countless thousands of his fellows and convert him into a singularly dangerous agent for the subversion of the society whose privileges he so quietly enjoyed. Proof, of course, remains to be established. But whatever the Judgment as to Mr. Gold himself, no one can doubt—certainly not after the Canadian cases, the Fuchs case, the Hiss case, the many other similar evidences of recent years—that this is the ‘insidious way in which Soviet Russian conspiracy, in- filtration, and treason operate in our society. The lengths to which the FBI had to go to
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD make this arrest are instructive, and dis- turbing, in themselves. We are often ace cused of an anti-Communist hysteria, and the excesses of McCarthyism give too much ground for the charge. But there is a rea- son behind even the excesses, and before the portentous figure of the obscure Mr. Gold, no one can deny that it exists. Railroad Retirement Benefits Should Be Increased EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. OVERTON BROOKS OF LOUISIANA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 25, 1950 Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Speaker, a num- ber of months ago I introduced H. R. 7063, which is a bill to increase the amount of money being paid retired railroad men under the terms of the Federal statute covering railroad retire- ment benefits. I have felt for a long time—and said so publicly—that retire- ment payments to these men are much too low. They should be increased. Retirement benefits generally have been increased throughout the United States over a period of years. Only the other day, General Motors entered into a 5-year contract with its hundreds of thousands of employees, under the terms of which it was agreed that retirement benefits paid by the company, when sup- plemented by general welfareretirement payments, should be in the sum of not less than $100 per month. This contract marks a new landmark in the payment of retirement benefits to the working people of America. It is a goal at which we aim. In many instances noncontributing re- tirement programs furnish real compe- tition to the contributing railroad retire- ment program. To my mind, the em- ployee who makes heavy contributions over a period of his active life should have this fact calculated in his retire- ment payments. In other words, where & person over a period of years actually puts a part of his salary into a fund for the purpose of later producing benefits, this fact should be recognized in the size of the returns which come to him in his old age. I do not believe the retirement systems throughout the Nation go far enough to adequately recognize this principle. My bill provides that retirement benefits shall be increased by 25 percent. In the light of the increased living costs, I think-this addition to present retire- ment benefits is in order. An annuitant receiving $100 per month now is decid- edly in a worse condition than he was in 1935, receiving the same amount of money. House rent, groceries, clothing, and incidentals have all increased enor- mously in price. Railroad retirement benefits have not increased’ in anything like the same percentage. The railroad man looking forward to a life of comfort and rest after a long run of active duty on the great railroads of this country is met by disappointment. He is entitled to more consideration. It has been said that the Reserve Fund is not of sufficient size to stand addi- tional benefits. There are, of course, serious differences of opinion as to this matter. The fund, however, has with- stood withdrawals at a time when they were much heavier upon the fund, con- sidering the amount of money coming into the fund, than at the present time. I am reasonably satisfied that additional benefits can be given without seriously jeopardizing the solvency of the fund. Even though this were not the case, I would say that Congress might look into the matter of whether or not a contribu- tion might be made to the fund to equal- ize the amount which is paid by Congress into noncontributing pensions. This is a serious matter, and one which should call for the attention and con- sideration at an early date of those in- terested in railroading. Our elder rail- road people should not be allowed to per- ish before some adequate increase in pension is worked out for them, The European Situation EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WALTER H. JUDD OF MINNESOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 25, 1950 Mr. JUDD. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrcorp, I include the following article on the necessity of admitting Germany to the Council of Europe if western defense is to be more than an illusory slogan. The article is by the brilliant French jour- nalist Bertrand de Jouvenel and ap- pears in the European supplement to Human Events. Since it was written the realistic proposal by Foreign Minis- ter Schuman for merging French and German steel and coal industries has given the brightest ray of hope for Eu- rope in many a decade. THE EUROPEAN SITUATION ‘WESTERN DEFENSE?-—NOTHING (By Bertrand de Jouvenel) Paris, April 1950.—Many a time in this correspondence I have dwelt upon the in- creasing peace of mind of the Europeans under the Marshall plan. A sense of recov- ery, of return to normalcy has relieved Eu< ropean anxiety, and induced individuals, feeling solid ground, to form and pursue their private plans. However, this new-found con- fidence has come from hugging daily reality and abstaining from looking too far to the future. The gloominess which alone pre- vails in Britain perhaps is due to the fact that only the English, so my wife bluntly says, retain the sense of responsibility of a sovereign nation. Thus hugging the ground, European opin- jon remains extremely indifferent to cold- war news. Whatever the news, all that mat- ters is that it shduld remain a cold war. There is the same incredulity about its turn- ing into a real war that was so rudely shat- tered in May 1940. A slight tremor shook the upper reaches of European opinion after A4055 the Privateer disaster. A number of people slowly grasped that the shooting had started, and they glimpsed the possibility that the Soviet mountain might start slipping down upon us. Such a thought, as soon as conceived, is dismissed as unbearable, for no one believes that some 15 western divisions could do anything to stop Russian lava. Not only are they far too weak but further they are strung along this long ribbon of shore which constitutes western Europe so that common defense merely means, with the one excep- tion of England which stands behind, that each national army stands on its strip of shore, giving and receiving no help to and from its neighbor. In order that the national armies should really help each other the jJands would have to stand in depth facing Russia, as if Italians fought with Yugoslavs on Yugoslav ground, and French with Ger- mans on German ground. But, as is well known, neither Yugoslavia nor Germany is part of the combined forces. It would, I think, be well worth while to take a poll of European opinion on western defense. I think one would find that the people don’t want to think about it and, if pressed, do not believe in it. CONTROLLED SCHIZOPHRENIA What of the higher ups? What of the western European policy makers? Controlled schizophrenia is good mumbo-jumbo I learned from. Dr. Fuchs. If I have rightly understood him, the formula provides a per- fect description of top western European thinking. Our rulers are capable of keeping perfectly separate their thinking about Rus- sia and behavior springing therefrom, and their thinking about Germany and behavior springing therefrom. When they think about Germany, they are obsessed by the regime under which this Nation lived from 1933 onward and by the evil it wrought in Europe from 1940 to 1945. They are haunted by the will to draw its teeth. For instance, in the French zone alone, 84,000 tons of ammunition have been destroyed, 16,000 blockhouses, 6,000 kilo- meters of underground telephones, and 13 underground factories. Fifty thousand ex- officers are under obligation to report weekly. Every precaution is taken to preclude rearma- ment of Germany, and to break the officer spirit (though, come to think of it, the offi- cers were the only ones to try anything against Hitler). When, on the other hand, our policy mak- ers think about Russia they desperately cast about for means of increasing security from its present level which is precisely nul. Were they suddenly offered a Ruritania standing between Russia and themselves, a land of proven military prowess and under a sympathetic Christian Democrat government, they would welcome it with open arms into their alliance and association. But this Ruritania is called western Germany. And that is enough to change our policy-makers’ mood from “come in” to “keep down.” This, as everyone indeed knows, stultifies all talk of western defense. THE ARGUMENT ABOUT GERMANY If you ask a western European policy maker why Western Germany is to be kept down, you will probably produce an out- pouring of emotional arguments: “Have you no memory? Don’t you remember what they did in Europe from 1940 to 1945?” The leading feeling you will ascertain is that it would be morally wrong to let Germany re- turn too fast to a normal status. It is then for us a moral duty, as my friend Raymond Aron puts it with brilliant humor, “‘to lose time.” The idea of returning Germany to a nor- mal status over a period of years proceeds from the wrong-headed identification of a
A4056 nation with an individual offender. This policy was pursued once after the First World ‘War and worked out very badly. At the out- set, under the shock of defeat, those Germans came forward who were most attuned to the western spirit and they had to bear the full prunt of our severity. I remember as a child seeing the German plenipotentiaries shut up at the Hotel des Reservoirs at Ver- sailles—these were our friends in Germany and we burdened them in German eyes with the humiliation they, and not the imperial- ists, were made to bear. Over the years the treatment of Germany improved while her governments worsened. German warmong- ers could point to the fact that those Ger- mans most inclined toward the Allies, an Erzberger, a Rathenau, had got the worst deal. Finally our feelings were completely relaxed when Hitler came in, and he, of all people, got the benefit of our having worked off cur nerves on Stresemanns and Briinings. This he offered to the German Nation as a proof that his high-handed policy was the effective one. This time we have seen to it ourselves that the best Germans from our point of view should be in the saddle. Is it reasonable to humiliate precisely the men of our choice and to identify in the popular mind their tenure of office with the maximum unequal- ity of treatment, so that again, others com- ing after them and far less our friends will get a better deal? This procedure is obvi- ousiy absurd. How much wiser the behavior of the Allies in 1814. They saw that if they installed in France a government sympa- thetic to their view of European order, they would give it a deep and firm foundation by making it plain that France got a far better treaty than she was entitled to out of con- sideration for her new government. But the procedure we follow is not only unwise, it is, further, unjust. A nation is not in fact an individual who should do time before it can be paroled. We cannot have it both ways and in seeking out those we held guilty of inhuman actions we in fact ad- mitted this obvious truth that a nation is a collection of people. It is not moral, it is highly immoral to punish those who have suffered under the Nazi regime. Take the case of Walter Eucken who died recently, an example of intellectual resistance under nazism., After he had endured all this, he had to end his life treated as a vanquished foe. One may say that this atonement for others is highly Christian—yes, if self- chosen, but then it should not stop at the borders of Germany and we should all do penance for the sins of our erring brethren. It would indeed be a grand sight if all the rulers visited Hitler’s death place to meditate on the crime of pride. A DIRECTORATE OF DEFENSE It is your correspondent’s opinion that Germany should be admitted into the Coun- cil of Europe on equal terms and that real powers should be granted to a civilian di- rectorate of European defense. The nations should be taxed a certain percentage of their national budgets in favor of this directorate of defense which would dispose of these re- sources in favor of a European army, while national armies would be restricted to po- lice and colonial forces. I fear the manna of American treasure falling on the several national armies, which may then touch up the regimental colors of yore. This is not common defense, but waste of money. What you want as defense directorate is not a clutter of generals, each imbedded in his na- tional military tradition and a servant of his own government, but first-rate statesmen, like Churchill most obviously. Let such men build up European defense; they would build up European unity as a by-product. Let them be elected by their national constitu- encies. These ideas may seem of excessive simplicity. But we shall not advance to- ward European unity until we have decided to give a certain body of Europeans a distinct mandate and real powers to achieve its objects. PATRIOTISM AND THE SOVIETS A friend has just come to me, hot from reading an American commentator’s remark that French patriotism provides a powerful counterfoul to Communist action, and he urges me to explain how far this view is op- posed to the truth. Indeed, French popular patriotism is now the most solid weapon of the Soviets in their policy toward France and western union. Yes, French patriotism palked the Communists in their efforts to grip the masses until the fateful day in 1935 when Laval, visiting Stalin in Moscow, gained from him a concession which he deemed a great victory and which turned out a most fatal gift to France: the admission that the French workers should concern themselves with national defense. Within 24 hours, with miraculous dexterity, the Communist Hu- manité ceased insulting the army and ven- tured into praise of our military heroes; Joan of Arc, whose memory had heretofore been mocked, was suddenly honored as “that most glorious daughter of the people.” And Red cells vied in procession around her statue with the traditional salutes of Catholic school children. This right-about turn was immensely effective. The Frenchman cherishes na- tional glory and was lashed into a fury by Communist guile. He lapped up the pa- triotic language which was used without shame by the Communist leaders, and indeed probably with sincere relish. This was 15 years ago. During all that time the Com- munists have been steeped in patriotism, with the sole exception of the 2 years during which the Hitler-Stalin alliance was in vigor. And during that time they had little oppor- tunity for public utterances, having been silenced first by Daladier and subsequently py the Vichy government, which turned out very much to their advantage. Aiter the German attack on Russia they, of course, returned to patriotism. Thus during all but 2 years of a period of 15, and these 2 a time of silence, the French Communists have spoken the language of patriotism. All thore who have risen in the party during this period—that is, practically all those who are now active (it is a party of extremely young organizers) —have heard no other language. And my personal opinion is that this lan- guage is spoken from the heart. The Com- munists feel far happier, as well as im- mensely more successful, now that they iden- tify themselves with the past glories of France, than they did while they derided them, a practice which only pleases a small minority of debunking intellectuals. They have established firmly in their minds that they were the main heroes of the resistance, and indeed their present poHtical enemies complacently adopted this thesis in the years 1944 to 1946; M. Mauriac then calling upon them in the Figaro, the building of which they now stone, that as they had done most, so should they—and so on, ‘But, will you say, if the French Commu- nists are genuine patriots, how come that they oppose the building up of national de- fense? I will answer with another query: Do you call them bad patriots, those who served the British Government rather than the Vichy government? To the Communists to- day the real friend of France is Russia, and our Government is alining us in a coalition against our national interest. They use the whole vocabulary of resistance: The Govern- ment collaborates with the present imperial- ist power, and in the true interest of France this destructive subservience is to be patri- otically opposed. Will people believe that? Well, quite a number of announced patriots believed during the occupation that the re- ‘APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD sistance had to be hunted down; that, surely, was much harder to believe. The Communists find themselves today in an exceedingly strong position toward the tenets of traditional popular patriotism. They oppose the Indochina war, put so did Clemenceau. Popular patriotism has never been interested in overseas territories. The obsession of popular patriotism since 1870, when the greatest military nation of Europe was sO humiliatingly defeated by Prussia single-handed, has always been Germany. Is 1t toward Germany that our Government takes precautions? Nay; it is against Russia, who “saved us” in 1914 and again in 1944, “Aw! Forget the Americans and the Brit- ish. It is thanks to the Russians that the Germans were groggy.” Thus, the Commu- nists. And they say, “Beware, thé German will come back.” Who thinks of the German, the hereditary enemy? Wedo, Yet tomor- row your treacherous Government, true heir of Vichy, is going to rearm the Germans, spearhead of a coalition against Russia and some time master of Europe after all. Can we call that a weak case? And is it still arguable that French patriotism is a shield against communism? Nay; it is a handle, thanks to which the Communists can turn the nation against governmental policy and hold back the necessary inclusion of Germany in western Europe. Popular patriotism is an unwieldy passion. It will run steadily against an ancient foe, regardless of new dangers and new necessi- ties. As early as the eighteenth century, when it was far less violent a passion, France was shaken by Choiseul’s swing from the tra-~ ditional alliance with Prussia to the alliance with the three-century-old foe, Austria, and many historians regard it as a major cause of the French Revolution. In our time, call- ing to patriotism for European federation against the Soviet threat is almost in vain. It is the Communists who can successfully appeal to patriotism. Their opponents must invoke love of individual liberty and point out that such liberty can be maintained only in a new political structure. THE KING OF THE BELGIANS Belgium, that exemplary country of Europe, ever quoted as a model of industriousness and liberalism, is tied up in a pretty mess. According to the principles of monarchy, Leopold is her king. This status has been put to the democratic test and he got 58 percent of the votes; far more than did Mr. Truman in 1948, or Mr. Attlee in 1945. And the power wielded by My. Truman is im- measurably greater, Then a cry was started according to which a king cannot be the king of a mere majority. This was asserted, for instance, by an admirable English paper which upholds the memory of William of Crange. Would he in 1689 have obtained 58 percent of the votes? One doubts it. Bel- gian politicians of the Socialist and Liberal Parties have developed on this occasion quite remarkable theories on the limitless right of minorities. If their utterances are collected jt shall be seen that the majority principle is entirely denied, an interesting departure. The root of the matter, of course, lies deep. King Leopold’s fight to regain his throne may be regarded as part of a great struggle raging all through formerly occu- pied countries. At the liberation, those who had held positions of responsibility, how- ever they had got them, had done things which those without responsibilities had not done. There were reasons to sweep them aside, often rightly and often wrongly. Thus the great openings, the great carpet-bagging era, Now in a stabler situation a come-back is staged by those who regard its success as necessary to clear their honor. And the greatest of the “come-backers’’ is King Leo- pold who is watched with the keenest in- terest by those in other countries who find themselves in a somewhat similar position.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD American Farming Era EXTENSION OF REMARKS KON. OVERTON BROOKS OF LOUISIANA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 25, 1950 Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Speaker, I have recently had a chance to go over some of the farm lands in Louisiana, the condi- tion of which I have been familiar with for many years. On this trip, I visited some of the farms which I had seen in the low period of the depression in 1932 and 1933. I had a chance to compare these farms now with the condition in which I saw them at the early period. I was amazed at the vast change that has occurred. In 1932 to 1936, farms in Webster, Claiborne, Bossier, Red River, De Soto, Bienville, and Caddo Parishes were being used for the growing of cotton. These same farms are still used for this pur- pose although there is at present a greater diversity in farming. In the 1932-36 period a great many of these farms were classified as submarginal farms, and I heard many of our people refer to the fact that the farms had lost their value as a means of earning a live- lihood for our people. They were, so these people stated, so rundown, de- pleted, and eroded as to be unpréfitable for use in sustaining families. The years have brought a vast change in the condition of these same farms. Last year, which was one of our best cotton years, I was told that these farms in the hill section produced an amazing amount of cotton. In the period of 1932— 36, the hill farmer, on many of these farms, required from 5 to 7 acres to produce a 500-pound bale of cotton. Some of them did not produce that much cotton. Last year, these farmers, so I was told, produced from a bale to a bale and a fourth per acre of cotton. Some farmers did even better than this in the hills. On the bottom farms which in the 1932-36 period produced a bale of cotton to an acre, last year they produced two bales or better to the acre. I attended meetings of our cotton farmers last fall and I was amazed at the cotton production stories being told. At one of these meetings, I can recall that I publicly referred to some of the stories of cotton production as being so fabulous as to border on the type of what we call fish stories. Whether these tales re- ported by some of our farmers with ref- erence to two to two and a half bales per aere are correct makes little difference. The important thing is that our per-acre production of cotton is now at an all- time high. It was in this area, Mr. Speaker, that in the 1932-36 period the United States Government chose to establish what is known as land-utilization projects. These projects were located in areas sur- rounded by land so poor as to be classi- fied as submarginal land. The farmers . said it was not worth cultivating in many instances. The land-utilization projects were built on land which was considered too poor for cultivation. It is in these general areas to which I now have ref- erence in this statement. Just as important as the increased pro- duction of cotton is the increase in the grade of the cotton produced on these farms. In the 1932-36 period cotton be- ing produced from the so-called submar- ginal hill lands in Louisiana was of a rather low grade of seven-eighths-inch staple. By dint of repeated efforts by experimentation and by much toil, the staple length of the cotton has been in- creased to 1-inch, to 144,-inch, and even 1%-inch fiber. Now, on this hill land, much of which, as I have said, was con- sidered submarginal in the thirties, the grade has improved and the length of the staple has been increased. As a re- sult of this, naturally, the price of the cotton crop has improved and our farmers are benefiting vastly from im- proved methods and increased harvest. One will naturally ask what has brought about such a vast change in the cotton lands in Louisiana; what has improved the appearance of the coun- tryside, the condition of the farm houses, and the aspect and attitude of our farmers, especially the hill farmers. It has been due in large measure to the Federal soil-conservation program, com- bined with the program of maintaining reasonable farm prices. In the early period the soil-conservation program began by trying to bring order out of chaos in the farm area. This program was begun as an educational one and gradually expanded from a few farms until it covered practically every farm on the countryside. The program is now accepted as a fundamental part of farm~ ing operations. By beginning with education and the proper use of land, by the elimination of gullies, land wash, and erosion, by build- ing terraces, and by the institution gen- erally of good farming practices, the value and utility of our farms has grad- ually been brought out. Land which when I came to Congress was made un- sightly by gullies and erosion is now vast- ly improved in its appearance. Farmers who were bankrupt, faced the future with discouragement and helplessness, now insist on raising the fertility of the soil by use of fertilizers. They are now demanding better homes, electrification of them and their barns, and the use of modern machinery. These same farmers are now facing the future with confi- dence and full of plans for improvement on their farms and the advancement of their families. In the countryside which in 1933-36 was devoid of beauty, we now ' see little flower gardens, rows of shade trees, and pretty little houses dotting the countryside. To my mind, the amazing part of this picture is the fact that all of these changes have occurred within the short space of time since I began to serve this area in the Congress of the United States. Had I been told that so much could have been done in such a short time when I first came to Congress, I would have seriously doubted the truth- fulness of such an assertion. And yet, I am a part of all of that program, I have AA057 supported every part, parcel, and portion of the soil-conservation program. I have bent every effort and energy of my congressional life in working to improve the lot of our farmers. In my first cam- paign for Congress, I witnessed countless cases of hard-working, honest hill farm- ers of north Louisiana, with wives and children, who finished the year with less than $25 to $50 profits from a whole season’s effort. I resolved that the des- perate financial plight of our farmers should be my first consideration in Con- gress. As I review the years, I too feel that we from farming sections can look for- ward with considerably more confidence in the future than we can with pleasure view the struggles of the past. Benight- ed, misguided, and depression farming programs have given way to well-direct- ed and well-balanced soil conservation programs of the present. We see to a remarkable extent the advantages of this great program at the present time. We reap the advantages of this great pro- gram; but in a larger sense, it is our children and their children who will reap the magnificent benefits of a well-di- rected conservation farm program; and they in time will rise up to thank those foresighted individuals in authority, in- terested in improvement of farm life, who have made possible the new day for our farmers in the United States. Public Power in Michigan REMARES F HON. JOHN E. RANKIN OF MISSISSIPPI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, May 19, 1950 Myr. RANKIN. Mr. Speaker, it was most amusing, as well as amazing, to hear the distinguished gentleman from Michigan [Mr. DonpERO] arise here in the House the other day and denounce public power as communistic, or social- istic. The power business is a public busi- ness. Electricity has become a necessity of our modern life. It must be handled by a monopoly, and any monopoly of a necessity of life is a public business. Be- sides, the water power of the Nation al- ready belongs to the Federal Govern- ment. That was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in both the Ashwander case and the Appalachian Power case. Suppose the private-power interests had as complete a monopoly of the elec- trical industry as the telephone com- panies have of the telephone business; just think what a burden the users of electricity would have to bear. I pay more for a telephone in my apartment here in Washington—if I never pick up the receiver—than I pay for both gas and electricity in that apartment. Two years ago I put a tele- . phone in my office in Tupelo, Miss., and it cost me more—if I never picked up the
A4938 receiver—than I paid for both gas and electricity in my home there, If the American people paid‘as much in proportion for electricity as they now have to pay for telephones, in some places, they would do well to have one light in each house, and the chances are that the farmers would be in the dark from Maine to California. Yet we find some people who want to turn the water power of the Nation over to this sprawling monopoly known as the Power Trust, so they can plunder the American people with rates all out of proportion, and limited only by the con- sumer’s ability to pay. The attempts now being made by pri- vate power interests to prevent the build- ing of public power lines to supply power to municipally owned systems and farm- ers’ cooperatives and force the Govern- ment to turn the power over to the Power Trust at these dams which the Govern- ment has constructed on our navigable streams and their tributaries is a repe- tition of their old scheme by which they tried to get their hands on the power generated on the Tennessee River by the TVA, and also along the Columbia River, and other navigable streams and their tributaries. If they had succeeded, we would have had no yardstick to show the American people what electricity is really worth, and we would all be paying the enormous overcharges now imposed upon the peo- ple of Michigan—outside of those munic- ipalities such as Lansing and Kalamazoo that own and operate their own power systems. This is the battle of the century. The greatest wealth this country has, outside of the soil from which we live, is the water power in our navigable streams and their tributaries, in which there are 394,600,000,060 kilowatt hours of hydroelectric power going to waste every year. If it were developed and firmed-up to the peak of the average year, we could not only electrify this country from one side to the other, but we could heat every house from Maine to Mexico with electric energy—the purest, finest, cleanest heat in the world. SANTEE-COOPER But the private power interests are trying to destroy these yardsticks, such as that of the TVA, and the Bonneville Administration. They are now making a terrific drive to get their hands on the power generated at the Santee-Cooper hydroeiecitric power project in South Carolina, for the purpose of blocking the efforts now being made to get that elec- tricity to the farmers of that State at rates they can afford to pay. I am familiar with the Santee-Cooper project. I went all the way to South Carolina, and addressed a joint session of the legislature in favor of that great developmert, when the bill for its crea- tion was being considered, and was being fought by these same private power in- terests that are now trying to get their hands on that power, in order to monop- olize it and deny its benefits to the farm- ers, and other consumers in South Caro- lina. They want to destroy the Santee- Cooper yardstick, just as they have at- tempted to destroy the TVA yardstick, APPENDIX TO the Ecnneville adminisir ation yardstick, and other yardsticks of ~vb"< er systems, in order to :™)°-~ rates on the people who use electricity, and who have the right to get it at rates based upon the cost of generaticn, trans- mission, and distribution. This Santee-Cooper project will be worth hundreds of millions of dollars to the people of South Carolina during this generation, if the State will just main- tein it as a public-power system, keep the hands of private interests off of ib, hold the rates down to the lowest possible level commensurate with sound invest- ment, and use it as a yardstick to show the neople of South Carolina, as well as the surrounding States, what electricity is really worth. Now let’s get back to the State of M'chigan, and see what public power is doing for the people of that State, and what it would do if all the people of Michigan could enjoy its benefiis The city of Lansing, the capital of Michigan, has one of the finest public power systems in the country, and has had for 56 years. I wonder if that is considered socialism or communism in Michigan. The city of Lansing generates and dis- tributes electricity to the people of a city of more than 90,000 population. The pecple of Lansing get their power through this public power system far below the rates charged by the private power companies in the State of Michi- gan. That public power system is valued at more than $18,000,000, and has long since paid for itself. The city does not owe a dime on it. The power furnished free to the city, tegether with the taxes paid by this municipal system, I dare say, exceed the taxes paid by any pri- vate power company in any city of its size in that State. It has no water in its stock, and is not controlled by a useless holding company. Then there is the city of Kalamazoo, another leading city in the State of Mich- igan, with a population around 60,000. Kalamazoo has its own public power sys- tem, and has had for 35 years, on which it does not owe a dime. I wonder if the people of Kalamazoo think it 1s communistic or socialistic for that city to own and operate its own electric light and power system, which pays, I dare say, more taxes, or more money in lieu of taxes, than is paid by the power companies in the average city of its size in Michigan. It has no water in its stock, and is not obligated to any holding company. There is Bay City, Mich., another thriving city of about 50,000 population, which has its own public power system, and has had for 53 years, against which it does not owe a dime. Its cash contri- butions and taxes paid into the city treasury, I dare say, exceed the taxes paid by private power companies in any city of its size. I am sure the people of Bay City do not regard public power as communistic or socialistic. It is not obligated to the power trust through any holding com- pany and has no water in its stock. I could name you a large number of other cities in the State of Michigan that wok THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD have public power systems, and have had for years and years, such as Allegan, Cold Water, Norway, Niles, Marquette, Wakefield, Travers City, Zeeland, Wyan- dotte, Sturgis, South Haven, St. Louis, Holland, Gladstone, Escanaba, Grand Haven—and a large number of other towns, cities, and municipalities in the State of Michigan that own and operate their own generating and distribution systems, and have for years and years. They have no water in the stocks of their power systems, and do not have to pay ributes to any holding companies. Therefore they can supply their people with electricity at reasonable rates. Let me remind thc gentleman from Michigan that his State is just across the line from Ontario, Canada. If all the people of Michigan had received their electricity at the same rate they did in Ontario in 1849, they would have saved more than $117,080,000 on their light and power bills. If the people of Michigan had received their electricity at the Tacoma, Wash., rates, they would have saved more than $133,030,000 last year. And remember that the Tacoma, Wash., light and power system pays into the city more taxes, or more money in lieu of taxes, than is paid by the power companies in the average city of its size in Michigan, or any other State. And I might add that if the people of -Michigan had got their power at the IVA rates paid by the people in my own district, they would have saved more than $119,000,C00 on their light and power bills during the year 1949. We are not trying to nationalize the power industry, as the gentleman from Michigan has charged; but we do not propsse to build these great dams on our navigable streams and their tributaries, and then shut cff the towns, cities, mu- nicipalities, and cooperative power asso- ciations, and turn the energy generated over to the Power Trust. As I said, the power business is a pub- lic business. The water power of the Nation already belongs to the Federal Government. There is enough of it go-~- ing to waste to electrify this country from one side to the other, and probably heat every home in America. That water power should be developed and supplied to the people of the Nation at rates based on the cost of generation, transmission, and distribution, and not turned over to the private power mo- nopoly to wring the lifeblood from the American people by such exorbitant rates as they now impose on the people of Michigan—outside of those cities where they now have public power systems. Instead of denouncing public power as socialistic or communistic, let us face the facts and follow the example set by the city of Lansing, Mich., as well as by the TVA, the Bonneville Admin-~ istration, and other public power agen- cies and municipally owned systems throughout the country, and get cheap electricity to every home, including every farm home, and every business es- tablishment in America. That will do more to enrich our coun- try and bring happiness and prosperity to the American people in every section
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD of the Nation than anything else that could possibly be done now or hereafter. It will not only make our people pros- perous and contented, but will place our couniry far out in front as the outstand- ing leader among the nations of the earth in the onward march of modern progress, Appeasement EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN W. McCORMACK OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 31, 1950 Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, un- der leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following editorial from the Boston Post of May 25, 1950: APPEASEMENT All signs now point to the probability that Russia is about to win another victory over the majority members of the United Nations on the question of admitting Communist China to the organization and ousting Na- tionalist China from the seat she has been occupying. Yesterday the British Government came out formally for the admission of Red China to the United Nations. France has indicated it will not stand in the way of such action. The United States will not vote in favor of the admission of Red China, but it will abide by any majority decision on the question. Thus it appears that Russia by browbeating all the other nations, by walking out of every meeting in which Nationalist China was rep- resented, and by boycotting all essential ac- tivities of the United Nations has brought the other countries to terms. The action about to be taken on China is, under these conditions, nothing but surrender to Russia. It is base appeasement of the Munich brand and though it may appear to settle some problems temporarily it can, in the long run, produce nothing but harm. The demo- cratic nations of the earth never seem to learn much from experience, no matter how bitter. Memorial Day Address at Gettysburg, Pa., by the Honorable John W. Bricker, of Ohio EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWARD MARTIN OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Wednesday, May 31 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. MARTIN. Mr. President, yester- day, at the historic national cemetery at Gettysburg, there occurred the annual strewing of the flowers on the graves by school children. State Senator McPher-. son, of Pennsylvania, presided. I had the honor to attend, together with Maj. Gen. Charles I. Carpenter, Chief of Chaplains of the United States Air Force. The speech of the day was delivered by the junior Senator from Ohio [Mr. Bricker]. Inorder that we may all have the opportunity of reading our col- league’s able and eloquent address, I ask unanimous consent that it may be print- ed in the Appendix of the REcorp. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Rrcorp, as follows: SPEECH or SENATOR JOHN W. BRICKER AT GETTYSBURG, Pa., ON MEmorrmaL Day, Mar 80, 1950 We gather this afternoon under the same panoply of heaven where one of the fiercest battles of time was fought. Those who fell here lived to build, and died to save the finest way of life the world has known. The yearning to be free is as imperishable today as then. Man’s right to govern him- self is yet inalienable. They fought on this field, one battle in the never ending conflict for human liberty and individual opportunity. In that age-old struggle first one side has forged ahead and then the other. At the Battle of Gettys- burg, human rights took a long surge for- ward and the cause of human freedom began to seem secure. From this battlefield spread the feeling that the Union would live, that righteousness would yet prevail. The ques- tion there was, Would America remain a union? Today, Will the Union remain American? During all history there has been in the affairs of men and nations a constant con- flict between the power of offense, of de- struction and aggression, against man’s ability to defend himself in his person and in the enjoyment of his property. The Battle of Gettysburg epitomized that conflict. Im the first day the power of de- struction and of the offensive seemed too much to withstand. But on the second and third days the power of defense and of re- newed strength in a noble cause took com- mand. From the days of the Roman phalanx to the Monitor and the iron-clad ships, the tanks, the battleships and sub- marines, poison gas, bacterial warfare, the atom bomb, each implement of destruction had made necessary new defenses. The im- plements of peace have been ever used as the instruments of war. Science has moved from the first fire, through gun powder and dynamite, poi- sonous gas, nitroglycerin, to the fission of atoms and now the fusion of force into matter. All of these can be used for peace or war for good or evil. With them we can build or destroy. We now are living in one of those epochs of history when the powers of destruction have outrun our ability to defend ourselves. The end of all we love and cherish may come unless divine provi- dence takes a new hold on the hearts and lives of mankind. For a century and a half America has been satisfied to fight for the right to preserve her heritage but yet has never been bent on wielding power over other peoples. Ours has been a fortunate history. From war we have turned to the pursuits of peace and to building a mighty nation. Our hearts still yearn for peace. Ruthless aggression, pelf, power, and plunder have had no part in our national development. Our people have been willing to work. They have worked and used the God-given resources which are at hand. The spirit of compassion has controlled our lives. Help-~ fulness for others has been part of the life of America. Compassion for others is a glorious saga of our achievements. We have given bountifully of our labor and our wealth that others might not suffer. Our contribution in war has been the greatest of any nation, any time, anywhere. In ‘the recent war we. contributed 14,000,000 men and women to the battle. Our fleets fought upon the seven seas. Our airmen flew the skies wherever the enemy could be found. Our soldiers carried the brunt on every battlefield where the enemy set foot. A4059 Those who fought with us fought upon lim- ited segments of the world-wide battlefield. We gave $50,000,000,000 of our substance to our cobelligerents. Our total cost of war was half a trillion dollars. With only 150,000,000 people, with only one-sixth of the territory of the world, we were able to do all this. Since the days of the war, once mighty na- tions that had been able to take care of their own, to win wars and to prosper, to encom-~ pass much of the world, with far more peo- ple and far more resources than we have ever enjoyed, have been suppliants at our door. The spirit of compassion still prevails in the hearts of the people of our country. They have responded. We have poured out now over thirty billions of dollars to the needy of the world that they might not be engrossed in the maelstrom of an all-engulf- ing, destructive, godless, ruthless philosophy of government. Why have we been able to do that? The answer to that question seems to be an illusive one, that the world does not yet grasp. The natural resources are as great in other places, the fertility of the soil is just as good, the rains fall and the sun shines on other lands as they do on ours. Why have we then been able to do so much in the cause of righteousness and human liberty? Why ‘are we the last bastion against an economic and political foe that is encompassing so many nations and subjecting so many people? ¢ The only answer that can be found any-~ where is that we have governed ourselves longer and better and been freer than any other people of any nation on earth today. That is the heritage of Gettysburg, of St. Mihiel, of the Global War in Europe and the Pacific, But more than that it is the heri- tage of 160 years of human liberty, individ- ual opportunity, the ability and the will- ingness to work, to build, to achieve, and to live a good way of life. The conflict to preserve this cherished her- itage, not alone is world-wide today; it is being fought at the crossroads of America. Various segments of that line of conflict are being fought out in the city councils, in the State legislatures, and in the Congress of the United States. I do not believe that any nation or combination of nations has the power to defeat us from without, but that heritage can be lost at home. Our Government is becoming daily more and more powerful. The greed for authority over others inspires many of our leaders at this very hour—all done, of course, in the name of helping humanity. Thus, did Hitler rise to power. By such powers did Mussolini enslave the people of Italy. And by such hypocritical claims accompanied by ruthless murder and purge has Stalin enslaved the Russians and other peoples of the world. If we are to be tomorrow, the Kind of country that the men of Gettysburg died be- lieving America to be, dreamed that we should be, and yearned for us to be, we must keep America free and freedom loving, self- governed, strong, and determined to main- tain the right. Whenever you enhance the power of gov- ernment, just to that degree do you suppress human liberty. The duty of this generation is to preserve the maximum of human free- dom, consistent with orderly self-govern- ment. Where are our dangers at home? Government power can destroy us, neglect can destroy us. Everywhere today there is a demand for personal economic security. Those who lie here had no personal security. They fought for personal liberty. There can be no economic security without political liberty. . The creative genius and individual re- liance of a free people have enabled us to win every war we have fought. That cre- ative ability cannot be ordered by govern- ment, cannot be directed by bureaucratic
A4060 control, cannot ke paid for with government dole or subsidy. If we are to adopt the methods of the power and police states that we have fought to suppress, it would be as though cur country, after the war between the States and in memory of the fierceness of the Battle of Gettysburg, had adopted slavery as a national policy. Those who founded our Nation, those who have fought for it and builded it have ever known the danger of the power of govern- ment, the power of concentrated wealth, the pewer of organized religion, the power of the masses and the power of purposeful and selfish minorities to destroy the inalien- able rights of man. This country was builded as a bulwark against aggression and power. It was builded as a bulwark against the power of concentrated wealth and economic power that all might have opportunity. The founders knew the danger and the human suffering that followed in the wake of reli- gious bigotry and the religious war of old and sought to free men to worship God ac- cording to each individual conscience and desire. They knew the power of organized minori- ties, ruthlessly led—so they builded this country as a bulwark against the power of the organized, selfish, willful, determined minorities. They, likewise, well realized that . the majority can destroy the rights of the individuals and minorities, and they builded our system as a protection against the power of the majority, who sometimes are enflamed by passing passions. So, thus, the individual and the minority groups have rights inalien- able as free people so long as the Constitu- tion abides. Above all, they knew and have known the power of organized government to destroy human liberty. So they builded this, our Government, as a bulwark against the power of government itself. With checks and bal- ances, the sovereignty of the State and local governments respected, with the individual’s place secure, the police state has been no part of our development. The human heart and soul, with capacity for growth and development, for service and outreach toward man’s concept of his God, are the most precious things in life. To pro- tect them our Government was founded and must continue to live. What profit us, in the end, if we gain domination and control of the world, destroy our national enemies, and lose human libsrty here at home. The spiritual and moral virtues of América Will be ours only so long as we are a free people. Faithfulness in this trust today in a mighty conflict the world around will mark us as worthy of a nobler tomorrow. Recre- ancy now in the cause of human liberty, for which Gettysburg was fought, would tarnish the glory of the achievement of the men of Gettysburg. May we upon this sacred soil renew our determination to keep burning brightly the torch of freedom against the day for which the Master lived. May peace on earth and good will be yet the lot of men and nations. Then we will have done just honor to the heroes beneath this sacred soil. The Jefferson Papers EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CHARLES R. HOWELL OF NEW JERSEY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 31, 1950 Mr. HOWELL. Mr. Speaker, under permission to extend my remarks in the Record, I want to call the attention of the Congress to a remarkable historical event—the publication of the first vol- ume of the Jefferson papers. The tre- mendous task of collecting, sorting, and editing the letters and papers of Thomas Jefferson is being carried on at Princeton University in the congressional district which I have the honor to represent. Last week the first of the 52 volumes which will make up the completed work was presented in an appropriate cere- mony to the Library of Congress. A fine editorial discussing the Jefferson papers which was published in the May 17 issue of the Princeton Herald follows: THe JerreRsON PaPERs The ceremony being held this afternoon in Washington to commemorate the pub- lication of the first volume of the Jefferson papers marks a milestone in the history of au extracrdinary undertaking. The copies which will be presented to President Truman, General Marshall, and Dr. Freeman by Presi- dent Harold W. Dodds, represent a vast amount of research and the best in Ameri- can scholarship, yet they are but the fifty- second part of the whole and for that reason are little more than an introduction and a symbol of what is to come. Before the editors and the reseach staff conclude their labors, 18,000 letters written by Jefferson will have been printed in full and a further 25,000 letters written to Jef- ferson either in full or in summarized form, The sheer size of these figures appears to convey the story without further elabora- tion yet in point of fact it tends to obscure it. For all of these letters did not simply fall into the hands of the editors, although the principal Jefferson collection has been the property of the United States since 1848. ‘The search for Jefferson documents was, and is, being carried out far and wide, and, as an instance, one was discovered in the cus- tody of the Otoe Indian Reservation. Nor do the figures convey an indication cf ths size and type and quality of the edi- torial organization required to annotate them, the multitude of controls required to catalog them, the innumerable files, cross- references, microfilms, photostats, the whole paraphernalia behind the scenes which will not be seen or probably even envisaged by the ultimate public. The ceremony in Washington, therefore, will be an introduction, but something more—a tribute to Princeton University and the University Press, and the New York ames, which made the publication possible through financing the project as a memorial to the late Adolph S. Ochs, president of the Times, And, in a special sense, it is a trib- ute to the editor in chief, Dr. Julian P. Boyd, and his assistants, Dr. Lyman H. Butterfield and Mrs. Samuel S. Bryan. Biggest Story EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KATHARINE ST. GEORGE OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 31, 1950 Mrs. ST. GEORGE. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the Appendix of the Recorp, I include the thirty-second article by Mr, Frank C. Waldrop on the infiltra- tion of communism in our country: ‘APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Biccest STORY (By Frank C. Waldrop) It was slightly more than 20 years ago that Communists in America discovered some- thing Communists in Poland, Czechoslovakia, Rumania, China and other nations have been rediscovering since 1945. This overpowering fact is that all Com- munists of the world outside Russia are mere Colonials after the manner of British sub- jects outside England, and that Stalin han- Gles them as expendable chattels of empire just as the British used to handle Hindus, Egyptians, Polynesians, and other lesser breeds outside the law. Whoever was reading in this space yester- day knows that I am at present intrceducing details on that feature of the Soviet regime by quoting the sworn testimony of one Beniamin Gitlow to the House Committee on Un-American Activities given in 1939. Gitlow was one of the founders of com- munism in this country, a member of the top policy-making board in Moscow, the Communist International, and one of the very few to quarrel with Stalin and live. The quarrel came about this way. The Communist Party in the United States held a national convention early in 1929 to elect a leadership. William Z. Foster, who is today the titular head of the party in this coun- try, campaigned as Stalin’s man. Jay Lovestone, of whom more in this space shorily, was found to be in control of 90 percent of the delegates. Whereupon there came from Moscow direct orders from Stalin that Foster must get the job regardless. Lovestone and others of his faction were directed to get entirely out of the party leadership and report to Moscow for assignment in other countries. Finally, the delegates were told that two new men would come on from Moscow as United States representatives in the Com- munist International, to which the locals, as in other countries, were supposed on paper to send delegates of their own choice. In the wrangle that followed, Lovestone and Gitlow, as head of the party in the United States, and party representative on the International, went to Moscow to fight the issue out. There they got the big news. The Inter- national in fact was not superior to the Communist organization within the Soviet Union, nor the maker of its own policies, It was actually just a dummy of foreign fronts for the personal decisions of the head of the Russian organization, J. Stalin. To- day, that seems obvious—yet Communists in Europe have found it out again and again in great surprise. The ghastly shock to those simpletons of 20 years ago can well he imagined. Said Gitlow later: “When the decision was finally made we fought against it and voted against it. Stalin was present at the meeting and deliv- ered a number of speeches. He lost his usual composure and became enraged. * * *” Gitlow said that as soon as the dummy meeting was over, he was confronted by Molotov, whom we all know so well for his performances at early meetings of the United Nations, and formally read out of office for the high crime of having crossed the boss. Now here in Gitlow’s own words, is the sum of the lesson that communism pounded into him the hardest way—a lesson that Alger Hiss, Klaus Fuchs, and who knows how many others, refused to learn: “I broke with the Communist philosophy completely, because the cornerstone of Communist philosophy is the dictatorship of the proletariat, and once you accept the position that the world can be improved only by the establishment of a rigorous dictatorial regime, ruled by a few men on the top, from that moment on I felt that all freedom, all liberty, was a thing of
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the past, and the very objectives that you were after could not be obtained. “And so I broke with the concept of the proietarian dictatorship and tcox the posi- tion that if we are improved the economic lot of man, if man is to enjoy more political lib- erties, if there are to take place worthwhile sccial changes, those changes must take place under conditions which will guarantee to the great mass of the people more liberty, nct less liberty. * * * ‘In Russia we have a dictatorial regime thet enjoys more power than any other rul- ing government in the world, because Stalin and the small ruling clique around Stalin own and control and direct the economic life of Russia, the poiitical life of Russia, the cultural life of Russia. In other words, what we have in Russia is a gigantic monopoly on the part of a ruling clique of all phases of Russian life.” Biggest Story EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. KATHARINE ST. GEORGE OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 31, 1950 Mrs. ST. GEORGE. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the Appendix of the Rrecorp, I include the thirty-third article by Mr. Frank C. Waldrop on the infiltration of communism in our country: Biccest SToRy (By Frank C. Waldrop) What does the Communist conspiracy re- quire of its cheap, expendable manpower in the United States of America? When an American becomes a Communist he may be ordered to do anything, from theft of atom bombs to blackmail of a high-school girl for her father’s office files. . Bere is just one example as told under oath by one who had himself been impri- soned as a Communist, had risen to the peak of party rank in this country and then had been contemptuously kicked downstairs by Stalin for the high crime of differing with the boss. . The following is a quotation from Benja- min Gitlow’s testimony before the House Committee on Un-American Activities. It appears in volume II of the committee hear- ings on pages 4683-5, inclusive. “In 1928 the Soviet Government was very hard-pressed for foreign currency, because whatever foreign currency it could lay its hands on it was storing or using in prepa- ration for the 5-year plan. The 5-year plan was just about to begin. “At the same time the Soviet Union was going through an internal economic crisis which also curtailed the income of foreign currency. “Around that time the German Commu- nist Party admitted to membership to the party one of the most expert engravers in Germany, &@ man who was so adept in en- graving work that he could duplicate any- thing.” Gitlow said the Gay-Pay-OO (Soviet se~ cret police) then set up a counterfeiting plant with this expert engraver in charge. He continues: “But the Gay-Pay-OO was very anxious to counterfeit American currency. In 1928 Nick Dozenberg was assigned by the Gay- Pay-OO to find out the secrets of the serial- ization mumbers of American currency bills, XOVI—App.——-256 He once inquired of me whether I knew where such infermation could be cbtained, but I did not snow. I had no contacts what- soever, “After we were expelled from the party In 1929 it appears that Nick Dozenberg, act- ing for the Gay-Pay-O0, already had in his possession countericit American currency in the form of $190 bills, which were being ex- changed in Cuba, in South America and in the United States proper. But the exchange was not going ahead as quickly as the Gay- Pay-OO desired. What they wanted was to make some contact to make the exchange on a large scale involving several million dol- lars.” Though expelled from the Communist Party, Dozenberg maintained contact with some other members who were also expelled, Gitlow said. One of these was a Dr. Valentin Burtan, of New York City, anxious for re- admission to the conspiracy and ready to prove himself by any means. Says Gitlow: “At that time, in 1933 or 1932, Burtan made the acquaintance, in a speak-easy, of a German ex-officer, an adventurous fellow, who was engaged in the job of shipping con~ traband munitions from the United States to Latin-American countries. “Burtan picked up a good acquaintance with this individual and said that it would not be a bad idea; they would contact Amtorg (Russian trading agency in New York.— Editor) to arrange for the shipping of gas munitions, gas bombs, etc., from the United States to-‘the Soviet Union because the Soviet Union was very much interested in that, and also some of the latest forms of machine guns being manufactured in this country. . “Through this German officer, the under- world in Chicago was contacted. They were first given a taste of how easy it was to pass the counterfeit money in Chicago, and then errangements were made in Chicago to pass, I believe, around a million dollars in coun- terfeit money at one time. “Burtan and this German were engaged in the job of getting the counterfeit money over to Chicago, closing the deal, and bringing the proceeds of the sale of the counterfeit money pack to be turned over to the Gay-Pay-OO. The American authorities got wind of this situation. The German was arrested, and he confessed. “Burtan was arrested Jater on, and the whole manipulation of this counterfeiting originated with the Gay-Pay-OO. The print- ing plant was never discovered because the printing plant was not in the United States. It was in Germany. The Gay-Pay-OO was never involved in this matter, though they were at the root of it. “They were the real perpetrators of the crime, and the dupe who, out of idealistic purposes, out of the idea that he was doing something good, is serving a prison sentence for this crime.” Biggest Story EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. KATHARINE ST. GEORGE OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 31, 1950 Mrs. ST. GEORGE. Mr. Speaker, un- der unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the Appendix of the Rrecorp, I include the thirty-fourth article -by Mr. Frank C. Waldrop on the infiltration of communism in our country: A4061 Bracrst Srory (By Frank C. Waldrop) If you’re a Communist from America vis- iting in Moscow, pay attention to your caviar. As long as you get it fresh, unsalted, and black, you are safe. But when the waiter brings you the gum- my, red kind it’s time you were already gone. Your life is in danger. This is advice from one who knows, and you can find it in volume 11 of the hearings of the House Committee on Un-American Activities in the testimony of Jay Lovestone. Lovestone was once head of your organiza~ tion in this country—if you are a Commu-~ nist. He made many trips to Moscow. He was an aristocrat of the conspiracy, one of the very earliest of the charter members. He Knew Stalin, Trotsky, Bukharin, Litvinov, Molotov. In fact, as he put it: *T might say that I have received or been subjected to the highest honors of the Com- munist Party in my time save one, and that is liquidation by a firing squad.” Long before the squalid episode of Earl Browder’s rise to and fall from the top dis- honors of communism in the United States of Amerca, Lovestone was one of the con~ spiracy’s elder statesmen. The things that happened to him in Mos~ cow when they switched the caviar from high quality black to stinky red, nave been repeated with Communists from every country. Stalin, whom Lovestone once called his friend and leader, sooner or later always turns out to be what Lovestone calls him now, Herr Stalin, In other words, Stalin is Hitler as Hitler was Stalin. President Truman may think he is getting some place when he says that he likes old Joe Stalin. Mr. Roosevelt thought that he, too, was getting some place when he tried to butter up Stalin at Tehran and Yalta by poking fun at the helpless Churchill who swallowed the insults and picked up added money for the Socialist British Empire, to this day kept alive only on a United States pension, But you—if you are a Communist—would profit more by listening to the story of Jay Lovestone, who went to Moscow in July of 1929 with 90 percent of the Communist or- ganization in the United States back of him. And what happened? Here is Lovestone’s own story: “First of all, we had a very violent con- flict over the question of how the party’s international should be run, managed, or led. We (the section from America) advo- cated what was known as party democracy, and Stalin and his puppets, while they did not outright reject it, did actually vitiate every concept of party democracy that we once thought had to be in the international. “Secondly, we had a vigorous clash with the Russian Communist Party as to the type of leadership for the international organiza- tion as such—that is, in the Communist In- ternational. . “Our position was that the Communist In- ternational should have a collective and gen- uinely international leadership in which Russia could be first, but the first among equals. We were against a monopoly of leadership by the Russian Communist Party. “In the third place, we differed with the Communist International, which, in actual- ity meant the Stalin-led Russian Communist Party, over a series of questions involving the American institution. “For example, we were denounced as ‘ex- ceptionalists’ and that was, by the way, a high crime in the church. “That was because we had stressed that there were certain historical peculiarities and industrial conditions in the United States distinct from those in other lands. “We denied their claim that in the United States there was as much radicalism oar as
A4062 much radical labor movement as there was in a number of European countries. “We differed with the Stalin leadership every time on the entire American economic and political trends. The position of Herr Stalin was that the American economic sys< tem was going to pieces. “We said that the Communist Party was headed for a big job in creating a crisis of very grave consequence to capitalism in the United States; that it was far from finished and that the beast still had a lot of Kick in it. “For that, we were roundly denounced. The theory of Stalin was that the revolution was pretty much around the corner for the United States.” The above-mentioned conference in Mos~ cow was in July-August of 1929, a year of por- tentous happenings in the United States of America. What did Stalin know that caused him in the midsummer of 1929 to think revolu- tion was soon to pop in the United States of America? Biggest Story EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KATHARINE ST. GEORGE OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 31, 1950 Mrs. ST. GEORGE. Mr. Speaker, un- der unanimous consent to extend my re- marks in the Appendix of the Rrcorp, I include the thirty-fifth article by Mr. Frank C. Waldrop on the infiltration of communism in our country: Biccest Story (By Frank C. Waldrop) In the summer of 1929 there was a big pow-wow of world Communist field officers with Stalin at Moscow. The boss had de- cided the United States of America was soon to blow apart in revolution, and he wanted to get his team ready, The above information comes from one Jay Lovestone, who was there on the job. Lovestone went to Moscow in March of 1929 as head of the Communist conspiracy in the United States. He escaped by means he has never yet disclosed in full, kicked from all his offices, and lucky to be alive. Why? Well, here are his own words, re- peated from yesterday because they are so full of curious significance to Americans, re- flecting on the course of history these 20 years past. You can find the original of this in volume 11 of the hearings by the House Committee on Un-American Activities. “The position of Herr Stalin was that the American economic system was going to pieces and that this was the last and final crisis for capitalism in the United States. “We,” the Communist delegates from the United States, “said that the Communist Party was headed for a big job, in creating a crisis of very grave consequence to capital- ism in the United States; that the beast still had a lot of kick in it. “For that we were roundly denounced. The theory of Stalin was that the revolution was pretty much around the corner in the United States.” Now, all this, remember, was going on in Moscow in the late spring and early summer of 1929, when the United States of America ‘was still enjoying the prosperity that had come with the expansion of industry for 10 busy years preceding. What was actually going on inside the Strategic war command of communism that year The record shows that Communists all over the world had been doing their worst to corrupt finance everywhere. It is established that they faked bond is- sues, currency, legal tender of all kinds in the Western World then, as they were to do again in China in the 1930’s. They had spies planted in banks and treasuries, and their most able financial minds had the assign- ment to do anything anywhere they could, to shatter the structure of capitalistic busi- ness. Suddenly in Europe banks began to crash. Then, on October 26, 1929, the New York Stock Exchange was swept with a panic wave of selling. Some 16,000,000 shares changed hands that 1 day. Who bought, incidentally, that which was sold? It took 2 years for the market to settle back to a reasonable order of business and by that time value of securi- ties traded on the exchange had dropped by an estimated $50,000,000,000. Whose actions really tilted the market into that catastrophic collapse? In the chaos and the panic of the moment men who might now be able to piece the story together leaped from windows, shot themselves, drank iodine, or just collapsed on a couch and willed themselves to die. Records were lost forever. It was a desperate hour for America and for the world. It was also desperate for Stalin. All around him was hatred. He could not help but see Moscow was still unsafe for czars, as of old. Indeed, his “dear Kirov,” the military commander of the capital, re- ceived the bulletin in 1934 that started Stalin on the bloodiest purge of our age. Nor would the factories run or the peasants behave. The Soviet bureaucracy was stran- gling itself. The military were shot through with dissent. In the United States of America there were panic and idleness and loss of value. But in Russia there were famine and ferocious bru- tality and no value to lose. Stalin’s regime was suffering worse than any other on earth as hard times hit the world. What exact part did the Soviet plottings of 1929 play in the succeeding waves of dis- aster that rolled across the United States of America from 1980 onward? Maybe the truth will come out some day, if civilization ever gets its hands on the secret archives of world communism now hidden deep in the Lenin library, in Moscow. But one more important truth has stood up before the world as a shining mark. In the generation since 1929 American capitalism bas endured the most fantastic kind of beating at the hands of imbeciles, experimenters, irresponsibles, traitors, and crooks manipulating the power of govern-~ ment. It has fought and financed and won the most tremendous and the least excusable war in all of human history. The genius of American capitalism has even saved Stalin himself from the firing squad he so richly deserves and now is being burdened again to face him down all over the globe and save the reputations of politicians in America who have been, through their idiotic recklessness and worse, the prime source of American trouble. Biggest Story EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KATHARINE ST. GEORGE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 31, 1950 Mrs. ST. GEORGE. Mr. Speaker, un- der unanimous consent to extend my re= APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD marks in the Appendix of the Rrcorp, I include the thirty-sixth article by Mr. Frank C. Waldrop on the infiltration of communism in our country: Brecesr Srory (By Frank C. Waldrop) We pause now for a word from J. Stalin on the coming revolution- in the United States of America. He is addressing a special commission of world Communist field agents in Moscow. The date, May 6, 1919. Listen to him as recorded on the Official minutes: “T think the moment is not far off when a revolutionary crisis will be unleashed in America; when that revolutionary crisis comes in the United States it will mark the beginning of the end of world capitalism. “The Communist Party of the United States must be aimed to be able to meet that historic moment and to head the forth- coring class combats. Preparation is nec- essary for this, comrades, a preparation of all forces. For this the American party must be improved and cleansed.’’ And so the Communists of the United States of America, on the word of this man so far away in the ancient Kremlin fortress in Moscow, Russia, suffered a paroxysm of disgraces, expulsions and reorganizations. Two factions in the United States branch of the Communist organization had gone to Moscow. William Z. Foster headed the mi- nority, as Stalin’s man. Jay Lovestone had control of the extreme majority which had warned Stalin against attempting revolution in the United States of America. So violent was the conflict that followed Stalin not only broke Lovestone but also he rejected his own man, Foster, who had em- barrassed him by not knocking off Lovestone ahead of the visible, public, screeching row in Moscow. And so it was that he chose an obscure hay-shaker from Kansas to be the general secretary and titular big wheel of commu- nism in the United States of America. The said hay-shaker was one Earl Browder, of the most native American background and appearance. In the years to follow, Browder was to become a barometer of unmatched accuracy for measuring Stalin’s pressure on the United States of America, its President and its Government. We will hear much more of him. Whoever has had the patience to follow this winding and wayward narrative thus far may remember that I began by saying that I stumbled upon communism in January of 1930 as a young reporter freshly arrived in New York City. As I made my acquaintance with the Com- munists, they were just launching what they confidently believed would be the last climac- tic assault on the United States of America, with Browder in charge, They actually believed a revolution was at hand. Thus it was that in the period 1930-33 the Communists precipitated spectacles such as the bonus march on Washington. That hor- ror, which so shocked the people of the United States, has long since been exposed for what it was—a sham inspired and guided by Stalin. The evidence and the proof have accumu- lated in great detail in congressional hearings and the disclosures of apostate Communists unveiling facts behind the facts of the day. The bonus march on Washington is sym-~ bolic of that whole desperate moment in our national history, but it is just one of the many such Communist manufactories de- signed to make a bad thing all the more hideous and menacing. Whispering campaigns started runs on banks. The President of the United States
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD was assaulted in secret and openly, with libels and slanders unmatched before or since. Franklin D. Roosevelt won the Presidential campaign of 1932 and early the next year went to Miami, Fla., for the usual preinaugural rest. There, on the night of February 15, 1988, as he appeared in Biscayne Park, one Joseph Zangara pulled a pistol. A woman snatched at Zangara’s arm as he opened fire. Five people were hit by his fusillade, among them Anton Cermak, mayor of Chicago. Zangara, on arrest, claimed that he was an anarchist—a cover that Communist assas- sins had been using for many years. How many people know that in Yugoslavia, where the apostate Tito now holds his shaky throne, there was at that time a Communist college for essassins—men specially trained for Zangara’s kind of work? Biggest Story EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KATHARINE ST. GEORGE OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 31, 1950 Mrs. ST. GEORGE. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the Appendix of the REcorp, I include the thirty-seventh article by Mr. Frank C. Waldrop on the infiltration of communism in our country: Biaarst SToRY (By Frank C. Waldrop) Stalin’s ignorance and ineptitude at gov- ernment, as distinguished from malicious destructiveness, was never hetter demon- strated than in the years 1930-39. Of malicious destructiveness and intrigue we all know from the record that he is a master. And of his three greatest accom- plishments in that field, all three were made at the expense of the American people. One. He obtained diplomatic recognition from Mr. Roosevelt for his regime in 1933 just as it was on the verge of exploding. Two. After the United States had been thoroughly trapped in European affairs by Mr. Roosevelt with Communist help, Stalin pulled the trigger for war in 1939 by signing a@ peace pact with Hitler. Three. In 1945 at Yalta, he got Roosevelt’s consent to his conquests, now so loudly de= nounced by the very factions in this country that were with him at the time in deed and in spirit. It is necessary to remember these triumphs of Stalin’s particular art, which is destruc- tiveness, to see all the better his utter in- competency as a true public servant. Remembering them, too, helps to appre- ciate the significance of his declaration in 1929 that revolution was at hand in America and the capitalistic world. This was before the market crash. And how did things go in Russia as the well-advertised storms crashed in the United States of America? ‘You don’t hear so much about that in all the Communist-tainted literature of our time, but let’s just review a few notable events. Thereby we can better understand just why Stalin, by 1933, was eager to change the sub=- ject from revolution to procurement, with desperate urgency, of that point 1. Stalin, you may recall, took charge of Rus- sia in 1924 when the organizer of the first Soviet state, Lenin, went dead, much to the surprise of the choirs of Communist propa-~ gandists all over the world who had made him up to be not only Superman but also In- destructo. He had some trouble getting started, but on October 1, 1928, Stalin proclaimed to the world the first of the big international cam- paigns that were by example to lead the world to fear, respect, and follow commu- nism on the economic front. - On that date he announced the great Sta- lin 5-year plan, under which the Soviet Union was to industrialize and demonstrate the superiority of scientific socialism as con- trasted with decadent capitalism. The slogan of the day was “overtake and surpass America.” And to goose the muz- hiks into stepping lively, there was released a general wave of shootings for “inefficiency,” coupled also with carefully tailored stories about the wonderful factories in America. Indeed, Henry Ford became a sort of minor folk-hero for a brief spell and Americans generally were popularized as a clever set of monkeys but with no sense about govern- ment. But that hardly lasted through the first frest. Americans, British, and German tech- nicians and engineers who had been brought in found the situation impossible. It is not correct, incidentally, to suggest that all Russians historically have been either flea-ridden farmers or crazy, cruel aristocrats with a few revolutionists on both sides. As a matter of fact, in the ninteenth cen- tury Russia startled the world with the speed and vision of her progress in both science and industry. You may laugh at the stories Moscow has been broadcasting about Russian inventions of everything from the wheel to the atom, but it’s not all bunk. If they had sense enough to put their propaganda on a basis of historical fact, in- stead of exaggerating in such a way as to make it seem they did it all alone and only last week by order of Stalin, they would have a case hard to refute. Russia, when the works blew up in war and self-destruction, was actually on the way to an able, effective industry. So when Stalin announced his great 5-year plan in 1928, he actually had a genuine his- torical foundation on which to base it. True, most of the people who knew how to do the work were all dead and gone, And the plant itself was far out of date. What little development there had been was a by-product of another of the many curious and still unclarified side deals that Germany and Russia have toyed with through the years. At the end of the 1914-18 war, Lenin im- ported German generals to show him some trade secrets on running military machinery. I will have some stories on the Red army, further along, that will show why he sent for the Germans and some consequences thereof. He also imported German engineers at the same time, and it was they who had keps the Russian industrial machinery patched to- gether until the time of the great 5-year plan. James A. Farley—A Popular Choice EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EUGENE J. KEOGH OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 31, 1950 Mr. KEOGH. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- orD, I include the following editorials from the Freeman’s Journal, Coopers- town, N. Y., April 5, 1950, the Walton A4063 Reporter, Walton, N. Y., April 14, 1950, and the Catskill Daily Mail of April 15, 1930: [From the Catskill (N. Y.) Daily Mail of April 15, 1950] JIM FarRLey CovLp Win Greene County friends of James A. Farley, and their number is legion, are viewing with interest the spontaneous gubernatorial bcom which has been developing in his behalf the past few weeks. ‘Genial Jim” has been at- tending about the same number of dinners and other public events as in the past, but the welcome he has been getting everywhere around the State has just about amounted to an ovation. However, when he’s ques- tioned on his attitude toward making the race for the Sitate’s highest office, he’s mum as the proverbial clam, Both these facts are cited to substantiate the fact that the Farley boom is completely spontaneous, that Jim, the master politician, has done nothing whatsoever to inspire it. As a matter of fact, from where we sit, it seems pretty obvious that the former Post- master General will not lift a finger in his own behalf unless or until the public de- mand has reached such proportions that his nomination without opposition is assured. Farley is a fighter, but he is also a great believer in party harmony. He remembers that Thomas E. Dewey was first swept into the executive mansion at Albany after the Democratic Party split at Brooklyn over the candidacy of John J. Bennett, Jr. He knows, too, that as a leader in the fight for Bennett, he may risk the opposition of elements which opposed him at that time. It is our belief that those old wounds have healed, but it is also quite apparent to those who know him, that Jim Farley will require tangible proof before throwing his hat in the ring. On the basis of the clamor in many up- state and Long Island counties for Farley’s nomination, there is good reason to believe that he could defeat any possible combina- tion of opponents at the party’s State con- vention next summer. However, that is not enough. Without the support of all factions within the party, Farley won’t be willing to make the race. Nevertheless, we are thoroughly convinced that citizens throughout the State are wait- ing for the Democratic Party to offer James A. Farley for the governorship. There are many reasons. First of all, he is a good businessman. He has proved that in a number of very im- portant jobs, and we are confident that if he is sent to Albany, he would cut red tape, he would spend and save wisely and he would apply the rules of simple arithmetic in a manner the public could understand. In the second place, he wouldn’t evade issues, either as a candidate or as Governor. He would face every problem speedily and without pussyfooting, and once he had taken a position, there he would stand. Finally, Jim Farley is a good politician. He once wrote that “when political organi- zations begin thinking about jobs and noth~ ing else, when they forget that the public pusiness should come first, they have begun their own death chant without realizing it. * * ™* The protest of the public is the pest way to discipline an organization against that sort of thing.” That provides a pretty accurate idea of the kind of administration Jim Farley would offer. So the State political picture boils down as follows: Rank-and-file voters want Farley for gov- ernor. The majority of party leaders want him, too. Some of his old adversaries would like to head him off at the convention. However, these same leaders want to win, and a casual
A4064 perusal of the others who are being men- tioned as possibilities should convince them nomination of Jim Farley offers the surest road to victory. {From the Walton (N. Y.) Reporter of April 14, 1950] A PopuLar CHOICE Too cften voters are faced with the choice of making a selection between two mediocre candiaates. In such cases the voter will usually vote his party ticket without enthu- siasm. He feels that his political leaders have been unwise in making the choice of candidates but that there is little he can do about the situation. This is the year of a gubernatorial election. Gov. Thomas E. Dewey can have the Repub- lican nomination if he desires it as he con- trols the Republican political machine in New York State. Regardless of whom the Re- publicans nominate the Democratic Party should seek to place in nomination a candi- date who has outstanding qualifications— a man for whom all independent voters will feel no hesitation in voting. Such a man is James A. Farley. Before Mr. Farley can go before the voters he must receive the nomination from the State Democratic convention. That conven- tion has the opportunity to pave the way to certain victory at the polls. With Mr. Farley as a candidate there will be few voters who will have any doubt that Mr. Farley is a man fitted in every way, to serve them as chief executive of New York State. [From the Freeman’s Journal, Cooperstown, N. Y., of April 5, 1950] James A, FARLEY For GOVERNOR On November 7 the people of the State of New York will go to the polls to name a new Governor, and the Freeman’s Journal would like to go on record at this time in support of one of the great men of our time for this highly important office—James A. Farley. Before Mr. Farley can go-before the voters in November, it will be necessary for him to receive the nomination of his party at the State convention this summer. Opportunity is spreading its wings in favor of the Demo- crats in the State at this time, and their nomination of Mr. Farley will pave the way to certain victory in the fall. The Freeman’s Journal respectfully urges without any qualification or reservation the nomination of Mr. Farley, a man fitted in every way to serve New York State as its chief executive. Memorial Day and Citizenship EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. NEIL J. LINEHAN OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, May 29, 1950 Mr. LINEHAN. Mr. Speaker, the Con- gress and the President have asked that this day, long sacred to the memory of departed heroes, be observed with thoughts and prayers for peace. Peace is the great question of our time. We realize now as never before that the mak- ing of peace, on which the Saviour be- stowed his benediction, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God,” is not a simple thing. Peace is something that has to be made; it is not something into which the world It is not a negative thing, the mere absence of war; it calls for positive actions and attitudes. It is not a merely sentimental thing, accomplished by good intentions and pious resolutions. It is not a one-sided thing; it takes two to make a quarrel, they used to say; now we know that it also takes two to make a peace; peace cannot be achieved by any unilateral virtue or self-restraint. Most of all, it is clear as never before that peace may be a very costly thing— not so dramatically costly as war, per- haps, but nevertheless far from cheap. The scene which surrounds us today is evidence of that cost. Here lie buried those whose lives have been given for their country in the past. Who can estimate the worth of these lives? What these young men might have meant to the world if they had lived? What their Joss means in the unrecorded sorrow of parents and wives and sweethearts and children? The great treasure of any country is not its steel mills or its rolling prairies or its public buildings, but its young people. And here we commemo- rate citizens whose lives, for the most part, were sacrificed in early manhood before the story they could have told could be unrolled, or their contribution made to the family or the Nation which gave them birth. All too readily, because these dead cannot speak to us, we accept the fruit of their sacrifice in an unthinking way. We have our existence here in this coun- try. We have our freedoms. We can proceed to worship according to con- science, to speak according to our belief, to advance with life and liberty intact on our pursuit of happiness. We exer- cise these privileges every day of our lives. But that we have them is due to the fact that in the past these Amer- icans have been willing to lay down their lives for us. Privilege is always preceded by sacrifice. Theirs has been the sacrifice. Ours now are the priv- ileges. We do right when we honor them, with our flowers, our songs, our parades, with everything which can be provided, at this most beautiful season of the year, to re- mind ourselves of our indebtedness. We must also honor them by making peace. “The making of peace,” as someone has said, “‘is a less spectacular feat than the waging of war, but in terms of effort, determination, and skill it calls for a similar outgoing of resources.” When the United States taxes itself and strains its economy, as it is doing today, to build up the welfare of hun- dreds of millions of stricken and un- fortunate people in many parts of the world, so that they shall be better pre- pared in their minds to resist the insidi- ous propaganda of communism, this is a part of the making of peace. When the United States ties itself into a mu- tual-defense pact with the nations of western Europe, as it is doing today, in order to enable the free world to resist aggression that is planned against them, that is also a measure of peace. When we pour money and men into the build- ing up of our own Army and Navy and Air Force, so that we shall not again can drift. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD be caught flat-footed by an aggressor with ambitions for world domination, then again we are doing something to make peace. Aggressors of the type of Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin do not start warfare against the strong; it is the weak who invite their attention. These measures of which I speak are all great matters of public policy. They may seem, and sometimes are, a long way off from the ordinary citizen. But each of us has his own responsibility for the peace of the world, not only in supporting the Nation in these matters of high policy, but in the ordinary sur- roundings of civilian life. And here, too, we may take inspiration from those whom we commemorate here today. If these dead could speak to us, I am sure they would say something like this: “Be good citizens. Do not seek for your- selves, or your group, advantages which are at the same time disadvantages to the Nation or the world as a whole. Be ready, aS we were, if necessary to give the last full measure of devotion to the common weal.” Or, to quote the words of one of the greatest of all the American founding fathers, Thomas Jefferson: Love your neighbor as yourself and your country more than yourself, Be just. Be oe. Murmur not at the ways of Provi- ence. Such citizens are carrying on the tra- ditions of the noble dead and are cre-~ ative for the future of America and the peace of the world. That is a responsi- bility for all of us, which we will do well to recognize on this Memorial Day. Recommendations of the Hoover Report EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. RALPH W. GWINN OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, May 29, 1950 Mr. GWINN. Mr. Speaker, the crusade to throw the oppression of Government off the backs of the people is joined by the young people. They have exercised the ancient right of petition to Con- gress for relief. I present it herewith: We, the senior students of the citizenship class of Bronxville (N. Y.) High School, in the interest of our future life investment and in accordance with our heritage of the right to petition, do ask that some action be taken to carry out the recommendations of the Hoover report. We have made a study of the Hoover report and feel that the loose fiscal policy of the administration has created, and unless immediate corrective measures are taken will continue to create, the de- plorable waste of both money and efficiency in our Government. As our generation will inherit the iniquitous results of the extrava- gance now being allowed we feel compelled to petition action. NaTaLiIg MARSHALL, Parracta STORCK, Corninc S. PaRKER, Dave ATWATER (And 88 other members of the class).