APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Great expenditures would be required; yet not so great as to be beyond our means. And assurance can be made doubly sure by eliminating socialistic squandering from the Federal budget. In Mr. Hoover’s words, our revised policies must “avoid eoonomic disaster which can destroy freedom in America.” Rogers Renews Move for Record Vote on Federal Expenditures EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. DWIGHT L. ROGERS OF FLORIDA IN THE HOUTE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Mr. Speak- er, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I wish to state that during the second session of the Eighty-first Congress I introduced House Resolution 450 which would require a yea-and-nay vote on all appropriation bills passed by the House of Representatives. I received favorable editorial comments, as well as radio comments, from all parts of the Nation endorsing this resolution and the principle that it sought to establish, but the resolution was never reported out by the Rules Committee for consideraiton by the House. I, therefore, have introduced this same resolution and it is now known as House Resolution 119. I am again receiving enthusiastic endorsements from news- papers and radio commentators. My colleague, Hon. Custer B. Mc- MULLEN, inserted in the Appendix of the Recorp on February 13, an editorial from the St. Petersburg Times carrying its endorsement to this resolution, I in- clude herewith a splendid article written by John Pennekamp, who is associate editor of the Miami Herald and writes a column entitled “Behind the Front Page,” which is read widely throughout the State of Florida, as well as other parts of the Nation, John Pennekamp is not only well known for his fine articles and editorials but for his civic leader- ship, and for the contribution he has made in the establishment of the Ever- glades National Park, The above-men- tioned follows: BeHIND THE Front PAckE—Rocers RENEWS Moves For Recorp VoTE ON PeperRaAL ExpPen- DITURES (By John Pennekamp) Congress will spend something like $70,- 000,000,000 duriag this session. Would you like to know how each Senator and Repre- sentative votes on each appropriation? Chances are you won't, unless a bill which Dwicur L. Rocers, Fort Lauderdale, United States Representative from the Sixth Florida District, fares better than it has in the past. Rocers wants to compel a recorded vote in the House on every measure that spends money. He has made a compilation of the spending by the first session of the Eighty-first Con- gress—-the current seasion is the first of the Eighty-second Congress—which shows: It spent 4 total of 651,714,916,058, and there was a recorded vote in both Houses on only $16,420,620,879 of the total, Thus two-thirds of the money was appro- priated without the citizen being able to de- termine how his Senator or Representative voted. Of the 851,000,000,000, approximately $30,000,000,000 was spent without a recorded vote in either House. Of the remainder, ap- proximately 86,000,000,000 was spent with a recorded vote in only one House. Here is a list of the appropriations which were made with no record vote: Funds to UN for Palestine refugees, $16,- 000,000; independent offices, €7,600,000,000; Labor-Federal Security, $2,300,000; Agricul- ture, $715,000,000; Treasury-Postoffice, $3,- 000,000,000; State-Justice-Commerce, 8687,- 000,000; Independent offices, $7,600,000,000; Interior, 584,000,000; supplemental, 675,000,- 000; and military, $13,000,000,000. The House also shied away from a recorded vote on $5,600,000,000 for foreign aid, while the Senate left no record of how its Members voted on $100,000,000 for advanced plan- ning for public works and $664,000,000 for Army civil functions. That public sentiment has been over- whel iingly for the Rogers proposal has long since been established. In a survey which he made tn Florida, Rogers learned that it was favored at a ratio of 2,727 to 39. Nationally the suggestion won general edl- torlal approval, and was widely acclaimed by commentators. But he could not get it out of the Rules Committee. Whether it will have better going in this session will depend on what degree of atten- tion is paid to public opinion. In periods of national crisis, it frequently is regarded as safe to ignore public opinion because the pressure of the times make for forgetfulness at election. Congress has acted to eliminate one of its evils of its financing operations. Instead of an omnibus appropriations bill, it has gone back to separate appropriations. This eliminates the dependency which some appropriations frequently relied upon from others in the same bill, and also enables the Congressmen to separate various items nnd vote for them individually. That move, Rogers thinks, also has im- proved the chances for his bill. “I think,” he says, “that it is important that this resolution be adopted so that the taxpayers can Know how their representatives vote to spend their money. With Con- gress due to appropriate or spend $70,000,- 000,000 of the taxpayer's hard-earned cash, and putting on the bite for far heavier taxes, certainly John Q. is entitled to know how his Representative, or Senator, is spending John Q.’s money.” The Will To Peace EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LAWRENCE H. SMITH OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 8, 1951 Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. Mr. Speak- er, I am including as part of my re- marks, an editorial that appears in the current issue of the United States News and World Report which ts a reprint of an editorial that appeared on December 6, 1940. As usual, Mr. David Lawrence rings the bell. The time has come for us to give serious consideration to the thoughts he has expressed for we all know that if another war comes it may be the end of civilization as we know it, A797 The above-mentioned follows: Tas Wr. To Prace (By David Lawrence) (The excerpts which follow appeared a little more than 10 years ago-—-in our iasue of December 6, 1940. The first year of World War II had passed, and the American people were discussing the possibility of belng drawn directly into the conflict. The thoughts ex- pressed then seem somehow applicable to our presezt-day situation and hence are re- produced this week.) The urge is to meet force with force. Our own Nation waits patiently with a feeling of resignation—when chall our turn come? Every day seems to bring us nearer to the edge of the precipice. Entanglement appears assured despite our best effort to keep out of the war. Whether our lot be peace or war, nations, like individuals, must discover for them- selves again a basic relationship to the spirit- ual force that can move heaven and earth. It is this power of the Almighty which men from time immemorial have been slow to rec~ ognize except in times of adversity. Such an era of desperation is here, The world leans heavily on thin reeds of tradi- tion and wonders what it is that keeps the plague and the holocaust unabated as all around us reason and logic, unselfishness and justice, are pulverized by the bombs that blast the bodies, not solely of combatants, but, of innocent men, women, and children, When shall we turn the tide of this brut- ishness? How shall we penetrate the armor of the stolid dictatorships which hold mil- lions within their frightful discipline? For this the Pope urges prayer. We must pray, his holiness says, until the Lord shall hear our supplication. We must find within ourselves, moreover, that new approach to Him which will someday bring understand- ing to a bewildered world. But, you will ask, where amidst these ab-« stractions do we find concrete guidance? There is always the risk that one’s own ex- hortation will be clothed with self-righteous- ness. We as a Nation have done nothing wrong, we think. We have offended nobody else in the world, we say. Surely, we are not guilty of any international transgression, we argue. But the penetrating examination which !s sO essential to any appraisal of self compels the admisssion that America and her citi- genry have sinned by thetr prolonged indif- ference to the problems of a world which now entangle us despite our selfish desire to avoid their burdens. When all around us men and women, young and old, begin to see that prayer is futile unless those who pray are ready to make each day the sacrifices that entail service to others, then perhaps the present generation of which we are a part will qualify for the blessings of peace which now are denied us. The world has become too much rooted in the theme of mere possession, of acquisition, of quest for power, of the vanity of place, of compensation only through the coin of ma- terialism. The compensations of the spirit and of genuine brotherhood do not yet grat- ify and this may be one reason why prayers die on our lips, silenced in fear and mis- giving, because we have not ventured to do the work on earth that God would have us do. The ego that guides us in our day-to-day bickerings slowly saps the strength of a na~ tion, for the whole cannot be etronger than the sum of its parts. Creature comfort be- gets an idolatry that makes us indifferent to the woes of suffering humanity in other lands, We want our lives, our property, our fortunes, and our sacred honor—and we are willing to let the rest of the world shift for itself, Can it be that a higher force now challenges this principle of national policy,
A798 th.s selfish tenet of individual behavior, and even as we pray asks us to prove that we realty would pay the price that peace de- mands? Peace ts a hostile concept today because we are afraid of what it may mean to us, We are afraid of the pride that must bury as we admit our shortcomings. We are afraid of the property loss we must undergo as we concede that world trade and a world equi- Ubrium require financial and material con- tributions as generous in the days of peace as they were extravagant in times of war, But peace is inevitable. Our trust in the ultimate consummation of a peace with jus- tice is not misplaced. Its realization 1s merely postponed till the human instinct for brotherhood emerges again. It can come only as nations, one by one, find in their revitalized individuals an understanding of the obligations of prayer. For when we learn to pray, not for our comforts and our material wants but for the lives of others even in far distant lands, and when we, too, begin to find each day in our own lives the way to serve unselfishly the people all around us, then perhaps will the power of prayer well up to heaven, bringing us @ peace whose rewards we heave truly earned and whose blessings we have really deserved. Anniversary of Lithuanian Independence EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN LESINSKI, JR. OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF R&PRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. LESINSKI. Mr. Speaker, under Jeave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following letter I received from the Lithuanian American Information Center: LITHUANIAN AMERICAN InForMaTION CENTER, New York, N. Y., February 3, 1951. Hon. Joun Lesinekt, JRr., United States Representative From Michigan, Washington, D.C. Dear ConorgessMAN LesinsxI: February 16, will mark the thirty-third anniversary of the independence of Lithuania. Lithuanian Americans, as well as Lithu- anians everywhere this side of the tron cur- tain, will observe the day with fitting cere- monies while Lithuanians in the homeland, completely shut off behind the iron curtain, will silently and secretly join in the observ- ing an independence which has been tem. porarily put aside. In the brief span between the two World Wars, Lithuania established her right to take her place in the family of free nations. The cause of freedom was precious to her. Despite economic hardships, Lithuania showed remarkable vitality, great ability in nelf-government and economic develop- ment, Today, as a nation, Lithuania is being ex- terminated. She is a victim of a consistently perpetrated genocide. The Soviet occupation has cost over 600,000 lives, victims of torture, planned starvation, political executions, and exile to death camps. Lithuania, together with other nations be- hind the iron curtain is waging a great strug- gle against world Communist expansion. Their fight for their freedom is not only for thelr own liberation, but it is a fight for the freedom of the world. Lithuania's underground is still waging a heroic fight against a mighty, vastly supe- rior, ruthless force. Lithuanian Americans have a stake in the survival of this anctent race. Almost every Lithuanian Amertcan family still has rela- tives in the old country, with whom all con- tact has been broken during the Soviet occu- pation. The Lithuanian American Information Center, as spokesman for the Lithuanian American Council, which represents nearly 1,000,000 Lithuanian Americans, would like to call this anniversary to the attention of their good # merican friends who have helped in the past to appeal to the conscience of the world. Please accept, sir, our expression of deep esteem. Sincerely yours, Tue LirHuantan AMERICAN INFORMATION CENTER. The Barriers to Impeachment EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDGAR A. JONAS OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. JONAS. Mr. Speaker, the edi- torial that follows, and which was pub- lished in the Chicago Daily Tribune on February 13, 1951, is in line with the expressions contained in many letters that come to my desk practically every day. It must be evident to all of us that the people of America are disturbed about our foreign policy. They are dis- turbed and concerned with the large casualty list in Korea. They are sick and tired of hearing congressiona] de- bate and procrastination over who has the power to send American troops to participate in secondary and police wars. We need a clarification of this very much muddled question. Once a law is passed by Congress which clearly forbids the method pres- ently resorted to by President Truman— that is to say, a law that specifically provides that no American troops can be commandeered by the President to participate in hostilities akin to those now taking place in the far eastern sec- tor—then the American people will have @ more definite policy upon which to proceed in the event there is a violation or defiance of such a congressional mandate. I can conceive of no better way to de- termine whether the President of the United States has laid himself open to impeachment than that of his continu- ation to stand in open defiance of a con- gressional act, a constitutional provision, or all treaties made in pursuance thereof, The editorial to follow lays special em- phasis on the fact that a bill of im- peachment should not be confused with a trial for a crime: ARTICLES Yor A BILt OF IMPEACHMENT Even many who concede President Tru- man's unfitness for his office question whether he can be removed by impeach- ment. Some argue that votes for impeach. ment cannot be obtained. This is a question of practicability, not principle, and it may be solved as the disastrous effects of the Truman polictes are made apparent. Others, however, assert that Mr. Truman, whatever APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD his failings, has done nothing for which he could be impeached. This is a false defense, arising from the confusion of impeachment with a trial for crime. Crime may be the basis of impeach- ment, as in the cases of bribed judges, but impeachment, under the plain language of the Constitution, is not & process for punish. ment of crime. It is a legislative procedure for removing unfit officials, involving no other penalty than removal and future disqualifi- cation of the office holder. The grounds for impeachment are thus aga broad as human failings. One judge, early in the Republic, was impeached simply be- cause he was crazy, and there was no other method of removing him from the bench. When the time comes for the impeachment of Truman, the articles of the bill will fall into two classes, each backed by overwhelm. ing evidence. One is Truman's violations of the Constitution, which he is eworn to uphold and defend; the other is his repeated spon- sc-chip and protection of grafters and in- fluence peddlers in his official family, includ- ing the White House circle. More than 7,000 young Americans have been killed already in Truman's unconstitu- tional war in Korea. The post-ratification of his act by the United Nations cannot save him, because he failed to observe the law that requires congressional assent for fur- nishing troops to UN. In his assertion that he will send troops to Europe without the permission of Congress the President has served notice of intention to violate the Con- stitution again, Truman's institution of Pendergast spoils politics in the White Houso has brousht the Presidency to ite lowest position in history. His military aid, Major General Vaughan, ac. cepted bribes, one of which was passed on to Mrs. Truman. Vaughan's friend, Maragon, now in prison, peddled influence from the White House with Vaughan’s assistance. The recent report of Senators Fu.aricHt, Dovaras, and Carerarr on venality within the Reconstruction Finance Corporation again reached into the White House. An old family friend of the Trumans, after a meteoric rise in the bureaucracy, was shown to have steered bad loans through the RFC and then left public office to be paid off by the recipients, Another White House employee was found to have used his official position for the promotion of other political deals with RFC funds. Truman, instead of clean- ing house, launched an angry attack on the Senators who had pointed out the crooks he sponsors, Truman is crooked as well as incompetent. That is sufficient ground for the impeach ment of any official. Letter to Hon. Herbert Hoover EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KATHARINE ST. GEORGE OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mrs. 8ST. GEORGE. Mr. Speaker, un- der unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks in the Appendix of the Recorp, I include a letter addressed to ex-President Hoover by a constituent of mine, Mr. Harry Meola: Mota & Mroxa, Middletown, N. Y., February 13, 1951. Hon. Heasext Hoover, New York Ctty. Dean Ma, Hoover: Your 10 points are to the physical well-being of the Republic what the 10 Commandments of Moses are to the scul.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD So long as you and other loyal citizens do not compromise with the internationalist who would waste our heritage and abolish the United States for a world state, the day will soon pass when he may call a good American, isolationist, and then go to dinner, There 1s no compromise with an Alger Hiss or an internationalist who would give his country the kiss of death—at Yalta or in Congress. Rather Benedict Arnold had not failed in his attempt to keep us in the folds of the Union Jack. Rather the Union had broken like humpty-dumpty at Gettysburg. Rather death at the end of a foreign bayonet within our own wall of iron than sacrifice one more American boy to the Red Moloch in Europe. Sincerely, Harry A. MEOLA, What Is To Become of the Family-Type Farm in the United States? EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. USHER L. BURDICK OF NORTH DAKOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. BURDICK. Mr. Speaker, as the farm population in the Central West moved to cities and villages in the days of the Dust Bowl and effort was made by Congress to equip the people with means by which they might again estab- lish homes on the land. Land loans, production loans were put in operation, and the rebuilding of farm homes seemed to be getting well under way. But before we were quite out of the depression following World War I the Second World War began. We went at production again with full force. Boys were drafted from the farms and in such great numbers that production of crops seemed doomed. But another factor ap- peared for the first time. Tractor power on the farm had made marvelous strides in perfection. A gas tractor could do the work of 12 horses and 3 men-—and every other farm device to save man- power came forward almost overnight. Production went ahead, but in the wake of this unheard-of production the farm population began to go down again. Some small-farm owners were unable to purchase this high-powered machin- ery, and if they did, they did not have land enough to farm an economical unit for the full utilization of tractor power. The large farms could operate all right and at the same time take on several small farms to give their tractor power full operation. Production went up again, and the smaller farms were aban- doned and many of the buildings moved to the towns and villages. One time in North Dakota the highways were lined with buildings being moved to the larger centers of the country. Farm homes disappeared and small villages seemed like ghost towns compared to their former status, County-seat cities in- creased in population; business increased at these points, while the small-business places in the county either carried on a day-by-day trade or went out of busi- ness entirely. Now we are threatened with another war, if we are not indeed already in it. Restrictions have again been put on strategic materials. Farm machinery will not last forever and much of it needs replacement now. Two farmers apply for machines—one a small family-type farm with, say, 320 acres, and the other farmer operates 10,000 acres. Each needs a new tractor. Which one will get a tractor? The argument that those in authority use is that, after all, pro- duction is what is needed in wartime— ani lots of it. The man farming 10,000 acres can produce more than a small farmer, therefore he receives a prefer- ence in obtaining machinery. Again, let us take the drafting of farm boys. One father has a son who operates his farm and without which this small farm can- not. operate. He asks to have his son deferred. The 10,000-acre farmer has two sons who alone operate this very large farm unit. He asks to have his sons deferred. The Selective Service Administration is concerned with pro- du:tion—and lots of it. They argue that the large farm will produce so much more than a small farm that the result is as follows: The small farmer’s son is drafted and the two sons of the large operator are deferred. There seems to be no conception on the part of the managers of this Government that a farm home is necessary. They are not interested, in the least, in pre- serving the farm home. What they are concerned with is production, and pro- duction they will have if they put out of business every family-type farm in the United States, These small farms will have to quit as the fathers, in many cases, are too “stove up” physically to operate their farms. In answer to this, the Army says, “Well, we will send you farm laborers to take the place of your boy.” They do, and what does the farmer get? In the last war, Negroes from Alabama were sent out to run tractors; store clerks and soda-fountain jerks came out to run the combines. And how they ran them. There were not enough repairs between Ohio and Minneapolis to replace the parts smashed by these tractor experts sent out by the all-knowing Army. The tractor business is not learned overnight, and the very reason the Army is so red hot to get farm boys is because they know machinery, and practically every one of them is a mechanic. The Army must have these men and hand us 4 bunch of nondescripts, who know noth- ing about mechanics or anything else. They are so inferior that the Army will not take them for combat training. Unless we can arrive at a place in our civilization where we can have peace for at least a few years, it is obvious that the old family-type farm, which has been the bulwark of our progress and develop- ment, will disappear and we can turn back to Goldsmith’s Deserted Village and repeat with him: ‘ Til fares the land, to hastening {lls a prey, ‘Where wealth accumulates, and men decay; Princes and lords may flourish, or may fade-— A breath can make them, as a breath has mede; But a bold peasantry, their country’s pride, When once destroyed, can never be supplied, A799 Need for Students To Influence Public Affairs EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HERBERT H. LEHMAN OF NEW YORK IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 15 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. LEHMAN. Mr. President, the Students for Democratic Action of New York State, a fine, anti-Communist group of liberal-minded young men and women, publishes a Newsletter whose March edition contains a very construc- tive outline of the principles and pro- grams of this organization. It is an idealistic and at the same time a sound and practical set of principles. I am encouraged to see the young people of America thinking in these terms; it will be well for our country if more of them do so. I ask unanimous consent to insert this article written by Mr. Richard A. Givens in the Appendix of the Recorp. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: ARTICLE FOR MARCH 1951 Issur or NEw Yorke Srupents ror Democratic ACTION NEws- LETTER (By Dick A. Givens, Students for Democratic Action national board member) The dangerous international emergency mukes {t more vital than ever for students to participate in public affairs. The purpose of Students for Democratic Action (SDA) 1s to give students an opportunity to influence public affairs and to learn at first hand how politics works. SDA’s stand in the current crisis, as decided and agreed on by SDA mem- bers, may be summarized as follows: 1. We favor full political freedom for all people everywhere, and hence— (a) We strongly oppose all forms of totali- tarianism, whether Communist or Fascist, and (b) We favor full civil liberties and aca- demic freedom for all, including those with whom we disagree. 2. We believe equal opportunity for all is not only desirable in itself, but also will help strengthen democracy against any form of totalitarianism. Therefore— (a#) We oppose all discrimination, includ- ing segregation, based on race, creed, color, or origin, and (b) We favor public action wherever needed to assure equality of opportunity in social and economic life. 8. We recognize that in the atomic age, all nations are interdependent, As a result, we believe that in the present international emergency— (a) No nation can stand alone, and we can survive only by full cooperation with other free peoples, (b) Aggression anywhere must be resisted as strongly as conditions will permit, but (c) Primary emphasis must be placed on defense of areas most vital to the survival of the free world—especially Western Europe. 4. We believe that by working together, Hberal (and hence non-Communist) stu- dents can and must do something about such issues as foreign policy discrimination and extension of civil liberties. Hence SDA activities include (a) Support of liberal candidates in elec- tion campaigns,
A800 (b) Work on campus to promote exten- stons of academic freedom and nondiscrime imation (for example, at Columbia, BDA se-~ cured student body adoption of a plan to end bias clauses in the rules of student organi- gations, tncl fraternities), (c) Educational meetings (on such issues as Franco Spain, atomic energy policy; and academic freedom), and (d) Political work between elections (through publicity and direct representa- tions to government). SDA is proud of its achievements in pro- moting academic freedom and nondiscrimi- nation, in educational projects, tn election campaigns, and in political work between elections. But the continuing crisis calls for even greater efforts. Democracy will be strong or weak depend- ing on the vigor or apathy of ita citizens. The democratic way of life cannot be strengthened by leaving things to the other fellow. And the necessary drafting of many students to help stop aggression means those remaining must be even more effective than before. Surely every enlightened citizen owes it to himself and his future as well as to his country to participate in the political life of his country. For a New Middle East Policy EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LAWRENCE H. SMITH OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 8, 1951 Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. Mr. Speak- er, under leave to extend my remarks, I am including an editorial that ap- peared in the Christian Century for Jan- uary 24, 1951, entitled “United States Should Reexamine Near Eastern Policy”; Unrren States SHOULD REEXAMINE NEAR Eastern Poricr The role of the Arab nations in the cur- rent world crisis serves to confirm our re- peated warning that American policy to- ward the Near Eastern countries has been poorly conceived. As leaders in the bloc of Arab-Asian nations who are striving to break the impasse in Koren, the Arab countries assume & new importance. Unhappily, our relations with them over the past 5 years are hardly calculated to impress them with etther the honesty of our avowals or the ob- jectivity of our interest in Korea—-or any other area of the world. In view of the pres- ent precarious balance of power in the UN, 1¢ is distinctly our loss that these countries no longer possess their traditional faith in and friendship for the United States. If the present conflict should balloon into a world war, the disastrous effect of our short- sighted Near Eastern policy would become even more apparent. These are not days when nations can disregard human rights and put thelr trust tn Singapores and Gi- braltars. The friendship and active support of whole areas and peoples are now as much a factor in the conflict with communism as they have alwdys been in keeping the world et peace. American Near Eastern policy has lost for us the respect and friendship of 40,000,000 oriental Arabs and of many mil- ion more smong their kinamen and co- religionists in North Africa and southern Asia. Certainly it is time that our policy. makers took a more realistic view of the facts in the situation. It ts not enough that we help provide the meager rations that keep body and soul together for some million Arab displaced persons. Despite any reper- cussions it may have on the partisan Ati~ cal scene in America, we should hasten to re- examine our Near Eastern policy, Conces- sions should be made to defensible Arab grievances. That is to eay, we should take ateps to help implement all UN decisions re- garding Palestine, Beyond that central con- sideration, we should proceed to do what we can do—and we can do a great deal-——to lift the level of economic life for the peoples of the Near and Middle East. The Defense Construction Program in Alaska EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LYNDON B. JOHNSON OF TEZAS IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 15 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi- dent, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp a statement I recently made to the press regarding the defense construction pro- gram in Alaska. There being no objection, the state- ment was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Senator Lrnpon B. JOHNSON, chairman, Preparedness Subcommittee, Senate Armed Services Committee, today announced that Senator Luster Hunt, chairman of the Alas- kan task force of the Preparedness Sub- committee, had informed him that the lag- ging program of defense construction in Alaska has received an urgently needed shot in the arm. Members of the task force in addition to Senator Hunt were Senators Leverrtr SaLTONsTALL and Warne Morag. Senator Jounson further stated as follows: “As a result of recent labor-management conferences held at Anchorage, Alaska, it now appears that the Defense Establishment and other Government agencies engaged in vital construction in Alaska can be assured of 12 months of construction uninterrupted by labor disputes. “During the past construction year a series of crippling strikes struck at the heart of defense construction in Alaska. Due to the gravity of the situation, the Alaskan task force of the Preparedness Subcommit- tee demanded that an interdepartmental labor- t conference be called in an attempt to stave off further work stop- pages during construction season. As a re- sult of this suggestion by the Alaskan task force, an interdepartmental committee was established by the Secretary of the Interior. The purpose of this committee was to ac~ quaint both labor and management with the urgency of the situation. Dr. Frank Graham, special consultant for the Department of the Interior, was chairman of the meeting. “After the frst day's session, representa- tives of both labor and management re- quested that the conference recess in order that they could enter into direct negotia- tions. When the conference was concluded, January 26, 1061, contracte had been signed by all the unions and contractors to cover the next construction season. Each of these contracts contains a no-strike, no-lock-out clause. The committee has been informed that at least one and probably two of the major craft unions would now be on strike if this conference had not been arranged. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD . “In view of the fact that this conference ‘was attended by all of the conatruction crafts within the Territory of Alaska and by most of the international construction trade unions, I feel that the results achieved set an example for our national preparedness eff ‘ort. “The spirit of cooperation shown by both labor and management in this conference was very stimulating and gratifying to us. “It ls my belief that this conference, called at the insistence of the Alaskan task force, has made an important and significant con- tribution to our defense effort.” Dean Acheson EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WILLIAM S. HILL OF COLORADO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. HILL, Mr. Speaker, the Loveland Reporter-Herald, whose editor is H. E. Holden, gives us some interesting side- lights on what our people back home are thinking. I commend this editorial to you for careful reading and considera- tion; Tris Fettow, ACHESON No more glaring instances of Presidential bullheadedness and brash determination to have his own way regardless of the impact upon the country has ever been seen in America than President Truman's insistence upon keeping Dean Acheson as Secretary of State. At a time when the United States is giving its very lifeblood to halt the spread of dan- gerous ideologies, we place our foreign policy in the hands of a man whose entire career reeks with procommunism. And our own President insists that it be this way. Who is this Acheson? What has his record been? Who are his friends and coworkers? Acheson is the man who in 1946 as Under Secretary of State, engineered the United States loan of $90,000,000 to the Communist puppet government of Poland. Acheson’s own law firm helped press the request in the State Department. Acheson was legal counsel to the Soviet Union before he entered United States Gov- ernment service. (This by admission of Sen- ator Millard Tydings, of Maryland, his politi- cal mentor and close friend.) Acheson is the man who, appearing before a Communist-front organization with Paul Robeson in Madison Square Garden in Noe vember 1945 said: “There is no specific rea- son to suppose (that) the vital interests of the American and Russian people” will ever be opposed. Acheson is the same man who appeared be- fore the Foreign Relations Committee of the Senate on June 10, 1946, and asked for lend- lease funds for China, a part of which would be used for the purpose of arming the Chinese Communists. Acheson is the man who sald: “I will not turn my back on Alger Hiss." He also was counsel for Lauchlin Currie, another pro« Communist who ordered dumped into the In- dian Ocean 120,000 tons of supplies destined for Chiang Kai-shek. Acheson is one of those who has con- sistently sat upon the evidence in the no- torious Amerasia case and 1s still keeping the facts from pubile scrutiny. Acheson and his pals are the men who could have spared us the Korean war and our disgraceful humiliation in the Orient,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD And who are his friends? Well, there were Alger and Don Hiss. There is Philip 8. Jessup, Owen Lattimore, John Carter Vin- cent, John Stewart Service, John J, Mucoio, Justice Felix Frankfurter, and a host of others with similar records and similar ideas. Do you think any of them would be welcome in the American Legion or the VFW? Yet this ts the man on whom we are forced to rely to keep us at peace with the world or to guide our conversations with other nations in times of war. How can we expect to atop Rusala with a pro-Communist doing our talking? Perhaps it te as some of our GI’s in Korea saked Congressman Huon D. Scort, of Penn- sylvania, when he visited the battlefields: wae” about this guy Acheson, is he on our Fathoms and Feet, Acres and Tons: An Appraisal EXTENSION OF REMARKS iF HON. CARL HINSHAW OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 14, 1951 Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Speaker, as we consider the implementation of the At- lantic Pact and the military-aid pro- sram—MAP—we realize that one of the most serious complications, although little thought of by the man on the street, is the fact that measurements, weights, gages, and so forth, the calibers of rifles and guns, the power ratings of engines and electrical equipment, even the scales by which maps are made, vary not only between countries, but even as between the different departments of the military services in one country, such B88 Our own. French cartridges will not fit British rifles or machine guns and neither will American cartridges. Brit- ish-made nuts and bolts generally are different from those made in other coun- tries, including our own. The French kilogram and liter in no way correspond to the English pound and quart; even English quarts are different between dry and wet measure. The examples could be multiplied many fold, but the sum total is a terriffic problem in supplying arms and equipment, spare parts, am- munition, food, clothing, airplane en- gines and instruments, and spare parts, and so forth. It means multiplication of confusion. It means a tremendous problem in the organization into a sin- gle effective striking force of military forces of different countries each of which must have its own separate sup- ply train because its weights and meas- ures, and so forth, its gages and power ratings are different from those of other countries involved in the same combined armed force. This constitutes a serious problem of General Eisenhower and his staff. One of their first requirements must be standardization of as many of these items as possible. Therefore, I deem it appropriate at this time to present the following article which sets forth clearly and succinctly the genesis of the princi- pal systems of weights and measures now XCVII~—Arpp.——Bb1 employed in the tndustrial world, for the better understanding of all concerned, If one were to speculate, one might very well prognosticate that the proper and efficient implementation of the Atlantic Pact and MAP will require the member countries to adopt a common system of weights and measures of all kinds. FaTHOMSs AND Fret, Acars anp Tons; AN APPRAISAL (By Keith Gordon Irwin) {Professor emeritus in the Division of Science and Arts of Colorado Agricultural and Mechanical College, Professor Irwin presents here some of the results of many years of library investigation, particularly in European books for the years 1200 to 1700, Eventually these results will be given a much fuller treatment in a book manuscript, which will deal also with the evolution of weighing devices and will include forms of early thermometers, barometers, and clocks.) Who has not heard—and, hearing, perhaps believed—that our foot rule’s length was set for all time by the boot Jength of an early English king? And that the size of the nose of another early monarch played, somehow, a part tn setting the dimensions of our yard- stick? And who has not read—and, reading, perhaps believed—that an acre's length was the furrow-long strip that a certain mythical yoke of oxen was able to plow between rest- ings? And that the acre itself was the land that these oxen could turn over with the plow in a day's time? And who has not been told—and, listening, perhaps belleved—that the entire system of weights and measures in common use in this country 1s but a hodge- podge of diverse units, in a plan that is with- out logic and with little merit? It has long been recognized that historical facts may not square with the origins sug- gested in legendary tales. In the case of the common measures, there is convincing evi- dence that arrogant and whimsical kings and robust oxen were not the prime actors that the stories have implied. Nor is there truth behind the allegation that the common units were illogical in their nature or in their in- terrelationships. But is one to be con- Gemned as & believer of fairy tales if he ts inclined toward disturbing thoughts as to whether these age-old measures are cither adequate or desirable for a modern world, and whether a proper and wholly defensible procedure might not be to discard the old system and start anew on a more modern one? Such thoughts need not be considered either irrelevant or inconsequential. Their consideration justifies the presentation of our common system against a background of history. THE COMMON MEASURES OF LENGTH AND FARM AREAS AGAINST THE BACKGROUND OF HISTORY Our present system of measures for dis- tances on iand and sea is a direct heritage from the half-forgotten measures brought to England by the Anglo-Saxons of 15 centuries ago. The plan they used was so remarkable for its simplicity and high practicality that we might be pardoned for seeking to credit it to Saxon genius. But the plan itself ante- dated by at least half a thousand years the Saxon landing on British soil, for Greek lit- erature left an ample record of its use along the shores and waterways of southeastern Europe even tn early classical times, The basic unit of this old plan was the arm stretch, or the distance spanned by the out- stretched arms. The Greeks called this the orguia, In Europe it became the toise of the French, the faedm of the Danes, the fathom of the Saxons. Races of people differ in stat~ ure. So the actual length of this baaic unit varied somewhat from one racial group to another, The classical metrologists report that the Greek arm stretch in Soion'’s time was equal to 72.90 of our inches, In medieval Burope its tength tn the Rhineland was equal to 79.08 inches. With the long-armed Saxons 4t reached 79.20 inches. But throughout Eu- rope the same Gecimal plan was used for the smaller and larger units. The nature of the completely decimalized arrangement was worked out by the scholars first of all for the classical plan, for which Greek literature gave abundant clues. Under the name of the Greek Itinerary System, this plan may be found listed among the measures of antiq- ulty. The entirely comparable old English plan as developed by England's eminent mMetrologiat, the late W. M. F. Petrie, was worked out from such source material as old mapa, old itineraries, old laws, and the meas- urements of ancient buildings. In words of today, the Saxon arrangement becomes: Ten finger widths equal one doublehand, Ten doublehands equal one Saxofathom, Ten Saxofathoms equal one chain. Ten chains equal one furlong (for land Measures) or one cablelength (for offshore measures), One thousand Saxofathoms equal one mene” (the old English sea-and-land mile). Farm lands were laid out in @ similar sim- ple way: A block of Jand 100 Saxofathoms wide by 100 Saxofathoms long equals 10 acres. As this land would be plowed lengthwise, 6 strip of land 10 Saxofathoms wide by 100 Saxofathoms long equals 1 acre. The Saxofathom, as a unit of length, has long since disappeared, being outlawed siz centures ago in favor of a shorter fathom, Yet that ghostly arm stretch is still the basic measure for the farm lands of an English- speaking world. A modern contrivance for measuring small acreages has, perhaps un- wittingly, restored for the moment the old 6Baxon measures and the simplicity of the old plan. Because it has done so, the con- trivance 18 worth describing. Made of light material and triangular in form, it has a waist-high handle for the apex of the triangle and a strip of wood for the base. At either end of the strip, and jutting down a few inches, is a rounded peg, From center to cen» ter the pegs are 79.20 inches apart. This number is important, for it is the exact length of the old Saxofathom. The main measure 1s divided, on the baseboard, into 10 equal parts, and each of these, again, into 10 equal parts. These divisions correspond to the double-hand and finger-width units of the old plan. When in use the device is given a whirling, end«for-end motion a6 the operator walks down the boundary of the field he is measuring. For a square 10-acre field the count should be 100 Saxofathoms for width and the same for length, and the report is that even an inexperienced operator will not miss these results by more than an inch or so. For fractional acreages or plots of ground not dimensioned in any exact Saxofathom manner, the scale upon the base of the device is called into play, any part of the main unit being represented as a deci- mal fraction, For flelds laid out with square corners the acreage !s found in all cases by multiplying together the length and width, as measured in Saxofathoms, and dividing the result by 1,000. The plan is that of the Saxons. The use of the decimal point, if one is needed, is the only part of the plan that is modern. Had the men of that long-ago time in England not been such tall men, with such a great reach of arm and long stride, a sec- ond development in English measures would certainly have followed a different course and a simpler one. In the year 1066 Saxon England was conquered by the Normans from across the English Channel. In the following centuries Norman caaties took the piace of the simple fortified homes of the on thanes, and abbeys and Gothic cathe- drals were reared on the aites of earlier
A802 ehurch structures. Skilled workers were needed for this construction—workers in carved wood and fashioned stone, forged “metal and shaped glass, embossed leather and embroidered tapestry. Such craftsmen, brought to England from the Continent, were, in general, shorter in stature than the fair-haired, biue-eyed Baxons. As the Saxo~- fathom was too long a distance for their outstretched arms to span, thelr measures, of necessity, were based upon shorter lengths. At first the units adopted by one craft may have had no close agreement with those of other crafts. And there must have been trouble between the various craft groups, betwren the hewers of wood and shapers of stone who knew only Saxon measures. A compromise plan was imperative if confu- sion was to be avoided. About the year 1260 such a compromise plan was developed; by 1360 it was in vir. tually universal use tn all but the most rural districts of England. This plan set up a new fathom exactly ten-elevenths as long as the old Sanxofathom. This new unit was divided in half to get the cloth maker's yard, and into six parts for the craftsman’s foot. The new fathom met with no special ob- jecticn from those who held the lands of Englend. The acre, of course, was no longer to be referred to as 10 fathoms by 100 fathoms in sive, for the fathom itself had changed. It was now 11 new fathoms by 110 new fathoms. The plan had lost part of its decimal simplicity, but the boundaries of the acre were intact, And the rod—a common measuring stick of 24, Saxofathoms——was not changed in length, though new notches were to be cut on it to mark off its length into sixteen % feet. The furlong was also in- tact. But for some reason the old mile of 10 furlongs was discarded. For it there was substituted a statute mile of 8-furlong length. This meant for the square mile of farm land a drop from 1,000 acres to 640 acres. Of the subordinate units of the old plan, & few had to be forced out of existence to prevent confusion. Thus the old yard was legally abolished to make way for the new one, which was ten-elevenths as long. The finger width also gave way to the inch. For the hand—as a twentieth of the Saxo- fathom—there was a different fate. By a mere 1-percent increase in size it was to fit into the new plan as a .4-inch measure. Thus only a few changes were made in bring- ing the craftsman units into accord with those of old England, and none of these af- fected land areas or invaded property rights. Yet the full consummation of the shift of measures, small as it was, stretched almost across two centuries. In 1624 an attempt was made to restore the simplicity of the Saxon plan for farm measurement, Edmund Gunter, a practical English mathematician, proposed in that year an arrangement of measures that by- paseed the old Saxofathom and reintro- duced the old double hand under the name of link. If we include the finger width as the amaliest unit, we may write the Gunter plan as: 10 finger widths equal 1 link, 100 links equal 1 chain, 10 chains equal 1 fur- long, 1° square chains equal 1 acre, 1 square furlong equals 10 acres. On the practical side, Gunter devised for the surveyor a skillfully constructed chain with 100 equal links. With the aid of such a chain the surveyor could measure farm areas rapidly and accurately and report the result in simple, decimalized units. George Washington, as a young man, used Gunter’s equipment and plan, as did all American sur- veyors from Washington's time almost to our own. The Gunter measures did not gain com- mon acceptance among farm people, for the plan neglected that versatile measuring unit of the farm, the rod. To the surveyor an acre would be 10 equare chains of land; to the farm user it would be a block of land ¢ rods wide by 40 rods long, or its equivalent. To that extent, the Gunter attempt to re- store the decimal simplicity of the old meas- ures fell short of accomplishment, In Saxon days there had been no differ- ence between the length-measure plan as used for distances on land and for distances out from the shore, except that the furlong of the landsman was the cable length of the seaman. The sea and land plans were to di- verge, however, when the new fathom was adopted. The men of the sea were to retain the old system in its entirety, cutting all units to ten-elevenths their former size, in keeping with the change in the fathom. This meant that the sea mile of 1,000 new fathoms was, after this, considerably longer than the 8-furlong statute mile used for land measurement. Some centuries later, a small but highly important change was made in the sea mile’s length. By that time the ocean navigators had discovered that the length of a minute of arc on a great circle of the earth was slightly more than 1,000 fathoms. By in- creasing the sea mile to 1013.4 fathoms, the two would be brought into coincidence. In time this change was adopted officially, the new length becoming the nautical mile of th3 seaman, or the geographical mile of the cartographer. As the result of these several stages of de- velopment, each entirely lozical in itself, the English system of length and surface meas- ures came to be not a single plan but a com- posite of three interwoven designs. The old English part had given the English-speaking nations their farmland unit of the acre and the statute mile. The craftsman part had contributed the yard, the foot, and the inch. The distance-at-sea part had furnished the nautical mile. And the units so developed may not readily be changed. The farms of the British nations and the United States would seem to have imposed an unbreakable rigidity upon the size of the acre, The foot that received its length when there were few crafts has, today, embroidered around it the workday measures of a thousan@ occupa- tions. The size of the nautical mile is fixed by the very earth itself. THE METRIC MEASURES AGAINST THE BACKGROUND OF HISTORY We shall now need to turn our attention to @ modern plan that was devised to eliminate the more pronounced disadvantages inherent in such older systems as that of England. In the decade that followed the American Revolution the use of decimal fractions took on practical importance. In the money sys- tem devised for our newly established country these fractions when used with decimalized mone units made a combination that was startling in simplicity and usefulness. To carry this same idea to the whole field of measurement became the dream of scientists and others the world over. Only a French Revolution could have brought such scientific dreams so swiftly to fruition, for that period was one of those rare times in history when old standards were swept away, without a word of protest, to make room for new ones carried on a wave of high idealism. There was no com- promising, no counting of costs. Many of the plans pressed so urgently by the savants and accepted so enthusiastically by the rev- olutionary assembly were not, however, to become a permanent part of the structure of French measurement. The 10-day week ran too counter to human requirements to gain more than a transitory existence. The deci- malized plan for the hours of the day and the new form in which the year’s calendar was cast met a like fate. And so did the plan for measuring the earth in a new kind of degree—though the failure here was re- lated to the international scope of the plan and the puny effect that the decisions of a revolutionary assembly of France would have APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD in dictating the measures of a world. The plan itself proposed that the old method of dividing a quadrant of the earth into 90 degrees, with each degree marked off into 60 minutes of arc, be changed to give each quadrant 100 new-sized degrees and each of these, 100 new-siged minutes of arc. Al- though this novel plan 300n passed into ob- livion, it was to leave a permanent imprint on another part of the over-all plan, as we shall see. The plan developed for the handling of measures and weights, unlike most of the others, was to outiast the French Revolution. It was intended to be ideal both for land and for sea, and its final form was a mod- ernized version of the English nautical mile plan and that of the old Saxon-Teutonic sea-and-land system dovetailed to give a single composite. For all its attempt at high practicality, this French, or metric, plan was to fail at a point where success seamed most certain. And a chance factor was to prove of outstanding importance in its acceptance. In the sea part of the plan, there is a close basic relationship between the metric meas- ures and those of England. The nautical mile, as has been pointed out, matches the length of a minute of arc on a great circle of the earth. The mewwic mile was devised along the same line of reesoning. It was to match the length of a hundredth of a hun- dredth of the earth’s quadrant, following the idea of the new-sized degree and new-sized minute of arc, whose existence in a sort of blueprint sta:e we have already mentioned. Just as a tlLousandth of the nautical mile was (very nearly) a fathom, so a thou- sandth of the metric mile was to be (ex- actly) the length of the new French basic measure to be known as the meter. This metric mile (later christened the kilometer) was, by nature of its relation to the size of the earth's quadrant, 540/1000 as long as the English nautical mile. That it falled as a useful sea messure may not be charged to any gross error in the measure- ment of that part of the earth that this unit was to represent. It came, instead, from the evanescent nature of the new-sized degree upon which its length had depended. Today in metric countries the same nautical mile is in use in the rest of the world, this length of a@ minute of arc on a gieat circle appearing, quite awkwardly, ag 1,852 meters, The newly devised ‘1easures were, how- ever, successful as land units. This was not through design. It was due to o chance re- lationship, to the fact that the meter was half as long as the old north-Europe fathom, This ancient arm-stretch unit, which, among the Saxons, was the basis for all measurements on land .nd waterways, had its counterpart in the measures used by the Teutonic tribes that invaded the rontinental Roman provinces with the collapse of the Western Roman Empire. It was in terms of these fathoms that the captured Roman lands were laid out anew. There was, it is true, a little variation from tribe to tribe in the length of this almost universal x \easure. The Saxofathom was a little longer than most of the others. Its length, as mentioned previously, was that of 79.20 present-day inches. For the districts along the Rhine the corresponding length was 79.08; for some parts of France it was 78.24; and for Spain, 78.08. Strike an average of the last three, and you have 78.77. Double the length of the meter, and you have 78.74. The simti- larity is startling. It seems much too close to be the result of chance. But upon that accidental relationship was to rest much of the acceptance of the metric system as a land measure for continental Europe. The importance of that relationship may, perhaps, best be shown by placing the metric plan of length beside the well-decimalized Saxon system. Had the meter been exactly half as long as the Saxofathom it would nec-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD essarily follow that every Saxon unit of length from the finger width to the old @ng- lish mile would be matched, unit for unit, by a metric measure of half its size. Ex- tended to farm land, a block of ground that measured 100 Saxofathoms by 100 Saxofath- oms would be 200 meters by 200 meters. In Saxon terms that much land would be 10 acres, in metric 4 hectares. Even the English statute mile, though not a part of the origt- nal Saxon plan, would fit into the simple scheme of relationships. Ite length of 8 fur- longs, or 800 Saxofathoms, would be equal to 1,600 meters. In the average American relation of Saxon and metric measures that we have pointed out will arouse no particular interest. to him that we could secure inter- national uniformity in the matter of land areas by cutting down our 10-acre flelds to 4-hectare size and our miles to 1,600-meter lengths, and he may but shrug his shoulders, He wants to know how much would have to be pared off. Tell him that it would amount to but 3.63 feet for each dimension of the 10-acre block and about 80 feet for the mile, and he may reply that 30 feet is almost as wide as a country road. You argue that this amall change would make our measurements agree with those of continental Europe and the Americas to the south of us, and he re- sponds, “If they really want unity that much, let them up the meter a bit to match what we have to offer.” He does not con- sider himself a reactionist or a blockader of progress, His answer represents, to him, simply common sense. THE BACKGROUND FOR THE COMMON AND METRIC UNITS OF WEIGHT Up to this point we have followed only the story of the development of measures of length and surface. We should speak some- what briefly of other units as well. It has often been implied that the plan used by the founders of the metric system in arriving at weights units was unique. On the contrary, all comprehensive systems of measurement and weight from the time of Solon in ancient Athens down to the present appear to have used it. It would be more logical to stress the point that in the metric plan the relation of smnall weights to each other or to large weights was in every case @ decimal one. How the gram-weight of the metric system was to represent the weight of a cubic centi- meter of pure water at a temperature of 4 degrees Centigrade is doubtless familiar to everyone who has studied the physical sci- ences. How the English craftsman obtained the weight of the pound 1s seldom told. This weight unit came into general use in England in the relatively brief period be- tween the years 1300 and 1833. As may be judged from internal evidence and from a knowledge of similar methods used elsewhere in Europe, the English plan was to set the weight of a cubic foot of water equal to 1,000 ounces, that of 16 cubic feet of water equal to 1,000 pounds. The metric plan was to parallel the other, but with a more complete decimalization, when !t set the weight of a cubic decimeter of water equal to 1,000 grams, and the weight of a cubic meter of water equal to 1,000 kilograms. It is always far easier to prepare accurate replicas of a standard weight than to de- yelop the standard itself from volume meas- urements, a fact that has been recognized since Solon's time. The original standard establishing the legal size of the pound was placed in the English exchequer in the time of Edward Ill. A new standard, conforming to the original one, was prepared in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, Although neither of these fs in existence now, close replicas of Elizabeth’s pound constitute the standards of today in England and the United States. Whatever may have been the case in the earlier standards, those of today are too heavy by half s drop of water ounce, if the cubio 1oot of water used in checking the weights is measured under the same refine- ment of conditions specified for metric weights, The error, which amounts to 8 parts in 6,092, or eleven one-hundredths of 1 per- cent, may have been introduced in connec- tion with Elimabeth’s standard. It appears Teasonably certain that her advisory com- mittee suggested that the weight of the pound should, for commercial convenience, be made equal to 7,000 troy grains. For pure water at a temperature of 4° C., the correct value is exactly 6,992 grains. The similarity in basic plan between the cubic foot of water and the ounce, on the one hand, and the cubic decimeter (or liter) and the gram, on the other, explains certain relationships between English and metric measures that have been noted by technical and scientific workers. Thus, the weight of @ liter of a gas as given in grams matches in number value that of a cubic foot of the gas as recorded in ounces. Also, the specific gravity of a solid or Mquid has a numerical value that is the same as the weight of the solid or liquid in grams per cubic dect- meter, or the weight in ounces per oubic foot, if these weights are divided by 1,000. For example, the specific gravity of mercury is 18.6; a cubic decimeter of it weighs 13,600 grams; a cubic foot will weigh 13,600 ounces. Or the weight of moisture present in a sam- ple of air will be expressed by the same num- ber whether given in grams per cubic meter or in ounces per thousand cubic feet. Or a solution of a certain strength may be made either by adding the required number of grams of the material to make up a liter of solution or by using the same number of ounces in making up a cubic foot of solu- tion. Such similarities can be almost end- lessly extended, but always, it should be noted, the results will match only to three figures, for there 1s an inherent error in the English plan of 8 parts in a total of 7,000. OUR WINE MEASURES The pint and gallon that we use for liquid measures are not, by their nature, compara- ble either to the cubic foot or to such metric measures as the liter. They represent wine measures set up under legislation for the wine-handling trade. The tun, a large unit not mentioned in a direct way in the early English laws, was the quantity of wine that in a vat measuring 4 feet by 4 feet on the inside would fill it to a depth of 25 inches, This much wine was considered to weigh 2,000 pounds. Since wine has an average specific gravity very close to 0.96 for wine~ cellar temperatures, the results were always close to the 2,000-pound estimate. The basic small unit of this wine plan was the pint, & measure that was 1/2000 of a tun and £0 would hold a pound of wine. In later times many commodities other ethan wine were, at one time or another, measured out in pints—that is, in capacity vessels of an assortment of sizes each de- signed to hold a pound of a certain kind of commodity. The Queen Anne bushel, which has been in use with us since colonial times, ig an example of a 64-pint measure set up for grain. During the nineteenth century the British Empire, plagued with 6 multiplicity of such pints, swept away the wine measures, the Queen Anne bushel, and 4 variety of other capacity devices, replacing them by a single system in which the {mperial gallon, a new unit, was to have the volume of 10 pounds of water and the new bushel was to be 8 im- perial gallons in size. The plan stopped short, however, of being adequate from a modern point of view. It failed to make the pint the volume of a pound of water, with the pint divided decimally into smaller units. These two points were important. Our pint and gallon are not adapted to general work with liquids to the extent that A803 the British imperial gallon and the metric liter are. It should be noted, however, that our pint is basically defined in terms of water, for tt was to be a vessel holding one pound of a liquid whose weight (as indi- cated by the specific gravity) would be 96/100 that of water. It would follow then that 96 pints (12 gallons) of water would ‘weigh exactly 100 pounds, and a sixteenth as much, or 6 pinta of water, would weigh ex- actly 100 ounces. These values are come- pletely correct for temperatures close to 60 degrees Fahrenheit, or wine-cellar conditions. Even the Queen Anne bushel is not so bizarre in its capacity as the legal content of 2150.42 cubic inches would imply, It is exactly 56/45 of a cubic foot in size; so 45 bushels of grain will just fill a bin whose inside meas- urements are 7 feet by 8 feet by 1 foot. The tun of wine as a liquid capacity meas- ure seems always to have been matched in the early days of the wine moasures by the idea of a tun weight of 2,000 pounds, which is what such a quantity of wine would weigh. Given a more modern speliing and now ap- plied to commodities in general, this weight unit 1s our 2,000-pound ton. And tunnage, or the number of tuns of wine that a boat might carry, is now tonnage and represents any load or cargo measured in tons. Another tun-weight idea was in use, from the beginning, among seamen. It was a gross weight taking in the weight of the tun of wine and the containers for the wine. Whether the liquid was handled in barrels or casks, 12 pounds of container weight was estimated as being required for each 100 pounds of wine, or 240 pounds for each 2,000 pounds of wine. This gross ton of 2,240 pounds soon became fixed for all commodities carried by ships. Its continued use has long resulted in a moderate amount of confusion. TROY AND APOTHECARY WEIGHTS Not long before the development of the English weight plan, the thriving Italian cities of Venice, Florence, Genoa, and Milan had set up an integrated plan of a similar na- ture to fit their commercial needs. And the same had been true of the group of federated cities along the Rhine, the North Sea, and the Baltic Known as the Hanseatic League.: For all three—England, the Italian com- munes, and the Hansa cities—the weight units were derived from the weight of a cubic foot of water. England, as we have noted, divided the weight of their cubic foot into 1,000 ounces. The Hanseatic League split the weight of ites somewhat larger cubio foot into 1,000 onzen. The Italian cities. with a still larger basic cubic foot divided it into 1,383 onzia. The result was an English ounce of 487.5 grains, 8 Hansa onze of 480.0 grains, and an Italian onsila of 436.2 grains. The Oxford Historical Dictionary suggests that the abbreviation oz. as used for the common ounce, is, in reality, that of the Italian ongia. The difference between 437.5 4 and 436.2 grains was evidently so slight that, the two weights must have been considered commercially equivalent for ordinary weigh- ing. The Hansa onze, neatly 10 percent heavier, than the other two, was known in England as the troy ounce. This weight unit domi-| nated the commercial dealings of Western | Europe during the ascendency of the Han-; seatic League, for the weighing of silver and: gold, as well as for drugs and luxury items, which, coming from the Bast, were dls-, tributed by the merchants of the Rhineland) cities. By the close of the reign of Eliza-! beth of England the prime importance of; the Rhineland onze and its companion, weights of the drug trade was dwindling.! Bitter religious ware had obliterated old: trade routes. The products of India, Chinas and the Spice Islands were reaching Europe by cargo ships that ran directly to the cities that faced out on the Atlantic. There were new sources for silver and gold and new weight systems for their handling.
A804 By the end of the nineteenth century the troy and apothecary weights which in an earlier day had been raised by the Hansa cities to a position of international impor- tance had vanished in all countries but our own. The metric countries had built their copoela around metric units, The British had abolished all the old weight units of these two systems except the troy ounce, using it only in the minting of coins. Even in the United States there has been a gradual shift away from the old apothecary weights to metric ones in the filling of prescriptions and the compounding of medicines and to common weights in wholesale drug handling. It is not improbable that another decade may see the end of the scruple and the drachm. Perhaps the “fine ounce” may be gone as well, They have all outlived their usefulness, MODERNIZING CHANGES OF THE PAST THREE- QUARTERS OF A CENTURY ‘This brings the story of the development of the English and metric units down to the year 1870. The English syetem was by that time half a thousand years old; the metric system had not yet spanned a century. But neither had as yet reached a condition of immobility. Thus, in the decade following 1870 we find the metric system being im- proved for scientific purposes through the concerted efforts of an international group of scientists. New definitions were set for the meter, kilogram, and liter, and smaller units were added to the original plan. It was in this period that the meter changed ite status from 8 French measure to an inter- national one. From that same period of time modernizing changes began to be applied to the com- mon units, most of the modifications being along the line of decimal-fraction handling of the foot, inch, and pound. Thus the new engineer's chain, supplanting Gunter’s chain for surveying and land measurement, was 100 feet long, with the foot divided decimally. Before the turn of the century the microme- ter, a device that could be used to measure the parts of a machine to the hundredth or even thousandth of an inch, had been added to the mechanic's list of indispensable tools, The shift to decimal dimensioning has been largest in the metal trades. In this connection we have the report of 8, B. Elrod, of Purdue University, at te 1948 meeting of the American Society for Engineering Edu- cation: “Fractional dimensions are giving way to decimal dismensions. The two place decimal system inaugurated by the late Carl E. Jo- hanssen, in the Ford Motor Co. plants, has gained ground rapidly and is used by most of the automotive industry and over 80 percent of the aircraft industry. The system has the advantages of the metric system without re- quiring a reeducational and retooling pro- gram. Surveys conducted periodically show the shift to decimal dimensions continues steadily.” With us another movement has also been under way that is directly related to the idea of modernization. Bythe turn of the century, or shortly after, many devices had been per- fected that could measure or weigh in an au- tomatic and highly accurate manner, the re- sults being reported to decimal-fraction parts of the unit used. There were odometers to measure the length of trips, chronometers to read time intervals, and vending machines to report on gasoline supplied and its cost. All were practical, all were tllustrative of the ease with which decimally divided units can be handled in measurement and in cal- culation. But something more than decimal dimen. sioning and mechanical devices is needed to give a real modernization to the common plan. As in the metric system, well-named large and small units are needed within the framework of the decimalized main measures of length and weight. Strangely enough, the know-how needed to design a machine that automatically measures liquids to thou- sandths of a pint, determines to the nearest pound the weight of a load of coal, or carries out the thousand and one things demanded of weighing and measuring devices does not include the know-how for the production of & modernized plan built about the common units. Nor have the engineering schools or industry itself presented a program that might effect such a plan, though each has made some contribution to the emerging pattern of modernization. Considering the present status of our capacity measures and the difference in such measures as used in this country from those of other English- speaking countries, it may be considered surprising that the more thoughtful repre- sentatives of engineering and industry have given but nominal approval to the proposed substitution of the pound-pint, or volume of a pound of water, for all other pints, By replacing our present wine pint and grain pint with such a pound-pint, and fitting it into the framework of the imperial gallon and British bushel, we could achieve a cae pacity plan having both logic and practi- cality. With such a plan we may envision 4 day when the kilopint and millipint of the English-speaking world would become the useful measures that the kiloliter and milli- liter are for the metric countries. THE POSSIBILITY OF WORLD UNITY IN THE MATTER OF MEASURES AND WEIGHTS Even a well-modernized treatment of the common units cannot be expected to result in a plan that would equal that of the metric system. As a younger system, the metric units had a greater over-all simplicity of re- lationships. The weight standards were more accurately constructed. Each main unit was the center of a decimalized arrangement of both large and small secondary units, for which a simple and consistent naming plan had been developed. These things made it the best that the human mind could con- ceive and the human hand construct, In 1866, by act of Congress, the use of metric units was legally sanctioned in this country. This meant that a duality of measures would, after that date, be per- mitted. And it was freely predicted that the meter, liter, hectare, and kilogram would soon supplant, in a comparative way, the foot, pint, acre, and pound of the older system. This prediction was based upon two premises: the appeal that an interna- tional system of measures and weights might be expected to have for the liberal-minded thinkers of America, and the practical ad- vantages of the metric system itself. The results were highly disappointing. America was definitely not international-- minded. And the practical advantages were considered nebulous by a people whose life activities had been geared to the common units. Thus the farm population could see no advantage in the use of the hectare and kilometer over the acre and the mile that would justify the effort involved in making the change. Within the home a somewhat similar condition existed. Such craftsman units as the yard and foot had been built about the height, the arm-stretch, and the stride of men. And the American home, reflecting the life of the people who lived there, had used these unite for the sizes of rugs, the heights of ceilings, and the dimen- sions of furniture and other equipment. It ‘was quite understandable, then, that the housewife would discover no advantage in substituting the unfamiliar and awkwardly APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD long meter for the homely, useful units about which her home and ita life had been developed. Likewise in the shop the Ameri- can worker discovered no advantage in the centimeter over the inch, as a small unit of length, that would justify the redesigning of the machinery in the shop to give whole- number dimensions in centimeters or milli« meters for such things as bolts, steel thick- ness, gears, and shafting, None of the population groups that we have mentioned—the farm people, the housewives, and the workers in the shops— had considered the metric system as & whole. Each group condemned the new system as impractical because it failed to offer advantages in some limited field. There is a reverse side to the picture. Gains have been made for metric units in such special areas as the scientific laboratory, where the handling of small lengths, vol- umes, and weights 1s almost universally done in such units. Even operational plants that handle raw materials by the ton or gallon may have a laboratory equipped only with metrically calibrated apparatus. In the field of machinery manufacture, the producer of scientific equipment normally makes prod- ucts fitting whole-number metric dimen- sions. Those producing general equipment intended for metric countries may follow the same policy. But for the vast majority of the factories which, in this country, are producing tools and machine products for the American public only common-unit di- menstoning will be used. To do otherwise would lose a hundred customers for one that might be gained. And the same general idea extends to all the major flelds of human endeavor in the United States, For many of us it is with reluctance that we acknowledge that our dream of world uniformity in weights and measures is, after all, but a dream. To be sure, England, cen- turies ago, shifted from the agrarian meas- ures of the Saxons to the industrial measures of the craftsmen, and did it without deVas- tating effects. But the units of the old plan and the new were fully commensurate, no property lines were affected, and the indus- trial workers were convinced of the need for the change. Any attempt to install the metric system in present-day American, sup- planting the common units in a legal way, would be favored by none of the factors that supported the change to craftsman units. We may, of course, point out that France made such a shift and emerged successfully. But our present situation does not parallel that of France toward the close of the eighteenth century, Previous to the adop- tion of the metric plan that country was without any unified, national system. Sev- eral length standards were in use, each supreme in its own area. The weight units, though quite uniform throughout France, needed drastic redesigning. They represented the thousand-year-old coinage weights of Charlemagne, for which some worn coins of old Byzantium had been the model. For this peculiar combination of measurement ilis the introduction of metric values could have the desirable effect of a compromise plan, not far out of line with old measures, yet capable of sweeping away all the old outmoded or conflicting stand- ards. A somewhat similar set of conditions was present at the time of the establishment of the German Empire in 1871. The some- what variant measure and weight standards of the numerous kingdoms, principalities, and duchies that were combined in empire formation were brushed aside, the meter and kilogram, as compromise units, taking their place. For the system of common units found in this country and other English-speaking na-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD tions there is present no mixture of rival meas‘tres that weuld call for eradication, no rate need of a com proposal Whose jorcerul Adoption could bring order to chao’ ugtion. No el to or a Germany exiets. Pare * France In an indirect way the adoption of the metric system by continental Europe was to improve the situation for those countries which, like our own, use the foot, the acre, and the pound. By eliminating the older measures of that continent that went by the name of “foot,” and “acre,” and “pound,” the widespread metric adoption left the world with but one foot and one meter, one acre and one hectare, one pound and one kilo- Thus we conclude our report on the origin and development of the English and metric systems. With such a backzround we should be able to make tome rather reliable predic- tions aa to the future. The history of the past would seem to justify with certainty the following aspect of the future. These two eystems—English and metric—that today dominate eo completely the industrial world will continue, side by aide, as the giants of the world of tomorrow, Neither has been able to absorb the other— a situation that will not change in any fore- seeable future. On a second point there would seem to be equal certainty. The common system is still in the process of change, with the future offering ample oppor.unity for further mod- ernization. Russia Speeds Up Construction of Water- way Connecting the Don and the Volga While Our Government Delays Con- struction of a Similar Project—The Missing Link in Our National Defense Program EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN E. RANKIN OF MISSISSIPPI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 14, 1951 Mr. . Mr. Speaker, it is im- possible to fully evaluate the grave dan- gers that lie before us. But there is one thing we do know, and that is if the continental United States is ever at- tacked by a foreign power our main weapons of defense will be the airplane and the atomic bomb, with such naval and radar facilities as our Government is willing to provide. ‘The missing link in our defense pro- gram, as well as the missing link in our inland waterway transportation system, is that short connection between the Tennessee and the Tombigbee Rivers that would provide what would amount to a slack-water route from the Gulf of Mexico to the Great Lakes, and to all points on the Great Lakes, the Ohio, the Tennessee, the upper Mississippi, the Missourt, and the Ilinois Rivers, and at the same time save the swift current of the Mississippi for downstream traffic. RUSSIA SPEEDS UP CONSTRUCTION OF A GIMILAR PROJZCT The Army engineers say that the only other project on earth that compares with it, when it comes to transferring the traffic from one major watershed to another, with so much ease, so little ex- pense, and such tremendous savings in transportation costs and distances, is the one connecting the Don and the Volga Rivers in Russia, the construction of which Stalin is now speeding up with all possible haste. The engineers’ report shows that this Tennessee-Tombighee project will cut the water distance between the Gulf at Mobile and our atomic-bomb plant at Oak Ridge, Tennessee, by more than 800 miles, and cut the cost of transportation from the Gulf to where this project en- ters the Tennessee River, by more than 75 percent, or from $39,060 to $8,680 on a barge load of 14,000 tons; a saving of $30,380—on its fuel bill alone. Their report also shows that it will cut the water distance from Mobile to our new atomic-bomb plant at Paducah, Kentucky, by more than 350 miles, and cut the cost of transportation by more than 60 percent, or from $2.40 a ton down to 89 cents a ton; and that a barge load of 14,000 tons going from Mobile to Pa- ducah would have its cost of transporta- tion cut from $34,580 down to $12,460, or a savings of $22,120, on its fuel bill alone. Now let us take the States that border on the Great Lakes, the Ohio River, the Missouri, the upper Mississippi, the Illi- nois, and the Tennessee, such as IIli- nois, Kentucky, Indiana, Ohio, West Vir- ginta, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wiscon- sin, Minnesota, Missouri, Iowa, Nebraska, and Tennessee—States in which our great steel plants, aluminum plants, and other large manufacturing establish- ments, necessary to our national defense, are located. Everybody knows that our iron-ore deposit in the Mesabi Range is now being depleted. There are only two other sources from which that ore can be ob- tained—Labrador and Venezuela. The use,of the fron ore from Labrador in this area is out of the question until the St. Lawrence project is constructed; and the use of the iron ore from Venezuela in this area is out of the question until this short missing link in the Tennes- see-Tombigbee inland waterway is com- pleted. The Aluminum Company of America, whose plants are distributed throughout this area, is getting 95 percent of its bauxite from South America today. This inland waterway would greatly facilitate the importation of that raw material which is so necessary to our national de- fense. The enemies of the St. Lawrence proj- ect continue to harp on the fact that it would be frozen up something like 5 or 6 months in the year. This Tennessee-Tombigbee inland wa- terway will not be frozen at all, but will _ be open for traffic the year round. A805 Tt has already been authorized by law, and more than half of it bas been com- pleted, or will be when the Demopolis Dam, which is now under construction, is finished; and the planning of the rest of the project has already been done. What we need now is an ample appro- priation to speed up the construction of this vital missing link with all possible haste. It will give us a slack-water route from the Gulf to the Tennessee River, and then a downstream route along the Ten- nessee 215 miles to Paducah, Kentucky, and then 47 miles down the Ohio to Cairo, Iliinois—making a downstream route from the point where this project con- nects with the Tennessee River on the Mississippi State line to Cairo, Illinois, of 262 miles. There are 47 locks and dams on the Qhio River between Cairo and Pitts- burgh, Pennsylvania; 8 on the Allegheny; and 19 on the Monongahela, which provides what amounts to a slack-water route along the entire length of those streams. Therefore,’this project will pro- vide what will amount to a slack-water route from the Gulf at Mobile, to Pitts- burgh, and to all points along the streams mentioned, by which the raw materials 80 necessary to our national defense, as well as to the industries in that area, may be imported, and, at the same time, save the swift current of the Mississippi for downstream traffic. The barges that go down the Ohio, the Illinois, the Missouri, and the Missis- sippi to the Gulf, carrying the finished products produced in that area, could bring back the tron ore, bauxite, oil, salt, sulfur, lumber, cotton, cottonseed, and other raw materials necessary to their operations. The average tow bargeload is 14,000 tons. Every load of that size going from the Gulf at Mobile to Cairo, Illinois, would save $20,160 on its fuel bill alone. That would be the saving on every bargeload of that size going to any point on the upper Mississippi up to Minneapolis and St. Paul, or to any point on the Illinois or the Missouri Rivers, or to any place along the Great Lakes. Going to Paducah, Kentucky, or to any point between Paducah and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, or to any point on the Alle- gheny or the Monongahela, it would save $22,120 on its fue) bill alone. Going to Oak Ridge, or to any other point on the upper Tennessee, it would save $30,380 on its fuel bill alone. Unless some cheap method of trans- porting these raw materials into that area, such a8 this inland waterway, Is provided, many of those great industries are going to have to move. I am appealing to the Members of Congress from those States to join us in our efforts to secure the necessary ap- propriations to speed up this construc- tion with all possible haste. At this point I am inserting a table that was worked out by the Army _ engineers showing the cost per ton of
A806 barges carrying 14,000 tons and showing the savings via the Tennessee-Tom- bigbee. Remember these are the savings on the fuel bill atone. The table referred to follows: Showing cost per tow of barges carrying 14,000 tons and showing the savings via the Tennessee-Tombigbee on its fuel dill alone Cost via | ae oat vio | Average From To~ Mississippll Pombighye| #2 7ines por tow of per tow of tow ol 14,000 tons 14,000 tons 14,000 tons 8, LO .cececnnnenencenenee COIrF0. nn ceweennnnpecennncancennenee $28, 280 $18, 480 , 800 New Orleans, La Padueah.....-. CITITTININT 29, 400 7, 640 11, 760 Zonnessee- Tombighes junction. a yet i, aH 20, 20 fhe, Ald... eneneeeeeew ene ee ALO. Loe nae nen nn nee e eee nee eeee 3, , , Mobite, Ala Paducah ...0 0.22. cesceseceaeee 34, BRO 12, 460 92) 120 la Aennessee-Tombigbeo junction a0, nd a a0 80 Port Birmingham, Ala............-.. Malo 22. 2n wee ene e ene ee ' 3,3 a mens Paducah. ..--2.. seasees , B80 12, 480 80, 100 ; Aormssace-Tombigbee junction... 7, rie & Ge 8, 300 OlI8, AlB..nscencnnnnnnnevacees BIO. . Leen ne eee e enna wenn nen n neuen wane 2 , Domop Paducah... ......---c-20-0.,20seeeeeee ; O40 8, 540 30, 100 Columbus, M Cal Pormbighee Junction ---- 4 bao +140 a2 480 lumbus, Miss..........5 enwewenee! Calta... cece cence nneeneen nen aeedenee , fi ° Paducah 40, 740 6, 300 34, 440 fsa] sao | $3,880 Aberdeen, Miss........ aeeeeeewecemas Cairo. - 2.22. eee eee ee 5 , 3, herdeen, Paducah... 41, 440 , 0 5, Mi Gennes Tombigbee function. & ga tie 44, 100 1 MISS... cen eneeeaeenerenenen| OBITO.. oaennnn nen neenaenneeee i Amory Paducah 41, 860 5, 320 36, 540 Tennesseo-Tom bigheo Junction . 44, 340 1, 840 , 800 Fulton, Mis8.......esscnevedeceraccee| CHO... cee eeweencnnnee 41,020 5, 740 35, 280 Paduea! 42, 140 4, 900 87, 240 Tonnessce-Tombighee junction. 46, 620 1,120 5, 500 Remember that this is the only pos- sible way to construct what will amount to a slack-water route from the Gulf to the Great Lakes, and to all points on the Qhio, the Illinois, the Tennessee, the Missouri, and the upper Mississippi Rivers. It is 1,768 miles from Cairo down the Mississippi to New Orleans, then along the intercoastal waterway to Mobile, then up this slack-water route along the Tombigbee to the Tennessee, and then downstream on the Tennessee and the Ohio to the point of beginning. Of that 1,768 miles, 1,131 miles of it is downstream, and the rest of it is in slack water. There is not another project like it on earth, or one that can be constructed to compare with it, unless it is the con- nection between the Don and the Volga, in Russia, which Stalin is now speeding We cannot afford to wait, Christianity and the World Crisis EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JAMES T. PATTERSON OF CONNECTICUT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. PATTERSON. Mr. Speaker, the December 28, 1950, issue of the National News-Letter is devoted to a message by his grace, the archbishop of York, on the present world crisis, This most eminent churchman has set forth in a scholarly manner the difficulties which beset the civilized world. I believe that the mes- sage is deserving of widespread reader- ship and include it as an extension of my remarks at this point. CHRISTIANITY AND THE Woatp Crisis (A message from His Grace the Archbishop of York) BisHorrHorPe, YoRK, December 25, 1950. Dean Reaper: Commander King-Hall has asked me to write the Christmas news letter, and suggested I should take as my subject Christianity and the World Crisis. I feel greatly honored that he should ask me to do this. I shall attempt to state concisely and plainly a Christian view of the crisis and the way in which it should be met. THE UNIQUENESS OF THE CRISIS It 1s a truism to say that we are living in an age of crisis. The self-confidence and security of the Victorians has gone, and we no longer look upon progress as certain. The crisis through which the world is now passing has two characteristics which dis- tinguish it from all previous experiences, It is different in intensity, for it is shaking the foundations on which our civilization is built: the beliefs, the standards, and the ideals which for generations have been taken for granted are now threatened with destruction. It is different also in its ex- tent: it is not Hmited to any one nation, or even to one continent. Modern inventions have linked up the world as never before: ideas are flashed within a few seconds of time from one end of the earth to the other. Restlessness, change, revolutionary move- ments are everywhere to be found. Hope for the future is uncertain, for there is dread that man by using the destructive ‘weapons he has invented may commit race suicide. The old age in which our fore- fathers and most of those who read this letter were brought up, is rapidly vanishing, and the new age has not yet come to the birth. The early church looked forward with hope to the passing away of the world and all that it held, but modern man dreads the ruin which will come upon civilization if atomic weapons are used in another war. CAUSES OF THE CRISIS There are three fundamental causes which have led to the world crisis. 1. First, the emergency of an unrestrained nationalism. Nationalism is far more than the patriotism which is selfless love of the fatherland; it is the passionate assertion APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD “my country, right or wrong.” The totall- tarian state is the organ through which a nation both expresses and attempts to realize its most arrogant ideals, The state gradu- ally makes unrestricted claims over all its subjects, and treats them as if they existed for the good of the state and not the state for their good. The interests and power of the state are set above all moral standards. Nations as well as its own subjects must yield to the will of the totalitarian state. The spirit of Deutschland Uber Alles is not a disease limited to Germany alone; wherever it 18 found it shows the intolerance which disregards the rights of all other nations. Its supreme law is the welfare and glory of the nation; nothing must stand in the way of this; conduct is good or bad insofar as it furthers or hinders national power. POVERTY AND HUNGER 2. Nationalism is intensified by poverty and hunger. Often its aggressiveness is due to the necessity of finding room and food for an overlarge population. In older his- tories the economic factors in the rise and fall of nations were usually ignored. Kari Marx went to the other extreme and treated economics as the cause of all historic move- ments. It is now generally accepted that Marx made a valuable contribution to the scientific writing of history by the emphasis he laid on the economic background of social and political changes. But he was wrong in regarding the economic motive as the sole explanation of human action, Man is far more than an economic animal, Thomas Carlyle once said that if a shoeblack were given the whole world he would still be dis- satisfied, “for he has needs over and above his stomach.” With this reservation, we may find in economics one of the main causes of world unrest. In many parts of Eastern Europe hunger and want have led to revolution, In the Far East famine is epidemic and hunger is normal; at brief intervals in India and China millions die of hunger, and even in favorable years a very narrow margin separates the peoples of the east from starvation. Where there is want there exists a fertile field for revolutionary propaganda. In the past the people of these countries accepted their lot as inevitable; now through the cinema and through contact with the western armies they have discovered that their misery is not the universal fate ef mankind, and they are told by the agitator that within their reach there is a new and better world if they only have the courage to rise against their masters and to break away from ancient traditions and customs. This teaching has an inflammatory effect on hungry people who already have felt some faint stirrings of revolutionary nationalism, GODLESS RELIGION 8. Nationalism and hunger would not, however, by themselves account for the crisis of our age. The dynamic cause is to be found in a religion which denies God and proclaims a gospel of equality and plenty. The evangelists of Christianity were not more fervent than the apostles of communism. On a gigantic scale with all the modern methods of propaganda through the wire- Jess, the cinema and the press, they conduct & relentless attack on western civilization, and attempt to replace it by a new social and political order, The headquarters of communism are in Moscow, but in every land it has its agents pledged to advance its cause regardless of truth and patriotism. The fifth columnist gives the whole of his allegiance to “the cause” and disregards all the ordinary ties of honor and loyalty. He is ready to betray his country, to spy out its secrets, to sabotage its industries,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD to stir up strife between employers and em- ployed, to foment suspicion between trades- union leaders and thelr followers, to incite his fellow workinen to useless strikes, and to obstruct the peaceful settlement of in- dustrial disputes. Behind all the local move- ments of communism there stands the armed might of Ruasia with its great armies, its 25,000 tanks, its huge air forces, built up within the screen of peace propaganda, of which the Stockholm petition and the War- saw Peace Congress were the latest mani- festations. When the guns ceased from firing there was expectation that the world would enter into a period of peace. Thess hopes have been cruelly disappointed. A new kind of war, the cold war, is being waged on a wide frontier. Already in Korea the cold war has become a shooting war, and the Inter- vention of Communist China in the dispute has suddenly brought dangers of immeasur- able gravity. The extensive frontiers of the Soviet Union enable it to stir up trouble at far distant points. It prompts the satel- lite states to action and meanwhile keeps its own armies intact. The western democ- racies are thus compelled to disperse and dissipate their forces in different parts of the world in the attempt to halt the ad- vance of communism. A false step may be taken by one of the powers, and suddenly the whole world will find itself on the brink of a catastrophic war in which the atomic bomb and every other destructive weapon would be used in the struggle. CHRISTIANITY AND PEACE Christianity is a religion of peace and con- demns war as one of the greatest of evils. The recent Lambeth Conference reaffirmed a resolution passed by its predecessor in 1930 “that war as a method of settling interna- tional disputes is incompatible with the teaching and example of our Lord Jesus Christ.” It insisted also on “the duty of governments to work for the general reduc- tion and control of armaments of every kind, and for their final elimination, except those which may be necessary for international peace protection.” But the conference also recognized that in an imperfect world “there are occasions when both nations and indi- viduals are compelled to resort to war as the lesser of two evils.” It is here that the conference and the great body of Christians differ from pacifists who regard peace not only as the greatest of blessings but also as the greatest good. Most Christians, hating war and eeeking peace, hold that injustice is a greater moral evil than war and that justice is a greater virtue than peace. The Christian realizes that under present conditions unilateral dis- armament js more likely to lead to war than to peace, for an aggressive state would be tempted to attack a nation with great pos- geasions which had deprived Itself of all possibility of effective defense. Peace peti- tions and congresses may weaken the reso- lution to resist injustice and serve as @ con~- venient screen behind which the aggressor state can complete its arrangements to attack. The Christian must always urge the duty of reconciliation, but at the same time he recognizes that the state may call upon him to resist by force injustice and tyranny. It ts easy for the paciflat to denounce all war, but most Christians have the harder duty of deciding when war is more tolerable than some intolerable injustice. THE WITNESS OF THE CHURCHES It is not sufficient therefore for the Chris- tian churches to praise and. to de- nounce war. They must attempt to remove ths causes which are most likely to lead to it. The divisions of Christendom are a grievous scendal, but they must not be exaggerated, fo: there is remarkable unanimity among the different communions on the causes of war and the measures required to remove them. There is greater cooperation today between the Christian churches than at any previous time since the separation of the churches of the west and the east. The drawing together O7 20 many churches is, as Archbishop Temple said, “the great new fact of our time.” The Reformed churches meet and confer together in the World Council of Churches, and, though the Roman Catholic Church is un- willing to take part in these conferences, various papal encyclicals have shown how clese is the agreement of the Roman Catholic Church with the other churches in Its atti- tude to the world crisis. There are three great lines of agreement in the Christian approach to the crisis. THE LIMITATION OF NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY First, the churches are united in their conviction that above the changing laws of nations there is the absolute, unchanging law of God binding on all reces, nations, and individuals. All through western Christendom there was at one time the con- ception of a universal law. True, it was often broken or ignored, but, nevertheless, men judged themselves, and still more their neighbors, by their observance or rejection of this law. The Ohristian conception of univarsal law comes from belief in the sover- eignty of God who reigns in righteousness on high above all nations and individuals, This is opposed to the theory that a nation can make for itself its standards of right and wrong. When a state does this it tramples underfoot the claims of weaker nations and destroys os scraps of paper the treaties It had made with them. The Pope, in an encyclical of October 1939, was expressing the mind of Christendom when he condemned the total!- tarian states, for ‘they seek to dispense the civil authority from observing any of those higher laws which have their origin in God. The divine authority and the influence of tts laws thus set aside, !t necessarily follows that the civil power attributes to itself that abso- lute autonomy which belongs to the Creator alone." The practical corollary of the recognition of the sovereignty of God is that there must be some limitation of the national sover- eignty. As long as each state claims com- plete sovereignty in its relationship to other nations there is little hope of abolishing war as a means of settling disputes. Interna- tional laws and covenants are the recognition that there must be some limitation to that complete sovereignty in the exercise of which a nation disregards the rights of ita weaker neighbors. The old League of Nations and the United Nations organization were given a somewhat vague and shadowy superna- tional authority, but its exercise depended upon the support of the nations of which they are composed. The opposition of a powerful state or the exercise of the veto can cripple effective action by UNO. It is always difficult for a nation to accept any limitation to its sovereignty. Even the at- tempt to set up an international authority to control the making and use of atomic weapons failed through the refusal of Russia to allow the infringement of her sovereign rights to the extent of permitting effective inapection within her borders. But while Christians can hold different views as to the methods most suitable for limiting national sovereignty, they are united in accepting the principle that all nations are under the sov- ereignty of God, and therefore must not live for themselves alone. The Ohristian ideal of world order is a fellowship of nations under the rule of God, each making in freedom its distinctive contribution to the good of man- kind. The United Nations has proved dis- A807 appointing tn many ways, dut it is worthy of support as the only existing organisation for the exercize of international control. THE BACKWARD NATIONS The Christian churches are also united in demanding a falrer distribution of the world's goods, so that the poorer nations may be given opportunities for a higher stand- ard of living than at present they possess. In the past the more powerful nations have often subjected backward peoples to shame- less exploitation, They have sometimes given them order and peace, but in exchange they have taken advantage of their want and ignorance to extract from them cheap labor. Little has been done to help the teeming populations of the east to over- come their poverty by teaching them im- proved methods of agriculture. Primitive cultivation produces far smaller crops than is the case in those countries where scientific methods are used. Recently Mr. Malcolm Macdonald stated in a broadcast that in Great Britain 60 peo- ple depend on a thousand acres of cultivated land as against 900 in Asia; the yield of wheat per acre in India averages 600 pounds as against 1,000 pounds in the United States; in India there are 10,000 tractors compared with 2,400,000 in the United States, with a farming area only one-sixth greater. The Columbo Conference has recently made rec- ommendations which, if carried out, would lead to the supply of the necessary canital, but this depends on the readiness both of the richer states and of private investors to grant the required money or to lend it on reasonable terms. The taxpayer will have to make sacrifices to save the backward peo- ples from starvation; he may even have to accept for a time a lower standard of living. Greater prosperity in the Far East and else- where would reduce the danger of revolu- tion; but the Christian motive for sup; this policy is that of compassion for the chil- dren of the One Father who are suffering destitution and squalor, The last Lambeth Conference urged "the statesmen of the world, together with thetr people, to do thetr utmost to frame a world policy for the fuller development, and a juster distribution of the world’s economic resources to meet the needs of men and women of all races.” COMMUNISM The churches are also agreed that they must resist the materialistic communism which is now threatening the peace of the world. This will not be defeated only by physical force or by economic changes. It ie a new religion bringing hope to millions. Its faith, therefore, must be outfought by a stronger faith, and the devotion its creed in- spires must be met by a stronger devotion to a nobler creed. Ideas can be suppressed for a time by force; they can only be de- cisively defeated by ideas which are true and not merely attractive. The predominant form of communism, Marxian, is opposed to Christianity on three matters of vital importance: it is material- istic, denying God and the spiritual; it de- grades man into a mere instrument of the state; and it assumes that in thie world there can be created a perfect order of classless justice. Against this the Christian asserts his belief in & al God who is the supreme reality; that every individual is of value, with rights belonging to him as a man; and that man’s disobedience to God prevents him from making a perfect order within history. Marxian communism every- where sees in the Obristian Church an enemy which it must persecute so as either to de- stroy or to intimidate it. On the other hand it is important that Christianity should never be treated merely as a conventent ram~ part against communism. Christianity is
4808 too great to be a means to any end; it must be accepted because it is true, and not be- cause it is expedient. SPIRITUAL CRISIS The roots of the world crisis are not so much economic, political, and social, as spiritual. Man has lost his belief in a living God, and with this he has lost the meaning and purpose of life. He is driven here and there without any clear and satisfactory goal in view. He is restless and disillusioned, sometimes wildly optimistic that the latest scientific discovery or political theory will inaugurate an earthly paradise, but at other times fearful lest some catastrophe may destroy the civilization he has built up and that death will extinguish forever his own individuall'y. He ts intimidated by the size of the universe and his apparent insignifi- cance amidst the vastness of the infinite spaces. Loss of belief in God has left him perplexed and helpless in the midst of forces which he has helped to unleash, but which he now finds he is unable to control. Christianity offers to men the key of the riddle of life; it teaches that God created men to do His will; that He reveals in Christ His love for them, and what He intends them both to be and to do; that He calls them to love Him, and to live in peace and good will with their fellow men of all races and lands; that He promises them the help which the world cannot give, and a life which mortal death cannot destroy. This faith has been largely abandoned; millions now never take the trouble even to consider if it might be true. But the fallure of acientific materialism to give lasting hap- piness and peace should make men ask them- selves again whether they have not been precipitate in abandoning the religion of their forefathers, and whether they should not seek the old ways of truth, mercy, and righteousness, and, still more, whether they should not follow One whom millions before ther have found to be the way, the truth, and the life. A spiritual remedy, the return to the living God, will alone solve the crisis in the affairs of the world and in the lives of individuals. Tt ia difficult in these days of great anxiety to speak of a happy Christmas. Yet I ven- ture to wish you all a happy Christmas, with the prayer and hope that the statesmen and peoples of the world may be given such wis- dom and forbearance that this stricken world may soon see the cessation of strife and the first signs of the dawn of peace. Yours sincerely, Cyr Exor. Lithuania EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN C. KLUCZYNSKI OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. KLUCZYNSKI, Mr, Speaker, February 16 is the Independence Day of Lithuania. In commemorating this day it is proper and fitting to pause, at least briefly, at Lithuania’s present-day plight, and to see where it fits or could At into the framework of world prob- ems. Lithuania is forcibly occupled and il- legally ruled by the Soviet Union. The independent state of Lithuania is being converted into a Soviet colony. Lithu- ania’s economic, cultural, and political system, based on that of the free world, has been destroyed by the Soviets. Hu- man rights and fundamental freedoms have been nullified and abolished. The people have been deprived of their prop- erty rights and their livelihood; they are being terrorized, persecuted, arrested, and deported to prisons and slave-labor camps in Siberia and the northern wastelands of Russta. The criminal acts of the occupant of Lithuania constitute an international case of aggression and genocide. The unprovoked and forcible occupation of a sovereign and independent state and the persecution and annihilation of its in- nocent people, in accordance with inter- national law, is a grave criminal offense. It follows, then, that the Soviet Union has committed an offense not only against Lithuania and the Lithuanian nation, but also against the entire civil- ized world. The Soviet violations were perpetrated in the following manner: First. By their conspiratorial agree- ments—of August 23 and September 28, 1939—with the Nazis to divide Lithu- ania, Poland, and other states between Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany. Second. By the seizure and plundering of the Lithuanian state. Third. By the terrorization, deporta- tion, and annihilation of the people of Lithuania. Lithuania was one of the first victims of the Soviet expansion to the west and must be placed alongside other states in any plan guaranteeing the integrity and sovereignty of the states of Europe. Without securing the existence of Lithu- ania it is impossible to secure and main- tain the existence and sovereignty of other small European states. In solving the problem of the self- government of European states the de- cision should be based in a manner such as was stated by Talleyrand, the French delegate to the Vienna Congress in 1815, to wit: Russia must withdraw from Europe or the Western Powers must drive her back to her own borders. In settling the problem of liberating the states of Europe not only should the principles of international law be kept in mind, but also the Atlantic Charter and the United Nations Declaration, by which all of the signatory nations, not excepting the Soviet Union, renounced all claims to foreign territory and ex- pressed themselves in favor of liberat- ing all of the enslaved countries. The New York Times recently proposed that the Western Powers come out “with a broad program of their own—a program which will not only expose the Soviet maneuvers but also carry new inspira- tion for all freemen and help to mobilize the moral forces of the world in the same way that the Atlantic Charter and the United Nations Charter did in other days of stress, There is no better way of doing this than to revive the principles of both these charters, and to apply them to all nations, including those now held in bondage to the Soviets.” This pro- posal deserves commendation and sup- port. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Lithuania still is occupied and enslaved by foreign armed forces, just as she was during World War Ii. Lithuania and her people do not belong to Russia and must be distinguished from the Russians racially, culturally, and philosophically. Russia belongs to the east, Lithuania be- longs to the west. The Lithuanians have an ancient and glorious past, and they have every right to national independence, which was wrested from them by Soviet force. They are fighting and will continue to fight without let-up for their independ- ence. Their struggle is not only for their own rights and freedom, but for the free- dom of the democratic world. The enemy of the Lithuanians is also the enemy of the entire democratic world. The Lithuanians are in the front lines of the conflict, and the help of the de- mocracies, from both near and far, is absolutely necessary for Lithuania. The Lithuanians solicit and beg all freedom-loving people to support their crusade against the horror which de- stroys nations, against the enemy of freedom and mankind, against dictator- ship, against despotic Red imperi>licm. Thirty-third Anniversary of Lithuania’s Independence EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. PETER W. RODINO, JR. OF NEW JERSEY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. RODINO. Mr. Speaker, in a memorandum to the United Nations, on Lithuanian resistance sent from the un- derground toward the end of 1948, we read: There is a little country in this weary world where since 1941, day and night, year in and year out, machine guns and auto- matic rifles roar, hand grenades explode, and fierce flames pierce the skies. * * * This is called Lietuva—Lithuania. Her people are fighting Attila, Tamerlane, and Genghis Khan reincarnated in communism, They are but one of a group of peoples still fight- ing for the Atlantic Charter and the “four freedoms” which had been proclatmed by the western allies, which had been accepted by Russia, and violated at Tehran, Yalta, Potsdam, and San Francisco. These freedoms have, indeed, been vio- lated by Lithuania’s protector and lead- er to socialism, the Soviet Union. To- day, only a small number of the former population is still in Lithuania. Thou- sands of these brave people have been killed or sent to Siberia. Their crime? They believed with all their hearts in the right of peoples to order their own na- tional existence. They refused to bow their heads to the Russian conquerors. A few survivors of Soviet camps met, some months ago, in Jerusalem. Faith- ful to their country's old Catholic tradi- tion, they placed a plaque in the Lithu-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD anfan language, on the altar of the third station of the cross. It read: 1940-50: Lord! eave Lithuanta. Jerusalem, January 22, 1980. Many thousands of Lithuanians now live in America where they have found the freedom and the human decency that is presently denied to their mother country. But they do not forget Lithu- ania and their less fortunate brothers who suffer under Moscow's rule. They will never forget them and they will al- ways be ready to fight the enemies of the democratic people of the world. On this day, February 16, which marks the anniversary of Lithuanian independence, it is fitting that we pay tribute to those people who continue to resist with what- ever means they have at hand the crush- ing domination of Soviet imperialism. Why Not a National Holiday To Honor F.D.R.? EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HERBERT H. LEHMAN OF NEW YORK IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 15 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. LEHMAN. Mr. President, the Machinist, a publication of the Interna- tional Association of Machinists, an A. F. of L. union, published an editorial in its issue of January 25 urging a na- tional holiday to honor the late Presi- dent Roosevelt. I ask consent that this excellent edi- torial, setting forth a proposal to which I heartily subscribe, be printed in the Appendix of the Recorp. There being no objection, the edito- rial was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows: Wuyr Not a Nationa. Hotmay to Honors F.D.R.? (Next Tuesday, January 80, would have been Franklin Roosevelt's sixty-ninth birth- day. For the fourth year, we are reprinting our editorial, originally published on Janu- ary 29, 1948, urging a national holiday to honor FDR. One State, Kentucky, has adopted this idea and made Roosevelt's birthday a State-wide holiday. The proposal is now being considered in several other States.) Today Franklin Roosevelt occupies a place in our history beside George Washington and Abraham Lincoln as s leader who came to the American people in a time of great crisis and led them through. We observe the birthday of Washington in every State and that of Lincoln in 81 Btates. Roosevelt's birthday, January 30, should be added to those two. Most of us are not too young to remember the stark fear that faced this Nation in 19383. The United States was in the throes of 4 crisis unprecedented in time of peace. Most of all we needed something to restore our confidence. Franklin Roosevelt did that and more, He pulled us out of the crisis by main force. As one historian has written, the 99-day session of the Seventy-third Congress that began on March 9, 1983, witnessed the most daring Presidential leadership in Amer- jean history. He followed in the middle thirties with a program of social legialation—social security, labor relations, home ioans, bank-deposit insurance, rural electrification, minimum Wages—to name a few of the great New Deal laws. Roosevelt gave the common people of America the chance for security and self- respect. During the second half of his administra- tion, when we were plunged into the worat war in our history, Roosevelt led us to victory. The forgotten men whom Roosevelt fought for can lead the way in making his birthday @ national day of remembrance. National holidays can only be suggested by Congress. They must be officially proclaimed by State governors and local mayors. Any group of Citizena has the right to petition a governor or mayor to proclaim # holiday. Observance of Washington's and Lincoln's birthdays came slowly. Three months after Washington's death in 1799, Congress adopted @ resolution urging a public noting of Feb- ruary 22. A few cities followed the sugges- tion in succeeding years, but tt was not until the one hundredth anniversary of Washing- ton’s birthday in 1832 that the entire coun- try made the day a holiday. Almost the same held true in Lincoln's case. In 1866, a year after his assassination, Congress adopted a resolution urging observ- ance of Lincoln's birthday. The idea grew, but again it was not until 1909, the one hundredth anniversary of the Great Eman- cipator’s birth that the observance became a national custom. For 10 years we have been observing koose- velt’s birthday as national infantile paralysis day. But his birthday must be remembered for more than the great personal handicap which he overcame. Working men and women will gladly honor him on his birthe day, as one of the greatest friends they ever had. For more than that we must remember him. Roosevelt was one of America’s beloved leaders. His ideals deserve to be remembered by every American this year and every year. A Democratic Foreign Policy EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. JAMES E. MURRAY OF MONTANA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 15 (legislative day of Monday, Jantary 29), 1951 Mr. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there be printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an ad- dress on the suvject A Democratic For- eign Policy, delivered by Mr. Michael Straight, editor of the New Republic, at Pittsburgh, Pa., at the annual Roosevelt Day dinner sponsored by the Pittsburgh Chapter of the Americans for Demo- eratic Action, I am informed by the Public Printer that the manuscript is estimated to make 2% pages in the Recorp, at a cost of $225.50. There being no objection, the address ‘was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: All across America tonight, we in ADA are meeting to honor # great leader that we followed and loved. He could not stand unatded, but he lifted this Nation to its feet. He could not walk alone, but he led this Nation in the long march toward social justice and lasting peace. A809 Roosevelt was our field commander—in the greatest army ever formed in modern timesa—the army of the New Deal. Some, like the liberals, were scouts In that army, ranging ahead of the lines. Some, like the trade-unions, brought up the heavy bat« talions, A few, Uke our main speaker, were officers. Most of us were privates. All of us served under a gay and daring leader. His method in politics was to fire a star shell to outline the ranks of the enemy, alert the people with a battle order, and close to grapple, with all the Nation taking sides. The days of his Presidency were dramatic and exciting days. Those of us who marched with him loved what we fought for and fought for what we loved. Six years ago we lost Roosevelt. And every one of us who remembers that day can bring back a sense of tears at the world’s Joss, and our own loss, Each day that we move without him, the magnitude of that loss grows. In his bold and militant apirit Roosevelt would have advanced the cause of freedom in all countries by a world New Deal. For all our efforts, we have retreated from his spirit and the magnitude of our dificulties is the measure of our retreat. If we come tonight to honor Roosevelt, then we cannot ignore or conceal those diffe culties. We must turn and face them as he would have done. Roosevelt faced in fascism the challenge of the great lie. It sought world power through world war. It appealed to two mn Taces that were a fraction of mane nd. We face in communism the challenge of corrupted truth. It seeks world power through world revolution. It appeals to all peoples to whom poverty and exploitation make unendurable the conditions of today, We are a stronger Nation than the Nation Roosevelt led. But we face a far greater task, It is a harder task because we are divided. In Roosevelt's day the liberal movement, save for a few months between Munich and Dun-« kurque, knew where it was going. Today the Mtberal movement, which alone can save America, is in danger of being scattered to the winds. Pacing that danger, let us agree first on the nature of the challenge that confronta us, The Soviet regime is a ruthless regime, committec to innate antagonism against the free world. It has failed to provide a better life for ite peoples. So it must rule them by terror and justify the terror by driv- ing fear and hatred of the outside world into every enslaved Russian mind. The Soviet regime is a corrupt regime with little to offer free peoples. It seeks to crush the heritage of Europe, the faith of Latin America, the nationalist ambition of Asta to be independent and free. It ls a weak sys- tem that gains by our greater weakness; it seizes leaderahip where we forfeit leadership; it enslaves people where we abandon people; it stands for progress where we deny progress; it wius by default. The Soviet regime is an opportunist re- gime. It places a high value on world power. It places a still higher value on preserving ite own power. it is patient and cautious. It fears and respects the might of industrial Amerioa. It avoids unnecessary risks. It launches aggression where aggression is unopposed. It incites revolution where revolutionary conditions prevail, Where strength and atability preclude aggression and revolution it retreats and waits. The Soviet regime is a realistic regime. It recognizes that the free nations still hold two-thirds of the world's peoples, and three- quarters of the world’s resources. It knows that as long as free people stand together aggression cannot pay. Ita single, unswerv- ing ambition is to break up the unity of free peoples, in order to overrun them one by one. Too many Americans have given up all hope of world peace. But if thig analysis is
A810 right, there is no need yet to give up hope. Por as long as the free peoples are strong and stand together peace is possible. Only when they are weak, and divided, is the world threatened by war. In attacking the unity of free peoples the Soviet leaders are unprincipled and astute, They combine peace campaigns and cam~< paigns of aggression. They play on labor's fear of capital and capital's fear of labor. They exploit the guilty conscience of the liberals, even while they plot sabotage and assassination. They force a wedge through every crack and crevice in the free world. In Europe the Russians use the threat of force to terrorize all peoples. Eighty So- viet divistons stand on the borders of Eu- rope. Twenty Polish divisions are being raised under a Soviet general to sweep through Germany. Ten Czech divisions are being raised to move into Austria and Ba- varia. 8x hundred thousand soldiers in Bul- garia, Rumania, Hungary, and Albania are being trained, equipped, and indoctrinated to attack Tito, the insolent dwarf who defied Stalin’s will. To bring that force closer, the East German puppet parliament enacts the death penalty for West German resistance leaders and openly marks them down for execution when the Soviet armies roll. The impact of this force and terror strikes in every European heart, The West German Communist Party has been heavily subsidized by German indus- trialists as an insurance policy against the future. In France and Italy the Communist Parties conduct door-to-door canvasses, col- lecting contributions from washerwomen and elevator operators, and presenting them in return with receipts marked: “Present this for protection purposes when the Red army arrives.” In Yugoslavia the pressure is even more intense, Day by day the pattern of infiltra- tion, subversion, and provocation by border incidents that preceded the attack on South Korea is being worked up against Tito. Today, and for the foreseeable future, no land force stands between the Red armies and the British channel. Day by day the Russians warn that efforts to defend Europe may set those armies rolling. And yet the peoples of Europe are accepting the chal- lenge, and taking the risks of defense. They are taking the risk on the assurance that they have the whole-hearted support of the one nation that can match Soviet power— the United States. In Asia, Russia is working in the same way to divide Asia and the West and to break the resistance of Asia to aggression. In colonial days, no force existed in Asia that would resist aggression. The oppressors were too weak, the oppressed lacked the will to resist, The leaders threw their weight against the Allies in the war, and collab- orated with the Japanese, The Indian jurist who sat on the war crimes tribunal refused to join its finding that Japan was an ag- @ressor on the ground that Japanese aggres- hon was provoked by the imperialism of the est. Fortunately for us, the rise of Soviet ag- gression has coincided with the rise of one force in Asia that is strong enough to resist it—Asian nationalism. For nationalism must clash with imperialism, and in Asia, as in Europe, communism is the cloak for Rus- sian imperialism, 80 when the Communist fifth column in Asia was hurled against the Nationalist movement by Moscow it falled— it failed that is except in China, where Chiang Kai-shek forfeited the leadership of Chinese nationaliam and it passed by default to Mao Tae-tung. Today Russia is weak in non-Communist Asia. But democracy is also weak. No de- mocracy in history has ever been created overnight. Yet the democratic nations of Asia are all less than 6 yeara old. No democ- racy has ever functioned under conditions of 90 percent illiteracy and the continuous threat of starvation. But those are the con- ditions under which the democracies of Asia are trying to function today. They are almost overwhelmed by inflation and falling living standards. They are working desper- ately against the timetable forced on them by Communist China without regard for hu- man costs. They know that they cannot survive free in war and already war is raging in Korea. Yet they are committeed to de- mocracy and to the United Nations, and against aggression, again in the belief that the one free nation which can help them will provide inspired leadership for progress and peace, That is the challenge to great leadership that America faces in Europe and Asia. It is a challenge that Roosevelt would have gladly welcomed and one which in his spirit we can meet today. Are we meeting that challenge in Roose- velt’s spirit? In Korea our soldiers are fighting with great courage so that we can be courageous. At home, we are moving to mobilize our own strength. But in providing inspired leader- ship to the world we are faltering at a critical hour. We are not living under the shadow of the Soviet armies. We are not overwhelmed by poverty and famine. Yet we are becoming obsessed by fear. We are losing the quality that has made America and held it together— confidence in ourselves. One group that incites fear and loss of confidence in America is the isolationists. They want us to dishonor our pledges to Europe. They want us to crawl back into a cave and wait for doom to overtake us. They propose that we surrender Western Europe to Russia and yet hold Britain, 20 miles away. They suggest that we triple the economic resources available to Stalin and then sit back and wait for him to collapse of his inner weaknesses. Their proposals have been condemned on economic grounds and mili- tary grounds and strategic grounds. And in God’s name isn’t it about time that it was condemned on moral and spiritual grounds? It seems to me perfectly clear that if we willingly surrendered a thousand million people to Soviet enslavement we would at the same time surrender our own moral and spiritual will to survive. No people who committed so enormous a crime could be left with the conviction that their society held out anything worth fighting for. We would sink into a morass of apathy and cynicism, and the last free nation would be lost without a shot being fired. Americans know that. And they will re- ject the Hoover doctrine when it is placed before them honestly and openly. It will not be. Instead, men with praise of free- dom and fine anti-Communist phrases on their lips will move this year to enforce the Hoover doctrine tn a concealed dishonest form. They will attempt to withhold from our allies the vital lifeblood in manpower and military and economic aid that Presi- dent Truman has asked for and that alone can save thousands of our lives later on. I stated that a new Korea ‘s in the making in Yugoslavia. I want to repeat now, that Just as the refueal of Congress in 1950 to aid South Korea brought on the Communist attack against South Korea, so any evidence in 1961, that the Congress is abandoning Europe by withholding aid, will bring on a Communist attack against Yugoslavia and will lead to world war. But that is precisely what the Republican-controlled Congress may do, unless we act now, One threat to American leadership comes from the isolationists. A second threat comes from the provocationists, The first g-oup seek to isolate America, The second group makes it easy for Stalin to isolate us. We went very far last year toward provok- ing Russia, and breaking up the new-formed APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD partnership of free peoples, when we pressed for the immediate rearmament of Germany without any safeguards in the form of an economic or a military or a political federa- tion of Europe. Our allies almost broke with ‘us, because they knew that a remilitarized sovereign Western Germany is capable of provoking a third world war in order to re- unite Germany, and to make Germany pre- dominant after a war in which Russia and America hav2 drained their life blood. In the same reckless spirit we are going very far right now to provoke China, ard to break up our partnership ware: we continue to intervene on the losing side in China's civil war. Once again our allies are ready to break with us, because they know that we are playing Russia’s game. Fo" not once but many times Chiang Kal-shek has de- clared that he would welcome a third world war as the one means by which he can march back to Chungking behind a phalanx of American planes, American guns, and Ameri- can boys. The Congress and the administration have piled error on top of error in our Asian policy. First, the administration surrendered the control of Asian policy to the generals. Then the generals passed it along to the China lobby. People talk of appeasing Com- munist China—the same people who spent the thirties fighting Roosevelt and appeas- ing Hitler. I am not concerned with appeas- ing China; I am very much concerned with continued appeasement of Knowland, Mc- Carthy, Fulton Lewis, and Henry Luce. Those men have succeeded in squandering America's moral standing in Asia. They have obscured completely the nature of our strug- gle against Soviet imperialism. We want to arouse Asia against Soviet im- perialism. At the same time we assert our imperial control over an integral part of China in Formosa. We want to stir Asia up against Stalin's use of puppet regimes. At the same time we deliver our incom- parable power to our puppet, Chiang Kai- shek, who could not survive a month on For- mosa, let alone in China without our aid. We want to mobilize Asia against Russia's efforts to ride roughshod over the interest of small countries in the United Nations. At the same time we threaten that unless the UN falls in line when we crack the whip we will quit the UN and abandon our allies. The Chinese Communists are engaged in selling their nation out to Stalin. And one day the people of China will punish them for that crime. That day is postponed because, when we oppose the legitimate nationalist aspirations of China to control its own ter- ritory, and to join the community of nations in the UN, we consolidate 400,000,000 nation- alist Chinese behind their Communist op- Ppressors. Still worse, we turn all the nation- alist sentiment of Asia against us. That is what is happening now and it spells disunity, Gisaster, and war. That 1s no reckless charge on my part. Last week Life magazine wrote: “Life sees no choice but to acknowledge the existence of war with Red China and to set about its defeat in full awareness that this course will probably involve war with the Soviet Union as well.” Senator Tarr added that he favored cutting down our commitments in Europe in order to help Chiang Kai-shek inside the mainland of China. “If this brings war between the United States and the Chinese Communists,” he said, “tt is nothing different from what we now have. In fact, it would be a much less dane gerous war to us, much less fatal to our men, and much less expensive in material.” I suggest to you that that line amounts to strategic insanity and moral suicide. The Chinese are doing their best to settle without a general war in Korea. There is only one nation that can gain from a war
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD between America and Ohina, and that is Soviet Russia. Senator Tarr and the com- fortable men in Rockefeller Center may see no difference between today’s limited conflict in Korea and unlimited atomic war. But the peoples of the world who have suffered bombardment and occupation and famine know very well what the difference is. And if they believe that America has grown 40 callous and indifferent to human life as to seek unlimited war, then they will desert us, and we will be left entirely alone. Certainly we ere disillusioned with the failure of other nations to back us. Certainly we will find it hard to function with nations that challenge our decisions and dispute our will, Let’s remember that patience as well as atrength is the price of union among the free peoples today. Roosevelt foresaw that in his last message on the state of the Union. “In our diaillusionment after the last war we preferred international anarchy to inter- national cooperation with nations which did not see and think exactly as we did. We gave up the hope of gradually achieving a better peace because we had not the courage to ful- fill our responsibilities in an admittedly im- perfect world, “We must not let that happen again or we shall follow the same tragic road again—the road to a third world war.” A nation enters a war for one purpose— victory. In unlimited war against China there can be no victory. Our partnership with the free nations would break up. All Asia would oppose us. The United Nations would be against us. We would waste our lifeblood for nothing. Yet that is the drift of American policy, now that our policy 1s out of control. Certainly we must hold in Korea. But the one purpose of holding in a war we cannot win is to negotiate an honor- able settlement. The liberals in America, who have rushed to the aid of Chiang Kal- shek and sanctioned the use of the atom bomb against China have done the liberal movement a grave disservice. We must re- gain our sanity and retrace our steps before it is too late. None of us today dares to say what Roose- velt would do if he were with us. We do know that he would tell us not to lose faith in peace, or give up trying for peace. It ia for us to ask how; I suggest that the answer may lie along these lines. First, we must make war unprofitable for the aggressor. That means sustaining General Eisenhow- er in his critical task of preventing eggres- sion against Europe. It means sustaining Eisenhower with American soldiers. It means sustaining Eisenhower with mili- tary aid to help our allies rearm. It means sustaining him with economic aid so that our allfes can turn their resources to rearmament. It means supporting political federation in Europe without which Eisenhower is a mili- tary tyrant if he takes the actions he must take to defend Europe. Making war unprofitable means raising a large armed force in the United States, and @ just armed force. There is still Jim Crow in our Army, and no Jim Crow army is going to save world democracy. Second, we must help others share the bur- den of resisting aggression, We have learned in Korea that we lack the resources to police the world alone. The answer is not to give the world over to Stalin, but to help other free peoples carry their share. Only the Europeans can defend Europe. Only the Astans can hold Asta. Our task 1g to help them defend themselves, and us, in acommon fight. They will carry their share of the common load only if we permit them to share in the determination of our common policies. That means that we must stop biustering and threatening in the United Nations. We must Hsten to what Asia is saying and what Burope is saying. We must recognize their ambitions and their deep- seated fears, and we must share our resources with them. We must remember that in Bri- tain a family eats meat once a week, and that in India a man sent to fall gains weight on 18 cents worth of food a day. We must real- ize that the price of partnership ts to treat others with the respect and understanding that partners deserve. We must act and think as part of the UN team. Third, we must cut down the potential of communism. We must remember that aggression and revolution strike where poverty and ex- Ploitation leave the free nations econom- ically and socially weakened. We must remember that the military vie- tories of communism are prepared by our economic and social defeats, Our people today are embittered by our losses in the Korean Wer. And they are fearful of the costs of rearmament, It is for us to make it clear that as long as we attempt to prop up corrupt regimes against a tide of progress, no amount of arms and aid from America, for all our wealth, can provide stability, It is for us to make {t clear also that prog- ress is the alternative to communism and that the more we can cut down the potential base of communism in human misery, the less we will have to spend in fighting com- munism where it takes hold. Aid ts sterile unless it is accompanied by reform. Reform, at least in Asia, is im- possible through democratic procedures without aid. Both go together and, within limits, a policy of supporting reform can reduce the amount of ald necessary to halt communism. Aid means military aid, and economic ald. No Congressman will be caught voting against military appropriations. But very few will support President Truman's request for $4,000,000,000 in economic ald this year, That is because we have failed to demon- strato that economic aid to our allies is as vital 10 our own security as military weapons, In Asia today, living standards are falling, the situation js getting out of hand, At euch a moment time is of the essence. Roughly, this is true: The sooner we give aid, the More we can atress economic as against military ald and the less we will have to give. The longer we delay aid, the more we will have to stress military assistance, including manpower, and the more we will have to give in order to retrieve a situation that 1s drift- ing out of control. Aid, ag I said, is part of the story. The rest is reform. We cannot easily explain de- mocracy to Asian peoples unable to read or write. But tf we can make it clear to the great majority of Asians that democracy means that the farmer owns his land, then Gemocracy will take roots. This year the Government of the United States should de- clare that land reform is official United States policy, calling for land reform in feudal econ~ omies, supporting land refurm in nations like India, where representative governments lack the means to carry thelr own sound programs out. That step alone can save untold re- sources and lives in our long struggle against Communist revolution that poses as reform. Fourth, we must keep our own democracy moving forward. That means strengthening the economic and social and spiritual foundations of our society that endures because it is stable and just and free. The struggle we are waging ie a long en- during struggle. If its duration were this year and next year only we could afford waste and luxury, and time misspent in snipping pennies from the luncheons given to school kids, and the social-security bene- fita patd to our old people. But this strug- gie is a long one, and if it means years in A8i1 which the military budget is a hundred billion dollars or more we must confront the real first of raising production in order to maintain living standards, secondly in preventing the continued erosion of our standards of education and welfare. We must raise productivity, and we must share what we have. Roosevelt was disgusted with the inadequacy of the excess-profite tax he was given in the last war. How would he feel about today’s tax which allows our corporations 60 percent more in excess profits than they earned in the profit-rich years of the last war? A just acciety means a society thet justly shares its burdens. It means also a society in which all participate, Today our Govern- ment is being turned over to the direction of one group—the manufacturers. We need their skills, But we need also the skills of labor, American Jabor is bitter today at the lack of realization of its problems in our representative Government. And unless labor feels that its voicé is raised in the councila of government, its voice will be raised instead on the picket lines of costly strikes. We cannot afford that kind of dis- unity at home. A free society means a society that gains strength and wisdom through tolerance and compassion. Freedom after all is not a relic of a bygone age, to be laid on the shelf as @ sentimental keepsake, Freedom is the means by which a democratic society cleanses itself of forces of corruption and greed and selfishness and incompetence that threaten all human societies. Those forces exist in every society and unless they are exposed they multiply. They are exposed when s0- clety itself protests the right of its citizens to protest. When that right is withdrawn, far too often today, the efficient functioning of a free society is immediately imperiled. After all we are no greater in resources and manpower than our enemies. Freedom is our one unique weapon. If we forsake it to play the Russians at their own game of sup~ pression we are lost. They play that game so much better than the worst of our in- tolerant men. Last, we must stand for great ideas. We cannot pretend that the burden of re~- armament is easy to bear. We cannot deny that the outlook for generations is dark. For every one of us, the prospect of war is fearful, For our allies, Jiving on the margins of misery, and under the shadow of the Soviet armies, facing again the horrors of bombard- ment and occupation, the future seems far ‘worse. Yet we have no alternative but to face our common future, and affirm our common destiny. Behind the fron curtain, enslaved peoples face the same future. They go on working for their masters because they have no choice. The peril and the glory of freedom is that it offers free peoples a choice. We can be sure that they will make the right choice, whatever the cost, only {f survival holds out to them the vision of a world of happiness and opportunity and lasting peace for their children or their grandchildren if not for themselves. Only the vision of a better world at the end of this struggie will give embattled peopies the strength to shoulder today's burden and to struggle for- ward. Roosevelt knew that when he founded the United Nations during the darkest hours of Bataan. Churchill knew it and the knowl- edge summed up his greatness. “Those who serve supreme causes,” Churchill said, “do not consider what they can get, but what they can give.” If we see communism simply as a threat, then we may be overwhelmed by communism in one form or another, If we see communism as & challenge, then we can overcome that challenge, and in overcoming it we can make this time of
A812 sweat and agony a time of advance toward a new time of peace. The answer lies not in our governments or our leaders or our allies. It lies in every one of us. It is a challenge to every one of us. ‘We can meet the challenge by working harder, by giving more, by taking less, by holding to our faith, and by joining to- gether, in continuous, organized, disciplined action, in militant liberal groups like Amer- icans for Democratic Action, knowing that only this extra effort as citizens can make all our other efforts worth while. We all know that at heart. That is why we have met together tonight. We have met, not to mourn Roosevelt, but to draw from his life of service and his spirit of dedica- tion, a new inspiration for ourselves: As Justice Holmes once said: “At the grave of a hero we end, not in sorrow at the inevitable loss, but with a kind of fierce joy; and with the contagion of his courage we go back to the fight.” Thirty-third Anniversary of Independence of Lithuania EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. THADDEUS M. MACHROWICZ OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. MACHROWICZ. Mr. Speaker, February 16 marks the thirty-third an- niversary of the independence of Lith- uania, The United ftates can well be proud of the fact that it was one of the spon- sors of the re-creation of a free and in- dependent Lithuania after the conclu- sion of World War I in 1918. In the 20 years that followed, the people of Lithuania, through a progres- sive, liberal, and democratic govern- ment, and through its achievements in the field of education, social justice, and industry, have well established their right to a place in the family of free nations. Unfortunately, Lithuania, just as Po- land and other countries beyond the iron curtain, became the victim of Nazi ag- gression in 1939. And just as in the case of Poland, after the Nazi invaders were defeated, Lithu- ania was trampled under the equally cruel and ruthless foot of the Communist Soviet invader. Hundreds of thousands of Lithuanian victims have been brutally murdered or lost in concentration camps, But the indomitable spirit of the Lith- uanian people lives on. They continue to fight for their freedom and the freedom of the world. I think it is entirely fitting and proper that we pause on this day to consider the plight of these Lithuanian people and of the freedom-loving people beyond the fron curtain, . In our search for a formula to estab- lish world peace we cannot fail to resolve to include restoration of full independ- ence and liberty to them as an essential and indispensable condition, without which there can be no hope for a just and permanent peace, Aged and Disabled Retired Enlisted Men EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWIN C. JOHNSON OF COLORADO IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 15 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp a letter written to the President by John H. Hoeppel, founder of National Defense magazine, making an impas- sioned plea for more consideration for aged and disabled retired enlisted men. Inflation has taken a heavy toll from all in this country including veterans who are on fixed compensation. This is the source of most of the trouble about which this letter complains. It is ad- dressed to the President, but it should have becn addressed to Congress as well, and that is my reason, Mr, President, for asking permission to insert it in the Ap- pendix of the REcorp. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Fepruary 6, 1951. The Honorable Harry 8. TRUMAN, President of the United States, Washington, D. C. Dean COMMANDER IN CHIEF: In the inter- ests of fair dealing to the aged and disabled retired enlisted men of the armed services who are today victims of discrimination and the increasing lower standard of living due to increased prices and higher taxes, we re- spectfully appeal to you to consider the fol- lowing statement of facts—and if you feel as we do that they merit your consideration, will you please forward this letter to the Secretary of Defense recommending to that Office that the discriminations and injustices here complained of be corrected through legislation? We have every confidence in the Congress of the United States to deal fairly and squarely vith the aged and disabled retired enlisted men of the armed services if you as Commander in Chief and the National De- fense Department will make the proper recommendations to the committees of the Senate and House on the Armed Services. First and foremost, we ask your kind at- tention to the desperate plight of thousands of aged and disabled retired enlisted men in the lower pay categories who today are not receiving sufficient to live because of the depreciated dollar which buys ever and ever less. We repeat, there are thousands of aged and disabled retired enlisted men, all of them veterans of an American war, who received $89.25 per month retired pay in in 1922 and who today receive only $96.25 per month retired pay. In other words, in the last 28 years these men have received only 67 per month increase in retired pay. If you will compare the cost of living in 1922 and the in- crease iu taxes of at least 1,000 percent since that period, you can readily see that the income of these men is down to the vanish- ing point and that they are not far removed, especially if they have dependents, from the standpoint of charity. Five different times industrial workers have received an increase in pay since World War IX. Bo much so that many of them are today receiving 100 to 200 percent more pay than they received in 1940. Our indus- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD trial workers and civil-service workers have received substantial increases as here shown above that of thousands of retire: enlisted men of long service. An economist, writing in today's press, directing our attention to the vanishment in purchasing power of the dollar, stated with a presentation of concise figures that unless an individual today received 270 per- cent more pay than he did in 1935 that then such individual was a victim of our own shrinking economic policy. We are not quall- fied perhaps to compare this economist’s analysis but we do know that with the ex- ception of one group of retired enlisted men, all of them today are immeasurably in more desperate straits with tre small increase which they receive than they ever were when compared with the retired pay they received in the ysterdays. Illustrative of this, we mention that an enlisted man of the first grade received $133.87 per month in 1922. Today, his taxes have increased approximately 1,000 percent and ‘vith living costs up 200 or 300 percent, the same man today receives 6220.50 per month. In other words, his living stand- ards have been immeasurably and patheti- cally reduced. The foregoing comparison was made in respect to the first grade where their pay is highest. The comparison with men in the lower grades would show that virtually all of them have suffered an inor- dinate lowering of living standards so much so that ere long some of them will become— if not now—objects of charity. At the moment Congress is deliberating on paying $50 per month combat pay in addil- tion to foreign-duty pay for all enlisted men who are in the combat area in Korea. We offer no objection; rather, we heartily ap- Prove this proposal. However, those of us who served in combat in two to five wars and who were never considered for combat pay and who since our retirement have con- tinued to be discriminated against because of apathy and indifference on the part of the department heads, we are not asking for retroactive combat pay but we do ask for a square deal so that our retired pay may be in keeping (measured in purchasing power) with the dollar which we received when we were retired after 30 years of creditable and honorable service. All industrial workers and public employees have recently received cost-of-living bonuses, and eve. Congress it- self, not ignoring yourself, received substan- tial increases in pay, much of it income tax exempt, while those of us who served our Nation in combat abroad are thus far ignored for a cost-of-living bonus and we are even denied a square deal in the computation of our longevity pay which we gained fighting our Nation's battles abroad. We especially appeal to you to recommend to the Depart- ment of Defense that all retired enlisted men receive at least a cost-of-living increase of $20 per month. The coal miners recently received approximately 630 per month which was about the nth increase they have re- ceived since 1940. We have no criticism to make of this, but we do feel that those of us who faced bullets and who won Uncle Sam's battles in the yesterdays are entitled to be relieved from poverty today, due to the rapidly diminishing purchasing power of the dollar, and the addition of proportionate tax which is levied on a man whose income is only $600 per annum. We further urge you as Commander in Chief to remove the abject discrimination practiced against individuals who are penal- ized under the provisions of Public Law 361, Eighty-first Congress, because they had the ability and efficiency to be promoted during World War I. All such individuals who were promoted to commisstoned rank have been denied longevity pay for their double time while at the same time men with whom they served in the yesterdays receive longevity pay
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The discriminations under which the re- tired enlisted mren of the Army have suffered, unfortunately, are extensive and we are re- luctant to take your time to call your at- tention to them, but we will conclude this appeal to you with a further statement and a request, to wit: Do you think it ts fair and honest that an enlisted man of the Navy who never served in war and with only 16 years’ experience, that such enlisted man should be treated free in a Navy hospital while at the same time an Army enlisted man with 80 years’ service who served in combat in two or more wars should be forced to pay for hospitalization in an Army hospital even though the disabilities for which he requires service are of combat origin? This abject, inhuman, and unfair discrimination along with the others described above are a matter of official record, Will you kindly, as Commander in Chief, deal as fairly and squarely with those of us retired as you are seeking to deal with those now serving in Korea today? We believe that you will do this and it is with this de- gree of confidence that we conclude our ap- peal, thanking you for your consideration to this and wishing you well in your service to our Nation for a better America. Sincerely yours, Narionwat Derense Macagine, By Joun H. Hoxrrrr., Founder. Chiang Kai-shek Should Be Permitted To Open a Second Front in Asia EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN M. VORYS OF OHTO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. VORYS. Mr. Speaker, under leave granted to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following ad- dress of Hon. Josrex W. Martin, Jr., Re- publican leader of the House of Repre- sentatives, at the Lincoln Day dinner of the Kings County Republican Committee at Brooklyn, N. Y., on Monday evening, February 12, 1951: It is @ privilege to join tonight in this ugh of Brooklyn lies a great cross seo- tion of families and homes that in them- tical party which has served this Nation Pell through generations of constant de- Across this land of ours, the American people, weary of the trend toward a total state, have come to realize more and more that the lone champion of the basic free- doms that have made America great is the Republican Party, And they ere going to translate that belief into action and elect & Republican Congress and a Republican Pres- ident in 1952? And why shouldn't they? Is there a per- son within the range of my voice who dosa not realize deep inside him that something is fundamentally wrong with the Democratic leadership in Washington? Is there any- body within the range of my voice who does not fervently hope that out of the election in 1962 will come an administration possess- ing the basic characteristics that made Abraham Jincoln great—intelligenoce of pur- pose, unflinching devotion to ideals, and, above all elee, the courage to carry out what the brain and heart and soul dictate? It is the great tragedy of our day that in & period of criels we have an administration in Washington which is so bankrupt in lead- ership that its first measurement of every undertaking is whether it will help perpetu- ate those in power. Votes have become the yardstick of their policies. This is not the true spirit nor the wisdom of our fine American heritage. And I am proud to stand here and tell you tonight that there are patriotic Democrats in and out of Congress, in and out of government, who tell me with the deepest sincerity that the only way to save America, the only way to achieve the leadership we so desperately need, is by a landslide Republican victory next year, We welcome Democrats and independents everywhere to this crusade, Our task far transcends party lines, The great issue before the world today— &n issue so vital that it affects every man, woman, and child on earth—is: Which will triumph, the forces of Marxism as embodied in communism and socialism, or the free principles of liberty and individual dignity of man which our civilization has evolved out of 3,000 years of experience? Shall it be the godless materialism of Marx, or the idealism instilled in us by the Teligious teachings of all faiths? Shall it be the police state that triumphs, or shall political systems thet recognize the essential dignity of man emerge victorious? Shall we become the victims of secret po- lice, or shall we walk the earth as free men fearing no one but God? Shall our homes and our churches be liqui- aated, or shall the morality of the family and the basic religious teachings survive, mightier than ever? Those are the questions. To meet them we must not only possess the finest qualities of spirit and the maximum of wisdom, but we must be able to translate those qualifica- tions into practical action. Let us apply ourselves tonight to examin- tng the situation we are now in, Here briefly ts what we see: Since the end of World War II, due prin- cipally to the use of armed might and the tactics of infiltration, and due also to the incredible policies which the United States and other free nations have followed, the Soviet Union has managed to expand ite domination from 170,000,000 people to 800,- 000,000 people. In other words, almost with- out firing a shot, Communist Russia in five so-called peacetime years hag increased its domination fivefold over human beings and now physicaily controis half of Europe and half of Asia and threatens the other halves on both continents, That is fact No. 1. The free countries, on the other hand, de- void of the guile and nmmorality which the Communists practice, have failed ta produce the political weapons necessary to match the unprincipled tactios of the Soviet Union. True, BOA has been devised as a weapon, A&iz and it has had some success, but it has not been enough by any means. Our counter- propaganda, a political weapon ao effectively used by the Soviet Union, hap been long on quantity and pitifully short on quality, Our programs of technical assistance and capi-«- tal loans have operated in dubious fashion and have not proved too effective. In short, we have permitted ourselves to be completely outmaneuvered itn the employment of poill- tical weapons. That ts fact No. 2. Finally, while Russia has spent the last 6 years increasing its armed might, the fres countries, and particularly the United States, have been busily engaged in reducing their military strength. In our own country, the record must show that the Eightieth Congress passed laws directing the President of the United States to build the Air Force up to 70 groups, to strengthen the Marine Corpse, and to broaden naval avia~ tion by the construction of a super airoraft carrier. But unfortunately, the administra- tion had other plans. These plans called for the armed services to be reduced, and by the President’s own directive countermanding the action of the Republican Zightieth Con- gress, the Air Porce was held to 48 groups, the Marine was virtually consigned to oblivion, and construction of the super air- craft carrier, on which $4,000,000 already had been spent, was ordered halted by the White House in 1040. The Republican Bightiteth Congress, by passage of the Vandenberg resolution, laid the groundwork for the military assistance program, and the Eightieth Congress also voted funds over administration protests to send arms to the anti-Communist Chinese Government of Generalissimo Ohiang Kai- shek. The military assistance program was commenced, but unfortunately the military aid that the administration permitted to reach the anti-Communist Chinese Govern- ment of the generalissimo was far short of what waa needed—in fact, it was pitifully emall. But that is not all. Because we had fuszy-minded, pinko officials in our security setup, the Soviet Union was able to steal the secrets of the atomic and the hydrogen bombs. To sum up, Russia and its satellites have spent the last 5 years in an enormous armament program while the United States and the other free nations were disarming. That ie fact No. 3. No one regrets the Korean conflict more than the American people. But despite its terrific cost, Korea has finally awakened the world and certainly the United States to the fact that the Communist conspiracy is essen- tially a conspiracy employing deception and armed might. So, we are rearming—rearm- ing at greatly increased cost to the United States and the free nations everywhere. The Air Force is at last being built to 70 groups, and construction of a superaircraft carrier has finally been started all over again. The Army is being expanded. The Marine Corps is coming back into its own. The Navy is being taken out of the mothballs. I ask you—could it be that the Republican Bightteth Congress was right after all? We long ago learned that no Nation can suddenly launch a huge rearmament pro- gram without throwing its entire economy badly out of joint. Because that is a fact, the edministration found it necessary to seek, and Congress to vote, the tmposition of wartime economic controls. So, once more America is plagued by arbitrary controls ad- ministered by political favorites and White House errand boys. Once more we are burdened with bureaucratic red tape, high prices, and shartages. I think J can be pardoned for what I am about to say. Had the directives and poli- cies of the Republican Eightieth Congress been followed instead of sabotaged, the Korean conflict might never have happened, wartime controls and sky-high taxes might
A814 not be with us, and the world crisis which now exists might have been averted. Now, let us examine what we are doing today from a practical standpoint. We appear to have solidified our position slong the Han River in the vicinity of the thirty-eighth parallel in Korea. That thes- ter occupies approximately 200,000 of our troops, with Japan as a base of operations. On Formosa to the south, the recognized Government of the Republic of China, headed hy Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek, still holds out, together with its anti-Oommunist army of 600,000 troops. Despite the fact that the only Government of China that we offe cially recognize is the generalissimo’s gov- ernment, the administration in Washington refuses to back the generalissimo and his fighting forces. In fact, President Truman in his official announcement on Korea on June 27, 1950, declared that we were send- ing the Seventh Fleet to Formosa to prevent any more air and sea operations by the generalissimo's forces against the Chinese Reds, thus inactivating the 800,000 troops on the island. On the Chinese mainiand, anti-Commu- nist guerrilla bands continue to make raids on the Chinese Reds. Approximately 1,500,- 000 anit-Communist Chinese guerrillas are engaged in these sorties. In French Indochina, a so-called volunteer Communist army, composed substantially of Chinese Reds, engages a French force. The Prench have approximately 150,000 fighting men operating in that area. ' In the balance of Asia, the operations of the Chinese Reds are a constant threat to the security of Burma, Malaya, Indonesia, Pak- istan, and India. ‘ In Burope the forces of the Soviet Union and its puppet states are comparatively quiescent. However, military men are gen- erally in agreement that the Soviet Union, with its 200 Red army divisions, could roll all the way to the English Channel on the west and to the Pyrenees on the south un- less a miraculous rearmament program were undertaken by the free nations of Europe. At the present time, the free nations of the world combined could not muster more than 60 divisions to stop a Soviet advance in con- tinental Europe. Two nations in Europe are on the outside looking tn. Yugoslavia, a former satellite, has broken with the Soviet Union, and Tito casts an occasional friendly glance at the western powers. Spain, the guardian of the Pyrenees and one of the strongest military powers in Europe today, remains isolated from the free nations, anti-Communist though the Franco regime is. That briefly is the practical situation. Just where do we go from here? Apparently it is the aim of the adminis- tration in Washington, as it has been for the past & years, to put our eggs in the European basket. We are told that Ameri- can troops should be put on the continent of Europe. We are at this moment sending more and more military supplies to the members of the North Atlantic community. We are sending food to Tito. We are in consultation with the governments of West~ ern Europe and their military leaders. Everyone knows that we must have an effective aid program for Europe, Everyone knows that we muat not, if we can possibly prevent it, allow the resources and produc- tive capacity of the free European nations to fall into Communist control. It is es- sential to have a program thet meets this ‘problem. But I protest with every resource at my command the formulation of any over-all strategy which virtually ignores the focal point of our trouble today—-Asia. And I might add that Repubiieans in countless numbers, myself included, have been protest- ing such a policy, such a strategy, for years. Our protests date all the way back to 1943 when the first secret decisions were reached by the administration in Washington to give its blessings to the Chinese Communists as &@ political force tn the Orient, as opposed to our great ally, the established government of the Republic of China.' How many Americans recall that on December 15, 1045, President Truman pub- licly announced to the world that unless the Republic of China admitted Chinese Reds to its government, American aid would be cut off? How many Americans recall that the aid was cut off and that General Marshall was sent to China to make sure that the troops of Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek stopped their attacks on the Chinese Reds? How many Americans recall the protests against this policy made by such outstand- ing experts as General Wedemeyer, Patrick J. Hurley, and William C. Bullitt? How many people recall that General MacArthur declared that our failure to help the Repub- lic of China may be “the single greatest blunder in the history of the United States’? Stop and think. We abandoned the anti-Communist forces of Asia once, and the Reds took over China. Are we going to make that same mistake twice? ‘ America has suffered 50,000 casualties in Korea. Mr. Truman says we are going to stay in Korea. Are we going to leave 200,000 American boys stranded in Korea? Or does some master planner think the pressure can be taken off them by deploying other hundreds of thousands of American boys to the scene in Europe? If we really want to take the pressure off our forces in Korea, and if we want to dl- minish the threat of a Soviet sweep across Europe, why, may I ask, do we not employ the 800,000 anti-Communist Chinese troops on Formosa? There 1s no question whatsoever about the desire and the eagerness of the generalis- simo and his troops to join in battle against the Chinese Reds. When the Korean con- flict broke out, the generalissimo, within a week, offered to transport immediately 33,000 troops from Formosa to Korea. We turned him down cold. , Why? Our State Department claimed that we did not want to antagonize the Chinese Reds and bring them into the conflict. Well, the generalissimo’s troops are still on Formosa, but our boys have been fighting the Chinese Reds since last November. The State Department's reasoning is no longer valid today, if it was ever valid. What could be sounder logic, both strate- gically and militarily, than to allow the anti- Communist forces of the generalissimo on Formosa to participate in the war against the Chinese Reds? Why not let them open & second front in Asia? Let us consider the possibilities: First, there is good reason to believe that the Chinese Reds could not support a two- front war. They have neither the railroads nor the highways nor the transportation to supply a force fighting in Korea and another on the Chinese mainland, where presum- ably the troops of the generalissimo would infiltrate if we gave them the necessary material aid. Second, there is excellent reason to be- Neve that if the generalissimo's 800,000 fighting men reached the mainland of China tomorrow, they would double the size of their army within six to eight weeks by the addition of anti-Communist guerrilla forces already fighting the Reds in South China, Third, the opening up of a second front on the Chinese mainland by the forces of the established government of China, operating from Formosa, would not only take the pressure off our forces in Korea, but would reduce the pressure on the French in Indo- china and the Communist threat to Burma, Malaya, Indonesia, Pakistan, India, and Europe. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Fourth, according to responsible military optnion-——yes, right in our own Pentagon— the establishment of a second front on China’s mainland by the armies of Generalis- simo Chiang Kai-shek is not only feasible and practical with aid from us, but it would be the cheapest operation that we could promote in the terms of dollars and man- wer. The forcés of the Generalissimo are mostly battle tested, and they are as well trained as the Chinese Reds. Their needs to make a second-front operation successful fall mainly in the categories of ammunition, transpor- tation, planes, tanks, and food. The Gen- eralissimo has planes and tanks, but he would need more. The Generalissimo has a navy, but it needs replacement parts and servicing. Whether the second front would be opened up by an invasion of the mainland or whether it would be built up by a series of commando raids and night landings would depend on the number and strength of the Chinuse Red forces in that area. For such purposes the Generalissimo already has assembled miscel- laneous craft, but his operations would be much more successful if the United States provided amphibious craft, landing barges, and PT boats. In addition, it would be desirable to have American experts to help train the General- issimo's officers and men. Shipments of food—a critical item in Asila—would be a prime necessity. What kind of logic is it that lets our sol- diers die in Korea when, by shipping the proper supplies to the Generalissimo, a sec- ond front could be opened in China without @ single GI being forced to place a foot on the soil of ‘the Chinese mainland? Certainly, if the Soviet Union can employ its puppet states to fight its wars even against their will, then the United States can call on its friends who are not only willing but begging for the opportunity. Certainly we want a united and militarily strong Europe. Certainly we are willing to provide equipment and possibly some of the manpower necessary to achieve that goal. But let us not place all our eggs in the European basket. Let us remember that we have friends in Asia and that we are fighting a@ war in Asia at this very moment. It it is right for American boys to fight Chinese Reds in Korea, what can be wrong with American help to the anti-Communist Chinese fighting the Reds on their own soil? What are we in Korea for, to win or to lose? If we are in Korea to win, then we should do everything possible to bring that victory about, If we are not in Korea to win, then this administration should be indicted for the murder of thousands of American boys. Some persons may ask: If a second front in Asia can be opened at very small cost to ourselves and without employing American troops, why haven't our generals done it? The answer is that we do have military people who favor the employment of the anti-Communist forces of the Republic of China, There is good reason to believe that General MacArthur favors such an operation. There is good reason to believe that there are people in the Pentagon who favor such an operation. Why hasn't a second front been opened? The reason is that the State Department is preventing it, the same State Department crowd that cut off aid to the Government of China back in 1946, thus allowing China to fall into Communist hands. Can anyone expect the State Department to admit 6 years too late that it was wrong? Can anyone ex- pect the State Department to acoept the blame for the fact that American boys are now being killed by Chinese Reds? No; the State Department, as now con- stituted, is never going to permit a single soidier from Formosa to participate. Why? Because it would mean that the Btate De- partment would finally have to admit that we should have supported Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek all along.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD If we want to develop # true global strate that will wipe out the Communist threat of world domination, if we want a strategy that will save Europe and save Asia at the same time, if we want a strategy that will help save American lives not only in Korea, but wherever the next so-called police action may occur, then I say to you that we must clean ort the State Department from top to bottom, starting with Dean Acheson, The master planners in the Kremlin have had their eyé on Asia for a quarter of a cen- tury. All anyone has to do is to read the writings of Lenin, Stalin, or the Dally Worker. William Z. Foster, the head of the Communist Party in the United States, wrote in the Datly Worker on December 2, 1945, “the war in China ts the key of all problems on the international front.” Hitler in Mein Kampf stated emphatically that Aeia was the key to the world situation. Tojo knew th-t Asia was the key to the world situation. Military strategists of many governments have declared the same thing time and time again. Almost everybody Knows it except our State Department. Time is running out in Asia. How long do you think 1,500,000 anti-Communist guer- rillas can hold out against superior forces? How long will it be before the bottome rust out of Chiang Kai-shek’s small navy? Ylow long will it be before his guns, tanks, and planes are completely outmoded? How long will {t be before the Chinese Reds have per- fected their defenses to such an extent as to make a second front impossible? No; time is not on our side. If we permit the State Department's bankrupt policies to prevail, time will have run out completely, while more thousands of American boys die on foreign soil. The people of Greece will never forget that the shipment of 60 of our Navy's Helldiver bombers was their salvation back in 1946. Those 50 planes, together with only three American military men to train Greek fliers, and a mere handful of mechanics to teach the Greeks to service the planes, turned the tide against the Communist forces in Greece. Certainly, if we could afford to gamble in Greece and achieve such wonderful re- sults, we can afford to take a chance on For- mosa, A little can go a long way if it is effectively applied. Successful policies are not meas- ured in billions of dollars, millions of foot soldiers, and thousands of planes. The true measure is how effectively those dollars, those men, and those planes are employed. Nor ts the measure of good government its multi- tude of controls and edicts, or the secarcities and hardships it imposes, or the lavishness of ite spending and the harshness of its taxes. Don’t you think it is about time Washing- ton learned that? Yes, in this orleis, we need leadership and sound policies as we have never needed them before. As Americans, everyone of us must act in the full meaning of good citizenship. We must look to the year of 1052 for deliver- ance, It is up to every American to help ob- tain this leadership by promoting widespread discussion of the issues and the most care- ful selection of political candidates in both fes. Each of us can help; each of us should participate to the utmost. As we near the end of this day of tribute to Abraham Lincoln, let us borrow from his ‘wisdom, his simple principles and his frugal- ity. Let us remember that it was the clear, high-principled thinking of Lincoln that saved this Union, and let us realize that without clarity of thought, without actions based on fundamental principles, without the moral values that he embraced, we can- not save the world we live in, We have more than an opportunity. We have a duty. God grant us the wisdom and the strength to perform it. Truman Did Not Exceed His Power in Sending Armed Forces to Korea een EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THOMAS E. MARTIN OF 10WA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 15, 1951 Mr. MARTIN of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, much has been said in Congress and in the press about the powers of the Presi- dent as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. On January 12 I placed in the Appendix of the Recorp at page A113 a statement of my own in which I reviewed briefly my own views on the constitutional and military powers of the President. One of the outstanding editors of my district, Wallace .E. Sherlock, of Falir- field, Iowa, wrote an excellent editorial January 17 expressing his views of the President’s powers, just prior to receiv- ing the CoNnGRESsIONAL Recorp contain- ing my remarks. Iam including Mr. Sherlock's editorial and editor's note which appeared in the Fairfield Daily Ledger of Wednesday, January 24: Truman Dip Nor Excrep His Power in SEND- ING ARMED Forces Tro Korga There is much interest being aroused whether the President has the lawful right to send our troops into foreign countries without an act of the Congress. As we count the pros and cons, it appears to us that the cons are in the majority. However, we are convinced the pros have the better of the argument. . The President is the Cqmmander in Chief of the Army, and, unless the Congress en- acts laws to the contrary, the President has the right to do about as he pleases with the Army. As we read constitutional history, the Con- gress is superior to the President, but the latter can act in emergencies that relate to foreign affairs, especially military affairs, when the Congress fails to act or 1s not in session so it can act quickly. Of course, the President is supposed to follow precedents. In defense of the proposition that the Congress is superior to the President, we need only to cite, as our first reason, the fact that the drafters of the Constitution provided for the legislative department of our Government first in that document. At that time, the Representatives were to be elected by the people and the Senators were to be chosen by the State legislatures. The people were to be the sovereign power under the Constitution. Certain powers were given the House of Representatives that were not even given the Senate, because, as provided then, the Members of the House of Representatives were the only national offi- cials who were elected by a direct vote of the people, An example is the provision that all bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives. That the Congress was to be considered superior to the President is proven by such statements in the Constitution. It was to have the power, by 4 two-thirds vote, to pass an aot over the President's veto; it has power to coin money and regulate the value there- of; to establish post offices aud post roads; to declare war, and make rules concerning cap- tures on land and sea; to raise and support armies; to provide and maintain a navy; to roake rules for the government and regula- A815 tion 'f the land and naval forces; and other po were. The expreased powers of the President are limited. The two important powers are the right to veto laws enacted by the Congress and the power vested in him as Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy. The Con- stitution does not go into detail as to the extent of his powers as Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy. The Constitution does give the Congress the power to declare war, to raize and sup- port armies, to provide for and maintain a Navy, to make rules for the government and regulation of land and naval forces. If the Congress fails to make these rules, then the President in emergencies has the right as Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy to use the Army and Navy without waiting for Congress. So far as we can gather from Treading constitutional and military his- tories, the Congress never has set up these rulee—either general or specific. The late President and late Chief Justice of the Supreme Court William Howard Taft 1a on record as saying: “The President is the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States. Under this (provision of the Constitution) he can order the Army and Navy anywhere he will, if the appro- priations furnieh the means of transporta- tion. “Of course, this instrumentality which this power furnishes, gives the President an opportunity to do things which involve con- sequences that would be quite beyond his power under the Constitution directly in effect. “Under the Constitution, only Congress has the power to declare war, but with the Army and the Navy, the President can take action such as to involve the country in war and to leave Congress no option but to de- clare it or recognize its existence.” Mr. Taft went on to point out cases in which the President used the Army and Navy in foreign countries without waiting for the consent of the Congress. He cited the acts of Polk in ordering the Army into the disputed territory between’the Nueces and Rio Grande Rivers which brought on the Mexican War. There are numerous cases in United States history when the Presidents sent the Army and/or Navy into foreign areas without the consent of the Congress. Some of the coun- tries invaded requested the presence of our armies—others did not, There was the Nicaraguan case under Taft’s administration. We landed a part of our Army in Vera Cruz in Mexico to bring the Huerta administration to its senses, President Wilson sent our Army into Mexico just before World War I. Then there was the landing of our Army in China during the Boxer Rebellion under the McKinloy administration. We could cite a@ number of other cases where aimilar acts have been committed by Presidents of the United States. We are not writing these lines to defend President Truman for his invasion of Korea or his proposal to send a large farce into Western Europe without asking the Congress for a declaration of war. But we are saying that he has had plenty of precedents, But we are reviewing that part of our American history to impress on the Congress the importance of setting up some general rules to control under such circumstances, — Eprror’s worr.—The above editorial was written January 17, but we have not had the space for it till today. Since writing it, we have received daily Conarzsstona, Recor No. 7, volume 97, and we find on page A115 an extension of remarks of our own Co: men Tomas E. Marti on this same ject. Mr, Maermr takes much the same stand we have taken above. He saya among other
A816 statements: “President Truman had the au- thority and power under section 2 of article II of our Constitution to order American troops into Korea. “The President's obligation and Nability for national security as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces necessarily leaves to him the matter of determining how far he must go within his powers to fulfill that obligation unless so limited by Congress.” Mr. Martin goes on to say: “Unleas Con- gresa places restrictions and limitations on the use to be made of the Armed Forces of the United States before additional troops are sent to Europe, the President as Com- mander in Chief of our Armed Forces un- doubtedly has the power to send addittonal Armed Forces to Europe even though he in- tends them to operate there as a part of a great international army, “The power of Congress extends to all legis- lation essential to the prosecution of a war with vigor and success, except such as inter- feres with the command of the forces and the conduct of the campatgns.” We may add to Mr. Marrin’s statements that if Congress fails to act then “the sky is the limit” for the President, Vice President Barkley Receives 1950 Histadrut Humanitarian Award EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EMANUEL CELLER Oy NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 2, 1951 Mr. CELLER. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I include herewith the following account of the presentation of the 1950 Histadrut Hu- manitarian Award to Vice President Bark.ey by the National Committee for Labor Israel: On Wednesday, February 7, 1951, at 11 a.m., leaders of the National Committee for Labor Israel met in the office of the Vice President a€ the Senate Office Building, to present to Vice President ALBEN W. BARKLEY the 1950 Histadrut Humanitarian Award. The com- mittee headed by its general chairman, Jo- seph Schlossberg, included Isaac Hamlin, gen- eral secretary, Harry Greenberg and Joseph Breslaw, vice presidents of the International Ladies Garment Workers’ Union (A. F. of L.), and Charles M. Segal, a director of the Na- tional Committee for Labor Israel. In a tribute to the Vice President, Mr. Schlossberg said: “Mr. Vice President, as chairman of the National Committee for Labor Israel, it is & pleasure to present to you the 1950 Hista- drut Humanitartan Award in recognition of your selfless and devoted ald to the Btate of Israel and the Histadrut, the General Fed- eration of Jewish Workers. “Your efforts on behalf of the new state of Israel have done much to create the proper climate for the understanding of all people of the struggle of Israel for the pres- ervation not only of its own life and future, but of the democratic principles which we as Americans hold so dear. “The present international unrest under- scores only too dramatically the urgent need of preserving democratic institutions in the world today. We consider Israel a vital flank in our fight against totalitarian ag- gression, and in view of this, we deem it of the utmost importance that Americans con- tinue to give wholehearted support to the Jewish state and to ita democratic instru- ments. “Mr. Vice President, you have labored hard to support the cause of Israel and the Histadrut, which has laid the very founda- tion for the Jewish State. You have brought the message of Israel and freedom and democracy to the people of America, and in so doing you have made a great con- tribution to the very life of Israel. “In presenting you with the 1950 Histadrut Humanitarian Award we wish you health and many more years to continue your indis- pensable efforts on behalf of the United States and freedom and democracy every- where.” The Vice President replied: “Mr. Chairman, it is with a deep sense of gratitude that I accept from you the 1960 Histadrut Humanitarian Award. I could not claim that anything I have done merits this distinction from you and from your committee. Nevertheless, I deeply ap- preciate the generous spirit which has con- strained you and your organization to be- stow this award upon me. I thank you and them for the distinct honor which you do me today. “Whatever I have done in behalf of the freedom of Israel and the Jewish people who have found and are finding it a haven for applied democracy, I have done because I believe profoundly in democracy end in the ideals of free government for all people. The creation of the new State of Israel seems almost a miracle of our period. It came earlier than most people expected. I am happy that our Government, through the President, was the first to recognize it, and that our Government sponsored its admission to the United Nations, “I am especially proud to be the recipient of this award because of its meaning in connection with labor Israel. All my life I have labored and sympathized with those who labor. All my life I have sought to advance the welfare of those who labor, and to recognize their worth in any democratic system of free enterprise and equality of opportunity. “The recognition of this service by the State of Israel arid by the friends of Israel is a fitting companion to their recognition of the individual rights of man and the dignity which men may attain under free institutions. “It is needless for me to say that I wish for your organization, the Histadrut, the greatest possible success in its worthy efforts. I wish for the State of Israel permanent and increasing stability, and I wish for all the People who may find rescue and refuge under its institutions not only life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but that they may overtake happiness and clutch it to their bosoms as a part of their way of life. “Again, let me thank you for this great honor which you have done me.” The UNESCO Story EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JACOB K. JAVITS OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 2, 1951 Mr. JAVITS. Mr. Speaker, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cul- tural Organization—UNESCO—is a UN agency devoted to the promotion of bet- ter understanding among the peoples of the earth through education and the interchange of ideas. Appended hereto 4s the foreword to the publication the UNESCO story and the preamble to APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the constitution of UNESCO, which out- line the fields of work in which this international organization is engaging: Forrworp The story of UNESCO its one of a great crusade for international understanding, based on the belief that cooperation and good will among the peoples of the world can be a deciding force in the search for a lasting peace. UNESCO's high ideals and principles are expressed in the preamble to its constitution, To make their achievement a reality instead of a dream, however, its member nations must fashion a practical program on which the peoples of the world can work together. That is UNESCO's primary challenge today. Each member nation faces another respon- sibility: providing information on UNESCO's program and objectives to its own citizens and making plain how communities, organi- zations, and individuals can contribute to them. The UNESCO story embraces such long- Tange ambitions as teaching the illiterate half of the world to read and write—other far-reaching projects to raise standards of living which only the resources of govern- ments can carry out—combating ignorance and prejudice throughout the world, freeing the minds of men. It 1s a story of cooperation being fostered among nations and among great organiza- tions, national and international, and of the contributions of leaders in education, sci- ence, and culture. But 1t also is the story of the things ordinary citizens of a fortunate land can do to help those tn other lands to share tn the progress of civilization, of what a@ community in any country can do toward playing its part in world affairs. The UNESCO story in the United States, if told in terms of UNESCO objectives, is that of the great civic, religious, and student or- ganizations which have sent medical mis- sions and educational aid to war-devastated countries, and of scores of foundations and universities which have helped rebuild insti- tutions and equip laboratories. It is that of educators and scientists and writers seeking ways to better understand- ing, and of thousands of American teachers and youths who have gone abroad as ambas- sadors of good will. It is the story of courses on UNESCO and its objectives in scores of colleges and schools and of movements to end intolerance in our own cities and towns. It 1s a story to which hundreds of commu- nities and groups are adding chapters day by day—of a little western town which staged an international festival in which half of its citizens participated and which drew 2,000 people from the surrounding countryside; of & grand plano sent to the Athens Symphony by music clubs; of an American children’s art exhibit in a Japanese school; of thou- sands of groups in our own country trying to understand the problems and ways of the peoples of other lands. UNESCO makes no claim to credit for all these activities. Most of them started in the United States through organizations which believed in the UNESCO idea before UNESCO got fairly under way. The UNESCO contribution has been to expand them and give them a firmer foundation for the fu- ture—and to point up new objectives. It is the achievements of these organizations, and the deep desire of individual citizens to take part in efforts seeking world cooperation and peace, that underlie the strength of the UNESCO program in this country today. PREAMBLE OF THE ConsTITUTION or UNESCO The governments of the states parties to this Constitution on behalf of their peoples declare— That, since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the de- fenses of peace must be constructed;