A3696 market, with a resultant tax loss of $90,000,- 000 a year. This sounds like pipe-dream forecasting to industry observers — they reckon the loss at $10,000,000 at most—and from one standpoint is irrelevant, anyway: If the tax is unjust and regressive, if it tends to protect the status quo under which five companies claim 95 percent of all sales at the expense of smaller companies, then the tax should be adjusted to a more equitable figure, Some brisk competition among the “economy brands” would have a healthy effect on the cigarette industry’s “big three” or “big five,” and might well result in greater sales for the industry as a whole with corresponding benefits to growers and a gain in revenue, instead of a loss, for the Treasury. This is a good bill, aimed at correcting an ill-advised tax discrimination. We commend it respect- fully to cur readers and to the Virginia Congressmen who are concerned, not only with fair play but also with the good health of an industry that means so much to this State. For a Free and Independent Slovakia EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. MELVIN PRICE OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, May 16, 1950 Mr. PRICE. Mr. Speaker, at the re- quest of Mr. John Sedlacek, chairman of the Southern Illinois Slovak Federa- tion, 1321 North Thirteenth Street, East St. Louis, Ill., and under leave to do so, I herewith extend in the Appendix of the Recorp an article which appeared in Jednota, largest Slovak Catholic weekly in the United States, published in Mid- dletown, Pa,., by the First Catholic Slovak Union, I am personally well acquainted with Mr, Sedlacek. I know of his high stand- ing in his home community and the fine character of this man. He is among the Americans of Slovak ancestry who would like to see their countrymen rid them- selves of the communistic yoke. I have the feeling that men like Mr. Sedlacek and those who work with him in this country, through their encouragement to their relatives and friends in the old country, will provide the spark that will give these people the courage to continue their resistance to communism and even- tually gain real freedom for their native land. The article follows: For A FREE AND INDEPENDENT SLOVAKIA—~THE ORIGIN AND AIMS OF THE SLtovak NATIONAL COUNCIL ABROAD (By Peter Pridavok) 1 Prior to the Munich crisis in 1938, there existed—as is commonly known—a very strong autonomist movement in Slovakia, aiming at home rule within the framework of a dual Czech-Slovak state, as it had been originally conceived by the great majority of Slovaks, and also by many Czechs. But fora long time there was nothing that could be called an open mass-movement among the Slovak population for the complete separa- tion of their country from the former Bohe- mian crown lands to which it has been an- nexed as a result of the dismemberment of Austria-Hungary in 1918. The attitude of the racial minorities, especially of the Magyars, was, of course, different. They had never completely given up their hope for a reunion with Hungary, thelr mother coun- try, and even if they did adopt an autono- mist attitude for immediate practical pur- poses, their long-term policy was separatism. One can hardly speak of a unity of pur- pose between the Slovak autonomists and the Slovakian Magyar separatists—but in one thing they certainly were united, in their intense dislike and resentment of the strong- ly centralistic rule of the Prague administra- tion which looked upon Slovakia as a Czech colony and under which the autochthonous Slovaks and Magyars suffered equally, though their grievances were not always of the same order. Had it been possible to co- ordinate the basic policies of the two dis- contented racial groups (the German minor- ity played only a minor role in Slovakian po- litical life prior to 1988), Czech centralism and unitarism, i. e., the false ideology of a united Czechoslovak nation, could not have survived for very long in its guise of a demo- cratic government. It would have been forced either to yield to the overwhelmingly anticentralist vote or else to discard the mask of democracy altogether and to resort openly to sheer coercion and dictatorship. A glance at a few election figures will show how hopeless would have been the position of the Czech Government in Slovakia, had her autochthonous inhabitants been able to find a common platform. The anticentralist (autonomist and separatist) political par- ties, such as the Slovak People’s Party, the Slovak National Party, the Christian Social Party, the Magyar, and the German National Parties, plus the Communists who, until 1935, when the Czechoslovak-Soviet Pact was concluded, were vociferously separatist, de- nouncing the Slovak autonomists as traitors for having only demanded a home rule, and not a separate Slovak state—in all parlia- mentary elections, with the exception of the 1920 ones which, however, cannot be regarded as normal democratic elections, received an overwhelming majority of votes (though not of seats)—-owing to clever gerrymandering. Totalof | Autonomist valid votes | and scpara- recorded. tist votes Election year-- 19: 1,341, 191 378, 958 1, 425, 595 918, 995 1, 434, 926 801, 931, 1, 625, 549 1991, 551 1 This figure includes the number of votes cast for the Communist Party [210,785] which, on Moscow’s orders, joined the centralist camp, after Dr. Benes had signed a treaty of alliance with Stalin in 1935. The progovernment (centralist) vote would have been even much smaller but for the more than 200,000 Czech colonizers settled in Slovakia by the government for the purpose of Ozechizing the Slovaks, and for the in- timidation (or bribing) of voters dependent on the government, such as civil servants, teachers, etc. The homesickness of the Magyars was quite understandable from their point of view. But it necessarily became the main, if not the only reason for the slovaks’ refusal to join forces with them against the odious Prague centralism. The resentment of the Slovaks against the betrayal by Masaryk and Benes of the Pittsburgh Agreement and of numerous other Czech-Slovak compacts between various bodies and individuals abroad during the war years 1914-18 was great, and anti-Czech feeling ran, at times, deplorably high, But their fear and anxiety, lest Slovakia should once more become a dependency or province of Hungary, was even greater. Thus, although they were far from feeling happy in the new, diminutive Czechoslovak replica of the former Austria- Hungary, they considered it a lesser evil than the possible return to Hungary, and accepted the Czecho-Slovak State as a temporary ex- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD pedient, created withcut their active consent by the Paris peacemakers, but regarded as necessary while the peace settlement pre- vailed, This temporary acceptance of Czecho- Slovakia (supposing it would have more far- reaching changes in its constitutional struc- ture) did not mean, of course, that the Slovaks were prepared to give up their aspira- tions for a fully free and independent nation- hood within the limits compatible with a wider federal organization comprising as many of the central European nations as possible; it only meant acquiescence in a pestponement of the realization of their ultimate national ideals, for no nation re- nounces its freedom and independence voluntarily and forever. The Pan-Czechs, such as the Czech politicians who tried to imerease the numbers of the Czech nation by a simple arithmetical operation, namely (by the addition to it of 3,000,000 Slovaks), did their utmost to convince the Slovaks— and the world at large—that it would have been for their own good, if they had as- sented to national extinction, but without any success. The Slovaks did not forget that once upon a time, more than 1,000 years ago, their ancestors had had a State of their own (the Nitra Principality) which, in its later development (as Great Moravia) was—al- though only for a short period of about one century—the most powerful State in central Europe, comprising besides modern Slovakia also the greater portion of modern Hungary, a good slice of Poland, the whole of the modern province of Moravia, which then ex- tended into Austria, and had, for a brief period, conquered also the Czechs of Bo- hemila. ‘ Nations, like the proverbial elephant, have long memories, which are even strengthened when adversity befalls them. It is there- fore understandable that the Slovaks, after the downfall of Great Moravia, circa A. D. 906 have never ceased to dream and to sing about the glory that was Nitra, Prince Pri- bina, and King Svatopluk. The memory of a once free Slovak nation appealed to them even throughout the eight centuries during which their national con- sclousness was being reduced to an almost thanatoid state in the feudal kingdom of Hungary, the official language of which was Latin, And when the French Revolution roused the sopite national feelings of the until then, almost amorphous masses Of cen- tral European humanity, the Slovaks, too, began to return to national life. At that time their popular leaders did their best to revive and to strengthen the Great Moravian tradition. It was in this sense Juraj Fandli (1754-1810) wrote in his popular works on husbandry, and it was these past memories the poet Jan Holly (1785-1849) glorified in his epic poems modeled on Homer’s IMad. The memory of the past national greatness also prompted the army of Slovak insurgents against Magyar domination, in 1848-49, and the political leaders who demanded from the Emperor of Austria the setting up of a Duchy of Slovakia as an autonomous province of his dominions. This same idea was ex- pressed in &@ memorandum submitted to the Emperor Francis-Joseph in 1861, pleading for the “recognition of our national indi- viduality on the territory inhabited by our people,” the creation of a (Slovaklan) prov- ince of upper Hungary and the division of the country into counties readjusted on na- tionality lines. Even the Slovak emigrants who had left Hungary to become citizens of the New World where there was more freedom and more bread for them, nurtured the idea of a free Slovakia in their newspapers and other publications, and at the beginning of this century founded an organization (the Slo- vak League of America) whose aim was— and still is—the liberation of the old coun- try. Toward the end of the First World War,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD when the edifice of the Habsburg monarchy was crumbling, Dr. F. Juriga, then the only Slovak representative in the Hungarian Parliament, voiced the true sentiments of his people when he declared before angry Magyar deputies (October 19, 1918), that the Slovak nation wished to establish a national state of their own on the tradition of the Great Moravian Empire of Rastislav, Svatop- luk and Cyril and Methodius. These ideals fell short of realization at that time, mainly because of the machina- tions of Masaryk, Benes, and their associates who had succeeded in convincing the Entente Governments, on the one hand, that the Czechs and Slovaks were in fact two branches of the same nation (cf. Masaryk’s fallacious assertion: “The Slovaks are Bohemians in spite of their using their dialect as their literary language,” in his memorandum sub. mitted to Sir Edward Grey in April 1915), and, on the other, the Slovaks, that the cre~ ation of a Czecho-Slovak state was their only chance and the only way of release from the Magyar bondage. At first the Slovaks accepted this Czecho- Slovak solution, but only on the supposition that Slovakia would be a fully self-governing part of the dual Republic. When, however, they became aceneint+ed with the real aims of the Czech rut. er-nun (amalgamation of the Slovaks with the Czechs in a single na- tional unit), and when they saw the col- onizing policy of the Prague administration, they grew more and more convinced that Czecho-Slovakia promised as bad a prospect for the future of the Slovak nation as Hun- gary had before. Andrej Hlinka, the most popular national leader, from a Czech prison, foretold the fall of Czecho-Slovakia as early as 1920. The shortsighted and extremely selfish policy of the Prague rulers precipi- tated the complete disruption of the broth- erly links between the two kindred nations, so that already in 1933, when Slovakia cele- brated the one thousand one hundredth an« niversary of the Slovakian Prince Pribina, Czecho-Slovakia was morally finished, insofar as the Slovaks were concerned. Only their fear of Hungarian revisionisr. prevented them at that time from shaking off the Czech overlordship. But from that year on- ward the dissolution of the unhappy Czech- Slovak marriage was a foregone conclusion— it was only a question of time and of cir- cumstances. An opportunity presented it- self in the troubled months between Septem~ ber 1988 and March 1939, and the Slovaks seized it, as would any nation in a similar predicament. Ir It was a misfortune for the young Slovak state, that it has come into existence on the eve, and not on the morrow, of a great war that was bound to reshape the map of the world, and a tragedy that Hitler had been its godfather. The cause the Slovaks had been fighting for was as just as any great national cause in history. But the circumstances in which its temporary victory had been brought about, were sufficient to discredit it in the eyes of the western democratic world, igno- rant of the plights of the Slovak people in the “model democracy” of Czechoslovakia, This the Slovak leaders, and even the peo- ple at large, knew only too well. But they could neither halt nor alter the course of events, for after Munich, the smaller na- tions of central Europe were left without any alternative to determine their actions. And so the joy of the Slovak people at the rebirth of their nation after more than 1,000 years was mixed with great anxieties with regard to the future, Perhaps other people in central Europe were in such a had predicament; they had been fighting for their freedom and inde- pendence, yet the democratic West, which ‘was engaged in a deadly struggle in the de- fense of freedom, had turned deaf, ears on them, while Hitler, the self-confessed de- stroyer of freedom of all non-Teutonic na- tions, as well as of Christianity to which they were deeply attached, had—-for his own, and only temporary reasons—adopted the cham- pionship of their freedom. They had no il- lusions whatever that if Hitler had won the war, their independence, such as it was, would have been destroyed in the same way as the independence of Poland was destroyed. On the other hand, they were being told, day and night and in and out of season, that if the Western Allies won the war, Benes and his following would be given a free hand to take their revenge on the Slovaks for having dared even to dream of freedom, for which the former purported to have been fighting. And Benes (with all his following) was seething with revenge. When the author of these lines—who had left his country im- mediately after the outbreak of the war, in order to work for the freedom of his people on the side of the Allies—arrived in Paris on October 15, 1939, he was greeted thus by the commanding officer of the Czechoslovak military units which were then forming in the southwest of France: “Well, I hope you have come to jo our ranks and that you will have nothing in common with that autonomist scum. For I must tell you, that after the war, we are going to settle the so-called Slovak problem very thoroughly and for good: we’ll shoot or hang some thirty to forty thousand Slovak separatists, and the question of Slovak autonomy or independ- ence will be rid of forever.” Although Benes was then not yet recognized as President of a nonexistent Czechoslovakia by any of the western governments, this democratic attitude, voiced by one of his lieutenants, was surely alarming enough, and for good reason, for later, when Benes had succeeded in establishing his position with the western governments, the anti-Slovak tone became frequent in the Czechoslovak press and radio propaganda. In the evening of the same day, the present writer met Dr. Milan Hodza, the former Prime Minister of Czechoslovakia, himself a Slovak, and told him about his experience with that liberating hero. Of course, he was outraged and disgusted, but did not think that the time was ripe for starting a separate Slovak political action as had been suggested to him by the present writer. A few months later, however, Dr. Hodza himself initiated the formation of a Slovak National Council, which was duly established at the beginning of January 1940, with Dr. Hodza as President, and the present writer as General Secretary. At that time it was not possible to inaugurate in France a politi- cal action for a separate Slovak state, for several reasons. First, there were very few politically minded and educated Slovaks in France. Second, Dr. Hodza, though after his long experiences with the pan-Czechs was quite favorably disposed to the idea of a free Slovakia, felt that as a former Cabinet Minister of long standing, and later Prime Minister of Czechoslovakia, he could not well engage himself in an action that would have belied his political past. And last, but not least, Dr. S. Osusky, who since the disintegra- tion of Czechoslovakia was continuougly rec- ognized by the French Government as Czechs oslovak Minister, warned Dr. Hodza, the pres- ent writer, and the handful of the Paris Slovaks, against any separatists Slovak action, asserting—quite falsely, as he him- self confessed later—that the French Gov- ernment would review it with the utmost disfavor and hostility. The Slovak National Council therefore re- stricted its political postulates to the Octo- ber program, that is to the wide political autonomy within a federal Czecho-Slovak Republic which has been achieved in Octo- per of the previous year, It therefore joined up with the preparatory committee for a Czech National Council constituted in the meantime by a Czech group disapproving A3697 of the policy of the Benesites, which had accepted this Slovak program, and the two bodies acted henceforth as the Czecho-Slo- vak National Council in Paris, each of them retaining its distinct individuality in mat- ters concerning their respective nations. At that stage the council considered its task was mainly to counter—with the very lim- ited means at its disposal—the authoritar- jan and violently anti-Slovak activities of the Czechoslovak National Committee for- merly under the auspices and actual head- ship of Dr. Benes. Considering that in the given circumstances and in the atmosphere which then prevailed at the Quai d’Orsay, the only possible way of fostering its ends would be to play an active part in the na- tional committee, which in the meantime had been recognized—thanks to the efforts of Mr. Osusky—by the French, and conse- quently by the British, Governments, It therefore announced its establishment to the national committee (Dr. Osusky was in- formed beforehand), as well as to the French Government, and demanded an anequate representation on it. By a letter daiod Jan- uary 16, 1940, Msgr. Sramek, the nominal head of the committee, refused, on consult- ing Dr. Benes, to recognize the council and to deal with it, but—characteristically for the mind of the whole group—invited Dr. Hodza personally to join the committee which he declined. The Czecho-Slovak National Council in Paris could not develop any large-scale ac- tivities, mainly because the Benes commit- tee, being recognized by the French Govern- ment as an allied quasi government (though not on the same footing as the Polish Gov- ernment of President Raczkiewicz), made use of this situation and of the various war- time regulations restricting political activ- ities, and by denouncing the council as dis- ruptive and even pro-Nazi, succeeded in checking and isolating it almost comnletelv. The following little incident illustrates the situation which then prevailed in Paris. Some time in February or March the council had agreed to issue a proclamation to the Slovaks and Czechs residing in France. Its text was sent to the printers, where it was confiscated and the setting up destroyed by the French police on the instigation of the committee who had somehow got wind of the proclamation through one of the spies in the printing works. After the collapse of France the council ceased to exist. Only one of its members, the present writer, succeeded in escaping to Britain (Dr. Hodza was living in London), and he was interned on his arrival by the British authorities, who had been told by the Benes committee that he was a Nazi agent, and was held in detention for 10 months. Some of the members of the Czech National Council were treated similarly. Russia—and Alaska Statehood EXTENSION OF REMARKS fe) HON. E. L. BARTLETT DELEGATE FROM ALASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, May 16, 1950 Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Speaker, the Senate Interior and Insular Affairs Committee has completed hearings on the Alaska statehood bill following pas- sage of that measure by the House on March 3. Under leave to extend my re- marks in the ReEcorp, I wish to include a statement which Julius Epstein of the Friends of Democracy, Inc., of New York City, had planned to submit to the Sen- ate committee in support of the issue
A3698 which is so important to the Nation, as well as to Alaska. That statement was not submitted as the hearings had closed, but I am particularly anxious to have it made available because it contains in- formation not previously brought to- gether as to the views of Soviet Russia regarding Alaska: Mr. Chairman, I greatly appreciate the opportunity to testify before your commit- tee. I am here to testify in support of granting full statehood to Alaska. Alaska 1s our direct frontier with the Soviet Union. Only 4 miles of water, which is ice the larger part of the year, separate Little Diomede Island, which belongs to Alaska, from Big Diomede Island, part of the Soviet Union. The International Date- Jine whick is also the border line between the Western Hemisphere and Asia, runs be- tween these two islands. Today, I do not want to dwell on the rather well known strategic importance of Alaska. As long as more than 30 years ago, the prophetic Gen. Billy Mitchell predicted that the nation that holds Alaska, can rule the world if it chooses. He also called Alaska the Achilles heel of America. I do want to call the attention of this committee and the public to the rather for- gotten fact that there is evidence for the existence of a Soviet campaign for the re- covery of Alaska. Time and again the greatest American newspapers which are well aware of their re- sponsibility referred to this campaign. From my big file on Alaska, accumulated during the last 10 years, I just want to quote a few— and there are many more—examples. On June 29, 1940, the New York Herald Tribune carried an article written by its staff correspondent Ansel H. Talbert. The article appeared under the date line Nome, Alaska, June 28. Its title was “Alaska Puz- zled by Reds Moving to Nearby Isle.” I quote: “On Tuesday, in Juneau, the Alaskan cap- ital, Gov. Ernest H. Gruening told this cor- respondent that the reason for the sudden Russian activities on Big Diomede, of which he had been told by Nome residents, consti- tuted one of the greatest mysteries in the north. Prof. Cecil F. Robe, of the Univer- sity of Alaska, a noted student of Alaskan and Russian history, also expressed sur- prise, but pointed to a recent story in Pravda, the official Communist newspaper. The story, Professor Robe said, asserted that the sale of Alaska io the United States was illegal and a robbery because the Russian Czar did not consult the people about the trans- action.” A few weeks later, to be accurate, on August 11, 1940, the New York Times published an article by its famous correspondent and writ~« er Hallett Abend under the headline: “Threat to Alaska seen in red force.” After dealing with the military preparations on the east Siberian coast, some 50 miles from Alaska proper, Hallett Abend continued: “The Unitec States does not threaten Russia’s position in the northeastern part of Asia, and the region is far from Japan’s plans for Asiatic mainland expansion. In the opinion of military and naval men here, this vast and secret military development can mean only a Soviet design against spercely populated and poorly defended Alaska, which was Russian territory before the United States bought it. “Soviet newspapers and magazines have been devoting much space to Alaska and its riches while articles extol the deed of Czarist generals and admirals of a century ago. There is an intensification of the campaign for ‘recovery of rich lands that once belonged to Russia but do not belong to the USSR be- cause they were ineptly lost or corruptly sold latcr when the dynasty became decadent.’ “Since the only territory that Czarist Rus- sia ever sold outright was Alaska, the impli- cations are plain. “The thousands of young Russian men and women who are being settled in northeast Siberia are all representatives of the ‘younger generation’ that has matured entirely under Soviet control. They are said to be carried away with the idea that they are to be the glorious conquerors of the world, that they must sow the seeds of revolution everywhere, and that, to quote from a Vladivostok news- paper, their mission ‘first of allis to get their hands on Alaska which idiotically was sold to cavitalist America by the Czarist Govern- ment’” Six years later, in August 1946, the Scripps- Howard newspaper chain sent its staff writer Jim G. Lucas to Alaska in crder to make a thorough inquiry into the political and eco- nomical problems of the country with spe- cial stress on Soviet-Alaskan relations. Jim G. Lucas did an excellent job. He wrote a series of six articles under the head- line, “Alaska—First Line of Defense.” In New York, Lucas’ articles appeared in the World Telegram. Publication started on August 26, 1946. It is right 1n the first article that Lucas states, I quote: “The Soviets never have conceded the Czar’s right to sell Alaska. Russian airmen and seamen stationed in Alaska during World War II openly referred to it as Russian territory. ‘ “Along the Siberian coast, Russia has has- tened completion of at least one major air and naval base. “Her patrol planes fly daily over American bases in the Aleutian Islands, while at the same time our planes are denied the air over Siberia. “At Umiat, where the United States Navy is Grilling for oil in its 35,000 square-mile Bar- row Basin, trouble may be brewing. The discovery of high-grade petroleum in com- mercial quantities conceivably can arouse the cupidity of other nations.” In his third article, appearing on August 28, 1946, Lucas has the following to say: “Navy’s discovery of a ‘second Iranian oil field’ in its 35,000 squarec-miles reserve around Point Barrow and Russia’s stub- porn refusal to admit legality of the Alaskan purchase in 1867 may soon bring tension to a new high.” Lucas’ fourth article which appeared on August 29, 1946, deals with the attitude of the many Russians who came to Alaska dur- ing World War II. He has this to say: “Native Alaskans have been told for many years that the U. S. S. R. does not admit legality of the Czar’s sale of Alaska in 1867. An authority who spent 3 years at Cold Bay supervising the transfer of lend-lease ships to the Russians said he failed to contact one Russian officer who did not refer to Alaska as Soviet territory.” Latest reference to the Soviet refusal to admit legality of the United States’ Alaska purchase of 1867 can be found in the March 19 issue of this year of the New York Journal- American and the other Hearst papers. I mean an excellent article by Gov. Ernest Gruewing. This article by the present Gov- ernor of Alaska was inserted in the Conares- sionaL Recorp of March 20, 1950, by the Honorable E. L. Bartiert, Delegate from Alaska. I just want to quote four short paragraphs from Governor Gruening’s article. Here they are: “We are in grave peril of losing another year. We are inviting attack through our back door, left conspicuously ajar. “It is left ajar for invasion by an enemy who does not acknowledge the validity of the sale of Alaska by the Tsar. “It is, from the Soviet standpoint, still ‘Russian America.’. They mean, if we will let them, to hold that part of America physi- cally, permanently, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD “Statehood—the full incorporation of Alaska into the Union—1s the one clear answer America can make to this oft-uttered threat of annexation following invasion.” The quotations quoted in this statement represent only a very small part of my file on Alaska. However, they suffice to illustrate the point that there can be no reasonable doubt whatsoever that the Soviets carry on with their campaign for recovery of Alaska. Since Stalin is certainly more intelligent than Adolf Hitler, his ally of 1939, he did not yet register any Official claim to the Terri- tory of Alaska. But, as the quotations con- tained in this statement indicate, Stalin ob- viously not only permits such a campaign put wants it carried out, at least for inner consumption. America could pronounce no clearer “hands off Alaska” than by granting full statehood to Alaska, and by granting it now. Resolution on Germany EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CHET HOLIFIELD OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, May 16, 1950 Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Speaker, the other day the newspapers carried a news item that was an insult to every free manand woman. A dispatch from Bonn revealed that 13 out of 14 newly ap- pointed diplomatic officials of the West German Government were former Nazi diplomats. Thirteen faithful servants of Joachim von Ribbentrop, who was hanged for conspiring to make Germany rule the world, are going to represent what is considered the democratic Bonn government. The fact that such appointments are being made by the Germans is in itself sufficient reason to appoint an investi- gating committee such as my resolution envisages. Actually, the case of the diplomats merely highlights the degree to which Nazis have infiltrated into Ger- man political, judicial, economic, educa- tional, and cultural life, obtaining in many cases the most important posi- tions. It would literally take days to only read to the House the names of Germans whose membership in the Nazi Party has proved an asset rather than a liability in their postwar careers. Over a year ago a high Bavarian offi- cial reported that 90 percent of the judges in Bavaria are former Nazis. An on-the-spot investigation by Dr. Joseph Mire, American trade-union official, dis- closed that 50-70 percent of all Bavarian government positions were being held by former Nazis. On the one hand, 32,744 Bavarian officials were former party members; compare these figures to the 1,095 officials who had been persecuted during the Hitler regime. In almost every section and sphere identical WNazi infiltration obtains. Three presidents of denazification courts in Germany denounced the travesty of justice that goes under the name of de- nazification whose result has been, they pointed out and I quote, “That many state offices have become restricted
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Nazi organizations.” Almost 600 may- ors in Hessen are former Nazis. Or, to take another typical case, the mayor of Schwaebisch-Gmuend who was elected with a plurality of '75 percent is a for- mer SA Oberfuehrer. In the field of education many thousands of ex-Nazis have returned to their old teaching jobs. One of them, according to Dr. Alonzo G. Grace, former Director of the United States Education Division in Germany, teaches the alphabet as follows, “A is for Adolf, H for Hitler, G for Goebbels.” In the great industrial center of the Ruhr, most of the managers of the giant tron, steel, and coal enterprises are for- mer Nazis. They represent the inter- ests of the very same industrialists who put Hitler into the saddle as they have powered Germany for three wars through their alliances with various na- tionalist and militarist groups. Some appointments have been so shocking that Germans have struck in protest, as when former SA Obersturmfuehrer Grewe be- came a member of the Ruhr Board of Transportation. With the approval of American occupation authorities top ex- perts who helped Hitler run his war economy now run the economy of the ‘West German state—as if men like Malt- zan, Dinkelbach, Abs, Albert, and Puen- der were trustworthy allies and guard- ians of a peace-loving, democratic, and spiritually rejuvenated Germany. Can anybody doubt that the mass re- turn of the Nazis presents as great a challenge as a major military defeat? To leave that challenge unanswered would be a calamity of the first order and completely nullify our victories on the battlefield. I for one propose, in concert with the Members of this House who are cosponsoring this resolution, that an investigating committee be sent to Germany at the earliest convenience of the President of the United States. Welcomed to Nebraska EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. A. L. MILLER OF NEBRASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, May 16, 1950 Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. Mr. Speak- er, the President is returning to Wash- ington today from a “nonpolitical”’ trip made at the expense of the taxpayers. While it was a costly junket and ended up in a political rally in Chicago, I am hoping that President Truman and his advisers learned what the people think about the free spending, Government- do-all policy he is promoting, which is throwing the Federal Government fur- ther and further into the red during a period of prosperity in which we should paying off our huge debt. If they learn this lesson the money for the junket tmmay not be ill spent. The President had a good opportunity to learn their thoughts as he traveled through my State and district. We are a thrifty people and still believe in the old-time virtues of thrift and individual initiative in the solution of our problems. We believe in matching the things we would like to do against our ability to pay for them. But let the editorial in the Alliance (Nebr.) Times-Herald of May 9 tell the story: GOP WELCOME MEssace To TruMaN Is MASTERPIECE The National Republican Committee can take a leaf out of the book of the Nebraska wing of the party in confronting the Tru- man “nonpolitical” tour. Instead of wait- ing for the President to make some slip, such as: “I like Ol’ Joe Stalin,” the Nebraska com- mittee used the Truman visit to Nebraska to go on the offensive. Heading an advertise- ment: “Welcome Mr. President to Ne- braska * * * the State with no bonded debt * * * no sales tax * * * and the lowest per capita tax in the Nation,” the President was greeted in eastern Nebraska Monday with the following message from the State GOP committee that rings the bell of politics, propriety and hostship: “The founding into the Constitution that Nebraska could have no bonded debt, aside from $100,000 in case of emergency. " “How wise they were. It made the voters tax conscious. ‘Pay as you go’ has been our policy of government. “Look about you! The artistically beau- tiful and practical Capitol costing $10,000,000 was paid for when finished. The outstand- ing State University and Teachers Colleges accommodating 15,000 students annually have been built and maintained on a cash basis. Same with the penal and charitable institutions. The State has paid its share in cash for a 9,500 mile highway system that compares with neighboring States. “And, Mr. President, all of this has been and continues to be done with the lowest per capita State tax of any State in the Na- tion. It was $35.92 for 1949 compared with a national per capita State average of $57.43, and that includes a 1.1 mill levy for a $25,- 000,000 program to improve the physical plants of our mental institutions, university, teachers colleges, and other State activities. “Nebraska is a progressive State; progres- sive in the sound economic sense of working, saving, and living within its means. It ac- cepts wholeheartedly the philosophy ex- pressed by Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1982, ‘Any government, like any family, can, for a year, spend a little more than it earns, but you and I know that a continuance of that habit means the poorhouse.’ “It is a young State, admitted in 1867, and continues to be young by giving to each gen- eration the assurances of a divine providence that ‘as a man soweth so shall he also reap.’ The young people as they go out on their ’ own know that the minimum of their income will be taken in taxes for running the State, “Yes, sir, Mr. President, Nebraska was s0 founded and has lived and progressed that her people never need fear being robbed or deprived of their cherished liberties. They know by experience that independence for themselves is not born of dependence upon the State. “You find here a forward-looking people whose love of personal freedoms and inde- pendence has not shorn them of the vision s0 essential to the welfare of their fellow man. They look beyond the boundaries of the State and Nation with charity for all. Never forgetting, however, that charity be- gins at home. “So, Mr. President, we ask of you and all of your successors, the preservation of those rights inherent in our form of government— to do our best for ourselves, and run our State within the all-wise plan that was in- tended when the Union was founded. That is the basis upon which we have prospered and progressed. It is the basis upon which we have been able to make our contributions to the Nation and all others, A3699 “In all earnestness and sincerity, Mr. Presi- dent, we welcome you to our Commonwealth. We want you to know from being among us that our interest 1s uppermost in preserving here and throughout America those prin- ciples of government upon which we have been privileged to live and build, not for our- selves alone but within the precepts and teachings of a mighty Prince of Peace who went before. “May God attend you on your journey.” Bizgest Story EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KATHARINE ST. GEORGE OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, May 16, 1950 Mrs. ST. GEORGE. Mr. Speaker, un- der unanimous consent to extend my re- marks in the Appendix of the Recorp, I include the twenty-second article by Mr. Frank C. Waldrop on the infiltration of communism in our country: Bicctst Strory (By Frank C. Waldrop) Stealing the atom bomb is by no means the main accomplishment of the Soviet agents in America. Long before that, they had stolen some- thing far more important. The thing they stole, of course, was the attention, intelligence, and loyalty of Ameri- can school and college teachers, who in turn delivered into communism all they could of a generation of American youth. When the history of our times is finally written, this story of communism’s influence in the American educational system from 1920 to 1950, and its consequences, will be the undoubted climactic chapter. How did it happen? Why did it happen? What is the cure? That it happened, all of us know. The waves of sickly pacificism, internationalism, the youth movements, and the denials of American factual history, the blushing at the facts of American successful life, the groveling submission to mass slogans, and the parroting of these as gospel, all can be clearly identified as Moscow-made. Never in our country’s history had any- thing like it occurred before. And never was there such a catastrophe of lost personality, lost moral and intellectual stature, and lost time. Never did a generation suffer such ravages of alcoholism, insanity, suicide, divorce, and dissipated character. I am speaking, now, of the generation that got into college about 1925 and of those in the 10 years or so following. Other gen- erations I know only at second-hand and can fudge only by examining the literature and visible behavior of their time. But the generation that passed through college between 1925 and 1935, I have lived in, and all who have lived in it with me know what it has lost at the hands of the Marxists. Karl Marx taught that religion, any re- ligion, ts the enemy of enlightened intelli- gence. He described the family as a degrad- ing evil, represented individual initiative, enterprise, and ownership of wealth as the total enemy of human welfare, and taught the destruction of religion, family life, capi- talism, and every other institution of civili- zation as we know it, ' Furthermore, that they must be destroyed not in words, but in bloody action. There is nothing new in such a demon suggestion. It is a line of thought that has
A3700 lived in the dark side of man’s nature always, in some form or other. But until the Communists who claimed Marxism as their philosophy fell by accident and unprepared, into control of the govern- ment of Russia, never did this dark and dirty instinct hold the reins of actual government over a great empire of human beings. And so a group of educators in America abandoned their duty to stand against the destroyer, but instead delivered into its power the best-fed, best-clothed, and most envied young people in all the world. No wonder the victims lost their way, and turned so frequently to self-destruction. School and college classes of present times cannot begin to imagine what they have escaped. For that they can thank Stalin, not anybody else. For Stalin, by his actions, has proved the lie that was always at the bottom of the Marxist story of the world. Russia, today, with atom bombs in one hand and germ bombs in the other, calcu- lating with icy logic just when it would be most profitable to make the final assault, does not square with the fairy tale. And 2 President of the United States who says one day “I like Joe Stalin” and the next sends his Secretary of State screeching around the earth in search of alliances while at the same time frantically clawing at the poison fleas other people spot on his own shirt front—he, too, gives away the truth behind the scene, As this story runs on, I have to tell the facts of a degrading and humiliating episode in American history. The names and the dates and the actions, as I promised in the beginning, are all coming from the public record, The Federal theater project, for instance, tuat mocked and ridiculed the very taxpay- ers whose money paid the authors and actors living off it—that was no secret. It was a project of the United States Gov- ernment itself, the government that Wash- ington and Franklin and Jefferson and Adams built for us, that Lincoln preserved, and that millions of Americans down through the generations had revered and lived by and for which many a one had died. But as I tell these facts, I hope for one accomplishment, to move the reader to a determination that the past does teach the present and guide the future. The influence of Marx on the United States of America has to be broken or we are a finished people. The Postal Service EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ANTHONY F. TAURIELLO OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, May 16, 1950 Mr. TAURIELLO. Mr. Speaker, un- der leave to extend my remarks in the REcorp, I include the following letter and statement: National FrpEraTION oF Post Orricn CLERKS, Washington, D. C., May 15, 1950. Hon. A. F. Taurimu1o, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. My Drar CowcoressMan: I am herewith transmitting a statement adopted unani- mously by the National Executive Committee of the National Federation of Post Office Clerks which met in the city of Washington, D. C., on May 10 and 11, 1950. Very truly yours, WILLIAM OTT, ' Secretary-Treasurers NATIONAL FEDERATION OF Fosr OFFICE CLERKS, Washington, D. C., May 13, 1950. The executive committee of the National Federation of Post Office Clerks, having con- sidered the release of the Postmaster Gen-~ eral, the Honorable Jesse M. Donaldson, un der date of May 11, 1950, relative to the cur- tailment of service by the Post Office De~ partment, makes the following observations: While it is true, as the Postmaster General states, that the report of the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representa- tives does not carry the usual statement indicating that if the Department’s business continued to increase, “consideration would be given to supplemental appropriations,” it is also true that nowhere in the report of the House committee is there any statement in- dicating that such supplemental appropria-~ tions will not be granted, if the facts justi- fied such action. Certainly the statement by the Appropriations Committee that “this amount should suffice to render adequate service without requiring the Department to come in later for deficiency requests” is not to be construed as a prior rejection of sup- plemental appropriations. While it may be futile for critics to claim that the Post Office Department can make savings by administrative action in any other way than by curtailing existing services and reducing the number of people employed, it nevertheless is true that the Congress has never at any time in the history of the Post Office Department determined that the Post Office Department was anything but a service organization, primarily designed to serve the American people efficiently. Many of the services performed by the Post Office Depart- ment could never be expected to become self- supporting, regardless of any rate likely to be established by the Congress. However, it is interesting to note that the program for curtailment of service, which the Postmaster General has outlined, dces not reduce the services in those areas where no reasonably conceivable postal rate would make them self-supporting, but rather reduces the serv- ices in the metropolitan areas which, by and large, actually pay their own way. There can be no doubt that service on rural routes, services at post offices of the fourth class, and services at most post offices of the third class, not only are at present unprofitable put could never be made profitable, no mat~- ter how high postal rates might be set. The Postmaster General has called attention to the fact that almost one-fourth of the popu- lation receives its mail on rural routes and, according to the latest available report of the Postmaster General, more than 30,000,000 individuals receive their mail on such routes. It should be obvious that the volume of mail originating on rural routes and the volume of mail delivered to patrons of such routes could not under any circumstances, or any rates likely to be established by the Con- gress, pay the cost of service rendered. If the Post Office Department “must readjust its affairs on a businesslike basis,” as the Post- master General states, he would not elim- Inate service at the points where the reve- nues were produced but would eliminate the service at the points where actual losses occurred, In the establishment of city delivery the Congress refused to authorize the establish- ment of such service unless the revenues of a@ particular office would pay for it. However, in the establishment of rural delivery which ‘was opposed on the floor of Congress by many Members on the grounds that it would be a costly operation and that it would bankrupt the Government, such rural delivery service was established, despite the fact that it wag well known that it could never pay its own way. In other words, the Congress knew it ‘was spending money for a service which would never produce anywhere near sufficient revenue to pay its own way. For the current APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD year that loss is figured at not less than $150,000,000, or more than twice the amount necessary to be saved, according to the Post- master General. The statement by the Postmaster General that the curtailment of collections from street letter boxes will not cause any serious inconvenience to the users of the postal serv= ice, appears to be extremely wide of the mark. Actually, the average citizen now may attend to his correspondence after having finished his dinner and take the letter out to his street jetter box with every assurance that before morning that same letter will either be ready for delivery in his own city or will be well on its way to delivery in a city many miles dis- tant. By restricting collections from street letter boxes to those reaching the main office not later than 8:30 p. m., practically all mail posted after 6 o’clock p. m. will lie in the street letter box until sometime the following day, causing an initial delay of from 12 to 20 hours in every instance. This is certainly far from the ideal of an expeditious service. With the rapid development of air trans- portation, the American public has been turning in increasing numbers to air mail service. At the present time, air mail service is reasonably fast and a letter mailed prac-~ tically anywhere in the country with air mail postage affixed will be delivered at any other address in the continental United States within not more than 36 hours. With the re- stricted collections and the restricted deliv< eries required by the orders of the Postmast- er General, air mail letters may be initially delayed for 12 or more hours before even reaching the post office, and if such letter reaches the office of address anytime after 7 o’clock in the morning it would be further delayed a minimum of 24 hours before being dclivered to the addressee. While the Postmaster General has based the necessity for the order on an alleged failure of the Congress to appropriate suffi- cient revenues, it is interesting to compare his statement now with his statements on the same subject one short year ago. At that time (February 10, 1949) the Postmaster Gen= eral in a statement to the House Committee on Appropriations stated ‘over the years we have had to obtain deficiency appropriations because of understatement in our estimates - and I am satisfied that if this committee gives us the amount that we are requesting here today, and the increased volume of mail that we originally estimated materializes,’ that we will always have the kind car of this committee as we have had in the past and I have no fear of failure to obtain sultficient funds to operate the postal service.” However, in the most recent statement of the Postmaster General, he is trying to con< vey the impression that the curtailment of service has been forced by the refusal of Congress to provide the funds necessary to maintain satisfactory service. The most cas- ual study of the facts would prove this to be untrue. The Post Office Department will not begin to operate on the appropriations that he makes reference to in his statements until July 1, 1950. It is true that some action to- ward reducing the amount of appropriations originally requested by the Postmaster Gen- eral has been taken by the House. However, when appropriations for the Post Office De- partment have been considered by Congress in past years, the amounts have invariably. been jockeyed up and down. The present curtailment order was issued prior to the final determination of the amount to be ap- propriated for the maintenance of the postal service for fiscal year 1951. The Postmaster General certainly has not helped to secure the appropriation which he claims he needs by cutting the service below the minimum required. It should be made clear that the work per- formed by the so-called temporary employees ‘was necessary labor that should have been performed all along by classified civil-service employees. Yet, the Postmaster General has
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD admitted that even the earnings of many present classified employees will also be re- duced as the result of these orders. The Postmaster General has stated that it is the temporary employees who will be af- fected to the greatest extent by any reduc- tion in force. Based on our observations and past experience, in many instances classified employees will be entirely without work op- portunities over long periods of time. At a time when the volume of mail is the highest in the history of the postal service, it Ul becomes the Post Office Department to reduce the number of employees, thereby greatly increasing the work load on those who re- main. According to the Postmaster General’s own statements, while the revenues increased more than 110.72 percent and the number of pieces handled increased 64.70 percent, the increase in the number of employees was less than 48.43 percent. This indicates that the employees have over the years gradually increased their efficiency all out of proportion to the increased volume of mail and are today rendering even greater service than at any time in the past. The increase in the volume of mail, together with the elimina- tion of proper pick-up and delivery, com- bined with the reduction in the number of employees below the minimum required to handle the mail and give adequate service, will cause a congestion and delay that will decrease the efficiency of the postal service and will contribute to increasing costs rather than effecting economies. Texas in Our Blood EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. PAUL J. KILDAY OF TEXAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, May 16, 1950 Mr. KILDAY. Mr. Speaker, as a part of the recent Fiesta San Jacinto in San Antonio, Tex., the Battle of Flowers Oro- torical Contest for 1950 was held. Mr. Jack Yonge, of Abilene, Tex., was award- ed first place for his oration, Texas in Our Blood. He has given us a beautiful outline of the history of Texas and some famous Texans, Iinclude his oration, as follows: Texas IN Our BLoop “There are over 7,000,000 people in Texas, people of all occupations, all trades, farmers, ranchers, business wizards, laborers; people of varied character, of high and low ideals. But from El Paso to Texarkana, from the borders of Mexico to the upper reaches of the Panhandle, from Sabine Pass to the bat- tlegrounds of San Jacinto, no matter what the difference in the people, if they live within these boundaries, there’s Texas in their blood. A true Texan can’t disguise his feelings when thousands in the Cotton Bowl or Me- morial Stadium rise and in one tremendous voice sing The Eyes of Texas slowly and -magnificently. Or when a friend is buried on the side of a Texas hill and sand blows across the grave before the funeral is over. Or when he rides across the sun-drenched Texas prairie and his chest swells with pride at its vastness. Or when he passes the red- granite capitol and sees the Lone Star flag being lowered to half-mast in mourning for one of its citizens. A true Texan simply has Texas in his blood. And the vitality of the State has a life- blood all its own. At the Texas borders, instead of a port of entry, there’s a mat reading “Welcome.” Texas, with friendliness as its heartbeat—vast, hospitable, full of euphoria, and blushing with beauty—its vitality can be expressed historically, geo- graphically, in terms of politics, economics, raw materials, folklore, and education. In the files of the Texas saga, In the not- long-bygone days when the territory was without definable limits, when the home- steaders were restleés, straining to become @ republic—in this atmosphere our land was conceived and made a reality. This reality was only a potentiality to the men who first sacrificed their lives so that it might come into being. It came into being in a little chapel in old Mission City on a spring morning in 1836, As dawn and the attack approached, the sky glowed crimson; the Mexicans’ eyes, sangui- nary, and the blood of Texans ran cold. Bowie, the Louisiana backwoodsman, had the roughness of a frontier fighter, yet a love for his friends which compelled him to remain and fight with them for his bed. Crockett, the Tennessee scout, tall, hand- some, a crack shot, defended the open part of the wall. Travis, the soft-spoken colonel; his sin- cerity equaled only by the tenacity for what he knew was his duty. Bonham, the dauntless adventurer, with @ white handkerchief around his neck, thundered wildly back through Santa Ana’s cuttbroats to die for the reality. They listened for the hoofbeats of relief, but there was no relief; there was only death. With almost superhuman effort, they slaugh- tered one Mexican after another before their lives were expended in defense of the Alamo. They had real Texas in their blood. They contributed in those last hours enough bravery and fortitude into the bloodstream of Texas for all mankind to be proud. The Raven, 6 feet 6, his massive shoulders clad in buckskin, a hard-living, hard-drink- ing, hard-eating chieftain who had big tawny hands and big worrles, worries big enough to make wrinkles in his forehead that spelled misery for Santa Ana, he was the undis- puted boss of the Texas revolution. Charg- ing to shouts of ‘Remember the Alamo,” “‘Re- member Goliad,” axid to the strains of a flute playing Won’t You Come to the Bower? he led 740 Texans to victory over twice as many Mexicans at San Jacinto. President of the Republic and governor after statehood, a shrewd judge of men, he could be a lion or a@ fox and was as occasion demanded. So came our champion to fill the needs of the time. And when he passed in 1863, we lost a full-blooded Texas son, The roll call of those who lived and died for the reality of the Republic includes thousands from Capt. Dick Dowling to the cattlemen—Charles Goodnight, Sol West, Charles Moss; to the settlers who cleared the Brazos River bottom, and the countless who forged a link in the chain to greatness. Al- ways among those and often unremembered are the Texas women. Their part of the story is as important and colorful as the battles, the diplomacy, the bloodshed. We're bunt- ing for the lady represented by the statue of the pioneer woman on the capitol grounds. Perhaps it’s the mother of Texas, Jane Wilkenson Long, wife of the famous doctor and partner to him in the fight for inde- pendence. Or perhaps it’s Sarah Cannon, who held off the Comanches all afternoon with only a flintlock before an arrow stopped her. Or it’s the devoted mothers of the first 800 families that came into the new frontier under the empresario system—women of steadfast purpose, of infallible morals, of high ideals. Probably it’s significant of everyone of them, for it was the women who inspired the heroes to come to Texas, clear the land, plant the crops, mold an empire from a forest or @ desert; the women who were the eyes of conscience testing every cause to determine its worthiness in building a Christian civiliza- tion, And the women who mothered the sons A3701 and instilled in them the virtues of honesty and fidelity. The personalities of a colossal past have been diverse, and we remember: O. O. Henry, the writer. Elizabeth Ney, the sculptress, making im- mortal the features of Texans with the tedi- ousness of Michelangelo carving the face of Christ. H. Y. Benedict, who fought against the three P’s: Politics, prejudice, and poverty, 50 that a dream might come true—the dream of @ university of Texas. Anson Jones, last President of the Repub- lic, who toiled assiduously for a goal and when it came, arose with tear-brimmed eyes to tell the crowd gathered around the cabin- capitol in deliberate and solemn tones, “Gen- tlemen, the Republic of Texas is no more.” History fades and materializes into today and tomorrow. We are beginning the second century of statehood. The brawn that cleared the tim- per, fought the Indians, established settle- ments like Nacogdoches and San Antonio is constructing skyscrapers, doing the big shoulder work of the oil fields, quarrying gravel for the highways. The brains of men like Cameron, Fannin, Fisher, and Austin are transplanted as if by blueprint to form the structure of our own minds. The simple inventions and mechanisms of the pioneers are transformed into dynamos of sizzling progress. Our symbols are as varied as ranch brands, the Buckhorn Saloon, smokestacks, brag= garts, cowboy hats, oil derricks, cotton, cat~ tle, millions of acres, and the bristling en< ergy of the people. And you can throw in Florida’s winters and California’s sunshine and a list of other things long enough to cover the 1,000 miles from Brownsville to Dalhart, and you haven’t begun to show our thousand faces. There’s more good humor and common sense packed into our veins than could ever be measured by inventory or conceived by foreigners. . Our landmarks are as obvious as if there were a giant “T” embroidered with pecan trees and mockingbirds and a chorus of a4 tril- lion voices singing Texas, Our Texas in the blue skies over every town—where we have our Will Rogers, our Lincolns, the sons of our Crocketts, our Travises, our Houstons. We have our tycoons, our executives, our pub- Ushers, our professional men, and most im~ portant, our little people, who claim none of the glory but who are the pulse of our Texas civilization 24 hours of every day. Foreigners marvel at the fortuitousness with which wealth has accumulated. In 1884 there were $84,000,000 in bank deposits; in 1949, over three and one-half billion. Some people think the land of the Texas wealth is a dollar sign with a halo over it. But it’s red-blooded men-—working, sweat- ing, figuring in a world of finance and in- dustry—striving to better themselves and their State. For this is a place where a milkman, a farmer, or a Houston dry cleaner can become a millionaire overnight; where the Texas blood of a ponderous oil tycoon still tingles at the sight of a gusher spiral~ ing toward the heavens, where the languid beauty of the piney woods is matched only by the waving wheat of the plains, where one city can be a baby Manhattan, a genuine me- tropolis packed with glitter and charm, an~ other city only 33 miles away—a cattle an- nex—a meat-packing town, a town of smiles and windy streets, where the Gulf wind makes the nights cool, where copper, sulfur, petroleum, barbed wire, synthetics, grain, Jumber, natural gas, and railroads are prod= ucts that emerge from throbbing industry, where sleek Herefords or slate-colored Brah-~ ma bulls flourish on the King Ranch, the world’s largest beef factory, where a valley of oil, roses, and rain make life beautiful and people happy, where a bow in the legs, adventure in the soul, and a canter off into
A3702 the sunset are all ingredients that make Texas a paradise. Men sacrificed on the Texas frontier. They traded part or all of a lifetime for the land that gives Texans pearl-gray Stetsons, hand- tooled boots, Cadillacs, the right to work, and freedom from oppression. The loyalty of a people to their State is equaled only by the size of the Texas moon, by the heri- tage of an illustrious past. It’s a real thrill to see a dust storm at Amarillo, a cattle auction at Abilene, a fruit harvest in the Rio Grande Valley, or an old- settlers’ reunion in Buffalo Gap. But the biggest thrill of all is after visiting foreign States to come across that Texas border; if the air smells fresher, if the sun shines brighter, 1f your soul feels friendlier, if you long to see the sun rising on a hill smothered in bluebonnets with dew in each bloom spar- kling lke a diamond, then you’re home, pardner, and you’ve got Texas in your blood. Discrimination in American Universities EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ARTHUR G. KLEIN OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, April 3, 1950 Mr, KLEIN. Mr. Speaker, on last Washington’s Birthday I issued a state~ ment denouncing discrimination and coercion at the George Washington Uni- versity, and was in turn criticized by one or two well-meaning innocents. A short time later I inserted in the Recorp the findings of the Anti-Nazi League in regard to discrimination at City College of New York, and again was subjected to criticism. On Friday, May 12, 1950, the Washing- ton Post printed an editorial headed “Bias in colleges’ in which, with its usual clarity and economy of expression, the Post says precisely what I was saying, and specifically points to the failure of the George Washington University to take part in a conference here to combat discrimination in colleges. Under leave I am inserting that editorial in the Rrec- orp. I am also inserting a news story from the Washington Evening Star of April 25. I expect to have more to say about discrimination, wherever it occurs, but especially in educational institutions, from time to time. The individuals, or groups, who believe in a hush-hush policy on discrimination will get little aid or comfort from me. The matter referred to follows: [From the Washington Post of May 12, 1950] Bias IN CoLLEcEs Delegates from 28 colleges located in Mary- land, Virginia, Delaware, and the District of Columbia meeting here recently for a re- gional conference, took an unequivocal stand against discrimination in higher education on grounds of race, creed, or national ori- gin. Every major institution of higher learn- ing in Washington was represented—with the single conspicuous exception of the George Washington University. The attitude expressed by the educators scems to us ex- tremely heartening and significant on two counts. It reflects, in the first place, a recogni- tion that scholars have a responsibility for leadership in their communuities. The aca- demic function is not fulfilled by a mere acceptance of prevailing mores; the plea, too frequently advanced in the past by timorous educators, that they must abide by unjusti- fiable prejudices out of deference to local opinion, is an outright abdication of respon- sibility. It is precisely to its institutions of learning that a community is entitled to look for guidance in sloughing off outworn and invalid patterns. The examples set by such institutions constitutes a powerful educative force. The action of the regional conference re- flects, in the second place, a recognition that discrimination on account of race, religion, or national origin is indefensible so far as the universities themselves are concerned. It runs directly counter to what they teach. The educators called for repeal of State laws requiring segregation at the college level. The indication that the teachers themselves are ready to initiate this process—instead of waiting until they are forced to do so by the Supreme Court—is most encouraging. Their view should carry weight with the State leg- islatures and will serve, we hope, to accel- erate a trend toward genuine equality in edu- cational opportunity which has already gained great momentum. [From Washington Evening Star of April 25, ' 1950] COLLEGE PaRLEY Urcrs BAN ON DISCRIMINA- TION—LAaws To OPpsn SCHOOLS TO MINORI- TIES ASKED BY REGIONAL GROUP Representatives of 28 District, Maryland, Virginia, and Delaware higher education in- stitutions have gone on record opposing dis- crimination against any minority group in college admissions. The conference of educators and students, meeting at American University yesterday, advocated repeal of any laws requiring segre~ gation in colleges and universities. The group added that “positive” laws ?rsideiv 7 schools to turn down applicants c> 3 cits of race, creed, or color “may be onec . ¢ Cc- sirable means of ending discrimination.” Both Virginia and Delaware require segre- gation of races in education. Dr. Walter E. Hager, president of Wilson Teachers’ College, who was chairman for the day-long session, told the conferees, “You have faced the problem squarely.” EIGHTY-FIVE ATTEND PARLEY “We have gone on record much more vig- orously than I anticipated we could at this conference,” he asserted. The conference was sponsored by a group of Washington area educators to consider problems of discrimination in higher educa- tion. It was the first regional conference of its kind, advocated last fall by the American Council on Education. About 85 educators, students, and others connected with schools were sent to the conference by the heads of their institutions. The elimination of a qualified college ap- plicant on grounds of race, creed, or national origin “is unjustified and un-American,” a majority of the conferees agreed. They urged institutions in this area to reexamine practices and policies regarding admissions with a view to ending discrimi- nation. Dr. Hager, in a summing-up talk, said the conferees recognize it may take a long time to accomplish their ideals. It will be ncces~ sary, he said, to lead up to the ideals through education. STEPS SUGGESTED Some of the steps suggested to carry out the program are interracial workshops at colleges, opening of more college activities to the community, exchange of students among various institutions, and leadership training of students. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD It was felt the major barriers to ending discrimination exist among boards of trus- tees, residents of a college community, and others outside of the student body. Dr. Hager was authorized to appoint a committee to plan with national organiza- tions how discrimination in education can be combated. . The conferees felt they did not have enough information to consider discrimination in hiring teachers. They suggested colleges could experiment by placing representatives of minority groups in important faculty posi- tions under conditions carefully planned to assure success of the experiment. The recommendations adopted at the closing general session were prepared by four groups that had met separately earlier in the day. Dr. Hager explained the group reports represented a majority opinion and were not necessarily unanimous. The full meeting adopted the reports by a voice vote without much discussion. CALLED DANGEROUS WEAPON In the opening address, a University of Maryland dean described racial and religious hatred weapons as more dangerous to Amer- ica than those of steel, flame, or nuclear fission. Dr. Harold Benjamin, dean of Maryland’s College of Education said “these shadowy enemies can do tremendous things to our people. They can take differences in color, magnify them until we have a whole system of economic and social barriers. They can transform good men into cruel monsters.” Dr. Benjamin said dynamic education was necessary to combat the fear and ignorance which lead to hatred. He added that “‘di- visiveness stares me in the face” at the Uni« versity of Maryland, but did not elaborate, Negroes are not admitted at College Park, NINE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SCHOOLS REPRESENTED Heads of the tour rroun cessions were Dr. M. Weldon T°: ou, ¢. Le..chburg (Va.) College; Dr. AU. PD. Cv cus., president of the Universily of Delaware; Dr. F. Wilson Shaffer, of Johrs Hoyking University; and Dr. F. GI. wera, cette tresident of Washingtor Co... le, Chasien owt, Md. Nine District schools were represented, 15 Marylar 4a 4 oemea ol) Delaware. George \.i her, seis.) was the only major Wen, reo. that sent no delegates. The planning committee which sponsored the conierence was composed of Dr. Hager and Dr. H. F. Cotterman, University of Mary- land; Dr. Roy J. Deferrari, Catholic Univer- sity; Dr. Donald Derby, Amcrican University; Dr. Hugh G. Price, Montgomery Junior Col- lege; Dr. Edwin H. Sponscller, Hood College; Dr. Charles Thompscn, Hawird University; and Alex Weirs:ein, ef the Weshington office of the Antidefamation League. Dead Animals on Our Public Highways Dangerous to Public Health REMARES oF HON. JOHN E. RANKIN OF MISSISSIPPI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, May 15, 1950 Mr. RANKIN, Mr. Speaker, on Janu- ary 30, I made some remarks on the sub- ject of dead animals on our public high- ways, in which I pointed out their dan- gers to the health of the Nation. Those remarks were published in the April issue of the American Highways magazine,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD wath the result that I am receiving let- ters from all over the country relative to this matter. While the medical profession, and especially the Fublic Heaith Service, seem to have succeeded in conquering, or eliminating, at least to a large extent, certain diseases, such as yellow fever, typhoid, and malaria, we are still plagued with many other maladies, some of which are probably more devastating, such as tuberculosis, cancer, heart disease, polio, paralysis, hydrophobia, and so forth. Let me call your attention to the fact that smallpox was never controlled, and it is doubtiul if it ever would have been controlled even by vaccination, if it had not been for the installation of water- works and sewerage systems in the great cities of the world. On May 10 I received a letter from Mr. S. W. Jackson of Franklin, Pa., district engineer in district 1-0 of the State highway department of that State, showing the number of dead animals re- moved from the public highways in his district of seven counties during each month of the year 1949, and also the total for the year, and showing the total of dead animals found on those highways during the years 1941 to 1949. District No. 1-0, contains seven counties—Craw- ford, Erie, Forest, Lawrence, Mercer, Venango, and Warren. I am inserting Mr. Jackson’s letter in the ReEcorp and also that portion of his annual report showing the total number of dead animals, both wild and domestic, removed from the highways in his dis- trict. You will note that for the year 1949 in these seven counties they re- moved the bodies of 20,081 wild animals and 3,569 domestic animals—making a total of 23,650. In this connection, let me call your at- tention to the fact that a statement in the same issue of the American High- ways magazine, on page 14, shows that during the first 4 weeks of this year there were 4,417 animals killed on the highways in Virginia. Pennsylvania and Virginia are not ex- ceptions to the rule. The same condi- tion prevails in every State in the Union. Every autormobile that rolls over one of these dead animals picks up whatever disease germs it may contain, and prob- ably exposes to that malady every indi- vidual who touches the tire that comes in contact with that carcass—to say nothing of the rest of the car. The letter of Mr. S. W. Jackson, dis- trict engineer for the seven counties in Pennsylvania, reads as follows: COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPARTMENT oF HiIcHWayYs, Franklin, Pa., May 10; 1950. Hon. Jorn E, RANKIN, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. Dear Mr. RANKIN: I have noted with in- terest the article in the April 1950 issue of American Highways covering your remarks before the House relative to the removal of dead animals from highways. I have, as district engineer of the Pennsyl- vania Department of Highways, made a study and hobby of collecting data on this particu- lar subject for the past 9 years, and I have sent out copies of our annual reports cover- ing this matter to the Game Commission of Pennsylvania and several other States, as well as to conservationists and sportsmen’s associations. So far as I know, no other A3703 record of this kind has been collected by any agency in this country. I have charge of State highway work in seven counties in northwestern Pennsylvania with a State highway mileage of 4,100 miles, and this data is furnished to me monthly by our highway caretakers, who make from two to five trips per week over each highway, and among their responsibilities is the removal and disposal of the bodies of wild and do- mestic animals and birds Killed by the oper- ators of motor vehicles. This report is an actual count of the bodies removed and is not an estimate. You will note the main part of the report shows the details according to species of ani- mals involved in each county for each month, and at the end of the report is shown the totals for the year 1949. I have also appended to the report the totals for each of the years from 1941 to 1948, inclusive. You will note there was a decrease in the wild animals killed during the war years and until 1948, since when a material increase has been shown probably due to increased traffic and increase of some of the species of animals, especially opossums. Possibly you might be interested in re- ferring a copy of this report to your conser-= vation department or local sportsmen’s asso- ciation, and I am enclosing a couple of extra copies for your use. I trust this information may be of interest ind use to you. Sincerely yours, S. W. Jacuzson, District Engineer, District 1~-O. Here is an excerpt from Mr. Jackson’s report, showing the number of dead ani- mals removed from the public highways of his district, by counties, in 1949, and also showing the totals. It also shows the number removed from the highways in that district every year since 1941. The report referred to follows: Record of dead animals and birds removed from State highways, District 1-0, Pennsylvania Department of Highways, Franklin, Pa., S. W. Jackson, district engineer Total for year by counties Species Crawford) Erie Forest Domestic fowl animals: Chickens_.....-...- Duck 1 District totals for years 1941 to 1944 inclusive do not include Lawrence County, District total for year— Lawrence; Mercer | Venango| Warren | 1949 1948 1947 1946 1945 | 19441 | 19431 | 19421 | 19411 1, 502 1,225 | 11,727 | 8,734 | 5,428} 6,603) 6,804} 6,525 | 7,155 | 9,125] 8,728 105 240 849 610 310 546 520 433 3 415 464 25 167 259 230 175 17 159 174 118 352 | 1,502} 1,205 516 801 925} 1,065 | 1,417 | 1,797 1, 748 17 50 232 100 31 60 37 36 4 25 27 15 85 142 103 61 40 29 37 ay 23 31 906 899 692 | 1,095 977 695 298 10 12 26 33 18 10 54 80 7 73 141 59 49 wewwweee]| 2 [omen en nn | one eee ne 1 2 2 1 1 5 3 1 8 4 3 56 69 41 36 46 17 16 34 84 25 22 25 36 35 3 6 6 3 ( 23 29 126 145 165 102 160 187 203 4 8 23 35 18 20 8 7,709 | 9,567 | 9,688 | 9,660 | 10,504 | 12,575 | 11,824 _=—=} 2, 026 1, 982 1,886 | 1,747
A3704 As I pointed out, there were 20,081 wild animals and 3,569 tame animals, removed from the highways in those seven counties in 1949, which is almost double the number removed from the highways 1n the same district in 1941. This is a very serisus matter, one that ¢ “ects the health, even the life, of every human being in the United States. I trust that the rest of the Nation will follow the example set by Pennsylvania, and see that these dead animals are promptly removed from the Nation’s highways in every State, as well as in the District of Columbia. Addresses of the President at Boise and Nampa, Idaho EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. COMPTON I. WHITE OF IDAHO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, May 15, 1950 Mr. WHITE of Idaho. Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege, under leave granted to extend my remarks in the Recorp, to insert two further addresses by the Pres- ident of the United States on his recent trip through Idaho. Following are the addresses made by the President at Boise, Idaho, and Nampa, Idaho: REMARKS OF THE PRESIDENT AT Borsz, IDAHO I am very glad indeed to be here this morning. I certainly appreciate your most cordial greeting. It is very impressive to come into this rich valley. Here you have an empire which is made possible through the miracle of reclamation. It all comes from having water. Your great program of irrigation in this area has brought prosperity to your farms and your cities. Iam told you have some 350,000 acres irrigated in this sec- tion. This is a tremendously valuable addi- tion to the economic well-being of the whole country. I think there is a deeper significance in what you have achieved here than you peo-~ ple may realize. A relatively small amount of Government money for reclamation has brought rich returns to the whole area and to the whole Nation. When people talk about the size of the Federal budget, they forget that when we set aside money for things like reclamation, it is just like investing money in gilt-edge securities. The money invested for the de- velopment of this valley is an investment, it is not an expenditure. Reclamation means richer farm lands, more prosperous cities and industries, cheaper power, and healthier opportunities for a bet- ter standard of living in this whole area, The penny pinchers who want to cut off funds for reclamation simply do not under-~ stand good business principles. The future has in store rich potentialities for the Boise area, for Idaho, and for the whole Northwest. We have done a great deal of good pioneering work in resource devel- opment, but we need more power dams to develop mineral resources, and to bring cheap power to all the communities of this area. We need more sound reclamation projects, we need better soil and forest conservation, To do these things right, we need a co- ordinated program for the development of the entire Columbia River Basin, including the Snake River Valley. In order to harness the mighty resources of land, water, forests, and minerals, we must tackle all phases of this development simultaneously. There is a direct relation between what we do in all sections of the Columbia Valley, if we are to get cheap power, flood control, rich soul, and all the other benefits which flow from a balanced program. I am convinced that the only way to get such a balanced program is through the establishment of a Columbia Valley Ad- ministration, which will treat the region and its resources in a way which will bring greater benefits to every section. Don’t let anybody tell you that the Colum- bia Valley Authority I have recommended would be socialistic. It would not have a bit more authority than the present Fed- eral agencies have. It would specifically pro- hibit interference with anybody’s water rights, or any other rights you may have already established. The Columbia Valley would be firmly under the control of the Congress—the elected rep- resentatives of the people—just like all other Federal agencies are now. Instead of moving in the direction of more centralized Government, the Columbia Val- ley Authority would move in the direction of less centralization. The Columbia Valley Authority would have its headquarters right out here in the Columbia Basin, where the people can deal with it first-hand. Insucha situation, the State and local governments can participate much more effectively in re- source-development work. The experience of the Tennessee Valley proves that conclusive- ly. And we had a lot of old mossbacks that did everything they possibly could to tear down the Tennessee Valley Authority. Without a Columbia Valley Authority we will continue to have a scatter-shot approach to resource development, with one phase em- phasized at the expense of another. You can see that by what happened to the rivers and harbors bill the Senate passed a couple of weeks back. They putin part of a program, and left out other parts, like Hells Canyon Dam, which are just as important. The re- sults of such a policy are wasteful and un- economic, and I hope you will join me in working for the Columbia Valley Authority. This will stop all the fuss between Reclama- tion and the Army engineers and all the rest of the bureaus in Government, by having it right out here where you can keep your finger on it. Above and beyond the immediate benefits to this area, the success of projects like these will aid in strengthening the entire country, I want to say to you that if we hadn’t had the power projects in the Tennessee Valley, if we hadn’t had the Bonneville and Grand Coulee Dams and other power projects, it would have taken us much longer to win the war. But, having these projects and plenty of power, we were able to set up those great establishments which contributed to the im- mediate winning of the war, and the saving of young American lives. Now, I want to see a Northwest power de- velopment, a Southwest power development, @ Northeast power development which will include the St. Lawrence Seaway project and the Bay of Fundy project and the Connecti- cut River project, and we will have the great networks in the Southeast, the Tennessee Valley project now being built in South Caro- lina and Georgia, I want to say to you that if we get that done, if we get the propér development of the Missouri Valley, the Ohio Valley, the Mississippi Valley, nothing in the world can prevent this country from accomplishing its APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD purpose. It will mean an economic develop- ment that will keep us the most powerful nation in the world, and a nation which works entirely for peace and not for any selfish purpose. That is what Ihave in mind. That is what I am out here to tell you. That is what I want you to understand: that I am working for world peace on a basis that will make our economic set-up the greatest in the history of the world, as it is right now. I want to keep it that way. I want to keep on develop- ing it. Now with your help we can do just those things. I can’t tell you how very much I appreciate this turn-out. I am more than happy you have been so kind to me and so very cordial. I am out here to let you know what I am thinking; I am not running for office, Tam on a nonpolitical tour now, but I may see you a little later on that subject. REMARKS OF THE PRESIDENT at Nampa, IpaHo I can’t tell you how much I appreciate this reception. This is a wonder; 1t gets better and better as I go along through Idaho. I got up this morning at 6 o’clock, and I have been going ever since, and it seems as if the crowds get bigger and the weather gets bet~ ter and the welcome more cordial. And I appreciate it. I understand that today the Boy Scouts are sponsoring the dedication of a replica of the Statue of Liberty here in Nampa. That is a wonderful thing; that is a wonderful thing. In this fortieth anniversary of scouting in America, it is certainly fitting that the Boy Scouts are carrying on a crusade to strength- en the arm of liberty. You know, I am the honorary national president of the Boy Scouts of America, and I congratulate you on your enterprise that you are putting on here. I can think of no more important task than to strengthen the arm of liberty. . There are many ways in which we must work to strengthen that arm. We have to maintain a strong defense organization, and above all we need to stay strong in our desire to preserve peace in the world. One very important element in the strength of the United States is the high standard of living we have established for the people of this country. Through our social-security program, farm legislation, fair-labor standards laws, housing acts and other progressive legislation, we have helped to make this country the richest in the world. We have made it possible for our people to live decent, worth-while lives, to ve them without undue interference. With the world in a troubled state, it is even more essential that this country con- tinue to grow in strength. Our national strength depends on our keeping all groups and sections of the country prosperous. I want to sec farmers, businessmen—both big and little—and the working men and women all well off. I am greatly encouraged by the reports I have been hearing about the expanding industrial prosperity in the great State of Idaho. Despite some recent downturn in farm income, the average income of each person in the State of Idaho increased over 170 percent between 1940 and 1949. Even more important, the average per capita income in this State increased at a much faster rate than the average increase throughout the country. Now, isn’t that remarkable? That is remarkable—I don’t think you appreciate what that means, I am glad to see that Idaho is showing the way. That is the goal toward which I am work- ing all over the country—toward a balanced
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD prosperity for all the people. If the farmers have good incomes, and labor has good in- comes, and business 1s prosperous, then that makes the whole country prosperous, and gives us a chance to continue our position in the world, as the leader of the whole world, working for peace. Never again will we go back to the days when the robber barons stuffed themselves with riches and the little people got just afewcrumbs. Those days are gone forever— and I am glad of it. We are strengthening the arm of liberty in our country economically, militarily, and spiritually. Let us never forget that when we strengthen liberty at home we strengthen peace in the world. We stand for something. We stand for the moral well-being of the world. We have @ system of morals which believes in honor and ethics and upright living. We are in a controversy with a country that has no ethics and no morals. Because we have the ethical standards that we have, I am just as sure as I stand here that in the long run Almighty God is going to give us an opportunity to get peace in the world. We don’t want to conquer any nation; we don’t want to exploit anybody. We want everybody in the world to be happy, just as we are. I hope you Boy Scouts will keep up the good work. This is a fine step you are taking here today. I hope it will be possible for me to attend the National Jamboree at Valley Forge next month. I am counting on it. But the President never can tell where he is going to be or at what time. He has to meet conditions‘as they come up. But I hope I will see some of you at that jamboree, Thank you very much. Resurgent Nazism and Communism in Germany EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. JOHN W. McCORMACK OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, May 16, 1950 Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, un- der leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following resolu- tion of the General Court of Massa- chusetts: Resolution memorializing Congress to study and review the problem of resurgent nazism and communism in Germany Whereas there are growing reports of the resurgency of nazism and communism in Germany: Therefore be it Resolved, That the General Court of Mas- sachusetts urges the Congress of the United States to institute a thorough-going study and review of the resurgence of nazism and communism in Germany; and be it further Resolved, That copies of this resolution be sent forthwith by the State secretary to the President of the United States, to the presiding officer of each branch of Congress and to the Members thereof from this Com- monwealth. In house of representatives, adopted April 26, 1950. LAWRENCE R. GROVE, Clerk. In senate, adopted in concurrence May 8, 1950. Irvine N. HAYDEN, , Clerk. Saving the “Lost” Wartime Immigra- tion Quotas for the Desperate War-Im- poverished Peoples of Europe and Non- quota Status for Parents of Citizens EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. ARTHUR G. KLEIN OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, April 3, 1950 Mr. KLEIN. Mr. Speaker, my sym- pathetic interest in all immigration mat- ters is so much a matter of public interest that Commissioner Watson B. Miller jok- ingly calls me his best customer. It was, therefore, that I discovered in an editorial from Il Progresso Italo- Americano, the largest and most influen- tial Italian-language daily in the United States and perhaps in the world, warm endorsement of two of my favorite pro- posals—throwing open to use the “Jost” wartime national immigration quotas, and permitting parents of American citizens to enter as nonquota immigrants. Only 3 weeks ago I introduced H. R. 8209, which would, if enacted, amend the Immigration Act of 1924, as amended, to add to the definitions of nonquota immi- grants “the mother or the father of a citizen of the United States.” Under leave, I am inserting the edi- torial, which follows: AN URGENT AMENDMENT For some time we have been urging that our Government take the necessary legis- lative steps to permit the entry into our country of a number of immigrants equiva- lent to the quotas unused during the war, We always felt and continue to feel today that in advocating this measure we are ask- ing for nothing more than simple justice and a warm human approach in the execu- tion of our law as it is on the statute books today. In short, we have not been pleading for a fundamental revision but for a funda- mental humanization of our execution of the existing law. Here we hasten to add that the response in Congress to our proposals has heen rather receptive. We did not look forward to unanimous acceptance. Of course, we did not expect to arouse the narrow-minded or bigoted, We realize that there are still some Members of Congress whose social-economic vision is yet to grow out of and beyond the pale of their own district. We understand that it takes time to grow out of the narrow limitations of local community politics, nar- row neighborhood interests and approach. But fortunately for Congress and the Ameri- can people, there is still hope for an equitable and practicable decision to be made in the not distant future in regard to our appeal, In its handling of the entire question of im~ migration, the House of Representatives is to be commended and congratulated on having as the chairman of its special subcommittee the capable, earnest, and farsighted legis- lator from Pennsylvania, Congressman Francis E. WaALrER. IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION Though we are hopeful of the future and will continue to work untiringly for the ad- mission into our country of a number of immigrants equivalent to the number in the immigration quota unused during wartime, A3705 yet we realize that there are certain lesser phases of the entire present immigration law which need speedy attention and basic re- vision. We approach all such phases in the same spirit as we approach the major issue of using up the unused immigration quotas. We cannot repeat too often that it is our firm belief that America’s best interests and ideals would be most served vis-a-vis Europe if we were to use up the unused quotas. In the same sense and spirit do we now propose for immediate enactment the fol- lowing provision as an amendment to our present Immigration Act: “The parents of children now residing in the United States should be accorded the same preferential status for entry to our shores that children living overseas now have. These parenis are to come in to the United States as nonquota immigrants.” Of course, as with children coming from overseas, those bringing their parents will have to assume full responsi- bility for their support so that they will not become a public charge. Arithmetically speaking, the number of parents who would thus be enabled to come to the United States on the basis of the above amendment to our present Immigra- tion Act may not be large. But the entire question is far more than a problem of num-~ bers. It is much more than a question of arithmetic which confronts us here. It is a human issue that we face. We must meet it in a humanitarian manner. No matter how comparatively few may be the number thus admitted or how little the misery thus eliminated, our country’s demonstration of generosity of spirit and humanitarianism in action can only aid greatly the enhance- ment of America’s moral prestige abroad. WILL HELP AMERICA Moreover, such an amendment to the pres- * ent Immigration Act will also have a whole- some effect on the morale of our citizenry directly involved in and affected by the bringing in of their parents now abroad. There can never be too many humane ways in which the Government can and should lift the morale of our own people. A little consideration by our Government for even a limited number of its citizenry will go a long way toward raising the contentment of all the people in our land. We sincerely urge every Member of Con- gress to heed our appeal. We urgently plead with Congressman WaLTEr to lose no time in introducing a bill which will amend the Immigration Act to provide for parents the same preferential status as nonquota im- migrants that children now have. This amendment is to operate in all other respects in the same manner as the present provision covering children does. We cannot emphasize too strongly that prompt favorable action on our proposal will serve as a timely, positive factor for improv- ing the attitude and deepening the friend- ship of many peoples in Europe for our coun- try and our Government. In this critical hour when our Nation is battling against the poisonous propaganda of barbarous and despotic communism, the enactment of such legislation will not only increase the num- ber of our friends and augment the already existing friendship for America, but will at the same time also strike a hard and telling blow at the Communist slanderers of the American people. Mr. Speaker, Tl Progresso Italo-Ameri- cano is, of course, the newspaper brought to its full flower of circulation and in- fluence by the late Generoso Pope, my good friend and adviser. His place has been ably taken by his son, Generoso Pope, Jr., who is obviously emulating his father’s policies of enlightened assist- ance to Americans of Italian derivation.
A3706 I would, if I could, go much further than is proposed in this editorial. I would like to throw open to use all the unused immigration quotas which lapsed during the war years, without regard to national origin. By following that pol- icy, we could have avoided the necessity of enacting the Displaced Persons Act; put, since that could not be done, I have thrown my full support behind the en- lightened amendments contained in the House bill to amend the Displaced Per- sons Act of 1948. On January 23, 1947—3 years ago—I introduced a bill which would have pro- vided, if passed, for using all unused 1m- migration quotas for all nationalities to the end of the fiscal year of 1947, to be used for admittance to the United States of victims of war displacement without regard to nationality. Obviously, this would primarily have benefited those victims of the Hitler madness defined as displaced persons; put it also would have benefited Ital- ians, Greeks, Turks, and Spaniards, with their pitifully small annual quotas, On the same day I introduced two other bills differently worded, but having the same ultimate effect, which would have been to make the unused “lost” na- tional quotas usable for the relief of those who most needed relief; on March 11, I introduced a bill which would make the treatment of illegal entrants—stow- aways—less harsh and less similar to the brutal methods of Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia; and on March 29, 1948, I. introduced House Joint Resolution 434 to suspend the operation of section 401 (e) of the Nationality Act of 1940 as to American citizens who lost their citizen- ship by participating in the Italian elec- tions. In the present Congress I continued my strenuous efforts to effect a liberali- zation of immigration laws and of ad- ministrative policy. It is clear that there is a great deal of doubletalk in the executive agencies chiefly involved in immigration matters, which are the Department of Justice and the Department of State. While our policy-making officials from the President down are proclaiming the welcome we should give to new citizens and visitors, officials at lower levels are doing their utmost to frustrate the offi- cial policies. As an example, the visa division in 1949 circulated to consuls a letter writ- ten by a Republican Member of Con- gress in 1948, and is using that letter as a basis for denying visitors’ visas to Catholics and Jews. Greeks, Italians, Spaniards, and Jewish and Catholic refugees from Nazi and Communist per- secution in central Europe are the chief victims of this discriminatory closed door policy, which has been encouraged by influential Members of Congress. Accordingly, it has been my satisfying duty during the last 18 months to pro- test and argue against this un-Ameri- can attitude both on the administrative and the legislative levels. Since the beginning of the Highty-first Congress I have introduced the following public bills, all intended to ease the plight of the intending immigrant to the United States: House Joint Resolution 872, to suspend the deportation of all persons who have filed form 500, under section 4 of the Displaced Persons Act, until the Senate has finally dis- posed of the pending bill. House bill 2027, to amend section 3 of the Immigration Act of February 5, 1917. House bill 1234, to authorize the admis- sion into the United States of persons indig- enous to Indonesia, to make them racially eligible for citizenship, etc. House Joint Resolution 30, to suspend the operation of section 301 (e) of the Nation- ality Act of 1940 in certain cases. House bill 1915, to amend the Nationality Act of 1940. House bill 1649, to repeal section 342 (h) of the Nationality Act of 1940. House Joint Resolution 239, to suspend the operation of section 404 of the Nationality Act of 1940 in certain cases. House bill 8209, to admit parents of citi- zens as nonquota immigrants. House bill 8268, to repeal section 404 (c). In the same period, I introduced 46 private bills in behalf of aliens; some of these are duplicative, and some were withdrawn; but the fact remain that, in the effort to be helpful to distressed peo- ple of foreign birth in the United States, I have introduced more private bills in this Congress than any other Member but one. In normal times I might not regard this as a favorable distinction; but in this postwar era when so many people are suffering through no fault of their own, I believe that anything I can do, without impropriety, to help those who need help is worth while. The World State EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. RAYMOND W. KARST OF MISSOURI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, May 16, 1950 Mr. KARST. Mr. Speaker, the follow- ing print, which was delivered in April 1930 by Joseph P. Donovan, C. M., J.C. D., now rector of Kenrick Seminary, in my district in St. Louis County, is today very timely. So far as logic goes his argument for world state is flawless. When this speech was made in 1930 his remarks were probably considered fan- tastic. Today it will provoke thought and sound thinking as a foundation for everlasting peace. THE WorLD STATE (By Joseph P. Donovan, C. M., J. C. D.) The strange thing that strikes us as we consider the widespread and honest efforts of the present day for international peace is the fact that every method but* the most obvious one has been advocated and to some extent employed to bring about the reign of peace foretold by the prophet Isaiah 2,700 years ago—and he spoke in a literal sense— “They shall turn their swords into plow- shares, and their spears into sickles: nation shall not lift up the sword against nation, neither shall they be exercised any more in war.” The poet has sung of the parliament APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD of man, the federation of nations; and states- men and peoples are actually engaged in perfecting a league of nations. But an international or world state, in the strict sense of that term, is not thought of. Re- liance is placed upon agreements that in their nature are private, although the parties thereto are sovereign nations.1 At the same time an assumption is entertained that law, emanating from genuine public authority, as a remedy for the evils nations are begin- ning to groan under, 1s not only nonexistent but also nonexistible. Yet does it not behoove us Catholics, with our high traditions of juridical achievement in public as well as in private law, to inquire into the likelhood of the contrary assump- tion? Is it not time for us to ask ourselves if the day is not r~n-ore~~ perhaps is already here, when ¢ ia -c ~ +. exact that nations begin to do what families have long since done? For thousands of years how families have been gathered into state or governmental units in order to obtain a temporal good otherwise impossible, namely, the administration nationally of civil and criminal justice and the promotion nation- ally of the common welfare. Therefore, may not the time be already ripe for those na- tional units formed by the necessary union of families to coalesce in turn under a second compulsion of the law of nature into a larger form of civil society, into a society springing from secondary though absolute needs and empowered to administer internationally civil and criminal justice and to promote internationally the common temporal wel- fare of nations and, as a subsidiary func- tion, to supply the deficiencies of individual nations and groups of nations? This counterassumption of ours first calls for clearing up of the confusion that pre- vails on the notion of society. The well- known definition—a union of persons pursu- ing one end by a community of means— signifies to one group of thinking and non- thinking people that such a union can do anything the component persons want done. To another group of thinkers and non-~ thinkers, the same term “society” connotes a gathering that can accomplish nothing in practice but everything in theory. Yet the truth is that society is truly mighty while not all powerful. Here it is well to remark the fundamental distinction that public ju- rists have always made between the various unions that individual man can or does enter into. Amicable and juriditzal, accord~ ing to those publicists, are the bas c kinds of society; but these kinds are worlds apart. The arricable society, association, or union of persons is from below; the juridical society, from above. Man enters amicable society of his own initiative in order better to use gifts or endowments of nature or grace at hand. The entrance into amicable socicty confers no new right. It merely enables him to use that previously possessed right jointly, and thereby gain accidental advan- tage over what would have been the use of that same right singly. Amicable society is verified at the one extreme in the white man and the black man who went in cahoots to hunt possums. It is verified at the other 4When I prepared the above paper I was unaware of the striking proposal put forth by the Reverend Father Delos of the Uni- versity of Lille at the French Social Week of 1926. That distinguished churchman proved the need of an international state from the existence of a distinct international good. He proceeded in an inductive way, whercas I proceeded deductively from the notion of perfect society through apparently interna- tional facts to the need of a world state. I am aware that noted publicists try to make out that both Victoria and Suarez taught a community of nations, but a close scrutiny of their respective contexts indicates that they spoke in a racial, and not in a juridical sense.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD extreme in the merchant princes who enter into a partnership to trade on a national or international scale. Of amicable society only is the adage, In union there is strength, literally true. For it incvesces shmen oth but gives no new source of s .. The latter, the other grand division, juridi- cal society, does do. And because juridical socicty does give new strength, does confer new rights, 1t has to come from above and be a creation of law, and not proceed solely from the will of man. Even where amicable society has a personality distinct from the persons composing it, that personality it owes tolaw. The business corporation differs from the business partnership because law has intervened in the first case and not in the second. Yet this giving of legal person- ality doesn’t essentially lift the group enjoy- ing it out of the category of amicable so- ciety; for this personality is granted only to serve the pooling of individual rights. But where juridical society is entered, so- cial rishts and duties, or social privileges straightway spring up. Conjugal society, marriage, is our first instance of juridical society in time and in growth. For conjugal society expanded into the family acquaints us with the initial form of juridical society in the temporal order and becomes the occa- sion of the second form of juridical society taking on actual existence. The individual man by entering conjugal society acquires a new character. He becomes husband. The individual woman by getting married is no longer just woman. She is wife. Through the marvelous creation of natural law per- fected by divine positive law, two persons secking individual perfection suddenly find themselves promoting social perfection. They are, in consequence, forthwith clothed with new rights and new responsibilities. They who were and still are personally equal have at once become socially unequal. Since there is a true union, a real society, here, there must be authority to rule. And by the very necessity of things the headship has to lodge in one and the subjection in the other, yet always are the obedience exacted and the obedience yielded measured by the needs of this actually little but potential’y great so- ciety. The husband is autnorized to com- mand only for the common good; the wife is enjoined to obey only for the common good, and that as appraised by a human and not an abstract standard. The union has been entered into by way of contract, yet the union is no mere contract, but a natural in- stitution deriving the laws of its life from the purpose the Creator has revealed in His nec- essary and free legislation on conjugal so- ciety. Because the modern de-Christianized state and the modern de-Christianized indi- vidual overlook this Juridical phase of mar- riage, they sce no contradiction in dissolving it for cause, contract like. They make mar- riage only amicable society in practice, there- fore in morals no less than in logic are de- barred from punitively distinguishing be- tween the use and the usurpation of con- jugal rights. For the society that the indi- vidual can legislate for is in the very nature of things of his own creation, is an amicable society, a union of persons all but infinitely removed from the inviolability of juridical ¢ society, whatever may be the rank of the latter’s righteously sacred grouping. God provided, we may say, that the hu- man race would physically live by society just as the individual physically lives by food and air. But as the families multiplied a new juridical creation in the temporal order ‘was disclosed. There was discovered a need for what might be called, continuing the food and air figure, a hygiene service for the race. For it was seen, as the families began filling in the vacant spaces of the world, that another social instrumentality would have to be requisitioned to insure a food supply commensurate with the increase of popula- tion, a thing that in the beginning the fam- ily seemed clearly sufficient for. The earth's surface would eventually have to be scien- tufically cultivated, and the families by them- Selves could not bring this about. But in- stantly imperative was an authority for reg- ulating interfamily relations. Where all were equal, no one commanded. Where af- fairs pertained to everyone, no one dis- charged them. Unsettied disputes and un- prevented or unpunished crimes would alone be the black death of the race. So there was evinced a juridical need for a public society to do for the family what the family could not do for itself. This gives us the juridi- eal origin of civil society, God’s authoriza- tion of the state. That authorization was incidentally bestowed by the Creator when He constituted man capable of earthly per- fection and put him under obligation to pur- sue that perfection, without however jeop- ardizing his heavenly perfection. The grant of civil powers was enfolded in the needs of the race, Historical events would do the un- folding. The juridical origin of civil society, then, is clear. But the historical origin, owing to the lack of human records, remains hidden in obscurity. When Abraham came out of Ur of the Chaldees, he left behind him a peo- ple among whom civil society was fairly evolved. When he went down to Egypt to sojourn, he came in contact with a state that had long since passed out of its childhood. But even up to the late day of Roman de- velopment the ruling power of civil society imitated the personal authority of the father rather than the public authority of the com~ monwealth. Territoriality was slow to en- ter into the composition of the state as an essential element. And some will have it that the Greeks and Romans required that power be fixed to the soil by a people before that people could be called civilized. Yet the potestas patria long bore traces of the precivil era when self-defense sometimes justified the father in exercising the right of life and death over the unruly son, and when more often a half conscious intima~ tion of the public society to come was the urge that brought about the wielding of the jus gladui. No great flight of imagination is required to picture the vicissitudes that the race went through from the time that single families living in isolation experienced no need for necessary association with other families un- til closely mingled families found themselves merged into a larger and inseparable unity that philosophers afterward called the State. Still the pre-civil stages of the family have cropped out in subsequent history as often as the accidents of colonization or political transition have thrown families on the fringe of civilization. Abraham himself, hot in the pursuit of the marauding kings, was an exam- ple of families leaguing together to safe- guard life and property. Even the people of Israel under the Judges might be said to have lived a family rather than a civil existence. And in feudal days private warfare was much the rule and public warfare the exception. Feudalism itself in giving way to popular monarchy seemed hardly more than the theory of civil society yielding to the fact of civil society. In other words there was al- ways an appreciation of a need of public au- thority before the tangible instrumentalities of that authority were evolved. Coming events cast more than shadows, they cast part realities before. And are not things much the same in the international order? Heretofore in the world’s history national contacts were moral rather than physical. Distances were enough to make the clash of interests only occasional, even if these occasions did occur periodically. Now the distances have disappeared. The con- tacts are physical. Accordingly, the conflict of interests is constant, As a result nations A3707 have begun to put more energy in pretect- ing their life than in living their?.c. ikecy want peace. To secure it they are by turns soft spoken, blustering and bullying. But peace itself is a negation, and were it attain- able by either Sunday school methods or row- ay methods the positive element in interna- tional life would still be missing. And that nocitive elament of progress is a sufficient “7 "CC. the common goad to insure ade- quate temporal welfare. Who in the intra- state s phere would rely upon private arbitra~ tion to settle disputes, cooperative effcrt to prevent crime and self-defense to ward off attacks® Yet with the interstate sphere growing into a lixe complexity, we are loath to think we require the voice of authority to determine and the arm of authority to exe- cute in matters equally beyond private con- trol. When disarmament is suggested to the nations now, they naturally take the attitude that the early families would have taken had some primitive pacifist pointed out how beautifully deadly brawls could be avoided, if only each family would cease to arm itself. Those families would not have understood how this new condition could save them from armed robber bands. With Russia ready to range amuck over the world and other un- toward *s>r“*ir~cncic~ cqually probable, mod- ern nator ca .-ov be persuaded to go de- fenseless. But were the menace of war to disappear by some stroke of magic, there would still be the artificial barriers of com- merce to tear down. What private efforts, what amicable society among nations would be sufficient for the reac li-hrr+r* cf this greatly desired end? br soa yce ac form of society conceivable in the prernises is a public society perfect in the international jurisdiction as the nation is perfect in the national or domestic jurisdiction. And that form of perfect juridical society can be aptly called the world state. Our only abhorrence of such a necessary society is what might be called our perverted innate fear of lawful au- thority. If the families had not found them- selves in civil society before there was any prevision of their incorporation, they too would hive been most eloquent in conjuring up the tyrannies that the great superfamily could be guilty of. Yet their prematurely mourned loss of liberties would for the most part have consisted of rights altogether be- yond the original domain of the family. To acknowledge the right of a world state is comparatively easy; but to bring about the fact of a world state will be a task of the most delicate statesmanship. Alliances, treaties, the present league, are all so many points of departure. International trade, wlerniticnal danance, and other economic activities are attempting to solve problems as intricate in their department of human life. What at the outset must be remem-~ bered is that the world state will start from the actual and work toward the ideal. By the time it reaches its permanent status, there will be a true equality in the coalescing nations. In its provisional status, however, it will move from present inequalities toward the aimed at equality. The same happened in our own Union. We went from minority white suffrage to universal manhood suffrage and then to universal equal suffrage. We progressed from a Nation of 18 States and Federal territory through States and terri- tories to a Nation with one unbroken stretch of States. Civil society itself everywhere came into existence under numerous kinds of inequality. If things had been otherwise we would have witnessed an unreality. The timid Catholic, of course, will be fear- ful that his advocacy of a world state would bring him in conflict with the claims set up for the Pope as the head of a Christian ethnarchy. Yet no loyal Catholic has any intention to abridge either the direct or in- direct prerogatives of the Pope. Let the seceded nations return to Christian unity tomorrow and the pagan and moslem nations
A3708 embrace the faith, and a Christian ethnarchy we shall have with the Pope as the active subject of authority. But this ethnarchy would have authority in international affairs, barring a real relation of faith or morals, only by way of devolution. And substitutes suppose the absence, not the presence of native authority. The Pope, as well as churchmen in humbler stations, prefers to be left alone that he may be able with un- divided energy to conduct the affairs of that kingdom which is not of this world. He does not wish to be drawn away from spirit- ual affairs to become engrosied in unfinished temporal affairs. Mere’; bee.: se the church’s organization has taken over the duties in times past of temporal rule where civil so- ciety failed, no one has thought that the church should therefore bear the double burden of sovereignty as a normal condition of things. Because the church, like her Divine Master, has gone about doing good in the way of giving relef from evils that otherwise would have remained unlifted, it does not follow that she countenances hu- man laziness, When human ailments knew no scientific remedy, she counseled people to pray for their cures. But now with medi- cine and surgery developed, she would charge with superstition the person who would want to forego the aid of science in order to exalt the power of prayer. A juridically undeveloped world the church hastened to help. She had been uncharitable or even unjust, if she had not, but she doesn’t pro- claim a juridical Sabbath, so that she may still have scope for her international min- istrations. Perhaps when Pope Alexander VI drew his line of demarcation between the Spanish and Portuguese fields of future discovery, he was consulting for the higher good of Christen- dom, therefore exercising distributive jus- tice in the spiritual order. In that hypoth- esis even there was only a devolutive and not a direct duty, for the spiritual problem was caused by a deficiency in the temporal order. Had the nations already had a true juridical tribunal before which their inter- national difficulties were justiciable, the Pope would have had no occasion to intervene. In that case only an outraging of faith or morals by the International Society would have given the Pope jurisdiction. It is no objection, then, to a world state that its emergence would diminish the Pope’s rights by devolution. That very diminution would spell an intensification of the native rights of the Pope, and be an indication that na- tions and individuals were coming by moral health. The Pope would be the first to re- joice that he was no longer called upon to mediate between nation and nation; for in this he would behold the wider truth of the inspired utterance, “He hath made of one blood all the nations of the earth.” And he would understand that in the state, too, there is neither Jew nor Gentile, bond nor free. And what an illustration our own na- tional experience affords of the international consummation that soon may be. On the morrow of independence gained we were, as our constitutional philosopher, the illustri- ous Brownson, will not let us forget, “A Nation of States.” But there was only a dim consciousness of our nationhood. Hach of the former Colonies continued to administer its intrastate affairs; but the interstate af- fairs were elther not administered at all, or they were inadequately administered by a Continental Congress based on the assump-~ tion that the States formed only an amicable society, or worse yet, there was an attempt on the part of several States to administer them severally, a pure usurpation of author- ity, just as that of the families in the pre- civil days who would have tried to regulate interfamily affairs. There was the right and fact of nationhood; yet there was practically no distinctive exercise of national sov- ereignty. As far as appearances went all but the domestic phase of sovereignty had been vacated. The new Nation was quiescent. The high powers of sovereignty might be thought absent. But, lo, a faint conscious- ness begins to develop. The conviction grows that the States together can and must do what pertains to the good of each and all, a thing that singly they were powerless to achieve. Only an agreement is needed on how this Nation is to act. A genius has al- ready sketched organically a form of govern- ment. Common counsel gives it political perfection. It is put into operation. So in- stantaneous is its success that a people who were shortly before at the edge of political and private disaster begin wondering why an engrossed parchment can work such an unbelievable transformation. But a parch- ment had not wrought the change. The rec- ognition of a fact-had brought order where pefore there was chaos. Thirteen States made a Nation one and inseparable. That was the fact. The adoption and the carry- ing out of the Constitution was the recogni- tion. The unexampled success of the en- deavor established the fact if the establish- ment was necessary. The nations of the world for upward of 4,000 years have been doing what the en- franchised Colonies of America were per~- jlously trying to do for 4 years. God by His creative act has seemed te give the bond of world union. Has not the experi- ence of those unhooped staves been long enough and bitter enough to result in a call for the adoption of a written constitution in order to give expression to the natural con- stitution long ago bequeathed by the provi- dence of God in a wondrous succession of historical events? Time for Action EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. GEORGE G. SADOWSKI OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, May 5, 1950 Mr. SADOWSKI. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the ReEcorD, I wish to include an editorial written by Tommy (T. W.) Thompson, president of Ford local 600, UAW-CIO. This article appeared in Ford Facts, the official organ of local 600: Time FoR ACTION A little over a week ago a renegade took the witness stand at a Senate invesligating committee meeting. He was Senator JosrepH R. McCarrry's chief witness in his attempt to smear Presi- dent Truman by attempting to show that Owen Lattimore, a high State Department adviser, was a top Soviet espionage agent and a Communist. I don’t know whether or not Owen Latti- more is or was a Communist or a Soviet agent, as Senator McCarruy has charged. But I do know that some very important and reliable Americans have said that he is not. It is also common knowledge that the FBI and Army Intelligence have cleared him as a loyal American. And what about Louis Budenz, Lattimore’s accuser? He was born and raised a Catholic, He forsook his religion and left the church. In 1945, after 10 years out of the church, he got religion and returned to the Catholic faith, He was born an American in Indianapolis, Ind. Yet in 1936 he became the interna- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD tionalist editor of the Communist Daily Worker. In 1945, at the same time, he re- embraced the Catholic faith, he suddenly became a good American again. Apparently Mr. Budenz could be anything or stand for any kind of principle which suited his own best interests at any particu< lar time. He can turn it on or off at will, Since his reformation, Louis Budenz has written a book and numerous magazine arti-~ cles; another book is to be published in May 1950. A very lucrative bit of writing in these congressional crusading days. Despite these facts indicating Budenz’ un- reliability as a witness under Ordinary stands ards, and the bias that becomes apparent when we remember the publication date of his new book, that august committee of the Senate allowed Senator McCartny to con~ duct his circus (with cameras, microphones, and news reporter) and do irreparable dam-~ age to the reputation of Owen Lattimore, an American who has brought his great tal< ents to the services of his country. But the greatest travesty of justice is that the Senate committee permitted Budenz to clutter up the committee’s record with com~ mon gossip. Somebody said that Lattimore was a Communist agent is the extent of the Budenz testimony. “Hearsay” evidence is what lawyers call it. No court in the land would permit this gossip into evidence in any case tried under sound and tested rules of law. Why should we as workers and union mem- bers be concerned with what is happening to a@ man named Lattimore in far-off Wash-~ ington? Simply this: Certain committees of the Congress of the United States have been con- ducting “witch hunts” for many years. Up to the present it has been the Com- munists in Government; soon it could be the Communist among labor-union officers and membership; later it could be Socialists; and stall later anybody who would dare raise his voice to speak out for the workers. And that’s where you and I come in. You may be inclined to think that a little remote. A CASE IN POINT But the Ferguson one-man grand Jury in Michigan is a case in point. If you recall, former Circuit Judge Homer Frrcuson slid into the United States Scnate and his special appointed »rosecutcr became a Wayne circuit judge on the piitlieily re- sulting from their one-man grand-jury activ- ity in convicting grafters in public office. While the Ferguson one-man grand jury ran roughshod over the politicians and other grafters, we all sat snugly by and smiled. When defense attorneys shouted to the high heavens concerning the violaticn of the grafters’ constitutional rights by the onc- man grand-jury system, we paid ro atten- tion. The fact that no othe: S.a.e in the Union had sanctioned such arbitrary power in one man bothered us not a bit. We overlooked one significant fact. The one-man grand jury was an innovation of the Republican Party in Michigan. It was spawned by a Republican legislature—at- tained its greatest impetus under a judge who was Republican and a Republican spe- cial prosecutor right here in Detroit. That infamous one-man grand jury system would still be with us, except for two inci- dents. The first was that a one-man grand jury was set up to investigate Michigan sales tax frauds in 1948. The first dip of the net brought up the biggest fish. The automobile dealers who had reaped the grand golden harvest from a car-hungry public after the war. But the car dealers of 1948 happened to be the financial angels of the Michigan Republican Party. Five dollars from the sale of each car since the end of the war found
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD its way into the treasury of the various dealer associations. How much of that went to the Republican Party only the Republi- cans know. In 1948, as taday, the strongest and most effective Republican political group in Michi- gan was and is the organized auto dealers. They were astounded to learn that their books could be seized by a one-man grand jury; that their constitutional rights meant nothing once the one-hand grand jury swung into action. But unhke the politicians and grafters who had been forced through the one-man grand jury wringer before them—the auto dealers could do something about it. Wasn’t the legislature controlled by the Republican Party and didn’t they have a strong hand on the purse strings of the Republican Party? Then came the second incident. A one- man grand jury case from Pontiac was ap- pealed to the Michigan Supreme Court, which followed the pattern it had established and upheld the power of the one-man grand jury. The case was appealed to the United States Supreme Court, which reversed the Michigan Supreme Court in March 1948. The United States Supreme Court said: ‘“Michigan’s one-man grand jury * * * combines in a single office the historically separate powers of grand jury, committing magistrate, prosecutor, trial judge, and petit jury. This aggregate authority denies to the accused not only the right to a public trial, put also other basic protections secured by the Sixth Amendment (U. S. Constitution) .” Armed with this United States Supreme Court decision, the auto dealers (aided by Michigan liberals, who had fought against the one-man grand jury for years) prevailed upon the 1949 Michigan Legislature to re- store the constitutional rights of Michigan citizens by taking the teeth out of the one- man grand jury law. For years we sat idly by while the cancer~ ous one-man grand jury law whittled away our constitutional rights. Shall we continue our do-nothing attitude while infinitely more dangerous Republican unconstitutional practices whittle away our constitutional liberties by congressional com- mittee action? No one can deny that committees of Con- gress should be permitted to investigate into matters of legislative concern. But where does the legislative concern end? Shall the legislative branch of Gov- ernment be permitted to take over the execu- tive powers of Government under the guise of investigating for legislative purposes? What about the constitutional rights of citizens involved in congressional investi- gations? Is the Congress above the Con~ stitution which created it? Yes, we can all agree that the Congress should be permitted to investigate matters of legislative concern but it should be done im an orderly manner, under established, tested rules which will protect citizens from boing unjustly accused and unfairly held up to public ridicule and sworn. Since the days of Martin Dies, a super- duper American Gestapo has been super- imposed upon us under the guise of con- gressional committee investigations. All they lack is the secret police and the power to condemn to death or they may have made Himmler’s Gestapo seem like a Boy Scout troop by now. We can assume that from the reckless disregard of the rights and reputa- tions of American citizens under their pres- ent procedures. If the American Gestapo gains full ma- turity, you can bet that it will be used by the money barons to destroy the labor unions and again impose the industrial tyranny that existed prior to 1932. Is what is happening to Owen Lattimore in far-off Washington of importance to you and me as union members? You can bet your life that it is, XCVI—App.——-234 We dare not sit idly by and permit these witch hunts to ccntinue. What happened to the auto dealers under the one-man grand jury could happen to us in Washington. I was most interested in what staid, con- servative Atlantic magazine had to say about the McCarthy investigation in its May 1950 issue which came out last week: “The atmosphere in the Capital, in conse- quence of this parading of names in loyalty investigations, is becoming unhealthy. Little heed is paid to the fact that the victims of the name-calling, unless they are eminent enough, are damaged in their lives and posi- tions. Congressional immunity is a shield for the reckless accuser. For an analogy to these times, historians are turning back to the days just before the opening of the nineteenth century when the alien and sedi- tion bills were under discussion. The warn- ing raised by Edward Livingston that we should not ‘excite a fervor against a foreign aggression to establish a tyranny at home,’ can be stressed again with some justification. The tyranny today is the tyranny of the legislature.” Then again, under Mood of the Capital, Atlantic magazine concludes with: “Soon if we don’t watch out, Congress will foster a secret police on the citizenry on the worst totalitarian model, and it will be done over the head of the FBI itself.” To all of which I say a loud “Amen.” When the stench of what is happening in Washington becomes unbearable to conserva- tives, it is long past the time for liberals to swing into action. It is time that all union members and other liberal-thinking Americans began de- manding that the Congress adopt rules for its investigating committees to end the witch hunt type of investigations; to protect Americans from false, unjust, and unfair accusations by publicity-seeking committee members and book-publishing and magazine- article-writing witnesses, It is about time that the Congress of the United States began practicing a little of that American democracy that they love to talk about. Spence Bill for Rent-Control Extension EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. BARRATT O’HARA OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 11, 1950 Mr. O’HARA of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I am extending my remarks to include the following editorial from the Wash- ington Star of May 8, 1950, supporting the Spence bill for the extension of Fed- eral rent control which is now the sub- ject of public hearings in the Banking and Currency Committee: FururRE oF RENT CONTROL If national rent control is extended once again after June 30, the extension is apt to follow the lines of a compromise suggested by Representative Spence, of Kentucky. Un- der his plan, Federal rent control would auto- matically end after 1950, except for those communities that in the meantime took the positive step of asking that it be continued. The compromise seems reasonable and car~ ries a persuasive appeal. That Federal rent control is still very much in the picture is shown by current estimates that some 29,= ‘000,000 people, living in nearly 4,000 incor- porated cities, towns, and villages, including 63 out of the 92 cities of 100,000 population, A3709 are still protected by Federal rent control, Only 4 States and a relatively small number of towns and cities have chosen to end rent control. Two States have adopted rent con~ trol laws of their own, which are superseding Federal law. But if failure throughout the country to end rent control indicates any~ thing, it would seem to be that control is still needed in many localities. That con- trol, under the Spence plan, could be re- tained by any city or town that asked for it. The District law, of course, is entirely sep- arate from the national rent-control law. If Congress ended national rent control by fail< ure to extend it, the same thing might be expected to happen with the locallaw. But the wiser way of reaching a decision on ex- tending or ending local rent control is to rest that decision on what the facts may show. It would be well if hearings were begun scon on pending House legislation to extend local rent control and every effort made to obtain through testimony an accurate picture of things as they are. Few cities of the country, if one includes metropolitan areas, have exceeded Washing- ton in the amount of new construction in relation to population. Last year alone 16,- 989 new units were completed here. Rentals in this new construction are far above those in controlled buildings. Those who favor it argue that control for another year will tend to bring down the rents in new construction; those who want to end control argue pre- cisely to the contrary, claiming that only when rents in new construction are subject to competition from rents released from con- trol will the level of new-construction rentals begin to fall. Nothing is proved one way or the other by such opinions, and a congres- sional hearing could at least obtain pere tinent facts on the need for continued con= trol. Bullitt Says Dupes in State Department Do Soviet Agent Job EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. DEWEY SHORT OF MISSOURI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, April 24, 1950 Mr. SHORT. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I include the following newspaper article from the Washington Evening Star of April 1, 1950: Buuuirr Says DuPES IN STaTE DEPARTMENT Do Sovizt AGenT Jos A former Ambassador to Russia charged last night that dupes of Soviet propaganda are doing the work of Russian agents in the State Department. : The critic was William C. Bullitt, who told a Georgetown University audicnce in Gaston Hall that the United States cannot expect to win its struggle for survival against Russia until the State Department rids itself of Communist sympathizers. | “These naive Government Officials entered the Department through improper screening during the war,” Mr. Bullitt asserted. ‘They remain there now,” he said, “because Secre- tary Acheson and his closest associates and friends have a vested interest in their own mistakes.” The former diplomat declared that the Secretary had been pursuaded by his coun~ selors, befuddled by Soviet psychological warfare, to cease economic and military aid to China, “In any European parliamentary democracy, a minister of foreign affairs who had tossed a great ally like China into the
A3710 hands of Stalin, would have been dismissed from his post,” he added. He said he regards Indochina as the most critical area in southeast Asia and urged the immediate dispatch of arms aid to that country. He also proposed increased Ameri- can support of a western European federa- tion and of resistance forces in satellite countries. Turning his fire on President Truman, Mr. Bullitt said: “Our President has not understood that an over-all plan for defense, not only of our own country, but also of those countries which still remain outside Stalin’s domain, is essen- tial. The President has not yet found within himself the intelligence and spirit to take the offensive effectively against Soviet expansionism.” Report on President Truman’s Visit to Pacific Junction, Iowa, on Monday, May 8, 1950 EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EUGENE D. O’SULLIVAN OF NEBRASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, May 16, 1950 Mr. O’SULLIVAN. Mr. Speaker, at this time I wish to call the attention of the House of Representatives to a very revealing news item and editorial deal- ing with President Truman’s recent visit to Pacific Junction, Iowa, which is just across the Missouri River from Platts- mouth, Nebr., and the congressional dis- trict which I now represent in the Con- gress of the United States, to wit, the Second Nebraska District. This news item and editorial appeared on May 11, 1950, in the newspaper known as the Farmer-Labor Press of Council Bluffs, Iowa. Its verbally hard-hitting and most able editor, the Honorable George Wood- ward, Sr., is a tried and true Democrat of the old school, who garnered his full share of political and other wisdom as he traveled along the journey of life. His fair and fearless journalistic esti- mate of our greatest President is well worth his time and effort put into same, and is well worth the careful considera~ tion of true Americans, not of the “help Joe Stalin type,” who now are encased in the ignoble lower bowels of reactionary republicanism, which has nothing left to talk about but unfortunate sexual mis~ fits in the departments of Government, Reds who are not Reds at all, and Fascist economy which will, if put into effect, give bloody Joe an advantage in the cold war which he never expected or ever deserved. Years ago when I was a cowhand we met and treated in our own very proper and most convincing way these same kind of fellows who were always soiling normal thoughts of decent men and women with sex perversion subjects. This is the way we handled their cases. You see we felt always that these kind of fellows should be watched very closely, because we believed in the old saying that what was closest to the mind was dearest to the heart, so consequently we made those kind of talking fellows always ride sidesaddle with their pants on, so that people would meet and know them as they really were. In Omaha there is the greatest saddle- making firm the wild and woolly West ever knew or saw. It is Alfred Cornish, 1306 Farnam Street, Omaha, Nebr., and they still make the sidesaddles which the proper females of yesteryear were wont to use. I would suggest that all reac- tionary Republicans get their orders in before the rush. From my casual obser- vations, and Iam a pretty good judge of hindquarters, it will take a pretty big saddletree to fit some of these fellows’ ponderous midsections, but Alfred Cor- nish will, I am sure, take care of their riding needs no matter how big they come. Remember this please, when we get you riding sidesaddle, the way you really should go, you will never fool any- body any more. Just remember that when you point one finger at the other fellow there are always three of your own fingers pointed at you. Self-protection is always the first law of nature so please get natural in every way before you un- fortunately expose yourself. I now present the news item and the editorial. The news item: Truman Backs New Dean on CURRENT TRIP President Truman has come out swinging in behalf of his Fair Deal, the major portions of which have been accepted and endorsed by organized labor. In the Iowa portion of his current cross-country tour, the Chief Executive left little doubt that he considered his own program an extension of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal and perhaps that is the way the President would really like to have his efforts described—that he is endeavoring to carry on where F. D. R. left off, At Creston, the President assured a crowd of seven to eight thousand who braved the rain and cold to hear him speak that the Federal Government was not trying to take everything over, He also noted that Iowa seemed to have plenty of water and that good use was being made of it. The Presi- dent also declared that the REA, one of the rather early New Deal measures, was still bringing needed power to Iowa farms where there was none before this agency came into being. ‘ At Pacific Junction where the President was met by a considerable delegation from Council Bluffs and southwestern Iowa, and the crowd numbered over 3,000, the President reminded his Msteners that bank failures were practically unheard of these days and that this healthy condition had existed since the creation of the Federal Deposit Insur- ance Corporation, the Government agency which insures bank deposits. He said at the time of the establishment of the FDIC dire predictions were made that the plan wouldn't work but that this was around the time also that Iowa farmers were in pretty bad circumstances, in fact, the President re- called, an Iowa judge was almost hung be- cause he ordered foreclosures on certain farms where the farmers had been unable to make their payments. The President concluded his Pacific Junc- tion talk by saying that he was the same fel- low who came around 2 years ago looking for votes and that he still considered himself a “servant of the people.” Prominent among those welcoming Presi- dent Truman at Pacific Junction was Demo- cratic senatorial candidate Otha Wearin, for- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD mer Congressman from this district, who also chatted briefly with his old congressional colleague, former Washington Governor Mon Wallgren, Tom Keleher, local druggist and Democratic candidate for State representa- tive, and Democratic County Chairman Dave Burrows and Vice Chairman Dora Sowden, did the honors in presenting the President with a huge ice cream birthday cake. Ovher candidates including Jim Hart, who is run- ning for Congress on the Democratic ticket, shook hands with the Chief Executive. The editorial: PersIDENT TRUMAN Visirs Our Part or Iowa Like him or not, the President of the United States is a very human sort of fel- low. He is not stuffed shirt and he talks and acts like a down-to-earth person his intimates say he is and yet there is a quict dignity about him. Despite the many cares of his office, the most important govern- mental post in the world, the President im- presses you as the type of man who would always have at least a couple of minutes to listen to your own personal problems and offer a friendly bit of advice. In fact, we are pretty certain that the Chief Executive has one quality that perhaps has generally escaped his admirers and foes alike anc that is this: At any given time, he would be talking to average Joe Doakes he would be giving Joe the same attention and treatment that he would give, say Joe Stalin or Winston Churchill, at a high level conference involving the fate of nations. Call this the common touch or what you will, it undoubtedly has won the President friends and supporters among all the Joe Doakes and to tell the truth he seems mainly interested in the average Joes. Personally, President Truman is the pic- ture of health and even his most bitter foes, if they are honest about it, would have to agree with his Pacific Junction statement that although he was 66, he didn’t look it, On the cross country tour the President is making, he evidently is going to remind the Nation of where it now stands in com- parison with 18 years ego and offhand we would say that a lot of us meed reminding. President Truman, like his peerless prede- cessor, is continually being attacked by the special interests who yearn for a return to the good, old days. These good, old days, of course, were also the days of low wages, law farm prices, and Iow income for the small-business man, . Labor, of all segments of the population, is perhaps most familiar with what hap- pened prior to the New Deal and maybe be~ fore it is too late, all of us had better take stock and see if we hadn't better heed the President’s warnings. If we do, then we'll vote for a Congress this November which will be pledged to the maintenance of eco- nomic conditions as they are and not as they were in 1932. State of Our Defense: An Audit and Appraisal EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. DEWEY SHORT OF MISSOURI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, April 24, 1950 Mr. SHORT. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I include the fol- lowing article by Hanson W. Baldwin,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD which appeared recenily in the New York Times: Stats oF Our D=rense: AN AvDIT AND AP- PRAISAL—STRENGTH OF ARMY, AIR FORCE, AND Wavy FOLLOWING REDUCTIONS FOR Economy (By Hanson W. Baldwin) The state of the Nation’s defenses came into the congressional spotlight last week as General of the Army Dwight D. Eisenhower sucgested the addition of about half a bil- lion dollars to the 1951 defense budget. Gen- eral Eicenhower’s concern with our “dis- armament’—which he heavily qualified, however—was immediately discounted by President Truman, who categorically but po- litely denied that any of our defenses hed been reduced below the safety limit. At the same time, the President expressed the opin- ion that there was no fundamental differ- ence between himself and General Eisen- hower, who, as temporary presiding officer of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has been gen- erally credited with having prepared the mulitary budget. The continuing debate about our security program, which has been in the headlines ever since the Navy~Air Force differences last fall, centers around armed forces that now total about 1,490,300 officers and men. The Army has more than 600,000 men, organized in 10 divisions, plus smaller units; the Air Force has some 414,000 men, with 8,800 op- erating planes; and the Navy and Marines have about 460,000 men, operating 652 ships of all types; 5,900 active planes, and two marine divisions. BACKED BY RESERVE UNITS These Regular forces, far larger than in any prior period of our peacetime history, are backed up by Organized Reserve and National Guard units that also are larger than ever before and that are being increased in strength in the next fiscal year. The Regular forces—and particularly the Navy and Marine Corps—have been in the process of contraction for some time, how~ ever, and cuts scheduled for the 1951 fiscal year (starting July 1)—the budget for which Congress is now considering—were particu- larly severe, and were one of the reasons for the Navy’s resentment as expressed last fall in congressional hearings. Secretary of De- fense Louis Johnson has lightened somewhat the reductions scheduled then, but the bulk of them have gone through, or are scheduled to. The Navy is to operate fewer carriers than last year; 30 fewer destroyers, vital in sub- marine warfare, and fewer submarines. A major cut also has been scheduled in naval and marine aviation. The Army anticipates that the reductions will “of course, have an influence on our over-all combat effective- ness, but we are endeavoring to minimize the impact on our immediate combat poten-~ tial.” The Air Force remains at about the same size next year as this, but its hoped-for progress toward the 70-group goal, recom- mended some years ago, has heen frozen under the prospective budget to 48 groups. IMPROVED TRAINING The state of training, organization and equipment of these forces is far better than it was in the postwar demobilization period, and there has been definite modernization and improvement in the past year. But there are, of course, many weaknesses. Nearly all units are well below strength. Only part of the Strategic Air Command, the First Division, and Constabulary in Germany and the Highty-second Airborne in this coun- try, and the Navy’s Mediterranean and far eastern task forces could be considered ap- proximately ready for war. The Army has virtually no new postwar tanks or antiair- craft guns; only a relatively few ships and naval planes are equipped with the newest radar and sonar, vital in combating sub- marines; and the close-support tactical and troop-carrier planes of the Air Force are rela= tively few in number, somewhat deficient in training, and perhaps not entirely satisfac tory in quality. One of the greatest weaknesses, the effects of which will be felt most seriously only some years in the future, is the current and pro-~ jected rate of aircraft procurement—about 2,048 to 2,200 military and naval planes of all types per year. This rate 1s so low that unless 1¢ 1s increased 1t will not be sufficient to replace old aircraft, and by 1954 or 1955 or even earlier, a sizable part of our Air Force and Navy planes may be obsolete. The necessity of peacetime economy has imposed certain other weaknesses on the Armed Forces. The virtual withdrawal of the Navy from Midway and from the outer Aleutians is part of the calculated risk that any peacetime defense budget must assume, but there is no doubt that both positions— particularly the Aleutians, which tend to neutralize one of Russia’s most :mportant submarine bases, at Petropavlovsk—would have to be reoccupied and strengthened in case of war. EISENHOWER’S RECOMMENDATIONS These and a great many other weaknesses have been pointed out by various critics of the administration’s defense policies. Gen- eral Eisenhower last week added his voice, though moderately, to those of the critics. He cited particularly the need for the pro- curement of more planes for the Air Force, and suggested a 3-year program for strength- ening Alaska, more expenditures for anti- submarine warfare, and a strong economic and industrial mobilization program and a better intelligence service. His testimony was immediately followed by a plan advanced by the House Armed Services Committee to add $647,000,000 to next year’s budget to strengthen Air Force and Navy and Marine Corps air arms and to help to provide a radar fence for the country. These attacks upon the administration's defense program have a considerable founda- tion in fact, although some of the attacks undoubtedly have exaggerated our weak- nesses, and have been overly critical of Sec- retary of Defense Johnson’s economy pro- gram. The cuts in our defense funds have resulted in the sloughing off of some service “fat,” but when some 20 percent of our troop strength can be allocated to housekeeping duties to replace civilian personnel who have been dismissed, it is hard to substantiate Mr. Johnson's contention that our over-all com- pat effectiveness has been increased. In fact, there is no doubt but that our total active military strength is less today than a year ago and will be less still a year from now if the projected 1951 military budget goes through without change. REMEDIAL MOVES But the cuts in combat strength that are being made are not so important—except perhaps in the naval and Marine Corps air arm—as other definite and continuing weak- nesses. These weaknesses include: The intelligence services, economic and industrial mobilization planning, civilian-defense plan- ning, aircraft procurement, antisubmarine radar and sonar, a radar “fence,” tanks and antiaircraft guns, tactical and troop-carrying aircraft, Alaska, and Okinawa. Even before General Eisenhower’s testi- mony, work had been started to remedy some of these deficiencies; to take care of them all would cost much money, and in peace~ time there never is in a democracy what any military man would consider a truly ade- quate defense. The peacetime military budget must always represent an accommo- dation between economy and security, and unless we are to become a bankrupt state or A3711 &@ garrison state we can never even attempt to buy absolute security. A defense budget, moreover, must be flex- ible and relative to the world situation and the Nation’s economic condition. The budget for 1951 is based upon an assumption of continued presperity in this country and upon the estimate that war in the foresee- able future—the next 2 years or even 5 years—is unlikely. A Hearty Welcome to You, Mr. President EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. EUGENE D. O’SULLIVAN OF NEBRASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, May 16, 1950 Mr. O’SULLIVAN. Mr. Speaker, a number of persons and business insti- tutions of Lincoln, Nebr., ran the follow- ing full page advertisement in the Lin-~ coln Star of Lincoln, Nebr., which was headed by a large sized picture of our President and the greeting extended to our Chief Executive, in spite of the rainy weather, was tremendous: A Hearty WELCOME To You, MR. PRESIDENT, AND A Happy BIRTHDAY The people of Nebraska and the people of Lincoln are happy that the Chief Executive of the United States has chosen these spring days to visit a section of the great American breadbasket, whose broad fields of grain feed hundreds of millions of people. The Midwest—and no region is more typi- cally midwestern than Nebraska, which con- tains the geographical center of the United States—its cities, towns, farms, and people are a part of the heart of America where since the early settlements the common aspirations of freemen and freewomen have been held in high esteem. Its people have built fine homes, fine business institutions, fine communities. They know that these days immediately ahead will be a source of inspiration to you in your travels because here the spirit that has been consecrated in American thought flourishes. The peaple of Lincoln are happy that you have chosen the capital city of Nebraska for one of your major stops that you may visit with them and they may visit with you. In the spirit of democracy, the strength of free institutions rests upon the oppor- tunity of men and women of all political beliefs to mcet and talk. It is to the glory of America that since the very beginning a nation that has fulfilled the hopes of destiny continues to be an example of comfort and strength to the world. Here in a community which takes its name from one of America’s immortals, freedom of conscience and mind continues to be man’s greatest heritage, a life of dignity and purpose. This is your sixty-sixth birthday. In the spirit of the hour, the people of Lincoln and of Nebraska extend to you, and to the high office which you occupy, neighborly felicitations. American Stores Co., Lincoln Packing Division; “~Ben, Your Hairdresser; Best Laundry & Cleaners; Consumers Public Power District; The Famous, by Phil Byron; The Gas Co.; A Friend; Hompes Tire Co., H. Hompes; Kimmel Country Club Co.; The Lincoln Journal; Lincoln Market, Sam J. Gatte; Mowbray Lyon Co.; Northwestern Iron & Metal Co., Inc.; O’Shea-Rogers Motor Co.; The Lincoln Star.
A3712 The Lincoln Journal’s Account of Presi- dent Truman’s Visit to Lincoln, Nebr., on May 8, 1950 EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. EUGENE D. O’SULLIVAN OF NEBRASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, May 16, 1950 Mr. O’SULLIVAN. Mr. Speaker, the Lincoln Journal, of Lincoln, Nebr., a lib- eral Republican newspaper, edited by Hon. Ray McConnell, had this to say concerning President Truman’s visit to the capital city of Nebraska: Troman, Goop Rain Ger ENTHUSIASTIC WEL- COMES—PRESMENT URGES BRANNAN PLAN Way To PROSPERITY (By Dean Pohlenz) Anoarp TRUMAN TRAIN.—A Nebraska cloud- burst and grinning, friendly President Harry S. Truman arrived in Lincoln at the same time—and both received an equally enthu- siastic welcome from the State. Standing partly unsheltered in the face of a driving downpour, the President again and again. expressed to his audience his apprecia- tion for their lasting out his Nation-wide major address plugging for the adoption of his administration’s Brannan farm plan. A crowd first estimated by Lincoln police at about 8,000 gradually dwindled to 3,000 to 4,000 on the invitation of the President that he would not be offended if the rain-spat- tered audience left. He said he himself must stay and make the speech, since it had already been given to the newspapers. Many took him at his word and left. Some of the Presidential party and the press corps were in grumpy mood as they boarded the train for the Jump to Grand Island. A White House staffer acknowledged that the crowd had been inattentive because of the rain, but hoped that the newspaper and radio coverage would offset this to a large degree, Although the President studiously avoided labeling the advocated farm program as the Brannan plan, he urged its doctrine as the way toward well-being and abundance and the only way to assure peace and prosperity for ourselves and for the world. The President stressed the importance of the welfare of the farmer to the economic stability of the Nation needed to insure the success of our program for peace, The President asserted: “The plain fact is that the production-pay- ment plan is the best plan yet proposed for getting an abundant production of perish- able crops consumed without knocking the bottom out of the farmer’s income. “It is in the farmer’s interest, It is also in the consumer’s interest. I firmly believe it should be made a part of our national farm program.” Mr. Truman’s speech was the first of a series of nine major addresses scheduled for his 6,400-mile cross-country stumping tour. The trip has been generally recognized as the opening of an administyation campaign to pick up additional strength in the Novem- ber congressional elections. The Brannan plan jis one of a number of Mr. Truman’s Fair Deal proposals which the present Congress has pigeonholed. He scolded that the same charges of social- jsm and regimentation now heing leveled at the Brannan plan had been hurled at the New Deal’s AAA farm program in the 1930's. Instead of being communistic, these previ-~ ous farm programs, he said, strengthened the foundations of democracy by making the farmer more secure in the ownership of his land. They also allowed the farmer to regain control over his own destiny and enjoy more liberty and a better life than ever before in history, said the President. The President based his plea for the Bran- nan plan on four ideas: 1. Fair income to the farmer. 2. Increased food to the consumer at lower costs. 8. Increased conservation. 4. Maximum benefits to the family-size farm. In responding to the Lincoln welcome and a@ 50-pound, red, white, and blue birthday cake presented to him, the President spoke of Lincoln as the center of the Nation where the Corn Belt merges with the Great Plains. He said Lincoln was typical of a city’s de- pendence upon greatness and the importance of American agriculture. “This is the pattern all over our coun- try,” he said. He said that Lincoln is also directly affected by what is happening in Berlin, Paris, and Singapore. As President Truman descended the presi- dential train about 5:05 p. m., he was met by a welcoming committee of State, city, and democratic officials and escorted to a specially constructed speaking platform at Seventh and Q. He was tightly guarded by police and se- cret-service men to the disappointment of autograph enthusiasts. Lincoln’s Mayor Clarence Miles introduced the President. Lancaster County Chairman Willard Townsend congratulated the Presi- dent on his sixty-sixth birthday upon pre- senting the cake on behalf of the people of Lincoln and the State. Mr. Truman was also welcomed by Demo- cratic National Committeeman James C. Quigley and Nebraska’s Republican Governor, Val Peterson. Earlier a gala parade of welcome moved down O Street from Fifteenth Street to the station. President Truman’s address emphasized the relation of falling farm prices to depres- sion dangers. Although net farm income dropped 50 percent after World War I, he said that after World War II prices have dropped only more than 20 percent in the last 2 years. He emphasized that the present farm-price support program is failing to provide a satis- factory basis for dealing with perishable crops. Terming the potato situation ‘“‘shame- ful,” he said that it is foolish for the Gov- ernment to buy and store or buy and de- stroy food that people want to eat now. After conceding that the Brannan plan would require crop production limitation, he lashed out at critics calling this regimenta- tion. He said this principle is at least 20 years old and incorporated in all the major farm support programs in recent years. He singled out for special criticism the cal- culation of support levels on data of some out-of-date historical period. His reference was to the 1910-14 farm price index. The administration is asking for a reference pe- riod of 1939 to 1948. He said the farmers had to approve pro- duction controls by a two-thirds majority and asked how this could be called regimen- tation. Rather, he said, this is in the full tradition of self-government. He emphasized the Brannan plan advan- tage to the consumer. As to the cost of the plan, he said those people making fantastic estimates Just don’t understand how it would actually work. He made no estimate of the plan’s cost, but prophesied that the plan would cost no more than the present system. He said the plan also would shift food pro- duction from crops to livestock and stimu- late better conservation practices. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Although he said we should not ignore the welfare of the large farms, he added “it is only sensible where public funds are in- volved to provide a higher degree of protec-~ tion for the family farm.” He punctuated the end of his speech with the unscheduled statement: “Now, my friends, in farewell, that’s a farm program that will work, and I welcome your support.” It also said the following editorially on May 9, 1950: MEMO TO THE PRESS CORPS A memo to the newspaper correspondents and columnists aboard the President’s train: Gentlemen and Miss Fleeson, the last time a large number of you were here covering a political event, one of the more enterprising of your calling hired a cab and drove out south of town to the first farm he came to (I trust it wasn’t the State pen farm), inter- viewed a nonplussed man in blue jeans, then wrote an elaborate analysis of farm senti- ment. We call this technique in political writing “catching a farmer” or ‘“‘pulling a grass root.” It is a great improvement on your interview- ing each other at the bar. But you are here so short a While you may not have time to shoot out to the grass roots at the city limits and back, so we thought a few tips from us as to what we think folks are thinking, etc., might help you pad out your pieces a little, First, a word of caution. When you write about farm sentiment, to which President Truman is making an appeal, don’t make the mistake of thinking there is any such thing in one lump. There are farmers and there are farmers. There are farmers and ranchers who are well fixed, who are sitting on their piles, whose property is all paid for, and who want no part of price supports of any sort. At the other extreme are farmers who are struggling to get a start—young fellows, some of them—who will lose their shirts (to the well-fixed ones) if the bottom drops out of the market. Roughly, very roughly, reaction to any Government agricultural program tends to divide along those lines, and that goes for the Brannan plan. . HILL AND VALLEY FARMERS It is a tendency, no more, because farm-~ ers are not just economic robots any more than you are—or are you? Still, the sad- dest mistake you can make in writing about the way the President’s advocacy of the Brannan plan is received, is to generalize on farm sentiment by Mstening to one or two farmers and forgetting to inquire as to their economic status. A friend put it another way, reporting that, roughly, in his rural locality, the val- ley farmers are against the Brannan plan and the hill farmers are for it. This is another way of saying that the administration’s greatest appeal among farmers tends to be to the little fellow, the marginal farmer, That is a fairly obvious point, but, oh, well, I guess the President has been reminding you of that enough. REPUBLICAN, BUT—— Nebraska as of now is predominantly a Republican State, but it was among these less-well-fixed farmers of Nebraska—more than among the farmers of any other Mid- western State—that the Republican Party lost the most heavily in the 1948 election. This is according to Elmo Roper’s post mortem. This newspaper jis highly critical of the Truman administration on any num- ber of points. We are deeply troubled by the drift toward more and more Government enterprise. We are deeply troubled, and 50 are many, Many of our readers, by the ghastly size of nondefense Federal expendi- tures. We want Senator McCarruy to press to the utmost his effort to ascertain the ex- tent of Communist infiltration in Govern- ment, and we can’t acccpt the proposition
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the President asked the public to accept in his speech to the Federal bar—that there was nothing to worry about on this score. We are appalled, sometimes, by the apparent evidence that the White House doesn’t know what its own administration advisers and leaders are doing in Congress, particularly with reference to the cold war, and we said so last week in an editorial headed, “‘Does the White House know the score?” And so on— we don’t want to spoil the President’s birth- day. Nevertheless, to be honest, this newspaper recognizes both more sense in the Brannan plan than its more vocal opponents will ad- mit, and, as we get out among farmers, a greater readiness among many farmers to consider it than some of their spokesmen would have us believe. We talk about the cost of the Brannan plan, but has anyone ever figured the cost of the present price-support program, if something went haywire, say, in wheat, in- stead of in potatoes? From our point of view the greatest danger is that the cost of any price-support program will be misinter- preted to the consuming public by eastern publications lacking much idea of the mid- western farmers’ problems, whipping up sentiment against any Government farm program. Maybe the Brannan idea to let perishables seek their market level offers some insurance against this. At any rate, Republicans haven’t yet come out with any- thing better. “Cleveland Is One of the Most Enlightened and Appreciative Library Communities in the World; Experts Agree That the Cleveland Public Library Is a Live, Dynamic Force, Offering a Great Variety of Books, Services, and Infor- mation to Everyone” EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FRANCES P. BOLTON OF OHIO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, May 16, 1950 Mrs. BOLTON of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, these words I have just spoken appear in a most provocative article, What’s Wrong With Our Public Libraries, written by Jack Harrison Pollack and appearing in the current May issue of the Woman’s Home Companion. . These words of praise about the Cleve- land library system, our handsome main building in the heart of the city, with its 34 branches conveniently located throughout the community, have par- ticular meaning because they are in vivid contrast to library conditions as they have been found in most parts of our country. The public library inquiry, soon to be released, is an exposé of the true condi- tions of our 7,500 libraries in America. Sponsored by the eminent Social Science Research Council and financed by the Carnegie Corp., this thorough study will have some startling critical conclusions, and reveal not only that too many of our libraries—metropolitan and rural—are musty, ill-run, poorly stocked nine- teenth-century mausoleums, but some of the reasons why millions of Americans have not been inside a public library since they left school, and why today only 1 in 10 adults uses a library more than once a month. I commend to every Member in this House the reading of this very enlighten- ing article, and I should like also, to ex- tend to each of you the invitation prof- fered by Mr. Pollack to his readers: “Come visit the modern Cleveland Pub- lic Library, which experts agree is one of the best in the country.” The article from the May 1950 issue of Woman’s Home Companion follows: Wuat'’s Wrone With Our Pusiic Liprarins? (By Jack Harrison Pollack) How long since you visited your local pub- lie library? If it has been a long time, you have plenty of company. But is it because the library location is too inconvenient? Hours too limited? Chairs too hard? You can’t smoke there? The new books you want are never available? Or is it because you’re a lowbrow—and don’t care about libraries? To hear the cynics talk, it’s the last rea- son. We have the libraries, they argue, but the libraries don’t have the customers, Con- clusion: People are lowbrows. But the cynics’ whole argument is based on the false assumption that all our 7,500 libraries are what they ought to be—use- ful and efficient. It’s high time the depress- ing truth was known about America’s horse- and-buggy libraries. A lot of eyes should be opened by an au- thoritative new study of libraries all over the United States—the public-library inquiry— soon to be released. Some of its startling critical conclusions are now reported for the first time in a popular magazine. This thorough study, sponsored by the eminent Social Science Research Council and financed by the Carnegie Corp., which has built nearly 1,700 American libraries, reveals unmis- takably that too many of our libraries— metropolitan and rural—are musty, ill-run, poorly stocked, nineteenth-century mauso- leums. No wonder millions of Americans haven't been inside a public library since they left school. No wonder, as the inquiry reveals, only 1 in 10 adults uses a library more than once a month. Perhaps going to the library may not be your idea of a good time. Yet it can be that-——and a whole lot more—as you'll see later in this article. The men and women who intensively in- vestigated America’s libraries for 24% years were recruited from leading universities, Dr. Robert D. Leigh, the inquiry director, is one of the country’s top political scientists, a former college president, Government admin- istrator, and director of the famous freedom- of-the-press inquiry released several years ago. “A handful of our libraries are magnificent institutions,” Dr. Leigh told me. “But the overwhelming majority fall far short of what they could be.” The American Library Association, the na- tional organization for lbrarians, admits, “More than half the available service is sub~ standard.” Other authorities declare, “To- day 9 out of 10 American libraries are in- adequate.” Even worse, 35,000,000 Americans living in 600 of our counties have absolutely no library service, This is true in rich urban North, East, and West, as well as in the poor rural South. In wealthy Iowa and Nebraska, for example, 44 percent of the population lack any kind of library service. In only a few States do all of the people have at least some library facilities, Other studies at the Universities of Michi- gan, Chicago, Denver, and elsewhere tell the same shameful story—-poor public relations, old books nobody wants to read, lack of funds A3713 and trained personnel, unattractive quarters. And my recent visrts to numerous libraries throughout the United States confirmed this. I was appalled, for example, at how many libraries are housed in outmoded memorial tombs instead of cheerful, well-lit, modern structures. Most libraries were buult before 1918, when the fashion was huge-domed ceil- ings and a long, discouraging flight of stone steps. At least one librarian I know of—and nobody kncws how many patrons—had to stop climbing such steps on doctor’s orders. As for lighting, in one Ohio library (built originally as a theater) miners’ lanterns on extension cords are actually used to find books in the stacks. The stacks themseives rise five levels to dizzy heights around the former auditorium and are reached by spiral staircases and catwalks with knee-high rail- ings. “Lit” by a dirty skylight, the whole room is in perpetual twilight. One page boy fell four levels; it’s a mystery why more peo- ple haven’t been injured in this eerie, Edgar Allan Poe monstrosity. At another extreme, in a Southwest city of 50,000 the local library 1s situated in several tiny rooms in the county court house, with gossiping, tobacco-spitting court hangers-on to discourage women and children from patronizing it. Library public relations are, in general, so poor that even when a library is equipped to offer services other than lending books, most people don’t know about it. For example, lots of information is available by telephone from many libraries—checking a recipe, finding out how to remove a stain or getting guid- ance in buying books for home or office. Yet millions of people don’t know they can phone or visit their libraries for such infor-~ mation. Women, especially, make very little use of their library’s reference facilities, the Inquiry found. Luckily the picture isn’t all dark. There are some bright spots. Come visit the modern Cleveland Public Library, which experts agree is one of the best in the country. Though most libraries are traditionally low-pressure institutions, this dynamic one is a live community force, offering a great variety of books, services, and information to everyone. “Cleveland has the most enlightened and appreciative library community in the world,” a British visitor observed. A Cleveland housewife told me, “Since I’ve started going to the library I've improved my cooking, learned how to make my home more attractive, take better care of my children and have more to talk to my husband about.” What makes this library outstanding? Here are some of the reasons: It has a handsome easy-to-use main bulld-= ing and 34 convenient branches—all of which recently had new fluorescent lighting put in. What’s more, the library maintains over a hundred book stations in stores, factories, schools and fire stations. It owns and circulates more books per per-=- son than any large library in the country. It also lends thousands of phonograph rec- ords, 16-millimeter films, and reproductions of fine paintings—all on your library card. It has lectures, exhibits, concerts, movies, and discussion groups on topics ranging from, current events to mothers’ problems, during its nine-to-nine day. Its cozily furnished Robert Louis Steven- son young people’s room is a favorite hangout of teen-age poets (who even published their own book) and competes with the local ice- cream parlor for all adolescents’ leisure hours. The Cleveland library also runs the school libraries, so often neglected in other cities. The Cleveland Library answers questions, by telephone or mail, on subjects ranging from household repairs to the latest in child care. I heard women ask questions about nursery schools, party planning, gardening, jewelry making, jobs, how to dress for a
A374 church wedding, and even some intimate aspects of sex and marriage. Mother-in-law trouble, backward children, husbands who drink, are a few of the problems Cleveland librarians are asked to help solve. Some- times, even, stenographers who can’t read their notes and don’t dare ask their bosses, have them deciphered by the librarians. The library operates one of the most ex- tensive information services regarding local businesses of any public library—and some companies located in Cleveland because of this. Before purchasing a new vacuum cleaner or toaster the Cleveland housewife will frequently ask this department for ad- vice. The foreign-language division has almost 250 newspapers in 23 languages for Cleve- land’s 40 nationality groups. It translates thousands of foreign letters received locally. I heard one woman ask, ‘My uncle in Hol- land wants me to send him some shoes. He says he wears a size 43. What size is that in this country?” The library found the an- swer: size nine, A travel bureau helps Clevelanders plan trips. If you’re moving to another State you can get information about the climate, schools, shopping, and simular things. Speakers and exhibits are sent out to women’s clubs, church, labor, civic, fraternal, and other groups all over the city. The li- brary will give you pointers on how to he mistress of ceremonies, introduce a speaker, pronounce foreign names. Branch libraries have clubrooms for community gatherings. There are three sprightly 15-minute weekly radio programs and frequent use of educa- tional films (supplemented by talks) on health, science, nutrition, family, and com- munity problems. The library has the largest chess and checker collection in the world and holds tournaments on Saturday afternoons. It delivers books to shut-ins in institu- tions and in their own homes. Its ceiling books——-texts projected overhead—are god- sends to many bedridden Clevelanders. Of course all this didn’t just happen. Cleveland is a teamwork town where—ac- cording to a stock joke—citizens, before re- tiring at night, prayerfully ask themselves, “Have I cooperated well today?” The cul- tural spark plug of this community spirit is Cleveland’s librarian, Clarence §. Metcalf, an unpretentious warm-hearted man who would circulate his old hat if anybody would wear it. A number of leading librarians are hard- hitting men—Baltimore’s Emerson Green- away; Detroit’s Ralph Ulveling; Los Angeles’ Harold Hamill. Only true missionary spirit keeps many on the job. Librarians—who never go on strike—are one of the most un- derpaid, unappreciated, selfless groups in America. Today 15,000 library workers are needed but because of the scandalously low salaries few are entering the profession. Library trustees can be a headache too. Most of the country’s 85,000 board members are helpful. But some autocratic trustees, especially in smaller towns, consider libraries their private palaces, even dictating what books should be hought or displayed. That’s why some libraries keep controversial books off the shelves. Censorship is a big problem for librarians. Last year during the trial of ths eleven Com- munists, New York Public Library Director Ralph Bates was asked to explain in court why he circulated Marxist books. “We have four and a half million vol- umes,” he replied. “Some are on polygamy and murder—but that doesn’t mean we're in favor of polygamy and murder.” Some indifferent trustees snooze through board meetings and privately boast of never having read a book. One small-town trustee insists ell his library needs is “a Bible and a dictionary.” Another big-city trustee on the Nbrary board for over 20 years didn’t start coming to meetings until very recently, A Midwest city hasn’t built a new building be- cause each trustee wants it near his own Office. Libraries as a rule are free from unsavory polities, partly because the meager budgets promise little graft for the corrupt politi- clan. Bu occasionally, as in one large Mid- west city, the political machine even invades the public library, keeping the staff in an atmosphere of continual crisis. It’s a miracle that with all these handi- caps as many libraries as do render such ex- cellent service. Baltimore, like Cleveland, has a wonderful modern library, the Enoch Pratt, which not only serves but leads the public. Its peace- time atomic energy series is widely hailed as a pioneer achievement in popular education. When I visited the main branch recently, a huge sign outside challenged, “Atomic Energy: Better World Ahead?” The magnifi-~ cent building is on street level so that women can even wheel their baby carriages into the foyer, where a guard is on duty. The library has a dozen changing window dis- plays—Just like a department store. No wonder newspapers assign reporters to the Enoch Pratt as a regular news beat. A few other scattered big-city libraries Know their communities as well as their books. When race riots broke out in Detroit several years ago the library issued a leaflet of tolerance quotations which ran through three printings in a week. Compare this to some southern libraries which deny books to Negroes “because they are unsanitary.” Some smaller-town libraries are also on their public-relations toes. The Montclair, N. J., library puts brief messages on book tabs, such as, “Do you know the library has 200 cookbooks?” Once when a woman asked for help in naming her Persian cat the lbrary’s reference section suggested “Azada,” the name of an ancient Persian princess. Then, to dramatize the extent of the library’s service to the community, it persuaded the Persian (Iranian) Ambassador to participate in a public cat-naming ceremony. Any publicity about libraries is all to the good because it helps bring people into the library, To attract youngsters, some libraries have used soft-drink bars, jive concerts, snacks, and even dancing. I know a small-town library where mothers can leave their pre- school children while they shop—or visit the hairdresser. Louisville, Ky., now has 3 television sets in its main library and one in each of its 10 branches. Librarian Clarence R. Graham reports, “The added attendance has greatly stimulated interest in other library services.” The Lincoln, Nebr., and Peoria, Ill, libraries have set up “bookaterias”-— self-service book stations in neighborhood grocery stores. But “trick stunts” can merely supplement @ sound library program. They are no substi- tute for really serving a community. Unfortunately the typical American library today is both too small and too poor to give you effective service. They’re frequently understaffed, understocked, and not open full time. “The little independent library is really no modern library at all,” reminds Dr. Leigh. “And giving funds to it is a waste of public money. Certainly, keep the little libraries—but make them parts of larger units.” Instead of 7,500 anemic libraries as at present, the American Library Association recommends that we have 1,200 healthy con~ solidated county libraries, with as many branches as necessary. California has shown the way in starting such first-rate county libraries. Virtually all of the State’s 68 counties now have them. Nevertheless, even county libraries can’t always solve the problem, because of their small size or poverty. Dr. Leigh says, ‘We need library districts or regions large enough to provide a hundred-thousand-dollar an- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD nual budget from local taxes and appropri- ations. This doesn’t mean a hundred thou-~ sand dollars for each community library but that sum for groups of cooperating libraries which pool their books and professional per~ sonnel—whether in a city, county, or region.” Does this sound like a revolutionary con. cept of the public library? It’s the best modern thought on the subject and some-« thing that sheuld be of special interest to women. Many of our libraries grew out of women’s reading clubs at the turn of the century. Today, neglected and desperately needing a transfusion, they offer a new challenge to the women’s clubs of America to perform the finest type of community service. What can you do to help improve your local library? 1. Work through a Friends of the Library group. If your town doesn’t already have one, the American Library Association, 50 East Huron Street, Chicago, Tll,, will tell you how to start one. ‘ 2. Regardless of whether your library ulti~ mately ties up with a county, district, or regional library, help it get more funds today. Good library service costs money but it’s worth it. Many counties today spend more money for their beach commissions, rest rooms, and dog catchers than for their H- braries, 8. Urge your State legislators to appro-~ priate more money for libraries. Twenty States give absolutely nothing today. And look into the possibility of greater Federal ald. Some final words: Don’t let the cynics mis-~ lead you. Once people enjoy good library service they refuse to be without it. You'll know what I mean if you’ve ever seen book- hungry Louisiana women pushing baby car~ riages a mile over a gravel road to meet the bookmobile. Or watched eager Vermont youngsters waiting in the snow for the arrival of their “library on wheels.” A top Nazi once warned of the American public-library menace. Yes, books are weap- ons. But they are more than that. Andrew Carnegie, who gave noway $56,000,000, once said, “The person who enters a library is in the best society this world affords.” Isn’t it about time we made libraries rising instead of falling stars in American life? If they continue to be meaningless appendages to commercial media instead of dynamic edu- cational instruments, they may fade away. The public library inquiry has sounded the alarm. Will we heed it? The Tour at Its Climax EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JAY LeFEVRE OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, May 16, 1950 Mr. LEFEVRE. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent to extend my re- marks in the Recorp, I include an article appearing in this morning’s New York Herald Tribune. Mr. Speaker, I believe the meat of this editorial is in the last paragraph. The President’s tour has come to an end but the people have not been enlightened on the real problems and dilemmas con- fronting them. We are still faced with deficit spending and heavy taxes. It was with great regret when I read that the Committee on Ways and Means had agreed to impose a tax on the net ac- cumulated income of mutual savings
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD banks and building and loan associa- tions. To me, this is gross discrimina- tion. Not to consider taxing co-ops, unions, and charitable institutions for profits made in competition with pri- vate enterprise is not justifiable. In fact, I cannot find any grounds for such action. If there is going to be an hon- est effort to replace the taxes lost by reducing the present emergency excise taxes, in order to satisfy Mr. Truman, the Committee on Ways and Means would be justified in taxing the mutual organizations in business for a profit, on the same basis as private enterprises are being taxed today. Business, espe- cially small business, cannot continue bearing this hurden alone forever and I believe if private enterprise is to sur- vive, other organizations competing in the profit system must pay their legit- imate share of the taxes. Tue Tour at Irs CLrmMax The President’s arrival at Chicago was carefully prearranged to coincide with one of those large party gatherings which the Demecrats manage with uninhibited glee. The unbridgeable fissions within the party might reveal themselves; a local clergyman, hitherto friendly to the Democrats, might denounce the prcececines as a tasteless dese- eration of the Sabba.h. Yet the leaders and the rank and file, the Cabinet members and the crowds in the street, gave them- selves over wholeheartedly to what was in part a conference and in part plain circus, with the novel magic of television being combined with techniques as old as the torchlight parade. Coming from a country- wide tour, after scores of speeches and in- numerable public appearances, President Truman stepped for his major address into an atmosphere that must resemble the politician’s idea of heaven. What Mr. Truman might say on such an occasion was of less importance than the ap- pearance of the man himself, and what he represented in the minds of his followers. There have been times when he was con- sidered less than an asset to the party. In this same Chicago he had been nominated almost absent-mindedly for the Vice Presi- dency; in Philadelphia, 4 years later, the party leaders kept him waiting ignominuiously in a hotel room for his final selection as presidential candidate. But today Mr. Tru- man is surrounded by the kind of spell pos~ sessed by those who have been successful, and the party leaders are ready to cheer him, as they did last night, to the echo. He stood then, not only at the climax of his current tour, but at what may very possibly be the highest point of his career. The President sct forth confidently from Washington 8 days ago, and it would be hard to deny that the tour has been, on narrow grounds, a success. Mr, Truman’s speeches— even the off-the-cuff speeches—have been carefully prepared, so that there have been no bad slips; the itinerary was arranged to take him through areas that do not often have a chance to greet a President, and be- fore the audiences that gathered in shirt sleevoe lTeovineg their spring chores as the Yresat int ut... came by, Mr. Truman has been at his homely best. In his more impor- tant speeches he has stressed those programs, like the Brannan agricultural plan, which appear to make good talking points even though almost no one wants to see them en- acted; he has spoken in broad terms about the need for international concepts and ac- tion; he has stressed the themes of conser- vation and power developmont, which have a deeper hold on the West than we in the . Hast probably realize. Needless to say, there has been little il- lumination cast on the real problems and dilemmas confronting the Nation. Mr. Tru- man remains at the end enmeshed in the same contradictions which have marked his whole admunistration—the same undefined and apparently unlimited commitments, with good and bad inextricably mixed, and both canceled out by the danger of rising deficits and heavy taxes. Mr. Truman has had his chance to see and to be seen; the Democrats have had their day of pageantry. Now the country returns to the issues which cannot be exorcised by incantations, and upon the intelligent solution of which our safety and welfare depend. Reduction of the Cost of Government EXTENSION OF REMARKS Or HON. LESLIE C. ARENDS OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, May 16, 1950 Mr. ARENDS. Mr. Speaker, under leave to revise and extend my remarks, I am inserting in the Recorp the fol- lowing editorial entitled “Make It Stick” from the Cleveland (Ohio) Plain Dealer of May 12: Mass Ir Stick Here they are, the seven timorous Ohio Members of the House of Representatives who were unable to summon the courage to vote for a reduction in the cost of Gov- ernment that wasn’t even tied to specific projects, but designed merely to lower, slightly, the ceiling on bureaucratic expendi- tures as a whole: RospentT CROSSER and MricHarEL A. FEIGHAN, of Cleveland; Epwarp Brren, of Dayton; Tuomas H. Burue, of Toledo; Water B. Houser, of Akron; Micuarn, J. Kirwan, of Youngstown; and JoHN McSweeney, of Wooster. These seven Democrats—and their con- stituents should mark this well—cast their votes against the $600,000,000 reduction in the omnibus appropriation bill, which was approved by an overwhelming bipartisan majority of the House. Accurately sensing, we are certain, the de- sire of the people they represent and the need of this Nation for more economical operation of the Government, 14 other Ohio Congressmen voting on the measure—4 of them Democrats—voted for the budgetary reduction. We mention, in a commendatory way: Representative at Large STEPHEN M. Youna, of Cleveland, and Representatives Jamzs G. PoLk, of Highland, Rogrert T. Szcrest, of Sen- ecaville, and Hart T. Wacner, of Cincinnati, Demccrats; Frances P, Boron, of Cleveland, Water E. BrReHM, of Millersport, CharzeNcs J. Brown, of Blanchester, Curr CLEVENGER, of Bryan, CuarLes H. Exston, of Cincinnati, Tuomas A, JENKINS, of Ironton, WiLLIaM M. McCvttocn, of Piqua, J. Harry McGrecor, of West Lafayette, Jonn M. Vorys, of Columbus, and ALVIN F. WzicHEL, of Sandusky, Republi- cans. By voting the $600,000,000 slash in the omnibus money bill, by approving a compul- sory reduction in Federal personnel designed to save another $400,000,000, and by sending to the Senate an appropriation measure some $2,000,000,000 under Fresident Truman’s budget request, the House did not achieve the millennium in Government economy. Let’s be realistic about that. Horizontal cuts in operating expenditures and personnel are not the forthright scien~ A315 tific way to attain sound economy in Gov- ernment. The way to have done that would have been to prune away specific functions that are outright frills; to apply the economy shears to specific bureaus that are notori- ously top-heavy in personnel, that are staffed with propagandists devoted to fighting against Government economy. The way the House took was the way of expedience, for, as one Washington corre= spondent correctly noted, the horizontal re= ductions attracted the support of “members who in previous tests had balked at support- ing cuts in specific programs that they deemed essential or politically advanta- geous.” But the action of the House was significant pecause it showed that a majority in the House is sensitive to the public’s demand for economy. The big task now is to make the House economy action stick in the Senate. It will stick if the people of the United States—the individual citizens, the voters of America— make it unmistakably clear to the Members of the upper Chamber that governmental economy, almost ruthless economy, has their approval. Speech of the Late Senator David I. Walsh, of Massachusetts EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. PHILIP J. PHILBIN OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, April 24, 1950 Mr. PHILBIN. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent, I am having re- printed in the Recor» a speech delivered some time ago by the late and lamented Senator David I. Walsh, of Clinton, Mass. It is especially appropriate that this great fighting speech by Senator Walsh, which was the last major speech he de- livered in the United States Senate after Jong, honorable, and outstanding service in that body, should be recalled at this time when the town of Clinton is cele- brating its centennial anniversary. Senator Walsh was Clinton’s most il- lustrious son—distinguished legislator in the general court, Lieutenant Governor, Governor, and Senator from the State of Massachusetts for almost 30 years. The people of Clinton are proud of his contributions, proud of the great gifts which he consecrated to his country’s welfare, proud of his courage and his stirring patriotism, and proud of his de- votion to Clinton and its people. The speech follows: - Mr, WatsH. Mr. President, at this late hour after midnight, I hesitate to take the time of the Senate to make some observations that the unusual proceedings, the exciting and tense debate on this issue, have prompted. I had not intended to address the Senate at this time, but I cannot longer remain voiceless when the deep-seated con~ victions I entertain over what is transpiring here seek expression. Mr. President, the Senate has in recent. days been passing through a most unusual experience. I have been here a long time, and I have never seen the proceedings in the Senate assume the extraordinary char.~ acter they have during this debate and espe~ cially tonight. We have seen an antilabor coalition ride roughshod over a minority to the extent that cven a motion to lay on