APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Rather they were like four peas in the pod of freedom. Is it not true that in the first half of the twentieth century and specifically since World War I the above concept has been for- gotten if not denied? Consider the church. I believe that Christianity 1s and should be first personal and social always. I also be- lieve that this order and emphasis are vital. Personal first. Reduced to its pure essence, Christianity is Christ, and Jesus preached to, dealt with, and saved individuals. To Him human personality was the principal thing— a little child was to the Nazarene more im~ portant than a city. He did not attack gov- ernments nor institutions as such. Rather He dealt with the man in authority, the man himself. Certainly, He influenced society and His teachings turned the world upside down. But His formula was, “Change the man, and the changed man will change the world.” Today, however, the Christian church releases social charters and promotes plans for world peace, delivers philippics against private property and has intimated that capitalism and communism are equally re- sponsible for what is wrong with the social order. As churchmen we are eager to offer advice and final judgments in fields where we reveal ourselves as definitely less than mature specialists. I am not suggesting that these are matters beyond either the knowl- edge or responsibility of the clergyman. I do insist that they are not his first and principal task. As God’s man and Christ’s successor, these are not the unique reasons for the clergyman’s high calling. Jesus said, “I am the good shepherd.” Also He said, “I am come to seek and to save the lost” or “the confused,” and “I am come that they might have life and they might have it abundantly.” Humbly I affirm that my supreme business as a clergyman is just that. We have all been captured by the fetish of intellectual, social, and spiritual as well as industrial mass production. Mass produc- tion which makes automobiles cheaper and refrigerators available to more people at a lower cost may also cheapen thought. Cheap thinking obscures basic principles, clouds the clear vision of the American way of life, obscures American unity and leads us into the darkness of misunderstanding between races, faiths, and economic groups. How then can the original concept of American freedom, the rights and respon- sibilities of the individual whatever his ereed, clan, or economic status be regained? By turning again to the way we came in. Not by going back, certainly not. But by resolutely going forward. The way is still here, and thank God the door is still wide open. Men do not work for systems and for ideologies. They work for themselves or for and with other men, men like themselves. Companies that emphasize stock buying and holding by employees strengthen the American way. A partnership on whatever scale is within the divine principle of sharing. On my very recent trip to Israel I found the amazing labor movement there encourag- ing its members to become capitalists. The union itself is literally a capitalistic organiza- tion. Starting from scratch as it did, it could become just this. Now it is also the princi- pal agency and influence in developing in- dustries with private capital. Let me return to mass methods in selling individualism. No leafiet, no full-page ad- vertisement will ever take the place of the “top” saying, “You did a swell job yesterday, Harry, how’s the missus?” J.C. Penney is known as “the man with a thousand partners.” Twenty thousand is more nearly correct. There are many facets to the clear diamond of his success. But this shines brightest: His personal relations with personalities. This has been so intimately part of the man that always when one of his associates failed, Mr. Penney regarded the failure as his own and tried to do something about it. Here again enters the church. Men are still won as individuals, even as in Christ’s time, not in a “Bankers for Christ Week” or in a “Workers for Christ Month.” Understanding and good will cannot be standardized. Always it is a two-way street. The clergyman and the businessman have a common stake in American freedom. In- deed the individual citizen has with every other citizen this same stake. The first word in our national name is united. And when our unity is shattered or weakened by any one of us or by any group among us, the foundations of liberty are to some degree at least undermined. Too frequently the preacher removes him~ self from the everyday interests and practical problems of the layman, and nearly as often the layman assumes that the preacher would not or could not be interested in the prob- lems of the pew. Responsibility for mus- understanding or a lack of understanding may be just about equally distributed, but as a preacher I charge myself and those of my calling with dereliction because we have not moved in to remove the barrier and solve the problem. Too often we have accepted the financial support of men whom personally we respect and admire but whom as a class we criticize without knowledge. We owe it to ourselves to become acquainted with their industrial activities and economic standards, and I venture the suggestion that industrialists owe it to themselves to make an open door for us to industry. Generally the preacher has at least a background of practical ex- perience with hard work, a fair measure of fundamental intelligence, and a spirit that responds to a friendly invitation. In my own thinking, in my own decisions, in my own attitudes I have been influenced chiefly not by full-page advertisements nor by articles released from upper Broadway and Wall Street offices, but by you. And right here I should stop to call part of the long roll: Charlie Wilson, K. T. Keller, Robert Peare, James Kraft, J. Warren Kinsman, Paul Garrett, Franklin Bell, Ward Wheelock, Jack Duff, Jim Jarvey, Marvin Pierce, Albert Die- bold, and Harvey Firestone. These men and so many others are the real reasons why I pelieve in business. I believe in their prin- ciples, their wisdom, their patriotism. I have witnessed their unselfish sacrifice in the service of our country. I have been as- sociated with them in the activities of the church, and upon their character American enterprise stands firmly. The journal of which I am editor affirms this broad principle and practices it. Our life stories of great Americans continue to be one of the most popular features of our editorial content. Names I have mentioned are among those that have stood at the head of our columns. Also the great Christian labor leader, John Ramsey. And Mr. J. C. Penney’s Lines of a Layman is one of our most popular regular features. It is the intimate and personally acquired “know-how” that counts. Years ago in one of my earliest pastorates in Canton, Ohio, I had as president of my board of trustees the president of the Imperial Plow Co., Frank Neise. He just assumed that I would not be interested in Imperial plows until one day I told him that I had walked between the handles of an Imperial plow down a long Oregon furrow. I said that I would like to see how the old plow was made. Eventually I knew as much about the Imperial plow as the president of the company Knew. In those days Saturday was a full work day, and some of you may be old enough to remember the week hours, With the pastor A4103 of the First Baptist Church I organized a Saturday afternoon church baseball league. It was the second organization of its kind in the United States. When I went to the president of the Imperial Plow Co. to sug- gest a half-day holiday on Saturday, I had a running start on his attention and sup- port. He threw around a lot of weight in Canton, Ohio. To make a long story short, Saturday afternoon became a holiday for Canton industry, and industrialists came with the other workers io see the games. We are not finally impressed by academic thinking. We judge by results. We judge Christianity by the people who represent it, good or bad. We judge business by the men of business. I hope that you men will make a serious effort to personally in- terest your clergy in what you are doing and trying to do. Also what I say to you here I have said and I shall continue to say to my clerical associates. I do not believe that there will be a single occasion in which either you or I will be rebuffed. We need to know what manner of men we are, what our prob- lems are, what our ideals are. We need to know each the other man’s reason, his view- point, his ideals. For years, or from the time I was 10, Will Rogers was my intimate friend. I met him under unusual circumstances when he was doing rope tricks with a dog and pony show and after I had distributed handbills an- mnouncing the show. Years later during the period of his appearance on Broadway when he took the place of his friend, Fred Stone, after Fred had cracked up in an airplane accident, we had time together. I was pas- tor of a Fifth Avenue church then and spent a good many matinee afternoons in Will’s dressing room while he made up. One after- noon we discussed a mutual friend who was then in public life and under severe criti- cism. Will sat on the bench in front of the glass with a towel under his chin. Suddenly he got up, threw down the towel, stepped over behind me, placed his hands on my shoulders and looking over the top of my head to the spot where he had been sitting, said, “Dan, you can’t tell what a man sees when you are locking at him. You have to get behind him to see what he 1s looking at.” Right there Will made vocal my phi- losophy for public relations, my philosophy for relationships between the clergy and in- dustry, my philosophy for my relations with you and indeed with all other Americans. I never see life whole until I see it through the eyes of the other fellow and certainly as a churchman and clergyman I never know American business and I never know you antil I see your problems, your hopes, your failures, your triumphs, yes, and until I see America through your eyes as well as through my own. Also I am still won as my heart is captured. The grip of a strong hand always holds me. Don’t send your preacher a booklet. Go to see him. Hand him the booklet when you say good~bye. And I shall try to practice what I preach. I’ll not send you a sermon. Misunderstanding fills the vacuum created by a lack of understanding. Understanding in the area under discussion is equally my responsibility and yours, and misunderstand- ing comes as I live and work with you and as you live and work with me. Just 10 years ago a young man having finished his divinity course at Yale became the pastor of a church in Schenectady, N. Y. Conditions were in such shape that there was only one direction in which that church could go. The young domine started at the bottom. The war came along and put him into a chaplain’s uniform so that he had less than 3 years in which to complete his mis- sion. But in these 3 years he demonstrated what I have heen talking about. One evening he called a group of his men together. They
A4104 represented all levels of business activity— banking, the shop, and of course living in Schenectady, General Electric. He sold them the idea that they could and should sell the church. When they became panicky and sug- gested that this was definitely not them line, he grinned and answered, “But you sell, don’t you? You belong to the church? Your wives and children belong to the church?” He made clear to them that all he wanted was their selling ability. He had a plan. The men discussed it with him. He told them just about how many men there were 1n that city who were not in the church and whose families were not in any church, They spent a week end together in a hotel with an expert in the field of human relations. They organized an in- tensive and Cawr-to-T o-O-r83-Tc0t", man- with-man “in.ie. -cter.” Ce. riy they didn’t carry Bibles and read passages. They did now for the church what they did for themselves and for their various enterprises. They added to these enterprises the church and included in their over-all personnel, the preacher. Before the domine went off to war the large, near-empty sanctuary and its Sunday school rooms were pretty well filled. And though he never lived to see what men see now, the thing he started, the under- standing he helped achieve, the unity in common effort he made dynamic, today demonstrates in Schenectady everything I would say. Finally, this unity demonstrates America’s first imperative in a time when the world rocks. The command to American unity is the first command. And without unity—not uniformity—the unity of all faiths, colors, races, and economic groups, America can only become a lost cause. My theme today is vastly more than re- lationships between the clergy and business. Inclusive of that it also comprehends the greater things. What we do here and now to achieve understanding, cooperation, and good will, helps make America strong. Excerpts From Address by Hon. Hubert H. Humphrey, of Minnesota, at Annual Convertion of International Ladies’ Garment Workers Union EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HERBERT H. LEHMAN OF NEW YORK IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, June 1 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. LEHMAN. Mr. President, our able and distinguished colleague the junior Senator from Minnesota [Mr. Hum- PHREY], on May 25 was the featured speaker at one of the sessions of the annual convention of the International Ladies’ Garment Workers Union, at At- lantic City, N. J. I ask unanimous con- sent of the Senate to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorn excerpts from this address. There being no objection, the excerpts from the address were ordered to be printed in the REcorp, as follows: We have a great responsibility this year. The future of our domestic economy hangs in the balance as we face increasing unem- ployment over all the United States. At the same time on the international scene mil- lions of people all over the world wait to see whether international conflict can be avoided and whether they can feel free and secure to live their lives without war and without destruction. To a large extent what you and I do as American citizens will determine the an- swers to these questions. To a very signifi~ cant extent what you as members of the or- ganized labor movement do will answer these questions for ourselves, for our children, and for the people of the world. This is true because we live in a political democracy. We live in a country where the people have the responsibility to make the decisions. We live in a country, also, where increasingly the people are affected by po-~ litical decisions. There was a time not so long ago when it was possible for most Americans to live their lives and except for occasionally paying some taxes—and not too much of that—they had very little to do with the Government in Washington. Today, however, the situation is quite different. I need not tell you that labor’s rights are no longer secure merely through the process of collective bargaining with employers. To- day the rules of collective bargaining and the rights and privileges of organized labor are the object of political determination. Politics, effective political participation, must go hand in hand with the growth and the development and the maintenance of a strong labor movement in America. We seldom ask one another any longer “Are you interested in politics?” The sim~ ple fact is that if we do not take an interest in politics we might as well make up our minds that our freedom and our very being becomes endangered. The Taft-Hartley experience in one major respect has taught us a very important les- son. You and I know that the free labor movement can never achieve its objectives when the rules of collective bargaining are stacked against it and when the umpire and the referee operate one-sided rules and reg~ ulations. The Taft-Hartley Act has destroyed the neutrality of Government in labor-manage- ment relationship. The Taft-Hartley Act says to every American worker that no matter how you may fight, no matter how just is your cause, the orders are stacked against you and you haven't got a chance to ultimately win. There is a volume of evidence coming to Washington these days demonstrating that the Taft-Hartley Act is crippling the growth of the union movement, particularly in the South and in some of the other areas of this country where union membership is not as strong as it is in the industrial East and in the industrial centers of the Midwest and far West. TI say this without fear of any successful contradiction, there will not be any labor- management peace in this country until this grossly unfair antilabor legislation is re- moved from the statute books. There can be no labor-management peace until the economic relationships between labor and management are no longer settled by the general counsel of the National Labor Rela- tions Board, but are settled around the con- ference table between employers and em- * ployees. I want to say one more word about the problems of organized labor in the South. If democracy means anything, if freedom means anything, it means that working men and women have a right to organize and form unions of their own choosing. If our American heritage has any significance, it means that the right to bargain collectively must be protected and preserved. Today many hundreds of thousands of American men and women—yes, many hun- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD dreds and thousands of garment workers— are denied this inherent right. Organized labor in the South today faces problems very similar to those that the or- ganized labor movement faced all over Amer- ica in the late 1920’s and the early 1930’s. It faces threats of violence, coercion, flagrant brutality, and an atmosphere of fear and intimidation. The economy of America, not just the economy of the South; in fact, our very democracy depends on bringing to the at- tention of the American people the true facts of industrial anarchy which exists in so many sections of the South. That is the way we in America face our problems. That is the way we in America dealt with industrial anarchy in the 1980’s, The LaFollette’s civil liberties commiuttee of that day brought to light the true facts of collective bargaining and the American people acted to correct these evils, Again today the American people must be told the facts. Enlightened citizenry and an informed public opinion is our objective. I hope that the Senate Labor and Public Wel- fare Committee and its Subcommittee on Labor-Management Relations can help achieve that objective. For the labor movement and for American working men and women to fulfill their re- sponsibilities, however, they must be con- cerned with more than just the Taft-Hartley law or the minimum-wage law—important as these may be. American democracy needs and welcomes an aggressive instructed political-action pro- gram on the part of organized labor. At this point, however, we must under- stance ourselves. Political action does not mean top level strategy. Make it crystal clear in your own minds that elections are not won in Washington, D.C. They are fre- quently lost there, but they are not won there. Elections are won by hard work and by active participation in every voting precinct in this country. The essentials of a success~ ful political campaign—the essentials as I see them are the following: A program, and I put program first—a program that meets the needs of the people, and one that is worked out cooperatively with the rest of organized labor and the liberal movement. Secondly, candidates willing to fight for the people. We have got too many candidates where you have to fight for them. We need candidates who are willing to go out and fight for you, to fight for the American people. Thirdly, there is a need of political organ- ization that belongs to and is controlled by and managed by the rank and file of the people. Finally, a clear-cut statement of the issues in language, in the simple language that is understandable by all of the people. Now, my friends, if you have those ingre- dients, if you have a program that meets the needs of the people, candidates willing to fight for the people, if you have a political organization that belongs to the people and they are a part of it, and if you have a clear- cut statement of the issues in language that is understandable by the people, I submit to you no one can beat you, no one. There is the essence of success. Today as we face the acid test for Ameri- can democracy, the 1950 elections, there are disturbing signs. One of the most significant of these disturbing signs is the frantic efforts by the Republican Party. It is engaging in a@ smear political campaign rather than dis- cussing the issues which face the American people. The Republican leaders are attempt- ing to frighten the American people by re- peating false charges and hy waving the red flag. I know that the International Ladies’
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Garment Workers Union is well aware of the Communist danger in America. I know that the International Ladies’ Garment Workers Union was in the lead among the labor un= ions in America to remove the Communist menace from within its ranks. Those of us who really oppose communism, however, and who have had the opportunity to oppose them and fight them and to defeat them know that the cause of anticommunism suffers when it 1s made into a political foot- ball and when the charge 1s recklessly ban- died about. The liberal movement for democracy in America faces 4 dangerous coalition. Never in our history has there been a greater prop- aganda barrage against the American work- men and against the interest of the American p2ople than there has been during the past year. Ever since the miracle of November 2 the scothsayers have been concocting some kind of a new witches’ brew to pour out to the American people. While we were cele- brating and while we were patting each other on the back the old rear guard was in there plotting and planning every day of the week, getting their machinery ready again for the onslaught. There is a dangerous coalition, a coalition that distorts public opinion, a coalition that Gefies the truth, a coalition not interested in the presentation of the truth. This Dixiecrat-GOP coalition, under the leadership of the Tarts, the Wierrys, and the Byrrops, has lost faith in America. They condemn our policy at home and abroad with the same wild irresponsible charges. At home it is the welfare state that they oppose and abroad it is our aid to Great Britain and western Europe. I would not deny that there is some merit to the Republican claim that the Fair Deal program seeks the welfare state as an ob- jective. The welfare state is a legitimate objective—one that is perfectly consistent with our traditions and with the current wishes of the American people. A state which is devoted to the welfare of its mem- bers, a state which looks upon man and his welfare as an end in itself, is one I support and urge you to support. The United States began as a welfare state when its Constitution charged the Govern- ment with the responsibility of the “general welfare” of its people. In a sense, this was one of the great differences between this new country which was born and the tired nations of Europe in the eighteenth century. From that day until this day the history of the American development has been a history of providing greater welfare for its people. ' The political leadership exemplified by the Tarts, the WHERRYS, and the Byrps refuse to accept the fact that two World Wars and a major world-wide depression have changed our world. We are not the America of 1800 nor of 1900. We are the America of 1950. We are the America which is the greatest financial power the world has ever known. We have to act with a sense of great social responsi- bility. We are the greatest industrial power in the world. We must learn to use that power maturely. The American labor movement, which rep- resents the essence of democracy in our eco- nomic hfe, must recognize it has a responsi- bility for international leadership. If de- mocracy is to prevail in the world, we in the United States must help it prevail. If we fail, we fail with it. The liberal and social democratic forces of the world are our friends in Europe. They look to us for friendship and for assistance. We must respond to them with our own friendship and with our own helping hand. Investigation of Military Government in Germany EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ADOLPH J. SABATH OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 31, 1950 Mr. SABATH. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent, I insert in the Rrc- ORD a statement in support of House Resolution 425, which I introduced on January 12, 1950, and which provides for an investigation of the American mili- tary government in Germany and the civilian administration which succeeded it, and for other purposes. This state- ment should help us all to become more cognizant of the existing situation in Germany, and I hope will serve as a guide for the panacea of the now ex- tant evils. The statement and attach- ment A follow: STATEMENT IN SUPPORT or HousE RESOLUTION 425 (Introduced by Mr. Saparu, January 12, 1950) This resolution (H. Res. 425) calls for an investigation of the American military gov- ernment in Germany and the civilian ad- ministration which succeeded it, to ascertain the facts which permitted or encouraged the reestablishment of cartels, the resumption of power by former Nazis, the resurgence of fascism, nazism, and the rebuilding of Ger- man military strength and war potential. This resolution would authorize and direct the Committee on Foreign Affairs to conduct this study and investigation, reporting to the House not later than June 1, 1950, or there- abouts. UNITED STATES POLICY TOWARD GERMAN CARTELS AND CENAZIFICATION The United States policy toward German cartels was laid down in JCS-1067 (Joint Chiefs of Staff) and the Potsdam agreement of 1945. Under these directives, the United States military authorities were directed, among other things, to break up the con- centration of German cartels and economic power. The basic philosophy was patterned after our own Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890. Soon after the defeat of Germany the mandate to carry out the decartelization program of Germany was entrusted to the four occupying powers; however, these pow- ers failed to arrive at a common understand- ing of the problem. After the setting up of the bizonal administration for Germany, military government law 56 came into being, and formed the basis for all of our decarteli- zation policies. This law was promulgated February 24, 1947, At the same time ord- nance 78 was introduced in the British zone, To all intents and purposes these laws are in effect today. The preamble of law 56 reads as follows: “This law is enacted in accordance with paragraph 12 of the Potsdam agreement in order that (1) to prevent Germany from en-~ dangering the safety of her neighbors and again constituting a threat to international peace; (2) to destroy Germany’s economic potential to wage war; (3) to insure the measures taken for Germany’s reconstruction are consistent with peaceful and democratic purposes; (4) to lay the groundwork for building a healthy German economy.” Paragraph 2 of law 56 reads as follows: “Cartels, combines, syndicates, trusts, as- sociations, or any other form of understand- A4105 ing or concerted understanding between per- sons, which have the purpose or effect of restraining or of fostering monopolistic con- trol of domestic or international trade or other economic activity, or of restricting access to domestic or international markets, are hereby declared to be excessive concen- trations of economic power within the pur- view of this law.” Paragraph 8 of law 56 provides that “all economic *~*srrricet “rving their headquar- tersin the L::40 7  <: gone and employing in Germany more than 10,000 persons shall be examined as prima facie constituting ex- cessive concentrations of economic power.” As regards our denazification policy, under the directives from the United States Gov- ernment and the Potsdam agreement (con- cerning the elimination from important posts in the German public and private life of active Nazis) the United States military gov- ernment enacted law No. 8 in the early months of the German occupation. FAILURE TO ENFORCE THE UNITED STATES POLICIES IN GERMANY It is an historical fact that the German industrialists, financiers, and cartelists con- tributed mightily to the rise of the Hitler Nazi regime in 1983. After Hitler came into power these interests worked closely with the Hitler regime to help it unleash World War II. On the other hand, American finan- ciers, industrialists, and bankers have worked closely before World War II with the German industrialists in order to enhance their own selfish interests. United States collaboration with German interests to the detriment of the United States continues to this day. It would appear that the American-vested interests have not learned the lessons of the interwar pericd. As early as the spring of 1942, at a time when the United States was fighting for its survival, the geopolitical section of the United States War Department which comprised a group of industrialists with German tie-ups, recommended that a powerful Germany be rebuilt after the con- clusion of World War II. Thus, it was no surprise that soon after Germany surrendered, American and British representatives of corporations which had invested heavily in German industries prior to and during the Hitler regime, appeared on the scene, either in the Army or as high Officials or as advisers and took charge of implementing our policy toward Germany. Among the Americans were: Col. Sostehe-r2s Behn, Kenneth Stockton and Mark Sund- strom, of International Telephone & Tele- graph; Charles H. Powell, of Westinghouse; Brandon Gove, former head of Socony Vac- uum of Rumania; Robert E, McConnell, formerly of General Aniline & Film Co. (I. G. Farben); Peter Hoagland and Graime Howard, formerly of General Motors in Ger- many; Rufus J. Wysor, former president of Republic Steel, and many others. The New York investment house of Dillon, Read & Co. must be singled out in this con~ nection because it has played a prominent role during the twenties in building up the German cartels and heavy industries with American money. Three of its leading mem-=- bers have played a prominent role in Ameri- can life for a number of years. These men were: the late Secretary of Defense, James E. Forrestal, former president of Dillon, Read & Co.; William H. Draper, Jr., vice president of Dillon, Read & Co.; and Paul Nitze, former vice president of Dillon, Read & Co., and presently chairman of the State Department policy planning board (see attached state- ment A). Mention must also be made of Draper’s son-in-law, Philip Hawkins, who was instrumental in killing our German decartel- ization program. Our policy is and was to destroy the German cartels, Thus far, we have failed
A4106 to carry out that policy and the people of America have not been told the truth about our failures. Witness the fact that over 2 years ago, on January 8, 1948, former Secre- tary of War Kenneth Royall publicly stated: “We have abolished the pernicious cartels.” Not only have we not eliminated the German cartels, but the same Germans are again working with international cartels which they had helped to set up before World War II. THE FERGUSON COMMITTEE AND TESTIMONY TAKEN IN CONNECTION THEREWITH—AN ANALYSIS Some months after Secretary Royall’s un- true statement to the effect that cartels were eliminated, pressure was brought to bear by some who knew the true facts about United States decartelization policy. Secretary of War Royall then appointed a committee to study the results of our decartelization and deconcentration policies in Germany. The committee was headed by a former member of the Federal Trade Commission, Garland S. Ferguson and comprised two other members, namely, S. S. Isseks, and A. T. Kearney. The findings of the Ferguson committee were presented to Secretary Royall on April 15, 1949, after extensive testimony taken in Germany and Washington. The findings of the committee were that not one single car- tel was eliminated in Germany since VE day. It is worthy of mention that the results of the painstaking investigation made by Chairman Fereuson and the able members of his committee, were given little or no publicity, and the report itself comprising over 130 pages was difficult to obtain, al- though it was public information. As a matter of fact, the verbatim testimony taken in connection with the Ferguson committee investigation has never been made public at all. It is kept under lock and key in the Pentagon Building. The chairman of the Committee on Rules succeeded, however, in obtaining the verbatim testimony to be used in connection with House Resolution 425 and this investigation. The reason the Ferguson report was not publicized and why access to it was made difficult to the public, although contrary to the desire of the Ferguson committee, will be revealed by the photostatic copies of the verbatim testimony by such individuals as: General Clay, General Draper, Colonel Wil- kenson, Mr. Bronson, Mr. Hawkins, Mr. Charles Collison, Mr. Coleman, Mr. Johnston Avery, Mr. Laurent, Brigadier Oxborrow, Gen. Arthur Wilson, Mr. A. Sacks, Mr. Mar- tin, Mr. Bartels, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Spencer, and others. The nature and essence of the secret ver- batim testimony taken in connection with the Ferguson committee can best be sum- marized by a statement made on January 28, 1949, by Hon. Johnston Avery, former Chief of the Enforcement Section, Decartelization Branch, and presently an Assistant to the United States Attorney General (p. 102) when he stated: “I think the facts will support the state- ment that such men as General Draper, Wil- kenson, and Hawkins felt that the only way to bring about industrial revival in Ger- many was by rebuilding along the old indus- trial lines. We kept pressing Bronson, Haw- kins, Wilkenson, for additional decisions on Henschel, Bosch, VKF and Shoe Machinery (the processing of which has been com- pleted and same lacked only approval by top authorities). I became convinced that they (the top authorities) had no inten- tion of allowing the dissolution of any combine or monopoly.” (p. 105) “I was not guessing altogether as to their attitude. On November 7, 1946, Mr. Bronson while he ‘was control officer of I. G. Farben, had told me perfectly plainly and in so many words that he was glad he was not in the Decartel- ization Branch because he did not believe in the antitrust approach. He said that all of his background had been with big business and his sympathies were there too. iid And it was certamly no secret that Mr. Wilkenson (the economic advisor to Gen- eral Clay) did not believe in the decarteli- gation program, I believe he had been ad- mirably frank in that respect. However, the decartelization program was under the di- rection of these men.” The verbatim testimony of all the wit- nesses who were subpenaed by the Ferguson committee bears out Mr. Avery’s statement and is available to the members of the House Committee on Rules. ° Special mention must be made of General Clay, the former American Military Gov- ernor of Germany, whose attitude on decar- telization up to 1948 was above reproach. A typical instance is provided in his memo dated October 12, 1946 (ex. 25) to General Draper wherein he stated: “T don’t believe we can accomplish our purpose without striking out large corpora tions in Germany. Trevrorel om d fully am in sympathy with "7 cue... pased on size until we can destroy conditions which did exist in Germany.” However, :27f*hizz sparently happened to General C+, ‘41 in this regard, for it is a fact that in the spring of 1948, Gen- eral Clay corstetets tone 1+ upon himself to reverse ‘: Gir: che os policy. (See Exhibit 11-A.) Exhibit 11-A unequivocally shows that General Clay must be blamed for the complete reversal of our decartelization policies and for the failure to enforce MG Law 56, afore-mentioned. In a secret conference held by Clay with Bronson and Wilkenson, Clay stated: “That he realized that when his program was made public there would be a scream to the high heavens from the strong antitrust group, but that there had been similar screams be- fore as exemplified by the sounding-off of Martin back in the States, but that the screams had come and gone and there would probably be little more major interest to create a serious scream.” FAILURE OF UNITED STATES DENAZIFICATION POLICY Our denazification policy in Germany has been a dismal failure. An analysis made by John Herz in his study entitled “The Fiasco of Denazification in Germany” in the Politi- cal Science Quarterly, volume LXIII, Decem- ber 1948, shows that 12,753,000 persons had been registered under the German law for denazification as members of the Nazi Party and its affiliates. Of these, 9,073,000, or nearly three-fourths, had been dismissed as nonchargeable, By April 1948, 2,373,000 of the remaining 3,209,000 had been amnestied. By June 80, 1948, the remaining 836,000 had been tried and 87 percent of their number exonerated. Of the 526,680 thus convicted, 50.8 percent were classifled as followers, 10.7 percent as lesser offenders, 2.1 percent as of- fenders, and 0.1 percent. only as major of- fenders. These findings were in the lower courts. The appeal tribunals as of March 31, 1948, confirmed sentences on only 27 per- cent of the above convictions and the trend was to lessen and shorten the sentences. Of the 526,680 convicted Nazis, 430,890 re- ceived sentences composed exclusively of fines less than 1,000 reichsmarks (about $100 of the then current legal market and con~ siderably less than one-half that used on the wane extensively used open market). By May 1948 , only 1,677 Nazis remained in internment camps. The latest trends of the rising tides of nazism and nationalism in Germany were APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD discussed in the New York Times March 4, 1950, page 1—United States Fears National- ist Rise in Germany Despite Curbs, by Drew Middleton. On March 9, 1950, New York Times, page 1, SS Men Get Homes of Hitler Victims, by M. James. On March 10, 1950, New York Times, page 12, German Officials Accused by Police—Wuertemberg-Baden Re~ gime Said To Be Balking Inquiry on Nazi Court Frauds, by M. James. Then on March 18, 1950, New York Times, page 4, German Rightists Drawing Together, by Drew Mid- dleton. Witness an editorial appearing in the Christian Science Monitor of February 8, 1950, entitled ‘Mr. McCloy Calling the Ger- mans”: “We welcome his (McCloy’s) state-~ ment of American policy on Germany, but not because it unearths any unsuspected facts or newly discovered ways of dealing with them. Rather we welcome it as indi- cating that American officials are catching up with actualities in Germany and beginning to understand why many Americans have been disquieted about the application of American policy to the German question, Unfortunately one speech won’t bring de- mocracy to Germany, or rid that nation of latent Nazis, or of the ultranationalism which is so easily exploited by aggressive forces in the country. Unfortunately, too, Mr. McCloy’s address contained a fair quan-~ tity of material for self-congratulatory treat- ment of the German press.” “Main theme of McCloy’s address: (1) German leaders have paid too much atten- tion to issues with other countries like that with France concerning the Saar, and not enough attention to internal problems such as unemployment. (2) There has been too much thinking about a German Army and Air Force, too little about the processes of democratic government. (3) Too much re- liance on United States material aid, not enough recognition that the United States has a right to insist that American aid will not again be misled and misused to strengthen Germany for military adven- tures.” . Another excellent article appeared in the Washington Daily News under date of Feb- ruary 14, 1950, as follows: “From the northern Rhine region back- ward to Bavaria in the South, the signs are multiplying that militant nationalism and Pan-Germanism are on the rise. In the press, government offices, industry, the uni- versities, and even in the Bonn parliament, nationalists and Nazi elements have moved more brazenly in the open. * * * Dis- sident members of Chancelor Konrad Adenauer’s own Christian Democratic Party informed Leon Dennen of the Washington Daily News that Adenauer is now little more than a puppet of the industrialist, the Catholic hierarchy and the former officers corps. * * * Two extreme  rightists groups have merged to form the German Reich Party, controlling 600,000 West Ger- man votes. “Thus today, as after World War I, the Germans are being told that they were not really beaten in battle, that they lost through the undermining efforts of plotters and saboteurs only. Before the theme was: ‘The Jews are to blame for everything.’ Now it is the stab in the back.” Dr, Franz Richter, prominent member of the National Rightist Party, declares Germany must re- fuse to serve foreign imperialists. There can be no collaboration in a military way be- tween West Germany and the western powers, he said, until Germany has regained her full sovereignty and the last occupation soldier left. Dr. Kurt Schumacher, leader of the Socialist Democrats and recognized a8 one of the chief supporters of real German democracy recently said that 6,000,000 Jews
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD killed in Nazi gas chambers and tortured in concentration camps stood between Ger- many and the civilized world. Wolfgang Helder, a Bonn parliament deputy and mem- ber of the strong rightist group disagreed. “It was a pity, yes, that the Jews were done away with in gas chambers, he said. Other means could have been found.” As a matter of fact, Mr. Howard Ambruster in the Daily Compass of March 7,1950,carried an article on Germans Send Pro-Nazi Here as Consul. Mr. Ambruster says that “The newly appointed Consul General at New York of the West German Republic, Hans Schlange-Schoeningen, is roundly de- nounced as a violent anti-American and pro- Hitler anti-Semite in a petition now being sent to Secretary of State Acheson.” Recent newspaper accounts of one Nation- alist Party meeting reported that the old Nazi national anthem was being sung again in Germany. Yet our policy toward Germany, as estab- lished in 1945, pledged that “German mili- tarism and nazism will be extirpated and the allies will take in agreement together now and in the future the other means nec- essary to assure that Germany will never again threaten her neighbors or the peace of the world.” In this connection, Mr. James Martin, former head of the Decartelization Branch, American Military Government, testifying before the Ferguson committee on January 27, 1949, at page 7 of his testimony, stated: “In my presence General Draper and other members of the economics division in a rap:d succession of set speeches made state- ments emphasizing the need for German economic recovery and intimating that the removal of Nazis from the ranks of indus- trial management and the threats of a decartelization program were retarding and hampering German recovery.” Perhaps the most cogent reason for the necezsity of conducting a thorough inves-~ tigation of the failure of our occupation policies is evidenced by a statement made by Colonel Wilkinson, chief economic ad- viser to General Clay in answer to a ques~ tion put forth by a member of the Ferguson committee as to his whole philosophy on United States policy (p. 9, Wilkinson Testi- mony, December 18, 1948): “When a grovp of 12 editors from the United States were being briefed in Berlin on the economic situation * * * Istated that in the ex- ecution of the military government policy in Germany we were often faced with a situa- tion where we pulled on the hand of a2 man lying on the floor and wondered why he didn’t get to his feet in spite of the fact that we had one foot on his neck. I ex- plained that the policy of the United States Government as set forth in the Potsdam agreement and in the directives of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to Military Government called for important measures on demilitarization, reparations, restitution, denazification, and decartelization, which in their execution could not fail to have a most disruptive effect upon the other policies of military government which were directed toward the reconstruction of Germany.” CONCLUSION President Truman stated his position on December 2, 1948, at the first press con- ference after his election when he stated that the German cartels would not be re~ vived as long as he was in the White House (p. 19, Ferguson committee report). Since then, although there has been a change in the American military governor, the succession of Mr. McCloy to General Clay, nothing has been accomplished in the field of denazification and decartelization, and indeed, we have recartelized and re- nazified and remilitarized Germany, In view of the foregoing facts, it is im- perative that a thorough and complete in- vestigation be made so as to enlighten the Congress and the American people on the subject of our demilitarization, denazifica- tion, and decartelization policies in Ger- many, and further so that we may know who the high officials are in our Defense and State Departments who have been and are presently scuttling our basic German policy. * ATTACHMENT A AMERICANS WHO Have CONTRIBUTED TO THE Scurrninc or Ovr Poxricy Towarp GERMANY PAUL NITZE Paul Nitze was appointed recently as chairman of the Policy Planning Board of the Department of State. He succeeded Mr. George Kennan. Prior to this appointment Paul Nitze was Deputy to Assistant Secretary of State Dr. Willard Thorp, in charge of eco- nomic affairs. Nitze has been in Government service since 1940. In 1942 he was connected with the Board of Economic Warfare (BEVW)—his business being to purchase goods necessary to carry on war. While with the BEW he had extensive dealings with some of the prominent cartel representatives. One of his very intimate contacts was Maurice Hoch- sechleid, the kingpin of the tin cartel in Bolivia. Hochschleid used to refer to Nitze and say that Nitze was one of the few men in Government who he could get along with famously. Intercepted communications between Hochschleid and Nitze reveal that Nitze was the recipient of favors bestowed upon him by Hochschleid. Nitze’s activities were brought to the attention of President Roose- velt, which resulted eventually in Nitze’s quitting the Foreign Economic Administra- tion in 1944. The FEA was the successor agency to the BEW. When Nitze severed his connections with the FEA, he was appointed adviser to the War Department because of his connections with James Forrestal, the then Secretary of the Navy—and his superior officer in the banking firm of Dillon, Read & Co., New York. In 1945, Nitze was appointed deputy di- rector of the United States Strategic Bomb- ing Survey (USSBS), the purpose of which was to make an analysis of the strategic bombing since Germany’s downfall. Nitze went to Germany to study the effects of the bombing upon Germany’s heavy industry. He, together with a group of experts from the USSBS visited the Rubr industries and had extensive discussions with the leaders of the German heavy industry; the very same leaders who pushed Hitler to wage war (W. W. II). The United States investigations team in the Ruhr subsequently found a let- ter in the files of the largest steel cartel in Germany—Vereinigte Stahlwerke—to the ef- fect that the USSBS people gave an assur~ ance to the German heavy steel industry leaders that a bridge of friends of United States, Germany, and Britain, was formed to protect the German heavy steel interests. Incidentally, the Vereinigte Stahlwerke to whom this assurance was given in particular, was established in 1926 by the Dillon, Read & Co. investment house of New York with American money which was never re- paid. It is strange, therefore, that one of the men who was vice president of Dillon, Read & Co., namely, Mr. Nitze, should have been appointed deputy director of the USSBS. After his survey of Germany, Paul Nitze and his group went to make a similar investi- gation of the effects of bombing upon the Japanese industries. In this connection it must be pointed out that our entire policy toward Japan has also been completely emas= culated. 44107 Paul Nitze was appointed vice president of Dillon, Read & Co., at a very early age. It is reported that he was able to accomplish such a feat because of his marriage to a Miss Pratt, whose father is heavily interested in the Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey and General Motors Corp. : Nitze’s uncle, Mr. Hilken, was the chief paymaster for the Kaiser sabotage team which blew up the Black Tom and Kingsland plants in 1917, The damage was $55,000,000 and it was the greatest sabotage act in the history of the United States. Paul Nitze has been largely responsible for the scuttling of our postwar policy toward Germany while in the State Department, since his task was to frame our foreign eco= nomic policy. Memorial Day Address by Hon. Herbert H. Lehman, of New York, Before the Hyde Park Home Club EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HERBERT H. LEHMAN OF NEW YORK IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, June 1 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. LEHMAN. Mr. President, on Me- morial Day, May 30, the Hyde Park Home Club, formed by neighbors of President Roosevelt in 1932, held its fourth annual Memorial Day service at Hyde Park. It was my privilege to de- liver the Memorial Day address on that occasion. I ask unanimous consent of the Senate to have the address printed in the Appendix of the REcorp. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the REcorp, as follows: Today the Nation is paying tribute to its heroic dead. We honor those who have fallen on many battlefields in our struggles for liberty and justice. We remember the sacrifices which those men, and others, have made. Today, we rededicate ourselves to the defense of the principles for which those men died and which again call for our com- plete devotion. We are gathered in this quiet garden be- cause this is the last resting place of one man who gave to this cause and to this country the last full measure of devotion. The last full measure of devotion. These are not my words. They are the words of that other civilian soldier of an earlier war, Abraham Lincoln. And today these two men, Lincoln and Roosevelt, so dissimilar and yet so alike, are linked in the embrace of his- tory, among the leaders of America’s heroic dead. ' It was only 5 years ago that Franklin D. Roosevelt died. Was it 5 years ago or was it 50 or was it yesterday? Time has as little meaning for a figure as towering as his, as inches have for the measure of a mountain. In paying special homage to Franklin D. Roosevelt on this Memorial Day, we do not single him out as more worthy than the hundreds of thousands in America and the millions everywhere who have fallen in the fight for freedom. We merely recognize that he was and always will be a symbol of those lesser Known men who yielded their lives, too, on the battleground of liberty. Of course our tribute cannot add to the deeds that were done or enhance the sacri- fices that were made. What we can do here
AA108 today is to enlarge our friendship with Franklin D. Roosevelt and reexamine the causes for which he and the others died, and perhaps leave here with some new insight into those forces which moved him to the services which he performed. Even those of us who cherished the rich treasure of his friendship can enrich our knowledge of him. For he was many-~sided, as the deep knowledge of both joy and suffer. ing make people many-sided. And here in Hyde Park we can see, in some perspective, that which gave him joy in the midst of suf- fering and that which gave him calm in the midst of tumult. I have read somewhere that it is the mis- fortune of the famous that they cannot know the lot of those who pass unnoticed from the cradle to the grave; that it is the mis- fortune of the rich that they cannot feel the constraining touch of nature and neces- sity; and that it is the misfortune of the always successful that they can never know the feel of battle against odds. Franklin D. Roosevelt was famous and suc- cessful. Yét by his own peculiar experiences and his own personal sufferings, he came to appreciate the lot of the obscure and the unnoticed, to feel the constraining touch of nature and necessity and to know the mean- ing of battle against overwhelming odds. This knowledge and this appreciation helped make him a compassionate man and an outstanding leader of men. This trans~- formation was one of those accidents of which history is made. Happy accident, too, that there came to his side that great lady who, like her husband, is loved by mankind because she loves mankind. This pair be- longs truly not to America but to the world. Franklin D. Roosevelt was what might be called a marginal man, He was of the rich, and yet also of the poor. He was of the west, and yet also of the east. So real was his acquaintance with mankind that he ex~ pressed for them what they could not ex- press—their dreams, their hopes, their trials and tribulations. He had a creative way of profiting deeply from any occasion that brought him into contact with new people. He took away from a meeting with people not just a super= ficial impression, but the essence of a new experience. So in 1932, when he became President of the United States, hungry people, desperate farmers, and bewildered businessmen were, to Franklin Roosevelt, something more than statistics. They were men and women. They needed what he had once needed, courage and direction. He gave them courage and direction. He knew of suffering far more than most of us will ever know. He dealt with his personal problem of physical suffering with a dignity and strength that gave courage to all men who felt themselves handicapped in life. He lived silently and nobly with an affliction in a way which moved men to wonder who might otherwise have been moved to pity. No one who ever watched President Roose- velt ascend the ramp at Madison Square Gar- den carrying the weight of his large frame on the strength of his arms and hands, then reaching the rostrum, raise his arms in sal- ute to the people, could remain unmoved. For anyone who had seen this had seen and shared in courageous living. Only once in all his long public life did he refer to his handicap. But when the time came, and he knew that he must sit and not stand as he addressed the Congress, he had ho false pride. He said simply to the Congress, as he asked their indulgence that the weight of his braces required that this time, he remain seated. So he lived greatly in a simple but pow~ erful way. He made all of us feel that real problems could be solved; real barriers could come down; real sorrows could be borne silently end with dignity. This is the legacy which he left us. It is & creative legacy. We share today not our sorrow that he has gone, but his urge to move ever forward toward the day when all the people shall have food and shelter, warmth of home and loved ones, justice within our country and peace throughout the world. This is a good legacy, left by a man who knew that as we push back the barriers of class, race, and creed we find the fullness of life itself. These were the real and simple things which he taught us. But these lessons in living are only a part of what he left behind. And they account only in part for the great despair which filled hearts and minds the world over when he died, and for the pain which is not yet quite gone. I sat at his right hand during the 4 years that he was Governor of this, my well-loved State and was also his. I helped him in every way it was possible for me to help him. Yet it was I who was helped—in grasp and understanding of the problems of that aay, and of the problems that were to come later. Governor and later President Roosevelt did not have a ready-made formula for all the problems of his day. In fact, he avoided formulas. His genius was in his ability to improvise solutions to problems as they arose—solutions which borrowed from the past and yet were very much geared to the present. His touchstone was, “Will it work? ‘Will it meet the need?” Hence it is difficult to say what he would have done, in any specific situation today. What we do know, however, is that, to meet the problems, his actions would have been sound. He was the enemy of inaction, un- less that inaction, itself, were a form of action, President Roosevelt’s fundamental faith was that no problem was insoluble; it was only a matter of persisting until the right solution was found. How would President Roosevelt have felt about the growing threat of communism? And about the current attacks on the State Department and the Government Depart~- ments generally? What would he have done about the threat of subversion and espionage from Moscow-inspired sources? And about the atomic bomb and the cold war? Tuese questions occur to us often as the swiftly moving stream of events sweeps us down the rapids of these perilous times. We cannot answer these questions, Per- haps we should not try. We must only know that Roosevelt would have tried, as his suc- cessor is trying, to solve these problems with- in the flexible framework of a basic devotion to democracy at home and a tolerant under- standing of the world abroad. No fixed framework of preconceived notions would have found him. No rigid obstacles of what- ever magnitude would have stayed him. No approach, however bold and unprecedented, would have frightened him. Because I knew the man, and his patriotic devotion to his country as well as his bound~ less devotion to mankind, I am appalled at the endless repetition of the slander that President Roosevelt was naive or short- sighted or weak or even worse in his dealings with the Russians. I say that those who make such charges speak with little knowledge and great preju~ dice. President Roosevelt was the grand architect of our victory over a savage and ruthless enemy. He was bold and courageous enough to take calculated risks in diplomacy, as all his generals and admirals did in mili- tary operations. That grand strategy brought the enemy to bay and led to his downfall. That this strategy did not succeed in solv- ing the basic problem of the relations of APPENDIX.TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Soviet Russia with the world is not to Presi- dent Roosevelt’s discredit any more than it was to the discredit of Winston Churchill. That problem had been with Europe and the world since 1917. It had its origins in cen- turies of history. Its current manifestations are the result of all the forces which com- pined to produce the industrial revolution, and all the consequences which flowed out of that revolution. That problem, too, can and must be solved. But to attribute the pres- ent tragic state of world affairs to failure or error on the part of Franklin Roosevelt is a pase injustice and a sad reflection of inabil- ity to understand the meaning of the present struggle. Today, despite these slanders, the fame of Franklin Roosevelt grows steadily in this country, as it does throughout the world. In many lands there are majestic boulevards named in his honor. In many a2 village in far-off countries, squares and public build- ings bear his name. But these are only the products of men’s hands. A much more transcendental memorial is in the hearts of millions of men and women—yes, and chil- dren too—who know of President Roosevelt only as a remote and inspirational figure who fought in his land and in every land for jus- tice for every man, and for the liberation of the oppressed and the enslaved. In this world, convulsed by a conflict that is neither war nor peace, swaying on the very brink of disaster, the name of Franklin Roosevelt means to many millions of men and women, hope and peace. To these mil- lions, Franklin Roosevelt lives on as a sym- bol of faith in brotherhood and understand- ing. High on a hill overlooking Washington is that shrine called the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. Here in Hyde Park we have the Tomb of the Known Civilian Soldier. Frank- lin D. Roosevelt is famed and honored for his deeds. Wherever in the world there are men called civilized, wherever the values of liberty and dignity and humanity are rec- ognized, and wherever men dream of free- dom and of progress, there the name of Franklin Roosevelt is known and honored. Among our enemies, as among our friends, this name symbolizes the everlasting struggle upward which is man’s lot in this world. Why can we not somehow make use of this faith which men and women in every land have in Franklin Roosevelt? Why can~ not this faith become the bridge over which ‘we may cross the seas of hate and suspicion which divide people from people? Why can- not the devotion which we in America have for Franklin Roosevelt becomé a language in which we can communicate with peoples who are otherwise cut off from us? We must cherish no illusions about the present world situation. Ahead of us is darkness and peril. There is no simple for- mula for peace and justice in a world divided against itself, with one entire sector of man- kind under the rigid control of a brutal and tyrannical regime. But if, in opposing this tyranny with all our strength, as we must, we fail to exhaust every possibility for avoiding the catastrophe of a war which can spell the end of our civi- lization, we will have denied our obligation both to the dead and to the living. We will have betrayed the great trust which we bear. We will have failed completely in our obli- gation, not only to oppose the Communist terror, but to save mankind from final dis- aster. This is our responsibility. We cannot escape it. On this Memorial Day, on this day of re- membrance of all our heroic dead, here in this last resting place of Franklin D. Roose- velt, we must rededicate ourselves to this great task. As the tired and thirsty traveler is re- freshed at the roadside spring and continues on his journey with renewed vigor, s0 we
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD must take resolve and inspiration from this occasion and this ceremony, to redouble and again redouble our efforts. In the shadow of Franklin Roosevelt's garden, in the shadow of his home, yes, in the shadow of his world, let us recall the words he wrote, shortly before his death, but which he never spoke: “Today we are faced with the preeminent fact that, if civilization is to survive, we must cultivate the science of human relation- ships—the ability of all peoples, of all kinds, to live together and work together in the same world, at peace. Let me assure you that my hand is the steadier for the work that is to be done, that I move more firmly into the task, knowing that you—millions and millions of you—are joined with me in the resolve to make this work endure.” Though he was not spared to carry out this high purpose, we, who are here, must still be joined together, under the leadership of his spirit, to press on toward that goal. Discriminatory Practices of Colleges EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ADOLPH J. SABATH OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 31, 1950 Mr. SABATH. Mr. Speaker, I read with great interest and alarm, a state- ment by Gov. Chester Bowles on the In- ter-racial Commission’s report on dis- criminatory practices of colleges with re- gard to applicants for admission. Gov- ernor Bowles is presently the chief exec- utive of the State of Connecticut and was formerly the great and outstanding Ad- ministrator of the OPA. Governor Bowles calls attention to the discriminatory practices with regard to college admissions that prevails in the private nondenominational institutions of higher learning in his State. The same Situation exists throughout our country, and I sincerely regret same. Certainly, Mr. Speaker, it would be in the best interests of our country and would strengthen the position we hold in the world if we could bring about better understanding among the various groups in the United States and thereby elim- inate such discrimination. Such con- structive action and understanding on our part would, I am confident, unify our Nation and our enemies would not be able to, from time to time, point out that we should first clean our own hands be- fore we attempt to show them that de- mocracy is the best and only intelligent form of government. There can be no discrimination in a real democracy. The article, appearing in the December 1949- January 1950 issue of American Unity, follows: Denar Is DANGEROUS (By Chester Bowles,1 Governor of Connecticut) The special report of the Inter-racial Commission on the question of discrimina- 41The above is the text of a statement by Governor Bowles on the Inter-racial Com- mission’s report on discriminatory practices of colleges with regard to applicants for ad- mission. XCVI—App.——259 tion in Connecticut educational institutions will be greeted by most of our citizens with mixed feelings. One phase of the report dealing with our Connecticut public tax- supported colleges—the University of Con- necticut and our four teachers colleges— will make us all feel proud. This study clearly establishes the fact that in these five public tax-supported colleges, Protes- tants, Catholics, Jews, and Negroes are ac- cepted solely on the basis of their scholastic ability, aptitude, and character. This, of course, is as it should be. Never- theless, it is good to know that these col- leges, in which all of us as taxpayers have such a special interest, have taken the lead- ership in eliminating all discrimination and prejudice based on race, creed, or color. The junior colleges and secretarial schools also have succeeded in eliminating discrim- ination against Jews, Negroes, Protestants, and Catholics. SHARP AND UGLY But the record of our private nondenom-~ inational colleges in this field of discrim- ination seems to be a rather dismal one. Some of us may not be surprised to find that prejudice exists in these institutions, But the commission’s report prevents us from closing our eyes any longer to how sharp and ugly that discrimination often is. It is quite true that these colleges do not shut their doors to minority students. The record shows, however, that among the stu- dents who seek admission from high school, a clear preference is shown for Protestant boys and girls over Catholics, Jews, and Negroes. Protestants are accepted in 61 per~ cent of the cases, Catholics in 49 percent, and Jews in 41 percent. Superior students of the discriminated-against groups have a bet- ter opportunity than those of moderate scho- lastic ability. But in every group the evi- dence is clear. But this represents only half the story. Fifty-five percent of the students in our pri- - vate nondenominational colleges in Connect- icut come from private, nondenominational preparatory schools. And here the discrim- ination is even more blatant. For instance, only 10 out of 31 of these preparatory schools in Connecticut stated directly that they would admit Negroes. The degree of dis- crimination against Jewish boys and girls could not be accurately determined by the commission. But the fact that only 9 per- cent of all boys and girls in private prepara- tory schools are of Jewish parentage forces us to some obvious conclusions. Another area of discrimination which could not be covered in the report involves the question of discrimination among the students at our private nondenominational institutions on the campus itself. The Uni- versity of Connecticut by action of the facul- ty and the students called for an end to all discrimination on the basis of race, creed, or color in choosing members of fraterni- ties or sororities. But the action of the Uni- versity of Connecticut is the exception that serves to set off the ugly fact that practically every fraternity in the other nondenomina- tional institutions is more concerned with a seventeenth century concept of social ac- ceptability, which is one of the things we fought so vigorously to eliminate in the Sec- ond World War. There are those who tell us that if we will only wait long enough that the conditions described in this report will eventually ad- just themselves. In spite of the extremely pad record outlined in this report, there is no question but that progress has been made in the last generation, and particularly in the last 10 years. But today our democratic way of life is challenged by the totalitarian con- cept of the Communists. There is a grave question as to how long we can wait for the slow process of evolutionary change in a pe- A4109 riod in world history in which we are judged throughout the world not by our words, but by our deeds. Iam deeply hopeful that not only members of the legislature but every thoughtful citi- zen in Connecticut will study, this report carefully and will speak out in clear and unequivocal terms in denouncing the condi- tions which it has brought to light. I would also like to call, with all earnest- ness, on the heads of all our private nonde- nominational institutions and our private nondenominational preparatory schools to take action—forthright, vigorous action—to eliminate discrimination wherever it exists. Reeducating Germany With Nazi History EXTENSION OF REMARES HON. HARLEY M. KILGORE OF WEST VIRGINIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, June 1 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. KILGORE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an article entitled “Reeducating Germany With Nazi History,” by Telford Taylor, which appeared in the New York Times Maga- zine of May 28. Mr. Taylor, as a briga~ dier general, prosecuted war criminals at Nuremberg and later served as United States chief of counsel for war crimes from October 1946 to August 1949. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Rrecorp, as follows: REEDUCATING GERMANY WITH Nazr History— A PROSECUTOR aT NUREMBERG URGES THaT Facts DiscLOsED THERE BE UsEp To Trach Democracy (By Telford Taylor) Everyone knows the old story about the German, the Englishman, and the French- man who wrote essays on the elephant. The German wrote a six-volume series entitled “An Introduction to the Study of the Hle- phant”; the Englishman, a pamphlet on “The Elephant and Empire”; the Frenchman, a sprightly and daringly illustrated volume called “L’Eléphant et Ses Amours.” The recent episode in Berlin when, upon the urging of Chancelor Konrad Adenauer, a@ large audience arose and sang “Deutsch- land Uber Alles” provided an actual and equally pat revelation of national character- istics. In attendance were the three Allied military commandants of the British, French, and American sectors of Berlin, who all re- mained ostentatiously seated during the singing. When the meeting broke up re- porters asked the three gnerals for their comments. The British general observed that the dem- onstration “was in shockingly bad taste.” The Frenchman—one can almost hear his weary Gallic sigh—remarked that he had “heard that song before—~all too often.” The American commandant declined to com- ment, but one of his aides confided to the reporters that “the general hopes the whole affair will blow over.” Such hopefulness is typical of American attitudes toward the “democratization” of Germany. But the truth is that deeply rooted national feelings and issues do not “blow over,” nor can they be changed or solved merely by appropriating funds for ECA and the Air Force.
A4110 Tt hes been the basic purpose of the occupation not only to disarm Germany and reduce her economic war potential but to promote her “democratization” by means usually described as “reorientation” and “re- education.” And yet it 1s in this very field that the occupation’s accomplishments have been least impressive. In large part this disappointing showing has been due to lack of eflort and emphasis—in short, to an ab- surdly tiny investment of money, talent, and prestige. Here was at once an emergency and an opportunity which should have been tackled as a major national undertaking. Instead, it has been a backwater in which a small group of able and sincere men have struggled valiantly to move the boulder with a toothpick. To alter the German Weltanschauung is an ambitious undertaking which must be approached wi** 6 ceevor*ut Swareness not only thatour*yvors "ce 7 a but also that we are at the mercy of the international ele- ments. Since 1945 the Germans have seen much to support the conclusion that a na~- tion’s own military strength 1s still its best guaranty of security. The appeal of na- tionalism derives its greatest strength from the shortcomings and great failures of inter- national political idealism. The hard cynicism and revived jingoism thus evoked in Germany by world events are often aggravated by statements of non-Ger- man writers and public figures which seem to parallel the nationalist line. The follow- ing are good ezamples: “The exterminative wars which were planned, plotted, and waged against the American Indians during the latter half of the nineteenth century equaled in atrocities anything the Nazis ever did and were ex- tremely popular at the time. “For 3 years after the unconditional sur- render we kept the Germans on rations little or no larger than those in Nazi concentra- tion camps. * * * There was no crime the Nazis had committed which we or our allies had not also committed. “Crimes committed by American person- nel representing the United States seem so horrible in retrospect that it is difficult to believe that Americans could have resorted to such beastial practices.” These are the public pronouncement re- spectively of the British mulitary expert Maj. Gen. J. F. C. Fuller (in the magazine Ordnance for June 1948), the American writer Freda Utley (in her recent book, the High Cost of Vengeance), and Dr. George N. Shuster, president of Hunter College (speaking before the Academy of Political Science on April 7, 1949), who has recently been appointed Commissioner for Bavaria by High Commissioner John J. McCloy. Of course, in any land of free speech and press, there will be wild words. But the Germans for 12 years were cut off from con- tact with the democratic Western World and cubjected to a news and literary diet narrow and distorted beyond anything we can imagine. As a result, most Germans lack the ordinary informational background which helps us to evaluate the printed word and reject the obviously spurious or grossly exaggerated. The primary task of reorientation should be to lay before the Germans the true facts about the recent past and thus help to fill the informational vacuum left by the Nazis. For this task certain lines of endeavor have so far been slighted, rejected, or overlooked— lines which, even at this late date, hold considerable promise. There is a vast ac- cumulation of readily available and highly effective material which has not been ex- ploited. I refer to the official German docu- ments which fell into our hands at the end of the war, and which formed the evidentiary basis of the Nuremberg trials. It is my strong conviction that these docu- ments, if intelligently presented, would be invaluable for purposes of democratization. My opinion is based on a number of gen- eral observations of the postwar German mentality and the German reaction to the occupation and democratization during the 5 years since the end of the war. First of all, I think that we have over- estimated the reeducational potential of plugging democracy in the abstract and vila the customary channels of propaganda, such as radio, press, and movies. We failed to take into account the fact that, throughout the Nazi era, the Germans were subjected to an incessant barrage of political indoc- trination, the hollowrness and untruth of which were driven deep into the German rind by the utter defeat and ruin of 1945. This taught the Germans a lesson, but it did not teach them democracy. Primarily, it induced a profound distrust of all opinion- forming official pronouncements and eéx- hortations, and a bitter cynicism. Now, when the average German hears or reads statements about the advantages of democ- racy, American style, his impulse is not to weigh the truth of what is stated but to wonder what ulterior purpose lies behind 1t. Second, although the young people of Ger- many share this suspicion and cynicism, they are immensely curious about the world. They are painfully aware that nazism cut Germany off from intellectual contact with the rest of the world, and are correspond- ingly hungry for information and new ideas about government and society. But democ- racy, as @ political commodity, faces their cool and calculating appraisal rather than their eager acceptance. Third, we have tended to rely overmuch on what lawyers call autoptic profference— that is, proving the nature of a physical object by displaying the thing itself in court. We have endeavored to show democracy to the Germans by holding up the American way of life for their inspection, admiration, and emulation. So far we have gotten lots of inspection, and the seamy side of our way of life has not escaped notice. Furthermore, we have, somewhat unimaginatively, stressed colorful and indigenous features of Ameri- can political life—such as the New England town meeting—which are not universally essential elements of twentieth century democracy and which are of dubious export value, In any event, democracy is not a thing that can he effectively displayed like merchandise in a shop window. Particularly when it is offered under the lakel “Made in America,” it is likely to encounter a sales resistance stemming from national pride. There is no doubt that this pride, mixed with suspicion, has measurably diminished the beneficial effect of the American information centers— the “Amerika Hauser.” Finally, we have misgaged human nature in trying to make the Germans feel contrite by harping constantly on the death and de- struction that the Third Reich visited on other nations. Warsaw, Belgrade, Coventry, and Kiev are distant cities to the average German; what his compatriots may or may not have done there he is far from sure of— and he is by no means eager to find out. What the French or the Russians or the English say about this may not, he suspects, be any more trustworthy than what Goebbels used to say. The rubble to which almost every large German city was reduced is, on the other hand, part of everyday existence in Germany. Whatever may have been done to the Jews and the Poles, thinks the average German, it can’t be any worse than what has happened to him. Indeed, the stories of havoc wrought by the Wehrmacht in foreign lands gives many Germans a very considerable satisfac- 10N.. At least they were once cock of the “ APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD walk; at least the other fellow got a black e. Tt is only human nature that the Germans are more readily and lastingly impressed by the harm nazism did to Germany than by stories (terribly true though they are) of ravages wrought by the Third Reich in‘for- eign lands. But che Germans could hardly help being lasting1y impressed by the true facts about what nazism did to Germany and to German institutions. And for this pur- pose, the captured German official dccuments are peculiarly su:table. They are German, not foreign. They are contemporaneous proof of what actually transpired 1n Ger- many, not propaganda concocted to sell the Germans a demeccratic bill of goods. Their authenticity has been established beyond question by the Nuremberg testimony of the very men who wrote, received, or distributed them, Indeed, it is by means of these docu- ments—and, for the present, im this way only-—-that the lessons of the war crimes trials can be driven home in Germany. I think that the High Commissioner’s office has not fully appreciated what is involved here. Last January, in reply to a letter from Bishop A. J. Muench of the Vatican Mission in Frankfurt, recuesting an amnesty for con- victed war cursimuis, Mr. McCloy wrote: “I feel that 1t would be very unfortunate if any considerable body of responsible Ger- mans should undertake to question the fun- damental principles on which the war crimes prosecutions were based or the judicial soundness of the procedure which was fol- lowed and the judgments which were reached in these cases. I do not think that any German who sincerely believes in the fu- ture of Germany as a responsible and peace- ful member of the community of nations can reasonably doubt the enormity of the crimes of which the war crimes prisoners have been convicted or the fundamental principles of international justice pursuant to which they were tried.” This, with all respect to Mr. McCloy, is cart-before-the-horse psychology. The legal principles of the Nuremberg trials are not above controversy in the United States. And there is no reason to attempt to discourage such discussion in Germany. From the standpoint of “reorientation,” emphasis should be placed on the facts dis-~ closed in the documents rather than on principles of jurisprudence, or on convictions and sentences. If these facts are widely dis-~ seminated and become part of the common informational background of German opin- ion, there will be little need to worry about the German attitude toward the trials, The Nuremburg and other captured docu-~ ments tell an eloquent story of the course of German and European history during the very period which is still dark to most Ger- mans. They are therefore ideal material fcr educational use, and their meaning would be eagerly absorbed by German students and young people generally. They contain a vir- tually inexhaustible ‘supply of clear proof of damage and decay in nearly all phases of German life under nazism. For example, I know of no more striking illustration of the corrupt effect of the Nazi tyranny than is afforded in the field of medi- cine, where Germany once ranked so high, by the documents revealed during the Nuremberg “doctors’ trial.” As carly as April 1933, respected Social Demeccratic and Jewish doctors in Berlin were publicly de- graded and maltreated. Soon the established medical societies were dissolved and the en- tire professional apparatus was brought under party control. The prostitution of medical education was speedily accomplished; “political doctors” in S. A. and S. S. uniforms swarmed through the universities and were appointed to the
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD leading chairs. Students were required to spend an ever-increasing part of their time in Nazi and semimilitary exercises; scien- tific attainments commanded less and less respect. By the time the war came, the entire pro- fession was demoralized and its standards debased, to the grave detriment of the med- ical services of the Wehrmacht. From this low level, the path led straight to the in- speakable and often superstitious medical experiments on concentration camp inmates, amateurishly contrived and fruitless as well as fiendishly cruel. All this emerges starkly and dramatically from the documents. The same lessons are equally manifest in other branches of science, in law, and in eco- nomic organization. In the broader field of politico-military history, the impact of the documents is no less compelling. No one who has read the memoranda of Hitler’s conferences with his generals will remain long in doubt as to how the absorption of Austria and Czechoslovakia was planned and consummated, or who was responsible for starting the war and subsequently initiat- ing such side aggressions as those against Norway, Greece, and Yugoslavia. The texts of such key documents should be part of the basic material for school and uni- versity instruction in history and politics, and should be widely available in libraries and information centers throughout Ger- many. Certainly these documents would also help to accomplish the final discrediting of the old gods of German nationalism—the leaders of the Officers’ corps. The absurd pretensions of this inept, archaic, and unprincipled clique are mercilessly exposed in their own reports. Here, for example, we can see the German army reaping the harvest of its own stupid and brutal policies for the “pacification” of the Balkans by the indiscriminate slaughter of hostages in such numbers that the inhab- itants, instead of finding security through good behavior, were driven into the ranks of the partisans. The warnings against such tactics from German occupation officials went unheeded. The German generals thought they were being cold and realistic, but in fact, they were giving an eloquent demonstration of the rigidity and lack of imagination char- acteristic of their caste. Gen. Franz Halder (chief of the German general staff from 1938 to 1942) and his fel- lows are busy these days trying to retrieve the prestige of the generals by blaming their disaster exclusively on Hitler; this is to be the World War II substitute for the stab-in-the- back legend of World War I. Halder’s little pamphlet, Hitler als Feldherr, has had a phe- nomenal sale throughout Germany, and it is highly important that this meretricious and dangerous teaching be counteracted hy unassailable documentary proof, circulated just as widely. Is it now too late for effective action on our part in support of the aim of democratiza- tion? It is easy to argue that the time for all this is past, that we have set up the Bonn government and must not now meddle in internal affairs, that the Germans must he allowed to work out their own destiny. The occupation statute did not reserve any au-~ thority to the High Commission in the field of education. Will not the Germans spurn any further reorientation as an annoying interference? So far, Mr. McCloy has wisely rejected this defeatist attitude. The cold war, far from reducing the importance of promoting de- mocracy in Germany, has made it a vital necessity, basic to the success of our foreign policy. Expansion and renewed emphasis— including more money and the participation of leading educators—are gravely needed. But there is also much that can be more effectively accomplished by nongovern- mental agencies. Every gathering of Ameri- can liberals at which the German question is discussed ends in a demand for support of the liberal and democratic element among the German people. These inchoate pleas can only be implemented by establishing contact With such elements. <A refreshing and constructive example is that of Roger N. Baldwin, who recently resigned his long- held directorship of the American Civil Lib- erties Union, and who is now helping to establish a German Civil Liberties Union. It is to be hoped that many other American institutions and individuals will similarly dedicate themselves to this stupendous task; there is ample opportunity and crying need here for intiative, imagination, and de- votion. NUREMBERG STORY The basis for the Nuremberg verdicts was a 25,000-word indictment drawn up by legal experts of the four big powers in 1945. There were four counts: 1. Participation in a conspiracy to commit crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. 2. Commission of crimes against peace, in the planning, initiation or waging of a war of aggression, 3. Commission of war crimes through vio- lation of the laws or customs of war. 4, Commission of crimes against humanity through the murder, enslavement of civilians before or during the war, or persecution on political, racial, or religious grounds. Extension of Rent Control EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ADOLPH J. SABATH OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 31, 1950 Mr. SABATH. Mr. Speaker, the ex- tension of rent control is of such vital concern to my home city of Chicago, I consider it highly important that cer-~ tain facts be brought to the attention of the membership of this House. I now insert in the Recorp a letter received from Mr. Leo A. Lerner, chairman of the Citizens Committee for Rent Control, Chicago, Ill.; the resolution adopted by the Citizens Committee and other or- ganizations in Chicago on rent control; a letter addressed to Hon. Martin H. Kennelly, of Chicago, by the Citizens Committee for Rent Control; the views of Mayor Kennelly and the City Council of the City of Chicago, together with the resolution adopted by the city council urging the extension of rent control to June 30, 1951: CrrizENs COMMITTEE FoR RENT CONTROL, Chicago, Ill., May 26, 1950. Dear CONGRESSMAN: The citizens commit- tee for rent control is composed of labor, religious, and civic organizations who are gravely concerned with the crisis facing Chicago if rent controls are removed. The problem of housing in this city is well known to you. Chicago lags far behind other cities in the construction of both private and pub- lic dwellings. There is less than one-half of 1 percent vacancy in housing units rent- ing under $100 a month. Chief Justice Ed- ward Scheffler of the Chicago municipal court, which handles most eviction cases, warned that if controls are ended “there will be mass protests and perhaps some vio- A4111 lence.” In this great under-housed city with thousands of families doubled up, and other thousands existing in substandard hous-~ ing, the abolition of controls would bring sky-rocketing rents to those very persons who can least afford to pay. The democratic delegation from Chicago is to be congratulated on the excellent fight they are making. This committee would like to be of service to you. If there are any facts or figures needed from this area please call upon us. Be assured that the great majority of per- sons in Chicago—the tenants—are behind you in this crisis. We enclose the resolution adopted by the affiliated organizations. We urge our representatives to take this expres- sion to the floor of Congress as a statement from the leaders of this city as to the true need of Federal protection for Chicago citizens. Sincerely, Lzo A. LERNER. RESOLUTION FOR RENT CONTROL We, the undersigned organizations, gravely concerned about our own welfare and that of our fellow citizens, urge the Congress of the United States to enact promptly an act to extend rent control under Federal authority. We urge that the act include these provisions: 1. Effective controls over rents to be paid. 2. Effective controls over evictions. 8. Authority for the national Administra- tor of rents to control or recontrol areas. 4, Adequate provisions for administration and enforcement of all provisions. We believe that Federal rent controls should be extended after June 30, 1950, since the facts that caused Congress to enact the 1949 act still prevail in most rent-controlled areas. American Veterans’ Committee; Chicago Industrial Union Council, CIO; Chi- cago Federation of Labor; Independent Association of Machinists; Independ- ent Voters of Illinois; Japanese Ameri- can Citizens League; Chicago Ethical Society; Jewish Labor Committee, NAACP; [Illinois State Conference; Public Housing Association; Urban League; and Chicago Tenants’ Federa- tion. CIrrizENS COMMITTEE FoR RENT CONTROL, Chicago, Iil., May 24, 1950. Hon. Martin H. Kennewyy, Mayor, City of Chicago, Chicago, Iil. Dear Mayor KENNELLY: Due to the seri- -ousness of the crisis which the end of rent control would bring to Chicago, many citi- zens and labor groups have banded together to form a Citizens Committee for Rent Con- trol. The purpose of the committee is to bring to the attention of the public and to our legislators in Washington the wide- spread support for controls in this area. Already the fight for continuation of Fed- eral controls is being led by the Democratic delegation from Chicago in the House and by Lucas and Dovetas in the Senate. Governor Stevenson’s appearance before the Senate Banking and Currency Commit- tee and your wire to the House Committee highlight the fact that Illinois and Chicago are the Nation’s number one “distressed areas”. Most of the rural areas and small cities have been decontrolled. New York has its own State rent control law. Therefore the task of protecting its own citizens by Federal controls falls to the larger cities where controls are still desperately needed. The committe believes that the official - support of Chicago’s leaders for rent control must be made clear and vigorous. There- fore we recommend that our city council
A4112 pass a resclution stating the real and con- tinuing need for controls and endorsing the local option rent control bill. Further- more, that such a resolution be introduced by you, the mayor, stressing the official con- cern about the urgency of the situation. Such a resolution would put a strong weapon in the hands of our Congressmen who are making such a splendid fight for their con- stituents. We lock for the introduction of such a resolution at the May 25 meeting of the council. We shall continue to support you in your endorsement of controls for the pro- tection of Chicago citizens. Cordially, Lzo LERNER. CONTINUATION OF FEDERAL RENT CoNTROL— VIEWS OF MAYor 4NpD Ciry CouNcrIL or Crry or CHricaco, May 25, 1950 Whereas on May 9, 1950, Mayor Martin H. Kennelly addressed a telegram to the Honor- able Brent Spence, chairman of the House Committee on Banking and Currency, as follows: “The Honorable Brent SPENCE, “Chairman, Committee on Banking and Currency, “House Office Building, Washington, D.C.: “As mayor of Chicago I would like to pre- sent my views concerning the question of continuation of Federal rent control which is now being considered by your committee. “In Chicago at present there is less than one-half of l-percent vacancy in housing units except those renting for $100 2 month or more, This affects more than 95 percent of Chicago’s rental families, ‘It is obvious and certainly should need little argument that removal of rent con- trols at this time and in such a market, would result in severe hardship to a large segment of this community. “There have been practically no housing units built in the moderate rental classifi- cation during the past 10 years. So rent- ing famihes will have no choice if controls are lifted. Of course not all owners are un- scrupulous, but there are some who would take advantage of such a situation, and this Would result in severe hardship to many of our citizens, “It would be less than fair if I did not at the same time point out to you the financial difficulties under which many small prop-~ erty owners have been operating during the past few years. Statistics show that many thousands of small property owners have not been able to secure equitable adjust- ments in the rentals of their housing units. This should be corrected. “Large property owners, through their accountants and lawyers have obtained the adjustments to which they were entitled by Jaw. But of the small property owners in the two- and  three-apartment-building class, Many are still receiving the same rental which they received in 1942. “So, in urging continuation of Federal rent control I would also like to urge that the legislation adopted and its admiistra- tion as well should take into consideration the equities on both sides of the question. “MARTIN H. KENNELLY, Mayor.” And whereas the House Committee on Banking and Currency has approved a bill to continue rent controls to June 30, 1951, where such continuance is deemed necessary by the local authorities or the electorate: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the City Council of the City of Chicago concurs in the views ex- pressed by the mayor in the aforesaid tele~ gram of May 9, 1950, to the chairman of the House Committee on Banking and Currency; and be it further Resolved, That copies of this resolution be immediately forwarded by air maul to the President of the United States and Mem- bers of Congress from Illinois. State or ILLINOIS, County of Cook, ss: I, Ludwig D. Schreiber, city clerk of the city of Chicago, do hereby certify that the annexed and foregoing is a true and correct copy of the certain resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Chicago at a regular meeting held Thursday, the 25th day of May A. D. 1950. Witness my hand and the corporate seal of the said city of Chicago this 25th day of May A. D. 1950. [SEAL] Lupwie D. SCHREIBER, City Clerk, Move Disappointment in Prospect for Taxpayers From Capitol Hill EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KENNETH B. KEATING OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, June 1, 1950 Mr. KEATING. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I include an editorial from the Mobile (Ala.) Regis- ter. The editorial follows: More DIsaPPOINTMENT IN PROSPECT FOR Tax- PAYERS From CaPiro. Hint Pending in the Senate appropriations com- mittee is the omnibus appropriations bill recently passed by the House, calling for about $29,000,000,000 to finance most Federal agencies for the fiscal year starting next July 1 It is the feeling of Representative Ken- NETH B. Kearinc, of New York State, and no doubt that of many taxpayers all over the country, that the Senate should go further than the House went in trimming the size of this so-called single-package money bill. “As I think back over the passage [by the House] of the omnibus appropriation bill,” says Mr. Kearine, “I cannot refrain from pondering how appropriate is the title ‘omni- bus. The bill just passed reminds me of a nice, new, shiny bus. “This omnibus, jet-propelled and steam- heated, started out with the brave legend, ‘Economy or bust,’ stenciled on the side. It limped back into the Senate garage covered with dust and amendments and all you could read was the bust. “The weary taxpayers, who had been taken for this expensive ride, were astounded at the fare which the driver demanded. They had been told that this year they were go- ing to get the economy size ride and had been promised that the fare would not be more than they had in their pocketbooks, “At the very last minute the driver relented and scaled down his estimates of the gas necessary to visit all the Government de- partments and agencies. Somewhat re- lheved, the passengers settled back and counted the dollars they had saved. “But they were still overburdened with sub- sidies, pet projects and other mementoes of their trip, * * * The trip had cost less than they had feared, but much more than they could afford. And they still ran the chance that after they thought they were safely home, they might get an added bill for repairs from the Senate garage. “Eivery passenger ought to sit down and write to the repairman at the other end of the Capitol that they hope, when the bus is APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD overhauled, 1t will be found that riders have a refund rather than a further charge coming to them.” If concerted, determined effort had been made in the House, the omnibus single- package bill surely could have been reduced more than the amount of economies claimed to have been written into it. Taxpayers are aware that this huge bull, although designed to provide funds to oper- ate most regular agencies of the Government for the next fiscal year, does not cover all the demands for Federal spending, by a good deal, For instance, the bill makes no provision for foreign aid or interest on the Federal debt, two big items. These are among the spending demands to be handled separately. It is not yet indicated just what the Senate will do about trimming down the size of the omnibus bill. In the meantime, however, the general prospect as to 1950-51 fiscal year spending by the Federal Government is that the taxpayers will witness a continuation of extravagance. This Congress would do the Nation a real service if it would reverse the style of recent predecessors and choose the course of sound economy instead of extravagance in handing out money to spending agencies. The chance of the present Congress doing that seems, however, to be growing more remote as the session progresses, In short, the present Congress shows prospects of be- coming another keen disappointment to the taxpayers in its handling of the purse strings. Why Rent Controls Should Be Extended EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. JOHN B. SULLIVAN OF MISSOURI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, June 1, 1950 Mr, SULLIVAN. Mr. Speaker, with rent control due to expire June 30, and with proposed legislation providing for its extension to come before the House of Representatives sometime after June 12, I am including in my extension of remarks a discussion by me of why rent control should be continued, broadcast over KWK, St. Louis, Mo., on May 14, 1950. In the following questions and answers are some of the reasons why I sincerely believe that the welfare of our Nation requires that rent control be extended. I urge my colleagues in the House to ponder these reasons and I earnestly hope that they will recognize the driving necessity of such further legislation. The discussion follows: ARE Rewr CONTROLS Necessary? ANNOUNCER. Here in Washington, the fight over keeping rent control another year is growing more intense. Those who want controls to stay on tell us that without them, there will be a terrific rise in rents, a rise most tenants can’t adequately pay. Those who want controls taken off de=- clare that landlords have been denied fair rent increases under the present law. The question soon will be voted on by Congress. Here to tell us his views on rent control is Congressman Joun B. Suniivan, Eleventh District, of St. Louis. To start out bluntly, Congressman Suu.uivan, do you think rent control still is needed?
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Representative Sunprvan. I do. I cer- tainly do. Question. Why? Representative Svunpivan. It’s wanted. And the reasons it’s wanted come in the letters I get—I and the other Congressmen— and in the cold bare facts. Question. Letters—from whom? Representative SvuLLIvan. From people— people who rent. People who work hard to make ends meet. Wives who know how much has to be spent on food, on clothing for their youngsters, on other necessities. Husbands and wives who know the absolute maximum they can afford for rent. Here’s @ letter, for example, from a middle-aged gentleman in the Eleventh District in St. Louis, which I represent. His job brings in $55 a week for himself and his wife. There aren’t any children. But—he says: “Last year we were put out of our old place; the house was bought, and the new owner took the downstairs while a relative moved into our flat upstairs. “We looked and looked for another fiat; we couldn’t find anything. I took off from work to look, and some weeks I lost 3 or 4 days’ pay because my wife couldn’t get around so good and I had to find us a place to live. “The places we saw wanted much more than we could afford. Finally, one of the men at work told me his cousin was buying a@ place, and this flat would be for rent. “We went to see the landlord right away, and he was nice about it; he just said we’d have to take care of the repairs. There were three rooms and they did need working on, and the rent was $75. But we figured we had to have a place, even if the rent was higher than we figured on, so we took it. “We've been scraping pretty hard to get by. The landlord already told us the rent goes up to $100 if rent controls stop. “I don’t know what we could do then be- cause the wife can’t work; I don’t guess any- body would hire her because she hasn’t worked since we were married except keep house. I don’t know how I could bring home any more money, either. So please vote to keep on rent control.” That’s one letter. Here’s another: “We live in a rooming house because it’s all we could find. We have two rooms for my husband, me, and our three children. We pay $20 a week rent now. It used to be $12.50 a week. My husband drives a cab; he brings home about $40 with the tips included in that. The rent has gone up twice and the landlord is trying to get it raised again. He gets $80 a week now from the people who live in this house. So I just pray every morn- ing and every night that nobody takes rent control off because if it is taken off, I don’t know what people like us will do.” Question. Those letters are typical? Representative Suulivan. They're dupli- cated hundreds of times. I get 50 letters like that to every letter coming in to ask that rent control be ended. Now, it used to be that a tenant could shop around and find a place to live. That isn’t true any more. His choice is strait-jacketed. There are high rents on the vacancies—and there are very few vacancies, if any at all. Question. But JoHN, you think that if rent ceilings were removed, that more vacan~ cies would show up—and that rents might rise, but they’d level off in a short while? Representative Suxuivan. Let’s not Kid ourselves. To begin with, we have too many families living in crowded quarters, dou- bling up, living in places that should have been condemned a long time ago. If any vacancies would show up—at reasonable rentals—they’ll grab them. But with the rise in population—and in St. Louis, the popula- tion has gone up an estimated 200,000 in the past 10 years—we can appreciate the problem, It’s simply this—we’ve had that rise In population—we'’ve had an uncounted number of families living together in small, cramped quarters—and the Department of Labor now tells us that last December there were just about 1,500 dwelling units for rent in the entire St. Louis area. There just isn’t the rental housing available that people need. Now, as far as rents going up and then level- ing off—we’ve had an unforgettable exper- jience with that contention. Back in 1946, you remember, a fight was made on price control. We were told that if price con- trol was taken off, prices might go up but they, too, would level off and would come to rest at less than the OPA price. Is that what happened? No, there were exorbitant price increases. And the consumers paid through the nose. The same thing would occur if rent controls came off. The spiral would be- gin—and soon would be out of reach of those least able to afford an increase. Question. What about the cities where de- control has been tried? Representative SULLIVAN. Well, take Omaha, Nebr., for example. Rents were reported up 166 percent there after decontrol last November. Dallas, Tex., is another city. Rents went up 85 percent in Dallas. They went up 41.3 percent after Houston tried decontrol. And so on around the country, wherever decontrol was established. Did they come down again? You know the answer. Question. What does this mean in terms not only of money but in terms of people, in terms of national welfare and economy? Representative SULLIVAN. It means just this: With general rent increases, tenants would have to pay a lot more money in rent. That would mean that they’d be cutting down on buying food, clothes, and other necessities. When people cut down on buy- ing, industry finds it has to produce less. That brings about unemployment. And I might point out that a jobless tenant often can’t pay any rent at all. Question. Do you take the position, then, that landlords don’t deserve any rent in- creases? Representative Sutnivan. No one has ever opposed fair and justified rent increases for landlords. I do take the position that the law must be fair to both, and that the fair- ness is to be judged, not by one side or the other, but by the national welfare and in- terest. Now, I would like to point out here and now that 10,787 St. Louis area landlords received authorized rent increases between November 1949 and the end of April. These increases alone amounted to $97,663 more each month for the landlords. They aver- aged almost $6 for each of the 16,958 dwell- ing units covered during the 6-month period by the increases. In April alone, raises in rents were 0. K.’d for 1,608 landlords. These applied to slightly more than 3,000 housing accommodations. Question. Why, then, is pressure being applied for the end of rent control? Representative Sutzivan, The pressure has @ profit purpose. On the scales used to measure this demand that rent controls be halted, a sack of gold weighs more than pub- lic need. But let’s calculate again on the basis of more cold facts. Look through a St. Louis newspaper. See the listings of rooms and apartments and flats for rent. Most of them start at $80, $85, $90 a month. And the people who need rental homes just don’t make that kind of money. Those rents aren’t going to come down if rent con- trols are ended. On the contrary, they're likely to go up. Well, we're told, a lot of people who are renting now will buy homes if rent controls are taken off. Let’s not be taken in by that argument, either. Again, the fact is—and the loan companies wilk tell you this—that an increasing number of American families spend more than they earn. A4113 Question. Where will they get the money to buy? There’s a limit to what they can borrow. Representative Sutuivan. Equal with that is the fact that the backbone of our housing system is rental dwellings. Any break in that backbone will be felt along the entire body of our Nation. It would mean social and economic disruption, hardship for many of our people. And this will remain a danger as jong as we continue to have more people looking for places to rent than we have rental accommodations to take care of them. The public good will not be served by an act so ill-timed and so ill-advised as dropping rent controls now. Such a move would bring sudden sky-high rent boosts. It would re- sult in a chaotic scramble by families to find new rooms when they are forced to leave their old dwellings by rents which are raised beyond reach of their pocketbooks. It would mean cutting down for many of food bought, of milk and meat and vegetables and fruit, of clothes and household goods and appliances and the thousands of other items and services on whose steady and high pro- duction our good economy depends. Much stronger consideration could be given the arguments for ending controls if landlords now were not being fairly treated. But, under the present law, they are re- ceiving rent increases. I am working for a strong Federal rent control law—~a law that will cover all States. We cannot depend on the exigencies of chance; we cannot anticipate that the legis~- latures of our States all will come through and pass laws to protect tenants. Sound sense and reason—the welfare of our Nation—dictates that rent controls—national rent controls—must stay on. Growth of Alabama Business From 1939 to 1948 EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. CARL ELLIOTT OF ALABAMA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, June 1, 1950 Mr, ELLIOTT. Mr. Speaker, prelim- inary figures recently released by the Bureau of the Census of the United States Department of Commerce indi- cate a remarkable growth of Alabama business receipts during the period 1939 to 1948, Examples of this growth are as follows: 1939 1948 Retail sales....-.-.---- $436, 000,000 | $1, 631, 400, 000 Wholesale sales___..... 415, 700, 000 1, 641, 100, 000 Service trades receipts. 22, 700, 000 89, 000, 000 Hotel receipts.--..---- 4, 800, 000 13,000, 000 Amusement business Teceipts....---..----- 7, 000, 000 20, 800, 000 The period also witnessed a remark- able growth in employment in certain businesses, examples of which are as fol- lows: 1939 1948 employees | employees Retail trade establishments... 54, 774 91, 366 Wholesale trade establish- ments__._.----..------------ 14, 636 26, 007 Selected service trades......... II, 333 20, 485
A4il4 APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Mr. Speaker, in my judgment, no State in the Union has more possibilities for future growth and development along business and industrial lines than does the State of Alabama. Our great nat- ural resources of good climate, high an- nual rainfell, coal, timber, water power, industrial water, oil, gas, gravel, salt, limestone, iron ore—to name only a few, coupled with the enterprise of our peo- ple point the way to an expanding econ- omy in the years that lie immediately ahead. As a part of my remarks, I include a letter and statement from the Depart- ment of Commerce: DrpaRTMENT OF COMMERCE, Washington, May 22, 1950. The Honorable Cari ELLIOTT, House of Representatives, Washington, D. GC. Deak Mr. Exiiorr: Enclosed is.a copy of the preliminary release of the 1948 Census of Business for the State of Alabama, which I though would be of interest to you. If you have need for additional copies, please let me know. Sincerely yours, Netson C, PIERCE, Special Assistant. Unrrep STAaTEs DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, BUREAU of THE CENSUS, 1948 CENSUS OF Businrss — RETAIL, WHOLESALE, SERVICE 'TRADES—PRELIMINARY ALABAMA Retail, wholesale, and service establish ments located in Alabama showed a sub- stantial expansion in dollar volume of trade from 1939 to 1948 according to preliminary figures from the 1948 Census of Business released today by the Bureau of the Census, United States Department of Commerce. Retail sales in the State during 1948 ag- gregated $1,631,400,000, an increase of 274 percent over the $436,000,000 sales in 1939, when the preceding Census of Business was taken, Wholesale sales voluine in the State showed a 295-percent rise over the same pe- riod, reaching a total of $1,641,100,000 in 1948 as compared with $415,700,000 in 1939. The service trades included in the Census of Eusiness reported receipts totaling $89,9C0,~ 000 in 1948 compared with $22,700,000 in 1939. Hotel receipts moved from $4,800,600 in 1939 tu $18,000,000 in 1948. Amusement busi- nesses in the State recorded receipts of $20,- 800,000 in 1948 compared with $7,000,000 in 1939. Employment in the State also rose over the 9-year period between 1939 and 1948 for the trades covered by the Census of Business. Retail trade establishments reported 91,366 paid employees for the workweek ended near- est November 15, 1948. Of these, 74,791 worked the full week, and the remainder part of the week. The comparable total and full workweek figures for 1989 were 54,774 and 44,551. Wholesale trade establishments re- ported a total of 26,007 full- and part-week employees for the week of November 15, 1948, compared with 14,686 for the same week in 1989. For the selected service trades, November 15, 1948, paid employees numbered 20,465; the comparable figure for 1939, ad- justed for change in scope between the two censuses, Was 11,333, These preliminary figures have been com- piled from similar releases being made avail- able for each county in Alabama, Final fig ures, superseding the preliminary data for Alabama, will be included in a State bulletin to be issued in several months. Similar data will be made available in preliminary and final form for each of the States, TashE 1—Census of business preliminary results for 1948, by trade group—Alabama is iT moaorces, Work Active Paid ermnioyces, work ey week on: Prewess proprietors > . Number of] 949 sales and | of waincor- Nov. 15, 1918 Trade group and kind of business establish- ve oainte| porated + receipts ; ments businesses Pull work: November | Total eM | “week em- 1948 ployees ployees a | | -oOoOo |-- ee ee | Retail trade, total.....-.------0--------- en n- ee 28, 669 | $1, 631, 403, 000 27, 903 91, 565 74,791 Food group._._--.------------ ene ene n ene 11, 848 415, 188, 000 11, 680 9, 740 Eating and drinking places_..-..-..--------- 3, 970 82, 700, 000 4, 005 11, 480 General merchandise group, general stores.__ 2, 368 248, 420, 009 2, 164 13, 453 Apparel group....--------------~------------ 1,186 118, 600, CO0 1, 041 6, 161 Furniture, home furnishings, appliance group. 1, 240 91, 624, 000 1, 068 5, 18 Automotive group 1, 239 293, 484, 000 1,164 10,313 Casoline service stations.._ 2, 891 &6, 066, 000 2, 886 4, 087 Lumber, buildimg, hardwa: 1, 102 115, 629, 000 1,172 5, 673 Drug and proprietary stores. 866 50, 538, 000 859 3, 603 AU other retail stores..--- 1, 960 184, 174, 000 1, 866 5,140 Wholesale trade, total _.------------------------- 2,578 | 1, 641, 053, 000 2, 037 28, 007 ig Merchant wholesalers, total...-....--------- 1,524 774, 643,000 1, 281 18, 394 @ Groceries, confectionery, meat....-.----- 277 167, 885, 000 257 3,075 (2) Farm products, edible.......-- 183 72, 151, 000 200 2, 280 2) Tobacco.--------.------- 28 33, 418, 000 23 380 (2) Furniture, home furnishings. 15 3, 083, 000 9 103 (2 Automotive supplies_.-_..--- 171 25, 023, 000 1¢3 1,320 () Electrical merchandise. .._..-. 63 45, 851, 000 27 770 (2 Hardware, plumbing, heating. 46 75, 708, 000 30 1,491 @ Lumber, construction materials......--- 111 77, 148. 000 96 2, 005 @ Machinery, equipment, industrial sup- plies. ....--._--------------------+----- 215 74, 002, 000 154 2, 570 Q) All other merchant wholesalers.._...---. 415 199, 374, 000 322 4, 388 (@ Manulacturers’ sales branches, offices 246 418, 784, 000 3 3, 885 @ Petroleum bulk plants, terminals. 428 150, 577, 000 388 1, 850 (2 Agents, brokers (merchandise) 208 197, 925, 000 187 774 () Assemblers of farm products 172 99, 124, 000 178 1,128 ( £elected service trades, total.. 6, 946 89, 917, 000 7, 006 20, 465 18, 703 Personal services... 4, 232 51, 610, 000 4, 198 15, 606 14, 341 Business services. 210 6, 727, 000 176 1, 226 1,079 Automotive repairs and serviccs_ 1, 406 19, 451, 000 1, 406 2, 269 2, 060 Other repairs and services. ...----.----+----- 1, 098 12, 129, C00 1, 166 1, 364 1, 228 207 18, 036, 000 169 3, 468 3,305 ~ 170 2, 282, 000 166 406 355 AMUSCMCD ES ~ 00a nn nen eee nen enn e nce eee eee 801 20, 769, 000 535 3, 706 () 1 Includes employees paid for Jess than the full workweek. 2 Not available, TE All-American Conference To Combat threats all around us, to destroy our constitu- tional liberties and our Amcrican way of life, Communism Wins Endorsements and the agents and stooges of the Kremlin ~ —_—_—— are ever on the alert to divide the American EXTENSION OF REMARKS people so as to render us impotent in the coming struggle of God against Satan. OF We make the following recommendations HON. KARL E. MUNDT to this convention, to be transmitted to the OF EOUTE: DAEOTA local councils of our great State and Nation. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES t . . We recommend that under “good of the Thursday, June 1 (legislative day of order” at the council meetings there be a Wednesday, March 29), 1950 10-minute discussion on the attendant evils : of socialism and communism and the value Mr. MONDT. Mr. President, I ask of our inherited constitutional liberties and unanimous consent to have printed mn achievements of the American way of life by the Appendix of the Recorp resolutions a competent speaker. That this matter be adopted by the State convention of the well and ably handled and that it be given Knights of Columbus at their meeting Widespread publicity in the local press—the last month in Ilinois. This information  semtinels of liberty—in our communities. comes to me from Vincent L. Knaus, mm grand knight of the Knights of Columbus That a splendid publication on the sub- for Illinois, and I call special attention ject just recited is Counterattack, a to the resolution endorsing the newly weekly four-page letter that not only exposes organized All-American Conference To the evils of totalitarianism, its agents and Combat Communism, of which Rev. stooges here in the United States and else- Daniel A. Poling, of New York City, is where—names names and makes specific rec- now the national chairman. ’ ommendations on a week-to-week basis that . serie gives us ammunition with which to fight There being no objection, the resolu- yr enemies, that is reliable and can be tions were ordered to be printed in the accepted and that each council ought to ECORD, aS LOLIOWS: subscribe to this publication which costs Realizing the seriousness of the times we %24-a year and which is cheap at the price live in, when over one-half of the world is and is now considered the No. 1 enemy of enslaved by totalitarian communism, our communism here in the United States of own people remain indisposed and idle tothe America.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD nr That in order to destroy the ugly scourge of communism, there must be presented a united front against the enemy by uniting with other organizations recognized, as rep- resentative and national in scope and have a record and present a determination to fight communism and express and accept the ideals of American principles, ideals and ob- jectives and such an organization was just organized in this city May 18, 14, 1950 and known as the All-American Conference to Combat Communism. Our forces must be united and not dis- persed, our attacks must reach the objec- tives sought to be attained, because if we are not united, divided we will utterly fail and will never recover our lost constitutional liberties and regain the achievements of the American way of life. We, therefore, recommend that the Dl- nois State Council and the Supreme Council affiliate with the All-American Conference to Combat Communism, at once. Iv The the revelations at Fatima and the occurrences at Lipa demonstrate beyond the shadow of a doubt that in waging a war against this satanic ideology we must be spiritually armed and protected—that prayer and sacrifice are concomitant barrages to storm heaven to avert our threatened ca- tastrophe and destruction. We recommend the family rosary, recited daily, in the homes of our members. That the Knights of Columbus inaugurate in our beloved State—a 15-minute radio program— State-wide—under the direction of our be« loved State chaplain and bishop, to reach Catholic and non-Catholic alike—to a meth- od of prayer that has never failed and will not fail us now. That our council meetings, at the clos= ing prayer a decade of the rosary be recited, dedicated to the coronation of our blessed mother as queen of heaven. v That annually in the State, as an observe ance, of the Illinois State Council and by local councils—at a suitable date—we offer our prayers and hold an annual Communion Sunday in memory of Archbishop Aloysius Stepinac and Joseph Cardinal Mindszenty, (and all other martyrs to the same cause), of the torture and struggle they underwent and now remain the symbols of freedom against depravity in government. That our beloved State chaplain and bishop be consulted on this program—to make it a fitting tribute to these two men and others of our faith that stood up against tyrants and confessed their faith before men. (In this connection we recommend the sale and dis~ tribution of the Cardinal Mindszenty Com- memorative Medal.) vI That there is no substantial difference or distinction in the brand of world commu- nism, whether it be Russian, Titoism, or Chinese, as all seek to enslave man totally— both in body and soul. That this totalitarian ideology is directed at America as an enemy and that any help of any kind given by our Government of our money or influence to the Russian satellite countries be roundly con~ demned as action of disloyalty to the princi- ples and ideals many times expressed by our Government in world affairs. We recommend that our members, coun- cil and the State Council so express them- selves in letters to our elected or appointed servants of all political faiths of our Gov- ernment whenever the opportunity presents itself and not to quit for a time and leave the matter dormant but make it a barrage of letters until the matter is finally disposed of and concluded. This is our duty and re- sponsibility as men and we must be ever true to our allegiance to our God. This is not meddling in politics. vir We commend the excellent work done by Rev. Edward J. Duncan, director of the New Man Foundation at the University of Mlinois, and ask his kind assistance and co- operation with his staff in the work of the Religious Liberty Committee and we present our solicitude to Rev. Robert T. Hutch, director at Carbondale, with the same objec- tives in view. Conclusion That in order to insure this committee in its great work throughout the State that our State Deputy continue to appoint a State committee on this subject, representative of the whole State and that meetings be called at least four times a year. Dated May 16, 1950. Henry H. FoNxKE, Vice Chairman, Breese, BERNARD MILLBURG, Secretary, Morrisonville, Dan DOovYtLe, Alternate, Taylorville. Hoowarp Woopsury, Father Marquette. Vincent L. Knavs, Chairman, Santa Maria Council, South Chicago No. 1511. FRANK J. PREE, Centralia, Plugging Loopholes in Our Tax Laws EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. ADOLPH J. SABATH OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 31, 1950 Mr.SABATH. Mr. Speaker, sometime ago I wrote a letter to the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee of the House, expressing my feelings and views relative to plugging the loopholes in our present tax laws. This is a statement that I would have made personally had it not been for the illness of Mrs. Sabath which precluded my appearance. I feel that the committee should give due consideration to my views set forth in the enclosed statement and, under unanimous consent, I émbody both the letter afore-mentioned and the state- ment in the Recorp: Hon. Rosert L. DouGHTON, Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. Dear Mr. CHAIRMAN: Due to the illness of Mrs. Sabath and myself, which I am pleased is not serious, I was precluded from appear- ing personally before your committee. Therefore, I submit to you the importance of enacting legislation which will eliminate the many loopholes in the present tax laws and at the same time eliminate the several tax exemptions to trusts, so-called charities, institutions of higher learning, life insur- ance companies, and the mining interest de« pletion allowances, all of which are evading Government tax in one form or another and which amount to hundreds of millions of dollars annually. If my suggestions be car~ ried out you can easily repeal the excise tax and eliminate deficit spending. A415 All of you, Iam sure, desire to bring about the reduction of the burdens that fall on the average taxpayers, as you so frequently point out. I feel that if you consider my enclosed statement, you too will come to the conciu- sion that it is deserving of your favorable consideration, Sincerely yours, A. J. SapaTH, Member of Congress. REPUBLICAN DUPLICITY Mr. Chairman, the President, in a recent message to this Congress, urged the inclus- ion in the proposed tax revision bill cf spe- cific provisions for closing the many loop- holes in the present tax laws, and to repeal the exemptions presently allowed many cor- porations such as oil companies, life-insur- ance companies, and other corporations and organizations, on the huge sums used by them for purely speculative purposes. Some of our major education institutions are in- cluded in this category because of the tax exemptions granted in their original charters as charitable or eleemosynary institutions. Some years ago certain industrialists who had accumulated tremendous wealth con- ceived the idea of setting up trusts or foun- dations effective upon their death for the very laudable purpose of benefiting our in- stitutions of learnings, for research in medi- cine and other fields—to aid the needy, and for other worth while purposes of improving the general welfare. Among these are the Carnegie Foundation, the Russell Sage Foun- dation and later, the Rockefeller Founda~- tion, The profits from their operations were quite generally used for the specific purpose for which they were originally created. They have added to the material growth and wel- fare of our country. They were placed in @ tax-exempt status because their income was used for humanitarian and worthy pur- poses. Realizing the looseness of the provisions of the present law, a large number of greedy individuals conceived the idea of taking ad~< vantage of the law to serve their own selfish purposes, with the result that in the name of charity and higher education thousands of so-called family trusts have mushroomed in the last few years, resulting in a loss of hundreds of millions of tax dollars to the Government each year. The Virginia Law Review of February 1948 reported that there are in existence today more than 10,000 foundations of this type, and the vast majority are of the “family” variety. The actual number is not Known, it may well run into double or triple that number. These trusts are very secretive about their business. They take the posi- tion that their finances are nobody’s busi- ness. They have long feared the spotlight of publicity and the possibility of legislative action to bring them in line. These founda- tions receive today preferred tax treatment. They are definitely obligated to justify their public sanction. The larger and older foundations have recognized this respon- sibility; annual reports are published and the publie can ascertain where the income goes. All should be required to report their financial and other operations, and tax exemption should be limited only to their direct contributions to institutions with an active program for social welfare. Let me point out a few of the operations of recent date of some of these so-called trusts or foundations. The Hershey family formed the nonprofit Hershey Industrial School, which today owns most of the profitable Hershey Chocolate Co. Because of its tax-exemption status, operating costs of the company are not high. True, they contribute to the school, but it
A4116 would be very interesting to know the exact story of the millions of its profits that have gone into the building of a sugar empire in Cuba. In October 1948 a Chicago real-estate operator organized the Boston Foundation. Its first move was to purchase and lease the Edgewater Beach Hotel on Chicago’s lake front. The real-estate operator is now presi- dent of the operating company, leasing the property from his own foundation. Its con- tributions to Chicago charitable institutions last year was $105,000, in tax-exempt money. It would be interesting to know where the balance of the profit went. A year ago one of the South’s profitable textile operations was turned into a tax- exempt foundation, involving its $34,000,000 holdings. The community gets about $400,- QGO in tax-exempt moneys—about equal to the taxes the company formerly paid locally. All of its other huge profit total is tax- exempt to the Federal Treasury. Our universities and colleges have gone into business in grand style under this strangely overlooked weakness in our laws. Union College recently purchased all cf the properties of Allied Stores Corp., one of the largest national department-store chains. The same college recently acquired the Abra- ham & Straus property in Brooklyn for $9,000,000 and immediately leased it back to Abraham & Straus at low rentals under an 80-year lease. Oberlin College owns Montgomery Ward, Sears, Roebuck, and Woolworth locations in many parts of the country. The University of Pennsylvania, headed by that eminent Republican, Harold Stassen, and a Presiden- tial candidate of that party, owns the Lit Brothers Store property in Philadelphia. Lit’s, of course, leases it from the University at a very favorable rental. Columbia University, the haven of Gen- eral Eisenhower, owns the site of much of Rockefeller Center. Cooper Union owns the property upon which the Chrysler Build- ing stands. New York University has gone into the inacaroni business in a big way; it is also interested in the manufacture of pis- ton rings, table china, leather goods and other products through the ownership or control of business institutions, all enjoy- ing tax-free status. Had these particular corporations remained in [rivate status last year, they would have paid $1,500,000 in Fed~ eral taxes. The Bureau of Internal Revenue, realizing that noodle making was stretching the dough too far, went into court to compel the university to pay taxes. This case is pending at the moment in our Federal courts. Meanwhile, the involvement of educational institutions in the field of banking, real es- tate, commerce and industry goes merrily on. Universities own haberdasheries, citrus groves, movies, cattle ranches, the Encyclo- pedia Britannica (owned by the University of Chicago) and a large variety of other enterprises. Tre University of Wisconsin controls patent pools and collects royalties, Universities and colleges, together with foun- dations, have an annual income from their business activities of well over a half billion dollars annually. Were this income not tax- exempt, they would pay $173,000,000 in Fed- eral taxes annually. Realizing the danger involved in the rapid spread of this system, the Association of American Colleges has issued a warning that the right to tax exemption has been abused by many colleges, and should be watched very carefully. Some of our Republican friends in Con- gress are directing blasts against the coop- eratives for not paying just taxes. However, I want to point out the cooperatives are in an entirely different position from these so-called charitable trusts and educational institutions. Cooperatives are set up to supply goods and services needed by their membership. Furthermore, about 30,000 ecoperatives do pay income taxes, while only about 5,000 do not. By selling goods to their members at reasonable prices, the co-ops have succeeded in throwing much- needed light on the exorbitant prices charged by many of the big private monop- olies, while these so-called charitable trusts and foundations, interested in securing all the profit they can possibly squeeze out of their commercial operations, do nothing that might offend the corporate giants they are nested in. The Biblical observation, “Charity covers a multitude of sins,” ap- plies very aptly to the operations of these family trusts and foundations of recent years. An interesting light was thrown onto the operations of one of these so-called trusts some months ago as a result of the investi- gation conducted by the Senate Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce into the operations of Textron, Inc. This investigation disclosed that Textron, Inc., had employed the device of charitable trusts to a substantial extent as a means of acquiring risk capital which was used in its business transactions, such as sales and leases of plants and equipment and by substantial loans to Textron, Inc., and its affiliates. A number of trusts were created to provide the large funds this firm needed for its gambling operations. The operators of this scheme formed six different trusts in the New England area. First. The Rhode Island Charities Trust—named the city of Providence Community Chest as the sole beneficiary. The trust was formed in 1937, but testimony revealed that not a cent was paid to the Community Chest until 1945, and then the sum of $10,000 was turned over to it, During 1945, 1946, and 1947 the Com- munity Chest received a total of $85,000 from the trust, while the officers and the bank handling the funds for the trust re- ceived a total in excess of $140,000. This trust has never made an accounting to the beneficiary, nor has its books ever been audited. This is the story, substantially, of most of these so-called charitable trusts. But the most disconcerting and dangerous feature of all in the operation of some of these trusts is brought out by the experi- ence of the city of Nashua, N. H., with this corporation and trust. They purchased the Nashua Textile Mills in 1945, a mill which had been a mainstay of the economy in this community since 1823. Its previous owners were essentially manufacturers and not speculators in mill prop-rties. Through the cooperation of loyal local labor the mills and the community prospered. Textron closed this plint shortly after acquiring it, transferring its activities in this field to Puerto Rico, where cheap, sweat-shop labor was available, throwing 5,500 real American workmen out of jobs and demoralizing the community. This is a clear indication of tax-free in- come misused to destroy American unions, and to blight the spirit and destroy the well- peing of American labor. It is high time some action was taken to eliminate such demagogic and un-American practices through the inadvertent cooperation of our own Government. These loop-holes and tax-evasion schemes must be eliminated. If prompt action is taken, the present excise taxes can be re- duced or repealed as I have so consistently urged, and it would aid materially in reduc- ing or eliminating the deficit we are faced with and place the country in a sound finan- cial position. I am informed, however, that 10 of the Republican members of the Ways and Means Committee, unfortunately, in combination with a few southern Democrats, are holding APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD back the efforts of the Democrats who seek to remedy the pernicious situation referred to above. I fully realize these Republicans are under the influence of the National Asso- ciation of Manufacturers, among other pres- sure groups, which are opposed to any fair elimination of these loop-holes in the law. The Republicans themselves should try to pry themselves loose from this vicious in- fluence and I sincerely hope that some of the afore-mentioned 10 Republicans will recog- nize their responsibility to the people and aid the Democratic Members in amending the present law. There is ome more point I want to bring out clearly in connection with these lease- pack deals made between the trusts and foundations who purchase businesses, land, and properties, and the firms who lease them back at favorable long-term rentals. The rent they pay is a deductible item in their income-tax returns, again reducing the taxes they would otherwise pay to the Federal Government, and also giving them an unfair competitive advantage over the small-business competitor. It is tending to build up monopolies more and more, while driving the small-business man to the wall. In the interest of legitimate, honest small pusiness, and in the interest of the honest taxpayer, as well as in their own interest, these Republican members should join with the Democratic members of this committee who are trying to bring out a bill as urged by our President, and vote to eliminate these loopholes that are resulting in the loss of hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue to the Treasury each year. Not only that, but these same Republican members should vote with the sincere Democratic members to eliminate the exemptions that have been given to life-insurance companies, oil and mining interests, and other giant monopo- lies via the so-called depletion allowances, by which these groups have been able to evade their just contribution to the cost of government which protects and safeguards their far-flung interests. In addition to those now being charged with tax evasion, I have noticed that the steel and lumber racketeers have robbed the American people of millions and millions of dollars. I also observed that the textile manufacturers who controlled the price of textiles and the shirt manufacturers who boosted the price of $1.50 shirts to $5 and $6, saying the least, their actions have been criminal. I feel that their activities should be pene- trated as well as those of the war profiteers whose activities have been ignored. I feel, therefore, Mr. Speaker, that if the Ways and Means Committee fails to report a fair bill, eliminating these loop- holes and tax-avoidance schemes, the full responsibility will lie with the Republican members of that Committee, and the Re- publican Party will be foreclosed from charging that we Democrats failed to re- peal or reduce excise taxes as recom- mended by the President and which we Democrats desire. If the Republicans continue to oppose a fair tax bill, I shall insist in the next Congress that the number of Republicans on the Ways and Means Committee, as well as on some of the other committees where legislation recommended by the President is held up in which the masses are vitally interested, be reduced so that the majority party as now constituted, and as I know will continue in control of our legislative body, shall actually have a working majority in the next Congress and work for the will of the people.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD How Does Rural Housing Affect Family Living? EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. ROBERT E. JONES, JR. OF ALABAMA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, June 1, 1950 Mr. JONES of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, recently I asked a farmer who had just completed construction of an entire new set of buildings on his farm, “Just what do you think of this farm housing loan program which has made your new con~ struction possible?” His answer was, “My wife got the house she’s always wanted, and she’s satisfied. I’ve got the new barn I want, so I’m satisfied. She’ll enjoy working in the new house, and her work will be easier, too. And my new barn’s as good as our old house used to be, so it’s taken a lot of work out of the chores and we can enjoy those things now while we’re young enough to appre- ciate them, and not wait until we’re so old that we can’t enjoy them even if we can afford them then.” I have heard a lot of comments like that, and each time I hear them I am glad once more that I introduced H. R. 1373 during the first session of the Eigh- ty-first Congress. That rural housing bill, cosponsored in the Senate by Sen- ator Sparkman of Alabama, has since be- come the farm housing title of the Hous- ing Act of 1949; and in 6 months has already made it possible for over 2,000 farm families to have better housing than they had before or than they could have paid for without Government aid. An estimated 140,000 farm families will eventually have more adequate housing because Congress passed this law, and with that much improved housing in our Nation, the rural-slum areas will al- most disappear. But just how will this new farm hous- ing affect rural living? The home, whether it is a magnifi- cent residential estate or a small dwell- ing unit, is the center of our better human relations. The home which, with its surrounding environment, has the at- mosphere of being healthy, safe, and wholesome is the very essence of democ- racy. It is where our good citizens are born, grow up, and take their place in the community and Nation. By improv- ing the home, then, we automatically improve the future citizens of our com- munities and Nation. When no real home exists, or where the home is inadequate, unhealthy, un- safe, and unwholesome, we are breeding disease, high infant mortality, and social instability. In slum and blighted areas, such as now exist in many parts of our rural South, we are breeding bad future citizens, families which may listen when foreign ideologists whisper, or who would be physically unable to fight for our country if we should be attacked. Have you forgotten that the highest percentage of rejects for physical rea- sons during the draft was in our south- ern rural areas? The kind of housing that a family has plays an important part in the success or failure of that family. Our homes should provide comfort, convenience, privacy, an opportunity for the develop- ment of personalities, an opportunity for mental and physical development, and the cultivation of friendships. How many of these six goals are actually pos- sible in the rural slums which are all about us? Not many. Yet with the hopes held out for 140,000 new farm buildings through Government aid— about half of which will be in the South where the need is greatest—all six are again possible. But if we are to accomplish this goal, it will require the united efforts of all of us, not merely the passage of legis- lation and the appropriation of some money with which to make loans. The things which can be done by individuals to help bring about better rural living are exemplified by the recent work of the Virginia Federation of Home Dem- onstration Clubs. That group made an unbiased survey of actual housing con- ditions and needs in their State, and published if under the name “Farm Housing in Virginia.” Then this book- let was used as a study piece by the vari- ous clubs, and each club set up some project which would help make better housing possible in their State. The same idea could be used in every State, and with any group which is really in- terested in helping farm families live better. How serious is our rural housing sit- uation today? A few figures may startle you, but should convince you of the need for better rural housing if we are to create a more healthy America. Did you know that 9 percent of all farm dwellings have no toilet facilities at all, and over 80 percent still depend upon outdoor toilets? Did you know that only 2 per- cent of all farm dwellings have kitchen sinks? Only 29 percent have any sort of water at all within the dwelling? The most common source of water on the farm is a well or a spring—and only 6 percent of the wells or springs in the South are adequately covered to pro- tect them from disease and filth. In one county studied recently, 90 percent of all the farm dwellings were without screens for their windows, and many did not even have glass in the windows. It is to correct evils such as these Senator Sparkman and I decided it was necessary to include farm housing in the Housing Act of 1949. Now it is possible for a farm family to obtain the housing they need for adequate, safe, and wholesome living; using Govern- ment credit if they are unable to obtain the improvements otherwise. Under procedures established by the Farmers Home Administration to admin- ister this program, certain minimum standards have been set up, and no farm housing loan will be approved unless the dwelling meets these standards. Let us see what some of these standards might mean in increased convenience to the housewife, increased safety to the fam- ily, and in more wholesome living for everyone who enters the new dwelling. AANI7 First, there must be ample room. We consider a city section a slum where the dwellings have less than one room per person average; yet the average of all farm dwellings is more crowded than that. But the FHA standards require that the new dwelling provide ample space for the entire family, not merely a place where they can be herded to- gether for the night like cattle. There must be adequate storage space. A farmer’s gross income is probably the smallest of any cccupational field, yet a family which grows and stores its own food can live adequately from that in- come. The FHA standards require that the family have enough storage space so they can store all the food they need during the growing season, for use later in the year. There must be closets, too, for storing things other than food. If you go into most farm dwellings today, you will find them almost completely devoid of adequate storage space for clothes, linens, quilts, cleaning supplies, medicines. But the new dwellings built from loan funds authorized by the Farm Housing Act of 1949 will provide this badly needed closet space. Perhaps the most important thing that the Housing Act of 1949 can accom- plish for the farm housewife is to make over her kitchen into something which is the model of convenience and smart appearance. Running water will be in- stalled, built-in cabinets included, mod- ern kitchen equipment made possible by installation of plumbing and electrical inlets. Assistance in planning the kitch- en lay-out, too, will make it possible for the housewife to save many steps. For the 80 percent or more of farm families who still depend on the wash- tub for their bath, the biggest conven- ience added through proper use of loan funds will be the bathroom. What this means in added privacy alone will be worth the entire program. Suppose we stop for a moment and see just what has been done during the first 6 months of operations of this farm- housing program. Reports of the Farm- ers Home Adminstration indicate that by June Ist they had received applica- tions from over 20,000 farm families who desired housing loans to modernize or rebuild their farm dwellings. Of these, approximately 2,000 have already re- ceived loans amounting to $7,500,000; another 5,000 have been tentatively ap- proved for loans, subject to appraisals or title clearance. Another 5,000 are presently being submitted to county committees for approval. It is esti- mated that $25,000,000 will have been loaned to farm families for new housing by July 1st. Of the loans made to date, about half have been for complete rebuilding of the dwelling. Old structures with their leaky roofs, sagging walls, and unsafe foundations have been torn down and new, modern structures built to replace them. About a fourth of all money loaned to date has been for building other than dwellings, and three-fourths to rebuild or remodel existing dwellings. ‘Water systems have been installed in all cases where it did not already exist, and
A4118 installations of electrical fixtures have also been included where not already available. In the 4-year program set up by the Housing Act of 1949, a total of $275,000,- 000 was authorized for rural-housing loans, and this would make it possible for an estimated 140,000 farm families to have more adequate housing than in the past. With half the Nation’s farm population in the South, and with the housing problems more acute in the South than elsewhere in the Nation, it is estimated that somewhere near 75,0C0 southern farm familes will have better housing under this program within the next 4 years. A thousand or more of these probably will be in north Alabama. The first loan in the Nation was made in Jackson County, Ala., and I had the privilege cf attending the ceremony when the disabled veteran received his check, and have since seen his modern six-room house which replaced the ram- shackle house he previously occupied. The new dwelling has asbestos shingles on the sides, a fireproof roof, a decorative front and back porch. Inside there are hardwceod floors, which are kept highly waxed and would grace any city dwelling. There is a nice fireplace in the front room, closets in each of the bedrooms and in the connecting hall. The kitchen has built-in features and—for the first tume—running water. The loan funds included money to install an electric pump and to pipe the water inside the house. If the same house were in a good residential district up in Washington, D. C., it would sell for $12,000—but the veteran built it for less than $4,300. The family’s first child, born recently, made its start in a new home which it will enjoy for many years to come; but, without this loan it might have been porn in the drafty, unhealthy, impos- sible-to-heat old house. I am proud that I had a part in mak- ing it possible for this child, and thou- sands of others, to be born into a more American home atmosphére than would have otherwise been possible. Let us give the same opportunity to all our farm families, I sincerely believe that a farm family will work harder, make more money, and fight to maintain a farm home if— should adversity strike—that farm home is a comfortable and attractive one. If the piace is dilapidated and run down, or if it lacks the modern conveniences which make living worth while in America, the family is more likely to have an “Oh, what is the use?” attitude. They have less reason to desire to farm efficiently, participate in community af- fairs, or to share their homes with friends. I also believe the rural church and the rural schools will benefit by this new housing program. Indirectly, perhaps, but the church or the school is no better than the component individuals who make up its congregation or assembly. The child will take more interest in its studies and do a better job of preparing its homework where there is a good lighting system in the home. There will be less chance to pass disease from one scholar to another if the sources of some of these diseases are wiped out by home improvements. There will be a better comradeship among the pupils if the child feels he can bring his com- panions home to also enjoy the modern conveniences. And the church, de- pending as it does upon contributions from persons who attend, will find that with the prosperity of a new home or more efficient farming buildings, the farmer can come to church more reg- ularly and contribute more to its upkeep. The home demonstration clubs will benefit too. Families who might have once held back from attendance because they didn’t want to invite other club members to their homes will not have that reason for nonattendance now. And many of the lessons in good home- making, which are learned in home dem- onstration club work are not possible to practice in the present dwellings of our southern farmers, but will be possible under the new housing program. Our State Department EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ADOLPH J. SABATH CF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 31, 1950 Mr. SABATH. Mr. Speaker, a very interesting article was brought to my attention on a discussion of a diabolical scheme involving our State Department, which bears out my contention that, un- fortunately, the State Department gen- tlemen of our Government have been, and are presently being, influenced by shrewd, conniving British diplomacy. It is a privilege to, insert this discussion in the ConGRESSIONAL RECORD: A DtABoLicAL SCHEME AND OUR STATE DEPARTMENT The Economist of London, a weekly re- view, stated in an article on Jordan, Israel, and the Arab world, that it was most likely that the Hashamite Kingdom of Jordan and Arab Palestine would eventually become one and that, as King Abdullah always relies on the Arab Legion to maintain himself in power, without its support, he “could not keep his throne for a week” and realizes that he owes his position to the British ‘who are responsible for building up, training, maintaining, and financing the legion.” Hence, it is obvious that the so-called peace negotiations, almost reaching fruition, petween Jordan and Israel, were merely a blind to learn how much Israel was ready to concede in order to attain peace, so that British Bevin might estimate how much to demand of Israel by way of the threat of the British concocted and controlled Mufti’s Arab League and of the heavy armament Great Britain has been introducing among the Arab States that might be prepared for the second round, in the hope of recapturing all of Palestine and the Arab world under British suzerainty. All else is camouflage. Abdullah’s surrender to the Arab League was a foregone conclusion as soon as Britain thought the time ripe. Handing over Arab Palestine to Abdullah is tantamount to turning it over to the APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD British. Is there any legal or logical rea- son why Jordan should be permitted, by a mere unilateral declaration, in view of the UN resolution of November 29, 1947, or any subsequent events, to annex Arab Palestine and thus become a constantly threatening thorn in Israel’s sides? The chief disappointment, however, is the agreement with this diabolical scheme manifested by our State Department When will it recognize that America’s ac- quiescence to the British Foreign Office con- spiracies is entirely out of harmony with American interests? These demand a strong, democratic, and industrialized Middle Hast, not a Middle East eroded and milked dry by the greedy appetite of British colonialism. The willingness of certain influential mem- bers of our State Department to follow the British line wherever it happens to lead, surely is as fit a subject for congressional investigation as was the activity of those other men who were fascinated by the Com-~ munist idea and who have done so much incalculable harm through their influence in the making and carrying out of Ameri- can policy. Whether consciously or uncons sciously, a subversion of our policy in fa« vor of the British is quite as dangerous to our welfare as one in favor of the Commu. nists. Kansas in the Springtime EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HARRY DARBY OF KANSAS IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, June 1 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. DARBY. Mr. President, spring in Kansas is beautiful and picturesque, es- pecially at this time of year in the en- chanting Flint Hills in southeastern Kansas. Within this vast agricultural area, one may gaze from hill to hill ob- serving Herefords grazing against a back- drop of oil derricks—and silos, that seemingly stand guard like sentinels spaced across the sweep of grasslands. Few writers are more capable of captur-~ ing on paper the magnificence of such splendor than Mr. M. Seaton, publisher of the Coffeyville (Kans.) Daily Journal. He is one of our outstanding journalists and civic leaders—a young and very ca- pable one—whom we Kansans proudly admire. The Flint Hills country, covered with the famous blue-stem grasses, makes the best pasture land in the world. Cattle gain more weight per day in this area than in any other section. Because of the importance of this district in my State to the livestock industry, I want to call to the attention of my colleagues and other readers of the ConGRESSIONAL REc- orD an editorial by Mr. Seaton, entitled “Spring in the Flint Hills.” I ask unan- imous consent that it be inserted in the Appendix of the REcorp. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the REcorp, as follows: SPRING IN THE FLinT Hits One of the loveliest experiences of spring in southeast Kansas is a trip across the Flint Hills on a lazy, sunny day.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Last week we drove down against the dusty wind from Abilene to El] Dorado, on down to Winfield, and then to Coffeyville. As we turned east across the hills of Cowley county the wind dropped, and from Win- field to Sedan the beauty of the blue stem country spread out around us. Nature was in a pleasant mood the day she designed Chautauqua and Cowley coun- ties. The hills roll like swells in the open ocean. Streams turn and twist in the troughs, bordered with the green of bud- ding trees. As your eyes travel up or down the stream from the highway they are met with the wondrous beauty of redbud trees, bending gently forward over the current as if they were bowing in a watery minuet. High up in the grassland, spotted here and there like diamonds on a velvet cloth, are man-made ponds whose waters gleam as bright blue in the sun as mountain lakes. From high points in the hills one can see far ahead vistas of promised beauty shrouded in the mist of distance. At nearly every turn similar scenes reappear, changing slightly as one advances but only as friends change with time’s advance, basically the same with just the shade of difference that heightens interest. Herefords graze against a back~drop of oil derricks. Silos stand guard, symmetrical sentinels spaced across the sweep of grass= lands. Nestling in safety beside these guar= dians stand the farmiouses of cattlemen. The beauty of the Flint Hills in spring is the kind of beauty some women have: The smiling, kindly face that gives assurance of a peaceful mind and loving heart. To drop down into the valley of Sedan after a drive across the western hills is the perfect homecoming. Potential for Prosperity: Peaceful Trade Between Israel and Rest of Middle East EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. GEORGE G. SADOWSKI OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, June 1, 1950 Mr. SADOWSKI. Mr. Speaker, a very interesting article on trade and com- merce in the Middle East appeared in the magazine Israel Speaks, the May 26 issue. It is my firm belief that through trade and commerce lies the road to peace and prosperity. Mr. Nortman, the author of this arti- cle, is an economist on the staff of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, and is au- thor of the agency’s definitive brochure, Investing in Israel. POTENTIAL FOR PROSPERITY: PEACEFUL TRADE BETWEEN ISRAEL AND REST OF MippLE East (By P. Bernard Nortman) From an economic viewpoint, Israel and the states of the Middle East complement each other to a very marked degree. The Arab countries produce many of Israel’s needs, while Israel turns out products essen- tial to the people of the Middle East. The Middle East includes not only the Arab States (Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Trans- jordan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Iraq), which at present carry on little or no trade with _Israel, but also Turkey, Iran, Ethiopia, Aden and Cyprus, which at present—especially Turkey—carry on Israel. When trade relations between Israel and the Arab States are resumed in the future, many areas of economic cooperation can be worked out—not only in the exchange of producis, but for mutual assistance in de- veloping agriculture, industries, banking, in- Surance and ““i~-i-~ cnd in such public services as so... Wot and education for the Arab States. NINETY MILLION PEOPLE In the Middle East area live 90 million people, 89 percent to 80 percent of whom are tied to the soil as peasants, engaged in primitive agriculture, barely earning subsist- ence for themselves. Nevertheless, sharp though the contrast may be between a mod- ern standard and their present way of life, these 90 million souls are potential custom- ers for the fruits of modern industry. In Israel, on the other hand, only 20 percent of the people are engaged in agriculture, while 80 percent are involved in industry, commerce, trade and the professions. The occupational distribution of the peo- ple of the Middle East has deep‘ economic significance. First, since the Arab coun- tries produce the same things, mainly food and raw materials, they have little need to trade with each other. This is borne out by the relatively little trade, with few excep- tions, that now exists among them Second, although the Arabs do not have to trade with each other, Israel can provide a large market for middle-eastern food and raw materials, with which the demands of its population and industries can be met, What can the Arab countries receive in return from Israel? The answer is: A vast variety of semi-finished products, machinery and finished consumers’ goods. Even with the low subsistence level of the Middle East, there are at present millions of actual cus- tomers in this area able to pay for goods. The accompanying chart indicates the type of trade which Israel and other Middle East nations can carry on with each other. For example, Israel can get grains, leather, manganese, iron ore, oil, phosphate rock from Egypt, while Egypt can buy a whole variety of metal products, diamonds, shoes, chemi- cals, pharmaceuticals and citrus fruits from Israel. It is possible to multiply this one example many times over for each of the Middle East countries. Third, trade between Israel and the rest of the Middle East would help walleviate the foreign-exchange difficulties which exist in all these countries. Beneficial as the exchange of raw ma- terials and food from the Arab countries for finished products from Israel would be to the economy of each, economic relations between the two can achieve even higher goals. These are countries, which, com- pared with American standards, economi- cally are still in the eighteenth century. Each could help bring the other up to mod- ern standards—Israel, by offering its skilled and professional labor, her neighbors, their food, raw materials, and vast potential mar- ket. Thus trade between Israel and the other Middle East countries is a natural. Furthermore, the people everywhere behind the borders, are eager for resumption of this trade. extensive trade with RAISING SIGHTS Another point: It is 2 well-known fact that the largest volume of foreign trade is carried on not between raw-material-pro- ducing countries and manufacturing coun-= tries, but between highly industrialized na- tions. America’s trade is greater with Great Britain and France than with raw-material- producing nations. Nations which produce only raw materials usually have a low standard of living and Ailia cannot afford to import manufactured prod- ucts in quantities sufficient to raise this gan- erally low standard of living. At present most of the manufactured goods that the Arab countries import go to a very small percentage of the population. The goal to aim for in trade between Israel and her neighbors is not merely an exchange of cur- rently produced goods, but an industrialized Middle East and an improvement in the standard of Mrin~ —vh‘e’: would bring all sections of ~ royoe7 7 oc + up to modern levels, At present, the huge local demand for Israel-manuiactured goods created by the tremendous increase in Israel’s p-piita*icn, leaves only a small portion for cer. supply both the domestic and export mar- kets, Israel must modernize ard c industries on an efficient, tec: ern low-cost basis. New additional capital, especially foreign capital, has an opportunity to go in now to build up Israel industry so that when Near East trade is resumed in the “ovc4-fo" wict future, goods can pour forth . + vow + in the Middle East who cry out for them. PALESTINE TRADE WITH MIDDLE EAST (Major items only, based on 1944-45 figures) Imports from Egypt: Rice, wheat, and other grains; cig- arettes, raw cotton, fibers and hairs; mo- lasses; glassware; wool yarn and textiles; flax, hemp and jute, leather; books and other printed matter. Saudi Arabia: Camels, sheep, other live- stock; hides and skins. Iraq: Barley and other grains; sheep and other livestock; fruit juices; dates; crude petroleum; linseed; hides and skins, Iran: Legumes and nuts; dried fruit; tom-« bac leaves (chewing tobacco); crude petro- lJeum; hides, skins, furs; carpets; motor fuel, Syria and Lebanon: Barley, wheat, and other grains; livestock; dairy products; apples, other fresh fruit, nuts; potatoes and other fresh vegetables; raisins, oilseed; tree trunks and branches; agricultural seeds; wood products; cotton piece goods, silk crepe; rayon fabrics; cordage and twine; cloaks and weorlnae ennerel, re *. s Ci .e meal and oilseed; sheep and (aan *¢-.osk: fruits, nuts, fresh and frozen fish: darted fruit, olives; tobacco and cig- arettes; wood, timber, linseed oil. Transjordan: Barley, wheat, and other grains; legumes; sheep and livestock; ba- nanas, grapes, other fruits; tomatoes and other fresh vegetables; raisins; clay; raw wool; hides and skins; chemical fertilizers. Exports to Egypt: Oranges, diamonds, plateglass; re- fined fuel and motor oils; iron, steel, other metal products; industrial machinery; wool, silk, rayon, leather, other apparel; chemicals, .drugs, and medicines; paints, dyes, and var- nishes; leather bags, etc., leather goods. Saudi Arabia: Oranges, plate glass, shoes, other footwear; brass, copper products, in- sulated cable, wire. Iraq: Fruit juices, liquors, diamonds; choc- olates, sweets, starch, glucose; glassware, plate glass, stoves, burners; iron and steel products, cotton textiles; industrial machin- ery, shoes; socks, stockings, wool, other ap- parel, lamps; tanned hides, leather, toiletries, maatches. Iran: Fruit juices, liquors, olive oil, plate glass; mirrors, glassware, diamonds, safes, textiles; door, window fittings, stoves, burn- ers; fron and steel products, drugs, medi- eines; tanned hides and leather, leather products; handbags, shoes, other footwear, stationery; wearing apparel, paints, dyes, vare nishes. Syria and Lebanon: Oranges, grapefruit, melons, tobacco, cocoa; cocoa butter, raw
A4120 wool, refined fuel; motor oils, bricks, earthen-~ ware, piate glass; mirrors, glassware, safes, stoves, batteries; electrical, iron, steel prod- ucts; insulated pipes for wiring, cotton tex- tiles; industrial machinery, socks, stockings; wearing apparel, underwear; fertilizers and chemicals; paints; dyes, and varnishes; tanned hides, leather, leather goods; toilet preparations and dentifrices; kerosene, Mo- tor fuels. Turkey: Refined fuel and motor oils, kero- sene; diamonds, asphalt, furs; razor blades; dry batteries; chemicals, motor fuel; essen- tial oils. Transjordan: Machinery, iron and steel products; shoes, other footwear, textiles; wearing apparel, legumes, wheat flour; melons, oranges, dried figs, sesame seeds; olive oil, other edible oils, olives, soap; po~ tatoes, other fresh vegetables, sweets; ce- ment, plate glass, lamp glass, glassware; wood tables, other furnishings, kerosene; motor spirits, tanned hides, sole leather; matches, toilet preparations, stationery. The Jerusalem Question EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. ABRAHAM J. MULTER OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, June 1, 1950 . Mr. MULTER. Mr. Speaker, the United Nations Trusteeship Council is scheduled to begin its seventh session today at Lake Success. One of the most important problems on the Council’s agenda is the Jerusalem question. This question can be reasonably solved at the present session of the Trusteeship Coun- cil. Iam optimist enough to believe that such a solution is possible, and with it we shall remove a major obstacle in the way of peace in the Near East. Just a week ago, on May 24, a group of 285 distinguished Americans, including many outstanding Christian religious Jeaders throughout the country, sub- mitted a proposal to President Truman for a solution of the Jerusalem question and the protection of the holy places. They suggest the establishment of a United Nations Commission, comprised of the representatives of the various re- ligious faiths, as an international cura- torship over the holy places. The proposal of the 285 American lead- ers merits the fullest attention and con- sideration by the Trusteeship Council, the United States Government and its representatives in the United Nations, and the members of both Houses of Con- gress. The ideas and proposals con- tained therein are not contradictory to the plans advanced by the Government of Israel, but are supplementary thereto. Both should serve as a practical solution of the Jerusalem problem. In fact, a solution of this grave problem at this time would be a great moral boost to the work and the efforts of the United Na- tions in other fields of international activity. Mr. Speaker, I am placing in the Reccrp the statement presented to Presi-~ dent Truman and the names of the 285 sponsors of this proposal and commend it to the attention of all my colleagues: May 24, 1950. The Honorable Harry S. TRUMAN, President of the United States, The White House, Washington, D.C. Dear Mr. Present: The undersigned have the honor to submit to you a proposal for the settlement of the grave problem con- fronting the United Nations, and, therefore, the United States, respecting the protection of the holy places in the Jerusalem area. This proposal is submitted to you in be- half of the ay-ended list of 285 distinguished Americans, Wino huve -vudied this question for some time. They include 19 Protestant Episcopal bishops, 18 Methodist biskops, 8 Evangelical bishcps, 1 African Methcdist Episcopalian bishop, 42 heads of Christian theological seminaries, 7 college presidents, 20 college professors, 9 writers and editors, 77 Protestant Episcopal leaders, 25 Unitarian leaders, 26 leaders of other denominations, and 85 outstanding personalities in various walks of hfe. Cur rrevcse’ is that there should be es- tov Isa iy iternational curatorship for the holy places throughout the area formerly known as Palestine, to be discharged by a United Nations commission composed of the representatives of the Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Greek Orthodox, and Moslem faiths. The function of such a commission would pe— (a) To authenticate the holy sites in Pal« estine. (b) To be responsible for their preserva- tion. (c) To insure free access to them at all times, (d) To supervise the restoration of such holy sites, if any, as may have been damaged in the Palestine war. The international commission shall have the power to employ guards. It shall be responsible to the Security Council. Respecting the political administration of the Jerusalem area, we propose that there shall be established two zones— (a) A Jewish zone comprising those sec- tions in which Jews now live and have lived since 1860, to be integrated with the Jewish State, (b) An Arab zone, comprising the areas in which Arabs now live and have lived since 1850, to be integrated with an Arab State. We offer this plan as a substitute for the proposals now pending before the Trustee- ship Council of the United Nations. We ask that the principle embodied in the proposal for an international curatorship be accepted as the basis for American policy with a view to the later presentation of a statute to the United Nations based on this principle. The proposal for an international curator- “ship for the holy places was initially sub- mitted to the last session of the General Assembly of the United Nations by 15 Ameri- can leaders. Neither this nor any proposal received serious consideration by the General Assembly in the unfortunate atmosphere which produced the resolution of last Decem-= ber. We bring this proposal to your attention now because events have amply demonstrated that the internationalization of the Jeru- salem area through a corpus separatum, in the sense of the December 1949 resolution, is both unfair and unfeasible. The statute which has been drafted by the Trusteeship Council can never be carried out, not only because Jordan and Israel both oppose it, but primarily because the statute is based on neither a legal nor a practical reality. Under the statute the United Nations is called upori to establish an international city in an area of more than 100 square miles with @ population of 160,000 in order to protect ment of the city is to be based.” APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD 86 holy places concentrated in an area of less than 114 square miles. In a statute consisting of 43 articles, there are precisely 2 articles dealing with the holy places, religious buildings, and sites holy niece, relcious buuidings, and sites shall s. 2. .¢..G and freedom of access to them secured. Ié is noteworthy that under the status quo of May 14, 1948, the holy places, so recog~ nized, were limited to 10 in an area of 1 square mile. Not one of these places was in the area held by Israel. In the course of its deliberations of recent months the Trusteeship Council prepared and accepted a new definition of holy places under which the original 10 were augmented by 26. Of the 36 sites now designated as holy places by the Trusteeship Council, only 2 are with- in the Israel zone of Jerusalem. The re« mainder are largely concentrated behind the walls of the old city, held by the Government of Jordan. It is to protect these 36 sites that the United Nations, under the statute drafted, 1s called upon to establish and maintain a vassal United Nations city or state. There ls no provision in the Charter for such an international enclave. The Charter, in de- scribing the purposes of the trusteeship system, declared that its purpose is “to pro- mote the political, economic, social and edu- cational advancement of the inhabitants of the trust territories: in a progressive de- velopment toward self-government and inde- pendence, as may be appropriate to the pare ticular circumstances of each territory and its peoples and the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned.” The draft statute not only fails to con- form to this provision, it would turn the clock backward. It provides that the inter- nationalized area shall be under a governor, appointed by the United Nations, subject neither to the legislative council to be set up, nor to the courts. The populations of the city are to be represented through a legislative council of 25 elected members and 15 appointed members. In a city where the Jews constitute the overwhelming majority, with a population of 110,000, the Moslems more than 40,000, the statute provides that the Moslem, Jewish, and Christian commu- nities each shall elect eight members, and those who adhere to none of these commu- nities, one. In addition, the three religious communities are to be permitted to name 15 members on a ratio to be decided by the governor. No provision whatsoever is made for the economic welfare of the 160,000 inhabitants of the Jerusalem area. The economic as- pects of the situation are dealt with in one article of the statute, whereby the governor to be appointed by the United Nations is em- powered to take prompt steps “to formulate with the advice and help of such experts as may seem to him desirable the economic and financial principles upon which the govern- The gover- nor is given 6 months from the time of his appointment to submit to the Trusteeship Council a plan for the economic and financial organization of the city. What the statute entirely ignores is (1) that the city of Jerusalem is divided into two zones, and is operating as such, 1. e., an Arab zone under the command of King Abdulla of Jordan and a Jewish zone now fully integrated into the State of Israel: (2) that neither the Arab nor Jewish com- munity is now or ever has been self-sus- taining. Virtually the entire Arab population of Jerusalem, some 50,000, live behind the walls of the old city. Not a single Jew is to be found in the old city of Jerusalem. For the Arab population, internationaliza- tion With its so-called autonomy, spells dis-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD integration. Under the mandatory govern- ment the Arabs were the special concern of Britain which spent considerable sums on Arab education and health services and the modernization of its agricultural methods. Under the draft statute no substitute for the help of the former mandatory power has been arranged. Today, the local Arab authorities in the old city are unable to maintain educational and health services on their own or to insure employment. Only full and recognized integration with a state responsible for its welfare can save the Arab population of the old city from disaster. Jewish Jerusalem is a new city, 90 years old, initiated in 1860 and developed by Jew~ ish funds and efforts. Under the mandate the economic progress of Jewish Jerusalem was made possible by the fact that it was the home of the central Jewish authorities, thus creating employment; that it received funds from tourist traffic; and that direct contributions were made by Jewish funds abroad to various institutions in Jerusalem. Today, the Government of Israel has as~ sumed responsibility for the welfare of the new city. Saved during the war by Israel efforts, the Jewish community owes its re- habilitation to the Israeli Government and people. The latter have assumed responsi- bility for repairing war damage, creating em- ployment, establishing industry, providing an essential public-works program, and as- suring security. To maintain the entire corpus separatum the United Nations has voted the sum of $8,000,000. To meet the most essential need of Jewish Jerusalem alone, the State of Israel, operat- ing on an austerity basis, has already ap- propriated more than $21,000,000. The mu- nicipal budget for Jewish Jerusalem for the period 1949-50 is TL £1,500,000 ($4,200,000). The income of the municipality is estimated at IL £520,000 ($1,456,000), leaving a defi- cit of more than IL £900,000. The Israeli Government has appropriated IL £900,000 ($2,520,000) to meet that deficit. In addi- tion, it has appropriated IL £4,700,000 ($13,- 160,000) for administrative, police, and pub- lic services; IL £5,500,000 ($15,400,000) for enlargement of the water supply, housing, repair of war damage, credits for the pur- chase of raw materials for local industries, and so forth, a total of $21,080,000. Under the draft statute Israel and Jordan, both, are asked to move out of the picture. But no provision is made for the United Na- tions to assume the responsibilities of which these governments are to be divested. The resultant economic chaos can be envisaged. . Nor is this the total story. In view of the opposition of both Jordan and Israel to the draft statute, the United Nations would have to impose it. This would require a large po- lice or military force, which the United Na- tions does not have. For the administration of a peaceful city the Israeli Government employs 400 police- men at a cost of $4,400 annually to maintain 1 policeman and his equipment, but em- phasizes the need for rural police and frontier police. Under the armistice agreement, 3,200 soldiers maintain peace and security as be- tween Israel and Jordan. It is clear from the foregoing that the ob- jective of protecting holy places is best served by a plan which is accéptable to both peoples and in conformity with the pro- visions of the Charter. The principle of an international regime, applied solely to the protection of the holy places, on which the proposal for an international curatorship is based, is likely to find such acceptance. What is equally significant, it would satisfy the essential purposes of the United Nations. For it offers protection to the holy places, their preservation, and access to them, not only in the Jerusalem area, but throughout the Arab and Jewish territories. It removes the holy sites from the realm of factional dis- pute. It establishes an effective deterrent to desecration. At the same time, it assures that the two communities shall be enabled to develop normally and in freedom. A United Nations commission, represent- ing the principal interested faiths, and backed by the Security Council, is the best possible safeguard against any misuse of the holy sites. For any breach of the agreements respecting the holy places would automati- cally invoke the action of the Security Coun- cil. That in itself would serve as a potent deterrent. By permitting the integration of the Arab and Jewish zones with the Jewish state and an Arab state, the United Nations puts re- sponsibility for the well-being of 160,000 hu- man beings where it belongs. This is a re- sponsibility which the United Nations is in no position to discharge but which, none- theless, must be discharged. The settlement of the Jerusalem question along lines which reflect the realities of the situation will go far toward resolving the problems which still remain. Arabs and Jews, living side by side, in a peaceful Jerusa~ lem, can do more to hasten peace between Israel and the Arab world than any fiat of an international body. It is not in the interests of the United Nations to continue to press for a statute which must remain one of record and not of fact. The plan submitted by the signatories is feasible, provides the foundation for last- ing peace, and, if adopted, will redound to the prestige of the United Nations. You, Mr. President, who played so large a part in bringing about the resolution of No- vember 1947, establishing the partition of Palestine, can help to put an end to unneces- sary controversy by authorizing the American delegation to take the leadership in resolv- ing this question. The record of our country on this issue is a good one. It has opposed the internation- alization plan on the score of its unfeasi- bility. More than that ir now required, namely, leadership in espousing a construc- tive proposal as a substitute for an unjust and unworkable one. It is our hope that, under your direction, the United States will now sponsor a demo- cratic and practical solution such as we be- lieve the international curatorship proposal to be. Respectfully submitted. Freda Kirchwey, President, the Nation Associates; Arthur Cushman McGif~ fert, President, Chicago Theological Seminary; Norman B. Nash, Episcopal Bishop of Massachusetts; Reinhold Niebuhr, Professor of Christian Ethics, Union Theological Seminary; G. Brom- ley Oxnam, Methodist Bishop, New York; James G. Patton, President, Farmers Educational and Cooperative Union; Curtis W. Reese, Dean, Abraham Lincoln Center; Henry A. Atkinson, Secretary, Church Peace Union; Don- ald B. Cloward, Executive Secretary, Northern Baptist Convention; Bartley Cc. Crum, Member, Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry; Dale DeWitt, Regional Director, Unitarian Associa- tion; Frederick Bay Eliot, President, American Unitarian Association; Wil- liam Emerson, President, American Association for the United Nations; Henry W. Hobson, Episcopal Bishop of Southern Ohio. SPONSORS OF PROPOSAL FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN INTERNATIONAL CURATORSHIP FOR THE Houy Puaces SUBMITTED TO PRESIDENT Harry S. Truman PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL BISHOPS Rt. Rev. Douglas Henry Atwill, Protestant Episcopal bishop of North Dakota, Fargo, N. Dak. Rt. Rev. Carl Morgan Block, Protestant Episcopal bishop of California, San Francis- co, Calif.; Rt. Rev. Wallace #. Conkling, Protestant Episcopal bishop of Chicago, Chi- A4121 cago, Tll.; Rt. Rev. Henry H. Daniels, Protes- tant Episcopal bishop of Montana, Helena, Mont.; Rt. Rev. Angus Dun, Protestant Epis- copal bishop of Washington, Washington, D. C.; Rt. Rev. Goodrich Robert Fenner, Protes- tant Episcopal bishop of Kansas, Topeka, Kans.; Rt. Rev. Charles Kendall Gilbert, Protestant Episcopal bishop of New York, New York, N. Y.; Rt. Rev. Charles F. Hall, Protestant Episcopal bishop of New Hamp- shire, Concord, N. H.; Rt. Rev. J. Thomas Heistand, Protestant Episcopal bishop of Harrisburg, Harrisburg, Pa.; Rt. Rev. Henry W. Hobson, Protestant Episcopal bishop of southern Ohio, Cincinnati, Ohio; Rt. Rev. Charles A. Mason, Protestant Episco- pal bishop of Dallas, Dallas, Tex. Rt. Rev. Arthur W. Moulton, Protestant Epis- copal bishop of Dallas, Dallas, Tex. Rt. Rev. Norman B. Nash, Protestant Episcopal bishop of Massachusetts, Boston, Mass.; Rt. Rey. George Ashton Oldham, Protestant Epis- copal bishop of Albany (retired), Washing- ton, D. C.; Rt. Rev. Austin Pardue, Protes- tant Episcopal bishop of Pittsburgh, Pitts- burgh, Pa.; Rt. Rev. Lambe Edward Parsons, Protestant Episcopal bishop of California (retired), San Francisco, Calif.; Rt. Rev. Noble C. Powell, Protestant Episcopal bishop of Maryland, Baltimore, Md.; Rt. Rev. Frank Archibald Rhea, Protestant Episcopal bishop of Idaho, Boise, Idaho; Rt. Rev. John Moore Walker, Protestant Episcopal bishop of Atlanta, Atlanta, Ga. METHODIST BISHOPS The Very Reverend James C. Baker, Metho- dist bishop of southern California, Los An- geles, Calif.; the Very Reverend Fred Pierce Corson, Methodist bishop of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa.; the Very Reverend Ralph &S. Cushman, Methodist bishop of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minn.; the Very Reverend Dana Dawson, Methodist bishop of Kansas, Topeka, Kans.; the Very Reverend Ivan Lee Holt, Methodist bishop of Missouri, St. Louis, Mo.; the Very Reverend E. W. Kelly, Methodist bishop of Missouri, St. Louis, Mo.; the Very Reverend Gerald Kennedy, Methodist bishop of Oregon, Portland, Oreg.; the Very Rever- end Paul B. Kern, Methodist bishop of Ten- nessee, Nashville, Tenn.; the Very Reverend John Wesley Lord, Methodist bishop of Mas- sachusetts, Boston, Mass.; the Very Reverend Francis J. McConnell, Methodist bishop of New York (retired), Lucasville, Ohio; the Very Reverend H. Clifford Northcott, Metho- dist bishop of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis.; the Very Reverend G. Bromley Oxnam, Methodist bishop of New York, New York, N. Y.; the Very Reverend Glenn R. Phillips, Methodist bishop of Colorado, Denver, Colo.; the Very Reverend Clare Purcell, Methodist bishop of Alabama, Birmingham, Ala.; the Very Rever- end Marshall R. Reed, Methodist bishop of Michigan, Detroit, Mich.; the Very Reverend Alexander P. Shaw, Methodist bishop of Maryland, Baltimore, Md.; the Very Reverend Donald H. Tippett, Methodist bishop of northern California, San Francisco, Calif.; the Very Reverend William T. Watkins, Methodist bishop of Kentucky, Louisville, Ky. BISHOPS OF THE EVANGELICAL UNITED BRETHREN CHURCH Bishop A. R. Clippinger, Evangelical bishop of Ohio, Dayton, Ohio; Bishop F. L. Dennis, Evangelical bishop of Indiana, In- dianapolis, Ind.; Bishop E. W. Praetorius, Evangelical bishop of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minn.; Bishop C. H. Stauffacher, Evangelical bishop of Missouri, Kansas City, Mo.; Bishop I. D. Warner, Evangelical bishop of California, Puente, Calif.; Bishop V. O. Weidler, Evan- gelical bishop of Missouri, Kansas City, Mo. BISHOPS OF THE AFRICAN METHODIST EPISCOPALIAN CHURCH Bishop Reverdy G. Ransom, African Metho= dist Episcopalian bishop of Ohio, Wilber- farce, Ohio.