A720 rate on long-term securities is not the only method by which the Federal Re- serve Board can protect its open market committee. In exercising its control over national banks the Federal Reserve Board has the power to distinguish be- tween risk loans and normally sound loans. It also has the power to ask Congress to increase its power over re- serve requirements and as a temporary war emergency measure extend that power to all banks. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Tre TREASURY-FEDERAL RESERVE DISPUTE I would like to talk to you this morning about the differing convictions of the Treas- ury and the Federal Reserve, because these involve questions of policy that are of great importance to our economy and, therefore, to you as bankers. Public opinion is being brought to bear on the impasse that exists, and it is being marshalled through state- ments that oversimplify the point at issue. It would be unfortunate, as we see it, if too many people accepted the thought that, if the Federal Reserve were freed of its compul- sion to buy Treasury securities at fixed prices, the Federal could necessarily exercise a deflationary influence. Nor should we ac- cept the generality that preys upon our love for tradition, namely, that the Federal Re- serve was created as a supreme court of fi- nance and that it would be a sacrilege if it were interfered with in any way. Let me tell you at the outset where we stand on these matters. We believe it 1s most desirable that the Federal become more free than it has been in the past dec- ade to follow a restrictive credit policy at times when this is needed. We agree with those who say that Treasury domination of Federal Reserve credit policy is dangerous. We do not go along, however, with the sopho- moric contention that the Federal Reserve should be omnipotent or that it should be free to assume an attitude that might be described as “the Treasury be damned.” There 18 much appeal in the thought ad- vanced by Mr. Russell Leffingwell that the Treasury and the Federal Reserve be equal partners. On such a plane each can act to restrain the other or to goad the other as the case may be. The question of domination or partnership is lLinportant largely as a matter of who holds the final say. The real problem involves many technical phases of debt and credit management and the need for a continuing understanding of investor psychology. Per- haps the outstanding problem in the tech- nical field is whether 2144 percent Treasury bonds need be supported forever at par or better. We have long been of the Arm be- Nef that par support should not be a per- manent practice, At the same time we are equally firm in our belief that we cannot depart from such & practice overnight, par- ticularly in an atmosphere of contention between the Federal Reserve and the Treas- ury. We also believe that if the two part- ners in money and debt management are so for apart in their convictions that agreement can be reached only by literally hitting one of the two of them over the head, the public cannot be blamed if it loses confidence in both, and in the dollar, and in Treasury securities, We are inclined to place a great deal of weight on the importance of the state of mind of the investor and on the degree in which this must be considered in the man- agement of both debt and credit. The open-market operation is the principal instrument with which the Federal may af- fect the amount, availability, and cost of money. We know quite well how readily the Federal can expand the amount and can in- crease the availability of credit by the pur- chase of securities in the market. We believe that some misconception exists as to the ability of the Federal to contract credit by the sale of Treasury securities. Success in this regard depends upon the Treasury's cash position. If the Treasury is operating with a substantial cash surplus, the Federal can contract reserve credit by selling securities in the market or by redeem- ing obligations as they mature. If the Treasury does not have a cash sur- plus, attempts by the Federal to gell in the market cannot contract credit against the will of thé market and may only expand the amount of credit in use. At the present time the Treasury faces a deficit, and the prospect of the Treasury at- taining a surplus seems remote, Therefore, in future open-market operations the Fed- eral will be unable to contract credit to any appreciable extent by sales of Treasury securities on balance, Perhaps this is why we are confronted with the demand that the Federal Reserve be re- stored to the independence conceived for it 87 years ago. Such independence would per- mit of an attempt to reduce the inflation problem by denying credit to the market, with the obvious result that a sharp upward trend in interest rates would follow. In the meanwhile the Federal Reserve creates, on occasion, a situation where there is no market for Treasury securities. This brings us to the second phase of open- market operation, namely, the techniques employed by the Federal that would pro- duce a trend toward higher interest rates. One can be certain that if the Federal were free to precipitate, directly or indirectly, a sharp upward trend in interest rates and if it were determined to use this mechanism to the necessary extent, it could stop the pres- ent inflation spiral. But once this had been aecomplished, or during the process, another series of chain reactions would be started, such that the resultant inflation potential would cause our present problem to be dawarfted by comparison. The February National City Bank letter offered a comment that was of great interest to us in this connection. It was directed primarily to the defense effort, but it applies equally to those phases of credit and debt management that have precipitated the Federal-Treasury dispute. The National City Bank noted that during most of the time since Korea, people have been uncertain as to the extent of the requirements of defense and what was expected of them. The bank went on to say that little authentic informa- tion had been available on the size of the defense program, and it admitted that, al- though such uncertainties may have been unavoidable, the lack of a firm basis for calculations left the way open for unin- formed opinions, speculation, and extreme statements both public and private. The comment closed with the following quota- tion, “Undoubtedly there has been inflation by publicity, which has fostered a contagious state of alarm and scare buying.” We believe that the drawn-out public dis- cussion over the clash between a fixed inter- est rate and credit control, a discussion in which Federal Reserve officials have taken a long Jead, has contributed importantly to the expansion of bank credit, How much weight should be given by the Federal to the impact of its credit policies on holders of Treasury securities such as busi< nesses and individuals? For an idea we might turn to an estimate of the so-called inflationary gap that was recently made by a noted Federal Reserve economist. He said that the gap during the next year could be as much as $20,000,000,000 and will stem from @ contraction of $10,000,000,000 in the goods available for civilian purchase and an in- crease of & like amount in consumer and business income. He cautions that the esti- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD mate is premised on (1) no further price or ‘wage increases, (2) no substantial credit ex- pansion, (3) no further tax increases, and (4) a consideration of particular potency to our discussion; namely, no large use of avail- able liquid assets. He then points out that individuals and businesses hold $176,000,- 000,000 of bank deposits and currency and $90,000,000,000 of Treasury securities, a large part of which are redeemable on demand or have short maturities. The total is 6266,- 000,000,000. The question, therefore, is whether attempts by the Federal to reduce the size of the inflation gap will suggest that some portion of the $90,000,000,000 of these Treasury securities be sold or whether such investors thereby will be encouraged to in- crease their holdings. The Federal Reserve, as a special guardian of the purchasing power of the dollar, also must keep in mind that some 6100,000,000,000 of Treasury securities rest in the portfolios of commercial banks, savings banks, insur- ance companies, and the like, and that such investors hold additional billions of other marketable securities, the value of which would be affected, along with their Treasury securities, should a sharply increasing trend in interest rates occur. Managers of these portfolios, such as yours selves, are concerned with the decreasing pur- chasing power of the dollar, but you also take into consideration in the management of your portfolio the dollar prices that your security investments command in the market. Many of the decisions that you make with respect to the purchase, sale, or retention of these securities are based upon changes in market values. Collectively these decisions of yours, influenced as they must be by the Federal Reserve's policies, will bear importantly on whether individuals and businesses prefer to acquire additional securities or are inspired to bring their liquid assets into play in a manner that will heighten our Inflation. Thus the Federal Reserve is quite correct in saying that it must protect the purchas- ing power of the dollar, but the Treasury is also on sound ground when it says that in- vestor confidence in Treasury securities should not be impaired by unexpected sharp fluctuations in the dollar prices of its securt- ties. These two statements are the crux of the dispute. Now let us digress for a moment in order to examine the weight that should be given to the Board’s contention that it has a re- sponsibility for credit that it is not able to digcharge. There is nothing new about this. The Federal Reserve was charged just as fully in this connection 9 years ago as it is today. Yet 9 years ago, as a consequence of the war emergency, the Federal Reserve agreed to underwrite a pattern of rates for Treasury wartime financing. The Federal Reserve had no option because the Treasury faced an un- precedented deficit, the money had to be raised, and there was nothing else to do. Since the Treasury again faces a deficit, is there any better way to resolve matters than to bring about an agreement between the Treasury and the Federal Reserve in the technical area of interest rates and support techniques? Nine years ago when the Federal accepted the responsibility of protecting the prices of Treasury securities, the Secretary of the Treasury would have accepted a support price that was fractionally below par, When I say this I am not making an assumption. The choice of par, as & precise figure, was made by the Federal, and with the passage of time most Treasury security investors have come to believe that whenever “the cards were down,” neither the Treasury nor the Federal would elect to drop the support price of the 2% percent bonds below that figure. 1 Indeed, you will recall that by the time we had to face up to the inflationary prob< Jems of 1947 and 1948 a leading official of the Federal proclaimed that failure to sup«
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - port Treasury 214 percent bonds at par would Jead to a catastrophic condition. We repeat that we firmly believe that we need to get away from par support, and we believe that &@ program should have been and could have been worked out long before this, A period of national emergency and of bitter dispute between the Treasury and the Federal, how- ever, 1s not a propitious moment to engage in drastic changes or to withdraw support, Furthermore, if the reasons for support- ing outstanding Treasury bonds were com- pelling in 1948, how do we justify ignoring similar reasons today? The Federal has lived with its conscience for 9 years. Why must it suddenly choose @ war emergency and a period when the Treasury faces a deficit of unknown size to suggest that it be free to act independently? Indeed the differences between the type of inflation that we face today and that with which we were confronted in 1947 and 1948 should leave the Federal Reserve with less rather than more reason to have precipi- tated these questions. During 1947 and 1948 the inflationary problem arose primarily from activity in the private economy, at a time when the Treasury had a substantial cash surplus. The present inflation has been en- larged by the prospect of controls, of short- ages, and of an undefined but large defense program. Some portion of the plant and equipment expansion necessary to the defense program is yet to be met. The money needed from outside sources must come largely from either the insurance companies or the com- mercial banks. At the present time great emphasis is being placed on the expansion of bank credit. Few seem to realize that under existing conditions loans granted by banks are less inflationary than the exten- sion of an equal amount of credit by insur- ance companies, Now, the Treasury security and other bond markets have remained relatively calm throughout this drawn-out Federal Reserve- Treasury dispute and its accompanying pub- licity. This calm is the result of a general confidence that the Treasury long-term rate of 214 percent will stand, and so will par support for outstanding long-term bonds. In other words the rank and file of investors do not believe that the Federal will be or will feel tree, in the final analysis, to unstabilize the Treasury security market by decreasing the support prices or by withdrawing sup- ort. P My first question, therefore, is as follows: If against the contentious background of recent months, the Federal reduced its sup- port price for Victory 21's to 100 and, at the same time, became a more-than-usually re- luctant buyer of short-term Treasury secu- rities, would investors continue to be calm or would their confidence be somewhat shaken? Second, would a drop in the support prico of 2% percent bonds to 100 or an increasing denial of a market to some holders of Treasury securities produce an increased volume of precautionary sales? Third, if the Federal Reserve were to drop the support price to 99% or 99, how confident would institutional investors be that such support prices would hold? If the Federal breaks par in support of Treasury bonds, will this be deemed, by in- vestors, to be evidence that it has adopted a program of retreat to successively lower prices depending upon the volume of bonds offered to it? If, to make its credit less readily available, the Federal decided to let the market decline to whatever point was necessary to dry up selling, how far would prices have to decline? Does anyone know? Can we afford to act on optimistic guesses? Now let's go to the other side of these things. Let us assume that, to reduce the availability of credit, the Federal Reserve XCVII-~~App.——46 dvops its support prices sufficiently low that it ultimately dries up any substantial gelling. How many institutional investors would be= come buyers of Treasury securities? We are asked to believe that more Treasury securities can be placed if the interest rate offered on them is made more attractive. When bond prices decline interest rates be- come more attractive, but I have never seen a bond market that was undergoing a major decine that could be characterized as a con- fident one. If the bond market is caused to decline sharply while institutional investors are net sellers on balance, where are the ad- ditional buyers of these bonds going to come from? We believe that the important considera- tion ts not whether interest rates become more attractive or whether a higher level of rates is brought about. It is the trend of rates that is tmportant. As bankers, you may agree that there is a tendency to feel more “loaned-up” when the outlook is for higher rates of interest than is the case if the out- look is for lower ones. The same thing is true with respect to bond buyers. A given rate is unattractive if the trend of the market is down, but the same rate can appear attractive if the price trend is stable or rising. Please do not misunderstand. We are not an advocate of low interest rates. We would have much preferred a Treasury decision call- ing for a long-term 234-percent bond or a long-term 2')-percent bond at a discount to yield 2.70 percent or 2.75 percent. Both of these would have been possible without dis- turbing the stability of outstanding bonds if the Treasury and the Federal had evidenced an ability to resolve their differences. We have been told that market conditions have clearly shown that the Treasury has in- sisted upon interest rates that are too low. In justification, our attention is called to the natural forces of supply and demand as they appear in the market and to the amount of Treasury securities that the Federal has been forced to acquire The market for Treasury securities during the past year has been made almost entirely by the Federal Reserve, and the market has looked, most of the time, the way the Federal open-market operations caused it to look. Let me illustrate this by comparing two financings a year apart. First, we will yo back to November 1949. When the Treasury and the Federal Reserve were discussing the terms to be set on the approaching refunding of that period the market “looked” as though a 14% percent rate were no longer suitable, The Treasury, nevertheless, decided to con- tinue with a 14%-percent 1-year rate. It also offered a 1%-percent note with a 44-year term This note quickly reached a premium of eleven thirty-seconds above 100. Why? Because investors took the financing decision of the Treasury as an indication that the Federal had lost the fight to advance the pattern toward higher ylelds. Both olferings were an outstanding success. During the months following the Federal showed by its handling of the open market that it had not given up the fight. Even when the Treasury in the spring of last year acceded to somewhat higher interest ratea for shorter-term securities, the Federal ap- peared to be dissatisfied. At least, that is the impression gained by close observers, an im- pression that was more than fully justified by the open break that occurred in August of last year. Let us now consider the latest refunding in which the offering consisted of a single issue of 6-year 154-percent notes. The terms set by the Secretary of the Treasury were those recommended by the Federal Reserve, ones that were later characterized by the Federal as appropriate and attractive. Most market observers, and we believe the Treas- ury as well, were skeptical of the appropriate- ness and the attractiveness of a 5-year obli- gation for corporations who were large hold< A721 ers of the maturing securities. But there are grounds for believing that the Federal assured the Treasury that this refunding would be a success. What is the record? Only about 52 percent of the public holdings of the maturing secu- rities were exchanged for the new iasue and held throughout the exchange period. The remaining 48 percent of the public holdings were sold to the Federal or redeemed for cash. This hardly could be construed as a success- ful exchange from the point of view of the sound objectives of debt management. About 15 percent of the public holdings were redeemed for cash. This compares with @ 21 percent cash redemption last September and October and with the more normal cash redemptions of 6 percent or less. The drain on the Treasury's balance resulting from these two refundings was $3,500,000,000. The differences between the successful re- funding of November 1949 and the unsuc- cessful exchange offering made in November 1950 are twofold. In the first place, it te a testimony to the deterioration in investor confidence that has been brought about by the public wrangling over differences. Sec- ond, it suggests that the Treasury is a better judge of the type of securities that investors will buy than is the Federal. This brings to mind something that has occurred to us with increasing frequency over recent months. We have wondered whether the Governors of the Board and the other members of the Open Market Committee could possibly be too far removed from an intimate contact with the Treasury security market, that 1s, from the changing states of mind, the preferences, and the reactions of those whose activities create the supply and demand with which the Federal open-market operation must contend. These are details of great importance when it becomes neces- sary to refine the terms of Treasury offerings. We also have wondered whether an adequate exchange of technical information takes place between the Treasury and the Federal. We have wondered about these things, be- cause if such situations were to exist they would explain why some of the misundere standings arise. But let us get back to more tangible things, The apparent calmness of institutional in- vestors will be put to a full test when the Treasury begins to refund almost #40,000,000,- 000 of maturing or callable securities. The bulk of these refunding covers a span bardly longer than 4 months and begins this June. Were the Treasury to experience the same percentage of cash redemptions that it suf- fered in the last refunding, it would have to pay out about $6,000,000,000. No wonder the Secretary of the Treasury believes a stable and confident Treasury security market is @ prerequisite to financial mobilization. If, therefore, the Federal Reserve were to endeavor to make credit unavailable by re- ducing support or by withdrawing it, what would be the attitude of holders of the ma- turing and callable Treasury securities? Many have substantial forward commit- ments in mortgages and the like. A larger number would be offered good loans at rates substantially higher than those now pre- valling. Some of those loans will be neces- sary to the defense program. Would investors accept the refunding offer ings to be made by the Treasury? Or would they deem it prudent to redeem their securities in order to meet their com- mitments or to make loans? If, in the final analysis, the Treasury met with no greater success in these financings than in those Just past, would potential buy- ers of long-term Treasury bonds gain or lose in confidence? And, wholly aside from the Treasury's cash position, if it must meet large-scale cash redemptions, from whom will it obtain funds? From the Federal Reserve banks? Or from the commercial banks?
Aiz2 In either event it would appear that banks as a whole might be forced to cope with some more or leas unworkable plan such as a secondary reserve requirement, a ceiling re- serve plan, higher cash reserves, or they may be told to accept Treasury certificates of de- posit bearing interest at some rate, such as one-fourth percent. Yet none of these de- vieea will inaure an improvement in the credit condition over what it can be if debt menagement te permitted to work in our favor instead of against us. This ie not a question of interest costs. Surely many would prefer higher rates, but the determining element in the equation 1s the maintenance of investor confidence, This requires a stable and confident Treas- ury security market and confidence among Treasury-security investors that they will not be subjected to some abrupt manipulation of the market, by etther the Federal Reserve or the Treasury. Nt seema to us important that the attitude of the institutional investor toward the mar- ket for Treasury securities may determine the confidence that business corporations and individuals have in these same securi- ties. To parlay the reduction in the value of the dollar by decreasing the dollar price of Treasury securities abruptly may be the worst way to deal with inflation. In summation we suggest that the differ- ences between the Federal and the Treasury invotve questions of policy that are most important to the economy and to you. It ts dangerous to accept oversimplifications, either of principle or of the technical aspects of the points at issue. Federal Reserve open- market operations designed to reduce the availability of credit cannot do so on & quantitative basis except as the Treasury is armed with a substantial cash surplus. The Treasury will soon be operating at a deficit. A substantial cash surplus is hardly a pos- sibility. To reduce the support rendered to Treasury securities, against the present con- tentious background, or without warning, would be most dangerous. The withdrawal of support would be intolerable. Yet, we need to plan for its ultimate elimination, Of greater importance than an increase in interest rates, is the trend of rates. But, this ia no time to attempt to control] credit by atarting a trend to higher rates. To do 80 would multiply not reduce the inflation potential. Neither the Federal nor the Treas- ury should be omnipotent cr dominant. Each should consider itself to be an equal partuer charged with responsibilities of equal weight. Universal Military Training EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. M. G. BURNSIDE OF WEST VIRGINIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 12, 1951 Mr. BURNSIDE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- orp, I am including an article appearing in the Washington Post, Washington, D. ©., on February 11, 1981: GMT Can Buitp Ixz’s Wait vor Peace (By James B. Conant) (Following ts a digest of a radio address delivered last Wednesday night under aus- pices of the Committee on the Present Dan- ger.) The United States is tn danger. Few would be inclined to question this simple statement. The danger is clearly of a milt- tary nature. On this much we can all agree. But as to the exact nature of the danger which confronts us, there is far from being complete agreement among the citizens of this Republic. Nor are we by any means of one mind as to how we should mobilize the young men of the Nation. Indeed, some few question even the need for an army of the size announced. Now, if we are going to ask the youth of the country to serve two years in the Armed Forces—as I believe we must—each one of us who supports this program must be prepared to answer one question—why? Why must we !ook forward to a period of austerity, of partial mobilization, of more weapons for war, fewer tools for peace? The answer to these questions seem to me to be summed up ‘n General Eisenhower's recent statement that we must “build a se- cure wall for peace.” Within less than 18 months, the free world has been confronted with two highly un- pleasant facts. First, the Soviet military power is beginning to mount in terms of the most modern type of warfare—the United States monopoly of the atomic bomb has ended; second, the Soviet allies, at least, have shown a readiness to gain thelr ends by force of arms. Place these facts against the background of the postwar military situation on the European Continent and you can see the ov.tiines of the present danger. If Russia tomarrow should move its troops toward the Atlantic Ocean, European terri- tory would be conquered but the Russian industrial centers would be destroyed from the air. As !ong as the United States strate- gic Air Force is in this commanding position, the danger of Russian troops marching to the channel is relatively slight. But as the years go by, the deterrent power of strategic bombing will meet an ever- mounting counterthreat—a threat to the industrial centers of Britain and the United States, to the continental cities themselves. The Russians are building up their offensive strength and doubtless likewise their own def 2nses against strategic bombing. Therefore the danger of a third global war, I am convinced, turns on the fact that a few years hence the handful of men who rule Russia may decide that the power of our strategic Air Force has been largely can- celed out. If at that time Europe is defense- leas on the ground, the Russian hordes will begin to move, Strengthening the defense of Europe in terms not of a deterrent threat against Rus- sian cities but in terms of armies to stop an advance—this seems to me the top item on the agenda of the free nations of the world. Only then can we achieve a true global stalemate. What is required of the United States, if we are to play our part in building this wall of security? Clearly, the rapid pro~ duction of arms and military equipment— and on this we are well embarked. But we must also be in a position to furnish men. General Eisenhower says that we must be prepared to stand by tn a partially mo- bilized state for a long period of years. To this end, we must have a system of uni- versal military service. Congress has before it a universal mili- tary service bill. This measure needs to be understood by the American public, for there is much confusion as to what is in fact involved. In the first place, we are not talking about the type of legislation which would be noeded to mobilize the manpower of the country on 8 total basia if we became en- gaged in a global war. That 1s another aub= ject. I am discussing, rather, partial mo- dilzation for a long, drawn-out period of internstional stress and strain. I am dis- cussing the method of maintaining over ‘APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD maiy years three and a half to four militon men fn our Aimed Forces. What the situation requires is a universal military service act which will call into the Armed Forces all able-bodied young men when they graduate from high school or reach 16, whichever is later. This is a vital point in the argument; this is the essence of the bill which must not be destroyed by amendmsnt. ‘Those of us who support the bill believe that the interruption of # young man’s edu- cation should be before college, not during college, and, for those who go direct from high school to a job, before starting in an occupation. After they bave completed the 27 monthe of military service, these young men will be ready to enter college or go to work. The probleme which bedeviled us in World War II in regard to deferring special types of students or essential men in indus- try will be eliminated if military service is performed between the ages of 18 and 20. To my mind, it ts quite clear that a man’s military service had best be done before he enters the productive life of the country or bofore he begins his collegiate or professional education. On this point, we have the testimony of Dr. William C. Menninger, who was chief psychiatrist of the Army in World War II. “From the point of view of the mental health of our young men,” Dr. Menninger suid, “a program of universal military serv- ice and training is far more practical than our present system of selective service. The present system engenders hostility in the man who Is selected because he must carry an unfair share of the burden. Because it is selective, tt tends to stimulate men to seelc adcferment on whatever grounds they may be able to plead. “With our present system a man of draft- eligible age lives in uncertainty from mail to mail. The result is great unrest in our youth of this age, not only in colleges but in industry and business. “A system which begins at a definite age, which distributes equally the responsibility and privileges among all youth, and which runs for a definite length of service, is far superior, from any mental health point of view, to our present indefinite and discrim- Inatory system under the selective service law.” There is one obvious diciculty in a scheme of universal service between 18 and 20. How is one to provide from each age group the required number of officera and specialists? T have become persuaded, contrary to my first opion, that in order to accomplish the training of officers and specialists, a small fraction of each age group should be selected after basic training by a civilian board and sent to the colleges for specialized education. This feedback proposal is in the bill now before Congress, It meets the objections that many educators first raised to a unt- versal military service program. Some scientists have been disturbed lest the passage of this bill strike a serious blow at the national defense by interfering with the continuous flow of trained men. I ven- ture to think they aro mistaken, and call as sn expert witness Dr. Vannevar Bush, who headed all our scientific work during the last war. Dr. Bush appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee to urge the passage of this universal military service and training bill, and this is what he sald: “We shall call all young men at 18 with- out exception, adjusting standards to defer only those who cannot be used somewhere in the widely varied efforts of the Military Establishment. Once the system is in full operation, the process of chotce of men to receive advanced training to become officers or to develop new weapons, to maintain our public health, or to perform other profes-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD sional duties should be on a secure basis of fair competition, “There will be adjustments needed in a transition period, for it would be absurd to denude our laboratories just when we need them most, and it would be short-sighted to deny to industry the engineers it must have to build new weapons in adequate quantities in the next year or two. “But when the system is in full operation, every youth on reaching 18 should expect to get {nto the service of his country, with his subsequent advancement and the nature of his assignments during the entire age period until he emerges fron the Reserves and goes his own way determined by competitive tests and the judgment of fair men.” Let me emphasize the distinction between universal service and selective service, for this point is often misunderstood. The bill before Congress is a real universal military service bill and not merely an extension of the Selective Service Act to include 18-year- elds The power given the President to call up men by age groups and the establishment of a large Reserve are the distinguishing features When the call goes out for an age group, the draft boards will make no deferments in this group on grounds of occupation or de- pendencies. When the program becomes Tully operative, the services could count on at least 700,000 to 750,000 men from each age group, and another 100,000 for limited service by lowering the present physical and mental standards for induction, In addition to providing a force tn being, the continual flow into the Armed Forces of those who reach 18 and their release after about 2 years will provide over the years a pool of trained manpower—a Jarge body of men in Reserve status. I believe this to be imperative. The danger of an all-out war Is so serious that all our young men must have military training for their own protection as well as for the protection of their country. The present selective-service law expires in June, Clearly, before that date Congress must act on the bill that is now bofore it. But one may hope that the matter may be settled in the coming weeks. Until it is settled how we are to recruit our armies, there will be a feeling of uncertainty and confusion in many families throughout the land. I suppose all of us who are urging the rapid rearmament of the United States would agree that there is nothing we like about the whole business. Universal milt- tary service is a bitter pill to swallow, and I for one have come most reluctantly to sup- port such a program. But the desperate need to build up our military strength can- not be denied. Many of us remember with what shock we read of the fall of France in 1940 and with what fear we awaited the outcome of the battle of Britain. Our military men, we now know, were full of apprehension as to what would be the consequences to the United States of the loss of the British Isles. The margin of victory then was narrow enough, we all recall. But with the weapons of the 1960's, an enemy in control of the Channel ports would be far more dangerous, perhaps {mpossible to stop. In short, while the defense of Europe ts essential for the survival of Europe, it is Just as essential for the survival of a free United States. Europe lost-—just sketch the outline of such a world and fill in the details yourself. Imagine the Soviet Union in control directly or through puppets of all Europe, the Middle East, and North Africa; Britain neutralized, this hemisphere alone. Think in terms of military strategy, think in terms of raw ma- terials, think in terms of western civilization. What ia the alternative? A third global war? Not to my mind, It may be forced upon us any day—-that one must admit. But I believe there is still a chance, a good chance, of avoiding world war I1i—~a war which can lead only to wholesale destruction with no clear victory possible for either side. I believe there is a good chance of avoiding this catastrophe, but only if Europe 1s made defensible, and without delay, Need Arms First ee EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. FRANK CARLSON OF KANSAS IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, February 12 (legislative day of Monday,. vwuary 29), 1951 Mr. CARLSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to Lave printed in the Appendix of the Recor, an article appearing in the Kansas City Star of Wednesday, February 7, written in Paris by its foreign correspondent, Mr. Marcel Wallenstein. Mr. Wallenstein is not & casual visitor to Europe, but has lived there for the past 15 years. During that time he has visited the various countries and has had an opportunity to become personally ac- quainted with their problems and their thinking. I urge the Members of the Senate to read this splendid statement. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Nexp Anms First—WitH Progr AID AND LEADERSHIP FRANCE AND BRITAIN WOULD FIGHT THE RUSSIANS—TURN IN REICH FEEL- ING——~DESPITE WARRIOR TRADITION, GERMANS Have Strone Desire To Avorn ANY CONFLICT (By Marcel Wallenstein) Paris, February 7.--A stream of letters has been received from readers asking: Will Europe fight if necessary? One writer wants to know if we can de- pend on the British and French if we find ourselves up against it? Perhaps the most interesting letter is from a man in northwest Kansas who says, “The Germans have always proved to be the best fighters in Europe. There are millions of them we could arm to help us if we have to fight Joe Stalin. Wouldn't we be better off if we shipped guns and tanks to Ger- many and forgot about the others?” GIVES HIS ANSWER The answers as this reported sees them: Europe will fight if forced to do so—and {f properly armed and properly led by Euro- pean governments. By “Europe” is meant chiefly Britain and France. The British record of the last war should be too well known to need explanation here. The French defeat in that war in less than 6 weeks was caused partly by bad leadership in the government and in the field and the lack of weapons. A badly armed French army—without air cover-—-lost more men killed in the battles of May and June 1940, than the American expeditionary force under Pershing in the Kaiser's war, These two countries seem to appreciate the danger of remaining unarmed while an enormous Russian military machine sits in Europe. They are taking steps to the limit of their powers to correct their weakness. The report of General Eisenhower should A723: show a willingness to cooperate in Britain and Prance. TURN BY GERMANY And now as to eny. Here is the surprise. As the marl from Kansas writes, the Germans have been the warriors of Europe. But it is no longer so. The Gere mans of the present have no stomach for war. They don't want it at any price. Perhaps never in German history have the people been so pacifistic as they are now. This is true of the industrialists who s backing of previous war machines has been partly responsible for earlier wars, and true of the mass of people who formerly gave blind obedience to their rulers, The right and the middle of the German political Tramework look with distaste on rearmament, The most prevalent remark in Western Ger- many at the moment is “not for me” when one speaks of another war. FEAR THE RUSSIANS The people fear and hate the Russians, after the taste of Russian occupation. The Communist faith finds little sympathy from the average German workman. But he is not ready to take up a gun again fn defense of Western Europe. He looks around him at his battered cities and knows they would be the first to come under attack, The German iron masters are making money faster than at any time since the defeat of their country. The Allies of the west need their steel and buy it. The Rus. sians also want it, and the German em- ployers scem to have the idea that they can profitably do business with both sides if permitted to do so. A German on a | ustness mission to Paris recently said: “You need us. The world 1eeds us. We have something to sell. The Russians want to buy it, as well ag you. The Russians wouldn't kill us. They would let us work.” SEES CONTINUED JOBS This man actually believed men of his class would be permitted to continue at the heads of their industries if the Russians occupied the Ruhr. “Listen,” he said, “the Allies swore we should never again be mili- tarized. They made war a crime, They tore down our war plants. Now they are saying, “We want you back in another army—for another war.” Then he took his fat, cigar out of his mouth und said, “Count me out, Every German I know ts saying the same thing.” There is of course an element of black. mail in this. The Bonn Government and the recovering Western Germany heavy in- dustry leaders know how hard pressed the Western Allies are for manpower to meet the Russian threat, They, not unnaturally, wish to drive as hard a bargain as possible with former enemies before organizing a new German defense force to he enrolled with western armies, WORK THEIR ADVANTAGE Having been given an advantage by the political situation, the Germans are working it to the Mmit. The lawmakers of Bonn hesitate and stall on disarmament ques- tions. Eleenhower was received with less animosity than was expected—even with cer- tain reserved hospitality. If there are people who have no wish to rearm or fight in any predictable future time they live in Western Germany. The same probably is true in that part of Ger- many which wears the Russian yoke. Only the presence of German units in an international force can bring that force with- in measurable distance of an organization that could defend Europe againet Russian aggression. Every observer agrees—and few Germans deny !t—that German morale at present is unequal to playing its proper part in the defense of the west,
A724 Mr. Truman Decided in Favor of Inflation ree, EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWARD J. THYE OF MINNESOTA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, February 12 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. THYE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Recorp an editorial entitled, ‘Mr. Truman Decided in Favor of Inflation,” published in the Minneapolis Star of February 7,1951. The editorial contains a number of questions which are answer- ed by Mr. Arthur Upgren, economic con- sultant of the Star. It is a very thought- provoking editorial. There being no objection, the editor- ial was ordered to be printed in the REc- oRD, as follows: Mr. Truman Decipep 1x Favor or INFLATION For months the United States Treasury and the Federal Reserve Board ‘ave violently disagreed about Federal money policy. Sec- retary John W. Snyder wants to support par prices for Government bonds. The Reserve Board wants to let the open market make the price of Government bonds. When the disagreement broke out in a public argument, President Truman inter- vened and decided in ft.vor cf the Treasury Department. To throw some needed lUght on that decision, the Star got its economic consultant, Arthur Upgren, to answer the following questions: Question. Mow important was the deci- ston made by Presidont Truman after the White House meeting last Thuraday? Answer. The decision was more important than any other in giving the United States another dose of iufiation. Question. Who will be hurt by that infia- tion as it comes? Answer. The Treasury of the United States for a large amount, and the American people will be hurt by a still larger amount. Question. Will the housewife find it more dificult to buy food for her family? Answer. Yes; because more money will compete with her at the butcher’s counter, Question. Are you willing to guess how much more a $20 basket of groceries will cost Mrs. Consumer a year from now under these policies? Answer. If she goes to the legitimate markets, $2 more; if she goes to the black markets, eomething more than that and an awful lot of trouble. Question. What is inflation? Answer, Rising prices. Question. Then we are already having inflation? Answer. Yes; we have nad a considerahbie amount of it already—cost of living is up 3 percent since last March; wholesale prices are up 17 percent; the price of farm land is up 5 percent; city real estate is up 5 to 10 percent; farm products are up 24 percent; 28 important raw materials are up 48 per- cent. That is a part of the inflation we have already bra. Question. What causes inflation? Answer. Too much money, especially when that money is in the hands of people who already think prices are going higher. Question. I take it you believe the dect- sion at the White House last Thursday will mean still more money? Answer. Yes; it can mean much more. That's what the idea of making this war pro- duction perlod another 214 percent war means, Question. Just how will 244 percent bonds make more spending money? Answer. In two ways. First, the Federal Reserve will buy anybody’s bonds at par, Because there are $257,000,000,000 of bonds, a lot of cash money can be Jet loose that way. Second, which will be still more dan- gerous in the years ahead, the Government can borrow money eo easily at 214 percent that borrowing may truly become our way of life. Question. Isn’t It true that when the Fed- eral Government sells bonds, that usually increases the Capacity of banks to loan money to people in a position to borrow it? Answer. That is especially true when the Federal Reserve takes bonds from all comers at par. Doing that gives the bank all the reserves they need to lend money. Question. How many dollars worth of loans can be made for each dollar of bond face value? Answer, More than 665. Question. Secretary Snyder's argument that the Government should continue to bor- row money cheap was brsed on a plea that every 14 percent increase in the interest rate means Uncle 8am has to pay a billion and a half more in interest for the nationa) debt, Is that correct? Answer. Yes. It does mean a tiny fraction more is paid in interest on the debt, Question. But if a cheap money policy is followed, doesn’t the cost of the defense pro- gram go up because of higher prices? Answer, It goes up fast. I think of an example—Congress appropriated enough money early last summer to buy a thousand jet airplanes. But because of inflation the money bought only 770 jet planes. On 840,~ 000,000,000 spent for defense, inflation now is costing the Government 86,000,000,000. Question. You think President Truman made exactly the wrong decision last Thurs- day Answer. I think he did because a rise in prices of 10 percent can cost the American people $20,000,000,000 a year via inflation for the $1,500,000,000 the Treasury is trying to Bave. Question. Do you think such a bad decision can remain final? Answer. I feel sure the Treasury will have to reverse its policy. England did under a similar sot of conditions. Question. Then you think Governor Mar- riner Eccles of the Federal Reserve Board was right about stopping the Treasury's easy money policy and that Snyder is wrong? Answer, Yes, entirely, because this time we start @ war effort with tight, full employ- ment and rising prices. Easy money will feed the fire of inflation. In 1941 we had 12,000,000 unemployed, and factory output was low. It is not that way this time. We can’t produce a great deal more go the easy money will boost the prices of what we are producing. Meeting the Problems Involved in the World Situation EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JAMES E, MURRAY OF MONTANA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, February 12 (legisiative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. MURRAY. Mr. President, on January 6, 1951, Mr. James B, Carey, secretary-treasurer of the Congress of Industrial Organizations, delivered a very important address before a meet- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ing of the Ohio State Industrial Union Council at Columbus, Ohio. In this address Mr. Carey presents a thorough analysis of the dangerous prob- Jems threatening our country. He points out that this fight against Communist imperialism is not merely a militaristic struggle. If we are to win in this con- test, we must be able to show that capl- talistic democracy can provide a way of life superior to Communist dictatorship. As he points out, we have to realize “that the fight for civil) lberties, the rights of labor, decent living standards, and equality of sacrifice at home are a necessary part of the fight against Com- munist dictatorship and aggression abroad.” I ask unanimous consent to have Mr. Carey's address printed in the Appendix of the ConcressronaL Recorp. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: The world of 1951 is a world of uncertainty, of fear, of horrible danger, of treachery, of bravery. It is a year In which no one knows what the next months will bring, whether {t be hope or gloom, or despair, or confidence, or life or death. Right now, we have no way of knowing how far Russia's greed for power over men’s minds and bodies will carry it. We have no way of knowing whether Decem- ber 81, 1951, will see Soviet locusts eating up most of Asia and all of Europe—two-thirds of the world’s population—or whether by some means, military or moral, Moscow will have lost or withdrawn its grand strategy. The world will have to decide this year. There 1s no more time for equivocation: there is very little time for let’s-make-another-ap- peal, no more time for anything but action. If we can prove to Russia that real peace pays, maybe Ruseta will learn the facts of life the hard way. If that succeeds quickly, we can really bufld a world bulwark of peace that no one could break. As I appear here today, I want to talk about the dangers that are ours, and what J think is the road to take to prevent a crushing de- feat for the free world wo love. I want to focus your attention on what are the roles and responsibilities for government, for busi- neeé, for labor in this struggle. I want to talk about you and me, about yours and mine, It seems clear that we are all in this strug- gle together, If we lose to communism, cap- italsm is done for, free enterprise will vanish, there will be no free farmers, small business will become part of the Soviet ma- chine, and instead of free labor there will be the kind of slave labor we now see in Eastern Europe and in Ohina. There will be mo dif- ference between Democrats and Republicans in the Communist concentration camps, and the same bullets of the firing squads will kill Hoover and Acheson, But America is coming to the parting of the waye on the question of how our free- dom is to be preserved. There are two roads pointed out to us, and we will have to choose between them. But they are completely opposite roads. By one road we can defeat Communist ag- gression, maintain and expand the free world and realize the blessings of not only liberty but also a higher standard of living for our- selves and hundreds of millions of others. By the second road, we will at best main- tain in America an armed camp that will steadily degenerate into a semi-Fascist state, that will resemble more and more the dictor- ship that we are trying to defeat. What are these two roads open to us? First, there ts the road proposed by the McCormiok - Hearst - McOarthy-Taft-Hoover Dixiecrat axis. This group proposes in effect
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD that we aoandon our democratic friends throughout the world as being “unreliable”; that we hold onto the only “reliable” fighters against communism such as Franco, Chiang Kai-shek, the Emperor of Indochina, and others of that like and that we pull back to our shores and go into our storm cellars. By whatever name this is called, whether it is Taft’s reexamination or Hoover's isola- tionism, the theory is the same. This group feels that it 1s hopeless to try to defend democratic Britain and France, social demo- cratic Norway or Switzerland, or Italy. We ean only fight when America itself is invaded. Otherwise let the rest of the world go hang. Now this theory is not new. The same people who advance it now in fighting com- muniem advanced it in 1940 when the issue was fighting Nazi-fascism. You remember the America First group, whose political leaders were the same people, the Tafts, Mc- Cormick, Hearst, Hoover, and whose big-busi- ness backers supplied millions of dollars for propaganda. When Britain was fighting alone for democracy these brave men of the America First group wanted to abandon her and abandon Europe. They had no stomach to fight for democracy. It was too expensive. Here is what your own Senator Tart said in 1940 after France had been overrun and Britain was staggering under the blitz: “I do not know what the Germans may do, and no one knows what they may do until they are freed from the present war and have an opportunity to show. When they do, we can adopt the same methods. We can take the same steps that may be necessary to meet the particular kind of German blitzkrieg, if there is such a blitz- krieg, at the time we find out what It is.” In plain English this outstanding state- ment meant “Let the Nazis win the war and then if they attack us, we'll figure out what to do.” Isn't that exactly what Tarr is saying to- day in the fight against communism? At that same time, in 1940 and 1941 when Roosevelt was trying to get this Nation to rearm, the big industrialists sald we did not need to have more steel, more copper, more aluminum. They wanted business as usual, and profits as usual. It was organized labor that went out and demanded that this Na- tion mobilize to meet the Nazi challenge. The policy of these reactionaries, the ones who always cry “free enterprise,” and “de- mocracy,” was one of defeatism when it came to a showdown. They had no confidence in democracy or freedom. They were willing to throw in the sponge, Today, they are pursuing the same poll- cies. While the McCarthys, Tafts, Hoovers, McCormicks, Hearsts beat their breasts in de- nouncing communism in the State Depart- ment or on the radio and demand purges, when it comes to really fighting communism they want to throw in the sponge, retire to our storm cellers here. Isolationism and communism are allies to- day just as isolationism and fascism were allies just 10 years ago, in 1940 and 1941. To a few naive souls it may still sound extreme to link Senator Taft, Herbert Hoover, and Colonel McCormick—supposedly relentless foes of communism—with the Kremlin's scheme for world conquest, Nevertheless, wittingly or unwittingly, the Tafts and the Hoovers are as much in part- nership with Joseph Stalin today as they were with Hitler and Mussolini a decade ago. How? To begin with, not even an expert today can tell the difference between the Chicago Tribune's editorial policy and the editorial policy of the Communist Daily worker. Since the invasion of the Republic of South Korea last June both papers have screamed incessantly for the withdrawal of American troops from Korea. Both papers have demanded that American troops be pulled out of Asia and out of Europe. Both papers have declared, in effect, that both continents should be turned over to the tender mercies of Russian totalitarianism. Both papers have constantly attacked and undermined every major decision and action undertaken by the United Nations. There are other ways in which the Taft- Hoover-McCormick axis serves the Kremlin. These American isolationists today demand exactly what they demanded in 1940 and 1941—that this country retire behind its two oceans, that it turn itself into a kind of Gibraltar completely surrounded by a hostile world, Stalin himself couldn't ask for more. He couldn’t ask for a more gratifying surrender than for the United States to abandon the democratic nations of Europe and desert the nations of Asia where democracy is beginning to move forward for the first time. We would be handing over to Stalin’s slave-labor ma- chine countless millions of men and women and giving him, by default, the priceless natural resources of two continents to strengthen his war-making ability. Is it any wonder that even the Nation's outstanding Republican newspaper, the New York Herald Tribune, can’t even call this madness “isolationism.” The Herald Trib- une flatly terms it “retreatism.” I tell you as earnestly as I can: There is no place in this world today—this world of the atom bomb and the hydrogen bomb—where we can hide from totalitarianism. Neither the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans nor the North Pole are harriers. We can no longer mince words or insist on the niceties of etiquette when our Nation’s future is at stake, when democracy every- where is in desperate danger. We have got to see and state it openly that those men who advocate our giving up our allies in this life-and-death struggle are virtual traitors. Isolationism today is communism's fifth col- umn. Isolationism is as much our enemy as the communism it serves. Our own safety as a nation and the establishment of democ- racy and peace throughout the world depend on repudiation of everything that the Tafts, the Hoovers, and the McCormicks stand for. We must, for our own salvation and for the world's salvation, wipe out the poisonous illu- sion that we can survive without friends or that there can be peace in a world one-fifth free and four-fitths enslaved, What would happen in America as a result of successful isolationism? I think we already see the signs of it—~I think we can see that the isolationism of this axis of defeatism 1s tied to a reactionary pole icy at home. Here is what they will aim for: 1. They will try to convert America into an armed camp for an indefinite period while the Communists nibble away at the Western Hemisphere—at Canada, South America, the West Indies. 2. They will uso this situation they have created to panic the American people into giving them political power in 1952. 8. Once in power, they will use the Sub- versive Controls Act and similar acts to stamp out anyone or any group who disagree with them. Free labor, free farm groups, free citi- zens groups will be placed under iron control. The jails will fill up with political prisoners. 4. The greater the Communist menace be- comes from the outside, the tighter the con- trols would be placed on Americans, until finally we would resemble the same dictator- ship we are trying to fight. This is no wild dream. This is a grim, ghastly possibility. This is what would have happened if the Tafts had won the 1940 elec- tions and had controlled the Government then. Only then I think they would have had made their peace with the Nazis. I say this is a possible road, You may say that some of those who want to take us down that road don’t believe in dictatorship. That may be true. But if we all end up in a Come munist concentration camp or before a firing squad will it make any difference to us A725 whether Tarr or McoCartuy was only an ig- norant fool and not a scheming Fascist? What is the second possible road that we can take in this decisive year of 1951? That road is the road of fellowship with the demo- cratic world, realizing that we are all in @ state of siege, end it's a matter of all for one and one for all. As free men we all survive or perish together. This means that we recognize that Europe, having gone through two devastating wars, is mortally afraid of a third, so instead of being impatient and dictatorial, we work with the free people of Europe tn real com- radeship and understanding. We let the peo- ple of Europe and of free Asia know that we will not only share military defense with them but also the possibilities of decent liv- ing standards, We made clear that this is not a fight between the philosophy of com- munism and capitalism, but between democ« racy and dictatorship. We let them know that to the extent of our ability we will join with them to prevent a Communist aggression and will not desert them. We let them know that America does not want to dictate but to be at one with them in partnership and comradeship. This means that in America, we will not only keep our freedoms but expand them. We will sacrifice in proportion to ability to do it. We will expand our industrial capacity because we have confiderce that now and after this emergency there will be an un- limited market for the comforts and decencies of life. We will make America a showplace of democratic and civil rights because we are not afraid of the loyalty of Americans to freedom, In this struggle that lies ahead, {t will not be the McCarthys, the Hoovers, the Tafts, the McCormicks, who will be in the front nes in fighting communism. No, as always, it will be organized labor. For we have been fight- ing communism all over the world for 30 years, and it is the ICFTU that today is the first line of defense for democracy. It is strange and ironic, that the press is willing to play up these Tafts and McCarthys, yet it is labor who stands on the firing lines day after day, repelling the Communist on- slaught. It is an ironic and perhaps tragic thing that despite Tart’s 10 years of complete blindness, first before the Nazi menace and now before the Communist menace, the press of this Btate of Ohio went all out for him. In its blind antagonism to liberalism and labor, the press of this State was willing to court disaster to the Nation by having men like Tart in our national leadership, It is a strange and ironic thing that these big business corporations who yell about communism in Washington, refuse to join the struggle against Communists unless they are guaranteed their enormous-profits. The newspapers the other day said that U.S. Steel is building a $400,000,000 steel plant to ex- pand production. But U.S. Steel only agreed to do that after the Government guaranteed that it could write of the cost of the plant in 5 years, That means that the Government will pay U. 8. Steel 300,000,000 of the cost in terms of taxes that it will save. The com- pany will actually pay only one-fourth of the cost and it will completely own the plant, The same thing is true with regard to Alcoa in aluminum, with the monopolistic copper companies, You read last week end the con« gressional report on the way our defense 1a being held up by the refusal of the monopo- Ustic International Nickel Co. to expand nickel production. It ts a strange and {ironic thing that these big business corporations like General Elec-~ tric, Westinghouse, and International Hare vester can not only continue to do business with Communist unions but even try to pit Communist and anti-Communist unions
A726 against each other. Yet these corporations beat their breasts about the danger to free enterprise and the American way of life. And when I go to .he Munitions Board to propose that defense contracts not be granted to plants where there are Communist unions these great patriotic American corporations and the patriotic American press remain silent. What is the difference between having the GE plant in Schenectady whose union is run by Communists, than having the same plant located in Stalingrad where Communists are also in control. We in labor have a tremendous job to do in this year 1951. We have got to make clear to the American people the two roads that they can travel and the dangers to them if they travel the road of isolationism and reaction. We must educate them on the real way to fight communism, with arms, with ideas, with economic aid. We must show that it is fatal to appease dictatorship in Europe and Asia-——since the more conces- sions we feed to it, the stronger it gets and the weaker we get. We have got to show likewise that it is fatal to feed reaction with concessions here, because the more we feed it the stronger It becomes and the weaker the forces of Iiberal- ism and freedom become. We have got to demonstrate to all con- cerned, that the fight ogatnst communism by this Government cannot succeed if it is simply led by men from big business. There must be, in places of equality with them, leaders of American labor, directing the strategy, the policies, the operations of this vast “Operation Freedom.” Already much damage has been done to our cause abroad by not having men from labor in the top poucy and operating parts of our defense rive, We have got to renlize that the fight for civil liberties, the rights of labor, decent liv- ing standards, equality of sacrifice at home Js a necessary part of the fight against dic- tatorship and aggression abroad. We can only remain free in the world by being free a. home. All free American Inbor, through the united labor committce, has presented its program to President T-uman, Qn that program we can go to the American people, and to the people of the world. We have got to show the American people, despite the lfes told about labor in the last election, that we have no interests that are separate and apart from the welfare of our country and its people. We have got to show by our actlons and our educational work that, as in the whole history of our country, it has been organized labor that has led the way in this struggle for a better democracy. And today, we are prepared again. We want to unite with all men and women Of good will no matter whether they be Republicans or Democrats, businessmen or farmers, lawyers or doctors, Price Controls EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWARD J. THYE OF MINNESOTA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, February 12 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. THYE. Mr. President, I have re- ceived a letter from Mr. J. S. Jones, sec- retary-treasurer of the Minnesota Live- stock Breeders’ Association, with which he sends me a statement issued by the Minnesota Livestock Breeders’ Associa- tion on the subject of price controls, I ask unanimous consent that the state- ment be printed in the Appendix of the REcorD. There being no objection, the state- ment was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Parcs Conrroits Livestock producers, having Intimate knowledge of the livestock and marketing business and with thelr experience under World War II price controls fresh in their minds, strongly emphasize their belief that price ceilings and rationing on livestock and meats will not do what is expected of these measures; instead they urge the use of in- direct economic controls, which take pur- chasing power out of the hands of all con- sumers, as a practical and effective means of maintaining equitable distribution of meat and livestock products during this present, and perhaps extended, emergency. Price ceilings on livestock and meat tend to reduce production at a time when more production is badly needed. Such measures cause waste of both meat and essential by- products; they are costly to administer; the resulting black markets would not only by- pass established market channels, but would &lyo create serious health hazards. Livestock producers believe that the meat price situation is not as critical as it has been made to appear. With livestock wum- bers and feed supplies at high levels, we can reasonably expect to increase meat out- put by 12 percent in the next 2 years by from 2b to 30 percent within the next 3 to 6 years. For these reasons livestuck producers would rather see indirect economic con- trolse—which are inevitable and are develop- ing, such as higher taxes, higher tuterest rutes, restricted credit, and similar mcas- ures——usod to combat inflation, They be- lieve that price controls on meat and live- stock are both unworkable and unenforce- able; and that if inflationary pressures are controlled through indirect measures which sirike at the causes of inflation, the in- creased production which can be reasonably achieved under present circumstances will result in reasonable prices for meat and live- stock and will best serve the Nation's in- tereste in the long run. Political Basis Behind Antitrust Prosecutions EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN J. WILLIAMS OF DELAWARE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, February 12 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. WILLIAMS, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have inserted in the Appendix of the Recorp an article appearing in the New York Times of Wednesday, January 24, 1951, entitled “Jackson Grows Candid,” together with an editorial which appeared in the Wall Street Journal of January 26, 1951, en- titled “Candor.” The article and editorial quote Su- preme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson as having told the New York State Bar Association that for some years antitrust cases had been picked by this adminis~- tration on a political basis. I think this statement is one of the most damaging admissions of a prominent Government APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD official, and confiums the low level to which the administration has sunk dur- ing recent years. There being no objection, the article and editorial were ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: [From the New York Times of January 44, 1951] Jackson Grows Canpip—Says Potrricat Basis Is Beninn ANTITRUST PROSECUTIONS Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson told the anti-trust section of the New York State Bar Association last night that anti- trust cuses had been picked for prosecution on @ political basis. The meeting was held at the Harvard C.ub, and Justice Jackson was the guest of honor. Referring to his own experience in the Department of Justice before being appointed to the Supreme Court, he said with a laugh, in which the audience joined: “After all, they had to be picked on some basis. We might as well be candid about it.” Justice Jackson suld he belleved the Gov- ernment must depend more on adiministra- tive processes than on criminal conspiracy prosecutions tn dealing with anti-trust prob- Jems. Justice Jackson said he had favored the anti-trust laws because he believed they tend- ed to prevent the socialization of industry. Ike added that he did not believe in too great concentration of power, elther in in- dustry, Government, or unions. [From the Wall Street Journal of January 26, 1951) CANnDoR The other evening Supreme Court Justice Jackson told the New York Bar Association that for some years anti-trust cases had been picked for prosecution on a political basis. “After all,” Mr. Jackson remarked, ‘they hud to be picked on some basis. We might as well be candid about it.” Well, we admire his candor. Mr. Jackson, who was formerly Attorney General and be- fore that long connectod with the Justice De- partment, confirmed what & good many peo- pie had long suspected but were reluctant to believe, Most people would prefer to believe that the Government's policemen brought their charges on some other basis—reasonable grounds for thinking there really was a vio- Jation of the law, for instance, or, if they had to choose between several possible cases for immediate prosecution, giving priority on the basis of the evidence, public interest or something similar. So, though we admire the candor, we can- not join the laugh with which the Justice made his remark about the political basis and n which his audience joined the other eve- ning. We do not find it amusing. Presentation of the George S. Bartlett Award for 1950 to Robert Hugh Bal- dock, State Highway Engineer of Oregon EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HOMER D. ANGELL OF OREGON IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 12, 1951 Mr. ANGELL. Mr. Speaker, Oregon residents were greatly pleased to learn
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD of the presentation of the George 8, Bartlett Award for 1960 to Robert Hugh Baldock, State highway engineer for Oregon. Mr. Baldock has been our State engi- neer for many years and has taken an active part in highway problems throughout the Nation and as a result has reached the pinnacle of success in the promotion of highway legislation and the effecting and carrying out of a program for integrated highway de- velopment not only in our own State but Nation-wide. This award to Mr. Baldock was highly deserved and as representa- tive of the Third District of Oregon I want to add my word of personal appre- ciation for the honor thus bestowed upon my fellow citizen. I include as part of these remarks an article by Hal H. Hale, executive secre- tary of the American Association of State Highway Officials, together with Mr. Baldock’s brief response: PRESENTATION OF THE GEorGE 8S. BARTLETT AwaRp For 1950 ro Ropert Hucs BaLpock, Strate HiaHway ENGINEER OF OREGON (By Hal H. Hale) For an unknown period of time before the recording of the history of mankind in written form, peoples, nations, and institu. tions followed the practice of publicly recog- nizing outstanding achievement and accom. plishment by an individual with some special award or token. The earliest indication of this practice was in the so-called pagan era prior to the dawn of Christian civiliza- tion. In that period of worship of pagan gods the priests and various orders of the temples dispensed amulets or small tokens used in the rituals of worship of the day. The practice was continued and further expanded following the advent of the Chris- tian era, Many types of medals were, and still are, utilized in various forms of religious worship throughout the world, many of which bear some likeness of Christ or of the saints. As might be anticipated, kings, potentates, and emperors were quick to seize upon the custom of using medals for purposes other than religious, and frequently substituted their own likenesses for the religious symbols of the church, a practice not unknown to us in this generation. Adoption of the practice by the military was also an early and natural development, and it is in this field that the widest use has perhaps oc- curred. The American Congressional Medal of Honor is typical of the custom of recog- nizing outstanding bravery in wartime with an award of great honor. The British have been noted for their use of the custom for @ century and a half, Hardly any impor- tant event in British history is without recognition in the form of a medal or com- memorative token of some Kind. In the field of technical awards, early records indicate that students were presented with an emblematic scroll upon their com- Piletion of some prescribed course of study, thus the custom of the high school or col- lege diploma so widely used today. It would appear that the University of Naples was the first institution of higher learning to bring the presentation of a scroll and the conferring of a degree into general practice as an award of graduation. Following this commendable custom there was created in 1981 what is known as the George 8. Bartle‘t Award, to be conferred annually upon some individual who has made an outstanding contribution to high- way progress. This is the most important such honor or recognition in America and the world. In accordance with procedures established at the time the award was created, Robert Hugh Baldock, State highway engineer of Oregon, has been selected as the recipient of the George S. Bartlett Award for 1950. Mr. Baldock, or Sam as he is addressed by moat of us, does not come before this group un- known and as a@ stranger. Few among us are better known and none more highly respected, nor ts this the first high honor bestowed upon him. Mr. Baldock joined the Oregon Highway Department in 1918, shortly after being graduated from the University of Colorado. After having worked his way through the curricula of jobs afforded by such a department, he became chief engi- neer of the department in 1982, which posi- tion he still holds. Early in his highway experience he became an active participant in the affairs of the American Association of State Highway Officials. In 1947 he received the highest honor that the association can bestow, namely, the presidency of the Amer- ican Association. He has been a thorough student and author, as well as engineer and administrator, through all these years. In 1946 the University of Oregon, in due rec- ognition of his ability, conferred upon him the honorary degree of doctor of science. It is of more than passing significance that in our search in the Library of Con- gress for historical material for this impor- tant occasion, there was found a volume un- der the heading of “Merit” titled “A Bys- tem of Merit Ratings for Engineers,” by Robert Hugh Baldock. To me this means more than finding that he ts also listed in Who's Who in Amorica. Chesterfield, in his writings, left us this quotation: “Real merit of uny kind cannot long be concealed; it will be discovered, and nothing can depreciate it but a man exhibit- ing it himself. It may not always be re- warded as it ought, but it will always be known.” Sam, I knew George Bartlett. Not so in- timately as many present here knew him, but well enough to know that wherever he may be today, on the other side of the river of life, if he is privileged to glance back in- to this troubled world, that, as I am honored to place this plaque in your hands, he will smile, flip his haio with his finger, make a motion of straightening whatever he may be wearing for his bow tie, and say, “Fine; that’s just the way I wanted it to be.” I could find no more fitting quotation for this occasion than that of Lord Halifax: “True merit, like a river, the deeper it is the less noise 11 makes.” Congratulations, RESPONSE BY R. H. BaLpoce Ladies and gentlemen, members of the American Association of State Highway Of- ficials, I am humbly grateful and feel deep- ly honored to be the recipient of this award. Labor Unions Help Win Freedom Fight EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HUBERT H. HUMPHREY OF MINNESOTA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, February 12 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that an editorial entitled “Labor Unions Help in Freedom Fight,” written by Mr. Manchester Boddy, editor and publisher of the Los Angeles Daily News, and published in that newspaper, be printed in the Appen- dix of the REcorp. A727 There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Reconp as follows: Lazor Unrons Hewp WIN Freevom Fiamr In the spring of 1947 I returned from several months’ study in Central Europe with & trunk full of documents and observations proving that Red Russia expected to use organized labor as its main force in bring~ ing all of Europe under Communist domi-# nation. Some day, I hope, the inside story of how the Kremlin organized that great drive will be written. Then, and not before, will the American public learn that the decisive battle of the cold war in Europe was won for our side by organized labor—and not entirely by the Marshall plan and the architects who put the Atlantic Pact together. It must not be forgotten that Russia had all of the advantage in the early days of the fight for control of organized labor in EBu- rope. Workers were hungry, confused and in & general state of desperation. Industrial plants had been destroyed, workers’ homes Were gone, transportation was at a stand< still, the currency systems had broken down, and there were no standards of employment, Communism lost that fight, and every well-balanced American can take a deal of pride in the recent report by Harry Martin, president of the American Newspaper Guild and labor information director of ECA, on the part organized labor played in the Korean crisis. Among other things, he told a Common- wealth Club of California audience: “In Europe it was from the free trade unions that the earliest and strongest sup- port for the United Nations action on Korea came. While other segments of European society debated, the unions rushed to our side. “Only one day later the Norwegian labor movement issued a pamphlet totaling 500,000 copies called “War in Korea." Because of the swift action of the Norwegian labor move- ment, the Norwegian people were quickly in- formed on what had happened in Korea, a far-off country of which they knew little, but whose danger was also their own. “Delegates of the Durham Mine Workers Association, representing 100,000 mine work- ers, adopted a resolution cabled to Stalin, calling on him to halt the invasion. “International Mine Workers Federation delegates, representing unioas in Great Brit- ain, Sweden, Norway, Holland, and France also spoke out boldly following the Korean aggression at their meeting in Stockholm, almost on the borders of Russia, ‘Danish Communists attempted to inter« fere with the unloading of arms-aid. But it was a phony strike, a political strike, a trea- sonable strike. Leaders of the Danish unions promised it would not take place. The ship- ments were unloaded, “When Western Europe joined with the United States in the Atlantic Pact and the flow of arms began to move to our pact allies, the Cocos—as they are sometimes called in France-—-grew desperate. They called for a mass movement of European workers in pro- test against rearmament, Violence broke out along the water fronts all over Europe. “But the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions exposed the program for what it was, a vicious campaign of treason carefully calculated to destroy Europe's chance to resist aggression. The great fed- erations of transport workers, of dock workers and of seamen took the cue and struck back, “Today, with a few notable exceptions, the much-needed weapons of defense are being unloaded in major ports of every European democracy. “Just last month Austrian Communists, at first obviously encouraged by the Russians, had made plans for a coup to begin with u
A728 general strike and to culminate in open re- volt and the seizure of the government, There was much dissatisfaction among work- ers of all political persuasions with the new wage-price policy. So a general strike wis called and the Reds mobilized for action. “But the Austrian Federation of Trade Unions had been the major force responsible for keaping the total Communist vote down to barely 5 percent of the ballots cast. Its leaders now called conferences of the shop stewards in every factory in Austria—even in the Russian-ocoupled szone—on the day before the strike. “Down the ne went the word: the gen- eral strike is & phony, a trick to overthrow our government, and it must not succeed, The story of the next 4 or 6 days is essen- tially that of courageous and unarmed union members fighting with their bare fists, and with the sweat of their brows in the factories, against the well-trained and well-armed ac- tion squads of the Communists, “There are two countries in free Europe where the Communist trade unions still hold & substantial edge over their unshackled op- ponents: France and Italy. Much has to be done before the Communist influence in these countries is wiped out, The workers there must have decent standards of living and a fair share of the fruits of recovery. “In the countries where the unions are strong and free, the European recovery pro- gram is enjoying a genuine success; while in the countries where the unions are weak or are in the hands of the Communists, the recovery program has encountered its most discouraging problems. “It ts my firm conviction that these prob- lems will be solved as free labor grows strong endugh in Prance and Italy to make its voice heard and ite influence felt.” The St. Lawrence Seaway EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ALEXANDER WILEY OF WISCONSIN IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, February 12 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. WILEY. Mr. President, I have received from all over our Nation a con- tinued avalanche of well-justified mes- sages on behalf of the completion of the Great Lakes-8t. Lawrence seaway. My own State of Wisconsin in particular has confirmed anew its historic position urg- ing the Congress to complete this vital project. New hearings on the seaway will be commenced on Tuesday, February 20, before the House Public Works Com- mittee. These hearings, I trust, can be conducted with dispatch. I hope that they will not involve needless detailed repetition of the same old facts which have been presented a dozen times—pro and con—before other committees of the Congress and other authoritative groups, There are literally warehouses full of all of the duplicating and overlapping reports, hearings, documents, and so forth, which have been made on the sea- way thus far. And while I appreciate the desire of my colleagues on both the Senate and House side to get whatever new information might be available, it jis a fact that practically everything has already been said on both sides of this proposition. The case for the seaway is, I believe, complete and definitive. At this time, I ask unanimous consent that there be printed in the Appendix of the Concressiona, Recorp certain items on this vital issue: (a) The text of a radio address which I delivered last Saturday by transcrip- tion on Station WGN. (b) The text of an editorial from the Sheboygan (Wis.) Press endorsing the seaway. : (c) The text of a resolution from the Milwaukee Common Council along this same line. I also ask that along the more gen- eral line of the position of the upper Midwest in the Nation’s defense effort, there be printed an editorial from the Minneapolis Star. There being no objection, the address, editorials, and the resolution were or- dered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: . Ustna America’s Resources (Address by Senator Wier over Station WGN, Chicago, Ill, on Congress Speaks program, Saturday, February 10, 1961, 1:45 p. m.) It is a pleasure to speak to you this after- noon on @ subject which I believe is tmpor- tant to every American, namely the adequate using of all of our basic resources. I am grateful indeed to this great station for the opportunity to submit these thoughts to you. May I say, friends, that it will be a pleasure to receive your reactions to my re- marks this afternoon. You and I are well aware that our country is in the midet of a grave crisis. Every newspaper edition, every radio news broad- cast tells us the grim story. Now, in this crisis, if we were sure that we were really using every resource that our country pos- sesses, we would be less concerned. Unfor- tunately, however, we find that our country is eomewhat like a man who Is fighting for his life, but with one arm resting at his side, I say to you, my friends, that America is not using her great resources as she should, and I should like to prove that point to you. A FEW REASONS FOR SUPPORT OF SEAWAY To us of the Midwest, there is one great resource which in particular has not been fully tapped. I refer to the 2,400-mile inland ship artery which can be ours through com- pletion of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence sea- way and power project. Now, my friends, I need not repeat to you all of the vast number of reasons why this St. Lawrence project should be approved by the present Congress. Let me mention, how- ever, that the seaway will not cost the tax- payers a dime. It will pay for itself through ship tolls and electricity payments. It will, in fact, enable the cities and farms of the Midwest to have direct contact with the deep ocean ports of the world. It will help bring in vitally important Labrador iron ore which is so essential for midwestern industry and for American weapons, It will assure inex- pensive transportation for farm products. It ‘will give us a protected life line, free of the submarine threat which destroyed literally hundreds of ships off the Atlantic and Gulf coasts during World War II, Those are but a few of the reasons. Unless we utilise the seaway we will find ourselves tn the role of a second-class nation, Gepending on foreign imports of iron ore—~ imports from South America. We will be a second-clags nation which won't be able to adequately defend itself. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD RUSSIA HOPES SEAWAY WILL BE DEFEATED There is nothing that Joe Stalin would like better than to see the St. Lawrence seaway bill this year defeated once again. Joe Stalin would laugh up his sleeve. He would prob- ably say to himself: “Why, those foolish Americans. Here in Communist Russia we are building canals, dams, hydroelectric proj- ects. We are utilizing our Russian resources to the fullest. But over there those foolish Americans have a tremendous source for electric power—2,200,000 horsepower—to meet their shortage of electricity. But they are wasting that hydroelectric power. They could have a tremendous shipping channel to supplement their overburdened transpor- tation facilities. But do they use it? No; they allow a few selfish, obstinate lobbyists to sabotage the whole project.” That is what Joe Stalin would say to himself. Do you want that to happen? ARGUMENTS HASHED AND REHASHED Now, my friends, this seaway has been de- bated for a quarter of a century. It has been studied, investigated, reviewed, analyzed. There are whole warehouses full of reports on it. All of the facts are known. All of the arguments have been hashed and rehashed. Let's quit talking about it, Let Congress do something about it. Support of the seaway exists in every phase of American society. Every American Presi- dent, regardless of his party, has supported it—Herbert Hoover, Harry Truman—Demo- crats and Republicans. In Wisconsin, my own State, every single Governor, every sin- gle legislature, has supported it. ‘Who opposes the seaway? Just a handful of blind, selfish interests. They may not realize it, but their action amounts to en- couraging national suicide. Their action means that in effect America is fighting a defense effort with one arm hanging help- lessly at its side. What a travesty, what ridiculous folly. PORTS, BAILROADS OPPOSE SEAWAY But what do we see in the opposition? A few ports and railroads fear that the seaway will p-ovide them competition. But their fears are ridiculous, because there is more than enough transportation for the existing ports and railroads, plus tremendous new arteries. America’s railroads are already choked with trafic. They cannot possibly handle the increased tonnage that will be necessary during this national emergency. But still these certain railroads continue to spearhead the opposition to the seaway, just as they led the opposition to the Panama Canal 50 years ago, Now, you, my friends, know that in this year of 1961 anyone who objected to the Pan- ama Canal would be regarded as a candidate for a booby hatch. Why? Because that Canal has more than proven itself from a commercial standpoint, from a national defense standpoint, and from every other approach. And yet the same moth-eaten arguments which were originally raised against the Panama Canal back in the early 1900's, those same phony arguments are being raised once again today against the 8t. Lawrence seaway. Fifty years from now anybody who criticized the seaway would probably also be regarded as a candidate for &@ booby hatch. Why? Because this project ig so sound, so fundamentally just, so abso- lutely necessary that it takes a blind man not to see its advantages. But we are told that “there are none so blind as those who will not see.” Certain folks have put the blinders on their own eyes, but I say to them, that it is time to take those blinders off. WE WILL NEED SEAWAY 6 YEARS FROM NOW I say, let the Congress show that it has vision and judgment by approving the St. Lawrence seaway bill during the present
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD session. Let there be no further stalling, no further dilly-dallying, no further long, repetitious reports and expensive hearings. There is no reason for delay. Every minute is precious. The seaway, we know, will take more than half a dozen years to construct. But remem- ber, my friends, that we are in this emer- gency with Russia not just for 1951, but for perhaps as long as 10 or 20 years to come. If the seaway had been approved 6 years ago we would be using it today. The time for action is now AMERICA SHOULD DECENTRALIZE Now, my friends, I said at the start that we were not adequately utilizing our re- sources. Let us turn now to a second major field to prove that point. I say we should better utilize the re- sources of the small communities of this land. I say that the time is overdue for the Government to decentralize its agencies and spread them out among the smaller com- munities of this land. It is ridiculous to continue to center a quarter of a million Federal workers in one bomb target, namely, Washington, D. C. THREE TYPES OF ACTION NECESSARY Folks, in this fleld of decentralization, we need basically three types of action: (a) Decentralization of government. (b) Decentralization of population. (c) Decentralization of industry. Of these three phases, it is obviously most difficult to decentralize huge factories and millions of people. But we can fairly readily Qisperse key Government agencies. Now, I don't consider it real decentralization of you merely disperse an agency from Washington, D C., to some other huge, crowded city. That merely amounts to moving the agency from one target center to another. On the contrary, decentralization must mean moving out to the “grass roots” of our country. By doing so, we will pump economic life blood into many of these small communities. But what do we find? PHONY DISPERSAL PLANS At present, there are limited plans for so- called Federal decentralization or dispersal, But the plans are largely phony. Your Government is contemplating spending $150,- 000,000 to disperse agencies within a 20-mile or so radius of Washington, D C. Let me repeat that point, my friends, At present, certain Government planners want the Congress to appropriate around $150,- 000,000 of your tax money to set up agencies in temporary buildings within 20 miles of Washington. Now, that my friends, is per- fectly fantastic. In the first place, a high- speed bomber flying at 400 miles an hour can aim @ bomb at Waslington, and it is lucky to hit a target 10 to 20 miles away. In other words, what these so-called Gov- ernment planners are doing is saying that we trust that if Russian bombers aim their bombs at the Capitol or the White House, they will ieally hit those specific targets instead of having those bombs fall wide of their target. You and I know that if America puts suffi- cient interceptor planes, radar sets, guided missiles around Washington, that will partly prevent attacking bombers from Litting the targets right on the nose. This will mean that many bombs will fall wide of the target, and where will they fall? Right on the agenocles which have presumably been dis- persed and decentralized 20 miles away. Sv, my friends, merely spreading agencies 20 or 25 miles away from Washington will not satisfy the present need. I say that ersential Government agencies should be spread out in the grass roots of the 48 States. Moreover, I don’t want to see agencies com- ing into already overcongested cities. I want them placed, insofar as possible, in smaller communities. Now, obviously to do so, it will take a con- siderable amount of money and plarning. But this can and must be done. We know that in Russia they went Nterally back to the hills and built whole cities. They took their production plants and spread them over vast areas. But what has Washington done? It has simply put its head in the sand and failed to recognize the basic facts of history, WHAT REAL DECENTRALIZATION MEANS I say that units in Federal departments should be placed in those arens where the actual functions exist, for example, the United States Department of Agriculture divisions should be decentralized to the dairy areas, the cotton sections, the wheat sections of this vast Nation of ours. The Department of the Interior units should he located primarily in the areas ad- jacent to their subject matters, and so forth. WHAT ABOUT CONGREES, COURTS, AND PRESIDENT? Now, here is another fact, friends. The present decentralization planning of the Fed- eral Government takes no account whatso- ever of the fact that the White House, the United States Supreme Court, and the United States Congress could be completely put out of commission by a single atomic bomb. Well, I have been urging for years that our Government planners get down to earth and make some sensible plans for relocating the White House, the Supreme Court, and the Congress, as well as the central units of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Atomic Energy Commission in different areas of this coun- try In this way, we will be utilizing the resources of these various areas and we will be making sure that we don’t put all of our eggs in one basket, namely, Washington, D. C. CONCLUSION These then, are the two suggestions I submit to you this afternoon. First a sug- gestion for the completion of the St. Law- rence seaway and second, a suggestion for genuine decentralization. If we apply these suggestions, we will be better utilizing the great resources of the American people. We will be utilizing both hands, so to speak, instead of merely allow- ing one hand to dangle at our side. I want to thank you for listening to me this afternoon. I hope that when you write to your Congressman and Senator, you will give him your reactions to theso specific pro- posals. Thanks again, too, to Station WGN for its courtesy, and thanks to you my Heteners. This is Senator ALEXANDFR WILEY signing off from Washington. [From the Sheboygan (Wis.) Press] OPEN THE SEAWAY Senator Winey has asked support of the St Lawrence seaway project as a means of making North America “an atomic-age ar- senal of democracy.” He said Tuesday that it would be an abso- Jute sin to further delay construction of the seaway. The Senator made this comment in connection with the plans of a group of Sen- ators to introduce a new seaway bill this week. Similar legislation already has been introduced in the House. Senator WiLEy notes that our industries eventually will need new sources of raw ma- terials. The St. Lawrence offers a practical route for bringing these materlals—-particus larly, iron ore from Labrador—to the mills in the Great Lakes region. As the situation now stands, we are wasting a precious resource by failing to open this water route to large vessels, The natural waterway is there for us to use, but we cannot gain full benefit until the necessary improvements are made, A729 At the same time we are denying ourselves the benefit of a great source of power that would help meet the steadily increasing de- mands from our industries, The arguments againat the seaway are phony, Senator Wriey contends. He says the issue boils down to a “fight between certain selfish railroad and port interests on the one hand and the people of the United States on the other.” He hopes the American people will succeed and persevere. Members of the House Public Works Com- mittee will hold hearings during February on the proposed legislation. Advocates of the seaway should be prepared to fight vigor- ously for their cause and to answer all the various excuses that undoubtedly will be brought forth in an effort to forestall the project. It will be said that the project is too big and too costly to undertake at this time, but we agree with Senator Wiuny that the real objections will be based on selfish- ness. In spite of their steady growth, there always are some interests that are fearful they will be put out of business. RESOLUTION OF MILWAUKEE (Wis.) Common Councr Whereas on May 23, 1947, this honorable body adopted a resolution urging the Con- gress of these United States to pass legisla- tion for construction of the proposed Bt. Lawrence seaway project; and Whereas the present Congress ts again con- sidering the aforesaid project; and Wherens the development of the St. Law- rence seaway project would provide vast quantities of low cost hydro-electric power, would extend the benefits of direct ocean transportation to the City of Milwaukee, the State of Wisconsin and the entire Great Lakes area; would permit Milwaukee indus- tries to import raw materials at low cost and, by utilizing direct ocean service, to expand greatly their foreign trade and to reach new foreign markets, and in general would en- hance the economic prosperity and well- being of the Great Lakes area and the entire Nation; and Whereas World War II demonstrated the absolute necessity of the St. Lawrence Sea- way for the national defense and the mili- tary security of this Nation by providing a safe and landlocked basin for national de- fense industries, for storage of strategic ma- terials and for construction of naval and merchant vessels; and Whereas the agricultural and industrial resources of the Great Lakes area could have been effectively employed had the St. Law- rence Seaway project been completed and available for use at the outbreak of said World War IT; and Whereas the aforesaid is also true if this Nation of ours becomes involved in any fu- ture armed conflicts; therefore be it Resolved by the Common Council of the City of Milwaukee, That its members urge all Senators and Representatives from Wis- consin to lend their best efforts to assure the construction of the St. Lawrence Seaway at as early a date as possible to permit expanded foreign trade and to insure the national de- fense; and be it further Resolved, That the members of this honor- able body reaffirm the unalterable belief of the city of Milwaukee and its citizens in the merits of this great project which holds vast potentialities for the future welfare and pros- perity of the city of Milwaukee, the State of Wisconsin and the Nation at large; and be it further Resolved, That copies of this resolution be transmitted to the President of the United States, Senators ALEXANDER WILEY and JosEePH R. McCartuy, Representatives Curmznt J. ZaBLOCKI and OsARLES J. Kersten, and the other representatives from the State of Wis- consin,
A730 [From the Minneapolis (Minn.) Star of Jan- uary 22, 1951] ‘Tere Urrer MIpwrst in THE DevensE PRrocRaM The defense program now getting under Way presents the upper Midwest with some very serious, special problems. What is go- ing to happen to the region in terms of in- dustry and population, and what can the region legitimately do to maintain or strengthen its relative position in the Nation? Before attempting to answer this question, the Star would like to make ita own position clear. We do not intend to seek special favora for the upper Midwest. The region will insist, we are sure, on pulling its share of the national load, whatever that may be. But we do purpose to do everything we can do to see that the upper Midwest gets its Just deserts, and that it is not injured by avoidable blunders or official ignorance about the region’s true capacities. CLUES IN PAST 10 YEARS There are some clues in the experience of the past 10 years to what kind of problem the upper Midwest faces for the next 10. We know from the 1950 census that a defense program sucks manpower out of the region. Minnesota, for instance, suffered a popula- tion loas of 170,000—the difference between the number of people we'd have had because of natural increase, and the number we ac- tually have. The population loss of the upper Midwest region on this basis was close to half a million. From 1940 to 1950 the region showed a net gain in industry, but it lost ground relatively to the rest of the country. The same things—reletive loss of popula- tion and industry—almoast certainly will hap- pen to the upper Midwest in the next 10 years under the impact of the kind of de- fense program that is being planned. They seem unavoidable because of the manpower shortages in the making. Take uircraft production as an illustration. The present plan is to create plant capacity to produce 50,000 aircraft a year, but to hold production in such plants to one shift a day until events call for full production. The same pattern fe to be followed for tanks, electronic gadgets, and other “hardware.” It is not to be realistically expected that @ great deal of this plant capacity will be located in the upper Midwest. It will be located close to industrial conters where cut- backs in civilian production release the workers needed for one-shift-a-day opera- tion. Even in the initial stages this program will suck manpower out of the upper Midwest. If and when a signal is given for three-shift operation of new plants the suction will be- come irresistible for manpower not occupied with essential military work. SOME THINGS TO BE DONE In the face of this prospect there are some things the upper Midwest can demand in its own and in the national interest. 1. It can demand that no existing plant capacity here that could be used for militery production be duplicated elsewhere unless such duplication is unavoidable, 2. It can demand that reasonable heed be given to unemployment problems that will be created here as locations for new plant capacity are determined. The upper Midwest should press these do- mands in every possible way—through the influence of its business, industrial, and labor leaders, through ite Members of Congress of both parties; through ite civic and com- mercial organtzations. LOGICAL WAY TO START There 1s, fortunately, a logical way to start pressing such demands, It js to insist now, with all the vigor the upper Midwest can muster, that Federal procurement agencies learn what our region has to offer in plant capacity and skilied manpower. The region should ask that teams of com- petent procurement people come to the up- per Midwest without delay and spend a month learning what we can do and who can do tt. We have pienty of competent and experienced industrialists to plan the details of such a survey, and there's not the slightest doubt they'll put out the welcome mat, If such a survey can be arranged—and it's reasonable to believe it can—the question of establishing branch procurement offices at some convenient central point in the upper Midwest should be discussed with the visit- ing survey teams. The teams should come prepared to dicuss such branch offices, and to make definite recommendations about their establishment. The Star's editors do not pretend to know what the outcome of such a survey, and of frank discussion of the establishment of branch procurement offices, may be. But we strongly believe the survey must be made and the question of branch offices must be discussed. If these things are done, and done before the defense program begins to dislocate the economy, the upper Midwest will have real confidence it is getting its just desserts. If that confidence exists the region can be de- pended upon to make its sacrifices without much complaining, The Marble Plaques Adorning the Walls of the Chamber EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ANTONIO M. FERNANDEZ OF NEW MEXICO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 12, 1951 Mr. FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, un- der leave to extend my remarks, I include the twelfth and subsequent short sketches being published by the Wash- ington Post with respect to the men honored by the plaques which adorn the walls of the Chamber: Simon De Montrort: THE Cetzsraten Eng- Lis STaTEsMAN (Cmca A. D. 1200-1268) Simon de Montfort (circa 1200-1265), Earl of Leicester, spent a good part of his active life leading the revolt against Henry III of England. At the famous Mad Parliament of Oxford, he was opposition leader. De Montfort became almost a dictator of England after his victory on the battlefield at Lewes in May 1264. He stands out as an important figure in legislative history because the Great Parlia- ment he summoned was revolutionary in that it contained not only knights from each shire to represent the rural nobility, but also representatives from the towne and boroughs. He left s heritage of championing the cause of the nobility and the people against the king. For years after his death, De Montfort was considered a martyr by the Commons. His plaque wae done by Gaetano Cecere, of Fredericksburg, Va. Lovurs IX: AvTHor or Tae Miss or Amiens (A. D, 1214~70) Louts IX (1214-70), King of France, stands in history as the ideal King of the middle ages. He became renowned for his ability as a compromiser, an arbiter who APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD often was called upon to settle disputes be- tween warring factions of his nobility and in succession disputes in neighboring countries. Louls is said to have given charity to more than 100 beggars dally, but protected the royal decor by bringing them tn the back door. He went on two crusades, and was can- onized in 1297. In his relatively uneventful reign, Louls Ix simplified administration, tmproved the dis- tribution of taxes, abolished the so-called Judicial duel, and sought to tntroduce unl- form Roman law. ALpHonsO X: Famous Sranisn Kina oF THE Myrvpte Aoxs (A. D. 1221-84) Alphonso X, the “Wise” (1221-1284), was King of Leon and Castile and is remembered as author of the code “Las Siete Partidas,” which is the basis of Spanish jurisprudence. Historians set him down as perhaps the most interesting, though not the most capable, of the Spanish kings of the Middle Ages. Alphonso was called the father of Castilian prose. Besides “Las Siete Partidas,” several other important works were written under his editorship. They included the so- called Alphonsine Tables in astronomy, an illustrated book on games and 4 famous col- lection of medieval poetry and music. : Alphonso displayed legislative capacity and ® desire to provide his kingdom with a code of law and a firm judicial system. His plaque was done by Gaetano Cecere, a Fredericksburg, Va., sculptor. Epwaap I or ENGLAND: FOUNDER oF THE PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUTION OF ENGLAND (A. D. 1289-1807) Edward I (A. D. 1289-1307), as king of England, had such an important hand in the development of the law and the parliament- ary constitution he was ca’led the English Justinian, He did, however, fail in his chief ambi- tion—the conquest of Scotland—but suc- ceeded in humiliating his northern neighbor by removing the coronation Stone of Scone to Westminster. The general effect of Edward's work was to eliminate feudalism from public life. In 1295 he called a representative parliament of the three estates, which subsequently was called the Model Parliament, because it frst illustrated the type to be perpetuated in subsequent parliaments. “What touches all," said Edward's writ of summons, “should be approved of (by) all and it is also clear that common dangers should be met by measures agreed upon in common.” The parliamentary constitution of England was established as result of Edward's action. The Edward plaque was done by Laura Gardin Fraser, of Westport, Conn. Ambassador Monnet B. Davis EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CLARK W. THOMPSON OF TEXAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 12, 1951 Mr. THOMPSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, during my service on the Mer- chant Marine and Fisheries Committee I had occasion to study the unique and intricate relationship between the United States and the Republic of Panama. During a visit to the Canal Zone I ob- served the very excellent work being
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD done by our Ambassador, Monnet B. Davis. It seemed to me that he had an exceptional grasp of the situation and that he was performing an outstanding service to his Nation, Evidently he was appreciated by the people of our neighboring Republic. When Ambassador Davis left his post in Panama a very fine editorial appeared in the Star and Herald commenting on his service. I take pleasure in placing this editorial in the Concressiona, Rec- ORD, Ampassapor Davis Leaves Today we see a good friend of the Republic of Panama leaving our shores for other fields of endeavor to carry out new diplomatic mis- sions for his country. Ambassador Monnet B. Davis and Mrs. Davis are leaving for the United States to- day en route to Israel where Ambassador Davis will head his country's diplomatic mis- sions. We feel sure that Mr. Davis will har- vest the same success in his activities there that attended his mission here. While not neglecting the high interests of his country in his dealings with the Republic of Panama, Ambassador Davis was able to so conduct his mission here that the people of Panama could feel they were getting a fair deal. There were no high-handed gestures or impossible demands, instead there was always helpfulness and an obvious effort to understand our problems and viewpoints as he moved to carry out the purposes of his mission. And so Ambassador Davis won the respect and the friendship of the people who saw in him a sincere worker in the field of inter- American amity and cooperation, a worker filled with good will towards Panama. It is unfortunate indeed that the require- ments of the service should cause these con- stant changes in personnel. We no sooner get well acquainted with one envoy when he is shifted to some other post, and we must start all over again getting acquainted with his successor, In these days of continuing problems, it is hard to see men go who have threshed out issues with us and reached a thorough understanding of problems and their background, And Ambassador Davis 1s one of those men in whom we have developed confidence. The gathering at the penthouse atop the embassy office building yesterday was proof of the departing envoy's popularity both among his fellow citizens and among citizens of Panama. The general comment was—"‘It is a pity that he must leave us.” The Star and Herald joins wholeheartedly in this ex- pression of regret at the departure of this wholesome couple who have endeared them- selves tos0 many. But we do wish for them in their future activities the same measure of success that featured their stay in our midst. Address of Hon. Herbert H. Lehman, of New York EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. F. D. ROOSEVELT, JR. OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 12, 1951 Mr. ROOSEVELT, Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent, I include in the Ap- pendix of the Rrecorp an address made by Senator Herssrt H. Laxman at @ dinner in his honor sponsored by the Democratic State Committee in New York City on February 6, 1951: My party and the people of my State and and Nation have long honored me beyond my dreams and desserts. I have tried my best to requite these honors with faithful serv- ice. This gathering tonight is additional evi- dence of your friendship and your confidence for which I thank you all from the bottom of my heart, I am very proud that Senator SparKMAN, colleague and friend, has honored us all by taking part in this occasion. Senator SparK- MAN has become one of our main bulwarks and supports for a dynamic foreign policy. It has been my privilege, on many occasions, confidently to follow his leadership. One of the rich satisfactions of being in the Senate is the association with rare minds and high characters such as his, As far as I am concerned, personal gratifi- cation in holding high public office is far exceeded in these days of crisis by a sense of Personal responsibility. Concern for the security of our country and the world is con- stant and unrelenting. The days are filled with questions, and many nights are filled with prayerful reflection. But we in Washington share our anxieties with the whole Nation. And we draw fresh strength from the sure knowledge that our people have always risen to every need and every crisis. America will not fail the world now. A few days ago, former Secretary Hull, who helped guide America through the pertls of World War II, described the present situation as one of “chaos and unspeakable danger.” Never was a phrase more fitting. We are threatened with world chaos. are confronted with unspeakable danger. But we have not invoked this chaos, nor have we provoked these dangers. The men in the Kremlin have done that. We cannot wish the dangers away by hiding behind our ocean, by running away, or by retreating into isolationism. That is the fools’ paradise, the course of irresponsibility and sure disaster. In the face of these dangers, we must not retreat, but advance; we must not withdraw, but press ever Onward. Ours is the dynamic faith and the dynamic way of life. If we believe in it and in ourselves, as I know we do, we must not give way to fear or panic. What are the evil forces which have seized the world in their grip and have struck 80 many of us with dismay? They are the forces of an unlimited tyranny which seeks to justify itself by extending a ruthless pow- er over the entire world. Shall we abandon ourselves to these forces? Yet we cannot meet these forces with force alone, This tyranny parades under the false banner of univereal hungers—hunger for equality, for national and individual dignity, for economic security, and social justice. No- where are these aspirations more totally de- nied than within Soviet Russia. But a di- abolic and ingenious propaganda has kept this fact from large sections of mankind, This fact is least known among those peo- ples who feel these hungers most keenly— among the depressed and exploited peoples who for too long have been denied the bene- fits of modern technology and civilization, and who for too long have been oppressed by selfish economic and political forces. It 1s our responsibility today to convince these peoples that the ways of freedom promise economic and political salvation far more surely than the ways of repression and slavery. We must show our desires to bring about for all men a higher standard of liv- ing and individual security in a world at peace; we must show that freedom is not only compatible with these goals, but essen- tial to their achievement. This approech must particularly char- acterize our policy in those areas where our motives are most misunderstood—our mo- tives are misunderstood in many areas to- We A731 day, sometimes even by our friends. This must be the main weight of our policy in Asia, Just as military aid must be the main weight of our policy in Western Europe, Nor, in our concentration on the dangers . from abroad, can we afford to forget or over- look the problem of policy at home. To arouse and maintain the confdence of the free peoples of the world we must not only teach free democracy abroad, but practice it here at home. We muat intensify our ef- forts to eliminate these defects in our own democracy so that we may, with current ex- ample, prove that progress can be better achieved by evolution than by revolution. The measure of soctal Justice enjoyed by the American people is the measure by which we will be judged in the world. Equality and freedom and economic advancement are the great triumvirate which can command the hosts of mankind today. We recognize, of course, that, as President Truman pointed out, some desirable social programs must temporarily be deferred in this country, because of the compelling de- mand in money and manpower of our de- fense effort. But we must not cease to pro- claim our determination to fight for these programs as soon as the crushing burden of armament can safely be reduced. In the last analysis, our national strength is in the health and welfare of our citizens, These are the chief resources of America, Factories and machines are but passing as- semblies of metal and mortar. Our real power is in the skills, the vigor, the morale, the strength of heart, and the freedoms of the American people. We must have—we will have—national unity in our purposes and objectives. We may, for the sake of unity and under the pressure of necessity, defer decisions on some of our domestic issues. But we must not sacrifice our ultimate purpose to serve tem- porary ends, The effort to achieve our im- Mediate goals must not be used as an ex- cuse to abandon our ideals or our program for a better life for all people. We must proceed with clear mind and steady purpose. Our faith must be constant and strong. Our will must be unflinching. We must cherish one another, not only in this land of ours, but in all the free world, We must move aos great tides, not with fear- ful and frantic impulse, but with sure and confident pace, gathering strength and power as we go, in numbers and in our depth of purpose, until at last we reach the goal of peace, world security, and justice under law. Veterans’ Legislation EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JAMES I. DOLLIVER OF IOWA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 12, 1951 Mr. DOLLIVER. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following letter; VETERANS OF ForEIan Wars OF THE Untrep States, Washington, D. C., February 10, 1951. Hon. James I. Dorziver, Member of Congress, House Office Building, Washington, D.C. Dear Mr. Douurver: It will be deeply ap- preciated if you will insert in the Concras- AIONAL RECORD at your earliest convenience the following excerpts from my article tn the February issue of the National VFW Mag- azine: “The failure of the Eighty-first Congress to face its responsibility to the Nation's
A732 veterans can be placed squarely on the oor= step of the United States Senate. *° * “The House of Representatives, stimulated by an aggressive and sympathetic Commit- tee on Veterans Affairs, did a most com- mendable job in approving veteran legisla- tion but their efforts were largely nullified by an indifferent Senate. * * “The two Senate committees to which important veteran legislation is referred are always too busy on other legislation which they consider of primary importance to give the necessary attention to bills affecting vet- erans and their dependents. There are many able Senators on both committees but they just don't want to be bothered with veteran problems, especially when they re- ceive a little encouragement to let it alone. It ts a defenseless and tragic situation that should be corrected by the Eighty-second Oongress. * * “The solution to this problem would be the creation of a standing Senate Commit- tee on Veterans’ Affairs comparable to the efficient, hard working House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs which functions under the leadership of chairman Joun E. Rankin (Democrat, Mississippi) and ranking minor- ity member, Mrs. Epirn N. Poors (Repub- lican, Massachusetts). * “The comparative speed “with which the Senate can act when it wants to, and when the Chief Executive wants it to, was dem-~- onstrated in the passage of Public Law 894, Eighty-firet Congress, On December 4, 1960, the President recommended to the Congress that the program of vocational rehabilita- tion for disabled veterans, which was in ef- fect during and after World War II, be ex~ tended to Korean veterans. The Senate passed the bill on December 15, the House passed it on December 18, and the President signed {t on December 28. . Thanking you in advance for this “courtesy, I remain Respectfully yours, Omaz B. Kercrvum, Director. Mississippi Gets Its Balance and Climbs EXTENSION or REMARKS HON. FRANK E. SMITH OF MISSISSIPPI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 12, 1951 Mr. SMITH of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent, I in- clude in the Appendix of the Recorp an article by Bicknell Eubanks, from the Christian Science Monitor: Mississrrrt Gers Its BALANCE aND CLIMBs-— BAWI Pian Starrs Boom (Southern success story—IT) (By Bicknell Eubanks) JacKOn, Miss.—"“ We're on our way. They can't call us the No. 1 economic problem any more.” These words, uttered by Mississippi's ag- gressive Secretary of State, Heber Ladner, typify the South of today, for the South is on its way toward industrial leadership, its leaders feel. “Just take a look around,” Mr. Ladner told me when I visited him in his office in Missigsippi’s beautiful capitol. This was my firat trip to Jackson since 1936, and I was anxious to get first-hand the story of the State’s climb from the economic morass it had wallowed in for decades. I had come back to my native State of Mississippi to see if all the stories of progress were true. I remembered a State which was self-satisfied with its genteel poverty. In those days of the 1920's and 1930's when I firat became aware of what was going on around me, a farmer did well to get a couple of hundred dollars a year. He lived on credit at the stores. The stores existed on bank loans. And the banks could do no more than hope that next year's cotton crop would turn out all right, ECONOMY REBALANCED “That's all gone now,” Mr. Ladner told me. “Of course, we still are primarily agricultural, but our drive toward a balanced economy is showing up in a big way.” Bo I took his advice to “take a look around.” TI drove from one end of the State to the other. In almost every town of more than 1,500 population, I could see evidence of Mississippi’s BAWI program to “Balance agriculture with industry.” This evidence ranges from small factories— such as a window-frame plant in Winona, Miss.—to multimillion-dollar projects like the International Paper Co.'s rayon pulp mill at Natchez, Miss. To the visitor from the East, this growth presents an interesting feature—the absence of the dirty, congested, industrial sections of the older manufacturing centers on the At- lantic seaboard. In nearly every case, the new industries in Mississippi—as well as in the South in general—are away from bullt~ up areas, s0 that land costs less, taxes are less high, and there is hardly any problem of waste disposal. The International Paper Co.’s new plant at Natchez ts one of the most dramatic devel- opments in southern progress. It 1s located in a town which previously had been known only for its annual “pilgrimages” to its beautiful antebellum homes. Now Natchez is taking its place in the vanguard of the South’s march toward economic self-suffl- ciency. It is rapidly becoming the most in- dustrialized section in Mississippi. In addi- tion to the rayon mill, Johns-Manville and Armstrong Tire & Rubber Co. have each built & 83,000,000 plant. The rayon project is perhaps the biggest in the State. It is to cost a tetal of $20,000,- 000, with the first section, costing approxi- mately $5,000,000, already in operation. It is Mississippi's largest wood-using industry. The capacity of this modern plant will be 100,000 tons @ year, increasing the present estimated North American production of rayon 13 percent. The three big factories at Natchez are being developed by private capital. But Mississippi is not dependng alone on corpo- rations using their own funds to build in the Magnolia State. It has developed its BAWI program, under which communities or counties can float bond issues to be used in attracting new industry. While I was in Jackson, the State announced that the one- hundredth certificate of public convenience and necessity under the BAWI Act had been issued-——to the city of Clarksdale. William E. Barksdale, director of the State Agri- cultural and Industrial Board, was quite pleased. FORTY-TWO PLANTS OPENED “It shows the progress we are making,” he said. This former newspaperman said that during the past 6 years, 42 BAWI plants have been opened in the State, employing 12,410 persons and providing 927,368,000 annually in payrolls. BAWI and other new factories range from $80,000 projects to gigantic ones costing up to $20,000,000. Some of them include: Shannon, garments, $55,000; Brandon, ce- ment, $*,000,000; Purvis, women's alips, $190,000; Brookhaven, aweetpotato dehydrat~ ing, $30,000; Canton, milk processing, 960,= 000; Yazoo City, ammonia, $5,000,000; Hat- tlesburg, insecticides, $1,500,000; Crystal Springs, transformers, $100,000. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The effect of these and scores of other plants on Mississippi's economy cannot be overestimated, For more than 125 years, Mr. Ladner point out, the State had depended on @ one-crop economy based on eoll-de- pleting cotton. In the early history of the State, when the soil was rich and prices were good, money poured in. Then came the Civil War, the reconstruction era, and a decline in cotton prices. These factora, along with the draining of the growing power from the soll, pushed the State to the bottom of the heap, STATISTICS SHOUT Mr. Ladner had some powerful statistics to point up the econcmic gains in Mississippi. He cited them to back up his belief that these gains are mostly permanent. “In 1982,” he said, “the State tax was only $136,000. In 10949 it was more than §13,- 600,000. In 1982, the State collected less than $1,500,000 from. the sales tax. This same levy brought in more than $25,000,000 in 1949.” He pointed out that Mississippi is the ninth ranking oil and gas producer in the United States, with a 1949 production of al- most 38,000,000 barrels of crude ofl and al- most 109,000,000,000 cubic feet of natural gas. This provides a severance tax to the State of more than ¢500,000 a month. As I talked with Mr. Ladner, I recalled the dark days of 1932, the last year of Theo- dore G. Bilbo’s second term as governor. The State was almost bankrupt. Its bonds could find no market. Farms were being lost through foreclosure. Banks were going under. Teachers in many counties went un- paid. Outside sources of capital had dried up. Since then, beginning with the sales tax started by Gov. Mike Sennett Conner in 1933, the State has literally pullec itself up by its bootstraps. Communities are booming, the State's bonds are selling well over par, schools are thriving, and out-of-State capital 1s pouring in. ACCT, The Korean People EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. SAMUEL W. YORTY OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 12, 1951 Mr. YORTY. Mr. Speaker, within the past several days, two great American newspapers on opposite coasts, the Los Angeles Daily News and the New York Times, have called attention to a phase of the Korean War that merits more in- terest by far than we have given to it— the pitiful plight of the uprooted millions of Korean citizens who are struggling for survival between and behind the battle lines and midst the cross-fire of opposing armies. Mr. Manchester Boddy, the emi- nent publisher of the Los Angeles Daily News, a great humanitarian scholar and writer, commented editorially on Febru- ary 5, as follows: Puicut or EKorzaAN PEOPLE OVERLOOKED (By Manchester Boddy) The long and intensive experience news- gathering services have had in reporting world affairs is being put to excellent use in supplying war news from Asia, but there is one important factor in the Korean sitnae tion, of profound interest to American news- Pane renders, that I think is being oyer-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Ps refer to the condition of the Korean peo= ple. Some time ago Jim G. Lucas, a Scripps- Howard staff writer, wrote: “Returning United States pilots report streams of refu- gees heading north and others roving south. Apparently the Chinese Reds heve cleared out the villages to make room for troops. Every village on ‘the other side’ is fair game, Most of them are tioop concentrations, so we bomb and burn them.” One UP report quoted Gen. Robert B. Mc- Clure, of the Second Division, as ordering his men in the Wonju rrea to “kill ev rything that moves” to prevent the infiltration of Red soldiers who take advantage of our men, treacherously killing them, even in the back areas. Lt. Gen, Matthew B. Ridgway, aiter his first thorough inspection of the battle area, described what he saw as “perhaps the greatest tr.gedy to which Asia has ever been subjected in the course of its history. * * * Everything else is dwarted by the pathos of this tragedy. * * * Our American people haven't the faintest conception of it” That last sentence emphasizes the point I have in mind. The American people should have a very thorough conception of just what is hap- pening to the 30,000,000 Koreans whose homeland ts the battleground in a new Kind of war that may spread through Asia and to the continent of Europe. What does the average Korean know about the United States? In his own words—why does he think our soldiers are in Korea? Does he know what the United Nations flag means? Who does he blame for the war? What does he think the war is all ubout? What does he hope for—dream about—work for? We hear it said that life is cheap in Asta; that the average Korean does not look upon death as we do. How about that? After all, it is his country that is being reduced to rubble; his home that is being destroyed; his cities, ports, factories, and railroads that are being demolished. Just what does he think about all this? Or does he think? Does the average Korean fear the Ameri- can as he does the Red soldier? Does he think that some day he will have a voice in shaping the affairs of his homeland? Or have long years of suppression under Japa- nese rule—and fear of Chinese aggression before that—burned out his hopes and am- bitions? Spokesmen for the Korean people are a dime a dozen. Some are good and some aren't. But all are suspected of doing the thinking and talking for the Koreans for pur- poses of creating favorable or unfavorable propaganda. Our readers would like to hear the average Korean speak for himself, answer the questions I have suggested and many more that on-the-spot reporters can ask. We would like to see the answers just as the Koreans give them. Until early last summer Korea was ttle more than a name on the map to the vast majority of Americans; today it is a house- hold word—and any bright youngster in grace school can make it into an outline map of sorts. But we have only @ vague, shadowy notion about the Korean people. If our civilization must engage in bloody warfare, we can at least realize that our fighting involves human beings and not geography alone. One of these days a shocked America will want to rehabilitate what are left of the Korean people; to balance the horrors of destruction with an enlightened era of con- struction. We should get better acquainted with the Korean people. On February 11, the New York Times Magazine carried an illustrated factual account of the unspeakable hardships suffered by the masses of Koreans who have been driven from their homes in- to the barren fields, crowded trails and roads, frantically seeking survival in subzero temperatures. This article was written by Gertrude Samuels who also took the pictures which appeared with her article. Like the editorial above, the article is worthy of our attention and I am having it printed in our Rec- ORD: Korea’s REFUGEES—MISERY ON THE MARCH— Nor Even Worup War II in Evropr Pro- DUCED SO PATHETIC a FLow oF UPROOTED CIVILIANS (By Gertrude Samuels) Pusan, KorzA.—Just behind and in front of the shifting lines where bitter military battles are being fought on this mountainous peninsula, and out of earshot of the battle of semantics at Lake Success, are the Ko- Tean people, swept up in the tides of war. Their fate makes a strange and terrible story—of refugee women and children and the old, hungry, sick, uprooted, torn from families, begging fo. survival. Not even in the Europe of World Wat Il has there been s0 much collective human misery Everywhere one turns in the towns or vil- lages, where frozen ricé paddies are ter- raced into the mountains, are the pleading faces of hungry children, many dressed only in rice sacks, holding before them tin plates, or the mute, bewildered faces of mothers with young babies carried papoose fashion, trudging south to presumed safety. The cruel condition of the babies and orphans is heartrending. I saw 200 of these youngsters without parents, who had been gathered off the streets of Pusan hy the United Nations Civil Assistance Command (C. A. C.), dusted with DDT. vaccinated and given some cast-off clothing, as they were placed in the hold of a small cargo boat for tranefer to one of the inhabited islands off the south coast of Korea, One boy carried his crutches. Another, without legs, sat in a box. Their tired and pinched taces lit up momentarily as J fo- cused the camera on them. Like kids any- where, they shouted their own expression of amusement and approval, Ichi ban; (No. I!) In Taejon, within an area of about four square blocks, conditions were incredible, even for an oriental country. Perhaps 8,000 to 10,000 people were gathered on the bare earth and rubble, the women cooking the national dish of kimchi, a stew of cabbage, garlic, and red peppers, over open fires; old men striving to raise huts of rice straw mats, dirty and shivering children running, weeping, staring; and over the whole a wintry despair, To understand the plight of the refugees, one has to picture a tiny, heavily popu- lated country the size of England, the ma- jority of the people farmers who eked out a living on the soil, Poverty they are used to, put not starvation. The total population is around 28,400,000 of whom some 20,000,000 lived below the fateful thirty-elghth parallel. Today there are an estimated 1,912,500 refu- gees who have been pouring from both above and below the parallel to the “safety” zones. About 545,000 have found their way to 84 camps in the south. These are the lucky ones. But the great majority of the refugees, some 1,367,500, are literally on their own. There are three main groups trying to meet the responsibilities created by the exodus, They are the Korean Government, itself a refugee here from Seoul; the United Nations Civil Assistance Command, under the unt- fied command; and the seven-nation United Nations Commission for the Unification and Rehabilitation of Korea (UNCURK). The immediate concerns are for food and shelter. They may be partly answered by present plans A733 to transfer some 300,000 refugees to the is- lands of Kotedo and Chejubo by LST’s and cargo boats. The operations of CAC and UNCURK are largely advisory and supervisory, Although their members feel the plight of the refugees acutely, they are handicapped by Itmited functions and lack of means. As one ob- server said: “The refugees can't eat ad- visers.” The mathematics of the situation makes this point sharper. For some months, United Nations relief goods coming into the Goverment’s Office of Supply have ranged from skim powdered milk to charcoal and sleeping bags. But of 1,000,000 blankets promised by the United Nations, Government figures disclose that only 78,000 have been received; of 1,000 tents promised, fifty have arrived. (Incidentally all 7,000 CARE packages subscribed by individual Americans are marked “arrived '') But where agencies concerned with the refugees have been able to provide help, the results have been dramatic. I witnessed a mass feeling of children under 13 years of age here in the Korean Women’s Association building (there are three other similar centers in this crowded city), where the pinched and helpless look leaves children’s faces at the sight of food. They queue up like tired, little old men and women, their eyes glued on the vat of hot rice soup, and as each receives half a bowl- ful and a spoon, he starts to eat before look-~ ing for a place to sit down. Then each one tries to get in line again. I visited a tent camp on the outskirts of Pusan which can accommodate 7,000 refu- gees—in wooden sheds, huts of bamboo frames put up by the Government, 30 tents furnished by CAC, Here women and chil- dren are processed through a dusting sta- tion, sprayed with DDT and vaccinated against smallpox and typhus by a staff of Korean doctors and nurses. There is obviously no simple answer for 41] this misery. There is a bitterness and @ sense of helplessness on the part of the professional corps—international as well as American—that so few supplies are flowing in. The people of this country look to sym- pathetic Americans for help before it is too late. Mr. Speaker, these two great news- papers have performed a public service in supplying a reference that must not be neglected in the formulation of our plans relative to Korea. I recall all too vividly the indescribable condition of thousands of Filipinos huddling to- gether in fear, cramped on a small stretch of beach near Dulag, Leyte Is- land, shortly after we landed there. They were without food, shelter, sanita- tion or safety but they displayed a spirit- ually inspired courage in their quiet resignation. They had faith that their liberation would be accomplished, This gave them courage. How much worse must conditions be in Korea, where cold, destruction, shift- ing battle lines, and lack of advance planning for civilian relief, js aggra- vating the inevitable miseries that flow too relentlessly from the ravages of war. Even the outcome of the awful quandary in which they find themselves is still un- certain. As we come to a fuller under- standing of the facts, the American peo- ple will respond as one to the needs of the harassed children of little Korea, where the cynical Kremlin puppets chose to arrogantly throw down the gauntlet to the free world.
A734 Abraham Lincoln’s Voice Still Clearly Heard for the Democratic Way of Life EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CLYDE DOYLE OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 8, 1951 Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, this one hundred and forty-second birthday of Abraham Lincoln you and I sit as Mem- bers of the same great legislative body of which he was a Member from the State of Illinois from March 4, 1847, to March 4, 1849. He was elected as a Whig, and while here in Washington, lived at Mrs. Spriggs’ boarding house here on the Hill where the Library of Congress now is. Some of the other distinguished Rep- resentatives in the House at that time were Amos Abbott and John Quincy Adams of Massachusetts; Alexander H, Stephens and Robzrt Toombs, of Geor- gia; Andrew Johnson, of Tennessee. The Senators from Illinois were Sidney Breese, of Carlyle, and Stephen A. Doug- las, of Quincy. Lincoln was appointed to the Post Of- fices and Post Roads Committee end also to the Committee on Expenditures in the War Department. History records that the principal is- sues of those days were the War with Mexico, the ex‘ension of slavery, and the Wilmot Proviso, westward migra- tion, discovery of gold in California, and relations with the Indians. At the annual memorial service for this citizen of the ages, in the very next seat to me on my right was a Boy Scout in the uniform of the One Hundred and Second Troop of Washington, D C. We sat in the front row. My distin- guished colleague, Congressman Jon H. Morpock, of Arizona, was presiding as chairman. As I looked a few feet beyond this Boy Scout, there on the floor of the theater, in painted outline, were the footsteps of the assassin whose terrible deed almost caused a complete change and diamet- rically opposite course in the history of our beloved Nation. But thank God that then, as now, the American people rose in unity and strength and with com- mon purpose to defeat fear and to come to common accord because of their rec- ognition of the high purpose for which our America was given birth. If my recollection does not do me dis- service, it is a fact that on April 26, 1949, I also extended my remarks in observa- tion of the anniversary of the untimely assassination of Abraham Lincoln; and then again on February 9, 1950, I, like- wise, made remarks in observation of the one hundred and forty-first anniversary of the birth of Abraham Lincoln dur- ing the Eighty-first Congress. Naturally, because I sit in the United States House of Representatives where he once also worked and served God and humanity, I was interested to find the text of the following preamble and reso- lutions sponsored by Lincoln when he was a Member. This text is furnished me by the Library of Congress: Tux Livcoun Spot RESOLUTIONS Mr. Lincoln moved the following preamble and resolutions, which were read and laid over under the rule: “Whereas the Preaident of the United States, in his m of Mey 11, 1846, has declared that “the Mexican Government not only refused to receive him (the envoy of the United States) or listen to his proposi- tions, but, after a long-continued series of menaces, have at last invaded our territory and shed the blood of our fellow-citizens on our own soll"; And again, in his message of December 8, 1846, that “we had ample cause of war against Mexico long before the breaking out of hostilities; but even then we forebore to take redress into our own hands until Mexico herself became the aggressor, by invading our coll in hostile array and shedding the blood of our citizens”; And yet again, in his message of December 4, 1847, that the “Mexican Government re- fused even to hear the terms of adjustment which he (our minister of peace) was au- thorized to propose, and finally, under wholly unjustifiable pretexts, involved the two countries in war by invading the terri- tory of the State of Texas, striking the first blow, and shedding the blood of our citizens on our own soil”; And whereas this House ts desirous to ob- tain a full knowledge of all the facta which go to establish whether the particular spot on which the blood of our citizens was 60 shed wus or was not at that time our own soll: Therefore Resolved by the House of Representatives, That the President of the United States be respectfully requested to inform this House— First. Whether the spot on which the blood of our citizens was shed, as in his messages declared, was or was not within the territory of Spain, at least after the treaty of 1819, until the Mexican revolution. Second. Whether that spot is or is not within the territory which was wrested from Spain by the revolutionary Government of Mexico. Third. Whether that spot is or is not with- in a settlement of people, which settlement has existed ever since long before tho Texas revolution, and until its inhabitants fled be- fore the approach of the United States Army. Fourth. Whether that settlement ts or 1s not isolated from any and all other settle- ments by the Gulf and the Rio Grande, on the south and west, and by wide uninhabited regions on the north and east. Fifth. Whether the people of that settle- ment, or 8 majority of them, or any of them, have ever submitted themselves to the gov- ernment or laws of Texas or of the United States, by consent or by compulsion, either by accepting office, or voting at elections, or paying tax, or serving on juries, or having process served upon them, or in any other way. Sixth. Whether the people of that settle- ment did or did not flee from the approach of the United States Army, leaving unpro- tected their homes and their growing crops, before the blood was shed, as in the messages stated; and whether the first blood, so shed, was or was not shed within the enclosure of one of the people who had thus fled from it. Seventh. Whether our citizens, whose blood was shed, as in his message declared, ‘were or were not, at that time, armed officers and soldiers, sent into that settlement by the military order of the President, through the Secretary of War. Eighth. Whether the militery force of the United States was or was not #0 sent into that settiement after General Taylor had more than once intimated to the War Department that, in his opinion, no such movement was APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD necessary to the defense or protection of Texas. (Source: The OConarrssionaL Guosr, De- cember 22, 1847, p. 64.) The great Lincoln author, Carl Sand- burg, says of him: To understand the humor of this merry, serious, sad man, one must remember his sympathy and understanding for men and his deep faith in God. He moved without the slightest jar from telling a funny story to a decision on some serious problem of gov- ernment or to a declaration of his faith In the providence of Almighty God. And historian Sandburg also writes that Lincoln was paid a visit by members of the Baltimore Presbyterian Synod, and that, when they voiced their confidence in him as President, Lincoln made to them an avowal of religious faith, as fol- lows: I have often wished that I was a more de- yout man thanIam. Nevertheless, amid the greatest difficulties of my administration, when I could see no other resort, I would place my whole reliance in God, knowing that all would go well, and that he would de- cide for the right. Am I in error when I say to you, Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, that this Nation under God will only have a new birth when it follows the precept of President Lincoln in his statement to the Presbyterians as quoted by author Sand- burg in his pages devoted to Lincoln’s Laughter—and His Religion. Each time I enter the magnificent, yet solemn, Lincoln Memorial here in Wash- ington and view the following language engraved in marble over the great statue of our martyred President, I am in- spired: In this temple os in the hearts of the peoe ple for whom he saved the Union the mem- ory of Abraham Lincoln is enshrined fore ever, Also, I remember that in this very place my own son, in his young boyhood, upon his first visit to this hallowed shrine, in his youthful vigor and inborn and inherited admiration and love for the life of Lincoln, sought to climb up the base of the marble seat where Lincoln sits and touch the right tce of his marble boot. I then remarked to his mother and my wife that I would to God that I might deserve to touch the toe of the boot of this man who so clearly lived and died for the sake of his conscious belief. Lit- tle did I then realize that some day I would also be a Member of the United States Congress. One of the quotations which is most favorite to me and perhaps is particu- larly appropriate just now ts as follows: With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives ‘us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the Nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow and orphan— to do all which may achieve and cherish a Just and lasting peace among ourselves, and with all nations. Another quotation by him was in a speech delivered at Peoria, Ill, October 16, 1854, as follows: Stand with anyone that stands right. Stand with him while he ie right and part with him when he goes wrong.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Again, on this return to Washington from Long Beach, Los Angeles County, Calif., to take my seat as a reelected Member of this Congress, we deliberately drove hundreds of miles out of our way in order to again have the inspiration of visiting the Abraham Lincoln National Historical Park about 3 miles south of Hodgenville, Ky., to the situs of the 110 acres of land, about 100 acres of which belonged to Thomas Lincoln, the father of Abraham. This park area was ac- quired by the United States Government in 1916 and thereat is now housed and preserved the Abraham Lincoln birth- place cabin. The Memorial Building, which protects the original cabin itself, is magnificently situated and is con- structed of pink granite from Connecti- cut and of marble from Tennessee. As entered this significant Memorial Building of the old Lincoln family farm just a few minutes after it was unlocked by the National Park guard and hours before any other visitors arrived, my eyes again read the following upon the inside rear wall of the beautiful marble Memorial Building: He was the North, the South, the East, the West, the thrall, the master, all of us in one; there was no section that he had held the best; his love shown as impartial as the sun; and so revenge appealed to him in vain, he smiled at it, as at a thing forlorn, and gently put it from him, rose and stood @ moment’s space in pain. Remembering the prairies and the corn and the glad voices of the fleld and wood. (Maurice Thompson.) The color of the ground was in him-—the red earth; the smell and smack of elemental things: the rectitude and patience of the cliff, and good will of the rain that loves all leaves; the friendly welcome of the way- side well; the courage of the bird that dares the sea; the gladness of the wind that shakes the corn; the mercy of the snow that hides all scars; the secrecy of streams that make their way beneath the mountain to the rifted rock; the undelaying Justice of the light that gives as freely to the shrinking flower as to the great onk flaring to the wind, to the grave's low hill as to the Matter- horn that shoulders out the sky. (Edwin Markham.) This very day, as I look about me in this House of Representatives, I note that there is marked absence of much of the distinguished leadership on the minority side, the Republican side of the aisle. And it is good it is so, in my judgment. For, with deliberation and purpose, the House again takes note of the fact that many distinguished Mem- bers of this legislative body are in other portions of our great Nation, yesterday and today, speaking of his high purpose and principle and reminding the Ameri- can people that it is such high purpose and lives based on principles which are the only ones that, in fact, endure. Again today I have been asked by a couple of my colleagues here why I, a Democrat, always speak a few words at least in observation of the birth and the life and the death of Abraham Lincoln. Just a few minutes ago, in fact, I replied, in answer to such question to me di- rected, that, amongst other reasons, it was because I felt that his memory must always be perpetuated as a voice being a true symbol of democracy and an endur- ing voice for a world at peace. I should like to have lived here at Washington when he did. I think that his greatness must have been so visible that even the youth of his day recognized it. In fact, my own father told me of the several times when he drove a phaeton in which Mrs. Lincoln on occa- sion rode, and of the two or three times when he personally saw the President, My dad was then about 15 years of age, and it was during the Civil War. I always feel that my words about Abraham Lincoln’s life and its inspiring and «strengthening influence upon me and my ideals and ambitions ever since I was a little boy are entirely inadequate and woefully lacking in making it clear to anyone else just how much the life of Lincoln has meant to me. But, never- theless, I continue to increasingly realize that I am affected by what he actually was. So it is that I humbly speak with you and share the opinion that his posi- tion of enduring eminence among the great was such that he achieved it and possessed it without ever having anyone in his personal presence feel small. And each time I go to Gettysburg, the site of his world-famous speech of November 19, 1863, I am again very happy that as a young lad I came to feel that I must live to personally possess that attitude and spirit which Lincoln himself must have possessed and which he revealed in the words which begin: “Four score and seven years ago.” And, because so few persons have ever known who else was on the platform with Abraham Lincoln on that historic day, I relate that my best information is that they were: Mrs. Wise; Secretary of State William H. Seward; Col. Gordon Lofland; Hon. Horatio Seymour; Secretary of War Ed- ward M. Stanton; Postmaster General Montgomery Blair; Hon. Edward Ever- ett; Hon. Oliver P. Morton, Governor of Indiana; Col. John Hay, Secretary to the President; the Misses Gilbert; Hon. An- drew G. Curtin, Governor of Pennsyl- vania; Col. John W. Forney. And, now, with the world as it is, this Gettysburg Address again comes to us so intimately, I again repeat its text: Four score and seven years ago, our fa- thers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in lMberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long en- dure. We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a por- tion of that field as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It 1s altogether fitting and proper that we should do this. But tn a larger sense we cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who strug- gled here have consecrated it far above our power to add or detract. The world will little note nor jong remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here has thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us, that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave A735 the last full measure of devotion; that we here highly resolve thit these dead shall not have died in vain; that this Nation, under God, shall have a new birth of free- dom, and that government of the people, by the people, and for the people shall not perish from the earth. Mr, Speaker, because of what he was as a man and as an American citizen, and as a Member of Congress, and as a President of the United States; and be- cause of what he did as such; and be- cause I feel his voice still speaks to us as legislators in this House of Repre- sentatives in the United States Congress where he also was a Member—for these reasons amongst others, I could not do less than again thus simply and yet vigorously speak out to the end that you and I shall profit most and serve our country most if we also increasingly seek to have the spirit of Abraham Lincoln and live for the high principles and on the high plane which he patterned after to the very point of his untimely death at the hands of the assassin. Lincoln and Kosciusko EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THADDEUS M. MACHROWICZ OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 12,1951 Mr. MACHROWICZ. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following delivered by me on February 11, 1951, at the mon- ument of General Kosciusko in Wash- ington, D. C.: Tomorrow, the 12th of February, is a mem- orable day for liberty- and freedom-loving people everywhere. The hand of God must, in some way, have appeared in the selection of February 12, as the birthday of two great defenders and fighters for freedom and equal- ity for all peoples. The story of Abraham Lincoln, the Great Emancipator, who with his heart’s blood wrote forever an unforgettable memorial to the sense of justice, is well known to all of us. Few of us realize, however, how closely the life and ideals of Thaddeus Kosciusko paral- lel those of Abraham Lincoln. Inspired by a fervent love of freedom and Nberty, this great Pole’s imagination was stirred by the announcement of the Ameri- can Revolution, He borrowed money and came to America to offer his services to this Nation. His brilliant service in the American Army soon caught the attention of George Washington, who later placed him in charge of the building of the West Point fortifica- tions, where a monument was erected by the American youth es 6 grateful tribute to his heroism and leadership. Upon returning to Poland after the Amer- fean Revolution there soon flamed under Kosciusko’s leadership all through Poland once again the cause of freedom and liberty against a Russian tyrant. In the spring of 1792 he led a tiny but inspired army in its heroic resistance against the Russians, Upon the termination of the insurrection he returned to the United States. Of this country he said: “I consider American my second country and feel very happy on re- turning to her.”
A736 Some insight into Kosciusko, the man, can be had from the oath which he took upon assuming leadership in the Polish insurrec- tion. “T, Thaddeus Kosciusko, swear to the Polish nation, in the presence of God, that I will never employ the power which has been entrusted to me against any citizen, but I will exert it anly to defend the integrity of my country, to recover the nation’s inde- pendence, and so strengthen the general lib- erty of our country. So help me God.” That oath he never violated. According to the testimony of his contemporaries, he taught soldiers and peasants that they are his brothers, his countrymen, that they have a common country for which they were fight- ing together; he aroused in them love, un- bounded enthusiasm, and strength which overcame difficulties; he trained them by his example. He was democratic throughout, without ceremony visiting palaces and huts. Recognizing all men as his brothers, he dis- cerned only two kinds among them, good and bad ones. He was not a terrorist. He ‘was a pupil of Washington and similar to him by his nature. He was not very elo- quent, but his deeds spoke well for him, He reminded his people of “their incon- testable right of defending themselves against tyranny and oppression.” He told them: “No Pole can honestly look for per- sonal good, except in common good; none can think of saving honors and estates, except in saving the country.” He pledged the nation “to spare no sacrifices whatever, but to use all the meang which sacred love of trecdom can inspire in the breast of man; all that despair can suggest for its defense.” ¥is profound love of freedom and keen susceptibility to every form of human sut- fering remained with him unto death. And he displayed his deep sympathy for the Americun Negro slave when he dictated his parting testament to the new world shortly before his death. This was indeed a remark- able document and read as follows: “J, Thaddeus Kosciusko, being just in my departure from America, do hereby declare and direct that should I make no other tes- tamentary disposition of my property in the United States thereby authorize my friend, Thomas Jefferson, to employ the whole thers- of in purchasing Negroes from among his own as any others and giving them liberty in my name in giving them an education in trades and otherwise, and in having them instructed for their new condition in the duties of morality which may make them good neighbors, good fathers or mothers, hus- bands or wives, and in their duties az citi- wens, teaching them to be defenders of their Uberty and country and of the good order of society and in whatsoever may make them happy and useful, and I make the said Thomas Jefferson my executor of this.” The funds arising from the sale of his lands were used to found the Colored School at Newark, N. J., one of the firat educational institutions for Negroes in America, Such was the life of a great citizen of Poland and the world, Thaddeus Kosciusko, What a great travesty on justice that the Polish Nation which gave America and the world one of the greatest exponents of free- dom and the dignity of man, today suffers under the yoke of the very same Russian tyrant against whom Kosciusko led the Po- Hah Nation in revolt. There is no nation on earth with ideology so similar to that of our American Nation. There is no nation on earth which by its sacrifices earned liberty and freedom more than the Polish Nation. Our own Abraham Lincoln, whose birthday we also celebrate tomorrow, aaid: "No nation can endure half slave and haif free.” Were he alive today he certainly would have said, “The world can- not endure half slave and half free.” In these momentous and trying days, when the fate of the world and of our entire civilization is at stake, let us remember the example of those two great patriots whose memory we celebrate tomorrow. Let us not forget the oppressed Polish nation. In peace for the world, let us not lose sight of the fact that no just and permanent peace can endure in the world without doing justice and returning liberty and freedom to our great ally, the Polish Nation. t cntneaeran enamel How Nebraskans Feel About Present Management of National Affairs’ EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HOWARD H. BUFFETT OF NEBRASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, January 29, 1951 Mr. BUFFETT, Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I am in- cluding a letter received from a group of my constituents. Inasmuch as this letter reflects the sentiments of my mail generally, it oc- curs to me that it will be helpful if the thinking of these good substantial peo- ple is made available for other Members. While this le.ter has only a handful cf signatures, the men who signed it are successful citizens of mature judgment, and I am confident their views reflect a@ cross section of the thinking of the Second Nebraska Congressional District: JANUARY 17, 1961. Hon. Howargp Bourret, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. Dzar Ma, Busrertr: We respectfully request that you call to the attention of this Con- gress the following facts, which we believe are most detrimental to the United States: That every Congress since 1932 has shirked its duties in upholding the laws of the Con- stitution of this country. Both Republican and Democratic members of Congress have been either too lazy to do any sound think- ing or planning for the good of this country, or for politionl reasons have given more and more powers to the President and the execu- tive branch of this country. ‘We have heard propaganda how Mussolini was going to conquer the world, then Hitler, and now Stalin, but we are afraid that before the people in this country are aware of it, we will have a dictatorship here. We can- net take care of half the world and ourselves go, If we are going to cure all the ills of the world, and spend all of our resources, and kill all of our men doing it, we will be the losers all along the line. Let us have the biggest and best Air Force, Navy, and Army in the world but let’s keep them here to protect our country first, last, and always. We believe the President and all others involved in getting us into this Korean war should be impeached and removed from Office. ‘We must quit printing and spending money at the rate our President and bureaucrats want us too. Respectfully submitted. Ernest J. Jager, Harry A. Hoover, Paul Johnson, Vam Ampting, J. F. Vutzen, Ray Matson, Lee Wofford, F. Merion Mooberry, D. Pay Hosman, Violet 8. Anderson, Theodore F. Donelaon, O. A. Holsten, C. Suamen, H. V. Johnson, Omaha, Nebr. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Postal Problems EXTENSION OF REMARKA HON. JACOB K. JAVITS OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 2, 1951 Mr. JAVITS. Mr. Speaker, appended is the address of Mr. William C. Doherty, president, National Association of Letter Carriers, at Cass Technical High School Auditorium, Detroit, Mich., on January 6. The text of this speech is from the January 1951 edition of the Postal Al- liance, publication of the National Alli- ance of Postal Employees: The year just ended witnessed troublesome times in your postal service. Moreover, it is unfortunate that the end is not in sight, and will not be unless and until you and your neighbor and a whole host of other public-spirited citizens band together and make known your protests in high places; that is, the Congress of the United States, I have been actively identified with the postal service for more than a quarter of a century. Nearly 20 years of that time were spent as a working letter carrier; for the past 10 years I have represented letter carriers as president of their organization, the National Association of Letter Carriers. As their spokesman, I talk for approximately 100,000 letter carriers located throughout the length and breadth of our country. During all the time I have been associated with the postal service, I have never before witnessed so much confusion, contradiction, bunk, and bluster as will now be found in the topmost echelon of the Post Office Depart- ment. The concept of service to the Ameri- can public has been lost, even destroyed. Laws, rules, codes, and regulations that gov- erned the conduct of the postal service and its relations with the public and employees have gone overboard. Some of the things that are going on in the Post Office today will never lead to a savings in your tax dollar. A correct de- scription of this administrative caprice would be “false economy.” Ben Franklin is popularly regarded as the founder of our postal system. Actually, a mall service was in operation in this Na- tion during its earliest days. It is histori- cally correct, however, to credit Ben Frank- iin’s administration as Postmaster General as the one where the idea of progress in the postal service started. Today, approximately 190 years after his time, we are faced with a halt in the progress of the service. In- deed, on some fronts, retrogression has already set in. It’s time to get back on the road of progress, All of you are familiar with the curtail- ment of postal functions that has been plaguing the Nation for the past 9 months. Your mail has been delayed for days in reach- ing you; letters and packages you deposited in the mails have been subjected to the same unreasonable delay in reaching your correspondents. Small business, as well as industrial giants, have been forced to stand by helplessiy while the good will and patron- age of their customers melted away after vainly waiting for a shipment that was put in postal channels for delivery. One trate businessman has properly de- seribed the new order as “snail mail.” A well-known columnist has called for a De- liver-a-Letter-Week campaign to replace Letter Writing Week. Another mail user finally decided why special delivery matl costs more money than ordinary postage—it's to pay for the extra delay in delivery.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Now all of the cutbacks and eliminations that have taken place in the postal service during the past year have been foisted on taxpayers under the pious guise of economy. In the light of what has transpired in the last. several weeks, this so-called economy turns out to be the biggest film-flam ever put over on the long-suffering taxpayers of this country. The Postmaster General has been running up and down the country shouting, “Postal defict!" The press statements corhing from the Post Office Department, no doubt, in- tended to explain the poor mail service you are getting, would have you believe we are only a hop, skip and jump from postal bank- ruptcy. Well, if we are—and I don't think we are—then I must say that the Postmas- ter General's cure is novel, to say the least. First of all, his administration approved and encouraged legislation in the Congress of the United States that would increase postage rates in some instances as much as 200 percent. Stymied in that, the alternate cure was the wholesale firing of thousands of war veterans who were originally em- ployed as a temporary stopgep for an under- manned permanent postal personnel. This cruel reduction in force was accompanied by @ curtailment of mail deliveries, elimina- tion of directory service for misaddressed mail, establishment of inconvenient hours of service in poat offices and branches—in short, a slow, uncertain postal system in place of the swift, sure mail service you have a right to expect fram your Government, Now, going back to the Postmaster Gen- eral’s abortive attempt to ralse postage rates all out of reason, I want to say that letter carriers take the atand that it is adminis- trative caprice to expect people to pay higher prices for poorer service. Certainly, we do not expect a free mail service. No sensible person expects everything in life to be free. We do believe and we have long advocated a@ reasonable and fair postage rate but the term reasonable and fair does not mean to us that mail users should be gouged by exorbitant rates, while at the same time millions of dollars are shoveled out to cor- porations engaged to haul the malls, Reasonableness and fairness works two ways. Justice and equity is not a one-way street. Permit me to give you one recent example of the Postmaster General's concept of postal economy; that is, at your expense and to the profit of the rallroads. The day after the recent national elec- tlons—November 8—when the press wires were loaded with election news, little atten- tion was given to a big piece of news that affects every one of us whether we ever send or recbive a letter or a parcel, or ever ride a train. Announced at that time was a compromise agreement between the Postmaster General and the railroads that the Government would give to the railroads $312,000,000 in retroactive pay for carrying the mails—ret- roactive for 3 years. That's additional money you are going to pay which you never knew until now that you even owed. How would you like to be able to collect from those you work for on sch basis? Isn't that nice work when you can get it? In other words, the very same Postmaster General who tells you he cannot afford to give you good mail service, in the same breath wants you to believe that his Depart- ment can afford to spend six or seven times as much on retroactive mail haul pay to the railroads as he says it would cost to give you efficient postal service. This deal was approved by the Interstate Commerce Commission on December 4¢, just a few short weeks before Christmas. In re- leasing the report, the ICC said the $312,000,~ 000 of your tax money was “back pay for carrying the mails.” Santa Claus certainly came early and often with his bag filled to overflowing for the railroads. XCVII—App.——~47 At the time the postal authorities appeared before the 100 last November their testimony revealed that the railroads were to get this so-called back pay, but that in the fu- ture they were not to be paid for hauling empty mail cars across the country. I might say at this point that, at various times in the past, competent witnesses from the Post Office Department have testified before con- greasional committees that the Department uses only about 60 percent of the train space for which it pays with your money. The Railway Mall Pay Act was established in 1016. Like most public laws of the land, the sponsors of the legisiation and the men who caused its enactment were sincere and honest in their hopes for the legislation and the high purposes it was to attain. As happens in many of the laws put on our statute books, certain abuses developed and were allowed to grow. This happened under the law governing the mail pay syatem. Enormous millions of dollars have been given the railroads for hauling empty mail cars up and down and across the country. Your taxes pay the railroads an estimated $30,000,- 000 each year for empty “dead-head” mail cars. Persons outside the railroad industry and the Post Office Department are not expected to know all the ramifications involved in the payment for mail haul. Let me give you an example of how the system worked for years to your disadvantage. More mat] goes west than goes east when you pass the Mississippi River. This condi- tion creates empty mail hauling space com- ing east. Now no one is to blame far the fact that the mall volume headed west is greater than that coming east. In fact, it is not a blamable condition at all; but what I am finding fault with is that the Government, which is to say the Post Office Department in this case, paid the railroads the same rate for dragging these empty cars back to get new pay loads. Profoundly, from time to time, it was rec- ommended by the present Postmaster Gen- eral that these return trips be abolished. The latest pronouncement to that effect was at the time of the public hearings before the Interstate Commerce Commission last November. Well, let’s see what the record shows at this date. Although the hand-out was first agreed upon by the Postmaster General and the railroads before their ICC hearings, and it was agreed that the Post Office Department pay for no more empty mat} cars in the fu- ture * * ©* the ICC announcement of approval of the deal merely authorized the paying of 312,000,000 and said nothing what- ever about stopping payment of the same rate for empty railroad cars as for loaded mail cars. After attention was called to this gross omission, the ICC amended its previous decision. Of course, there is always the chance that payment for return trips may be abolished; yes; abolished by the simple method of pay- ing more for traveling in one direction, per- haps twice as much. Such a sum to be added to the $283,786,615 paid to the roads in 1949, for example, would bring the total payment to nearly a half billion dollars yearly, or an increase of about 800 percent since 1947, It is interesting to note that one of the Commissioners of the ICC dissented. Said Commissioner Lee: “The Railway Mail Pay Act of 1916 does not confer jurisdiction upon ‘us to approve compromise agreement with respect to the total amounts which shall be paid by the Postmaster General to the rail- roads for past and future services, * * © In my opinion, we are without power to pre~- scribe the lump-sum payment of 312,000,000 conditionally agreed upen by the railroads and the Postmaster General.” Another interesting point in this latest falas economy stunt in the curtailed postal service era is the statement attributed to the president of a large midcontinental railroad. Last September—which is to say before the compromise agreement or stipulation wes entered into—this railroad tycoon iesued & statement that he was counting into his road’s receipts some $2,000,000 in retroac- tive pay for mail hauling. It is Uttle wonder that the day this $312,- 000,000 hand-out was made by the Post Office Department, rail stocks hit their highest peak in 20 years. This €@312,000,000 ts just the beginning. It covers only the period from February 1947 through December 1960. New hearings are now underway to fix a reasonable and fair rate for the period beginning January 1, 1951. This $312,000,000 hand-cut is by no means considered a subsidy to aid in the develop- ment of a surface transportation system as is done for air transportation. The word “subsidy” bas been bandied about quite loosely in connection with payments by the Post Office Department to carriers en- gaged in the haul of mail. Actually, there is only one outright subsidy in effect at this time. It is paid to carriers hired or engaged in the transportation of mail by air. There are, however, numerous hidden subsidies in the Post Office budget. Section 406 of the Civil Aeronautics Act directs the Civil Aeronautics Board to fix rates for the transportation of mai! by alr, such rates not only to include carriage of mall, but for the sound development and maljntenance of an adequate air trainsporta- tion system, This latter injunction very plainly is a subsidy, even though carried in the postal fnanctal reports as a deficit with- out distinctton from other hidden subsidies. There is no requirement under present law to show how much of a particular payment to an air carrier is for service and how much is a subsidy. It is indeed interesting to note that no other public-utility legislation lumps subsidy and rates into one figure. Prior to 19386, steamship lines were subsidized through the mechanism of mall payments, but this system was replaced by the direct operating and construction subsidies pro- vided by the Merchant Marine Act of 1036. Neither I nor the organization I represent is attacking the financial ald to airlines. But we do hope to see a change in methods of procedures whereby actual service charges will be shown in one figure and subsidies refiected in a separate amount. There is much merit in this separation of subsidy from airmall pay. By the same token, we would ke to see a thorough investigation initiated with re- spect to the method of determining pay- ments for railroads. If you are interested in stopping future multi-million-dollar hand-outs, about which I have been talking, I suggest that you make known your protest to Congress. Included in this latest 312,000,000 deal its more than six or seven times enough to restore good mail service, but your mail service will not be restored unless you take the time to tell those in authority that you are now asking and demanding remedial action. And like every other citizen of our beloved Republic, the letter carrier has his personal problems. Specifically, he is having a most difficult time trying to stretch his salary to meet current high prices. That perplexing question, I readily admit, confronts 4 great many other people. The question of a wage adjustment and more important, the need for one, is not of the letter carriers’ choosing. The simple truth of the matter is that he is no longer able to cope with rising prices. Uniess some- thing is done to bolster his purchasing power, the battle will go by default and with it his meager savings, his living standard, and his potential to share jointly and equitably in the many and grave problems of our time.
A738 It may be that many of you are not fa- miliar with the rather unique procedure that 4s involved in the adjustment of wages for Federal employees. It is almost entirely dif- ferent from the accepted method in private industry. For instance, in one of your auto- Mobile plants here in the motor city, man- agement and labor sit down at a conference table and tron out their differences in a wage dispute. Management can cease production and labor can withdraw its manpower, if either so decide. Not so in negotiations be- tween the Federal Government and its em- ployees. It is preposterous to think of the Federal Government or its employees quit- ting its functions at any time. But the im- portant part, from the viewpoint of the em- ployees, is that they do not have the same economic weapon other workers have—that is, the right to strike and bargain for im- provementa in their welfare, hours of work, and wages. And I hasten to add, Federal employees are not asking, nor do they want the right to strike againat their Government. But they do insist on a quid pro quo arrange~ ment. Then, again, we find another difference in the manner of carrying out wage negotiations between the Federal Government and its employees as opposed to private industry and its employees. Let us again cite as an ex- ample one of your automobile plants and the union representing the men in the shops, When they sit down to negotiate, each side will be represented by two, three, or at the most five men. If the problem develops into 8 prolonged situation, an outside, disin- terested member of the Federal Conciliation Board sits in on the discussions. So there you have 10 or 15 people to bring into agree- ment. Compare that with the problem of the Federal worker. He has to convince 96 Senators, 435 Members of the House of Rep- resentatives, and finally the President of the United States. Uncontrolled inflation will surely under- mine our defense effort, destroy our Ameri- can way of life, and raise taxes to ruinous levels, Perhaps the answer is controls. But they are unpopular in the minds o° many people. As spokesman for approximately 100,000 letter carriers, I want to go on record for controls—but only after certain conditions are met and only if controls are accom- panied by certain other stipulations. Time does not permit a lengthy discussion of all the “ifs” and “ands” and the “whys” and “wherefores” of the complex question of controls. I have told you that letter carriers find themselves in an economic strait-jacket be- cause of their low wages and the rising cost of living. Briefly, permit me to give you a word picture of the situation in which the average letter carrier finds himself. The average carrier earns $3,200 per year— those are his gross earnings. The average letter carrier is a married man; he has two children. Like yourself, the average letter carrier is confronted with an approximate 75 percent rise in ving costs, using the pe- riod 1935-89 as the aver:.ge, Now is 1939 the top wage for letter carrier was 62,100. The average salary level was slightly less. There- fore, it follows that, if his salary had kept pace with prices during the years from 199 to 1950, he should have received money inoreases amounting to $1,575. That would means his average salary today should be $3,675. But it isn’t, as I mentioned a mo- ment ago, the average wage for a letter car- rier today is $3,200. In other words, there is glaring deficit of 8475 in his gross pay alone. In 1989, a letter carrier, earning $2,100 a year, paid no income tax on himself, his wife, and two children. He did, however, pay €78.50 into the civil service retirement fund, That left him a net take-home pay of slightly more than $2,000—and the pur- chasing power of the dollar in 1939 was 100 cents per dollar. Today, our average letter carrier is at- tempting to support his wife and two chil- dren on an average gross pay of $3,200-—less about $195 contributed to the retirement fund; less approximately another $115 in withholding taxes; less an additional 6150 re- quired for uniforms—and I might say that the letter carrier is practically the only Fed- eral employee required to wear a distinctive uniform on duty who has to pay for it him- self. Well, when you add up all the deduc- tions you find that our average letter carrier takes home approximately $2,750. Like every- one else, our average carrier has to contend with a purchasable dollar that has shrunken to 57 cents. It all adds up to a pretty dismal picture. The sum total of it all also dra- matically points up the need for an immedi- ate upward wage adjustment of postal salaries. We have presented our case to the new Congress, which convened last Wednesday, January 3. Iam happy to say that our ap- peal has met with an appreciative response in its phases. Several members of the House of Representatives have sponsored bills de- signed to increase postal wages up to 17 percent. As I explained to you, the success- ful prosecution of legislation that will bene. fit Federal employees is a long, tedious, and sometimes discouraging process. Merely in- troducing salary increase legislation is not enough; it is only the first step; your letter carrier will need lots of help along the way and it ds on that note that I will close this discussion. When your letter carrier approaches you and asks for your help in securing a much- needed boost in salary, I do hope you will lend a helping hand. We are convinced that our request for fair treatment with respect to wages is reasonable and I hope that I have been able to transmit some of our own con- viction to you. I also trust that you will write to your Senators and your Congressman and tell them you want to see your letter car- rier and other postal employees treated equitably in the matter of a living wage, Remember Back in 1939 When You Could Shop and Get Change From $1 EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOSEPH R. BRYSON OF SOUTH CAROLINA IN THE HOUSE OF PEPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 12, 1951 Mr. BRYSON. Mr. Speaker, I assume it is natural for the average Member of this body to feel that his people are most patriotic. History will justify my contention that those living in our fa- vored area of the South are indeed pa- triotic. Statistics show that we have more volunteers for the service than other sections, Ours is a proud but hum- ble people. In view of such a high de- gress of patriotism, my folks seldom com- plain. In our all-out effort to increase necessary defense matters, they are anx- jous to bear their proportionate share. Most of the industrial people in my dis- trict are employed in the textile mills, The wages there are reasonable but not high. By living frugal lives, it is possible to make both ends meet under normal conditions, It is difficult to realize how APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD most of our folks are living nowadays in view of the constant increase in the cost of the necessities of life. As one who has constantly and openly advocated general controls, I am of course disap- pointed in the slowness in the applica- tion of controls. To be sure, the word “control” itself is unpleasant. We are reconciled to the fact that many of our privileges and liberties must be tempo- rarily foregone in order to meet present emergencies. Unless run-away prices are controlled, I fear the consequences. Attached hereto is an excerpt from the current issue of the United States News and World Report which points out very graphically what is happening. Let us put first things first and adjust these grave differences. REMEMBER Back IN 1939 Wuen You CouLp Sor aND Grt CHANGE From $1 It looks like the same dollar. But it goes twice as fast as it did in 1939. Take grocery bills: Food that cost 89 then costs $21 now. Take clothes: The price of a 1989 wardrobe buys one coat now. It's the same all down the line, with a few exceptions, The 1951 dollar, compared with 1939, is half gone before you get it. It you want to see what has happened to the dollar, Just look back to the “good old days” of 193912 years ago. In those days a housewife could walk into a grocery store with a dollar and come out with a pound of coffee, a pound of ham- burger, a dozen eggs, a quart of milk, a loaf of bread, and a pound of shortening—plus a Tew pennies in change. Today she can get the coffee and bread for her dollar. The other items will take an- other $1.80. The average individual, watching his pay check go, may find the talk about a 60-cent dollar, or @ 50-cent dollar, a little on the theoretical side. He may need, instead, to look at actual prices and costs. When he does, he finds that a dollar goes about twice as fast today as it did in 1939. In other words, it goes only about half as far as it did in the year when World War II began in Europe. Meals provide an example. A typical fam- ily of four was likely to eat up about 89 worth of food in an ordinary week of 1939, Today, if the family has not improved its diet, it finds the food bill taking about 821 out of the weekly pay check. One reason is that the dollar that bought 814 pounds of good round steak in 1989 will not buy even 1 pound of the same quality steak in 1951. A quick backward glance is a help tn un- derstanding what has happened to the fam- ily's clothing dollar, too. For @60, back in 1989, a man could buy hfs wife a heavy wool coat with fur trim, and still have enough cash left to buy himself a wool suit, a pair of shoes, a hat, a dozen pairs of socks, a half- dozen shirts, five undershirts, and five pairs of shorts. Today, if the man plans to buy the same medium-quality goods, he will be wise to get the items for himself first. If he gets the coat for his wife first he won't have enough left out of 860 to buy his shoes alone. The clothing for him will cost a total of about $102.50-—-if he manages to find such things as medium-quality shirts, And the medium- grade coat for his wife will take $55. In that same 12 years, a rayon dress has gone up from $2.50 to $9.50, while the 61 cot. ton house dress has gone to $3.26, and a rayon slip that could be had for 85 cents has gone to 82.60. For a young boy's suit, 67 was ample in 1939. Today $16 is barely