APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Biggest Story EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KATHARINE ST. GEORGE OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mrs. ST. GEORGE. Mr. Speaker, un- der unanimous consent to extend my re- marks in the Appendix of the Recorp, I include the fortieth article by Mr, Frank Cc. Waldrop on the infiltration of com- munism in our country: Biacest Sroryr (By Frank C. Waldrop) Stalin’s inability to govern the people of Russia by any peaceable means has been the theme of this chapter now coming to a close. How many Americans have ever heard of Gen. Anton Vlasov? Today, Vlasov is a scattered handful of dust, lost and forgotten in the shattering upheavals of nations and nationalities that have been the pastime of this century. But he remains a symptom of the inde» structible worm in Stalin’s apple. When the Germans attacked Russia on June 21, 1941, Anton Vlasov was one of the Soviet Army’s most trusted high officers. He commanded the whole front just north and west of Moscow. Hitler’s first, whirling attack, as the public record shows, carried the Germans deep into the best of Russia. In fact, German scouts actually got close enough to Moscow to take a long-range photograph of it. And General Vlasov? All he did was lead an army of 100,000 Russians over to Hitler. Next, he set up at Brest-Litovsk in Poland where the first German-Soviet treaty was made by Trotsky a generation before, and be~ gan a radio campaign calling on the Russians to come one and all, over the line. Did they come? Well, Americans landing on the Normandy coast on D-day found thou- sands of Russian troops in the German de= fense lines. They were fugitives from Stalin who pre- ferred Hitler. And one of the great problems of resettling civilization in Europe at the wal’s end was that other thousands of Russians who had escaped the iron curtain in the confusion and refused to go home. Can you name any victorious nation in history—in all human history—that has had such a problem? That its citizens, in victory, would choose wandering the face o* the earth rather than to go home? Can you imagine two States of our Union having been so disloyal if we had been in- vaded in 1941, as to have their constitutions jerked as soon as Washington could get around to 1t? Well, that happened in Russia. In September 1941, the Volga-German Autonomous Republic of the U. 8. S. R. was dissolved. The “Germans” had been Russians for 200 years, but that wasn’t long enough for Stalin. In 1945, the Crimean Autonomous Repub- lic was also bounced. Too many citizens had gone over to Hitler during the oceupation. As a matter of fact, serious students of the German operation contend that Hitler could have won Russia altogether if he had not been so orthodox a Nazi. In the first fighting of 1941 the German military had the complete dissolution of the Soviet Empire well under way. The German Army’s target was the Rus- sian Army. And it had that army badly whipped and on the run. The civilians left in the wake of the fight were little worse off than before. In fact, a number of German mihtary governors were having excellent suc- cess with them—better than we have had in Germany, as a matter of fact, according to much evidence. But in 1942, the Nazis took over from the military governors and were so cruel and stupid, politically, they drove Russia back into Stalin’s arms. In a way, it was repayment to Stalin for having in 1933, driven Germany into Hitler’s. The revolution Stalin had predicted and undertaken for the world in 1929 had been a catastrophe for mankind, but no success for Stalin. The United States of America had eluded him, as he had been warned before the at- tempt by Communist delegations from this country. In Germany, the Communists from 1930 on collaborated with the then insufficient Nazis, to destroy the Weimar Republic that had already too impossible a task put upon it by the cruel and Draconian peace of Ver- sailles which the United States of America, to its eternal honor, had refused to sign in spite of Woodrow Wilson’s bullying. At Stalin’s order, the German Communists precipitated for the second time after 19128 a@ revolutionary crisis. The result was Hitler, so many Communists turned Nazi. They supplied a theory and doctrine for what otherwise was just a brutish rabble, and the spirit of their doctrine evolved straight from Marx and Lenin. Never forget Nazi was an abbreviation for National Socialist Party. . Finally, Stalin by 1933, had a revolution- ary crisis of his own at home. Factories were idle. Farmers were idle. People were in revolt all around him. Suddenly there came a call from over the sea from F. D. Roosevelt, Stalin was saved. Biggest Story EXTENSION OF REMARKS oO HON. KATHARINE ST. GEORGE OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mrs. ST. GEORGE. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the Appendix of the Recorp, I include the forty-first article by Mr. Frank C. Waldrop on the infiltration of communism in our country: Biccest STORY (By Frank C. Waldrop) The historical facts of Mr. Roosevelt’s se- eret maneuvering on Soviet recognition in 1933 are at last beginning to come out, and as mm all his other transactions with Stalin, the facts devastate his reputation. It is well known to all in Washington who have survived the Roosevelt dynasty that the late President was preoccupied with fixing records in such a way as to glorify bis impe- rial memory in the histories. He is the only President of the United States ever known to do such a thing as set up a museum and library of his career papers, carefully arranged and edited with the ut- most precaution to guide the thinking of those who would undertake to evaluate him in time to come. But for all his precautions Mr. Roosevelt failed to bar the gate against the record. EF happen to know of one eminent person- age who is even now writing his memioirs. This personage has an impeccable standing, both as to his character and as to his knowl- edge of the facts. He has decided to spill the beans under the provocation of the frauds and the distor- AAILT79 tions that attempt to make Roosevelt’s record on Russia something that it is not. His book is well on its way, and it is non- political, literal, and personal. But it is prejudiced. It is prejudiced toward the facts. It is going to make some liars’ faces red, for they cannot successfully challenge either the veracity or the personal experience and knowledge of the personage involved. Out of respect for him and his position, Iam going to cut off on this matter right here, except to say the gentleman in ques- tion has never run for public office in his life, but politicians all over the civilized world—and Stalin as well—know him and know that what he writes has the support of indisputable fact. His memoirs will be in print within the year, I am told. The manuscript is already going through a final revision. I mention this just by way of seeing how much hog’s caution is left between the ears of current so-called historians. These have given themselves up to propa- gandizing for the Roosevelt dynasty instead of reviewing objectively the things that have actually happened in the U.S. A. under that dynasty’s malign and disastrous abuse of power. If any such historian reads this, and can guess the identity of the personage now preparing those memoirs for publication, the said historian will not be the best of com- pany for his wife and family, hereafter. And so now we turn in this series to the final and worst chapter of all, the experiences of the American people brought down upon them like the plagues of ancient Egypt and the afflictions of Job, by Mr. Roosevelt’s granting of diplomatic status in this country to the Communist conspiracy against civili- zation. Mr. Roosevelt took office, you will remem- ber, at a time of wildest fear and panic. An assassin had almost shot him a short while before. The banking system of the Nation was utterly jammed and stalled. Very few people indeed even heard, let alone heeded, the obervations of careful and nonpolitical economists who said that the United States of America was already com- ing out of the depression of 1929. Whoever wants an insider’s account of Mr. Roosevelt’s temperament and behavior of those times will enjoy Raymond Moley’s After Seven Years. Mr. Moley was chief of staff of the original brain trust. But he didn’t last long, once his master was in office. His precise and devasting record of the go- ings-on of the times will tell you why. At any rate, whoever was around here then can remember that 1933 was a time of ex- citement and a feeling of impending change such as Washington had not known in the memory of the oldest inhabitant. As for me, I was as excited as anybody. At the start of this series I told how I met up with communism tn New York City in 1930 as a very young, undeveloped reporter. By the time I got to Washington, July 31, 1938, I was a little more experienced and I was beginning to realize that some influence utterly revolutionary really was taking hold in the United States of America. Something was making people restless and dissatisfied with the Constitution that laid down the rules of the American game. Some- thing was drilling into the heads of public officials that means could be excused if only they would profess ends that appealed to popular ideals, The only necessity was to disguise the means, when these were unpopular, and to label a governmental bludgeon as 2 feather. Then, perhaps, the people would not feel its blows. It was in this climate of Rooseveltean de- ceptiveness that Communists and their friends undertook their campaign to obtain Official United States diplomatic recognition for Stalin’s dictatorship.
A4180 Biggest Story EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KATHARINE ST. GEORGE OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mrs. ST. GEORGE. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the Appendix of the Recorp, I include the forty-second article by Mr. Frank C. Waldrop on the infiltration of communism in our country: Biecrst Story (By Frank C Waldrop) Would you say that William Green, head of the American Federation of Labor, has more sense than Justice Felix Frankfurter and a whole shoal of professors? Weill, get a copy of the Nea York Times for January 30, 1933 and look on page 4, There, you will find what Green had to say about United States recognition for the Soviet Union. Alongside it is the position of the pro- fessors. Frankfurters position was, as usual, given in secret, but in a few paragraphs I will tell about it. Here is what Green said: “It is the opinion of the officers of the American Federation of Labor that upon the question of recognition of Soviet Russia the issue is clearly drawn.” On the one side, he saic, were those who “seek to cherish and foster American princi- ples and to preserve American institutions.” On the other, “those who would risk all that our citizenship has gained through almost 200 years in experimentation in the principles of free government for a probable and uncertain increase in the sale of Ameri- can commodities.” He was talking about the propaganda campaign of the day, so reminiscent of the first Soviet campaign over here in 1918-20, that if the United States of America would only let down the bars it could do business with Stalin. Said Green: “This argument is not influencing and will not influence the judgment and opinion of American labor in favor of Russia, Rus- sian recognition or Sovietism.” Green held that until the Soviet Union had abandoned its program of world revolu- tion, its operations ‘in the United States of America, and had adopted the principles laid down by Charles Evans Hughes when he was Secretary of State, the American Federa- tion of Labor would fight recognition in every way. Now that was statesmanship on the part of old Bill Green, I submit. Yet the Soviet was recognized, and the labor movement in the United States of America was riddled and racketeered and used by communism in a generation-long operation that is not fin- ished even yet. But even, so, the record as above empha- sizes once more, as I have tried to show from the beginning of this series, that com- munism in the United States of America is not a labor movement. It is a drive for power by maladjusted intellectuals, idle rich who cannot find useful work to do, and by neurotics of all varieties. For instance, right on the same page with Green’s declaration in that same New York Times you will find a story headed: “Two hundred and sixty eight colleges join in plea for Soviet. Hight hundred fac- ulty presidents and faculty members urge Roosevelt to press recognition. Status held peace peril. Petition started by Feliowship of Recognition also holds curb on Japan is prevented.” Among the signers of the petition were such famous educators as Williaia A. Neilson, Robert Morss Lovett, Sidney B. Fay, Man-~ ley O. Hudson, John Dewey, Nathaniel Pef- fer, George S. Counts, William H. Kirkpat~- rick, Marion E Park, William I. Hull, Ernest Minor Patterson, Thomas Woody, Benjamin H. Williams, Alva W. Taylor, John R. Com-~- mons, Alex. Meiklejohn and E. A. Ross. Prof. Remhold Neibuhr was chairman of the “Fellowship of Recognition,” but he wasn’t the real brains. As usual, the Com- munists had a front man and a hidden manager. I have the story of the fellowship from the man who organized it, J. B. Matthews. Matthews eventually became director of research for the House Cammittee on Un- American Activities and has given his life ever since to showing Americans what com- munism really means. Matthews tells me: “I worked for many months as execu- tive secretary of the Fellowship of Recog- nition on this petition for the recognition of Soviet Russia. “Among those whom I personally solicited was Prof. Felix Frankfurter. He seat word back that we should kill the campaign and the press releasé, inasmuch as he had the President-elect in his vest pocket and could guarantee recognition.” Among those who helped him get signa- tures, said Matthews, was Margaret Lamont, wife of Corliss Lamont, the son of Thomas Lamont, member of the House of Morgan and one of America’s most famous bankers. And there you have a comparison he- tween the American Federation of Labor the American intellectuals and Mr. Felix Frankfurter, as the stage was being set in 1933 for F. D. Roosevelt to turn the Commu- nists loose on the United States of America as never before. Reorganization Plans EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THOMAS J. LANE OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mr. LANE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I wish to include the following article from the Daily Evening Item, Lynn, Mass., June 1, 1950: STREAMLINING GOVERNMENT Vital streamlining of the Federal Govern- ment still has a long road to travel. Thanks to a late spurt in Congress, we made more progress this year than it seemed we would. But that doesn’t obscure the fact we should have done a lot better. In one big batch President Truman sub- mitted 21 reorganization plans, most based fairly closely on the recommendations of the able Hoover Commission which studied the problem exhaustively. The Senate killed 5 and the other 16 are now in effect. Offhand that score looks good, but the results need to be analyzed a little. Former President Herbert Hoover, who headed the Commission, says only 1 of the 21 plans calls for major surgery on a Government depart- ment, That’s the one putting the Maritime Commission into the Commerce Department. The Hoover group recommended 19 major administrative shifts. Three others, besides the Commerce Department change, have al- ready been approved. They include reor- ganization of the State Department and uni- fication of the armed services. But that 6till leaves 14 to be acted on, - APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Not until these are instituted can the Gov- ernment begin to realize the efficiencies and economies promised from this great stream-~ lining program. Saving of perhaps $3,000,- 000,060 annually depend on carrying the plan to anmmation «’ does not appear to be worried because some of Mr. Truman’s proposals vary from the Commission’s. ‘The President has the right and duty to present his own ideas in these matters,” he says. What does trouble Mr. Hoover is the kind of opposition some plans have aroused. Proposals for realining the Treasury, the Agriculture Department, the Interstate Com- merce Commission, and the Federal Com. munications Commission were killed. Mr. Hoover 1s said to feel pressure groups worked hard against reforms that would affect them, while sroutirg loudly for all the others. Towend itl of these the Senate and House should take a constructive, statesmanlike at- titude. If they do not, congressional spout- ing about Federal waste and inefficiency will have an empty sound for a long time to come. “Eh, Tr Our Economic Advisers EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THOMAS A. JENKINS OF OHIO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mr, JENKINS. Mr. Speaker, there is no question that the confusion in Wash- ington extends to every department of the Government. Likewise, there is no question that the most serious confusion manifests itself in the White House. The president has surrounded himself with economic advisers who are noted for their advocacy o1 wild, radical theories. Leon Keyserling is uow the President’s chief economic adviser but his theories are not consonant with the theories that made America great. I see that the President, no doubt upon the advice of Keyserling, has added to his Council of Economic Advisers one Roy Blough who was formerly connected with the Treasury Department in the days of Secretary Morgenthau and Ran- dolph Paul. In those days, as I remem- ber, Roy Elough and Randolph Paul were the principal advocates of placing a tax on spending. They evidently felt that with the income tax taking practically all the money that many people had left after keeping their families that the Government should then proceed im- mediately to tax every item that the citi- zen spent. Think of that; taxing spend- ing with a tax on earnings and a tax .n spending how far are we from socialism? Mr. Speaker, I repeat, the White House surely is confused. The editor of the Athens Messenger, which is published in the district which I have the honor to represent, recently published an editorial in line with what I have said. The editorial is as follows: DANGEROUS ADVISERS There is a group of advisers to President Truman called the Keyserling group, none of whom have ever had any successful business experience, but whom the President considers experts on economics. It is probably the most important radical group of people steer- ing this country further and further into a
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD chaotic condition because their belief is that printing-press money and government sub- sidy is the way to prosperity. The Keyserling group says that profits are too high (even while it counts on siphoning off the greater part of profits by taxation, wherewith to continue the Government’s wild spending) so the profits must be de- creased by increasing the expense of doing business. The group says that wages should be raised, to decrease profits; that prices should be fur- ther raised, but not enough to cover in- creased costs. They claim that Government deficit is a good thing—that it is O. K. to spend more than is received. The Keyser- lings plan to so conduct the Government that these ideas will be realized, so that more inflationary conditions will exist, bringing greater trouble to readjustment, which is inevitable. They justify this crazy reasoning with their “purchasing power theory” which says that the Government will pump money, one way or another, into the hands of the great- est number of people, who, of course, will spend it for goods and services. This stimu- lates business, everything expands auto- matically, and everybody thinks it is just dandy, and votes for more of the same stuff. The theory is just like the rat-and-cat farm, where rats were to be raised to feed the cats, whose carcasses (after skinning) were fed back to the rats, the product of the project being cat skins, Supposed to economics in perpetual motion, if anyone asked about the market demand for cat skins, the whole thing showed up for the joke it was. One high Government official feels, how- ever, that such phony economics as the Key- serlings feed to the President all the time is not reasonable. He holds, on the other hand, that the faults of our Government come from the failings of the Members of the House of Representatives and the Senate, who, in too many cases are unwilling to represent the people correctly because they think more of holding onto their jobs and playing smart politics than they do of the country’s welfare. He advocates a replace- ment-of-Congressmen campaign, to put new life and guts into the national legislature. That, of itself, would be a good idea; that is, get enough capable men to run for congressional seats opening throughout the Nation, to put a new complexion in Congress. But, how long would it be before the new Congress would follow dangerous radicals like the Keyserlings, too? Soil Conservation on Indian Lands REMARKS . OF HON. BEN F. JENSEN OF IOWA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mr. JENSEN. Mr. Speaker, as all my colleagues know, I have long advocated proper and effective soil conservation for America. I have also constantly insisted that the Indian service practice more soil conservation on the Indian lands of our country, especially on such as the Navajo Reservation. I have in my hand a letter from a soil conservationist, Mr. Flory, who handles soil and moisture conservation for the Indian service. It proves conclusively that the most effective thing this Con- gress can do for our Indians in order for them to go forward and have a higher standard of living is to see to it that their soil is conserved and that it is made more fertile. Mr. Speaker, the Indian problem will confront us so long as they are left to eke out a bare existence between the weeds and rocks and dry dust, that is a certainty. The letter referred to follows: BurREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS, BRANCH OF Sol CONSERVATION, May 3, 1950. To: All Soil and Moisture Conservation em- Ployees, Subject: Zeal and fire that will not falter or tire. I cannot refrain from passing on to you the lift I got on my last field trip from an Indian farmer on a brushy, rocky, steep, small mountain farm. This man was about 50 years old. His family had been raised and had left for homes of their own. During all this period he had struggled with the slopes, the rock, and the brush in producing meager crops for a precarious living. His pastures were weedy, brushy, and of low-carrying ca- pacity; his buildings and fences were dilapi- dated; and then, within the past 2 years, something happened. He was sparked by the zeal and enthusiasm of an understanding soil conservationist who has his hands in the earth. This Indian’s eyes had a light in them that had never been there even as a youth because he was making a tired old farm live. He and the farm were being vital- ized together. There is no doubt that the remaining years of his life will be richer and more exciting than all the past. He now knows what to do. He has a plan—a farm plan—made for him and his farm. He is confident of the response of the good earth. Evidence of his enthusiasm was at every turn. He had cleaned the brush and rock off his land; he had limed and fertilized it according to its needs; he was using each field according to its proper use. He had planted the best pasture mixture known. He was proud as Punch with the rich mixture of Kentucky 31 grass and ladino clover that had replaced the broom sedge, brush, and poverty grass on his steep hills. His eyes glowed with pride as he pointed out his con- tented fat cattle and hogs enjoying this luxurious repast. He had planted the best improved varieties of hybrid corn. He had repaired his fences and buildings. He was modernizing his home and was anxiously awaiting the coming of electricity this summer. This man is on his way. He is not going to need much help any more, but what a shame that he was frustrated in his farming efforts during the most productive years of his life. What of the great numbers of young Indian men to whom land is available, who are indisposed, or apathetic toward us- ing their land? Most of them don’t know what they could do or how to doit. All they need is a sparking. Many of our SMC boys are giving that essential spark. Are you? Do you look over your work area and evaluate yourself in terms of people you have helped and inspired to a better way of life by getting them to work in harmony with nature, rather than against all her laws? It’s like striking a spark from flint to tinder. Start the fire and it will go on and on, opening up con- stantly new excitements, new curiosities, and new stimuli for the rest of an existence. Curiously and happily, each such experience will carry you along also to greater heights of satisfaction in knowing that you had a small part in making a life more complete and in conserving and improving another bit of land for posterity. The Indian lives closer to nature, under- stands more of her moods, and tries to accom-« modate his life and actions to her moods to a much greater extent than most other people. Great numbers go miles and miles to listen A4181 to Indian chants, watch the dances, and yet understand practically nothing of what the Indian is trying to portray. Few realize that what he seeks in these chants and dances is to become a part of nature, rather than view it as something apart like most of the whites do. His voice lifts to a shrill falsetto, then descending quickly to the deepest notes, repeated over and over to the timing of drums, tunes in with the sounds of the wind; the rising and falling sounds of water rush- ing downstream, the music of the stars. Na- ture’s voice speaks to him and he joins his voice with it. Do we know the fundamental, scientific facts of plant and animal nutrition, plant physiology, and plant ecology? Are we close enough to the land ourselves, and are we en- dowed with the intelligence, human under- standing, zeal, and fire to make our knowl- edge an effective tool in the hards of the tiller of the soil, to use his land in harmony with nature? A gratifying percent of SMC workers have the above attributes. I am inspired by their enthusiasm and their works on every field trip. This is to give them approbation and encouragement, There are, however, others who have missed the greatest satisfaction and remuneration a conservation position. with Indians offers, because they have not caught this spark, and, consequently, cannot pass it on or warm themselves in its kindled warmth. They see obstacles instead of goals or heights to attain, but strangely, all the boys with the spark had the same obstacles but took them in their stride. The stumbling block to the diffident is a stepping stone for those with the zeal and fire that does not falter or tire. Remember, we are not succeeding in con- servation until a folk knowledge, a behavior, or cultural pattern of conservation, is firmly fixed. When the Indians in your area prac- tice conservation from habit, then they have attained full stature as farmers and citizens. Evan L, FLory, Chief, Branch of Soil Conservation, The SPEAKER. The time of the gen- tleman from Iowa has expired. ’ Lynn, Mass. EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THOMAS J. LANE OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mr. LANE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I wish to include ‘the following article which is the thirty- third of a series of articles appearing in the Daily Evening Item, Lynn, Mass., June 1, 1950, on mayors who have served the city of Lynn, Mass., during the 100 years since Lynn became a city in 1850. The series is being written by Lawrence J. Quirk, whose grandfather, the late William P. Connery, Sr., was one of Lynn’s most colorful mayors 40 years ago. Mr. Quirk is an honor graduate of Suffolk University and has had ex- tensive experience as a newspaper and free-lance writer: Mayors or Lynn, 1850-1950 (By Lawrence J. Quirk) William P. Connery, thirty-third mayor of Lynn and the first to serve under the com- mission form of government, was one of the most beloved and respected men in the city. Known as the sage of Connery’s Corner,
A4182 he was @ man who was not afraid to fight all the way, whatever the personal sacrifice, for the principles he held dear. He willingly passed up numerous opportunities to make a fortune because he would not yield an inch to expediency. A true and sincere crusader for total ab- stinence, he was for years a one-man mem- bership committee for the famous old Father Mathew organization and brought hundreds of men into the society’s Summer Street quarters to take the pledge. He was one of the foremost original members of the Anti- Saloon League organized by the Rev. Ralph Ward, now a Methodist bishop, of which he was treasurer. Mr. Connery fought for progressive civic reforms and improvements for many years, making pithy pronouncements on all im- portant questions of the day from his coal office at Connery’s Corner, Pleasant and Wheeler Streets, where men of all classes and creeds were wont to congregate. His friends often called him too charitable for his own good. He gave unstintingly. Many a poor family found coal in its cellar with- out ever receiving a bill, and he thought nothing of taking off his rubbers or over~ coat and handing them to a man in need. A picturesque and colorful personality, he was noted for his philosophical wit and en- livened many 2 gathering with songs and dances from the extensive repertoire he had puilt up during his early minstrel touring days as Billy Barlow. As a speaker he was sincere, forceful, and persuasive, taking his audience straight to the heart of the matter ‘under discussion with a meaty, pertinent statement of the facts as he saw them. Elected alderman in 1901, at a special elec- tion to fill the vacancy caused by the death of Alderman Charles C. Fry, he immediately projected himself into the Walden Pond Dam controversy then raging. His fighting speeches resulted in a subsequent investiga- tion of the contracting methods employed in that project. He loved the political game, its stimulation, its variety and challenge, and he always counseled his sons, William P. Connery, Jr., and Lawrence J. Connery, who Jater represented the Seventh District in Congress from 1923 to 1941, to “fight hard, but fight clean, and be honest at all costs.” Mr. Connery was personally responsible for launching the political career of many a noted city, State, and national figure, and if he thought a young fellow had the right stuff in him, he would put him through his paces in the best Connery’s Corner style. He was known in Lynn as “The Father of Grade Crossing Abolishment,” talked about the question constantly and kept it before the public, and while alderman battled at every turn for its serious consideration. During his term as mayor, the overhead passes of the Boston and Maine Railroad were finally completed, though he had argued for a subterranean tunnel in the Central Square area as a better solution to the problem. He did, however, win out on the matter of keep- ing Silsbee Street open, and forced the build- ing of an underpass to maintain the con- tinuity of that thoroughfare, Under the commission form of government, which went into effect at the start of Mr. Connery’s term, in 1911, the mayor served also as Commissioner of Public Safety, along with four other commissicners, elected re- spectiveiy for finance, public property, streets and highways, and water and water works. Mr. Connery was an eminently constructive and forward-locking mayor, strictly honest in all his dealings, and kept a firm hand on all city departments, notably the police, which he turned into an outstanding law enforcement agency which cut to a mini- mum ali vice and crime in Lynn. Matoreycles were first purchased at this time for police use, and Mayor Connery au- thorized the motorization of the fire depart- ment, for which new equipment was pur- chased and a two-way engine house con- structed in the Highlands. A new Breed’s Pond dam was built, increasing the water storage to 1,700,000,000 gallons, and several new pumping stations were constructed. The school system was regraded and a kindergarten subprimary class was estab~ lished. The Master Chase Schoolboys Asso- ciation presented a fountain to the Whiting School in memory of the famous schoolmas- ter, Henry L. Chase. Classical High School was dedicated in June 1911 and the Brickett School was completed the same year. Many three-to-six tenement blocks were erected at this time, and a number of new factories went up. The Lynn Tuberculosis Sanitarium was established late in 1911 as part of a program initiated by Mayor Connery’s administration for the protection of public health. A 60- cent reduction was effected in the tax rate, which resulted in the coming of new manu- facturing concerns to Lynn, and Mayor Con- nery’s administration urged further reduc- tions if they could be brought about without sacrificing important public services and im- provements, Other events of the Connery administra- tion were the founding of the new Catholic parish of St. Pius in East Lynn, under the pastorate of the Reverend John P. Gorham; two serious fires, one at the Brett Lumber Co. building and the other at East Lynn Odd Fellows Hall; the renovation of the interior of city hall; the installation of city motor- boats on the ponds for the protection of children swimming; and the erection of fire escapes on the exteriors of a number of school buildings. Mayor Connery was born in Lynn, on Rock- away Street, on October 15, 1855, and .at- tended the Lynn schools, after which he went on the stage, touring the country with enor- mous success as a singer, dancer, and monol- ogist under the name of Bully Barlow. He later returned to Lynn, and in 1879 started a coal business. In 1882 he was married to the former Mary T. Haven, and in 1887 moved from his Alley Street residence to the famous Connery’s Corner, Pleasant and Wheeler Streets. Afterward he constructed a home at 8 Wheeler Street while continuing to conduct business on the corner, Active since 1876 in all worth while politi- cal movements in Lynn, he was alderman in 1901, a Democratic Presidential delegate from Massachusetts in 1904, and in 1911 and 1912 mayor of Lynn. He retired from the coal business and moved from the corner in 1915. He made his home on New Ocean Street until his death on November 24, 1928. He was the father of six children, the youngest of whom is the mother of the author. Connery Play- ground, in the heart of the brickyard he loved so well, was dedicated to his memory. Constitutional Liberties Endangered by World Government Proposals EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ROBERT F. RICH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mr. RICH. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I ineludé the fol- lowing editorial, which was published in the Retired Officers Bulletin, June .15, 1950, volume 6, No. 3, entitled ‘‘Consti- tutional Liberties Endangered by World Government Proposals”: CONSTITUTIONAL LIBERTIES ENDANGERED BY Worzip GovERNMENT PROPOSALS “He who sacrifices his freedom for security, loses both.”—Benjamin Franklin, ‘APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Legislatures of 22 States have signified their approval of world government which has for its purpose to develop the United Wations into a world federation. Thirty- two States—only 10 more—can force Congress to call a convention with a view to amend- ing the Constitution. Such an amendment, if tatified by 36 States—only 14 more than those now approving—would not only change our Constitution, but our entire way of life. House: Concurrent Resolution No. 64, Highty-first Congress, reading: “Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of the Con- gress that it should be a fundamental ob- jective of the foieigr policy of the United States to support and strengthen the United Nations and to seek its development into a world federation open to all nations with de- fined and limited powers adequate to pre- serve peace and prevent aggression through the enactment, interpretation, and enforce- ment of world law,” was introduced June 7, 1949, and hearings thereon were held October 12-13, 1949. The testimony given is con- tained in a publication of 292 pages. That resolution was sponsored by a total of 101 Representatives from 33 States. Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 56, sim~ ilar in import to House Resolution No. 64, was introduced July 26, 1949. It was spon- sored by 19 Senators from 17 States. Hear- ings on the Senate resolution were begun, put not yet completed. Also most alarming is the existence of a committee composed of 11 professors who have drafted and promulgated a world con- stitution. Six of those drafters are from the University of Chicago, while the remainder are ohe each from Harvard, Cornell, Stanford, St. Johns, and Toronto. It was their draft of a world constitution which was introduced at the Senate hearings, and may threaten the Constitution of the United States. Proponents of world government claim it would eliminate chiefiy the threat of future war, yet they fail to show that wars cannot be prevented until the causes of war are re- moved. Certainly any program that could end major wars appears meritorious, put let us not be misled by plausible reasoning and alluring arguments. We must face political realities and consider what requirements world government would impose upon us, the leading free nation in the world today. They would: (1) Abolish our Federal Consti- tutional liberties; (2) destroy our national independence and sovereignty; and (3) prac- tically enslave over 2,250,000,000 people com- prising the world population. Moreover, a world constitution would supersede our Federal Constitution, eradicate the tripartite division of our Government, take away our constitutional system of checks and balances, obliterate the office of Presi- dent of the United States, and erase our Supreme Court. Were it not for the temporary success of Mein Kampf and the present socialistic plight of England, Russia and China, the beguiling scheme outlined in the world constitution, and which would subvert our Federal Consti- tution, would not be worth serious consid- eration. But past events require that we be alert. The one worlders have already been suc- cessful in influencing some of our State leg- islatures and numerous Members of the Con- gress. There is no way of determining how many more might succumb to their subtle efforts, and it is timely, therefore, to point out that this so-called world government plan would further work havoc with our Sen- ate and House of Representatives, and doom our Bill of Rights. A fow more of its serious consequences would admit of arbitrary searches and seiz- ures, unfair trials, excessive penalties, ex post facto laws, the curtailment of free speech, and liberty of the press. Just what would we do if called upon to answer for a capital or infamous crime with-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD out a presentment or indictment of a grand jury? Or be twice put in jeopardy for the same Offense? Or be compelled to be witness against ourselves? Or be deprived of property without due process of law; or have it taken for public use without just compensation? Under such a sad state of affairs, one might possibly be arrested and even denied a speedy public trial by an impartial jury; or even kept in ignorance of the nature and cause of the accusation. Perhaps the accused would not be confronted with witnesses against him, nor would he have means of obtaining wit- nesses in his favor. Excessive fines might be ruinous; bail prohibitive. Cruel punishments could be inflicted; even the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus might be suppressed. Through the liberty exercised properly by our free press, we have learned recently how those things are now being done in other countries. Thus they are not merely remote probabilities; they are cold facts which would confront us, if we chose that system of jus- tice—or, rather the lack of it. Under “World Government” mind you, there would be no Federal Constitution, as we know it, inter- preted by an independent judiciary. The individual freedoms upon which our country was founded would be lost. Gone also would be the freedom of thought which their cur- rent news inspires. The power to lay and collect taxes would pass from our Federal Congress to the “World Government.” Understandably, that would admit of unlimited taxation. The power to tax involves the power to destroy. The power certainly should not be vested in those who may wish to exploit our resources. Socialist planned economy as suggested by the world government constitution would wreck our present economic system. In that connection, they would have the power to administer a world bank, establish fiscal agencies, regulate the value of money, issue currency, and control credit. In short, prop- erty values in the United States would be imperiled, and the economic welfare of our people, especially those dependent on retired pay and annuities, impaired. ° Boundary lines, which are now within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to fix, would come within the powers of the world government. Possibly all existing State boundaries in our country would be elimi- nated or reoriented. In that event, the present distinction between State and Na- tional Government would be obliterated. Pride of State would be lost; for that matter «f what country would our people be citi- zens? . No religious guaranty 1s contained in the world constitution. Obviously, that omis- sion would not bother the Communists, but what would become of our Christian religion in the absence of our constitutional guaranty of religious freedom? Religious effort might be abolished. What, then, would become of our moral standards, and equally important, our spiritual values? Experience has proved that when people are once deprived of the freedom of religion, the loss of other freedoms follows fast. For when you destroy faith, you destroy the roots of human decency. Search for confirmation of that principle need extend no further than an examination of the effects atheism has wrought behind the iron curtain in Russia. What also would become of “We, the peo- ple of the United States’? The world con- stitution dictates that we become the ward and pupil of the world commonwealth. Are we, the self-sufficient people of these United Stites to be reduced to the condition of needing a guardian? An objective of world government is to fuse into a whole the many diverse groups of mankind, regardless of their peculiar cus- toms, characters, and religious or racial dif- ferences. Within 3 years after the founda- tion of world government it would pre- scribe one language to be spoken, one unit of currency to be used, a single system of , and defense. weights and measures, and a universal cal- endar. That visionary document is dis- creetly silent as to how a satisfactory uni- versal language would be evolved, how it would be taught to the various language groups, or whether it would be accepted. A further proposition is that world gov- ernment would supervise and approve all laws concerning the movements of people, both as regards emigration and immigration, including the issuance of passports. That admits of a probability and even the possi- bility, if you please, of our eventually hav- ing an oriental population in leu of one predominantly Aryan. World government would take over the regulation of commerce which the Congress now supervises. Thus it is not difficult to figure out what might become of the agen- cies of the Federal Government charged with the regulation of commerce—foreign and do- mestic. The question should be asked: How can a super-government expect to succeed in such matters when our present Federal Government finds its own reorganization so difficult to attain? With respect to representation under the plan for world government, the two and a quarter billion wozla populavicn would be entitled to 2,250 delegates in its federal convention. Our representation would be about 150 delegates. Present party conven- tions would, of course, be a thing of the past. A world-government convention would be divided into nine electoral colleges, with each nominating three candidates. From that total of 27, three men are selected, and the one receiving a two-thirds majority is elected president. The 9 electoral colleges select 27 men. Nine lists are presented to the convention by the nine colleges; thus making the member- ship of the world council of 99 men. In those men would be vested the power to en- act legislation for the world republic. The president and the world council would then proceed to establish: (1) a house of national- ities; (2) a senate; and (3) an institute of science, education, and culture. The world constitution places supreme ju- dicial power in a grand tribunal composed of 60 justices; the chief justice being the world president. Those justices are appoin- tive by the president for a tenure of 15 years. Five justices would be assigned to each of the five benches. What they designate as the supreme court consists of seven justices; one selected from each of the five benches, with the chief jus- tice (world president) as chairman, and the chairman of the world council as vice chairman. There are no constitutional pro- visions that the Justices be learned in law, no limitations as to age, or that they are ex- pected to follow precedent so that the law shall have any degree of certainty. A tribune of the people is provided to represent the minorities. He is selected by a secret vote in their federal convention, but is not a member of the council. His official tenure is for 3 years. Allegedly his main function is to defend the natural and civil rights of over 2,000,000,000 individuals. Naturally, there could easily arise linguistic difficulties, and there would certainly be varied interpretations of right among the many diverse groups. The world constitution provides for a chamber of guardians, with the president as chairman, and six councilmen elected for 8-year terms. That chamber would control all appropriations for the budget of peace The president, being protector of the peace, is deemed the proper leader of the chamber. The armed forces of the world republic would be under its direction. It would have a general staff and an institute of technology, which would determine the technological numerical level to be set as limits to the domestic militias of the single communities or states, or the unions thereof. Armed forces and the manufacture of arma- A4183 ments beyond the levels thus determined would be reserved to the world government. Officers holding professional or active rank in the armed forces of the federal republic, or in the domestic militia of any competent unit, would not be eligible as guardians. World government jurisdiction would ex- tend to the judgment and settlement of any conflicts among the competent units, with a prov ‘uitier of recourse to violence. Its au- i: t.y . suld extend even further to the or- ganization and stationing of the Federal Gov- ernment Armed Forces, as well as to the lim- itation and control of weapons and of do- mestic militias in the component units. It is at this point the claim is made that war can be outlawed and that peace must be universally enacted and enforced. Ironi- cally, that is to say that they shall have peace, even if they must make war to secure it—a self-contradictory policy that runs counter to the lessons of history. Thus, to world government would be given the power to prohibit the possession by any nation of armament and forces beyond an approved level, arbitrarily deemed to fit re- quirements. Just what would become of the existing military establishments of this or other countries is not set forth in their guiding manual. That same world govern- ment would likewise be empowered to pro- vide armed forces, as may be deemed neces- sary, for world law enforcement. Should our Government ever become in- volved in world government, our present Federal Constitution would, as stated previ- ously, be superseded, and our control over our own armed forces would be lost. Consequently, the power of our Federal Government to previde for the common de- fense of the Un tcd S.ules. to suinaent, ire crease, or reduce the strength ¢- “ forces, and to conscript, would terminate. Our Congress would have no authority to call forth the military to execute or enforce our laws, or to suppress insurrections or re- pel invasions. All national defense statutes now in force would no longer be operative. No difference would continue to exist be- tween the Regular Army and the militia, as the forces of world government would supersede both. The Congress of the United States, if one existed in those circumstances, would be powerless to provide for the organ- izing, arming, and disciplining of the militia, or even governing that portion employed in the service of our country. No longer would we have our own Presi- dent, with his status as Commander in Chief of our Armed Forces, whose authority it now is to direct the over-all movements and pro- cedures of those forces. Doubtiessly, the present constitutional right of our people to maintain and hear arms, within limits, would be infringed, and the consent of home owners would have no consideration when the world government might desire to quarter troops in private awellings. What would become of the glorious tradi- tions of our armed services? Would our fine service academies pass into history? Could there possibly exist any feeling of security, defensively or otherwise, for the people of our country? Obviously, we would have to abandon the constitutional and statutory right of self-defense once we be- came a part of world government. Pos- sibly we might be placed at the mercy of a powerfully armed international mercenary force responsible only to whatever clique of Asiatic or European politicians might be in power in the world government at a particular moment. Furthermore, the world government would have the sole right to organize and dis- pose its forces. To that extent our sons would become slave. of the world state. The atom and H bomb would be taken over with our gold. Remember, at least 101 Representatives and 19 Senators and 22 States have already dt
AAL84 approved of world federation, Which now has a world constitution to guide its activi- ties. Abraham Lincoln, whose great character is graphically portrayed in the front cover picture of this issue, once said: “You can fool all of the people some of the time, and you can fool some of the people all of the time, but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.” Let us not fool ourselves concerning the grave implications of this impractical dreamer’s paradise. There are serious dan- gers lurking behind every facet of its struc- ture that should be exposed. Experience has taught us to beware. We gained our rich national possessions and our way of life the hard way and, if need be, we will preserve them in that same determined manner. A significant remark once made by Grover Cleveland, which is as true today as when it was spoken, is that: “A government for the rer7"> rv-74 depend for its success on the «:.'.. ‘cs. the morality, the justice, and the interest of the people themselves.” Accordingly, it is for all those who sub- scribe to the views herein stated to do every- thing within their power to bring this im- portant matter to the attention of every person devoted to the preservation of our liberties, freedoms, culture, and institutions; lest, under the terms a world government would impose, they be taken from us, to be restored not again. (Eprror’s Nore.—The views of this asso- ciation expressed in the above article are based largely upon the researches and writ- ings of the distinguished American jurist, Dr. R. J. C. Dorsey, LL. B., LL. M., M. DIP., M.P.L., D.C. L.)} River Development in New England EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THOMAS J. LANE OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mr. LANE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I wish to include the following self-explanatory letter from the Honorable Paul A. Dever, Gov- ernor of the Commonwealth of Massa~ chusetts: THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT, STATE Hovsz, Boston, May 13, 1950. Hon. THomas J. Lang, House of Representatives, Congress of the United States, Washington, D.C. Drar CONGRESSMAN LaNE: I am writing to emphasize and underscore the statements contained in President Truman’s recent mes« sage to Congress related to river development in New England. The provision for New England river de- velopment, as contained in the rivers and herpors bill, falls far short of meeting the normal and justifiable legislative require- ments of New England for its river develop- ment. New England industries are starving for cheap power. New England agriculture has never had the benefit of Federal devel- opment of our streams for flood control, irri- gation, and soil conservation. The people of our cities have never had the advantage of river-basin development which takes into consideration protection from pollution, pro- motion of municipal and domestic water supply, ead the development of recreational facilities. The President showed clearly that the rivers and harbors bill does not spell out the development of our rivers on the basis ofeny ~~ " ,- +, utilization. legis- lation ~- sot -; into account these varied uses of our water resources is defective and “ridcwits Th. I :-c.: also put his finger on the lack in the rivers and harbors bill of any provision for ccoperation in the planning stage on the part of all agencies with a defi- nite interest im river-valley development. Ge further emphasized the exclusion of rep~ resentatives of the New England States, spe- cifically chosen for that purpose, from any survey and planning commission, and, finally, the President stressed the absurdity of plan- ning for the development of an area like New England and at the same time excluding the St. Lawrence River from consideration. I am thus reemphasizing what the Presi- dent said as a means of urging you to bend every effort to remedy the injustice done your constituents in the rivers and harbors bill by supporting legislative and admiunistrative measures to remedy this injustice. I have in mind particularly the bill introduced by Senator Green which would remedy all the defects I have above pointed out. With kind regards, I am, Sincerely, Pavut A. DEVER. Prosperity Under Democratic Administrations EXTENSION OF REMARES HON. BARRATT O’HARA CF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mr. O'HARA of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, as the summer comes on us and the work of the Eighty-first Congress is in sight of completion, it is heartening to all of us wio are supporting the administra- tion of President Harry S. Truman to know that all is well with the country, and that there is to be no break in the long years of prosperity which have at- tended the conduct of the National Gov- ernment by Democratic Presidents and under laws enacted by Democratic Con- gresses. The issue to be determined by the elec- tions in November is whether the Amer- ican people wish to hazard another de- pression such as was visited upon the country under the last Republican ad- ministration and which wiped out the fortunes, the savings, the jobs, and even the hopes of an entire generation. David Lawrence’s United States News and World Report in the issue just out prints the results of a long and careful research conducted for the primary pur- pose of advising American businessmen and inyesters of exactly the present state of the country economically, and what reasonably can be foreseen in the future. As to the future, the publication in its Newsgram From Washington, comment- ing on the fears of some bUsinessmen of a bust after the pattern of Repub- lican years, says that the businessman “who resists the idea of change, keeps looking for a bust as bad as 1929-33, or worse, holds off, resists expansion and Sees trouble just around every corner” is .the “businessman who has missed the boat to date and may keep on missing it.’ APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The article from the United States News and World Report issue of June 9, 1950, follows: Onz BILLION JUMP IN DrvivENDS—StTocK-~ HOLDERS RreaP Ricues From 1950 Paorits Business profits point to a bonanza for stockholders this year. Dividend payments may top $9,500,000,000, a record. Company earnings are staying high. Less is being plowed back into the business. It means more for shareholders. There will not be extra checks for everybody. Prospects vary, industry by industry. Stockholders, watch- ing the profits curve, can see what to expect Stockholders this year are to get a record flow of cash in the form of dividend checks, Barnings are good and growing better. Boards of directors are in a position—and a mood—to pay out a slightly larger propor- tion of earnings, and to keep less 1n the busi- ness. The result is a prospective total of divi- dends that will reach, and probably exceed $9,500,C00,000 for 1950 That 1s $1,000,000,000 more than the previous record, set last year. Tt is more than $1,500,000,000 above the divi- dend total in the boom year, 1948. Flcw of dividend checks will reach its peak in the last quarter of this year. Year-end extra dividends probably will be iberal and numer- ous. Even after record payments to stockhold- ers, corporations as a group will improve their position substantially in 1950. They still will have left about $9,700,000,000 of their profits for use in their businesses. That total is well under the $13,200,000,000 that corporations retained after paying out divi- dends in 1948. Now, however, there are less- urgent programs of expansion—inventory building and new plant and equipment will require smaller sums. Profits totals this year probably will be the second largest in history. For all corpora- tions, the aggregate will come to about $32,000,000,000 before taxes and $19,200,000,~ 000 after taxes, on the basis of the present outlook. Total earnings, in fact, may well be more than that, and are very unlikely to be any Jess. Output of most products—and for most companies—is growing. Efficiency of industry, too, is improving. Wage-cost in= creases are not the factor they were in ear- lier postwar years. Company pension pro- grams granted in new union contracts are less costly than big wage raises would have been, Prices are holding firm or tending to rise, as demand for almost ail products holds high or rises. These are signs that point to healthier earnings. Net income, of course, is not going to be uniformly higher. Nor are stockholders’ checks. Not all corporations are going to be rolling in profits after expenses are paid and Government takes its cut. Some industries are not keeping up with the broad trend, and many companies within prosperous indus- tries are lagging behind. But for industry as a whole, big and little, the over-all pros- pect is excellent. Brightest prospect right now is the one that faces owners of shares in manufactur- ing firms. These companies, as a group, are counted on this year to report a rise of about 17 percent in earnings after taxes. With a larger proportion of those earnings to be paid out, stockholders should get about 30 percent more in cash dividends than they did in 1949. Profits of auto makers, immense last year, are to be even greater in 1950. Output is running at a spectacular rate of more than 9,000,000 cars and trucks a year. That per- formance could trim the fat from the car market again before many months pass. Then some of the smaller companies might not do so well. Yet earnings of auto makers for 1950, as a whole, are to be enormous. Companies that turn out building mate- rials and equipment for new homes are find-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ing another lush field. Their output and sales are being pushed up rapidly as the building boom rolls on at an astonishing rate, Lumber profits are to set new records for many companies. Lumber production is soaring, and prices are rising. Leading pro- ducers of building, heating, and plumbing equipment report first-quarter profits that averaged nearly 40 percent above those of a year earlier. Leaders in cement, stone, and glass showed gains averaging nearly 25 per- cent. Many companies in other industries, too, are riding high on the builaing boom. Man- ufacturers of electrical equipment, radios and television sets are examples. Television sales—and profits—are counted on to boom for many months. Profits that mean more cash for stock- holders are confidently expected to be greater in steel and oil, too. Prices of both, par- ticularly oil, have been rising. Steel mills now are expected to operate at capacity, or above, during most of 1950. Oil-company sales are being boosted by purchases of new autos, and by gas purchases of vacation drivers. , Stockholders are to watch the profit curve tise appreciably in still other industries. Outlook is good for companies that make paper and for those that fabricate rayon and rubber. Profit declines that occurred for some in- dustries in the first quarter are to be re- versed during the rest of 1950. That is the prospect for companies producing nonfer- rous metals, machinery for industry, and equipment for railroads. Sales of these prod- ucts are to rise as industry decides to spend more heavily in the growing 1950 boom. Aircraft companies, meanwhile, are to be-~ come more active and prosperous on Gov- ernment contracts. Profits also are éxpected to improve substantially for chemicals, paints, and similar products. What these brighter prospects can mean to individuals who own stock, at a time when corporations can be more generous with their earnings, is shown by dividend trends already apparent. Cash dividends going to stoc:.nolders al- ready are in a period of rapid growth. For individuals who own shares in some 100 large producers of nondurable goods, checks re- ceived in the first quarter of 1950 were up by an average of 14 percent from the level of a year earlier. In the same period, the rise in profits of those firms was negligible. Stockholders of big oil companies got 35 percent more in dividends, while profits of their companies averaged 25 percent less than they had a year earlier. Persons who own stock in companies mak- ing durable goods find the same trend. Shareholders of a group of the major ma- chinery producers, for example, were paid 50 percent more in dividends in the first quar- ter of this year, while the rise in their firms’ profits averaged less than 10 percent, Other industries are likely to show more moderate gains in profits and dividends. Companies that sell the products of in- dustry, at both wholesale and retail levels, probably will have an average rise of about 10 percent in profits this year. Stockholders, on the average, may get a dividend rise of no ‘more than 5 percent. Smaller gains in profits are being predicted for food and drug stores, and for restau- rants. Clothing and general-merchandise firms may fare no better this year than. last, but their earnings in the second half of 1950 are expected to be better than those of late 1949. Electric-power companies are enjoying real prosperity, and are likely to do still better.’ Demand for power keeps rising. So do rates. Telephone and and other com- munications companies, too, have a bright prospect. Shareholders in communications and utilities probably can count on. 15 to ‘an ever-increasing population. 20 percent more cash in 1950. A gain of about half that amount is due for investors in finance and service firms. Railroads—at least those in class I~—may end the year with a better showing than they have had last year. But the rest of the transportation industry, generally, is not ‘ou on for much improvement over 49, The situation is less favorable for some other groups of companies. Entertainment business is off, particularly for the movie industry. Department stores, mail-order houses, and many producers and sellers of a wide variety of nondurable goods are not doing so well. Altogether, however, the outlook for prof- its and dividends in 1950 is good. For 1951, too, the dividend prospect right now is bright. Any downturn that occurs in the next 2 years is expected to find many corpo- rations in a position to go right on paying out dividends at a generous rate. Marshall Plan and Point 4 EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. PETER F. MACK, JR. OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 31, 1950 Mr. MACK of Illinois. : Mr. Speaker, it is my unbiased opinion that the Marshall plan has accomplished more for the security of our Nation and its people than any other bill passed by the Congress of this Nation. It is also comforting for me to know that this is a bipartisan measure and that Republicans are to be con- eratulated equally with Democrats for its success. Tt is always distasteful to pay out sums of money for any cause, but we all abhor even to a greater extent the expending of money for the prosecution of a war which in addition to spending of enor- mous sums of money, could snuff out the lives of one-half our people over- night and destroy our natural resources. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, and it would be a greater service to our country to expend a few billions of dollars in precautionary measures now, than to squander hundreds of bil- lions in the fighting of a disastrous war in which even the victor would be the loser. It would seem to me that no sum of money however great is too much to spend to prevent a war or stop the on- ward march of communism. The money expended so far has, to 2 great extent, stopped the further spread of commu- nism on the other continents, which means that we have a longer lease of life on our freedom and liberties here. The sum of $3,000,000,000 outlay on the Marshall plan and point 4 program as a preventive of war is very small in- deed, compared to some $300,000,000,000 which the last war cost, not considering the slaughter of young American men. Aside from the commercial and hu- manitarian benefits of this program, it is important that resource developments be geared up to feed, clothe and shelter It must be borne in mind that population growth A4185 always out runs the means of subsist- ence, and causes many of the world’s ills. With an estimated population of 8,000,000,000 in the year 2080, which is an increase of 1,000,000,000 in the short spread of 50 years, it is imperative that the world prepare now to accom. plish the herculean task of providing sufficient production for this increase of world population. The problem of feed- ing this increased population can best be met by introducing modern ways of production to backward areas. We all are aware of the fact that we cannot afford to continue indefinitely pouring money out to these countries, and it is incumbent upon us to devise some means to help these countries to help themselves as in advocated in point 4 program. Our own undeveloped areas beyond the frontier were made produc- tive, just as these areas can be made productive, by American private capital with negligible amount of Government financial assistance. This program for the development of backward nations will cost the taxpayer of our Nation little if any money, and trade relations with these countries after they are developed will bring in billions in revenue to our Nation and perform a service to the people of the world that will be pleasing to God and man. It is high time that we were turning away from political rivalries and petty differ- ences and accomplish something worth while for the common people. Whether we like it or not, the Ameri- can way of life and the Russian philoso- phy are in a race to death for world dom- ination and every effort made now in support of our way of life will be well rewarded, This program can be carried on in a business-like way on a bipartisan basis. If we adopt a genuine bipartisan policy and throw the political spoils sys- tem to the four winds, success will crown our efforts. Notwithstanding that ours is a rich and powerful Nation, the undeveloped nations number some 28 or 30 countries with a population of 1,800,000,000 with a per capita income of less than $100 per year. This is a threat to our way of life.. With only 7 percent of the world’s popu- lation, it is essential that we strive to train and educate a large percentage of the world’s people along our way of thinking, our way of life and our demo- cratic free-enterprise system if this Na- tion, comprising only 7 percent of the people of the world, is to survive. That a great field exists for the de- development of backward areas of the world cannot be denied. Such de- velopment financed by private capital as were the undeveloped areas in America, would cost the taxpayer little; if any- thing, and would be beneficial to all hu- manity. Older residents well remember when our own Nation, or large sections of it, was undeveloped; when the In- dians—little less civilized than the peo- ple the President now speaks of—were herded into reservations so the West could be developed; .when States like Oklahoma were staked off by the Gov- ernment and thrown open to settlemert that the land might be used for produc- tion purposes. .
AA1L86 These States were just as unproduc- tive then as the undeveloped countries of the world are now. At that time there was no need for the Government or pri- vate capital to go outside this Nation for the development of other backward countries throughout the world. There was great need then for a program of de- velopment right here at home that re- quired all the assistance that both Gov- ernment and private capital could fur- nish. But today we have, technically speak- ing, no frontiers in America; and it is natural that both Government and pri- vate capital, not as a matter of cxploita- tion, but for the good of all humanity, vould lock with sympathetic eyes on other undeveloped countries of the world and extend their scientific knowledge and know how in the improvement of these countries and their people. Such efforts would not only materially help the people of America, but it would raise the standard of living of two-thirds of the world’s population, who as Presi- dent Truman said “are living in condi- tions approaching misery. Their food is inadequate, they are victims of disaster, their economic life,” he says, “is primi- tive and stagnant. Their poverty is a handicap and a threat to them and to more prosperous areas.” One can visualize the millions of acres in undeveloped land on the continents where the people are unable, through lack of technical knowledge, machinery and perhaps intelligence, to grow suffi- cient food to feed themselves and their starving people. It would be a sin if this great Nation with its great flow of capital did not develop these vast areas which would benefit all civilization with little, if any, cost to the American tax- payers. Private capital would willingly furnish the finance needed and would be assured of good returns on their invest- meut while the Nation would profit later through trade relations with these coun-~ ries. Such an undertaking, too, would be a contribution toward the elimination of communism, and a cushion against a major depression, and Congress should cooperate to the fullest extent with the President and American capital to en- hance this program. It is surprising that something was not done about this eforenow. Often during the past years many economists pointed out that if we did not curtail the increasing population, it would be only a matter of years until the earth would not produce enough foodstuff and starvation would face the human race. Our Government, with the capital and technical proficiency that we have in this country, could improve the conditions of the land and the people on the other continents to the extent of making them self-supporting, instead of pouring out money to them indiscriminately, and at the same time stop the onward march of communism, ne of our eminent commentators has said: If we duck our responsibility western Europe would rather soon become a new province of the Soviet Empire, and we in the United States would experience the equivalent of a gigantic military defeat, probably without a shot having been fired. , If Russia would overrun western Eu-~ rope we would have to increase our defense expenditures considerably. A large point 4 program would benefit the United States immensely and is a necessary condition for a prosperous world as well as a prosperous America, When income of the underdeveloped areas is increased, the United States will profit from increased sales in these areas. The least we can do is to mini- mize the resentment of the world’s poor by a system that will raise their standard of living as well as ours. The opposition contends that this is one more part of the socialistic commu- nistic scheme to further tax the Amer- ican people. Nearly a half hundred or- ganizations have besought Congress to adopt this program, and few, if any, rep- utable organizations are against it. Among the organizations supporting this program is the National Association of Manufacturers, the New York Bar Asso- ciation, the Guarantee Co. of New York, and the Farm Bureau. It is hardly pos- sible that these institutions and organi- zations are promoting communistic or socialistic schemes. All the organiza- tions who are supporting this program know that the promoting of prosperity abroad means a prosperous economy at home—that a prosperous world is a peaceful world. Oil Workers Dissatisfied EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THOMAS A. JENKINS OF OHIO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mr. JENKINS. Mr. Speaker, the In- ternational Oil Worker in its recent issue carried the following significant editorial: Orcanizep Lasor Is GreTrine TIRED OF PRETTY Promises But No Action From Democratic Parry There are many people who say that or- ganized labor and the Democratic Party walk hand in hand and sleep in the same bed. These people say that CIO-PAC is simply a wing of the Democratic Party. The time has come to make it clear that there has been no marriage between organ- ized labor and the Democratic Party. It is true that they have been seen keeping com-~ pany from time to time, but there has been no actual pact, formal or informal, between the two. And furthermore, if the Democratic Party keeps treating organized labor as it has in the past few months, it is doubtful if there kas be continued friendship between the wo. To put it bluntly, organized labor is get- ting plenty disgusted with the Democratic Party. Speaking for the Oil Workers Inter- national Union (CIO), at least, we can say that we -have found the Democratic Party long on promises and sweet talk and terribly short on bringing home the bacon, Let us itemize the promises and the deliv- eries of the Democratic Party since the work- ingmen and the farmers put it into power again in 1948: The Democratic Party promised to repeal Taft-Hartley. With a clear majority in both Houses of Congress, the Democrats failed to o this, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The Democratic Party promised to pass fair employment practices legislation. It has failed to do so. In fact, 33 Republican Senators voted to stop the filibuster and take up FEPC a few days ago, while only 19 Demo- crats so voted. And the Democrats have 12 more Members in the Senate than do the Republicans. Democratic Members of the House and the Senate, including House Speaker Sam Rar- BURN, rammed through the infamous Kerr pill to raise natural-gas prices. President Truman, fortunately, had the courage to veto this one. The Senate has not yet passed the im~ proved social-security law, even though the industrialists are now in favor of it. The Democrats sold out 25 cents and sev- eral millions of people short in the mini- mum-wage law. They settled for 75 cents instead of a dollar and excluded millions of people, The Democrats blocked the removal of the infamous Robert Denham from his dicta- torial power in NLRB. And we cannot for- get that President Truman first appointed Denham and in so doing brought shame to the Government of the United States. The Democrats have done nothing about the Brannan farm plan; instead they have allowed the present crazy-quilt farm plan to remain on the books. The Democrats have not even had the nerve to talk openly about national health insurance. Offhand, we can recall two good measures passed by the Congress—the housing bill and the oleo tax repeal. Very good, as far as they go. A good many labor people voted for Demo- erats 2 years ago—yes, and worked hard for them—because of the good party platform. But apparently the platform is just win- dow dressing to the party bigwigs. Democratic Senator Ep C. JoHNSON, in a recent Jackson-Jefferson Day dinner, said bluntly that “platforms don’t mean any- thing.” Well, Senator, we in labor consider a plat- form a promise and we don’t like people who break promises. We have a habit of tossing out on their behinds our union officers who break promises and we will endeavor to do the same to public officers, . Recently a State Democratic chairman said to a PAC representative: “We are not worry~ ing about the labor vote. Labor has nowhere else to g0 except to the Democratic Party.” You may be mistaken, Mr. Chairman. From all over the Nation, a groundswell of complaints against the Democratic Party is coming from rank-and-file union mem- bers to the headquarters of ofl workers in- ternational union and to the union news- paper. In essence, these complaints say: ‘The Democratic Party is kidding us—the Demo- cratic leaders are talking sweet, and deliver- ing nothing.” Sometimes the Democratic leaders do not even talk sweet. They pick their candidates and tell labor to take ’em and like ’em, with~ out asking labor what we want in the way of candidates. So what is organized labor going to do about the failure of the Democratic Party to deliver the goods? Mainly, we are going to pay less and less attention to party labels and more and more to the individual candidate. We are going to endorse and work for those individuals who look best, regardless of party affiliations. Eventually, one party or the other—or a new party as yet unborn—will come to real- ize that the powerful labor vote can make or break a political party. We mean to do no hollow chest ‘beating. Frankly, the labor vote has not yet been as well-mobilized in the past as it should be and it probably will not be in 1950. But year by year, the labor vote is being better mobilized. The power and the unity
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD of the labor vote is growing year by year. The time will come when it will be decisive. And let it be perfectly clear to the Demo- cratic Party that this vote will not necessar- ily be mobilized behind that party. When the budding maiden that is labor political action has blossomed into a fully mature beauty, she will not be waiting pa- tiently in the moonlight for Mr. Democrat to come along. No, she has had her share of broken dates and she may be out seeing the sights with some other fellow—playing a little hard to get. Larchmonter Founds Program To Buck Farm Price Control EXTENSION OF REMARKS OoFr HON. RALPH A. GAMBLE OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 18, 1950 Mr. GAMBLE. Mr. Speaker, I pre- sent for insertion in the ConGRESSIONAL Recorp the following article which ap- peared in the May 25, 1950, issue of the Larchmont (N. Y.) Times by Francis S. Quinn, Jr., concerning the founding by George E. Bailey, of Larchmont, of the Association for the Abolition of Farm Price Support, Inc.: LARCHMONTER Founps Program To Buck Farm Pricz ContTRoL (By Francis S. Quinn, Jr.) An enthusiastic young Westchester lawyer has jumped into the middle of the farm-price support controversy and is ready to battle Government-controlled prices with the weapon of public opinion. As founder and head of the recently or- ganized Association for the Abolition of Farm Price Support, Inc., George E. Bailey of 64 Ridge Road, Larchmont Woods, is convinced that the present policy of the Government in guaranteeing high prices to farmers by buying up abundant foods and letting them rot in Government warehouses is a criminal waste. The ultimate goal of the organization is to lower prices for foods by doing away with governmental controls, “There is no such thing as surplus of food in the United States,” Mr. Bailey de- clares. “Merely a surplus of food at present prices.” Referring to the findings of a recent study made at Michigan State College by econ- omists, he pointed out that a 2-percent in- crease in livestock in the United States would have more than taken up any wheat sur- pluses since 1930. And if meat were put on the market at a lower price, people would eat more and farmers would then sell all their livestock plus all the grain needed to produce the livestock to sell to the people. Attorney Bailey was raised in Marion County, Ohio, and as a youth lived and worked on a farm. He studied agriculture in school and matriculated at Heidelberg College in Ohio for a year before attending Ohio State University where he received his LL. B. After practicing law in Steubenville, Ohio, for 3 years, he entered the Army in 1941 and went overseas in 1943. In Bari, Italy, he had first-hand experi- ence with food in large quantities as pur- chasing officer for the Adriatic Base Com- mand, The major portion of his purchases were of vegetables and other perishables and he soon had a clear picture of the marketing of farm products, He joined the law firm of Reid & Priest of New York, tax specialists, in 1946 after he left the service. He married and settled down to what he thought was strictly a lawyer’s career. The subject of food prices began to crop up in spare-time luncheon discussions and although he doesn’t recall exactly how it all began, eventually the discussions reached the point of putting up or shutting up. Thoroughly interested in farm price control and dissatisfied with the way the Govern- ment was handling the situation, he decided to do something about it. In October 1949 press releases of his pro- posed stand against price control were sent to New York papers. Mr. Bailey was soon swamped with telephone calls, telegrams, and letters. People were interested in his ideas. So, to show his own sincerity, he immediately formed the Association for the Abolition of Farm Price Support, Inc., with his own money, and the inquiries mushroomed to 800. They came from persons in all walks of life, from farmers, laborers, and bank presidents. Needing some capital to work with, since the association is not only nonpolitical but nonprofit, he set up a regular membership fee of $1 with active sustaining members contributing $10 per year. At the end of April the membership num- pered some 800 from 13 States, and except for two or three obvious profit seekers, they are all interested parties with the future of our country at heart, Mr. Bailey sincerely believes. “We are now getting about five new mem~- bers per day with the average steadily in- creasing,” he says. The association went into an intense study of the farm problem before taking any con- structive action, but early this year it began to roll as 1,000 copies of a pamphlet enti- tled “You Are the Victim of the Farm Price Support Program” were distributed all over the country. Last month another thousand copies were issued. Why does farm price control exist today? In his pamphlet, Mr. Bailey states: “The enactment of the postwar farm price sup- port program was possible only because there was no organized opposition from those ad- versely affected by the program. When the present farm bill was before the Highty-first Congress, not one person appeared to rep- resent the consumer and the taxpayer. “The key to effective opposition to the present ruinous farm program is organiza- tion. To that end, the Association for the Abolition of Farm Price Support, Ine., has been organized.” He then appeared on Philip Alampi’s farm news program on WJZ. After his talk, he received 80 to 90 replies asking for more in- formation, which is all the more remarkable since the program goes on the air at 6 a. m. “They were all favorable,” Mr. Bailey says, adding with a grin “except one. And that suggested I ought to stick to law.” The queries were from persons mostly in the lower income levels and included a high percentage of laboring people and farmers. A sudden wiping out of farm price supports would only create a collapse that would lead to chaos, he admits, so the elimination must be gradual. “Price support does not create wealth,” he declared. “It merely takes some wealth from one group of taxpayers and shifts it to another.” This in itself will benefit neither the farm- er nor the consumer in the long run, Mr. Bailey maintains. “Certain basic economic principles should be stated to understand this,” he declares, “production must be controlled by something or somebody, The American way of control is by price. A4187 “If high price levels are artificially con- trolled, then the production must be con- trolled in only one way—by the Government. “The American farmer has the choice of two methods of control: he can have high prices and complete governmental control cf his production, or he can have price con- trolled by the market and he can have free- dom.” Suppose there will be no revision of the present ferm reese cusoer* rrogram? “The wc it te cae, Got. « Of the public reaction to the tremendous cost of support- ing prices, will impose rigid controls on pro- duction in order to lim.i expenditures,” Mr. Bailey declares. “Unless that trend is re- versed, complete socialization of American preduction will come within the nex decade.” He hopes to make his association national in scope with branches in each State and chapters in each city. Henry D. Bulkley, of 405 Weaver Street, Larchmont, now is attempting to form a local chapter of the organization in Larchmont. Plans of the association include the pub- lishing of a monthly newsletter to ke sent to all members in addition to various pamphlets and other material. Two months ago Mr. Bailey was invited by Chairman Haroup Cooter (Democrat, North Carolina) of the House Agriculture Com- mittee to send witnesses to Washington to explain their views on farm legislation. No date, however, was mentioned in the invita- tion, merely “sometime after Easter,” ac- cording to Mr. Bailey. REA: Its Value to Business as Well as Farms EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. A. S. MIKE MONRONEY OF OKLAHOMA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, May 9, 1950 Mr. MONRONEY. Mr. Speaker, all the farmers of Oklahoma know and ap- preciate the great value of rural electri- fication—its record of accomplishment and service to the farm families through- out the Nation. But in going over the State county by county, I find that few of the townspeo- ple realize what REA has accomplished— not only for the farmer—but for inde- pendent Oklahoma business as well. Some townspeople, misled by utility prop- aganda and ill-advised statements of their political demagogues, have the ef- frontery to compare rural electrification with socialism or with Government dic- tatorship. Nothing could be farther from the truth. ¢ REA is a going business concern in Oklahoma—as in our other 47 States. These farmer-owned and farmer-oper- ated businesses are successful—not only in getting electricity at a reasonable rate to the farms of Oklahoma—but also in paying back to the Government with interest the money loaned to do the job. They pay State taxes, pay standard wages, and buy from Oklahoma’s private businesses. The farmers of Oklahoma and other States are doing the job that the high-up utility men said was impossible. They are disproving the big utility claim that
A4188 it took at least a $1,000 prepayment or more to bring electricity to each farm. I have discussed the value of REA at seven annual meetings where from 800 to 2,500 farm members turned out to see that their enterprise is well-managed and to make decisions on important REA matters, It is their business and they are out to see that it continues to suc-~ ceed, Let us look at the record—a record un- equaled by any other Government pro- gram for success and for repayment of loans. Let us see what REA has done, not only for the farmers but for Okla- homa business as well. Free enterprise business in Oklahoma has built every one of the $60,000,000 worth of lines erected in our State. This work went to private contractors for the low bid. The worker, the lumberman, the insulator, and conductor distributor, the construction business were granted this $60,000,000 in new work because of the enterprise and pioneering of Okla- homa farmers. This sixty million in work would not have been possible with- out REA. Nearly 100,000 members of REA now are on the Oklahoma lines. Each one spends at least $500 for wiring, lighting, and appliances—many much more. All this was spent through free enterprise stores in our towns. That is another $50,- 000,000 for Oklahoma business—a total of $110,009,000 in business for our State which would not have existed without REA. Is not this really strengthening and building up Oklahoma’s private enterprise? Oklahoma’s invested wealth thus is $110,000,000 greater, the State is that much richer because of this investment—~ every penny of which went through pri- vate-business enterprise. Is any busi- ness which adds $110,000,000 to the inde~ pendent business of Oklahoma unfair to business? This is new business, business which would not have existed without REA. It is virgin territory—to fill a vital need where no other business existed in this line before. Only through Government cooperation with long-time interest- bearing loans could this new business have been created. Fourteen years ago, 89 percent of the farm homes of America were in darkness. Only 11 percent of the farms had been electrified in the 40 years in which elec- tricity had become an everyday necessity in the towns. Today—in 14 years, this 11 percent has been increased nationally to 78.2 percent of all American farms. In Oklahoma we have only 56 percent of our farms electrified, so there is much more work that must be done to extend our 36,000 miles of rural lines. Up to December 31, 1949, these REA’s of the Nation owed Uncle Sam $203,346,- 158 for repayments and interest due to that date. They have repaid him $223,- 114,845—about $20,000,000 ahead of time in their repayments. Can any other Government-lending operation show such a result? Of this amount, Uncle Sam has collected $91,999,730 in interest alone—and the remainder is repayment on principal, The gross yearly business—again busi- ness which could not have existed with- out REA in Oklahoma, now totals more than $5,000,000 each year. This means pay rolls for workers, money spent for materials, tools, poles, and wire—all through private business enterprise. Can this be unfair to business—con- trary to our system? Even the big utilities who seek to discredit the REA so much—who spread unfounded rumors of Government interference with their monopolies—profit to the extent in Okla- homa of nearly a million dollars a year in the sale of wholesale power to the REA lines. Each year the use of electricity on farms climbs to new heights as the farm- ers use more and more electricity in their farm work—as well as in good farm living. This ever-increasing demand re- quires—makes absolutely necessary— that far-sighted farm managers of these REA’s have some independent sources of electric energy. With a $60,000,000 investment in distribution lines, we can- not—we must not—hbe left without some firm and dependable source of energy to put on their lines to take care of an ever- expanding use of farm electricity. That is why I have insisted REA must have additional power properly distrib- uted for REA use. Without a depend- able source of reliable low-cost power we endanger this $60,000,000 investment. The private utility lines were built years ago before REA started to serve city load centers. REA has developed an entirely new load pattern—far removed from the big cities—yet today using a vast amount of electric energy. Instead of being handcuffed and shackled, with no source of energy excepting that which the utilities are willing to sell—after meeting all of their city demands—REA needs access to some of the vast power generated at Government flood-control dams. Who would deny farmers access to this needed power? NotI. I do not want to see this power, created with public funds, turned over in special privi- lege deals to two giant utility concerns to sell this public power back to farmers at whatever price they can demand. Adequate power, properly placed in the line, and at low enough rates to insure maximum use of electricity on the farms is my goal and also the goal of the Okla- homa REA’s. Any effort to double-cross the farmers to put them at the mercy of the giant utility cooperations will be fought by every farmer on the line. Oklahoma farmers cannot be fooled, they know the score—they know the is- sue—they know special privilege when they see it. As one old farmer told me: “Shucks, that ain’t socialism—that’s electricity.” I have dwelt long on the financial soundness of REA investments, its re- payment with interest, its creation of new business for thousands of little busi- nesses of Oklahoma. More important perhaps than all of this is the human side of REA. Talk to the farmers yourself and get the feeling of the new life that comes to them and their families when that vital wire touches their farm. ‘They leave the darkness of the nineteenth century and live immediately in the bright light of the twentieth century and modern full APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD home life and better living. That REA wire means bright electric lights, electric irons, washing machines, dependable radios, refrigerators. Talk to the ap- pliance dealers in the small towns. Most of them admit that from half to two- thirds of their appliance business goes to these lines that the big utility executives thought could not or should not be built, Realize the years of drudgery that are removed from farm women when they have the same chance to have electrical jJabor-saving appliances that city wives have had for so long a time. One appliance dealer in the western part of the State where a new line was being extended told me this story: “I asked the young GI farmer what ap- pliances he was going to buy, now that the line had reached him. “He said: ‘Mister, I’m going to buy my wife every appliance you’ve got to sell that will make her work easier. I’m go- ing to buy a washing machine, an elec- tric stove, & separator, and lots of other things as fast as I get the money to buy with. “You see, Mister,’ he said, ‘I saw my mother die at 40 doing the washing for us six kids, pulling the butter up out of the well, bringing in the wood for the stove, churning, and separating the milk, mending clothes over a kerosene lamp, and other chores. “«That REA line and the things that it'll run will let my wife live a lot longer and we’re going to have all the things she needs.’ ” Mr. Speaker, Iam proud of the fights I have been in to help get more rural elec- trification for the farmers of Oklahoma and the Nation. It has not been an easy task—and those who oppose this great program are always on the job with the cry that Government is interfering with private business. These big utilities com- panies have their friends in Congress and in the Senate—some in powerful places where the damage they can do is tre- mendous. Oklahoma needs to change its repre- sentation in the Senate this year. The record is clear and Oklahoma farmers cannot be misled or fooled. They want a man who understands and will fight for their interests—and not for special privi- lege—in that high office. Another Tax Grab EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. ANGIER L. GOODWIN OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mr. GOODWIN. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- orD, I include the following editorial from the Malden (Mass.) Evenings News: ANOTHER Tax GRAB Latest effort of the spenders to dig deeper into the earnings of the American people has to do with dividends from their investments. House tax arrangers have tentatively ap- proved a withholding tax of 10 percent on dividends. The plan would be similar to that now employed with respect to wages,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the money to be taken at its source, and would bring an estimated $150,000,000 in new revenue. The tax eaters make the claim that many persons do not report earnings from such investments, and they are out to get their hands on the money before it comes to rightful owners. This plan would make the corporations collection agencies for the Gov- ernment, as all employers now are. It would place a heavy burden on corporations and the ccst of collection and necessary book- keeping would be tremendous. This would reduce earnings, result in smaller dividends. This thing cannot go on forever. Eventually the American people will be forced to revolt against a Government which is milking them ary in the form of taxes. If the money went for necessary Government, to finance na- tional defense, or to retire national debt, there would be hope for the future. But when mullions are wasted in vote-enticing projects the time has come to call a halt. The only weapon available for an attack on the spenders is votes. They should be lining up now for the coming battle. Federal Rent Control EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. M. G. BURNSIDE OF WEST VIRGINIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mr. BURNSIDE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the RrEc- ORD, I include a letter written to me by the Governor of West Virginia, Okey L. Patteson, dated May 25, 1950: Hon. M. G. Burnsipz, House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DeEsaR CONGRESSMAN BURNSIDE: It has been called to my attention that, unless extended by pending legislation, Federal rent controls © will expire throughout the Nation on June 30, 1950. As you undoubtedly know, rent control now affects only those cities in West Virginia which are located in our highly industrial- ized sections such as Wheeling, Charleston, Huntington, and Bluefield. I am advised, however, by the rent-control officials, that there are about 300,000 rental housing units still subject to the Federal law and that these rental units house an estimated 1,000,- 000 people, which is only slightly less than half of our population. I have seen the statistics gathered by the Bureau of Labor Statistics on rental increases in cities which were decontrolled during 1949 by local or State option and I am alarmed that such a possibility might exist in our larger cities in West Virginia. I am alarmed because of the possibility that labor may feel it necessary to demand wage increases to compensate for rent increases, which, of course, could mean considerable industrial unrest within the State and a corresponding loss of income to the State treasury. According to the information which I have received, the extension bill should be before you for debate and a vote in the very near future. I feel it is my duty as Governor to urge you not only to vote for a continuation of Federal controls of rents, but also to take whatever measures may be available to you to the end that the extension legislation will be passed, With the kindest regards, I am, Sincerely yours, OxEy L. PATTESON, Governor. XCVI—Anp.——264 The Real Issue in the Hoover Reorgani- zation Plan EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. ANGIER L. GOODWIN OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mr. GOODWIN. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the RrEc- oD, I include the following article from the Christian Science Monitor by Joseph C. Harsch, chief of its Washington news bureau: Bureaucracy: ENTRENCHED AND UNCONTROLLED (By Joseph C. Harsch) Do we, or don’t we, want our public affairs run by someone we can throw out of office come next election day? ~ That really is the issue behind all this furor over the Hoover Reorganization Plan and what Congress is doing to it. Some of our public affairs are run that way now, Harry S. Truman and his Cabinet are subject to the will of the voters. We can turn them out in November of 1952 if a@ majority of us don’t like the way they are running our affairs. What we do not realize is that there is nothing the voters can do about large chunks of the Federal Government. We can’t get at these officials directly at the polls or indi- rectly through the party in power. And they don’t work for the public as a whole. They work in frequent fact for special group in- terests. The elected President of the United States can control the members of his Cabinet, and through the members of his Cabinet he can control those portions of the departments of Government which take orders from a Cabinet officer. But not until you look through a Congressional Directory do you discover how many branches of Government there are which take no orders from any- one. For example, the Patent Office is located physically inside the Department of Com- merce Building. But the Secretary of Com~- merce has no authority over the Patent Com- missioners. If the public became dissatisfied with Patent Office policy, there isn’t a thing it could do about it directly, or immediately. Of course, usually there is no great trouble about patent policy. And it isn’t likely that the Commissioners of Patents would long pursue a policy which made them unpopular. They are human, and probably would adjust themselves to a great wave of public disapproval. But the point is that if some Patent Commissioner wished to defy the Secretary of Commerce and the President and public opinion there is noth- ing voters could do about it at the next election day. Getting rid of President Tru- man would not touch the Patent Office, because Mr. Truman-has no authority over it. The same condition is even more true of the great independent commissions of gov- ernment such as the FCC, the SEC, the FTC, and the ICC. They are as independent of the elective process as the Supreme Court. We as voters can influence these commis- sioners in that vacancies are filled by Presi- dential appointment. Over the long run we can get commissions we like if we get a succession of Presidents we like. But it a long process. There is no direct responsi- pility to the voter. This is the condition which the Hoover ° report on Government reorganization is try- ing to reduce. Mr. Hoover does not propose to abolish the system entirely. It is tco deeply established for that. But his re-' A4189 organization plan would expand the area of control of the President over the Federal establishment. It would give the President more authority. Therefore, it would give the voter more authority. Also, it would make the President and his Cabinet more responsible than they are now for the affairs of government. But the special interests served by these various agencies of government do not like tampering with the present system. The raiiroads protect the ICC. The banks pro- tect the Comptroller of the Currency. They don’t want him under the Secretary of the Treasury. The ship lines tried to protect the Maritime Commission, but cvnat effort failed. The Maritime Commission had been So generous with the ship lines over such a considerable period of time that Congress wanted no part of it any more. The issue lies between the theory of gov- ernment by specialists and the theory of government hy politicians, In Germany they use the theory of government by spe- cialists almost exclusively. The politician has become a vermiform appendix on the German body politic. England is the great mother of government by politicians. We use both systems, but of recent years have been using the specialists more and the politicians less. This is the trend Mr. Hoover is trying to halt and reverse for the simple reason that the voter does not control the specialist, but does control the politician—if he chooses to. Labor and the Law EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HENDERSON LANHAM OF GEORGIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mr. LANHAM. Mr. Speaker, the edi- torial which appeared in the Chatta- nooga Daily Times on Thursday, June 1, which I am including with my remarks, expresses what I think is the general feeling today relative to labor unions, their rights and responsibilities under to- day’s industrial conditions and our com- plex civilization. The editorial is so moderately worded and written in such a sympathetic spirit and so well expresses my own views on the subject that Iam glad to give my en- dorsement to it and to present it here- with: Lasor aND THE Law There is at present a great body of law on our statute books dealing with labor-man- agement relations. The legislatien has been made necessary because of the growing com- plexity of our industrial system and because the interplay of workers’ demands and man~ agement’s concessions has kecome so im- portant to the national economy. This mass of regulation is still fluid and is likely to be so for years as varying social, economic, and political factors come into play. Changes result not only from ut- right legislative repeal or amendment but also, more subtly, from judicial interpreta- tion. A story elsewhere on this page today deals with Supreme Court decisions handed down this term on labor matters. From them may be discerned a possible pattern ‘or the measure of legality in labor relations. In essence, it represents the feeling that labor’s powers must be made increasingly subject to reasonable control in the interest of the general welfare.
A4190 Most of the notable decisions have dealt with the right to picket, long regarded as an extension of the right of free speech. The seeming trend is toward limitation of picket- ing when it becomes more a matter of coer- cion than advertising, when it is employed to gain objectives which are not the rightful concern of the union, or when it is used in violation of valid State laws. This newspaper has long supported labor in its attainment of rightful objectives. We will continue to do so, including the right to picket peaceably. At the same time, we realize that intemperate use of picketing— when it passed from the vocal or visual stage into that of the physical with violence to persons or property—has cost labor untold public support. The controls are a refiec- tion of that withdrawal of sympathy and approbation. But beyond that, the laws are also a recog= nition that the power of labor has reached the point that it carries with it definite responsibilities in its use. The legislator’s task is to balance the two: To channel the power into outlets which serve labor’s proper interests, and to assess the responsibilities which labor owes to society in general. There are signs that labor-management relations are entering a new phase of sta- bility. The recent General Motors 5-year contract is one such indication—and one marked by heightened statesmanship on the part of both the union and the company. The hoped for goal is for the law to serve as a mere guidepost to peaceful settlements, rather than a barbed-wire barrier on which both sides lacerate themselves in costly struggles. The present Supreme Court is liberal~ minded. That it should be seemingly in-~ clined to restrict labor’s actions should be a stern reminder for unionists to avoid abuses of their great powers. As a continuing friend of the labor movement, we hope responsible leaders will accept the apparent trend in law~ making for what it is—an indication of la~ bor’s approaching maturity as an economic force. Guilty Before Trial EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. DANIEL A. REED OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mr. REED of New York. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent heretofore granted, I am inserting an address en- titlec “Guilty Before Trial,” delivered by Benjamin F, Fairless, president of the United States Steel Corp., at the Boston Jubilee of 1950, Mid-Century Celebration of Progress, Boston, Mass., May 18, 1950: It is a pleasure and a privilege to be here today and to take part in this great jubilee that the Boston Chamber of Commerce is staging. I am particularly happy to see assembled in this room such a representative cross section of American enterprise. Here at a table in front of me I see some of my old friends from the Smaller Business Asso- ciation of New England, and at other tables throughout the room are many of the out- standing business and industrial leaders from almost every section of the country. ° Believe me, gentlemen, I am proud indeed to stand in the company of men who have done so much to give the American people the most bountiful standard of living this world has ever seen. It is reassuring to know _ kat success in business is not yet regarded as a disgrace in this great land of ours, and that fruitful enterprise is not without honor, except, perhaps, in some parts of our National Capital. However, I must confess that I am a little surprised at the boldness of the Boston Chamber of Commerce in arranging this cele~ bration at all. Now I wouldn’t say, of course, that you are boasting or bragging about your city, because I realize fully that no true Bostonian would ever permit himself to take more than a modest .nd@ becoming pride even in Boston’s most spectacular achievements. But I will say that you are certainly making no secret whatever of the fact that Boston is big and important and rich and successful. Perhaps ycu gentlemen have forgotten that Boston is an incorporated city, and that no corporate entity today can safely possess the characteristics to which you are pointing with such natural and pardonable pride. So I think I should warn you that down along the banks of the Potgmac, the wise and pru- dent businessman speaks of these things only in apologetic whispers and the motto that he follows is: “Grow slow.” I do not wish to convey the impression, however, that this antipathy toward bigness and success is universally entertained in Washington. It isn’t. There are Govern- ment officials who, I feel sure, look with high favor upon big business and good profits; and it is a great pleasure to have one of these Washington friends with us today. I refer, of course, to the distinguished Assist- ant Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Graham. He has my deepest sympathy for he has to meet what I suppose is the largest payroll in the world—the Federal payroll. On the other hand, I am certain that he must be very grateful indeed to all of us business- men for the help we give him. I do not know, of course, how well he makes out with the rest of you gentlemen; but as far as United States Steel is concerned, the tax collectors are getting two and a quarter times as much out of our business as the stockholders are. So I think we have a right to assume that ‘we are all among friends, and that the long- range interests of the Government and of business are really the same things after all, How could it be otherwise when Govern- ment is wholly dependent upon the success of business and industry; when business and industry are equally dependent upon suc- cessful Government and when the American people are dependent upon both? So any development which threatens the welfare of business or of Government is—and ought to be—a matter of immediate concern to both. And that is why I want to talk with you today about a problem that President Tru- man discussed in a special message which he sent to Congress 2 weeks ago—a message on small business. It was a temperate, rea- soned, nonpolitical exposition of his views on the subject; and it is in this same tem- perate, reasoned, and wholly nonpolitical vein that I propose to comment upon it. After saying a few guardedly kind words about big business, the President pointed out that—great and successful as this eco- nomic system of ours has been—it still is not as good as he, or any of us for that matter, would want it to be. He said that it is not providing jobs for all the men and women who want work, and that—if it is ever to provide full employment—-more new businesses, and more small businesses, must be established, He recommended therefore that Congress pass legislation designed to provide these new, small businesses with cap- ital and with technical assistance. Now gentlemen, I have noticed that when- ever our Government officials set out, these days, to be helpful to some segment of our economy, they think almost automatically in terms of money—of financial aids, or sub- sidies, These are governmental crutches ‘APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD which may serve well enough to support an economic invalid, but—of themselves—they can do nothing to cure his basic affliction. Unless the Government contemplates going into the crutch business permanently, there- fore, the day must come when these busi- nesses will be able to stand squarely on their own feet. So I can’t help wondering if the President, in his program, has really probed down to the roots of the trouble. Certainly we must recognize the fact that for more than 800 years, our American eco- nomic system hes provided employment for our people as our Nation has grown. Of course, there have been temporary periods of depression and famine—the “lean years” that have always beset both the agricultural and industrial advances of mankind since the days of Joseph and the Pharaohs. But ovez the centuries, generally, there have been jobs in America for all. Now, if what the President says is true— if our system is no longer fulfilling our em- ployment needs in this day and hour when we are enjoying a relatively high peak of prosperity—then, somewhere, there is a mon- key wrench in the machinery. And since all of us here in this room are intimately acquainted with the working parts of our industrial economy, it seems to me that it’s up to us to find the monkey wrench before it is too late. Let’s look around. Here we are in Bos~ ton, the birthplace of American manufac-~ turing and one of the Nation’s great centers of investment capital. ; More than 125 new manufacturing enter- prises are established here in greater Bos- ton every year. So, clearly, we do have new pusinesses. Moreover, Massachusetts has more investors in proportion to its popula- tion than any other State in the Union, and the savings deposits in Boston’s banks are nearly three times the national average on & per-capita basis. Clearly, therefore, there is available capital for business here, Why is it then that we do rot have more new businesses? Why are investors unwill- ing to risk more of their savings? Or, why are our people unwilling to seek more of this capital and to set themselves up in business? Gentlemen, as a mechanic who has had some slight experience with this great indus~ trial machine of ours, it is my professional opinion that we will do well to look for that misplaced monkey wrench in the Washing- ton gear box. In fact, it would not surprise me if we were to find several monkey wrenches there. ‘We shail certainly find tax laws that dis- courage investment and that encourage small businessmen to sell out, and to cash in on their capital gains. We shall find widespread antagonism toward profits and a reluctance to recognize the facts of inflation. Everybody realizes that a worker who earned $30 a week in 1939 now has to get $51 in order to have the same amount of purchasing power. Yet few peo- ple seem to understand that the stockholder who got a $6 dividend in 1939, now has to get $10.20 on that same investment, just to break even in terms of our present-day, 60-cent greenbacks, We shall find other laws and attitudes that will certainly tend to discourage even the most venturesome newcomer to the field of business but the biggest monkey wrench of all—the greatest single drawback to the effective operation of our modern economic system—is the amazing but undeniable fact that the minute any man successfully estab- lishes himself in any business nowadays, he automatically becomes a potential jailbird. Yes, the truth is that we have on our Fed- eral statute books today a complete hodge- podge of so-called antitrust laws which have been allowed to grow, like Topsy, for 60 years, and which cannot be reconciled even with each other. And the only way a busi-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD nessman can be sure of obeying them all is just to go broke. Now gentlemen, I am not a lawyer and Ym not going to ask you to take my word for that. I shall merely read you a comment written by Supreme Court Justice Jackson when he was the head of the Antitrust Divi- sion in the Department of Justice. He said: “It is impossible for a lawyer to determine what business conduct will be pronounced lawful by the courts. This situation is em- barrassing to businessmen wishing to chey the law and to Government officials attempt- ing to enforce it.” In other words, gentlemen, nobody in business, in Government, or anywhere else, knows what the law is except the Supreme Court of the United States, and sometimes even the members of the Court don’t seem to be too sure about it. In fact, the present judicial attitude toward our antimonopoly laws reminds me of a quotation from Ralph Waldo Emerson which is carved in large let- ters on the side of the new Hunter College building in New York, but which might be equally appropriate if chiseled on the marble walls of the Supreme Court building in Washington. It says: “We are of different opinions at different hours; but we always may be said to be, at heart, on the side of truth.” Now that is a very commendable philoso- phy. An enlightened willingness to change one’s mind from hour to hour may be a fine thing in the academic atmosphere of any college or of any court, but speaking as a practical businessman, I can only say, “It’s a helluva way to run a railroad.” So we come face to face with the fact that laws governing business are not really written in Congress, but in the courts, and what five members of the Supreme Court say the law is, may be something vastly different from what Congress intended the law to be. Again I do not ask you to take my word for it. I refer you to a quotation cited by United States Supreme Court Justice Burton in his dissenting opinion in the Cement case. There it was pointed out that the basing- point system had been in use by industry for half a century, and that Congress—after repeated study—had steadfastly refused to pass any of the bills proposing to outlaw it. Then it was said: “We know of no criticism so often and so forcibly directed at the courts—particularly the Federal courts—as their propensity for usurping the functions of Congress. If this pricing system which Congress, over the years, has steadfastly refused to declare illegal, is now to be outlawed by the courts, it will mark the high tide in Judicial usurpa- tion.” Yet the Court, as you know, did outlaw the selling methods used in the cement industry, The result was that the heads of more than 100,000 American businesses—men who had been conducting their affairs in a perfectly law-abiding manner—were suddenly con- fronted by the possibility of being classed as criminals, Gentlemen, I don’t have to tell you that if we persist in that kind of a system of law— and if we enforce it impartially against all offenders—virtually every business in America, big and small, is going to have to be run from Atlanta, Sing Sing, Leavenworth, or Alcatraz. And that is no mere personal opinion on my part either. One of the severest critics of this legalistic merry-go-round we live on is Chairman Lowell Mason of the Federal Trade Commission, whose duty it is to en- force many of these laws, and who can there- fore be regarded as one of the Nation’s out- standing authorities on the subject. He says: “American business is being harassed, bled and even blackjacked under a preposterous crazyquilt system of laws, many of which are unintelligible, unenforcible and unfair. There is such a welter of laws governing in- terstate commerce that the Government literally can find some charge to bring against any concern it chooses to prosecute, I say that this system is an outrage, and that it’s time the Government did something sen-~ sible about bringing its own operations up to the same standard of ethics that it expects of business.” Now those are strong words, coming from a member of the Federal Trade Commission and from a man who was appointed to that Office by President Truman, Unfortunately, they are also true words. The unhappy fact is that once a man goes into business, anything he does is wrong. We don’t need a lawyer to tell us that. Most of us know it from our own personal experi- ence, Let’s take the question of competition, for example: To a practical businessman—and stripped of a lot of legalistic gobbledygook—competi- tion is a very simple thing. It exists when two or more companies are trying to sell similar products tothe same customer. Eut when the businessman of today tries to com- pete in the open market, what happens? If his product is of approximately the same quality as that of his competitor, if each competitor provides the same service, and if both enjoy equally good reputations for dependability and integrity, it is per- fectly obvious that both are going to have to offer their wares at the same price in order to keep in the running. But if both quote the same price, that fact alone is construed to be evidence of collu- sion and a violation of the Sherman anti- trust law. . So our businessman cuts his price, tries to undersell his competitor, and thinks he’s staying safely on the right side of the Sher- man Act. Don’t ever try that, my friends, because then you’re in real trouble under the Robinson-Patman Act. Look what hap- pened to Minneapolis-Honeywell, and to Standard Oil of Indiana when they tried to cut their prices to meet their competition. The A. & P. has been accused—among other things—of consistently underselling its com- petitors. And one of the charges in the suit that the Department of Justice has brought against du Pont is that the com- pany lowered the price of cellophane 21 times. So if our businessman obeys the Sherman law, he is probably violating the Robinson- Patman Act, and if he obeys the Robinson~- Patman Act he is almost sure to be violat~ ing the Sherman antitrust law. He can’t lower his price safely, and he can’t leave it where it is; so the only thing left for him to do is to raise it. There’s no law against that, of course, except the law of supply and demand. If he raises his price, and his competitors don’t, he goes out of business. If his com- petitors do follow his lead and raise their prices too, he can stay in business, but he’s right back where he started so far as the antitrust laws are concerned, and in addi- tion to that he is almost certain to get an invitation—or a subpena—from Senator O'MaHONEY and Congressman CELLER. What- ever he does, he’s sunk. It’s no wonder people are reluctant to rush in and start new businesses today. The only mystery to me is that any new busi- nesses are started at all. But that is only a part of the story. The laws governing competition and prices have been changed frequently. Mr. Mason puts it this way: “In 1982,” he says, “we put a pants presser in jail if he conspired to fix prices. In 1933 ‘we put him in jail if he didn’t. Next year, vice versa again, “Later on, if he went into the coal busi- ness, we assessed a heavy penalty against him if he didn’t charge a fixed price. That A4191 is, of course, if the coal was soft. If it was hard, vice versa. “Then take the meat packers. We made them get out of the retail chain-store busi- ness in 1920. But now there are half a dozen big retail chains in the meat-packing busi- ness. I guess the meat packers just went into the wrong business first.” Is it any wonder, gentlemen, that a busi- nessman gets discouraged these days when not even his lawyer can figure out which end is up? But that’s not the end of his troubles either. In 1941, in the Rigid Conduit case, the Federal Trade Commission’s staff came up with a wonderful new theory. It decided that it didn’t even have to go to the trou- ble of finding a businessman guilty of any transgression of the law. His personal guilt—or lack of it—didn’t matter. If the Commission felt that there was a social danger involved, it could issue an order against him anyway. Lowell Mason, in a recent speech before the American Steel Warehouse Association, in Texas, pointed out that this interesting theory of justice—whereby a man could be penalized without being found guilty of any- thing—was introduced in Russia by Com- tmissar Krylenko. “It is not clear,” he says, “whether the Federal Trade Commission got the idea from Krylenko, or whether Krylenko got it from the Commission.” In any event, he observes, Krylerko has since been liquidated; but the American au- thors of the same philosophy within the Commission have not. These, then, are a few of the hurdles that confront the intrepid soul who would ven- ture into the business world today—but they are only a few. A compilation of the orders already issued by the Federal Trade Com- mission shows that there are more than 2,200 different business practices that have been held to be illegal. So our newcomer in the field would, of course, do well to mem- orize this list with painstaking care before he even unlocks the door of his own office. Gentlemen, I shall not belabor the point further. I merely submit that when every businessman in America can be found guilty of violating the law, then there is something wrong with the law—and not with the busi- nessmen. From our theorists in Washing- ton today, we hear a great deal about “tight- ening the loopholes” in our antimoponoly legislation. In heaven’s name, gentlemen, what loop- holes? What we need is not a tightening of the laws, or a loosening of them, but a com- plete redefinition of lawful business conduct. To quote one final thought-provoking sen- tence from Lowell Mason: “The Comintern loves it when the men of America who gov- ern, pit themselves againsé the men of America who produce, and it’s time that the Government and business stopped play- ing cops and robbers with each other.” To that, I think all of us here will utter @ profound “amen.” It takes a man of real courage to go into business today, knowing that he must satisfy the conflicting remands of his workers, his stockholders, and his customers. Any man who can do that deserves to succeed for he is performing a great public service. And if he is willing to take such risks, it seems to me that he is entitled to look to his Govern- ment for aid—not in the form of loans, or grants, or subsidies—but in the form of clean-cut, understandable rules which clear- ly mark the boundaries of good and lawful business practice. The defining of those boundaries should not be left to those who hate business, to those who seek personal or political power over it, nor to theorists who want to experi- ment with it. It ic not a job for irresponsible
A4192 underlings in Federal bureaus. It is a job which requires the highest skills of Govern- ment officials who understand the problems of business, and of businessmen who under- stand the problems of Government. It is a job—in short—for men who have a mutual respect for the rights of each other, and 4 common devotion to the welfare of America. If the realistic and informed men of Gov- ernment will ever sit down with reasonable and experienced men of business and make up their collective mind as to what monopoly really is, what competition is, what business conduct is ethical and proper, and what pusiness conduct is injurious and wrong, I think we will find fewer monkey wrenches in the machinery, and the Government will be able to get out of the crutch business in short order. I believe we need then have no fears about our economic system. It will continue—as it has for these past 330 years— to provide us with the jobs we need and the abundance of goods and services that has made America the wealthiest, happiest, and most secure Nation in the world. But all this is not just going to happen of its own accord. It is not going to happen at all unless we do something about it. As Americans we take pride in this historic city and in this historic State—in Faneuil Hall, the cradle of our precious liberties, and in the Bill of Rights which was forever to pro- tect us from the petty tyrannies of thought- Jess and indifferent government. I can think of no more appropriate sur- roundings therefore in which to dedicate ourselves here and now to the task of winning from our Congress at Washington the one remaining right that today is unjustly denied to every businessman in America and to every man in America who may wish to go into business, That is the right to be right. A Visit With Scott Lucas EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ALLEN J. ELLENDER OF LOUISIANA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, June 5 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. ELLENDER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an article entitled “A Visit With Scorr Lucas,” by G. Edwin Popkess, Jr., which appeared in Popkess’ Dajryman’s Journal for May 1950. There being no objection, the article ‘was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: A Vistr Wits Scorr Lucas I had the pleasure during the last week in April to go to Washington on business and while there to have lunch with Scorr “Ww. Lucas, senior Senator from Illinois and majority leader of the United States Senate. This was quite an interesting experience for myself and Benjamin O. Cooper, auditor of public accounts, State of Illinois, who accom-~ panied me. Scorr Lucas was @ very gracious host, in spite of the fact that he is quite busy han- dling the affairs of running the United States Senate. As we sat down in Senator Lucas’ quarters to have lunch with him, my first observation was the three big glasses of good, wholesome milk at our places at the table. Upon ques- tioning him, Senator Lucas informed us that hhe drank over two quarts of milk each day. My remark to this was that if every citizen in the country would do likewise, there would be no surplus supply. It was quite interesting to observe that the Senator’s luncheon included many varieties of dairy foods, including the one and only, butter, plenty of good American cheese and a cottage cheese salad. Naturally my reac- tion is that Senator Lucas is a real booster of dairy products and a large consumer of all dairy. foods. Senator Lucas was quite interested in dis- cussing with me the many problems affecting Dlinois farmers and dairy farmers specifically. He stated to me that he wishes the individ- ual farmers of Illinois would write letters to him to make known their wishes on farm legislation and other legislative matters af- fecting them. In the case of the recent oleo legislation and other legislation affecting the farmers, he stated that he received very few letters from the farmers of Illinois, but received many from the city dwellers of our State. An interesting fact in this connection is that Jast month Senator Lucas received and an~ swered personally 50,000 pieces of mail from persons from all parts of the country. He told me that his average is approximately 25,000 letters a month. We discussed many world affairs, including numerous Army problems, with which I am quite familiar. Naturally, a man in his posi~ tion has carefully studied every problem af- fecting our country, but the amazing thing to me was that he could discuss each and every one of them in detail. As I sat and visited with Senator Lucas after lunch, I thought about the fine record he has made as the Senator from Illinois. I. thought of how proud the people of our great State should be to know that an Dlinois Sen- ator has been chosen the majority leader of the United States Senate, the man who guides the destiny of all bills and all matters coming before the Senate. After several hours of visiting with him, I knew that Senator Scotr W. Lucas is a man who is devoting his entire time in Washing- ton to seeing that the wishes of the citizens of the State, which he represents, are carried out to the best of his ability. After leaving him, we had an opportunity to visit with other Representatives, Senators, and distinguished members of the press in Washington. All of them had a good word for our Senator, Scotr W. Lucas. As I left Washington, my reaction to my visit with Scorr W. Lucas was that he wants to do what the farmers of the State of Ili- nois want him to do, but in order to do this, he must be advised of their wishes. I feel that this is one place where our farmers have slipped. Too many of them have been will- ing to sit back and criticize without making their wishes known. It fs one thing to elect aman to serve you, but in order to have him serve you properly, you must advise him of your wishes. So I say to the farmers of the State of Illinois, your senior Senator Scorr W. Lucas is doing a real job for you in Washington. He is a man of experience, a real leader, and one that you should see to it is reelected in November to this high office, Curtailment of Postal Service EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. JAMES C. AUCHINCLOSS OF NEW JERSEY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mr. AUCHINCLOSS. Mr. Speaker, under the permission granted to me, I APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD am glad to include with these brief re- marks a copy of a letter I have today received from Mrs. Paul Mesgill, corre- sponding secretary of the Ladies Auxil- iary to the National Association of Letter Carriers, branch 225, Asbury Park, N. J. This letter very clearly and in a tem- perate manner describes the effect of Postmaster General Donaldson’s recent ill-advised order curtailing the postal service. If the administration would endeavor to implement the recommenda- tions of the Hoover Commission in the reorganization of the Post Office De- partment, there would be little need for curtailment of the service and the caus- ing of distress to so many faithful gov- ernmental servants. We are too apt to forget that the Post Office Department is a service to the people of the country and is not a busi- ness, and it is a service which the citi- zens expect to be maintained, nor do they expect it to be operated in an extrav- agant manner. SBusinesslikxe methods applied to this service would bring about a modernization and an increased effi~ ciency which would be reflected in sub- stantial savings and improvement of the service. I feel confident that the Postmaster General will reconsider his decision in this matter so that the distress as set forth in Mrs. Megill’s letter is alleviated. As she points out, no other nation in the world has curtailed its postal serv- ice, and it seems entirely out of order for us to do so. I hope my colleagues will read Mrs. Megill’s letter, which follows: LavIes AUXILIARY TO THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF Lzerrzer CARRIERS, BRancH 225, Asbury Park, N. J., June 2, 1950. DEAR REPRESENTATIVE AUCHINCLOSS: In be- half of the Asbury Park Letter Carriers’ Auxillary, No. 225, we wish to take this op- portunity to thank you for the reply to our letter concerning the curtailment of the Postal Service. We do appreciate all you have done and are doing to help us in the upheaval in the postal service. Mr. AUCHINCLOSS, we are writing the fol- lowing to inform you of the facts as we know them to exist in the Asbury Park Post Office. The curtailment order which goes into effect on June 10, 1950, is this: The Post- master has ordered 20 (8-hour schedule routes) cut to 18. The letter carriers are to report at 6:30 a.m. and case their mail for the route; due to the enlarged volume they are given approximately 3 hours to sort or case letters, magazines and papers. They are then to go out on the street and deliver that mail in approximately 5 hours street time put, Mr. Aucuincnoss, what is so inhuman about it is there are no provisions for lunch. The orders are, “take at least a half hour for lunch with whatever provisions you have made for lunch.” For the few letter carriers downtown it isn’t too much of a hardship to put his pouch in a box and walk to the post office where he can eat his lunch in comfort but what about all the other carriers who find themselves out in residential sections? Surely they are not able to carry their lunch pails all around the routes; if they should have their lunches sent out by mail truck where are they supposed to eat that lunch and find sanitary facilities? Residential areas have no public service stations and not even a chair is provided to sit on to eat that lunch nor is any protection from the extreme heat, rain or cold as the case may be. Mr. Avcuine.oss, is this the Government’s re-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ward the carriers receive after years of faith- ful service, many men who have 25, 35, and 40 years of carrying mail? It will be a hard continuous grind for whenever the car- riers load is lightened by delivery he will have to pick up another relay. The relays by the way are not all sent to locked mail boxes but to private residence porches. This order has already had reper- cussions in two published articles: One was thrown away 1n the trash by an unsuspecting resident and another was the theft of seven sacks of mail from a New York apartment house. The respect a letter carrier has for mail is to guard it almost with his life and now the Government orders it thrown around promiscuously. The letter carrier is not against econ- omy in any form because he necessarily knows every meaning of the word, but it seems so ridiculous to spend millions of dollars to transport mail quickly from one part of the country to another just to lay around awaiting delivery. In view of the recent strikes in industry we hesitate to think what would happen if these unions suddenly found that the provi- sions for lunch were completely wiped out of their workday. None of the countries receiving aid from our country have cut their mail service. These are the facts, Mr. AUCHINCLOsS, hav- ing no desire to delude a busy man like yourself. Thank you for being so patient with a group of women who are much concerned about the endurance and health of our husbands. Sincerely, Mrs. Pav MEGILL, Corresponding Secretary. Neptune, N. J. Tom Miller, of Texas EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. HOMER THORNBERRY CF TEXAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, on May 27, 2,400 Texans joined together in Texas’ Jefferson-Jackson Day dinner to honor the Democratic Party and to pay their respects to several of today’s outstanding leaders of the party. The dinner was held in Austin, the capital of Texas, and in the district which it is my privilege to represent. On the Monday following the dinner, May 29, the Austin American, in a front- page editorial, gave high and deserving honor to the man who did more than any other one individual to make the dinner the success which it was—the biggest Jefferson-Jackson Day dinner held any- where in the United States with the ex- ception of the Washington dinner. Texans attending the dinner had the privilege of hearing Vice President ALBEN BaRKLey, who had with him his lovely wife. Speaker Sam RaysBurn, Senator Lynpon JoHNSON, Congressmen WRIGHT Patm aN, Bos PoaGE, JOHN LYLE, and OLIN TEAGUE were also in attendance. The man behind the dinner, Tom Miller, has long been a keystone in the Democratic Party of Texas and the Nation. For 16 years he served as mayor’ of the city of Austin, and for the past few years he has served as finance chairman for the Democratic Party in Texas. Only last year he was honored by the citizens of Austin in being chosen as Austin’s most worthy citizen. As the editorial says, “Tom Miller rates right at the top among Texans who really do things for Texas.” Big Texas takes off its hat to Tom Miller, the man who does things in a big way for his Stete and his party. The editorial follows: MruLter SHows His Sizz The Jefferson-Jackson Day dinner demon- strated a lot of things as noteworthy as the cashier’s check for $100,000 handed to Speaker Sam Rayburn for deposit to the account of the Democratic Party. In money and in spirit, the affair has al- ready been tagged the biggest and the best’ in any of the 48 States. It was proof that Texans are still taking their party straight, undiluted and unhyphenated. It showed, convincingly, Austin’s know-how in putting on and handling a whooping big show. And, while the plaudits are still ringing, we think it demonstrated the fact that the man behind the dinner—Tom Miller—is a big man in a climate conducive to the pro- duction of big men. He rates right at the top among Texans who really do things for Texas. Austin people have suspected this all along. The dinner is the mest recent proof positive. Any affair that fetches $100,000 and 2,400 people is quite a project. It requires the talents and the time of a lot of people and every member of the committee in charge is deserving of the glory. It doesn’t minimize the efforts of anybody else to hand Tom Miller a lion’s share of it. He was the man who gathered in money and victuals, handled a thousand details of worrisome aspect, saw to the comfort of incoming visitors from Vice President BarKLEY and his wife down to the least known Democrat from the forks of the creek and commanded a crew of loyal work- ers here in Austin. He was, you can say, the man who caused the dinner to be. Characteristically, Miller wasn’t at the head table when the show came off. He wanted it that way. But the fourth table back on the south side of the coliseum, where he sat with his family, was a head table, too. A big man sat there. Trygve Lie Should Not Be Invited To Address Congress REMARKS HON. JOHN E. RANKIN OF MISSISSIPPI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Speaker, I thoroughly disagree with the gentleman from New York [Mr. MarcaNnronio] in his ardent desire to have us invite Mr. Trygve Lie of the so-called United Na- tions to address the Congress of the United States. This so-called United Nations is al- ready attempting to arrogate to itself the powers and prerogatives of a super- state, a supergovernment. It is al- ready invading various States of this Union and meddling with their internal affairs, A4193 Many of our States have alien land Jaws, which forbid an alien from owning land in those States. In my opinion, every State ought to have such a law. Recently a Japanese appealed to this so- called United Nations to outiaw the alien Jand laws of California. The United Nations, in violation of the Constitution of the United States, in violation of the Constitution of the State of California, in violation of the sovereignty of the United States of America, arrogated to itself the prerogative of declaring the alien land laws of California null and void. There are a dozen or more States that have these alien land laws. If this Com- munist-dominated United Nations has the power of a supergovernment to in- vade the State of California or Lcuisiana, or any other State, and wipe its alien land laws from the statute books, then it can invade any other State, wipe out its school laws, its labor laws, its laws of descent and distribution, its marriage laws, its laws against various crimes, or any other laws with which the members of that supergovernment disagree. A large number of the Communist dele- gates would probably find all laws un- desirable. Strange as it may seem, a crazy court in California rendered a decision back- ing up this mandate of the United Na- tions declaring the alien land laws of California null and void. Every member of that court who voted for that decision should be impeached, and if the Supreme Court of California should go off on such a tangent, then the State of California should clean out its supreme court. Thomas Jefferson said that if this Government was ever destroyed it would be destroyed by the courts. The rest of you may do as you please, but J, for one, representing the people of the sovereign State of Mississippi, do not propose to sit here and see our Gov- ernment destroyed in this way. Our first duty is to protect our coun~ try from her enemies at home, as well as abroad. If we fail to discharge that duty, then God save America. Federal Aid to Education EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF " HON. OREN HARRIS OF ARKANSAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I have supported Federal aid to education for our public schools since I became con- vinced of the dire need and came to the conclusion that in this field there is a direct responsibility of the Government, After the principle of local control and other fundamental policies were deter- mined in the last Congress, I supported the bill before the committee and even signed the discharge petition on the Speaker’s desk after the Education and Labor Committee failed to report it to
A4194 the House for consideration. I made a statement of my position at that time. It is disappointing to me that this Congress has likewise failed to assume the responsibility and provide this needed legislation. With others I had hoped that the Congress would have taken ac- tion before now. In that this second ses- sion of this Congress is well along and rapidly passing, I take this opportunity of again expressing my views and desire that some action yet will be taken, In that the Senate has passed a bill authorizing $300,000,000 per annum for Federal aid to assist the States in financ- ing their public schools, this now becomes @ responsibility which rests upon this House. Unfortunately the religious subject has been brought in as an issue. This question can and will be ultimately settled. I have previously stated my position that this program should apply to our public schools. This would be in keeping with the purpose and intent of the Constitution in preserving the sepa- ration of the church and state. In my judgment there is no unfinished task before us that is of greater im- portance than the enactment of a Fed- eral-aid-to-education bill. The education of our boys and girls lies at the foundation of our way of life. In any nation where the power of gov- ernment is derived from the governed the exercise of that power depends for its success upon the enlightenment of all citizens. Universal suffrage makes uni- versal education a necessity. *"Tis education forms the common mind: Just as the twig is bent, the tree’s inclined. The strength of our Nation is to a large degree the product of common knowl- edge and understanding on the part of men and women in every community in every State. That person best lends himself to democracy who is best grounded in the political, economic, and social institutions and traditions that distinguish the American way of life. The basic institution for the develop- ment of this common hackground of knowledge and understanding is our public schools. It is in the early years of the life of each citizen that the founda- tions of loyalty and of right attitudes are laid. The defense of our Nation is in the minds of our citizens. Good schools are essential and should be pro- vided wherever there are children to be’ educated. We know, however, that today there is in the United States no equitable distri- bution of educational opportunity. There are 10,000,000 persons who are for all practical purposes functionally illit- erate. There are several million school-age children who are enrolled in no school at all. There are perhaps 2,000,000 who are under the direction of teachers unable to qualify for the lowest standard certifi- cate. In many instances classrooms are presided over by persons with no more than a high-school education. The ratio of substandard certificated teachers to teachers holding standard certificates to- day is 20 times higher than at the begin- ning of World War II. It is of course impossible to appraise with exactness the penalties that flow from these conditions. We do know that they are heavy. They undercut our economy. Poverty and illiteracy are closely related. These penalties also con- stitute a threat to our national security in time of war, a fact that is strongly attested by the heavy rejection rate for educational shortages under selective service during both World War I and World War II. “The sure foundations of the state are laid in knowledge, not in ignorance,” de- clared G. W. Curtis, an outstanding lead- er of American thought in the last cen- tury. It is time, in the light of our own experiences in the twentieth century, that we shape a course of action with re- spect to the education of our young peo- ple that conforms to the basic needs of our country. To my knowledge the House Committee on Education and Labor has this year given considerable time and study to Federal aid to education measures. In late March the committee agreed, ac- cording to reports that I am sure are reliable, to consider H. R. 5939—often re- ferred to as the Burke public-school teachers’ salary hbill—sometime after April 17. We are familiar with the controversies that have raged around Federal aid measures before the committee, partic- ularly S. 246 which the committee re- jected by a vote of 13 to 12. The Burke bill avoids the area of religious conflict in Federal-aid legislation by limiting the use of Federal funds to the salaries of public-school teachers. All benefits in controversy are excluded from such leg- islation. I should very much like to have an opportunity to vote on a measure of this kind and I urge, Mr. Speaker, that the House Committee on Education and La- bor advance a bill which will give an early chance to vote for the improve-~ ment of educational opportunities for our young people. The most critical need today in edu-~ cation is for qualified teachers. We do not have as many of them as we need. There is a shortage of qualified ele- mentary school teachers in every State. We need 90,000 qualified teachers to replace those now employed on sub- standard certificates. We need an addi- tional 75,000 each year to fill vacancies created by resignations, retirement, and death. Another 15,000 are needed to re- duce overcrowding of classrooms in each year for the next 10 years. An addi- tional 32,000 are required to take care of the extra million school-age children this year as a result of the wartime and postwar baby boom. A total of 212,000 public school teachers are needed now. Estimates indicate that only 35,000 elementary school teachers will come from our teacher-training institutions this year, of which number only 22,000 will be college graduates. This contrasts sharply with the 103,000 that are re- quired if our obligations to our children are to be met. Mr. Speaker, every possible effort should be made by the Elouse to pass a APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Federal-aid-to-education bill before ad- journment. This legislation should be accorded the highest priority on the House Calendar. There is time in which to act on such legislation. The Nation can afford to make a de- cent educational opportunity available for its children. We have voted a large sum, running into billions of dollars, for European aid. We have voted almost $2,000,000,060 for public works. We have voted an addition $1,500,000,000 for high- way aid to be expended over a 2-year period. We have done these things without finding such expenditures to be particularly disturbing to a majority of the Members of this House. But when it comes to authorizing the relatively small sum of $300,000,003 per annum for the educational] welfare of our children there are those who begin to gag and say “This is the road to social- ism” or to something else when as a mat- ter of fact the Federal Government has been providing aid in one way or another to education for a century and a half. This was effectively stated by the chair- man of the House Committee on Educa- tion and Labor during the 1949 hearings on S. 246 and H. R. 4643, page 257, when, referring to organizations that have op- posed the enactment of Federal-aid legis- lation, he said: The thing that astounds me with these organizations is that they get so meticulously careful in a matter of this kind— Federal aid to education— and I have hurdled more obiectives than you might think to arrive at the ‘cc. where I am—-we get so meticulous about those things, but when it comes to a British loan, or $7,000,000,000 to Europe, or $1,000,000,000 here or somewhere else, there is never a pro- test. And I believe you will agree with me there is not a better investment on God's earth than education and children, It is my firm belief that this House will pass any reasonable Federal-aid-to- education legislation which the House Committee on Education and Labor will report. It is my sincere hope that the committee will move to early action in order that all of us may have a chance to perform a service which has long been overdue. The Right To Vote EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. RUSSELL V. MACK OF WASHINGTON IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mr. MACK of Washington. Mr. Speaker, of all the rights of Americans, none should be more precious to them than their right to vote. In Italy, where the people have far less educational advantages than in the United States, 89 percent of all eligible voters went to the polls in Italy’s last election, In Germany and in France, the percentage of those voting in na-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD tional elections has been even higher. Yet, in the United States in the last pres- idential election, only 52 percent of America’s eligible citizens voted. All of this goes to show, I think, that those who have been deprived of the right to vote, as most Europeans have in the times past, prize higher than we do the precious right to vote. A very thought-provoking, informa- tive, and patriotic editorial on this sub- ject, written by Mr. Albert S. Goss, Na- tional Grange master, appears in the current issue of the National Grange Monthly. In this editorial, Master Goss says: True Rieritr To VoTe The average American takes great pride in thore sturdy souls who fovght the Revo- Jutronary War to gain the right of self-gov- ernment, yet 48 out of every 100 citizens entitled to vote in the last general election did not take the trouble to cast their votes. The right to vole is very dear to those who ave personally lived under the heel of oppression. In a recent election in Italy, despite all its illiteracy, 89 percent of the eligible voters voted. France and Germany have bettered this record but in 1948 only 52 percent of our cligible American citizens took enough interest to vole. You may he sure that everyone who had some special ax to grind went to the polls. With half of our people staying home, every Communist and every crackpot in effect casts two yotes. With a little ganging up and concentration in the proper places, they are able to wicld tremendous influence because of the apathy of those of us who have come to take frecdom for granted. Most of the States in the following table should be thoroughly ashamed of their rec-~ ord. Even the best of them have nothing of which to be proud. The table shows the percent of eligible voters who voted in the 1948 general election: National Grange Utah. . nee nen nnn ene nee = 74.6 Colorado inne ne enn eee mt om ne enon mes em ~ 714 Delaware... n-ne nee ee eee eee 70.9 Montann.n .. nnn eee een ~ 70.3 Nevada... na nnnnn een enn - 69.0 West Virginia... nen ee 67.8 Idaho_---- eee 67.6 Tllinois. nen eee -- 67.5 Massachusetts... mn nen man 66.8 North Dakota -- 66,5 Rhode Island... 64. 8 Ind lara. 2 nnn ~ 64.7 South Dakota. n-ne nee eee 64.6 CONNECLICUtH 2 nen ee eee 64.0 Minnesota. 8 nner ne eee 63. 6 New Hampshire____.--~- — 63.4 New Mexico 63.0 New York... 62.5 Kansas....--.---~------ 61.0 TOW2. oo nee ne ee eee 60.0 Missouri... nner enn — 60.0 Wyoming..-.-.--- ene 60.0 CAE OF ME Be ae ee ee 59.9 New Jorscy..~----- ae enn e ieee eee eee 59.9 Wisconsin... 59.0 Nebraska... 57.7 OVO a ae ew ee ee re ee ee 56.5 Washington... 54.9 Michigan. 2 ene ee 53, Pennsylvania... ennnen enna enes 52. Vermont... nn nen ee eee ees 51. Kentucky. . Oxklahoma....-.-.------: ATIZON AR Wo ewe eee one oe om me Oregon... + -- enn ee ne enn ene Maine... nee meee Maryland_.....-.---~.-- Florida....--. North Carolina. Tennessee... ey eer Louisiana.-.--.-..--------~---------~ 27.7 Texas._.-~-.-.--------- -- 26.6 Virginia__- --- 23.7 Arkansas-_— ~ 22.0 Georgia... ~~ 21.8 Mississippi-....-.---_-_ ~- 16.6 South Carolina. -- 13.9 Alabama__..--.--------------------- -13.7 United States average-_..------ 52.0 The Cranges throughout the land could render no greater service at this time than to lay plans for a practical prcegram for getting out the votes. Some States already have held their primaries. In many States the days for registration will soon be over. It is not enovgh to get out the vote of ihe Grange members only. Granges should put on campaigns for getting every cligible voter registered and then follow up with a cam- paign to get out the votes. We live under a representative form of government. Our duty is to see that these placed in a position of official responsibility are truly representative of the people within their districts. Much of the sad state of af- fairs into which we have drifted 1s due to the fact that we have allowed minority groups to take over. It is high time that the people speak for themselves. Both Union and Confederate Seldicrs Are Honored by Chicago’s Civil War Monu- ments EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. BARRATT O'HARA OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, June 1, 1950 Mr. O'HARA of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, in the first session of the Highty-first Congress I introduced a resolution for an all-faiths memorial, being joined by many of my colleagues as sponsors. AS the authorization of this living memorial to the spirit of tolerance would not en- tail an expenditure of public funds and would serve a wholesome and useful pur- pose, I hope that some action on the reso- lution may be taken before we adjourn. There is a distinction only in form be- tween a memorial and a monument Both keep alive in the present the spirit of the past. They preserve and glorify the virtues of those who have trod the road before us and set the pattern of our course. I would say that no force is more potent in the molding of the national character of a people. Each generation of Americans has made its own distinct contribution, both physical and moral, and the nature of this contribution can be read in the monuments and memorials that have been left in its wake. Our generation perhaps to a greater degree than any that has preceded has progressed along the lines of tolerance. Truly, Mr. Speaker, ours is the generation of toler- ance. We have learned not only to work together, but to pray together even though our approach to the infinite ear is through different faiths and creeds, This is the thought behind the resolu- tion for an all-faiths living memorial. The form of the memorial, it is provided, A4I95 is later to ba determined by the members of the commission that would be created. Monuments and memorials often tell as much if not more of a people than the printed words in bocks of history. In Chicago, where Abraham Lincoln was nominated for the Presidency, is a mon- ument to John A, Logan, great son of Illinois and a hero of the armies of the Worth. In Chicago also is a monument to some 6,000 Confederate soldiers who died as prisoners in the camp named for Lincoln’s great rival in the political arena, Stephen A. Douglas. Under the caption ‘Decoration Day Tour” Charles Collins, conductor of the Line o’ Type or Two in the Chicago Tribune, has a cescriptica of monuments in Chicago associated with the heroes of the war of the sixties. I trust that my colleagues will find the article as inter- esting aSI did. The Line o’ Type or Two column is widely read in the Middle West. One of the predecessors of Mr. Collins as the conductor of the column was the late beloved Richard Henry Little, one of the greatest of the many great and famous newspapermen pro- duced by Chicago. His sister, I might add, is the wife of Arthur Sears Henning, long known in the Capital as the head of the Chicago Tribune Washington staff. The article on Chicago’s Civil War mon- umcnts follows: DecoraTIon Day Tour In Grant Park at the foot of Ninth Street, facing Michigan Avenue in an excellent posi- tion to review military parades, is the eques- trian statue of Gen. John A. Logan, who led the movement for the establishment of Decoration Day as a national holiday. It stands on a high mound, which is often described by humorists as the only hill in Chicago. Such wags are always wrong, and in this case, it should be noted that there is a higher artificial mound in Lincoln Park, which bears a statue of Governor Oglesby, elected in 1865, 1872, and 1885. The Logan statue, completed in 1897, represents the talent of a great American sculptor, Augustus St. Gaudens. [See also his seated Lincoln, a few blocks to the north.] Ancient wags of the town have been known to say that Logan’s horse, a highly spirited animal, seems ready to flick a fly off its nose with its fore hoof. Con- noisseurs of large scale public sculpture, however, have a high regard for this blend- ing of horse and man in heroic bronze. An inscription on the pedestal of Chicago’s memorial to General Logan says that he is buried beneath the statue. This is a state- ment of an intention that was never carried out. He was buried in Washington. * * * Perhaps the inscription is no longer legible, for much of the bronze lettering and orna- ment around the base of the pedestal has been ruined by vandalism. The Chicago park board sleeps over this problem year after year. It will not wake up until some- pody steals Logan’s horse. In Oak Woods cemetery, on the south side, there is an impressive memorial to the Con- federate soldiers who died in captivity at Camp Douglas. Burials, about 6,000. Iden- tifled and named with rank and regiment on bronze tablets are 4,275. This roster forms a sampling of the racial backgrounds of the rank and file of the Confederacy. About 99 percent of the names are of Eng- lish, Welsh, Scottish, and Irish origin. In St. Boniface cemetery [Clark Street and Lawrence Avenue] near the west wall, there is a memorial to members of a regiment of German-speaking citizens of Chicago who fell in the Civil War. The inscription is
A4196 in German. Most of the names suggest orgins in the Rhineland area. In Calvary cemetery, Evanston, near the Chicago Avenue entrance, partly visible to every passer-by, there is a monument in memory of Col. James A. Mulligan, a Chi- cagoan who recruited and commanded the Twenty-third Illinois Volunteers, entirely composed of men of Irish birth or descent. This regiment was called the Irish Brigade, but it is not to be confused with the other and larger Irish Brigade led by Gen, Thomas F. Meagher, a New Yorker. Colonel Mulligan died of battle wounds at Kernstown, Va., July 26, 1864. His last command was, “Lay me down and save the flag.’ These words form his epitaph. The Proposed Milk Embargo-—We Hear About Free World Trade But We Must Meet the Domestic Embargoes EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. REID F. MURRAY OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mr. MURRAY of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, the proposal to reestablish an embargo on milk coming into Washing- ton is of nationalimportance. Washing- ton is the only city in the Nation over which the Congress has direct control. While the administration invites larger and larger imports of foreign dairy prod- ucts by continually lowering the duty, it is a party to erecting embargoes on the marketing domestically of dairy prod- ucts. My contention is that grade A milk should be allowed to be shipped interstate the same as any other grade A product. The erecting of trade barriers under the guise of trumped up health standards will not stand analysis. In a few months in my State, Wiscon- sin, where milk is now bringing as low as 5 to 6 cents per quart and where one- eighth of the milk of the Nation is pro- duced, nothing but grade A milk can be produced. It does not make sense to first, com~- plain because the CCC accumulates dairy products when the Government itself is a party to preventing products from be- ing marketed, second, to erect artificial embargoes that affect domestically pro- duced dairy products and not even re- quire imports to meet the same stand- ards, third, to be a party to a program that subsidizes synthetic products like oleo, filled milk, filled cream, filled ice cream, and when this is done, to turn around and put an embargo on the mar- keting of grade A milk wherever pro- duced. First, if any milk, or milk products, like dried whole milk or evaporated milk, has the endorsement of doctors for baby feedings and, second, if any milk, or milk product is distributed by the millions of pounds through the school-lunch pro- gram, it looks ridiculous to try to main- tain that the same milk is not good enough for the general public; third, if other drinks can be marketed by mechanical or self-service, there is no valid reason why grade A milk is not en- titled to the same markets. In the meantime please go slow when you complain about the price of milk, or when you complain about the CCC accu- mulations. I include a copy of a bill I have intro- duced to meet this problem and my let- ter to Washington’s health officer and his answer thereto: H. R. 1555 A bill to authorize the shipment of grade A milk into the District of Columbia Be it enacted, ete., That the dairy plants in the District of Columbia are authorized to purchase, receive, process, sell, and distribute shipments of (1) grade A milk from any of the 48 States in the United States; (2) to receive, process, sell, and distribute cream imade from gerade A milk from any of the 48 States m the United States; (3) to purchase, receive, sell, and distribute natural skim milk and dried skim milk manufactured from grade A milk; (4) and to receive, process, reconstitute, sell, and distribute in the Dis- trict of Columbia, as bottle milk, any mill made from dried or natural skim milk made from grade A milk and cream made from grade A milk with present legal requirements for butterfat and milk solids. This act shall take effect 30 days after its enactment. Apri 6, 1950. Danret L. SECKINGER, M. D., Health Officer, District of Columbia, Washington, D.C. Dear Sie: It will be appreciated if you will kindly advise me whether or not it is permis- sible, under the present regulations in the District of Columbia to— 1. Ship skim milk, made from grade A milk, into the District of Columbia and dis- tribute this milk. 2. Bring dried skim milk into the District of Columbia, reconstitute it and sell it as skim milk. If this is not permitted, would you be kind enough to advise me why it is not? Sincerely yours, Rep F. Murray, Member of Congress. GOVERNMENT OF THE District or CoLumsBtra, ,OPFICE OF THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT, April 13, 1950. Hon, Rem F, Murray, Member of Congress, Seventh Dis~ trict, Wisconsin, House of Represent~ atives, Washington, D.C. Drak CONGRESSMAN Murray: In accordance with your request of April 6, 1950, I am en-~ closing herewith answers to your questions relating to the distribution of skim milk and dried skim milk in the District of Columbia, 1. “Ship skim milk, made from grade A milk, into the District of Columbia and dis- tribute this milk.” The Muk Act, Public, No. 496, Sixty-eighth Congress, approved on February 27, 1925, de- fines skim milk as “that part of milk from which the fat has been partly or en- tirely removed and shall contain not less than 9 percent of milk solids, inclusive of fat.” This definition is taken from section 13. The health department has taken the position that skim milk sold in this city must be obtained from fluid milk from producers (dairy farms) who hold a permit and from pasteurizing plants (dairies) who likewise hold a permit under provisions of this act, which is enclosed herewith. 2. “Bring dried skim milk into the District of Columbia, reconstitute it and sell it as skim milk.” ‘ Section 10 of the Milk Act requires label- Ing of both skim milk and reconstructed APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD milk and section 18 clearly defines recon- structed milk. Although the problem pre- sented by your question has never arisen, the health department would take this posi- tion: Dried skim milk if obtained from dairy farms holding a permit, separated and dried by a pasteurizing plant (dairy) holding a permit, could be reconstructed and offered for sale as skim milk provided it was labaled “reconstructed skim milk.” The term “recon- structed” used in the Milk Act is analogous to your term “reconstituted.” Section 2 of the Milk Act provides that anyone desiring to ship fluid milk or cream into the District of Columbia must first se- cure a permit from the Health Officer so to do, In conclusion, will say that in the advent the Health Officer’s authority would he chal- lenged, the Corporation Cotnsel would be asked to render a legal opinion. Sincerely, Danie. L. SeckincEr, M. D., Health Officer. What’s Wrong With Profit? EXTENSION OF REMARKS : OF HON. THOMAS G. ABERNETHY OF MISSISSIPPI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mr. ABERNETHY. Mr. Speaker, un- der leave to extend my remarks in the Appendix, I include the following edi- torial taken from a recent edition of Pathfinder magazine: WHaAtT’s WRONG WITH PROFIT? Several months ago the following item appeared in the Newark (N. J.) Evening News: “The Pennsylvania Railroad was attacked today by the Essex-West Hudson CIO Coun- cil for ‘devotion to the principles of profits first, the public welfare last.’ Joel R. Ja~ cobson, executive secretary, accused the rail- road of fantastic greed and unmitigated gall in announcing a dividend of 50 cents and simultaneously accepting a rate increase.” The actual fact is that the dividend did not come out of current profits, because for many months the Pennsylvania Railrond had been just about making expenses and even at times operating at a loss. The 50-cent dividend was paid out of earnings from pre- vious years, prudently saved for such a sit- uation. But the most disturbing (and in- comprehensible) thing about it is the kind of thinking that considers payment of a dividend evidence of “fantastic greed and unmitigated gall,” and that it is wrong for @ railroad to accept a rate increase in order to operate at a profit instead of a loss. What's wrong with operating at a profit? Every business concern must make a profit if it is to stay in business. Any company that fails to take in more than it pays out is headed for bankruptcy—and its employees for the loss of their jobs. Indeed, it was a labor leader who said: “The greatest crime against labor is a business that fails to make a@ profit.” And what about the millona of people who have saved money and invested their savings in the stocks of the Nation’s corporations? Aren't they entitled to a profit on their money? If not, why should they risk it? And from where then would come our fac~ tories and the jobs they provide? Corporations are people, people just like you and me, people who have invested their savings under the very common, very human, very understandable incentive of making a
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD profit. There are 18,000,000 such people— corporation is only a legal word by which their investments are pooled for collective and efficient use. There are some people who would have us believe that to make a profit is an evil thing. Yet they themselves expect interest on their bank savings accounts and dividends on their life insurance policies—and these are made possible by business profits. Everyone who owns a savings account or life insurance policy shares in the profits of American busi- Ness. The hope of profit is a universal driving force. America was built on it; it was the dream of profit that made people willing to risk their savings in the new factories, new machines, new ideas from which have come our high standard of living, our high wages, our steady growth. And our hopes for con- tinued progress and prosperity and a still higher standard of living have a common foundation—profit. It is what spurs men on to make things more efficiently, to sell them for less, to make what is a luxury today available to everyone tomorrow. We all want to keep America strong, its factories humming, its people steadily em- ployed at good wages, but to achieve these goals, American business must be healthy and prosperous. And to be prosperous, it must operate at a profit. The man who sells his home for more than he paid for it is not condemned for having made a profit. Why should we deny the necessity for a legitimate profit to American industry and the 18,000,- 000 thrifty people whose savings enable it to operate? Texas Production Credit Associations Are Farmer-Owned EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. W. R. POAGE OF TEXAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, June 5, 1950 Mr. POAGE. Mr. Speaker, on Decem- ber 31, 1940, the 36 production credit associations in Texas returned to the Federal Treasury the last of the Govern- ment capital which had been advanced to them. They are now entirely farmer- owned institutions operating on the money and credit supplied by their own members. I think this is an outstanding record. As chairman of the subcommittee of the Committee on Agriculture which has charge of all farm credit activities I am especially delighted that the farmers of my own State have sct such a fine ex- ample for the Nation. There should be very few who would be bold enough to criticize a Federal pro- gram of assistance in establishing this needed farm credit. Those who have criticized may find it difficult to explain that the farmers have paid off their in- debtedness to the Government and are evidencing the ability to operate a sound and needed credit system. As of this date, the two largest seg- ments of our farm credit program in Texas are entirely farmer-owned. They are the Houston Land Bank and the 36 production credit associations. Our committee has sought to find a workable and sound basis for placing the Bank for Cooperatives on this same road to pri- vate ownership. This endeavor has not been easy, but I believe that, given time, we will be able to make of this cooperative bank another farmer-owned institution. The REA financed cooperatives are not a part of the Farm Credit Admin- istration, but they are closely related to its work. They, too, have made great strides ard are making a wonderful rec- ord of meeting their obligations. Many of them have actually made substantial payments on their indebtedness before it became due. I think that the farmers of Texas are to be highly congratulated, and I think that they are entitled to the appreciation of the taxpayers of the en- tire Nation for the fine example which they have set. The great achievements of the Texas production credit associations and of the land bank prove that farmers can and will use Government help to provide for their own needs and that they can and will stand on their own feet at the earliest opportunity. A number of our leading periodicals have commented on this fine record. I attach some of these comments: [From the Temple (Tex.) Tclegram of January 2, 1950] Success or TExaS PCA Lain To FarRMER, RANCHER GROUPS (By Louis Franke) Two things, to my mind, stand out in the announcement made yesterday that the Texas production credit district, 1 of 12 in the country, had repaid to the United States Treasury the last of $8,000,000 advanced to the Texas associations as operating capital under the Farm Credit Act of 1983. Make it three. The third is that it’s hard to understand why anyone in these days would voluntarily give up the free use of Government capital and in so doing take on a tax bill that is going to run around a quarter million dol- lars a year. As one man put it to me, “The way everyone has their hands out to the Government these days, you could almost say that what the production credit associations did isn’t the American way. I wouldn’t be surprised if someone investigated them.” But the other two things together make up the plan or system which a lot of people believe is responsible for the success of the associations. The first is the loan system whereby a committee of farmers and ranchmen pass on the requests of their neighbors who want to borrow. It just stands to reason that a man who is raising cotton would be a better judge of another cotton farmer’s ability to raise cotton than anyone else. It’s a wonder some- one didn’t think of that long ago. Back of the loan committee plan is a pretty sound philosophy—look first at the man who wants to borrow. The committee also con- siders the repayment capacity of his busi- ness. Instead of looking at the proposition at first to see whether it is safe for the asso- ciation, they figure out whether it is sound for the farmer. They also go into the purposes of the loan, Will whatever he wants to buy make money for him? And here is a strange thing—they tell me it is not unusual for a committee to decide that the applicant is not asking for enough money. Then they call him in and say, “What you are asking for looks to us like it will not be enough to make your business as efficient as it could be. So we doubt if it will pay off, and therefore it is not a sound loan. But, if you will borrow a A497 little more and do it right, we will approve the loan.” Finally they look at his financial condition, the progress he has been making and—and only then—his collateral. They figure that if the man, the repayment capacity of his business, his present financial condition and the purpose for his wanting the loan pass muster, the value of his collateral will be secondary. It adds up to this: the more weaknesses that show up in the first four items, the more important the collateral; and the more im- portant the collateral becomes, the less desir- able the loan. In 16 years of operation under this sys- tem, the 36 Texas associations together have made almost 240,000 loans totaling over 900,000,000; their losses ran to less than five cents on $100. That is a pretty good recom- mendation for the plan. The second strong point seems to be the intermediate credit bank system, through which an association is able to discount its loans and reach into every part of the Nation to borrow money wherever private investors have money to loan. Over in India it has frequently happened that people in one valley have a complete crop failure and starve while in a nearby part of the country there is a bumper crop and no market, due to the lack of trans- portation facilities. The same thing has often happened in the past in the United States in the field of credit. Credit sources in one part of the country dry up and in another there may be plenty of money available. The intermediate credit bank system has bridged the gap. The investment public has so much confidence in the short-term deben-= ture issues of the intermediate credit system that private banks, trust companies, in- surance companies and securities brokers Oversubscribe each issue several times. The sounder a loan is, of course, the lower the interest rate. The Federal intermediate credit bank issues currently pay a little less than one and a half percent interest—only @ little more than government bonds. The system stood the test of the depression of the early 1930’s and never saw the time when it was not ready to discount any sound note. [From the Temple (Tex.) Telegram of January 2, 1950] Waco Propucrion Crepir Group Pays OFF Last $5,000 OwEp Among the 36 production credit associa- tions of Texas which retired the last of their Government capital last week was the Waco association, of which Bell, Coryell, McClen~ nan, Bosque, and Falls Counties are mem- bers, Burt Davidson, field representative for the association in Temple, announced, Mr. Davidson said that of the 36 associa- tions in Texas, nine paid off their capital in 1948, six in the first part of 1949, and now the remaining 21 are paying off theirs. The Waco association now has about 1,000 members of the five Central Texas counties, Mr. Davidson said. Bell County has about 200 members. Originally the Government put about $350,000 into the Waco association as cap- ital, and the association has been paying it off all along. The last payment, which was made Sat~ urday, was for $5,000. “We will now be just like any other in-~ stitution. We have retired all of our Gov- ernment capital and are fully member- owned,” he said. The production credit association was set up in the thirties when it was difficult for farmers to obtain loans from private in- stitutions.
A4198 Farmers can borrow from the TPCA for any co™icvl+urcl sirpose, including the educa- “7 ear +. to buy a new car, buy equip- ment, and other such purposes. Interest is 6 percent, paid only on the number of doliars the farmer uses and on the number of days he uses them. [From the Waco (Tex.) Tribune-Herald of January 1, 1950] PUA Pays Orr DEBT An unusual story of how a group of farm- ers, in the depression year of 1933, accepted the invitation of the Federal Government to organize a production credit association for Bell, Bosque, Coryell, Falls, and McLennan Counties, and have seen the organization progress from rags to riches in 16 years, is revealed in the business records of the Waco Production Credit Association. Ben D. Giles, McLennan County director and vice president of the association, told reporters that the last dollar of Federal capi- tal was returned to the Government on De~ cember 31, culminating a program of retire< ment of Government stock begun 5 years ago by the local farmers and ranchers—over 1,000 in number-—-who are now the sole owners of the business. All 36 production credit associations of Texas have done likewise, and Texas has led the Nation in attaining complete member- ownership. With this voluntary retirement of all Gov- ernment-owned stock, automatically follows the liability for the Federal income and all other taxes that other businesses and cor- porations pay. At a time when so many people and organizations are trying to escape taxes and to live off the Government, it is a novelty to see Texas farmers hand back their Government capital and voluntarily assume tax liability. ORGANIZED IN 1933 Organization of the Waco association took place on December 28, 1933, when a meeting of 30 farmers and businessmen was held at the courthouse in Waco. John Gorham of ‘Waco, route 3, was chairman and Louis Wil- liams of Marlin was secretary of the group, which also included J. H. Youngblood, Ross Brown, 8. ¥. Meharg of Waco, R. L. McKnight, Jr ,L. E. Ellwood of Temple, J. HE. Masters, Sr., of V.ott, W. C. Pallmeyer of Steiner, Tom C. Parks of Clifton, D. H. Attaway of Hewitt, R. J. Phillips of Iredell, H. C. Odle of Meridi- an, D. V. Poston, Charles E. Danshby of Valley Mills; T. W. Hander, Carl H. Aiken of Belton; John P. Geisler of Riesel; W. D. Walker of Satin; Holley Haynes of McGregor; Sanford Garrett, G. H. Bargainer of Reagan; M. Blankenship, A. C. Schloeman, D. I. Glass, P. H. Martin of Gatesville; S. J. Barnard of Mount; J. F, Dulaney of Mart; and J. W. Whittington of Oenaville. The first board of directors was composed of Ed Brewster of Temple, M. Blankenship of Gatesville, Charles E. Dansby of Valley Mills, Ross Stricklin of Reagan, and Robert A. Gorham of Waco, Route 8. The present board of directors is composed, of Lloyd Williamson of Pearl, Ben D. Giles of Waco, Route 3; R. M. Jones of Clifton, Lathel O. Caskey of Belton and W. D. Walker of Satin. GETTING THE RECORD STRIGHT Carlos Val. Smith, secretary-treasurer and manager of the association, who succeeded J. R. Taylor in November 1944, said: “I am indeed proud that our members, by their loyalty and cooperation, have made it pos< sible to realize the dream of owning our credit institution, “I would like to get the record straight,” he continued, “on two points about which the public has been confused. “(1) Production credit associations are not ‘relief agencies,’ ‘Government outfits,” nor even a ‘New Deal’ invention. They are owned, controlled, and operated by local farmers and ranchers. They are part of a complete system of credit for agriculture planned back in 1912, started off in 1915 with the establishment of the Federal Land Banks, carried forward another notch by the estab- lishment, in 1928, of the Federal Interme- diate Credit Banks, and rounded out in 1933— 84 by the establishment of the production credit associations. “(2) Production credit associations do not Jend, and never have loaned, any Government money. The object of the system is to tap the great reservoirs of private credit in the money marke’ of the country and make this credit available to agriculture through lend- ing institutions owned and controlled by the farmers themselves. “Our association,” Smith added, “brovght over $1,600,000 of this money into the cen- tral Texas community in 1949, to the benefit not only of farmers and ranchers but of people in all other lines of business.” [From the Dallas (Tex.) Morning News of Jan. 2, 1950] Texas PCA CiEars ITs INDEBTEDNESS Hearty congratulations are in order for the State’s 36 production credit associations and their coordinating agency, the Production Credit Corporation of Houston. During 1949, these associations put through a most re- markable transaction—they paid back to the Federal Government every cent of taxpay- ers’ money that the Government used in organizing them in 1933-34. The associa- tions, therefore, enter 1950 backed solely by private funds. They are full-fledged units of private enterprise. They must pay in- come taxes and all the other innumerable duties of which they have been exempt. And no one is happier about the whole thing than PCA itself. PCA was organized and still exists solely to meet short-term credit demands of Texas farmers and ranchmen. Actually, PCA is an extension of the agricultural credit system that began with the establishment of the Federal land bank in 1917. The land-bank system already has returned its Government investment. And now PCA is following suit. Almost 33,000 Texas farmers and stockmen have dug into their pockets for $8,000,000 to cover the Government’s original investment in PCA. Then the borrowers have forked up another $7,000,000 to establish capital and surplus needed to support PCA’s vol- ume of short-term loans. The system requires borrowers to buy cap= ital stock in proportion to the size of their loans—~-85 in stock for every $100 loan. But the $15,000,000 raised includes only about $3,000,000 in capital stock that borrowers legally were required to purchase. Indeed, borrowers wanted to own the system to such an extent that they have retained $3,200,- 000 in stock they were under no obligation to keep. They also have purchased an addi- tional $3,000,000 in stock, and they have kept intact about $5,800,000 in surplus from earn- ings over the past 16 years. Embedded in the action of these Texas farmers and ranchmen is a neat little ser- mon on Americanism. They were under no legal obligation to put up that extra money. No other PCA district has done it. They could have retained Government invest- ments in PCA. They could have continued to pile up tax-free profits and surpluses for many years. They could have enjoyed finan- cial security. But they didn’t. They weighed security against freedom. They chose free- dom. [From the Dallas (Tex.) News of December , 1950] Herr Arr THE Facts ABOUT PRODUCTION CREDIT ASSOCIATIONS IN TExas 1. They are organizations owned and operated by farmers and ranchers—making loans for crop and livestock production. 2. They obtain their loan funds by selling their loans to the Federal Intermediate APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Credit Bank of Houston, which in turn gets its funds by selling short-term bonds to private investors in all parts of the country. 8. In 1949 these associations brought about $100,000,000 of this money into Texas com- munities to the benefit not only of farmers and ranchers but of people in all other lhnes of business. 4. Although the Government furnished the initial capital stock back in 1934, these as- sociations do not and never have loaned Gov- ernment money. 5. The last dollar of this Government capi- tal in the 36 production credit associations in Texas were paid off at the end of 1949, and all these associations are now completely owned by farmers and ranchers. 6. These associations now pay Federal in- come and other taxes just like other privately owned business. The production credit associations and their 88,000 farmer-rancher stockholders would like for every businessman in the State, as well as all agricultural people, to learn more about what these financial or- ganizations are and how their services bene- fit the whole community. Headquarters of the associations are located in the following Texas towns: Amarillo, Austin, Beaumont, Brenham, Bryan, Canadian, Coleman, Corsi- cana, Crockett, Crystal City, El Campo, Gon- zales, Harlingen, Houston, Jasper, Laredo, Lubbock, Marfa, Marshall, McKinney, Mem- phis, Mexia, Midland, Plainview, Robstown, San Angelo, San Saba, Stamford, Stephen- ville, Sulphur Springs, Sweetwater, Tecxar- kana, Tyler, Uvalde, Waco, and Wichita Falls, [From the Country Gentleman of January Extra! THess Texans Reruse To LEAN on Unoue Sam The 36 production credit associations in Texas are doing something that deserves the thoughtful attention of the whole country. They are paying off the last dollar of the capi- tal advanced by the Federal Government to enable them to become established. In a time when large numbers of people are seeking dependence on the Government, itis exceptional to find a group that is volun- tarily giving it up. The action is all the more impressive when these facts are con- sidered: The use of this Government capital was free and no time Hmit was set for its return. In paying it all off, the associations automatically became subject to Federal in- come and other taxes, from which Congress had exempted them so long as they retained any Government capital. When Congress set up the production credit system in 1933 and approprlated $120,- 000,000 to get it started, it almed to assure the permanency of the associations and also to permit the gradual return of Government capital. The PCA’s were made cooperatives, with each borrower buying stock in propor~ tion to his loan. Eventually, it was in- tended, the farmers and stockmen were to own these associations completely through the purchase of capital and the accumula- tion of earnings into surplus reserves. The responsibility for achieving these ends was put upon the farmer-stockholders, They were to operate and control the associations, performing the tasks of making repayable loans and building up strong, self-supporting institutions, through boards of directors chosen from among themselves. The farmers and stockmen who directed the affairs of the Texas PCA’s took these pro- visions literally. During a 16-year period they made loans totaling $844,434,623. Losses plus the reserves set up to take care of such contingencies amounted to less than 5 cents on each $100 loaned. They also kept in mind the other half of the arrangement. By last July 1 all but $105,000 of the $7,835,- 000 of Government capital once advanced to them had been returned. The last of it is being paid off right after January 1.