APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD But—”, published in the magazine sec- tion of the New York Times for January 19, 1947. The article is written in a more or less humorous vein, but I think by reason of that it all the more clearly de- picts the conflict in emotions which we experience as we go about the all- impor- tant task of balancing the Budget and making some retirement of the public debt. ,I think the article might be read with profit by all Members of the Con- gress, as well as by citizens who are in- terested in this matter. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Fecorp, as follows: ‘THEY'RE ALL FOR LOWER TAXES, BUT AT THE SAME TIME EVERYONE WANTS GOVERNMENT TO KEEP UP ITS BENEFITS AND EVEN ADD TO THEM (By Richard L. Neuberger) PorTLAND, OrEG.—Folks out this way quar- rel aud bicker about a lot of things, but you can bet your warmest suit of winter woolcns that they all want that 20-percent reduction in personal income taxes. You can’t start aly rumpus on that. It’s as popular as a nice rich elk stew around the campfire. When Representative KNUTSON, of Minne- sota, the ranking Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee, first announced that everyone's taxes might be sliced a fifth, you would have thought he had offered to divvy up the Comstock Lode. The populace got so fubiliant that cowpunchers who never returned a tax form in their lives celebrated by shooting the light bulbs out of hotel signs in five or six cattle towns. Even Dad Wingate is for Mr. KNUTSON‘S proposal, and Dad is a crotchety old trapper on Granite Mountain who generally is op- posed to everything. He has the reputation of being the most “agin” man in the whole State. “Deed I am for that 20-nercent tax reduction,” said Dad. “It'd give me a real nice piece o' change. Why, with that re- duction I'd be headed straight for Easy Strect ff the doggone Guv-ment would only boost the bounty on coyotes. The Guv'ment has got so consarned stingy. Wouldn't hurt ‘em a bit to pay me 85 apiece for killing them critters.” That's a sample of the way people feel. And there's Colonel Sloan. We call him colonel because he’s always marching and trudging in the National Guard parades. The colonel had just come from a red-hot meet- ing to protest the War Department order closing the Sixth Army aren office in our home town. He was still reciting parts of his when we bumped into him. “Silly, dastardly, dangerous outrage,” har- rumped the colonel. “A schoo! child knows that whole office here didn’t cost more than @35,000 a year to maintain, and now they've gone and left our fair city defenseless.” We asked the colonel about the 20-percent tax reduction. “Bully!” he shouted. (The colonel was in the -American War.) “Those tax- eaters in Washington keep me impoverished. ‘They're the people who insidiously closed the Army area office while I was bedridden with influenza. Cut taxes immediately, I say. Should have been done long ago. Har- rumph!” Of course, our Congressman has the right idea on the whole situation. He's as strong as mustard for cutting taxes. Didn't we just reelect him by a whopping vote when he promised to keep the tax collector out of our cash drawers and to give us all Townsend plan pensions when we get to be 60? We've got a mighty good Congressman. He's work- ing hard to pass the Williamette Valley project to irrigate farms, and he assures us it’s going to help business, too, when the Government spends $180,000,000 right at our back door. What with all that money pour- ing in and then the tax reduction our Con- gressman has promised, we're going to have prosperity that will have us all in clover. But don't get the notion that our Con- gressman isn't for economy. He's a real economy man; none of that crazy spending for him. He watches the Treasury with an eagle eye. Only last week our Congressman came out against the dams that the bureaucrats pro- posed to build 3,000 miles away in New England. “A ridiculous waste of money. None of the advantages of the great Wil- liamette Valley project.” Those are the very words our an used. And then he said, speaking out clear and bold, “If we are going to lighten the insufferable tax burden the people are carrying, we must cleanse the public pay roll of bureaucratic meddlers.” Just to show how folks’ words are often misunderstood, the President up and closed the Reclamation headquarters downtown. Of course, our Congressman didn't stand for that. He sent the President a sizzling tele- gram telling him how he hadn't meant the local Reclamation people at all when he talked about bureaucrats. Funny how a man as smart as the President of the United States is supposed to be can get things wrong. Our Congressman told the President to economize by closing the Reclamation Office in Amarillo instead. After all, why should the tuxpayers support a Reclamation office 'way down there in Texas? Politics always starts everyone to arguing, I guess, but the 20-percent tax reduction must be an exception. I've traveled from the Continental Divide to the Pacific's shores, and I can’t find a soul against it. Sentiment must be just about unanimous, I imagine. A few blocks from my mother’s house lives a big banker. He’s a Republican. You should hear him talk for tax reduction. He practically gives his college cheer. He came by the other evening on his way home from a banker's meeting that demanded a return of the tariff on lumber. Over one of my father’s old-fashioned'’s the banker sald, “If the new Congress only gives us genuine tax relief, stops loaning money to foreign coun- tries, and affords us effective protection from competition by foreign products, we are in for a period of undiluted prosperity in this country.” The banker always talks in big words like that: he must read a lot. It's queer, but we have a friend in the CIO Political Action Committee who won't even stop in when he sees the banker's sedan in front of the house, yet our CIO friend is for tax reduction, too. We heard him on the radio the other night. He was making a speech in favor of higher unemployment insurance payments and increased expendi- tures for public housing. Near the end of the speech he came out for tax reduction. Naturally, he asked for tax reduction in the lower brackets. So our CIO friend and our banker neighbor are both for tax reduction, although we aren’t quite sure in just what bracket the banker thinks the reduction ought to be. Living here on the rim of the country’s western frontier, we frequently see farm and city people wide apart on political ques- tions. It’s not like that on this tax reduc- tion business. My wife's folks run a dairy and grain farm along the Columbia River. Every single one of them hopes Congress puts through the 20-percent-tax reduction. My mother-in- law even thinks the reduction ought to be 40 or 60 percent. “Look what a fix we farm- ers would be in if they shut off the parity pay- ments,” she told me during the holidays. “Our tires are all shot to pieces because ‘he Government doesn’t spend enough money on the roads. The REA should string more wires to get us cheap electricity. The only way we farmers can lay by a little is to gct out from under some of the taxes.” fiverywhere I go people are for tax reduc- tion, yet some of them are frightfully pro- vincial about it. I was over in Idaho a week A231 or so ago. When people there talk about tax reduction, they think the Government should economize on its hydroelectric power expenditures in the State of Oregon. That's @ fine attitude! We all know that Oregon needs more power if it is to attract new industries. Thank goodness we in Oregon haven't such a provincial outlook. A narrow person could criticize us, I sup- pose, for urging that Treasury money be saved by not building that proposed railroad to Alaska, but that’s a good deu! different because Alaska isn't even part of the United States. And if the railroad were built, what might happen to our steamship companies in Portland? ‘You can’t blame us for thinking of that. Our town has a larger proportion of its inhabitants over 60 than any other city in America, s0 plenty of Townsend Clubs still meet in the auditoriums of local school- houses. Even our Congressman, the one working with all his might and main for tax reduction, is a loyal Townsend Club member. The oid folks are anxious to gct those $200-a- month pensions, but until the Townsend plan comes through they have to count every cent. That 20-percent-tax reduction looks mighty inviting to them. The president of our biggest Townsend Club told me the tax reduction would so encourage general pros- perity that the country could easily pay all the old people Townsend pensions. “Then,” he added, “each of us Townsend- {tes will spend the 8200 every month and thus keep the prosperity going" I suppose Government expenditures must be cut somewhere along the line if we are to gct the tax reduction we all want, and our State has a United States Senator who knows how to cut them. He tells us that the Army and Navy spend more of our money than almost all the rest of the Government put together. He is making it tough for those generals and admirals to throw our hard- earned dollars sround. The Senator knows a lot about foreign af- fairs, too. He wants us to stup appeasing Stalin. “The Russians will respect us,” he said recently, “only if we show them a mailed fist.” Once in a while I worry about how we are going to stand up to the Russians if we get the 20-percent tax reduction by saving money on the Army and Navy, but I’m sure our Senator knows what he is talking about. After all, he’s been in politics a long time. One would think that if you talked to enough people, you would finally bump into someone who didn't want taxes cut. I even tried talking to an Indian with braids on the Oregon seacoast. He was very happy. His tribe had just won a $20,000,000 judg- ment against the Government in the United States Supreme Court. This Indian didn't speak like the Indians in the story books. He had been to the State university, and he said, “The Bureau of Internal Revenue hus ruled that our $20,000,000 from the Govern- ment fs income. I hope that Representative Knutson puts through his 20-percent tax re- duction in time to enable our tribe to keep ® greater share of the money.” I like this tax reduction talk for an extra reason. You have a chance to find out things you never knew before. Captain Homer Goodsell runs a tugboat service on the upper Columbia River. Whenever anyone solicits him on a charity drive, he always starts complaining about the money he loses. We all felt sorry for Captain Homer's financial plight, but the other day he blurted out, “Darn those Congressmen if they don’t pass that 20-percent cut. It'd save me a cool $2,500 in taxes every year.” We must have stared at Cuptain Homer sort of steady, for he looked sheepish and said, “Well, my business has been a whole lot better since the Government put in that big lift-lock at Bonneville.”
A232 Captain Homer stared back at us and added defensively, “That lock cost $11,000,000. It oughta have helped some.” I am a Grange member in good standing, and all the Grangers are for tax reduction. I thought a lot of them were ‘way in the hole on their farms, but when I heard them totaling up what the 20-percent cut would mean to their bank accounts, I decided they were doing all right. In fact, my fel- low Grangers seem about as strong for tax reduction as they are for parity payments, soil-conservation benefits, and rural electri- fication lines. I guess this sounds like my Grange is pretty reckless about spending Government money, but that isn’t so. You should have heard our Grange Master talk against waste- ful spending on unemployment insurance and similar ways of mollycoddling labor. Our Grange Master was pretty mad, too, when he said that. Hadn't the State fed- eration of labor just come out for saving money by eliminating all subsidies for ag- riculture? Taxes ought to come down any time now. Isn't approval of the 20-percent reduction practically unanimous? Even folks in Alaska are all out for it. On the streets of Seattle last week we hailed an old friend from Fairbanks. Over coffee and pound cake he told us that he was on his way to Washington, D. C., to lobby for two things— tax reduction and the price of gold pegged at a higher level. “More people in Alaska are for that 20-percent tax reduction than for statehood,” said my friend, banging the table with a fist, horny from many hours gripping the controls of a gold dredge. We parted, but not before he had ad- monished me to “work for Federal funds to keep up the Alcan Highway where it stretches through Canada.” I have traveled all over the West in the past few weeks, and I don't see how tax reduction can miss. Everyone is for it—cow- punchers, locomotive engineers, tugboat captains, waitresses, Indians, artists’ models, prospectors from Alaska, housewives, grocers, butchers, bakers, and candlestick makers. I've already figured out how to spend the 20 percent I'm going to save on my personal income tax. I'm going to buy a new rod and reel to use fishing for Rainbow trout in Tombstone Lake up on top of the Wallowa National Forest. I understand the fish there are 22 inches long, and I can get to Tombstone Lake with @ pack outfit just as soon as the Government appropriates money to swamp out that old trail across the pass. Patrick Henry, Lawyer EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. A. WILLIS ROBERTSON OF VIRGINIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Wednesday, January 22 (legislative day of Wednesday, January 15), 1947 Mr. ROBERTSON of Virginia. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an address entitled “Patrick Henry, Lawyer,” delivered by Michael Francis Doyle, of Philadelphia, before the Virginia Bar Association, at Virginia Beach, September 18, 1946, at which the Lord Chief Justice of England and the president of the American Bar Associa- tion were present. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Mr. Chairman: These remarks should be commenced by addressing this distinguished audience as, “fellow-citizens,” the first usage of which expression has been accredited to Patrick Henry himself in his address to the people of Virginia. Indeed, it might be regarded as presump- tuous for a citizen of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania—even a Philadelphia lawyer— to come to your State and before such a learned body as I am now addressing to dis- cuss the qualities of this great Virginian whom all revere and whose name is an in- spiration to the children of the schools of all our country as well as this Common- wealth. If that thought should be in the mind of any of my listeners, may I not suggest that until he left his home in Virginia—in 1774— to attend the sessions of the First Con- tinental Congress in Philadelphia, Patrick Henry always and solely classified himself as a Virginian. In this very month, 172 years ago—in fact it might be said on September 18, 1774—this great statesman arose in Car- penter’s Hall, in che city of Philadelphia, and expressed for the first time in one of his elo- quent addresses, "1 now speak no longer as a Virginian. I speak now and henceforth as an American.” It is from that city as an American, therefore, that I come to this State which he loved so well with renewed admiration of his qualities as @ man, and @ statesman, and to reaffirm my allegiance to his patriotic ideals. Philadelphia, the birth- place of the Declaration of Independence, salutes Virginia the home of the father of independence. Indeed, Philadelphia has its claim in other ways to his name and fame. His portrait by Thomas Sully, of Philadelphia, has been re- garded as the best likeness of him which has Come down to us. The famous painting of the Speech in the House of Burgesses Against the Stamp Act was by P. F. Rothermel, a Philadelphian. Carpenter's Hall, Philadel- phia, has on one of its walls the painting of DeLand of Patrick Henry Addressing the First Continental Congress.” Many offices in our Quaker City are graced by copies of these great works Not far from the site of Ben- jamin Franklin’s printing shop in Philadel- phia the first biography of Patrick Henry, by William Wirt, was printed and first saw the light of day. I trust, therefore, that if any evidence is needed of Philadelphia’s con- nection with Virginia's great son these facts will suffice. Patrick Henry was a man of great attain- ments, both domestic and public. He was the father of 17 children. He had responsi- bilities far beyond the heads of most families these modern days. While the date of his admission to the bar has never been in con- troversy, yet there has been contention over the length of time which he studied to be- come a lawyer. Thomas Jefferson and Judge Winston state that 6 weeks’ preparation en- abled him to pass the required tests. Other authorities, such as Colonel Meredith and Captain Dabney, contend that he studied law from 6 to 8 months, while Judge John Tyler, another of his contemporaries, insists that he finished his studies in 1 month, dur- ing which time he read Coke Upon Little- ton and the Virginia Laws. At all events, he successfully secured the approval of two of his examiners without much eyvamination, they hoping, no doubt, that his defects would be quickly discovered by their own colleagues, The third examiner, having learned that two had already signed his application, put him to a test and was convinced that, although he knew very little law, he knew many other things which were important for lawyers to APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD know, and dubiously signed his license. He thus secured the necessary assent of the re- quired number of the board of examiners. One, however, George Wythe, efused to sign. Patrick Henry was neither a graduate of a college nor a student in a law effice. He had neither « preceptor nor a diploma to attest his proficiency. He had neither an office nor acilerk. Indeed, at this time he had no vis- ible means of support. Having failed as a storekeeper, and without employment, he sought the law for his field of endeavor, It is possible that these elements may have even aided him in securing his license to practice law. At all events, his examiners showed ex- cellent judgment and never regretted their action. Some scholar, through research, found that Demosthenes, the noted Greek orator, was 27 years of age when he attained his greatest fame, and Cicero, the great Roman, also reached his fame at the same age. It might also be remarked that Patrick Henry was this same age when he first began his fame in the celebrated lawsuit, known as the Parsons case. What he early lacked in legal knowl- edge, he quickly absorbed with his keen pow- ers of observation and impressed the courts wheneve. he appeured on behalf of clients. There was no Colonial] Bar Association in Vir- ginia in those days—nor elsewhere for that matter. Patrick Henry, however, soon made himself the leader not only in litigation be- fore the courts, but in all public matters, small and great, affecting the community. He kept a record of his fees in his own handwriting which still exists. It showed that in less than 6 months of 1760, the year of his admission to the bar, he had 60 clients. By the end of 1763, in 3 years’ practice, he had 1,185 lawsuits in which fees were paid. These did not include many where his advice and services were rendered without charge. This pictured him as a busy, active young lawyer. I doubt if any of his profession in this State, of his age at this time, can show a record superior to this Such was the beginning of his career at the Virginia bar. It is not my intention in my ullotted time to continue an analysis of his professional services in the courts in detail] during the succeeding years. It must be observed, however, that the law aided him to become an orator and that he was a lawyer before he was a statesman. The field of the law still offers the greatest path, even in these days, to statesmanship and world leadership. His election to the Colonial Legislature opened his career of public service to his countrymen. His appearance in Phila- delphia marked him as a statesman and as a great Virginian, Patrick Henry, the Virginia lawyer, now develops into Patrick Henry, the founder of independence, and Patrick Henry, the statesman. He discontinued his profession of the law for 13 years to serve his State in public Office, At the end of this period he again reentered the law and commenced one of the most brilliant careers ever experienced by an advocate. His wonderful powers as they developed showed his leadership in nisi prius practice, as well as many of the great chancery cases of his time. It was asa defender of the rights of the common man and as a criminal lawyer that his eloquence had the widest scope. He had no equal among the great leaders of his profession in his State. It must also be acknowledged that Virginia had many of the great lawyers of this period. This admission by a Philadel- phia lawyer surely will not lessen even the luster of the Philadelphia bar. The distin- guished names comprising the list of officers and members of the Virginia Bar Association still attest that the qualities and splendid talents of their ancestors—famous names honored in those days—and these days as bow not disappeared from this historic
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD As an orator, Patrick Henry was the fore- most of his day. Judge Carrington, one of the leading men of Virginia at this period, who knew him well, stated his eloquence was beyond all power of description. He has been acknowledged as one of the greatest orators of all time. William Pitt, afterward Lord Chatham, one of the most noted of English statesmen and orators, has often been compared with Patrick Henry. ‘One, however, was primitive, plain, and a man of the provinces; the other was a complex development living in the center of English civilization. One was simple and sincere; the other was imbued by the power of his public office. They both, however, held lofty views, were farseeing, patriotic, and born to enthrall mankind with masterful language. McDowall wrote, “The most zemarkabl» characteristic of Henry's speaking was its union of dramatic power with a striking moral ascendancy. This was the salient characteristic of his life as well as of his oratory.” Grattan stated: “He lightened upon his subject and reached the point by the flash- ings of his mind which were felt but could not be followed.” Another contemporary af- firmed “He swayed every assembly he ad- dressed apparently at his pleasure. When fully aroused he overthrew all opposition and forced all to accept his views as the only true ones. His wonderful oratory made him a thousand times the superior of his oppo- nents. By common consent of all his con- temporaries, his eloquence was indescrib- able.” Gen. Andrew Jackson, while passing through Virginia and hearing him in a crim- inal case, said of him: “No description which I have ever heard, no conception I have ever formed gave me any just idea of his powers of eloquence.” Thomas Jefferson, at one time his colleague and admirer, and at another time his critic, stated in his autobiography that he appeared to speak as Homer wrote; again he said: ‘He was the greatest orator that ever lived.” Beyond all doubt his eloquence was one of the chief forces of the American Revolu- tion. It was as necessary to that great cause, said Henry Armitt Brown, noted Philadelphia lawyer and orator, as the intelligence of Ben- Jamin Franklin, the will of Samuel Adams, the pen of Thomas Jefferson, or the sword of.George Washington. There is such a time in a nation's trial that one voice speaks for all. It echoes the spirit of the age. The voice of Patrick Henry was the voice of America struggling for freedom. He must be regarded as the first and greatest leader of American independence. When Patrick Henry and the other dele- gates came to Philadelphia in September 1774 for the first meeting of the Continental Congress, few knew each other. They were acquainted ouly through their correspond- ence and from the pamphlets which had been published from time to time in the various Colonies. Patrick Henry had as his colleagues from Virginia, George Washington, Richard Henry Lee, Peyton Randolph, Richard Bland, Benja- min Harrison, and Edmund Pendleton. These were the leaders of the colonial cause. It is remarkable, however, that of this num- ber only twc weré Members of the Continen- ta’ Congress who signed the Declaration of Independence—Richard Henry Lee and Ben- jamin Harrison. Of this first Congress, John Adams wrote, “This Assembly is like no other that ever existed. Every man in it is a great man and orator, @ critic, and statesman, and, therefore, every man upon every question must show his oratory, his criticism, and his pOlitical abilities.” Charles Thompson, a son of Ireland, was confidential secretary of this Congress. At the first meeting the Members, “conscious of the impending perils of the movement,” re- solved “that all their deliberations should be kcpt inviolably secret.” His records were thus regretfully destroyed. Had his notes been preserved, they would show that it was Patrick Henry, the leader for independence, was also the one who kept the Congress from approving the plan of an English colony along the lines proposed by Joseph Galloway, of Pennsylvania. It took all the eloquence of Patrick Henry to prevent the adoption of Galloway's motion on that September day, 1774, when it proposed a plan for a colonial union formed with a council to be chosen from the 13 assemblies, and a President to be appointed by the King. This plan was defeated by only one vote. It was Patrick Henry's eloquence that secured the necessary votes to defeat it. It was a most narrow escape. Had it been adopted, there probably would have been no Declaration of Inde- pendence and no free government by the people of the United States. We would have been a colony under the crown of Great Britain. The history of the world would have been changed. Patrick Henry destroyed the carefully planned plot for a British colontal government in our States, and by his leader- ship directed the plans for our independence and our new Government. He is the father of American independence. The stirring history of the Revolutionary period cannot be detailed here because of the brevity of these remarks. It is enough to say, however, that Patrick Henry had made such an impression on the First Con- tinental Congress and so shaped the course of American history that his presence at the Second Congress was not essential. He then set out to show that a sovereign government could exist solely by the power of people ex- pressed in laws of their own making with- out direction of the British Crown and the power of its military anc naval strength. He gave the example of a public officer who could be the servant of the people, instead of their master, As the first elected Governor of Virginia he demonstrated how a Crown col- ony could organize into a State and carry on as an independent government. His devotion to the Revolutionary cause and his appre- ciation of the military genius and leadership of Washington have never been questioned. His example became an inspiration for other Colonies and to other patriots. He did a service in this regard which has not been fully recognized, even to this day. Patrick Henry wisely indicated the respon- sibility which independence would bring to the people of the Colonies, when he ex- pressed himself in a letter to one of his sons, as follows: “Whether this independence will bring a blessing or a curse will depend upon the use our people make of the blessing which e gracious God hath bestowed on us. If they be wise, they will be great and happy. If they are of a contrary character, they will be miserable. Righteousness alone can exalt them as a nation.” He challenged the new Federal Constitu- tion, because, while it was republican in form, it gave too much power to the office of President and failed in its protection of the liberty of the individual citizen. His fight against the Constitution as it was drawn successfully resulted in the adoption by the First Congress, under the Constitution, of the 10 amendments known as the Bill of Rights. It was his stand, as well as Jeffer~ son’s leadership and Madison’s pen, that helped to make these amendments a part of the Constitution. His warning of the ex- tensive power of the President has been fully justified by the exercise of authority of this office during the past century and especially in recent years. Patrick Henry was called upon to serve in more high offices than possibly any other American since the adoption of the Federal Constitution. He did not hesitate, however, A233 to decline public office when he felt he should not accept. This is his record in that regard: In 1794 he was tendered a United States Senatorship by Gen. Henry Lee, then Gov- ernor of Virginia. In the same year President Washington proposed to send him as a Minister to Spain. In 1795 President Washington offered him the post of Secretary of State. In 1795 he offered him the position of Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court. In the same year Washington designated him as Minister to France. He was suggested as a candidate for the Vice Presidency. He declincd votes offered te the Electoral College for the Presidency tself. For the sixth time he was elected Gov- ernor of Virginia, which he refused to accept. In 1799 President Adams named him as Envoy to France, and the Senate conlirmed the nomination, All these places and honors were declined by Patrick Henry. Patrick Henry died on June 6, 1799, in the 63d year of his age, at Red Hill, Charlotte County, Va., and was buried in the ground adjoining his home. Washington followed him before the end of the same year. Nei- ther were permitted to see the beginning of the new century. Like Moses of old, they could view the promised future from the hetghts of another Mount Nebo without fully comprehending the magnificent vision of the results of their labors. Has our country performed its full duty to the memory of Patrick Henry? I fear not. Our national development is largely due to his ideals of government, to his character, and to his labors. His conception of inde- pendence, born of Virginia soll, quickly grew in all the American Colonies, Our Nation is the leader in democracy and civilization because he lived. Today, however, we find new seeds of government being implanted in our beloved country, foreign to the homes of Virginia and contaminating to American soil. Communism is the antithesis of inde- pendence. The fruit of the efforts of Patrick Henry and those patriots who founded our Nation is now in danger of being de- stroyed. We must meet the challenge. We call upon the spirit of Patrick Henry by its eloquence to arouse the deadencd atti- tude of our people to valiantly meet this is- sue, We call upon our fellow-citizens to follow the spirit of George Washington, whose leadership created our Nation. We call upon them to protect the ideals of Thomas Jef- ferson that we may continue to be free. What these men built let no man put asunder. False doctrines must not be implanted in our schools, nor un-American laws be enacted for special privilege by our legislatures. Equality and equal rights shall be shared by all under the law, but no man or combina- tion of men—no matter under what guise— shall have transcendent rights. The spir- itual guidance which blessed the eloquent tongue of Patrick Henry in St. John’s Church, Richmond, became a benediction to the world. The voluntary expression of labor exemplified by the invitation to Carpenter's Hall, Philadelphia, to chart a new course of liberty was based on the conception of equal rights of all men and for all mankind. Let us not permit this conception of our liberties or these blessings now possessed by the American people to be destroyed. It is right and proper that we should honor the signers of the Declaration ot Inde- pendence and those who drew the Constitu- tion of the United States and presented these charts of liberties to the world, and who for them were willing to sacrifice their lives and fortunes. The grave of every signer of the Declaration of Independence which has been locuted is
A234 marked by a tribute of our Federal Govern- ment; the last resting place of each of the signers of the Constitution is marked by a national emblem of honor—but the grave of Patrick Henry—even to this day—is unhon- ored. It has been forgotten by the Federal Government; it has been overlooked by the Commonwealth of Virginia. Only a few months ago his home and his land at Red ‘iill were offered for public sale to settle the estate of the last owner. Were it not for a few patriotic men and women, the property might have fallen into hands of speculators and to possible desecration. The foundations of his home were he spent his last days still remain. His law office nearby still stands. His body lies in the ground which he marked for his resting place. It is one of the hallowed spots of America. My friends of Virginia, will you not join with those valiant ones who have become guardians of this shrine and help preserve it for our Nation? Lawyers from Pennsyl- vania and other States are willing to join with lawyers from Virginia in sponsoring this movement and becoming its protectors. As we joined together in 1776, when the blood of your fathers was offered to be shed with that of the patriots from the other Colonies, should we not now join together to continue to redeem our obligations to the founders of our Republic? May our devotion to the past and the knowledge of the dangers which confront us today create strengthened bonds of brother- hood which will, with God’s blessing, pro- tect us and our Nation now and forever. Essays on Benjamin Franklin EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FRANCIS J. MYERS OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Wednesday, January 22 (legislative day of Wednesday, January 15), 1947 Mr. MYERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to insert in the Ap- pendix of the Recorn two essays on Ben- jamin Franklin which were adjudged the best in a competition sponsored by the Poor Richard Club, of Philadelphia, and radio station WPEN in conjunction with the two hundred and forty-first an- niversary of Franklin’s birth. The prize essays were written by Betty Lou Martin, of the Prospect Park High School, Prospect Park, Philadelphia, and Warren R. Bisbing, of the Lincoln Prep School, Philadelphia, Pa. There being no objection, the essays were ordered to be printed in the REc- orp, as follows: BENJAMIN FRANKLIN SPEAKS TO THE UNITED NATIONS ON HOW TO LIVE TOGETHER IN WORLD PEACE (First prize winner in girls’ division, WPEN Benjamin Franklin essay contest, Betty Lou Martin, Prospect Park High School, Prospect Park, Pa.) Iam deeply honored and more than obliged to speak to you who represent all nations at this time and present for your arbitration my humble opinions which are for you to take for what they are worth. During my lifetime, world peace was prob- ably unthought of. As most Americans and very likely others of you no doubt know, I am a moralist and on such an occasion as this I could not leave my morals behind. I believe that this one suits the occasion best: “Wrong none by doing injuries or omitting the benefits that are your duty.” This is my idea of justice, and I believe most of you will agree that if this could be followed to per- fection, peace would be one direct result; but since there are nations who give nothing and take all they possibly can, I, myself, would deem such a thing impossible and more or less as wishful thinking. Yet, if each na- tion would be more broad-minded and tol- erant, you would be on the road to peace without so much blundering and idiotic groping around for the illusive key to peace. Be not disturbed at trifles, or at accidents common or unavoidable, and remember, lost time is never found again. Do not hesitute to do what you believe is right, but think in terms of the world, not your nation. Experience keeps a dear school, but fools will learn in no other, and scarce in that; and to conclude, God helps them that help themselves. I am, as ever, thine to serve thee, Benjamin Franklin. POOR RICHARD WRITES AGAIN (First prize winner in boys’ division, WPEN Benjamin Franklin essay contest, Warren R. Bisbing, Lincoln Prep School, Philadel- phia, Pa.) Many years ago I was happy in life to work with my fellow countrymen in forming the United States of America and in establish- ing the place of the Union among the na- tions of Europe. Back in those days, I wrote upon my return to Philadelphia: “I had not the firmness to resist the unanimous desire of my country folk, and now I find myself harnessed again in their service for another year. They engrossed the prime of my life. They have eaten my flesh, and seem resolved now to pick my bones.” Here, once more it appears that the public would have even my bones and dust served them. It is my duty. The efforts of my fellow Americans in building a United Nations is but the con- tinuation of my efforts in the eighteenth century. I have passed my wand on to men like Byrnes and Vandenberg, Marshall and Taft. Let me say that the motive force for a United Nations must spring from the good will of the peoples, the plain peoples of all nations. The diplomats and political lead- ers must foster this good will and honestly represent it in their council chambers. The diplomacy of the future must be established upon the recognition of basic human rights. All nations desire permanent peace. That peace can be threatened only by differences among nations. Therefore, people must de- velop a proper respect for other peoples who may have philosophical, economic, political, racial, and cultural differences. Such varia- tions among peoples must be recognized as natural. Guard against the development of bad will and prejudice upon the perception of such differences. Then again, a United Nations must be a strong union. Membership must be serious and not whimsical. United power and arms should be organized for the preservation of a permanent peace and of the United Nations, Only in strength can ideals be realized. It follows that the government of the United Nations must be conducted upon a sound financial structure. Proper arrange- ments should be set forth for the growth of resources to back the decisions of the massed peoples of the earth. Naturally, the peoples who so contribute to the government of the earth demand their proper influence and -representation. The legislative bodies should make laws to achieve justice and universal support. The people will constantly desire to know about the regulations enacted. Hence the channels of information must be kept open to all peoples. - Disputes which formerly caused wars will be settled by the judicial system of the United Nations. Such a court must develop APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ® respect for its opinions by the wisdom and understanding reflected. Appeals must be possible, but final decisions must be handed down. Reason requires that such decisions must be uphelc by force, if necessary. Thus, international government will develop legis- lative, executive, and judicial departments, Rights must be set forth and duties must be prescribed. Under such plans, mankind will witness the growth of a new and better social order, a universal society, a United Nations. May all blessings go with it. The State of the Unions EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ALBERT W. HAWKES OF NEW JERSEY IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Wednesday, January 22 (legislative day of Wednesday, January 15), 1947 Mr. HAVW/KES,. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have inserted in the Appendix of the CONGRESSIONAL REC- orp an editorial entitled “The State of the Unions,” written by Maurice R. Franks, editor of the Railroad Workers Journal, the official organ of the Rail- road Yardmasters of North America. I fee! that this editorial has many very valuable suggestions at this crucial time, when we are trying to solve ami- cably the question of relationship be- tween emplover and employee. I understand from the writer, Mr. Franks, that his suggestion with refer- ence to the creation of an industrial re- lations court is contemplated only as a court which can deal with the contro- versies which arise over the meaning and interpretation of a contract volun- tarily entered into between management and labor. It is not intended otherwise to solve the issues of employment or collective bargaining. Its purpose is to keep a disppte over the meaning of a contract voluntarily entered into from shutting down production while the equities of the parties under the con- tract are determined. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: THe STATE OF .HE UNIONS It ha: long been the custom for the Presi- dent of the United Stutes to deliver an ad- dress to the incoming Congress. ‘Shi so- called report on the state of the Union is, in effect, a formal report on his stewardship. The purpose is to outline the activities of his Office which naturally affect the state of the Union, and invariably suggestions considered by the President to be important to the na- tional welfare are made to the Congress. DEMOCRACY IN UNIONS This report of our Nation’s President im- mediately suggests to my mind another kind of Presidential report, one also affecting the national welfare. It woulc be extremely in- teresting today tc hear a number of these. I refer, of course, to possible reports by all our union presidents on the state of the unions. Not being a wishful thinker, I have no hope of seeing any such reports forthcoming at this moment. The reason for my lack of hope is simple: it is because the “stewards” of many of our unions find themselves, through poor stewardship, in no position to render a full and accurate report on the state of their unions,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD I am, nevertheless, of the belief that such Teports should be now obligatory. It is the Nation's due that the state of the unions should be clarified. Also that this inner eco- nomic government shall be put to function- ing along far more democratic lines. NO ROOM FOR HATE Through present-day manipulations of union bossism, in many cases a far cry from unionism as faithfully conceived, this coun- try has been thrown into a state of economic chaos, if not actual economic revolution, from which there is small chance for escape unless remedial measures are immediately found and applied. In searching for a remedy one considera- tion is of utmost importance; we shall first have to purge all hatred from our hearts and place the welfare of our country above every selfish inclination, whether we be worker or employer, politician or private citizen. Minus such a general attitude, we cannot hope to make order out of chaos. THE NECESSITY OF UNIONISM Although I lay no claim to being an eco- nomic doctor armed with a cure-all, I never- theless believe myself to be in a position to offer a number of suggestions which, if ac- cepted and acted upon, would play their part in bringing about a more harmonious rela- tionship and a better understanding between the workers, their employers, and the general public. My 27 years in the labor movement fully convinces me that unions—and I mean only good unions—are an integral part of our American way of life. Without good unions many workers would be sent reeling back into the days of the Simon Legrees of indus- try, when the individual worker was in all ways bound to do the bidding of a ruthless industrial master. Times when 16 hours of sweaty toil per day for a livelihood, utterly mean in itself, was the rule, and when even little children, by a cruel extension of this same despicable practice, were compelled to work from dawn to dusk with never an op- portunity to enjoy the inherent rights of every American. Indeed, without unionism it would not be long before the sweatshop, with all of its das- tardly and inhumane conditions, would be back in our midst; and it would not be long either before wages would be back down to a starvation level. Proof of this deduction may be found in the files of newspapers bear- ing the dates of 1933-34-35, during the true depth of the depression. In the columns of those newepapers are plenty of items—many of these illustrated by photographs from var- ious parts of the country—which bear tell- ing witness to the fact of anxious workers being auctioned off like slaves at the high bid of 20 cents an hour. And there are other items on file to record the miserable fact that men were discharged through the front door only to be rehired at the back door of the same shop at half the usual wage. These conditions no decent American desires to see return. The spirit of Simon Legree was not alto- gether dead in the thirties. Nor is there rea- son to suppose that his spirit is any more dead today. This being true, it is obvious that good © unions are very much needed to protect not only the workingman but also the honest employer against his chiseling racketeer competitor. It is no longer a question of “unions to be or not to be.” That matter has been defi- nitely settled. It is now simply a question of “unions, good or bad.” Well, I, for one, see no reason why we can- not insist upon good unions—particularly since these are possible, provided only we think clearly and act with wisdom and com- mon sense. MAN’S INHUMANITY TO MAN Every thinking person is deeply concerned about the present labor-management con- flict. Numerous cure-all suggestions are con- atantly being offered. Outstanding among these is: “Outlaw all strikes, and you have the answer!” Such a glib suggestion, when offered as a cure-all, is fantastic—outrageous, even, in this Republic which was itself first cast in the American mind in the form of a strike against oppression. Consider the rebellion against acts of the British Crown which led to the Boston Tea Party. No, never popular will be laws which force free men into slavery! There is, in fact, no single answer to the labor problem, and for the very simple reason that there is no single cause. The causes of present friction are numerous. Looming large among these is man’s inhumanity to man, man’s departure from the teachings of Christ. When the industrial Simon Legree held the whip, he lashed the worker in a manner most ungodly; and now that the whip has changed hands, and it is the la- bor leader—in many cases, as unscrupulous as Legree—who wields the lash, the blows which fall are still no less ungodly. Never shall we find peace among ourselves until workers and their employers stumble upon the obvious fact that they are not natural enemies but are, instead, full partners in a common cause: production. THE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS DILEMMA One of the chief causes of labor trouble may be charged directly to the method em- ployed in our industrial relations system— our procedure in the handling of labor dis- putes. Unless and until we face the fact that changes must be made in keeping with the times, we are bound to have labor trouble and all of its repercussions. In other words, our industrial relations procedure is mainly responsible for the present state of the unions—in truth, a hell of a statel—and simply because this system was put into effect during a period of blind hatred. The system I refer to originated through the National Labor Relations Act, more com- monly known as the Wagner Act, and to some idealistic nitwits as the Magna Carta of labor. This law was enacted during the worst of the depression—a period of great confusion. Examination of this law reveals that the authors themselves were Confused. The language of the labor act is so muddled that the clearest thinkers cannot interpret it, There is the preamble, stating that here is a law designed to diminish causes of labor dis- putes such as burden or obstruct interstate or foreign commerce—and yet nowhere does this law set up provisions to protect two- thirds of the integral participants in com- merce: namely, the employer and the public. No wonder the present labor act promotes disharmony! For, in effect, it protects only the unions and their leaders. STREAMLINE SLAVERY—1947 MODEL In some sections—particularly in 7 and 8— no real thought is given to the welfare of even the workers. Only the leaders are con- sidered here, since in these sections it is found that compulsory unionism is condoned, com- pulsory unionism being but another term for streamline slavery, 1947 model. In section 7 the worker is told that, through the passage of this law, he has a Tight to join a union of his own choosing— which, to my way of thinking, means that he has the right to join or refuse to join a particular union. And yet, almost immedi- ately following, in paragraph 3 of section 8, he is told that nothing shall preclude an em- ployer from making an agreement with a labor organization whereby one of the con- ditions of employment shall be membership in that union. In sbort, the worker is free in section 7, only to become a slave in section 8; since, unless he does join the union in possession of the contract with the employer, he is deprived of the very job which yields him a living. Upon being deprived of his right to earn a living through the instru- A235 mentality of a legalized closed shop, what be- comes of a man’s stated right to join a union of his own choosing? Other sections of this labor act make of the employer a criminal in the simple exer- cise of his natural prerogative of free speech, since there are specific stipulations which subject to fine and imprisonment any em- ployer who so much as speaks to an employee on the subject of unionism. CHISELERS WILL ALWAYS CHISEL If you believe these statements of mine to be exaggerated, it might be a good idea for you to read the actual text of the Na- tional Labor Relations Act. Once through with the job you will, I am certain, agree that it is the most lopsided piece of legisla- tion ever put over on the American worker, the employer, and the public. This labor act, you will find, fails to establish standards as to what constitutes legitimate unions or legitimate employers. It will also be clear to you that, under this law, chiselers are favored above ethical men—since chiselers have always been able to chop legalistic lan- guage to fit their chiseling intentions, SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT In the light of the foregoing, I do not hesi- tate in saying that, when the doors of the new Congress are opened, it would be a job well done were most of this act to be tossed straight through the window, and were a number of thoroughgoing amendments to be made in the interest of common equity and sound Americanism, If we are to have equity in the matter of industrial relations, the law must give full consideration to the three integral elements of industry: The noreerss the employers, and the general pub- ic. It must, however, be borne tn mind that such consideration cannot be realized in an atmosphere of mob hysteria or promoted by hearts of vengeance influenced by the haters of either side of industry. The matter must be calmly and fairly approached. Were I to be offered my say on this most tmportant issue, I should, with full deliberation, make the following recommendations to the new Congress: 1. That the name of the Labor Act be changed from the National Labor Relations Act to the Industrial Relations Act. This title, unlike the present one, is unbiased in its address. It indicates that the law is not set up to favor labor alone, but that it is prepared to recognize, with fairness to all, the three vital components of industry: Workers, employers, public. 2. That this Industrial Relations Act cre- ate an Industrial Relations Department of Government, one which would be unbiased in its outlook, and whose function it would be to coordinate the services of the Depart- ments of Labor, Agriculture, and Commerce; this new Department to be headed by a Director of Industrial Relations, an official under no special allegiance to any of the groups otherwise already fully represented. 8. That this Industrial Relations Act cre- ate an Industrial Relations Court. It would be the duty of this court to try all con- tractual dispute cases that come before it that could not be settled through concilla- tion, mediation, or arbitration—the decision of this court to be prompt and binding. There would be no allowance for a strike for the duration of any labor-management con- tract since this court would have full power to act on all side issues, including jurisdic- tional disputes, and thus avoid unnecessary cessation of production. 4. That this Industrial Relations Act stipu- late that only citizens of the United States or its poesessions would be eligible to negotiate any matter pertaining to industrial relations. 6. That labor unions, as well as employers, be required to render financial statements at yearly intervals at least, such statements to be attested to by certified public account- ants.
A236 6. That labor unions be required to ob- serve the rules of strict parliamentary law at all meetings, and that they be also re- quired to elect officers and conduct strike votes by secret ballot. THERE I8 HOPE To hear some people talk, one is led to believe that the union situation is hopeless. Well, with these people I simply cannot agree, convinced as I am that, if proper steps are taken, we can and will find the answer to the present vicious problem. Some people are Baying that the entire labor movement has gone Communist, or that it is herded by a bunch of racketeers. Fortunately, however, these are not the facts. The truth of the matter is that the rank and file of workers, whether belonging to the American Fed- eration of Labor, the Congress of Indus- trial Organizations, the railroad brother- hoods, the independent labor unions—or to no union at all—are, by virtue of the very fact that they have chosen to work for a living, good honest people, able and willing to do the honorable thing when they know it to be the honorable thing to do. And, by this same token, the leaders, by and large, are likewise honest men, since it must be remembered too that the vast ma- jority of them have come up from the ranks of the workers. This being the case, their misdoings can be charged to the head more than to the heart. It can never, therefore, be a simple matter of “knock ’'em down and drag ’em out!” Nor should legislation be enacted which will penalize the majority for the acts of a very, very small minority. GIVE THE UNIONS BACK TO THE WORKERS No doubt, we do need corrective legisla- tion designed to drive the racketeers and radicals from our unions, but there is no need to pile good unionism on the same wagon with the bad. The type of legisla- tion needed is that which will give the unions back to the workers and which will enable them to operate in accordance with tre true principles of unionism—which, of necessity, must be in complete harmony with the true principles of Americanism. When suggestions such as have been outlined in this article are placed squarely before the rank and file for consideration, so that they May analyze them according to parlia- mentary procedure and vote upon them by means of the secret ballot, it will, I am con- fident, be proven beyond all shadow of doubt that the vast majority of all union members detest the actions of the racketeers and radicals as intensely as do all other de- cent citizens. Also that labor will be the first to approve such corrective legislation as will make for better times all around. When this point its reached, no one will have need to fear unionism, because every- one will then be proud of the actual state of the unions. Frankly yours, Maovrice R. FRANKS, Editor, the Railroad Workers Journal. Commercial Radio Programs EXTENSION OF REMARKS oO HON. HOMER E. CAPEHART OF INDIANA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Wednesday, January 22 (legislative day of Wednesday, January 15), 1947 Mr. CAPEHART. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an article entitled “America Likes Its Commer- cials,” written by Carroll Carroll and published in the January 8, 1947, issue of Variety. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: AMERICA Likes ITs COMMERCIALS—REFLEC- TIONS ON A MEDIUM CATERING TO THE MASSES AND AN ANSWER TO THE CRITICS OF NATIONAL TasTr (By Carroll Carroll) HoLtywoop.—The steady flow of criticism leveled at commercial radio is not insidious because it’s consistently carping, but because it's almost exclusively in media that feel ra- dio’s advertising competition and offer no Opportunity for rebuttal. Radio's so-called public service or noncommercial moments are sometimes praised, though generally ig- nored by the public, while its most popular stuff is systematically panned. The fact that the sock advertising programs are barbecued almost exclusively puts the sincerity of the criticism in jeopardy and opens to the sus- picion of venality the entire editorial policy of the publication that carries it. The sincerity of each individual critic of Tadio, his right to criticize and the validity of his writing is not questioned. The trou- ble, in most cases, is that the critic, clothed in a Knight-in-armor complex, approaches his task as a defender of the people. He de- fends them by whacking away at radio com- mercials and the way they're handled, yet there is no definite indication that most ra- dio commercials are truly resented by any great number of people. The few cranks write. letters and can always get them pub- lished. But a hundred or a thousand or even ten thousand letters can’t represent 20,- 000,000 listeners. The average radio critic says radio is in a rut. He wants things changed. Yet there is every proof that change for the sake of change is the last thing the radio audience will accept. And 80 it goes. The truth is this: Almost anyone who cares to knock radio can find editorial sanc- tuary somewhere. Oongressmen who need a little publicity pick on Hollywood or radio or both. Reformers who would like to ve quoted take a poke at radio. Radio has been accused of causing everything from juvenile delinquency to bad crops. Anybody who can write convincingly can take a jab at radio and get it published in some magazine or newspaper. Why? The magazines don’t sock the press and the press rarely criticizes the magazines. But they'll all pile onto this Johnny-come-lately of advertising that has made itself felt. Even this would be O. K. if there were any forum in which to answer detractors who publish letters and write articles beginning— “Whenever I hear a commercial announces ment I turn off the radio?” There is no available space in which to reply to those who curiously qualify their right to criticize by saying, “Of course, I never listen to radio put * * *.” Then follows a blast against material the writer presumably absorbed by osmosis. Where can FCC’s frequent com- plaints that commercial radio is not in the public interest be answered? A medium of radio's size and dignity de- serves & defense area in which to point out to a lot of people that all this criticism consist- ently ignores the primary purpose of com- mercial radio. That purpose is to interest a huge audience. Each program seeks the largest it can get. None hopes to please only a certain few. There are some who could prove that this is the essence of democracy. But its critics contend that commercial radio is something between in- tellectual suicide and moral share cropping. The Federal Communications Commission, for instance, is constantly objecting to the APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD quality of commercial radio. But no Gov- ernment commission exists to police other forms of intelligence. No Government agency objects because all books published are not of the highest type and the ones that sell fastest are generally the hottest or the fun- niest. Nor does the Government tell news- papers to play down sensational stories and stuff that gets circulation. BUT WHAT ABOUT THE MASSES? Only the intellectual element of the luna- tic fringe wants to censor books, all of which are commercial projects—even the Bible— but everyone feels free to demand that some- thing be done about radio. Everyone ignores the fact that he has the power to make the most devastating attack in the world on com- mercial radio—the power to turn it off, The fact is always ignored that commer- cial radio’s catering to the masses has re- sulted in the most constant flow of high grade entertainment in the world, which buils down to the greatest good to the greatest number. That commercial radio makes peo- ple happy by giving them a lot of entertain- ment, and makes advertisers happy by giving them a lot of business, would seem to be sufficient grounds on which to rest any de- fense of it. But no! Commercial radio is forced to make an effort to confound its critics by trying hopelessly to prove that it’s something it never set out to be—art. In countries where radio attracts no very great or faithful audiences, because no pro- Gram is forced to compete with another in catering to the national tastes, radio is dull as entertainment and ineffective culturally for the simple reason that it does not reach the people. Symphonic music played all day Offers little to listeners who don't like, nor understand, this music—and what’s more don't want to. Lectures, even the best, are wonderful only to those who listen to them. And such listening can’t be forced. Ignoring this completely, critics of com- mercial radio lash out at the shows and stars this Nation loves and deplore the fact that radio doesn’t do more to educate and uplift. They prefer to scream at what the people quite obviously prefer. Thus the critics of commercial radio are critics not of art, nor of intrinsic goodness, but of the national taste. As such, they are naturally entitled to criticize until their lifetime pens expire. But why blame radio? Why blame advertisers? Advertisers have actually improved the na- tional taste in many ways both in print and on the air. There is no purpose in trying to defend commercial radio as art. But it can be de- fended as the greatest and most loved form of entertainment in the world; great because it’s highly competitive and loved because it is carefully planned to give people exactly what they long for, quick, easy, free, enter- tainment. It’s axiomatic that commercial radio in order to merit the word commercial must present what vast throngs of people like to hear most. Because when people don't listen in large numbers to a commercial program, it cannot sell enough product to pay for itself. It immediately ceases to be commer- cial and very soon ceases to be. The public, therefore, is the critic, judge, and jury on every sponsored radio show. A very large segment of the public—one or two million people at the very least—must like a com- mercial program or it cannot afford to remain on any network. Rarely, if ever, does the public dislike a radio show because it carries advertising, in spite of the fact that many of radio’s critics live by fostering this belief. Actually I have never seen anyone get up to turn off a com- mercial announcement. This is not because many commercials don’t deserve turning-off but because people are educated to accept them. People know they'll end in a minute and people are lazy. I have, however, seen
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD many a person turn off the entertainment portion of a radio show because he knew it would not end in a minute and he couldn’t stand it. When enough people do this the commercial announcements are automatic- ally turned off at the source. SINGLES; THE VOICE OF A PEOPLE For this reason, and for no other, commer- cial radio in the United States is most truly the voice of the whole population. The peo- ple ask for what they want by rejecting what they do not want. Radio entertainment speaks the thoughts of the Nation insofar as it reflects its taste. The voice of a people can't be the cultured tones of its intellectuals any more than it can be the babbling of its illiterates. It does not pay commercial radio to cater to either of these peripheral groups. The mighty middle class is the big buying public and the man who guesses best what that class wants to hear is radio's number one genius for the semester. In those parts of the world where radio is not in the hands of the much maligned advertisers, anxious to please large grcups, there is very little incentive to give people really high-caliber entertainment of a diver- sified nature. Nobody cares who listens when nobody benefits by increasing an audience. Perhaps it is culturally deplorable that more people in the United States want to listen to Abbott and Costello than to Tos- canini and 100 men, although analogous tastes are undoubtedly international. Never- theless, much maligned radio offers both Mr. Toscanini and the Messrs. Abbott and Cos- tello. While the critics snarl at the time Abbott and Costello waste, and much of the public snarls at the time Toscanini wastes. The truth is that radio’s critics have adopted a set of false values and refuse to associate cause and effect. They stand aghast at the size of the audience that listens every Tuesday at 10 p. m., eastern standard time, and wring their hands because so many peo- ple can't be mentally improved at that time instead of just amused by Bob Hope. But put in the mental improvement show, take out Hope, and try and find that huge audi- ence. Among the things that the war proved was the social and educational value of commer- cial radio with its gigantic audiences abso- lutely absorbent to the ideas of their weekly heard friends, Bing Crosby in a few casually read words could instill more patriotism and fire in more people for getting on with the war than all the best poetry of Stephen Vin- cent Benét, Archibald MacLeish, and Norman Corwin set to kettledrums and broadcast nightly over four joined networks. During the war commercial radio, with its selling know-how, packed the big propaganda punch. Cultural and intellectual radio sounded more inspiring sometimes to the cultured and in- tellectual few who listened. But the tech- nique of the commercial announcement was the hard-slogging doughfoot the propagan- dists turned to when there was a huge job that had to be done. And it proved these hard-slogging commercials were listened to on large audience commercial shows. YISBER’S CULTURE VERSUS ALLEGORIES Jack Benny, Fred Allen, and Fibber McGee, through their immense audience, are poten- tially greater sources of culture to the masses than all the allegories, wonderful as they may be, that Arch Oboler ever wrote. The fact that these commanders of public opinion don't exercise their power doesn’t lessen it. Though they hold their power casually, some- times even unconsciously, any three net- work comics working solidly together could swing the country any way they wished. Peo- ple even elect hillbilly singers to high political office. When Jack Benny has Joseph Sziget! as a guest he's doing more for music in a half hour than many a whole season of relatively unheard symphonic broadcasts, because men are Judged by the company they keep. And if Szigeti pleases Jack Benny and Jack Benny pleases Joe Public, Joe Public is going to like and listen to Szigeti. It's another proof that things equal to the same thing are equal to each other. No rush of critical torment is brought on because there are only a few concert halls in New York City and over threescore theaters. (All commercial projects.) No one wails because most of the best-remem- bered stage successes are musical comedies and operettas. Yet, because rudio con- sciously caters to this same genexual taste, radio is excoriated. Nobody balks at buying a magazine for from 10 to 50 cents, knowing it's perhaps 50 percent or more paid advertising. Yet critics insist these same people have cause to scream when a $15,000 radio program, which they get for nothing, is interrupted for 2'%4 minutes of advertising during 294, minutes. Make it 3 minutes out of 30, and it’s only 10 percent advertising for radio as against 50 percent, and over, for periodicals. And it's for free versus for cash. There is no way to deny that radio adver- tising, far from impeccable, sometimes tramples tuste. But there is also no denying that publication copy is frequently just as “neccable.” Each medium docs its best to police its advertisers, but “natures” spelled backwards is no different in print than on the air. Radio critics say commercials come into your home, your living and dining rooms. So do magazines. Radio is turned on with the knowledge that advertising makes it possible. And a 10-cent magazine buyer is aware that so much desirable read- ing could not be delivered as cheaply with- out advertising. True, children can hear radio and perhaps not read publication advertising. But most children who listen consciously to the radio can read. And only the fewest of radio's most violent critics complain for the sake of children. Furthermore most of the peo- ple who worry about children’s tender ears either ignore or don't know how hardy young minds can be, For every critic of commercial radio there must be a minimum of 5,000,000 radio fans. If they do not all actually benefit culturally when they turn on heir radios they benefit to the degree they expected to benefit. If they don't, they turn it off. The FCC not long ago gave out a snort against soap operas emphasizing all their weak points and adding the charge that they contribute to imbalance on a station’s pro- gram. Imbalance, a beautiful word, is ap- parently exactly what radio listeners want most. At the times when station and net- work programs are in most marked imbalance they enjoy the largest audiences. There is Tuesday with the imbalance of four big con- secutive comedy shows: Amos ‘n' Andy, Fibber McGee and Molly, Bob Hope, and Red Skelton. A similar !mbalance {is found in the Sunday comedy series. Jack Benny, Phil Harris, Charlie McCarthy, and Fred Allen have a tremendous audience. It is impossible to put anything important in competition with one of these top pro- grams because then the criticism comes from quarters crying to know, for example, why an outstanding show like Frank Sinatra is put in direct competition with Ed Gardner of Duffy's Tavern. People who want to hear one probably want to hear both. Whenever @ network or station has tried to combat or break up the imbalance of big shows or soap operas following one upon the other the ef- fort has been unsuccessful, The FCC claims soap operas please adver- tisers because they’re cheap. If they were only cheap, advertisers would not care for them, The fact that they're also effective A237 proves people listen to them. The fact that they’ve defied competition proves peuple prefer to listen to them. To argue against imbalance on the air and urge that educational material be sand- wiched in with other stuff has as much logic as to demand that newspaper editorials be slapped between comic strips. Or comics put on the editorial page. There is every good reason of logic and balance in favor of such @ move. But the people have proved their preference for imbalance. It's more convenient for them. If you want to make thein go out of their way you can mae them turn to the editorial page to read a comic. But you'll never make them read an editcrial that way. PUBLIC SETS THE PATTERN Another claim of the FCC is that radio favors the sponsor before it favors the public. To fix this, FCC suggests more nonsponsored programs and fewer shows built to a stond- ard pattern. This frames a nice question: Shall the public have what snonsors have dils- covered the public likes or what the FCC thinks it should have? An examination of available surveys indi- cates that the type of shows FCC suggests meet with considerable apathy. The stand- ard patterns FCC wants to eliminate are only offered by sponsors, not dictated by them. The patterns used are uscd because they are the ones the public chooses to listen to. And experiment on the part of sponsors has proved it’s useless to try to change these pat- terns to any great extent. Explanation of H. R. 665, Requiring Pri- vate Participation in Export-Import Bank Loans EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HOWARD H. BUFFETT OF NEBRASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 21, 1947 Mr. BUFFETT. Mr. Speaker, H. R. 665 would require the Export-Import Bank to secure on all loans over $5,000,- 000 full-risk private participation for an amount equal to 25 percent of the total loan. The primary objective of this bill is to encourage and require the operating policy cf the bank to conform with sec- tion (c) of its statement of basic prin- ciples, which reads in part: As a matter of prudent management and as required by law, the bank makes only loans which offer reasonable assurance of repayment. If the loans of the bank meet this standard, it is likewise reasonable to ex- pect that Export-Import Bank officials would easily find private banks to sup- ply 25 percent of future loans. Moreover, this bill would protect the bank from being constrained to make partial or outright political loans. For- tified by the requirement of private par- ticipation in its risks, the bank would not be embarrassed by requests for out- right or quasi-political loans. This safeguard would eliminate the charge either at home or abroad that the bank is being used as an instrument for political and economic warfare.
A238 The smaller credits of the bank are exempted from the proposal] in order that this smaller business would not be unduly impeded by participation require- ments. Probably the danger of political loans is not as important ix. credits under the $5,000,000 mark. Up to this time the bank has made some loans in which politics were in- volved. Foreign countries and well-in- formed people in Americe are not being fooled by this practice. The victim of this official deception is the ordinary American taxpayer, who desperately clings to the belief that those in high places in his Government speak only the truth. If the officials of the bank mean what they say when they solemnly assert that the bank makes only loans which offer reasonable assurance of repayment, this bill should be of real assistance to them. However, if the bank is to function as a combination politico-economic inter- national weapon, then obviously the safeguards of H. R. 665 are unwanted. If the bank is a politica] instrument, any pretense otherwise should end. Enactment of this plan into law would also encourage the return of internation- al lending to private channels. It would provide a partnership outlet for the gi- gantic loanable balances of the big banks of the Nation. While this gual is meritorious, it is of minor importance compared to the need for establishing the operations of the bank on a forthright basis. The proposal follows the patte:n used successfully by the RFC in making small loans, with local banks required to take a part of the risk. We have seen the boomeranging re- sults of lend-lease and UNRRA in sev- eral instances. It should be apparent now to the most foolhardy zealot of foreign hand-outs that international friendships based on economic paternal- ism are counterfeit. Years ago I got my first lesson on hu- man relations in finance from a sign on @ cigar store cash register. It read: I loaned money to three friends; I lost the three friends; also the money; I have decided to lose no more triends. In case administration officials do not agree with the moral of this verse, a case study of international loaning by a gov- erament may be enlightening. After World War I, France carried on an ambitious program of direct Govern- ment loans to European nations. Aside from participation in the two American- sponsored German credits, the objective was to strengthen her military position and have strong allies in case of war. How did this scheme work out? Read the following complete list of French Government post-World War I loans and recall what each country did for or against France when World War II arrived. When the time came for the borrowing nations to help France, those receiving almost half of the loans fought France. One nation, Turkey, stayed on the side- lines. The quick collapse of resistance of the other loan recipients is a matter of record. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD French loans to European countries between World War I and World War Il Country Rumania. .. Belgium 1923 Austria 1923 Bulgaria. . 1923. Germany (Dawes loan). 1924... Hungary.........-.--.-- 1924... Poland... 1927... Bulgaria. Rumania.___......----. Germany (Young loan). Fiuland.. Poland... 1931 (spring) 1931 (spring) -. 1931 (spring) .. 1931 (fall)... 1031 (October) . 1981 (fall)... -2-. 1982 (December) 1982 (November) 1933 (February). 1936 (December). -| 19388 (October) _.. 1939 (October) Amount United States currency £16, 600, 000 $75, 471, 000 1400, 000, 000 24, 320, OW) 1170, 00, 000 10), 336, 000 1 40, 000, 000 2, 434, 000 £3, 000, 000 13, 251, 000 196, 000, 000 6, 026, 560 $2, 000, 000 2, 000, (0 1130, 000, G00 5, 096, 000 1661, 000, 000 21, 968, 760 12, 156, 000 84, GOI 1300, 000, 000 11, 772, 000 125, (00, 000 81, 000 1575, 000, 000 22, 540, O00) 1675, 000, O40) 26, 460, (K) ~| 2400, 000, 000 15, 680, 000 - $8, 400, 000 #, 400, 000 $10, 000, 000 10, 000, 000 $14, 160, 000 14, 160, 000 $13, 650, 000 13, 650, 000 113, 000, 000 509, 600 1300, 000, 000 11, 760, 000 1 405, 000, 000 18, 001, 350 =| $13, 680, 600 13, 680, 000 newer eee enn e ee tee ween e nee 9 £6, (400, 000 19, 445, 000 1 Frances, ?* Gold. Source: Legislative Referonee Service, Library of Congress. In connection with the foregoing fac- tual record from France, the following comment from Nicholas J. Spykman, of Yale University, in America’s Strategy in World Politics, is worth considering: Loans create neither gratitude nor depend- ence, and they can be repudiated with the greatest ot ease. Not favors already received, but favors still to be received create for the donor a position of influence and power. The ability to grant or withhold access to a market, the opportunity to veto ever anew the outflow of the mines, or the export of a yearly crop creates a position of power which no creditor can match. In the political struggle for the Danubian region, rich France extended loans and poor Germany offered markets. It was the natural exchange of trade between agrarian Danubia and industrial Germany that proved to be an unbreakable bond and an opportunity for Germany to create an instrument of power which French high finance was unable to defeat. The Principle at Stake in Continuing RFC EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. FRED L. CRAWFORD OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 21, 1947 Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Speaker, with- in the coming weeks Congress will be called upon to furnish new breath of life for the Reconstruction Finance Corpora- tion and the situation confronting us as we consider renewal legislation is ably outlined by Mr. U. V. Wilcox, well known writer for financial journals and pub- lisher of a weekly bank news service, in the current edition of his Washington Backgrounds. The article entitled “The Principle at Stake in Continuing the RFC” is sub- mitted for consideration of Members of Congress under the unanimous consent which the House has granted: THE PRINCIPLE AT STAKE IN CONTINUING THE RFC (By U. V. Wilcox) WasHINaTon.—The chairmen of the Senate and House Banking Committees have before them a bill to continue the life of the Re- construction Finance Corporation. Presi- dent Truman has recommended that the giant all-purpose lending agency be ex- tended. Secretary of the Treasury Snyder would use it as a “stand-by credit agency,” noncompetitive with private agencies—if they fulfill their purpe@e. The life of the RFC legally expires June 80, this year. Congressional action must come during the next few months with public hearings and extensive testimony. The continuance of the life of the RFC involves the taxpayer, business, banking. It means more. The functioning of the capi- talistic system is also involved, If it is determined that the Nation must still support the giant bureaucracy known as the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, the implication is plain that the capitalistic sys- tem cannot be wholly trusted. There is doubt implied that it will work and that it will take credit risks as needed. Basically, the RFC exists to make loans. It Tends money. It is a bank—a Government bank. When, because of a world-wide de- pression, it was established for this purpose, there was the promise that when Govern- ment financial aid was no longer needed, it would end. It would cease to exist, its pur- pose in pouring out Government funds hav- ing been achieved; namely, to save the capi- talistic system. Now, all the official indexes, the forecasts of the Council of Economic Advisers and pri- vate agencies, see good times ahead. Blue skies and all the business traffic lights set for full speed. If it is determined that the RFC must be continued as a stand-by credit agency, then there must be some doubt about these fore- casts. If it is declared that the RFC will not lend in conflict with private finance, then why should it continue? As a threat? Its very existence, with its powers and au- thority to act, constitute a menace and an intimidation, If the RFC continues with what amounts to promises to be good, then what of the hazards if some administration or some set of officials come into power, unwilling to be bound by the original promise? If it is argued that the RFC is needed, just in case, the inference is plain that Congress can hardly be trusted to re-create another
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD RFC when conditions demand again the outpouring of Government credit. The game argument could be made on behalf of all the emergency powers which President Truman is now so properly turning back. Let Congress consider well the implications to the American system of free enterprise when it decides the future of the RFC. Save America’s New Competitive Power Policy EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JAMES W. TRIMBLE OF ARKANSAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, January 20, 1947 Mr. TRIMBLE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the REc- orD, I wish to include the following ad- dress entitled “Save America’s New Com- petitive Power Policy,” delivered by Mr. Clyde T. Ellis, executive manager of the National Rural Electric Cooperative As- sociation, and a former Member of the House from the district which I am honored to represent, at the Arkansas Rural Electric Cooperative Association banquet, Little Rock, Ark., January 16, 1947: Mr. Toastmaster and fellow Arkansuns, the power battle of 1947 is already on in Wash- ington, The enemy's objective this year is to cut us in two, divide our forces, and conquer us. The tactic is not new, but it promises to typify the opposition'’s present campaign against us. It is taking on ominous proportions. Power company presidents are pouring into Washington like bees swarming in the spring. The two busiest bees in the swarm are the presidents of the Arkansas Power & Light Co. and Southwestern Gas & Electric Co. Incidentally, one of these bees has a rare and peculiar stinger—made of nylon—nylon hose. TI appreciate your invitation to come here, as your employee, and talk with you candidly about the grave and momentous problems that face us today. This is, indeed, a crucial hour for Arkansas, The fate of the Nation’s power program hangs in the balance tonight. The course Arkansas takes may determine the course of the Nation. You and the rest of our people may hold in your hands the destiny of this State and of this Nation insofar as this power issue is concerned. You are well aware of the long, hard fight we made, beginning tn 1839, to get power authorized for Norfork Dam. At the same time Sam RAYBURN was making a similar fight in Congress for power in Denison Dam, on the Red River between Oklahoma and Texas. Without realizing it then, with these two dams we were laying the foundation for America’s first Nation-wide generating and transmission policy. With Norfork and Deni- son we were cutting the pattern for com- petitive sources of wholesale power for most of the rest of the country. By the spring of 1944, it was apparent that Norfork and Nenison woulc soon be generat- ing current. They would be the first flood- control dams in the country to generate powcr without special authority for its sale. Congress was faced with the necessity of determining, even in the midst of the war, bow Norfork and Denison power should be marketed. Some wanted an all-inclusive authority such as TVA. The power com- panies wanted all the power for themselves. These were the two extremes. Congress took the middle course for this area and for the country. In the Flood Con- trol Act of 1944 it delegated the Department of Interior to build the lines and market all power produced under the control of the War Department wherever generated In the United States. This included, of course, Norfork and Denison power. Congress directed the Secretary of Inte- rior to sell the surplus power and energy from all such projects “in such a munner as to encourage the most widespread use thereof at the lowest possible rates to con- sumers consistent with sound business prin- ciples, the rate schedules to become effective upon confirmation and approval by the Fed- eral Power Commission. * * * Prefer- erence in the sale of such power and energy shall be given to public bodies and coopera- tives. The Secretary of the Interior is au- thorized * * * to make the power and energy generated at said projects ‘available in wholesale quantities for sale on fair and reasonable terms and conditions to facilities owned by the Federal Government, public bodies, cooperatives, and privately owned companies.” This new policy was enacted after a hard fight with the power companies. Both Arkansas Senators supported it. It was hailed as a bold step forward for the people—the dawn of a better day in the electrical age. Southwestern Power Administration was created by the Department of Interior in September 19438. Undcr war powers of the President, it operated the Grand River Dam Authority in Oklahoma. After the Flood Control Act of 1944 was passed, the Secretary of the Interior desig- nated Southwestern Power Administration to build the line- and market the power from Norfork and Denison Dams, and from the many others to be constructed in the Scuth- west Thus was the Arkansas-Oklahoma-Texus region honored by being the first to bene- fit by America’s first national power policy, a policy of favoring the people with active power competition. This region gave birth under the act to a baby giant that would bring to us a whole new frontier for de- velopment—that would serve as a mode! for all America, (Incidentally, 1 want to pause to congratu- late the Arkansas Gazette on its splendid edi- torials of late, advocating the complete har- nessing of all these rivers.) Southwestern Power Administration spent 2 years making exhaustive engineering studies and last year requested of Congress €23,000,000 to begin the system. Part of this was to be used to tie Norfork and Deni- son together with high-voltage transmission lines. Part of the $23,000,000 was to be used for a firming-up steam plant at Lake Catherine. The Federal Government had spent 61,800,- 000 to partially construct that plant during the war. It is now idle and A. P. & L. is trying to get it. The balance of the 823,000,- 000 was to be used to build lines to cities and towns and electric cooperatives in Ar- kansas and the other States which needed and desired the power. A substantial part of the $23,000,000 was to be spent in Arkansas, and this was just the beginning. The rural electric cooperatives of Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas, Oklahoma, and Missouri went to SPA’'s support, unanimously. Dele- gations of co-op leaders rushed to the Cap- itol and testified before congressional com- mittees. The day we appeared before the House committee, the bees swarmed outside the committee door while we were in therc, and we had to walk through them on our way out. Of course, they testified, too. We got the worst of it. The House Com- mittee cut SPA’s request from $23,000,000 to A239 less than three and one-half million. The House raised the figure to $7.500,000. Our Senators and Congressmen are all my personal friends, as you know. I am not criticizing any of them for not supporting SPA, but criticizing ourselves for doing such & poor job of letting the people know the facts, for the people generally remained silent except for those whom the power com- panies pressured into writing and sending telegrams. When the bill went over to the Sonate the bees went over there too. Cur co-op lenders, with no honey to operate on, couldn't stay in Washington, but they did return there wend testify before the Senate comunitter The Senate committee knocked the baby out completely. But the Senate revived it with the help of Senators McCuEeLuan and FULBRIGHT, and passed the measure with the $7,500,000 the House had enacted. Unfortunately, for Arkansas, the foreign- owned power companies succeeded in kill- ing the steam plant and all lines in our State except the big connecting link. Wall Street won: our people lost. Today SPA's giant transmission line from Norfork to Denison, down through Arkun- sas—all that was left for us—is in the initial stages of construction. Even this line will yet be the nucleus of a great power system for a greater Southwest if we give it our wholehearted support. Tonight, however, the Government of the United States is on the verge of jJunking, at least for the present, the major part of its power-program plans for this area, so nobly launched only 12 short months ago. The President’s budget message last Friday called for less than $3,000,000 to proceed with the southwestern power lines during the next fiscal year—and the bees will no doubt try to sting that to death. In the face of last year's opposition or lack of support from a majority of Arkansas’ Congressmen, the President did not again ask for funds to he- gin the 811,000,000 Lake Catherine steam plant, so badly needeu, or for the much- needed transmission lines necessary to per- mit our cities and cooperatives to purchase Norfork power. Don’t blame the Govern- ment; blame ourselves for not supporting the Government in its stand last year. If the people don't act now, there will be little further progress for us soon. Let's take a look at this power program as it would affect the people of Arkansas. Nor- fork and Dentson each has a 35,000-kilowatt generator in operation. By the summer of 1948 each will have two 85,000-kilowatt units installed—a total of 140,000 ‘ilowatts This will exceed the present installed capacity of the Arkansas Power & Light system. Fort Gibson, in Oklahoma, !s under construction. Bull Shoals, Blakeley Mountain, and Nar- rows should be under contract shortly. Soon to follow will be Table Rock, Markham Ferry, Dardenelle, Gilbert, Greers Ferry, Ozark. Wolf Bayou, Webber Falls, Short Mountain, Tenkiller, Eufaula, Antlers, Pine Creek, and others. There will be at least 23 of these dams in Arkansas, southern Mis- souri, and eastern Oklahoma, forming the great lakes of the Southwest. One may take one look at Norfork Dam and realize that this is no idle dream. These things ure at hand. President Truman in his state-of-the- Union message to Congress last week said: “In the development of the great river systems of America there is the major oppor- tunity of our generation to contribute to the increase of the national wealth. This pro- gram is already well along; it should be pushed with full vigor.” At our regional meeting in Baton Rouge in November many of us here heard Assistant Secretary of the Interior Gerard Davidson say that power in this area can be produced at less than in TVA, at less than anywhere else in the United States with the possible
A240 exception of the Pacific Northwest. First, because of the several good rivers involved; secondly, because we have on-the-spot, low- cost gas and coal to firm up the hydro. In other words, because Mother Nature made us potentially power rich. Night before last I had the honor of ad- dressing the rural electric cooperatives and municipalities of the Tennessee Valley—from Tennessee, Kentucky, Alabama, and Missis- sippi—at a banquet in Nashville. In the 2 days I was in the valley I saw first-hand for the third time in 12 months the almost un- believable development and progress going on there. It made me happy indeed. But as I flew on here my heart grew heavy as I realized that Arkansas is missing what Ten- nessee has accomplished. Arkansas is the least industrial of all the States save one. Arkansas’ per capita income is the lowest of all the States save one. There is a direct relationship between the two. And President Truman told the Congress last week: “We should also give special attention to the decentralization of industry and the de- velopment of areas that are now under- industrialized. “Wide regions of this country still hold the promise of tremendous economic de- velopment. The Government should exam- ine particularly the contribution it can make toward this, development by stimulat- ing production and distribution of low-cost hydroelectric energy.” He was surely talking about Arkansas. And the best route known to us for accom- plishing that in this power-monopoly area is via an SPA or TVA, and SPA happens to be our only choice TVA, as you know, only generates and transmits power as would SPA. It does not distribute it, except in rare instances, tu big industries. It delivers its power to cities and towns and electric co-ops for distribution. There are 188 such distributors in the Ten- nessee Valley: 4 large cities, 80 smaller cities and towns, and 46 co-ops. In the fiscal year 1946 these 138 distributors of TVA's wholesale power sold almost 3,500,000,000 kilowatt-hours to 669,000 customers for 842,- 774,000. After paying all operating expenses, including $2,224,000 taxes, they had $11,986,- 000 net teft. Out of the $11,000,000, they paid 83,707,000 debt retirement and interest, and still had $8,280,000 left. Add this $8,000,000 to their $28,180,000 net earnings of previous years and you have a total net earnings of $36,410,000. This is approximately one-half their combined long- term debt. These 138 distributor: now own properties worth over $100,000,000 with a net equity of over 860,000,000 Those are people like you and-me who live in that poorer coun- try just across the river—poor rich folks. This record is truly outstanding. Many of these distributors have owned their proper- ties for only a few years Last year they reduced their rates—-already the second low- est in the country—by $850,000. Their com- bined rate reductions now amount to $12,- 000,000 annually. As their financial position improves, their rates will come down still more. It will interest you to know that if the 669.000 customers of these distributors of TVA power had been served at Arkansas Power & Light rates, their power would have cost them $34,000,000 more last year. If the customers of A. P. & L. had been served at the rates paid by the people in Tennessee, they would have saved almost 87,000,000 last year. And the greatest loss to Arkansas was not this overcharge of nearly 87,000,000, but the denial of adequate use of electricity caused by high rates. Residences and farms in Tennessee used an average of 1,002 kilowatt- bours last year, compared with only 959 kilowatt-hours used by residences and farms on the A. P. & L. system. Tennessee resi- dences and farms averaged more than twice as much last year as did Arkansas residences and farms—and paid smaller monthly bills. The average annual bill of customers in Tennessee was $34.05, compared with 639.14 on the A. P. & L. system. The cost per kilo- watt-hour to residences in Tennessee was 1% cents, compared with 4 cents in Ar- kansas. Small business establishments in Tennes- see saved 1 cent on every kilowatt-hour pur- chased, by comparison with A. P. & Ju. rates. This was a saving of $4,500,000 for small business in Tennessee last year. Small busi- nesses served by the A. P. & L. Co. would have saved nearly $3,000,000 last year if they had been served at Tennessee rates. Large industrial plants in Tennessee are served directly by TVA at very low rates. Smalier industries are served by the 138 dis- tributors. The average industrial rate of the A. P. & L. Co. includes both large and Small industries, The average industrial rate of the distributors in Tennessee was, never- theless, 8344 mills lower than the industrial rate of the A. P.& L. Co. Tennessee’s small industry saved $6,000,000 last year by com- parison with A. P. & L. rates. Small indus- tries served by the A. P. & L. Co. would have saved approximately $1,500,000 last year if they had been served at the Tennessee rate, If the families, farms, businesses, and in- dustries served by A. P. & L. alone would have saved $7,000,000 last year at TVA rates, you can appreciate that the savings of all of the people of Arkansas would run several millions more when we add the customers of Southwestern Gas & Electric Co., Arkan- sas-Missour! Power, O. G. & E., and others. It is sometimes erroneously said that if private utilities here reduced their rates to the same level as TVA that we in Arkansas would be as well off as the people in Ten- nessee. Thisisnot true. The people in Ten- nessee have these low rates and a $60,000,000 equity in their properties. In another 10 years they will own, debt free, all their prop- erties worth several hundred millions, and then they can reduce rates still further. I can illustrate this principle in another way: Two men with families occupy similar houses for 20 years. One buys his house on 20-year terms; the other rents. The monthly payment of the buyer and the monthly rental of the renter are the same. At the end of 20 years, one owns his house; the other owns nothing. Furthermore, the owner managed and operated his property to suit himself during the 20 years, whereas the renter enjoyed no such freedom The difference here is that in the power field in Arkansas it would cost half as much to own as to rent. Competition—free competitiva enterprise— has made America great. David Lilienthal, in his book, TVA—Democracy on the March, Bays: “A short time after TVA announced these low rates the neighboring private utilities of the Southeast followed suit by making large reductions in their own retes. The immediate result was a spectacular increase in the use of electricity in the homes they served. The year after the private companies adopted the principle of the TVA yardstick, though not the rates, for theirs did not decline so far, five of the six companies in the entire United States with the greatest increase in electric growth were here tn the Southeast.” Even Thomas Jefferson listed freedom from monopoly as one of the basic civil liberties, In his famous letter to Donald he wrote: “By a declaration of rights, I mean one which will stipulate freedom of religion, free- dom of the press, freedom of commerce against monopolies. * * * These are fetters against doing evil which no honest Government should decline.” APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The President in his same speech last week outlined five major economic policies which he said he believed the Government should pursue during 1947. The second cne he mentioned was, end I quote again, “resvuric- tion of monopoly and unfair business prac- tices, assistance to small business; and the promotion.of the free competitive system of private enterprise.” We all know how the attempts at public regulation of utility monopolies generally have failed. Only competition supplied by SPA—or outright public ownership—can offer any substantial hope to our people. If the power companies succeed in killing off SPA, I predict that even the power companies will regret it not many years hence. Everywhere in the United States that there is a competitive source of power, wholesale costs to the co-ops have gone down in the last 5 years; everywhere else they have gone up. Let us not overlook what a little competi- tion has already meant to the rural electric cooperatives of Arkansas. Having intro- ducei the model REA Act in the State sen- ate in 19387, I was naturally interested in seeing the co-ops get a decent rate for whole- sale power. I recall A. P. & L. refusing to give co-ops in Arkansas any rate for more than a year prior to that time and ther not until they were ordered to do so by a fair- minded State utility commission in 1937. The rate A, P. & L. filed as a result of this order was 171%, mills per kilowatt-hour. The commission refused to approve the rate on the grounds that it was too high. After much negotiation A. P. & L. filed an 11-mill rate under protest, stating at the same time in its letter to the commission that any rate under 17 mills was noncompensatory. In other words, that at 11 mills it would be Serving the co-ops at less than cost. Later, in 1939, to defeat efforts to bring TVA power into Arkansas, A. P. & L. lowered its rate to the larger co-ops to approximately 8 mills. It was not until SPA in 1945 de- veloped to the point where it was able to offer power to co-ops in Arkansas at a rate which would average 5 to 514 mills that A. P, & L. offered some of you a 6-mill rate. And this A P. & L. rate, as you know, had terrific restrictions in it. In spite of these A. P.& L, offers the Arkansas co-ops continued their enthusiastic support of the SPA budget re- quest last year. Now, in a further effort to wean you away from SPA support A P. & L. has recently offered you a rate as low as SPA and with some of A. P. & L.’s objectionable restrictions removed. Only the. fact of SPA competition has brought this situation about. Only the co- ops have supported SPA vigorously so far. Only they have sought to benefit immediately by it. Consequently, only they have bene- fited. Where would we be without SPA? Isn't it a case of Little Red Riding Hood and the wolf? IT understand that the A. P. & L. president has stated in the record before the Arkansas commission that he offered you that rate only to kill SPA I understand he has openly stated that A. P. & L.'s low rate to you is a subsidy, which the people of Little Rock and all the other cities, served by A. P. & L. must pay. Why doesn’t A. P. & L. make similar re- ductions to all the people? SPA would save every man, woman, and child living in the cities and towns of Arkansas—if we average their industrial, commercial, and residential savings—well over a dollar each per month. And SPA would be self-liquidating. It would cost the people nothing. Even the power companies would benefit, for they would pur- chase large blocks of the low-cost power. I-know you of the co-ops are not going to be gullible enough to believe for 1 minute that if all competition is killed A. P. & L. would continue to serve you at the present rate.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The president of Southwestern Gas & Elec- tric Co. had the distinction of opening the campaign against the rural electrification program in Washington last year. Never be- fore had the power companies appeared against us before congressional committees. It was in the Poage bill hearings, a little over a year ago, that he told the committee that the job of rural electrification in Amer- ica was practically done and that REA need- ed no more loan funds. At page 262 of the hearings, Congressman Hargis, of Arkansas, asked him: “Do you fee] that REA needs an additional appropriation to do the job ehead?” The S. G. & E. president answered, “I don’t think so; no, sir. * * * I think the money they have got, Mr. Chairman, is enough to do the job.” For the record, let it be said at this point that as of that time less than half the farm- ers in the United States had electricity. Only 53 percent have today. At that time less than 30 percent of the farmers in Ar- Kansas had electricity and only 31 percent have today. We stand forty-third among our sister States in the percentage of farms elec- trified. We, here in the power oasis, starve for energy. He was careful not to criticize Mr. Wick- ard, saying: “Mr. Wickard is a dirt farmer himself and we feel that he has the best interest of the American farmer close to his mind and heart.” But we got $350,000,000 in loans after the Southwestern Gas & Electric president told Congress we needed no more funds. So he has now changed his tune about REA. To- day he has set out to discredit REA, your national association—everybody—in a divide- and-conquer campaign, and, of course, still claiming that REA needs no more loans. According to the press, he made a speech to his employees recently. It got a lot of publicity, and the press quotes him as say- ing: “REA is the worst enemy the farmers have.” He even told them that the co-ops “are business-managed and free enterprise,” and that they “are capable of running their own affairs and should be allowed to do s0.” Do you see his strategy? Then he wrote the managers of the co-ops to which he furnishes power—in Texas, Loui- siana, and Arkansas—a two-page letter, dated December 12, 1946, and attached a newspaper clipping about his speech. I hold in my hand one of those letters. In it he said to the managers: “You are a business-managed operation, just as we are.” And— “As long as you meet your fixed charges there should be no interference by Federal bureaus with your operation.” I want to read you another paragraph from the Southwestern Gas & Electric president’s letter to the co-ops: “It 1s going to be necessary very soon for you gentlemen to choose whether yoti are go- ing to continue to be business-managed or- ganizations, buying your power and energy from existing free enterprise, at rates which you can enforce in courts, or whether you want to become, like the cooperatives in the Tennessee Valley, completely dominated by the public Power Trusts through the bureaus in Washington.” I read this statement to the Tennessee Valley co-ops and they got a big kick out of it—for it Just so happens that they are the freest and most independent co-ops in the United States. Some of them have paid off their loans completely. It was the last paragraph of his letter to the co-op managers that I enjoyed most, Let me read it to you: “We will be glad to meet with you and your boards, at your convenience, to give you our understanding of this entire picture, which, we believe, you will find is considerably dif- ferent than that given you by the propa- ganda of the Rural Electrification Adminis- tration in Washington and by Mr. Clyde Ellis of NRECA.” Now, my friends, it 1s up to you to decide what course you shall take. You have spear- headed the campaign for Southwestern Power Administration. The people generally have said little either way. The unorganized municipalities in Arkansas which could save millions of dollars a year, if SPA lives, have done little so far to support it. I speak not only of the municipalities whose power sys- tems are municipally owned, but also of those which would benefit, nevertheless, either through competition or by owning their own systems. The day is at hand when we in this part of the world must decide whether we are to be free or subservient economically. We are competing with every other section. It A241 js a highly competitive world. Shall we choose, then, to live out the electrical age under monopoly or under the benefits of a competitive system? I appeal to you and to every man and woman in the Wonder State to write your Senators and Congressmen now and let them know how you feel. Let them know whether you, the people, want for yourselves and your children the comparative poverty of a perma- nent power monopoly or the prosperity of SPA competition. Let's act now to save America's new competitive power policy. National Income and Federal Income Taxes EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. DANIEL A, REED OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 21, 1947 Mr. REED o: New York. Mr. Speaker, I am deeply interested in the proper ap- proach to the income-tax situation, espe- cially as it may relate to the creation of more property to tax, a larger revenue to the Government as a result of it, and an ever-expanding pay roll for the work- ers of this country. Not only this, I be- lieve that with the proper approach to the tax problem, especially in the light of past experience, taxes can be substan- tially reduced and at the same time more revenue collected and a substantial re- duction in the national debt can be made each year. This, of course, is based upon the assumption of retrenchment in gov- ernmental experditures and elimination of waste. All this can be achieved in- cluding, of course, a balanced budget. Under leave to extend my remarks, I am inserting in the Recorp the informa- tion to substantiate my statement: National tncome and Federal income taxes on individuals, estates, and trusts reflecting reductions in tax rates, 1921-29, inclusive Total annua! liabilities of! . iabilities of in- National income dividuals re- ments ported in tax individuals ! roturns filed In act of— with U. 8. ‘Treasury * 70, 000, 000, 000 704, 000, 000 73, 600, 000, 000 732, 0100, 000 |... 821, 000, 000 77, 100, 000, 000 77, 200, 000, 000 78, 400, 000, 000 000, 000 1, 002, 000, 000 , 500, $719, 000, 000 j.....-...----.- 861, 000, 000 | Nov. 23, 1921 662,000,000 | June 2, 1924 do... ... 1, 164, 000, 000 | May 28, 1928 Dec. 16, 1929 Principal changes in income taxes by Congress Principal provisions Surtax rates were reduced from those applying to 1921 income; cluding reduction of top rate to 50 percent; personal exemptions for married porsons wero increased from $2,000 to $2,500 (exeept for those with net incomes of over $5,000) and for dependents from $200 to $400; and taxpayers were permitted to be taxed at 12!2 percent on not capital gains if total tax on total net income was not less than 124¢ percent. Provided for a 25 percent credit or refund on all income taxes paid on 1923 income. Normal tax rates sharply reduoed: surtax rates cut in all income brackots; top rate lowered to 40 percent, tax eredit Total income tax revenue increased. allowed on earned income; and a modorate liboralization with respect to capital net gains and net losses. Incomes tax revenue increased. Increased personal exemptions for married persons from $2,500 to $3,500 and for single persons from $1,000 to $1,500; roduced normal tax rate; reduced surtax rates on incomes above $26,000 to a maximuin of 20 percent; and liberalized the amount of earned income for purposes of earned income-tux credits. Do. Income-tax revenue increased. Further liberalized the amount of Income on which earned income-tax credit could be claimed. Normal-tax rates applicable to the year 1929 reduced by joint resolution of Congress. 1 National Income and Its Composition, vol. 1, p. 1837 (by Nationa! Bureau of Economic Research, New York, N. Y.). § Statistics of Income, pt. I, Historical Summaries, 1938 (U. 8. Bureau of Internal Rovenue). Notwithstanding these successive and sharp reductions in individual income tax rates from 1921 through 1929, Fed- eral tax collections on individual incomes xXCNI—App.——16 were substantially maintained—actually increasing in the latter part—due to the stimulation and incentives they gave to producing a larger national income, which steadily expanded throughout the period. A similar but more striking ef- fect of the reduced tax rates on individ- uals having annual net incomes of $25,000
A242 and over is shown by the following figures: Annual income tax Uabdilities of individuals reporting net incomes of $25,000 a year and over in taz returns filed with U. S. Treas- Millions 1Statistics of Income, pt. I, Historical Summaries, 1938 (U. 5. Bureau of Internal Revenue). Edwards Perpetual Calendar EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOSEPH R. FARRINGTON DELEGATE FROM HAWAII IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 23, 1947 Mr. FARRINGTON. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I wish to insert an article appearing in Collier’s magazine for Sep- tember 21, 1946, concerning the Edwards perpetual calendar, which is as follows: GOOD-BY FRIDAY THE 13TH—THE CALENDAR BY WHICH WE LIVE IS FAR FROM PERFECT. WHY NOT HAVE ONE BASED ON COMMON SENSE? (By Kyle Crichton) If there was anything that one might think could be counted on in this stormy world it would surely be the calendar—the ordinary, day-by-day calendar. Of course it changes by the year and you're invariably looking at 1948 instead of 1946, but the thing has been in use for centuries and has rather a right to be considered sacrosanct. However, we find to our amazement that there are people who are very much irritated by the calendar. Having arranged trips and discovered that the train had gone the day before, they are inclined to be petulant. They maintain flatly that Just because somebody ‘was a fathead away back in the ages we don’t have to put up with the nonsense. Among these people is Lt. Comdr. Willard E. Edwards, electronics officer at the Ford Island Base, Honolulu. In fact, he started being annoyed as far back as 1919 in Quincy, Mass., when he spoke up in Latin class and said the calendar gave him a pain. The teacher looked at him with a baleful eye and said, “I suppose you can do better?” Teach- ers have got away with this sophistry for years, and it is to the credit of Willard that he was not daunted. He set to work and at the age of 15 turned up with the new calen- dar you sec herewith. : Not only has Commander Edwards rear- ranged things in a mathematical way but, if his plan is accepted, he may have wrought a vital social change. Consider New Year's Day, that awful period when you're trying to recover from what happened the night before—well, under the Edwards plan there is no New Year’s Day. Or rather, there is a New Year's Day but it isn't January 1. It's e holiday, it’s always a holiday, and it’s not counted. By eliminating that sad occasion, he is able to set up © perpetual calendar that never varies an inch from year to year. If your birthday is on a Tucsday, it will con- tinue to be on a Tuesday right down to the time when you don’t care, Here are some of the features of the Ed- wards revised new civil calendar: 1. There would never again be a Friday the 18th. 2. In leap years a second day apart, called, amazingly enough, Leap Year Day, is observed petween June 31 and July 1. This could be an international summer holiday. 8. Monday would be the first day in every week instead of Sunday. Saturday and Sun- day would be the week end, a8 we always knew they were. 4. The last business day of each quarter, the ninetieth day, falls on a Saturday. That makes it swell for bookkeeping, tax reports, and inventory. The year has equal quarters of 91 days. 5. The 1st, 15th, and 30th, common pay- roll, bill-paying, and accounting days, all fall on weekdays. 6. Easter Sunday would be fixed at April 14, which is close to the original historic date and agrees with a provisional bill en- acted by the British Parliament in 1928. With a fixed Easter there would be six 8-day United States holidays every year. Anybody who objects to this is a lousy employer. 7. There are 26 weekdays tn every month, 91 days in any 8-month period, and 65 school days in each quarter. Commander Edwards feels that he is get- ting closer to action all the time. In the last few years his calendar has been endorsed by business groups, educators, and newspa- pers. JoserH R. FARRINGTON, the Delegate to Congress from Hawaii, has introduced a House resolution which requests the Presi- dent to urge international adoption of the calendar. If New Year’s Eve in other climes compares even remotely with our reverent celebration, Commander Edwards’ calendar will be adopt- ed and some of us will get ourselves straight- ened out for the first time in years. Write somebody about this immediately. THE EDWARDS PERPETUAL CALENDAR This calendar has two international bolidayr—New Year’s Day, before Jan. 1, keap year day before July 1 January February bs ERoauls a tw ee a3 838 {RNs 38 BISe rr wlo Sane t iS& bY Sessa 1 New Year’s Day. Writer Finds Rightist Greece Has Greater Freedom Than Leftist Poland EXTENSION OF REMARKS Or HON. KARL E. MUNDT OF SOUTH DAKOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 23, 1947 Mr. MUNDT. Mr. Speaker, in the body of today's Recorp there will be found some highly interesting and re- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD markably informative statements about the true nature of communism and the actual objectives of those who espouse it, either wittingly or unwittingly, at home or abroad. Americans eager to know the truth are urged to read, in full, the addresses of Congressman EVSRETT DrrKsEn, of Jllinois, and Congressman JoHn McCormacx, of Massachusetts, found in the House section of the pro- ceedings of Congress as they transpired today. I also recommend that students of the CONGRESSIONAL RgecorD take care- ful note of the definitior of communism which I read into the Record when Con- gressman RANKIN yielded to me during the speech he made following the re- marks of Congressmen DIRKSEN and Mc- Cormack. That definition came from the usually reliable New York Times and conforms so precisely with that which our House Committee on Un-American Activities has been utilizing for the past 2 years that it appears the editorial writer gained his information from that source. In all events, it is a definition which every patriotic and well-informed American citizen should know and un- derstand. I now call attention, Mr. Speaker, to an article appearing in the Washington Times-Herald, the largest daily news- paper published in our Capital City. It makes some factual and illuminating ob- servations on conditions as they exist today in the war-torn countries of Poland and Greece, both of which suf- fered seriously during the Nazi invasion. Freedom and democracy, as we under- stand the terms, function in neither of these countries today, but the following article does point up some of the exces- sive oppressions which communism im- poses upon its victims. The comparisons in this article are substantiated by ob- servations and inspections made by Con- gressmen who visited in these war-weary lands last fall. The article follows: Wrirrr Pinps RIGHTIST GREECE FREER THAN Lerrist PoLAnp (By Robert Conway) Warsaw, January 14.—A comparison of political conditions in rightist Greece and leftist Poland definitely favors the monarch- ist goverment on the perimeter of Soviet Russia in eastern ° This is the considered opinion of this cor- respondent after spending last summer in Greece and on the eve of leaving Poland for another trip to the Hellenic }eninsula, This does not mean that conditions in Greece are good. But in Communist-domi- nated Poland there is more interference with civil liberties, more persecution than took place in Greece. BRITISH REPORTER AGREES For the sake of the record, this is not my opinion alone. Christopher Buckley, of the London Daily Telegraph, who also reported on Greece, agrees with me on all points. On numerous occasions I have had oppor- tunity to stress these points to varicus Com- munist leaders cf the Polish provisional gov- ernment, including Gen. Wiktor Grosz, spokesman for the foreign ministry. I told him in detail how Polish political evils ex- ceeded those in Greece. Grosz replied: “I regard as odious any comparison be- tween Poland and Greece, or Poland and Spain. A comparison between things which are not similar is not a comparison. There are abuses here, that I cannot deny, but one must always keep in mind that such abuses
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD are incidental to the achievement of a worthy object.” DETAILED COMPARISON This accurately reflects the Communist and pseudo-Communist argument. Here is the detailed comparison of Greece and Poland: 1. Freedom of speech: The Greeks, despite unquestionable intimidations, enjoy greater freedom of speech. Even Greek Communists express their opinions—in restaurants, side- walk cafes, and private homes—with some degree of assurance. 2. Freedom of assemblage: Prior to, during, and after the Greek elections and referendum on the return of the King all parties were permitted to hold political meetings. In Poland the Peasant Party has been unable to obtain permission to hold a meeting even inside a hall in Warsaw. 8. Freedom of the domestic press: Greek Communists were allowed to publish their papers without prior censorship, although such publications were monitored and the editors held responsible for their contents. In Poland, however, the opposition press is strictly censored and forbidden even to re- port the killings of Stanislaw Mikolajczyk's followers. On the other hand, the Polish Government press, day after day, publishes reports of out- rages against law and order. In Greece the Communist press was actually allowed to print what most people considered vastly exaggerated reports of police murders of Democrats, and to issue flat denials of gov- ernment statistics on civil war casualties in Greece. Such freedom is not conceivable in Poland, where even the fact that the United States and Britain have protested against election conditions has not been made known to the Polish public. CORRESPONDENTS FRET. IN GREECE 4. Freedom of the foreign press: Foreign correspondents have been arrested on several occasions in Poland and have been warned to accept government guidance in the search for truth. This has not occurred in Greece, where, for example, this correspondent visited jails and traveled wherever he wanted to and contacted political bandits without once be- ing taken into custody. In Poland, although I was specifically promised similar freedom, I was arrested and held for 30 hours, and since then have been unable to enter jails to investigate conditions. 5. Political persecutions by the gendar- merie: Poland's security police under a Com- munist minister of security {s more efficient than the Greek police. However, both are cruel according to the testimony of victims. 6. Rights of trial and habeas corpus: These fundamental rights under the American con- ception of justice have been scrapped in both countries. 7. The right to vote: This is interfered with to a certain extent in both Greece and Poland, but the wholesale elimination of names from registration lists which occurred in Poland never took place in Greece, 8. The right of all parties to enter candi- dates: The wholesale elimination of candi- dates which occurs in Poland never took place in Greece. High Import Levy Favored EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HUGH D. SCOTT, JR. OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 23, 1947 Mr. HUGH D. SCOTT, JR. Mr Speaker, under leave to extend my ree marks in the Recorp, I include a news item from the Philadelphia Evening Bulletin of January 21, 1947, reporting the results of its poll on the subject of importation of products of other coun- tries which can be sold at prices lower than our cost of production. This poll of a cross section of the city’s adults reveals a strong sentiment for the pro- tection of American industry and em- plorment opportunities for labor. The news item follows: THE BULLETIN POLL—HIGH IMPORT LEVY FA- VORED 7 TO 3-—DUTY TO PROTECT UNITED STATES LABOR MOST STRONGLY BACKED BY UNION MEMBERS (By Paul Trescott) Philadelphians are still wedded firmly to the idea of the protective tariff. Seven out of ten adults in the city oppose the idea of bringing in goods which can be made and sold at a lower price than they can be manufactured in this country. This is a margin of better than 8 to 1 of those with opinions, for 22 percent oppose the idea, and 8 percent have no opinion. When interviewers for the Bulletin poll talked to a cross section of the city’s adults they did not mention the word “tariff,” which it was felt would not be universally understood. Instead, the question was worded this way: “Some countries can sell certain products more cheaply than we can. Would you favor a policy of letting these products come into this country and be sold here at a price which is lower than we can make and sell them for?” The answers: Men Women All Percent | Fercent | Percent Yes.. 19 24 22 No. 73 67 70 No opinion... 8 8 Members of labor unions feel much more strongly about keeping out the products of other countries that might undersell us than do nonunion members. Here is the break-down of answers by union member- ship: Non- union Percent | Percent 15 23 73 au 12 8 Hearings on the continuance of reciprocal trade treaties, under which we exchange goods with other countries, were begun in Congress last week. Despite the strength of local opinion on the question of bringing in goods, the fact remains that many countries can buy our products only if we take theirs in return. Political and Economic Encirclement of Greece Grows Tighter EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. RAYMOND S. SPRINGER OF INDIANA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 23, 1947 Mr. SPRINGER. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my own remarks in the A243 Recorp, I include therein an article writ- ten by Mr. Sotarios Nicholson, of Wash- ington, D. C. The article follows: Capital authorities observe that the con- clusion of an economic pact between Soviet- dominated Yugoslavia and her similarly con- trolled neighbor, Albania, marks one more step toward the political and economic en- circlement of Greece. This tactic, an addi- tional element in the gigantic pincers move- ment directed by Russia against the ravaged Hellenic monarchy since the end of the war, further marks a move toward the ultimate Soviet aim of a South Slavic Federation of States, With Greece beset by cabinet difficulties and with her western allies having lost the Initiative, the Soviet strategy has taken the Offensive both in the above manner and in the hase implication made by Albania that Greece, rather than Albania, was responsible for the mining of the Corfu Channel. This mining led to the loss last October of two British destroyers, Saumarez and Volage, which went down carrying 44 men, and to the charge placed before the United Nations by Britain that Albania laid the mines, which were of a type left behind by the Ger- muns during the retreat from the Balkans. Diplomatic observers note that the eco- nomic anschluss between Albania and Yugo- Slavia is of far-reaching proportions, and will make Albania virtually a puppet prov- ince of the biggest of Russia's three Red proteges, Yugoslavia. This newest treaty be- tween Tito and Albania’s Premier Hoxha makes Yugoslavia a partner in every impor- tant branch of the latter’s economy by, first, establishing a customs union of the two countries, and, secondly, equalizing their cur- rencies. The customs union maneuver abol- ishes the economic frontier between the two countries, setting up an Albania-Yugoslavia commission in the former country to admin- ister the customs jointly. American econo- mists interpret the monetary system move as just falling short of establishing a single monetary system for the two countries. Other less sweeping but nevertheless im- portant factors in the Hoxha-Tito merger which now threatens Greek political and economic freedom are: 1. Yugoslavia will furnish technicians to help further Albanian agriculture. 2. Yugoslavia will also furnish technical aid to help Albania produce textiles, metals, and reconstruction materials. 3. Tito will extend credit to Albania for the purpose of creating consumer goods indus- tries. 4. Tito will strengthen Albanian economy by establishing companies backed by a com- bination of Albanian and Yugoslavian capital. 5. Not to be overlooked in this Russian- abetted anschluss between Tito and Hoxha is the fact that it tightens Tito’s hold on Albania’s oil flelds, which produced 1,500,000 barrels of oil in 1940, and are estimated to have a reserve of 25,000,000 additional barrels. In the eyes of Washington officials, the political significance of this Slavic pact is interpreted as a Stalin take-off on Hitler's policy, “in unity there is strength.” By uniting Albania with Yugoslavia, he joins two relatively small countries into a power- ful lever that can be used against demo- cratically minded Greece, and against the whole of southern Europe. Albanian implications that Greeks might have laid the mines that struck British ships in Corfu Channel are but a part of the systematic and intense application by the Reds of a smear campaign against the non- Slavic Hellenes. The attack made by the Albanian newspaper, Besketari, are said by some to be similar to the smear technique used by Yugoslavian and Bulgarian news- papers, and to be a planned attempt to re- verse Greece's position from an accusing na- tion to an accused one.
A244 Protection Against Foot-and-Mouth Disease EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. FRANK A. BARRETT OF WYOMING IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 23, 1947 Mr. BARRETT. Mr. Speaker, if your next door neighbor’s home is on fire, of course, you help him to put it out. If the wind is blowing toward your home you keep your eye out for flying sparks. Well, Mr. Speaker, that is precisely the posi- tion of the American livestock industry today. Mexico is on fire with foot-and- mouth disease. It has broken out over a broad area from Veracruz to Mexico City. Over a million head of cattle have been exposed. In order to meet the situation, perhaps, every single head of cattle in that in- fected area should be killed and buried. Certainly a strict quarantine should be imposed on that immense area, and Un- cle Sam will have to foot the bill, or at least, a great deal of it. We must do it to protect ourselves and I will tell you why. The investment in livestock in this country is equal to the combined invest- ment in the steel and automobile indus- tries. With an investment of that char- acter we simply cannot take the chance of foot-and-mouth disease spreading like wild fire over this country. Mr. Speaker, over the years, radio commentators, writers, and others have led the American people to believe that the sanitary embargo which prevented beef and lamb exports from South Amer- ica to this country was a subterfuge and, in fact, an economic barrier. Now, then, Mr. Speaker, the American people will have to unlearn everything these propaganda artists have told them. But we will be forced to pay through the nose for the concrete proof. Foot-and-mouth disease exists all over the world wherever cattle and sheep are produced, with the exception of the North American Continent, West Indies, Cuba, Australia, and New Zealand. On eight occasions since the turn of the twentieth century, we have had out- breaks in this country of foot-and-mouth disease. Each time, by prompt work of our Bureau of Animal Industry, it has been stamped out as quickly as possible. Dr. John R. Mohler, for many years Chief of the Bureau of Animal Industry, has estimated that the entire cost to the livestock industry and to the State and Federal Governments cooperating in stamping out the disease in these eight outbreaks, exceeds $200,000,000. The 1914 outbreak was the most serious and widespread and it was necessary to kill 172,222 head of cattle, hogs, and sheep in 22 States, at a cost of nearly $6,000,000. The livestock killed in that outbreak in the 10 larger States was as follows: IIli- nois, 78,566; Pennsylvania, 26,306; Ohio, 12,142; Massachusetts, 8,238; Michigan, 1,877; Indiana, 7,050; New York, 6,545; Wisconsin, 4.703; Kentucky, 4,025; Iowa, 3,914, Foot-and-mouth disease attacks cattle, hogs, sheep, and goats, The dis- ease is highly infectious and when once started spreads with great rapidity. The nature of the disease is such that every object with which the diseased anima) comes in contact becomes a possible source of infection from which other ani- mals or humans may spread the disease. Infected animals coming into a clean herd, of course, are main carriers of the disease but it is generally believed that next in importance to the infected ani- mal and product therefrom, that man can carry the germ and spread the dis- ease on his shoes or clothing. The Cali- fornia outbreak in 1929 was directly traced to garbage brought ashore from a ship just returned from Argentina and, it should be noted here, that this was in violation of the existing Bureau of Ani- mal] Industry orders. With the exception of the instances noted above, we have always had an ocean between us and countries where foot-and-mouth disease was prevalent. Now, suddenly, we find an outbreak in our next-door neighbor, the Republic of Mexico. The origin of the infection is of particular interest in view of the re- peated charges that the sanitary em- bargo against South American meat was &@ mere pretext used by the livestock in- terests to prevent competition from those countries that made no effort to stamp out foot-and-mouth disease. The dis- ease came to Mexico through the impor- tation of Brahma bulls from Brazil. A relatively small shipment, about 140 head, was received in October 1945. Our Bureau of Animal Industry immediately protested the acceptance of this ship- ment as being in violation of the sanitary treaty between this country and Mexico. The protests were ignored, and after a brief quarantine period in the harbor of Veracruz, the bulls were allowed to land, and of these 18 head were moved into the southern part of Texas. There is no record that this first shipment of bulls brought foot-and-mouth disease with them, and the few head now in Texas are under close quarantine and supervision. On April 10, 1946, a much larger ship- ment, 327 head, left Brazil for Mexico, and despite strenuous protests of our Bureau of Anima) Industry, were allowed to unload on the same island near Veracruz. The commercial cattle breeders in northern Mexico joined in the protest. Ata conference in Los Angeles late in July between representatives of our Department of Agricrlture and of the Mexican Department of Agriculture, it was agreed that these bulls would either be returned to Brazil or shipped to Eu- rope for relief purposes. However, the Mexican authorities permitted these bulls to move from the quarantined is- land to the mainiand, and they were placed on a ranch in the State of Vera- cruz. In about 3 weeks’ time after the bulls were moved to this ranch, foot-and- mouth disease broke out among them and among other cattle on this ranch. Unfortunately, the Mexican Government did not let us know of this outbreak for about 2 months, and it was not until December 18 that our Bureau of Animal Industry learned of the situation, and APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD not until December 26 last that the dis- ease was positively diagnosed by experts of our Bureau of Animal Industry as foot-and-mouth disease. Since that time several officials of our Bureau of Animal Industry have spent 2 weeks or more in Mexico survey- ing the situation in order to help the Mexican Government eradicate or check the spread of the disease. That survey is now completed, snd I am advised that Dr. Fladness, the Assistant Chief of th Bu-eau, left for Mexicc City last night for a final conference with Mexican of- ficials. Upon his return to Washington, the Department of Agriculture will make its recommendations to the Congress. I was pleased to know that our Committee on Agriculture had appointed a subcom- mittee, with the Honorable Gzorce W. GIt.ig as chairman, to make a thorough study of this entire matter. I am con- fident that under Dr. Giuuig’s able lead- ership the problem will be handled ex- peditiously. Unfortunately, much time has been lost, and it is now understood that the infection has spread to at least eight States in the vicinity of Mexico City and Veracruz. I want to emphasize first that this is not a human-health problem. While foot-and-mouth disease is transmissible to humans, it is only on rare occasions that this is observed. Secondly, that the livestock industry of this country simply cannot exist with foot-and-mouth dis- ease. In Argentina, where it has long been prevalent, they have large alfalfa fields on which the cattle run during many months of the year. On soft feed of this kind, the effect of the disease is far less serious than it would be under other conditions. In the northern and western part of this country, where cat- tle are on dry feed for C to 8 months of the year, the situation would be entirely different, and under the range conditions of the West, where cattle must travel long distances for feed and water, the situa- tion would be such that the cattle indus- try could not operate profitably. We must keep this country free of foot- and-mouth disease whatever the cost. I do not know what the program of the Bureau of Animal Industry and the Com- mittee on Agriculture will recommend, but it is absolutely imperative that we do everything possible to protect against this alarming situation. We must help Mexico to keep the disease from spread- ing into the northern Mexico States, for the very simple reason that if it ever gets up to our borders it will be practically impossible to prevent the disease from spreading to our country, no matter how tightly the borders may be closed. The disease can be carried by birds or by wild animals, as well as on clothing of human beings or packing materials, and in many other different ways. If it ever invades northern Mexico and is allowed to be- come established there, then we will have a constant batile to keep it out of our own.country. It is a distinct threat, even though now it is a distance of several hundred miles from the nearest infected territory to our own borders. Let us keep it at that distance and render every aid in our power to our sister Republic to eventually stamp it out.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The Bronx—A Seaport EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. DAVID M. POTTS OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 23, 1947 Mr. POTTS. Mr. Speaker, under per- mission granted me to extend my re- marks in the Recorp, I wish to bring to the attention of the people not only of Bronx County but of all the people of our country that Bronx County has every facility needed for a major seaport. Situated, as Bronx County is, along the East River and Long Island Sound, it is readily and easily accessible to the lanes uniting our country and Europe by water transport. All during the war, large convoys of ocean-going vessels were made up in Long Island Sound and Bronx County docks were used by large ocean-going vessels. In immediate proximity to those docks are great railroad yards, which could facilitate the movement of freight to and from those docks with ease. We in Bronx County feel that the Na- tion as a whole would benefit by the economies which would be realized by utilizing the facilities of Bronx County as a major seaport. In compliance with the admonition in the Bronx Home News to keep everlast- ingly at it, Isubmit, herewith, that news- paper’s editorial appearing in its edition of January 15, 1947, which sets forth very well the position which the people of Bronx County take concerning their seaport: For A BETTER BRONX—REPRESENTATIVE POTTS JOINS THE FIGHT FOR A BRONX SEAPORT The drive for a Bronx seaport has been under way for a quarter of a century. The aim is to spur Federal, State, and municipal governments and private enters prise toward every possible degree and man- ner of participation in upbuilding of the borough’s East River-Long Island Sound water front. WE'RE ENTITLED TO IT Deep-water channels and other natural advantages, as well as easy proximity to the Atlantic and coastal lanes, entitle our water front to a major role within the port of New York. Nevertheless, the role remains minor and the Bronx maritime vision remains unreal- ized because through the years borough civic and political effort have managed to win but a fraction of the development sought. Some notable advances have occurred, but the biggest and hardest part of the task lies ahead. We are therefore happy to note that the borough's only Republican Congressman, Representative Potrs, is moving to renew the drive. First of his party to be elected from the borough in decades, he announces de- termination to pitch in for an objective in which he can count on solid nonpartisan co- operation from his three Bronx Democratic colleagues, an objective for which Bronx Democrats themselves have campaigned. A VANTAGE POINT Named to a post on the House Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee, Representa- tive Potts hails this as providing a point of vantage for the fight. We look to him, there- fore, to make his views heard and felt. As a member of the new Public Works Com- mittee, whose purview includes river: and harbor improvements, Democratic Repre- sentative BUCKLEY will also be expected to put in a good word at all opportunities. The Republican majority’s budget-cutting intentions may put formidable obstacles in the way—and Representative PoTTs, os a freshman Congressman, will scarcely be in a position to wield strong influence. Never- theless, by asserting and reasserting Bronx claims, he can keep the project constantly alive. . Ports points out that “the future of Bronx industry and employment” would surely be enhanced by local port development suffici- ent to bring ocean vessels here and to make the Bronx a cargo-receiving and transship- ping center. More docks, warehouses, and industrial plants along the borough’s easterly water front would be a positive contribution toward borough-wide prosperity. - Some benefit must also accrue toward the country as a whole, he maintains. Federal aid can play a prime part in real- ization of Bronx seaport aspirations. When- ever it comes, it will be welcome. Repre- sentative Potts can be certain that his efforts in that direction will have all Bronx support and appreciation. St. Croix & Bayfield Railroad EXTENSION OF nREMARKS HON. FRANK L. CHELF OF KENTUCKY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, Junuary 23, 1947 Mr. CHELF. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I in- clud: the following address of Hon. J. Proctor Knott, of Kentucky, delivered in the House on June 27, 1871: Mr. Knorr. Mr. Speaker, if I could be actu- ated by any conceivable inducement to he- tray the sacred trust reposed in me by those to whose generous confidence I am indebted for the honor of a seat on this floor; if I could be influenced by any possible consideration to become instrumental in giving away, in violation of their Known wishes, any por- tion of their interest in the public domain for the mere promotion of any railroad en- terprise whatever, I should certainly feel a strong inclination to give this measure my most earnest and hearty support; for I am assured that its success would materially enhance the pecuniary prosperity of some of the most valued friends I have on earth; friends for whose accommodation I would be willing to make almost any sacrifice not involving my personal honor or my fidelity as the trustee of an express trust. And that fact of itself would be sufficient to counter- vail almost any objection I might entertain to the passage of this bill not inspired by an imperative and inexorable sense of public duty. But, independent of the seducive in- fluences of private friendship, to which I admit I am, perhaps, as susceptible as any of the gentlemen I see around me, the in- trinsic merits of the measure itself are of such an extraordinary character as to com- mend it most strongly to the favorable con- sideration of every Member of this House, myself not excepted, notwithstanding my constituents, in whose behalf alone I am acting here, would not be benefited by its passage one particle more than they would A245 be by a project to cultivate an orange grove on the bleakest summit of Greenland’s icy mountains. |Laughter.] Now, sir, as to those great trunk lines of railway, spanning the continent from ocean to ocean, I confess my mind has never been fully made up. It is true they may afford some trifling advantages to local traffic, and they may even in time become the channels of a more extended commerce. Yet, I have never been thoroughly satisfied either of the necessity or expediency of projects promising such meager results to the great body of our people. But with regard to the transcendcut merits of the gigantic enterprise contem- plated in this bill I never entertained the shadow of adoubt. [Laughter.] Years ago, when I first heard that there was somewhere in the vast terra incognita, somewhere in the bleak regions of the great Northwest, a stream of water known to the nomadic inhabitants of the neighborhood as the river St. Croix, I became satisfied that the construction of a railroad from that raging torrent to sume point in the civilized world was essential to the happiness and prosperity of the American people, if not absolutely indispensable to the perpetuity of republican institutions on this continent. {Great laughter.| I felt instinctively that the boundless resources of that prolific region of sand and pine shrubbery would never be fully developed without a railroad constructed and equipped at the expense of the Government, and perhaps not then. [Laughter.]| I had an abiding presentment that, some day or other, the people of this whole country, irrespective of party affilia- tions, regardless of sectional prejudices, and without distinction of race, color, or previous condition of servitude, would rise in their majesty and demand an outlet for the enor- mous agricultural productions of those vast and fertile pine barrens, drained in the rainy season by the surging waters of the turbid St. Croix. [Great laughter.] These impressions, derived simply and solely from the eternal fitness of things, were not only strengthened by the interesting and eloquent debate on this bill, to which I listened with so much pleasure the other day, but intensified, if possible, as I read over this morning the lively colloquy which took place on that occasion, as I find it re- ported in last Friday's Globe. I will ask the indulgence of the House while I read a few short passages, which are sufficient, in my judgment, to place the merits of the great enterprise contemplated in the measure now under discussion beyond all possible con- troversy. The honorable gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Wilson], who I believe is managing this bill, in speaking of the character of the country through which this railroad is to pass, says this: “We want to have the timber brought to us as cheaply as possible. Now, if you tie up the lands in this way, so that no title can be obtained to them—for no settler will go on these lands, for he cannot make a living— you deprive us of the benefit of that timber.” Now, sir, I would not have it by any means inferred from this that the gentleman from Minnesota would insinuate that the people out in his section desire this timber merely for the purpose of fencing up their farms so that their stock may not wander off and die of starvation among the bleak hills of the St. Croix. {Laughter.} I read it for no such purpose, sir, and make no such comment on it myself. In corroboration of this state- ment of the gentleman from Minnesota, I find this testimony given by the honorable gentleman from Wisconsin |Mr. Washburn]. Speaking of these same lands, he says: “Under the bill, as amended by my friend from Minnesota, nine-tenths of the land 1s open to actual settlers at $250 per acre; the
A246 remaining one-tenth is pine-timbered land, that is not fit for settlement, and never will be settled upon; but the timber will be cut off. I admit that it is the most valuable portion of the grant, for more of the grant fs not valuable. It is quite valueless; and if you put in this amendment of the gentle- man from Indiana you may as well just kill the bill, for no man and no company will take the grant and build the road.” I simply pause here to ask some gentleman better versed in the science of mathematics than I am to tell me if the timbered lands are in fact the most valuable portion of that sec- tion of country, and they would be entirely valueless without the timber that is on them, what the remainder of the land is worth which has no timber on it at all. [{Laughter.] But further on I find a most entertaining and instructive interchange of views between the gentleman from Arkansas, Mr. Rogers; the gentleman from Wisconsin, Mi. Wash- burn; and the gentleman from Maine, Mr. Peters, upon the subject of pine lands gen- erally, which I will tax the patience of the House to read: “Mr. Rogers. Will the gentleman allow me to ask him a question? “Mr. WasHBURN of Wisconsin. Certainly. “Mr. Rocers, Are these pine lands entirely worthless except for timber? “Mr, WasHBuRN of Wisconsin. They are generally worthless for any other purpose. I am perfectly familiar with that subject. These lands are not valuable for purposes of settlement, “Mr FARNSwortH. They will be after the timber is taken off. “Mr, WASHBURN of Wisconsin. No, sir. “Mr. Rocers. I want to know the character of these pine lands. “Mr. WASHBURN of Wisconsin. They are generally sandy, barren lands. My friend from the Green Bay district, Mr. Sawyer, is himeelf perfectly familiar with this question, and he will bear me out in what I say, that these pine timberlands are not adapted to settlement, “Mr. Rogers. The pine lands to which Iam accustomed are generally very good. What I want to know is what is the difference be- tween our pine lands and your pine lands. “Mr. Wasusurn of Wisconsin. The pine timber of Wisconsin generally grows upon barren, sandy land. The gentleman from Maine, Mr. Peters, who is familiar with pine lands, will, I have no doubt, say that pine timber grows generally upon the most barren lands. “Mr Prrers. As a general thing pine lands are not worth much for cultivation.” And further on I find this pregnant ques- tion, the joint production of the two gentle- men from Wisconsin: “Mr. Patne. Does my friend from Indiana suppose that in any event settlers will occupy and cultivate these pine lands? “Mr. WasHBURN of Wisconsin. Particularly without a railroad?” Yes, sir; “particularly without a railroad.” It will be asked after a while, I am afraid, if settlers will go anywhere unless the Govern- ment builds a railroad for them to go on. [Laughter.] I desire to call attention to only one more statement, which I think sufficient to settle the question. It is one made by the gentle- man from Wisconsin (Mr. Parng], who says: “These lands will be abandoned for the present. It may be that at some remote pe- riod there will spring up in that region a new kind of agriculture which will cause a demand for these particular lands; and they may then come into use and be valuable for agricul- tural purposes. But I know, and I cannot help thinking that my {friend from Indiana understands, that for the present and for many years to come, these pine lands can have no possible value other than that aris- ing from the pine timber which stands on them.” Now, sir, who, after listening to this em- phatic and unequivocal testimony of these intelligent, competent, and able-bodied wit- nesses {laughter}; who, that is not as incred- ulous as 8t, Thomas himself, will doubt for a moment that the Goshen of America is to be found in the sandy valleys and upon the pine-clad hills of the St. Croix? [Laughter.) Who will have the hardihood to rise in his seat on this floor and assert that, excepting the pine bushes, the entire region would not produce vegetation enough in 10 years to fat- ten a grasshopper? [Great laughter.] Where is the patriot who is willing that his country shall incur the peril of remaining another day without the amplest railroad connection with such an inexhaustible mine of agricul- tural wealth? |Laughter.] Who will answer for the consequences of abandoning a great and warlike people, in possession of a country like that, to brood over the indifference and neglect of their Government? |Laughter.] How long would it be before they would take to studying the Declaration of Independence and hatching out the damnable heresy of secession? How long before the grim demon of civil discord would rear aguin his horrid head fn our midst, “gnash loud his iron fangs and shake his crest of bristling bayonets?” {Laughter. | Then, sir, think of the long and painful process of reconstruction that must follow with its concomitant amendments to the Constitution: The seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth articles. The sixteenth, it is of course understood, is to be appropriated to those blushing damsels who are, day after day, beseeching us to let them vote, hold office, drink cocktails, ride astraddie, and do anything else the men do. [Roars of laugh- ter.| But above all, sir, let me implore you to reflect for a single moment on the deplor- able condition of -our country in case of a foreign war, with all our ports blockaded, all our cities in a state of siege, the gaunt specter of famine brooding like a hungry vulture over our starving land; our commis- sary stores all exhausted, and our famishing armies withering away in the field, a helpless prey to the insatiate demon of hunger; our Navy rotting in the docks for want of pro- visions for our gallant seamen, and we with- out any railroad communication whatever with the prolific pine thickets of the St. Croix. [Great .aughter.] Ah, sir, I could very well understand why my amiable friends from Pennsylvania |Mr. Myers, Mr. Kelley, and Mr. O'Neill] should be so earnest in their support of this bill the other day, and if their honorable colleague, my friend, Mr. Randall, will pardon the re- mark, I will say I considered his criticism of their action on that occasion as not only unjust but ungenerous. I knew they were looking forward with the far-reaching ken of enlightened statesmanship to the pitiable condition in which Philadelphia will be left unless speedily supplied with railroad con- nection in some way or other with this garden spot of the universe. [{Laughter.] And be- sides, sir, this discussion has relieved my mind of a mystery that has welghed upon it like an incubus for years. I could never understand before why there was so much excitement during the last Congress over the acquisition of Alta Vela. I could never un- derstand why it was that some of our ablest statesmen and most disinterested patriots should entertain such dark forebodings of the untold calamities that were to befall our beloved country unless we should take im- mediate possession of that desirable island. But I see now that they were laboring under the mistaken impression that the Govern- ment would need the guano to manure the public lands on the St. Croix. [Great laugh- ter.] APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Now, sir, I repeat I have been satisfied for years that if there was any portion of the inhabited globe absolutely in a suffering con- dition for want of a railroad it was these teeming pine barrens of the St. Croix. [Laughter.} At what particular point on that noble stream such a road should be com- menced I knew was immaterial, and so it seems to have been considered by the draftsman of this bill. It might be up at the spring or down at the foot log, or the water gate, or the fish dam, or anywhere along the bank, no matter where. [Laugh- ter.] But in what direction should it run, or where it should terminate, were always to my mind questions of the most painful perplexity. I could conceive of no place on God's green earth in such straitened circum- stances for railroad facilities as to be likely to desire or willing to accept such a connec- tion. [Laughter.] I knew that neither Bay- field nor Superior City would have it, for they both indignantly spurned the muni- fience of the Government when coupled with such ignominious conditions, and let this very same land grant die on their hands years and years ago rather than submit to the degradation of a direct communication by railroad with the piny woods of the St. Croix; and I knew that what the enterprising inhabitants of those giant young Cittes would refuse to take would have few charms for others, whatever their necessities or cupidity might be. [{Laughter.] Hence, as I have said, sir, I was utterly at 8 loss to determine where the terminus of this great and indispensable road should be, until T accidentally overheard some gentleman the other day mention the name of “Duluth.” [Great laughter.} Duluth! The word fell upon my ear with peculiar and indescribable charm, like the gentle murmur of a low fountain stealing forth in the midst of roses, or the soft, sweet accents of an angel's whisper in the bright, joyous dream of sleep- ing innocence. Duluth! ‘Twas the name for which my soul had panted for years, as the hart panteth for the water brooks. |Re- newed laughter.} But where was Duluth? Never, in all my Hmited reading, had my vision been gladdened by seeing the celesti>1 word in print. |[Laughter.} And I felt a profounder humiliation in my ignorance that its dulcet syllables had never before ravished my delighted ear. [Roars of laughter.} I was certain the draftsman of this bill had never heard of it, or it would have been designated as one of the termini of this road. I asked my friends about it, but they knew nothing of it. I rushed to the library and examined all the maps I could find. [Laughter.] I discovered in one of them a delicate, hairlike line, diverging from the Mississippi near a place marked Prescott, which I supposed was intended to represent the river St. Croix, but I could nowhere find Duluth. Nevertheless, I was confident it existed somewhere, and that its discovery would constitute the crowning glory of the présent century, if not of all modern times. [Laugh- ter.] I Knew it was bound to exist in the very nature of things; that the symmetry and perfection of our planetary system would be incomplete without it [renewed laughter]; that the elements of material nature would long since have resolved themselves back into original chaos if there had been such a hiatus in creation as would have resulted from leay- ing our Duluth, [Roars of laughter.| In fact, sir, I was overwhelmed with the con- viction that Duluth not only existed some- where, but that wherever it was it was a great and glorious place. I was convinced that the greatest calamity that ever befell the benighted nations of the ancient world was in their having passed away without a knowl- edge of the actual existence of Duluth: that their fabled Atlantis, never seen save by the
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD hallowed vision of inspired poesy, was, in fact, but another name for Duluth; that the golden orchard of the Hesperides was but a poetical synonym for the beer gardens in the vicinity of Duluth. [Great laughter.] I was certain that Herodotus had died a miserable death because in all his travels and with all his geographical research he had never heard of Duluth, [Laughter.} I Knew that if the immortal spirit of Homer could look down from another heaven than that created by his own cclestial genius upon the long lines of pligrims from every nation of the earth to the gushing fountain of poesy opened by the touch of his magic wand, if he could be per- mitted to behold the vast assemblage of grand and glorious productions of the lyric art called into being by his own inspired strains, he would weep tears of bitter anguish that instead of lavishing all the stores of his mighty genius upon the fall of Ilion it had not been his more blessed lot to crystallize in deathless song the rising glories of Duluth. [Great and continued laughter.) Yet, sir, had it not been for this map, Kindly furnished me by the Legislature of Minnesota, I might have gone down to my obscure and humble grave in an agony of despair, because I could nowhere find Duluth. [Renewed laughter. |] Had such been my melancholy fate, I have no doubt that with the last feeble pulsation of my breaking heart, with the last faint ex- halation of my fleeting breath, I should have whispered, “Where is Duluth?” [Roars of laughter. | But, thanks to the beneficence of that band of ministering angels who have their bright abodes in the far-off capital of Min- nesota, just as the agony of my anxiety was about to culminate in the frenzy of despair, this blessed map was placed in my hands; and as I unfolded it a resplendent scene of ineffable glory opened before me, such as I imagine burst upon the enraptured vision of the wandering per! through the opening gates of paradise. [Renewed laughter.] There, there for the first time, my enchanted eye rested upon the ravishing word “Duluth.” This map, sir, is intended, as it appears from its title, to illustrate the position of Duluth in the United States; but if gentle- men will examine it, I think they will con- cur with me in the opinion that it is far too modest in its pretensions. It not only illus- trates the position of Duluth in the United States, but exhibits its relations with all cre- ated things. It even goes further than this: It lifts the shadowy veil of futurity and af- fords us a view of the golden prospects of Duluth far along the dim vista of ages yet to come. If gentlemen will examine it they will find Duluth not only in the center of the map, but represented in the center of a series of concentric circles 100 miles apart, and some of them as much as 4,000 miles in diameter, embracing alike in their tremendous sweep the fragrant savannas of the sunlit South and the eternal solitudes of snow that man- tle the itce-bound North, [Laughter.] How these circles were produced is perhaps one of those primordial mysteries that the most skillful paleologist will never be able to ex- plain. |Renewed laughter.] But the fact is, sir, Duluth 1s preeminently a central place for I am told by gentlemen who have been so reckless of their own personal safety as to venture away into those awful regions where Duluth is supposed to be that it is so exactly in the center of the visible universe that the sky comes down at precisely the same dis- tance all around it. [Roars of laughter.] I find by reference to this map that Duluth is situated somewhere near the west- ern end of Lake Superior, but as there is no dot or other mark indicating its exact loca- tion I am unable to say whether it is actually confined to any particular spot, or whether “it is just lying around there loose.” [Re- newed laughter.] I really cannot tell whether it is one of those ethereal creations of intellectual frostwork, more intangible than the rose-tinted clouds of a summer sunset; one of those airy exhalations of the speculator’s brain, which I am told are ever flitting in the form of towns and cities along those Ines of railroad, built with Govern- ment subsidies, luring the unwary settler as the mirage of the desert lures the famish- ing traveler on, and ever on, until it fades away in the darkening horizon, or whether it is a real, bona fide, substantial city, all staked off, with the lots marked with their owners’ names, like that proud commercial metropolis recently discovered on the desira- ble shores of San Domingo. |Laughter.] But, however that may be, I am satisfied Duluth is there, or thereabout, for I see it stated here on this map that it is exactly 3,990 miles from Liverpool [laughter], though I have no doubt, for the sake of con- venience, it will be moved back 10 miles so as to make the distance un even 4,000. [Re- newed laughter.] Then, sir, there is the climate of Duluth, unquestionably the most salubrious and de- lightful to be found anywhere on the Lord's earth. Now, I have always been under the impression, as I presume other gentlemen have, that in the region around Lake Su- perior it was cold enough for at least 9 months in the year to freeze the smokestack off a locomotive. [Great laughter.| But I see it represented on this map that Duluth is situated exactly halfway between the latitudes of Paris and Venice, so that gentle- men who have inhaled the exhilarating airs of the one or basked in the golden sunlight of the other may see at a glance that Duluth must be a place of untold delights [laugh- ter], a terrestrial paradise, fanned by the balmy zephyrs of an eternal spring, clothed in the gorgeous sheen of ever-blooming flowers, and vocal] with the silvery melody of nature's choicest songsters. |Laughter.] In fact, sir, since I have seen this map I have no doubt that Byron was vainly en- deavoring to convey some faint conception of the delicious charms of Duluth when his poetic soul gushed forth in the rippling strains of that beautiful rhapsody— “Know ye the land of the cedar and vine, Where the flowers ever blossom, the beams ever shine; Where the light wings of Zephyr, oppressed with perfume, Wax faint o'er the gardens of Gul in her bloom; Where the citron and olive are fairest of fruit, And the voice of the nightingale never is mute; Where the tints of the earth and the hues of the sky, In color though varied, in beauty may vie?” {Laughter.] As to the commercial resources of Duluth, sir, they are simply illimitable and inexhaust- ible, as is shown by this map. I see it stated here that there is a vast scope of territory, embracing an area of over 2,000,000 square miles, rich in every element of material wealth and commercial prosperity, all tribu- tary to Duluth. Look at it, sir, [pointing to the map.] Here are inexhaustible mines of gold, immeasurable veins of silver, impene- trable depths of boundless forests, vast coal measures, wide, extended plains of richest pasturage, all, all embraced in this vast terri- tory, which must, in the very nature of things, empty the untold treasures of its commerce into the lap of Duluth. [Laughter.] Look at it sir [pointing to the map], do not you see from these broad, brown lines drawn around this immense territory that the enterprising inhabitants of Duluth in- tend some day to enclose it all in one vast A247 corral, so that its commerce will be bound to go there whether it would or not? [Great laughter.] And here, sir [still point- ing to the map], I find within a convenient distance the Piegan Indians, which, of all the many accessories to the glory of Duluth, I consider by far the most inestimable. For, sir, I have been told that when the small- pox break out among the women and chil- dren of that famous tribe, as it sometimes does, they afford the finest subjects in the world for the strategical experiments of any enterprising military hero who desires to im- prove himself in the noble art of war flaughter| especially for any valiant lieu. tenant general whose “Trenchant blade, Toledo trusty, For want of fighting has grown rusty, And eats into itself for lack Of somebody to hew and hack.” [Great laughter.] Sir, the greut conflict now raging in the Old World has presented a phenomenon in military science unprecedented in the an- nals of mankind, a phenomenon that has re- versed all the traditions of the past as it hus disappointed all the expectations of the pres- ent. A great and warlike people, renowned alike for their skill and valor, have been swept away before the triumphant advance of an inferior foe, like autumn stubble before a hurricane of fire. For aught I know the next flash of electric fire that shimmers along the ocean cable may tell us that Paris, with every fiber quivering with the agony of impotent despair, writhes bencath the conquering heel of her loathed invader. Ere another moon shall wax and wane the brightest star in the galaxy of nations may fall from the zenith of her glory never to rise again. Ere the modest violets of carly spring shall ope their beauteous eyes the genius of civilization may chant the wailing requiem of the proudest Nationality the world has ever seen, as she scatters her withered and tear-moistened lilies o'er the bloody tomb of butchered France. But, sir, I wish to ask if you honestly and candidly believe that the Dutch would have ever overrun the French in that kind of style if General Sheridan had not gone over there and told King William and Von Moltke how he had managed to whip the Piegan Indians. [Great laughter.] And here, sir, recurring to this map, I find in the immediate vicinity of the Piegans “vast herds of buffalo” and “immense fields of rich wheat lands.” {Here the hammer fell.] [Many cries: "Go on!" “Go on!"} The Speaker. Is there objection to the gentleman from Kentucky continuing his remarks? The Chair hears none. The gen- tleman will proceed. Mr. Knorr. I was remarking, sir, upon these vast wheat flelds represented on this map in the immediate neighborhood of the buf- faloes and the Plegans, and was about to say that the idea of there being these immense wheat flelds in the very heart of a wilder- ness, hundreds and hundreds of miles beyond the utmost verge of civilization, may appcar to some gentlemen as rather incongruous, as rather too great a strain on the blankets of veracity. But to my mind there is no dif- ficulty in the matter whatever. The phe- nomenon is very easily accounted for. It is evident, sir, that the Piegans sowed that wheat there and plowed it in with buffulo bulls. [Great laughter.} Now, sir, this for- tunate combination of buffaloes and Piegans, considering their relative positions to cach other and to Duluth, as they are arrangcd on this map, satisfies me that Duluth is destined to be the beef market of the world. Here, you will observe [pointing to the map], are the buffaloes, directly between the Piegans and Duluth, and here, tight on the road to Duluth, are the Creeks. Now, sir,
A248 when the buffaloes are sufficiently fat from grazing on those immense wheat fields you see it will be the easiest thing in the world for the Piegans to drive ther: on down, stay all night with their friends, the Creeks, and go into Duluth in the morning. [Great laughter.] I think I see them now, Sir, a vast herd of buffaloes, with their heads down, their eyes glaring, their nostrils dialated, their tongues out, and their tails curled over their backs, tearing along toward Duluth, with about a thousand Piegans on their grass- bellied ponies, yelling at their heels. {Great laughter.] On they come. And as they sweep past the Creeks they join in the chase, and away they all go, yelling, bellowing, rip- ping, and tearing along, amid clouds of dust, tintil the last buffalo is safely penned in the etockyards of Duluth. {Shouts of laughter.] Sir, I might stand here for hours and hours, and expatiate with rapture upon the worgeous prospects of Duluth, as depicted upon this map. But human life is too short and the time of this House far too valuuble to allow me to linger longer upon the delight- ful theme. |Laughter.| I think every gen- tleman on this floor is as well satisfied as I am that Duluth is destined to become the commercial metropolis of the universe, and that this road should be built at once. Iam fully persuaded that no patriotic Representa- tive of the American people, who has a proper appreciation of the associated glories of Duluth and the 8t. Croix, will hesitate a moment to say that every able-bodied female in the land between the ages of 18 and 45 who ts in favor of women's rights should be drafted and set to work upon this great work without delay. [Roars of laughter.] Never- theless, sir, it grieves my very soul to be com- pelled to say that I cannot vote for the grant of lands provided for in this bill. Ah, sir, you can have no conception of the poignancy of my anguish that J am deprived of that blessed privilege. (Laughter.] There are two insuperable obstacles in the way. In the first place my constituents, for whom I am acting here, have no more inter- est in this road than they have in the great question of culinary taste now perhaps agi- tating the public mind of Dominica, as to whether the illustrious commissioners who recently left this capital for that free and enlightened republic would be better fricas- seed, boiled, or roasted [great laughter]; and in the second place these lands, which I am asked to give away, alas, are not mine to bestow. My relation to them is simply that of trustee to an express trust. And shall I ever betray that trust? Never, sir. Rather perish Duluth. [Shouts of laughter.] Per- ish the paragon of cities. Rather let the freezing cyclones of the bleak Northwest bury it forever beneath the eddying sands of the raging St. Croix, [Great laughter.] Repeal Silver Purchase Acts EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EMANUEL CELLER OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 23, 1947 Mr. CELLER. Mr. Speaker, I have of- fered this day two bills to repeal the non- sensical Silver Purchase Acts. Recent developments have clearly in- dicated that the greed of a few mine owners, abetted by a powerful lobby, have sown seeds of their own destruction. Not satisfied with the exorbitant price of 71.11 cents per fine ounce as fixed by Federal statute, the silverites demanded and received $0.50 cents per fine ounce. The new law requires the Treasury to buy silver mined by American companies at 90.50 cents and permits it to sell its surplus silver at the same price. This was practically a hold-up. Cer- tain gentlemen in high places success- fully urged holding up every piece of legislation until they got this increase, While the contest was on in the Senate, producers of silver held up their supplies. They were awaiting the extra gravy spelled out by the new law. Industrial users of silver went without. They had to resort to melting down silver dollars to get the much needed metal. Then came the boomerang. Countries like China, New Mexico, and India found the new prices too attractive. India re- placed its silver coins with nickel and sent the silver to the United States inar- ket. Britain followed suit, substituting copper-nickel tokens for silver coins and also dumped its silver in the American market, tons of which are now begging for buyers. Silver came pouring in from Spain, China, Russia, the Near East, Mexico, from the four corners of the earth. The price dropped. The market price today fixed by the silver brokers is 18¥Y, cents. This is almost 12 cents below the price fixed by law. The end is not yet in sight. The price will go lower. Meanwhile, Uncle Sam must pay 90.5 cents per ounce. Silver needs no props like the Silver Purchase Acts. Uncle Sam has over 3,000,000,000 ounces stored away at West Point. ‘Uncle Sam digs it out of the ground with one hand and puts it back with the other. Silver must take its place unafraid and must compete on its own with other metals. We must no longer worship sil- ver as a fetish. The Silver Purchase Acts must be repealed. Electricity for Farmers—The Threat to Rural Electrification EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. ESTES KEFAUVER OF TENNESSEE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 23, 1947 Mr. KEFAUVER. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- orD, I include the following address of Clyde T. Ellis, executive manager, Na- tional Rural Electric Cooperative Asso- ciation, at Tennessee Rural Electric Co- operative Association banquet, Nashville, January 14, 1947: Mr. Toastmaster and fellow cooperators, the enemy’s battle of the bulge is on. He is striving with all his might to cut us in two, to divide and conquer us. The tactic is not new, but it promises to typify the opposition’s '47 campaign against us and is taking on ominous proportions, The battle of '46 was a new maneuver, in that never before had the enemy met us, head-on in congressional committees, Be- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ginning with the Poage bill hearings in Oc- tober 1945, the power companies have ap- peared against us at every opportunity. Farmers are the most peaceable people on earth. That’s one reason they are farmers; they like the freedom of country life. They never want a fight—which is one reason only half of them have electricity today. They didn't want all the power fights that were thrust upon them last year, and they don't want more this year. They have never at- tacked, nor instigated trouble with, the com- mercial power companies. But neither will they run from a fight. They didn’t run last year—and they won most of the engagements—although we must admit that a few times we got as jittery as an expectant father. To be able to properly defend ourselves— and I am talking about REA, the co-ops, TVA and every other phase of the power program, for we are all one in a given area, whether we like it or not—it is necessary that we keep our eyes on the broad objectives, the great und everlasting good to be achieved. To be able to better comprehend these ob- jectives and the complexities of our daily Problems at all times, it is well to keep ever before us the background out of which they grew, and continue to grow. To review them here this evening would be impossible, but I do want to recall a few facts of local in- terest from America’s power program history. The Tennessee Valley Authority and the Rural Electrification Administration both were conceived, in no small part, out of two notable accidents. Both might have come into existence in some form at some time, but they well might not have come in our time. The first of those accidents is related by the “Father of REA and TVA,” the late Senator Norris, in his autobiography, The Fighting Liberal. There he says, and I quote, ‘My association with TVA was purely accidental and, at the start, very much against my personal wishes.” He goes on to record how, shortly after World War I, the question of completing Wilson Dam was referred, over his protests, to the Committes on Agriculture, of which he was chairman. He continues, “I found myself confronted with a _ responsibility which I did not want,” but “I went to work.” Thus by the accident or coincidence of a committee assignment he became the vic- tim and ultimately the champion of the complete development of the mighty Ten- nessee. Twice Senator Norris got TVA bills passed through both Houses of Congress only to see them vetoed, first by Coolidge and then by Hoover, The White House was the barrier, and there is where the second accident comes in. We may call it the accident or coincidence of Franklin Roosevelt's affliction with infantile paralysis; or of his seeking treatment at Warm Springs; or even more simply, of his having so much time on his hands that he noticed even the minutest things about him—and enjoyed them all, save one. 1 quote from a speech he made at Barnesville, Ga.: “There was only one discordant note in that first stay of mine at Warm Springs. When the first-of-the-month bill came in for electric light for my little cottage I found that the charge was 18 cents a kilowatt hour—about four times as much as I paid in Hyde Park, N. Y. That started my long study of proper public utility charges for elec- tric current and the whole subject of getting electricity into farm homes.” Thus we have it in thei: own words that both Norris and Roosevelt—the two great leaders most responsible for TVA and REA— each became interested quite by accident. This is important because in each case it was a discovery that any intelligent and unprejudiced person might have made; a dis-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD covery of a dire need and the possible sat- isfaction of that need through a vast and novel program. Not by any stretch of the imagination were TVA and REA designed as steps toward some ism, as some of our dearly beloved self-interest leaders in the divide- and-conquer campaign would have the world believe. Rather they were separate and inde- pendent discoveries of the same ways and means of removing the barrier of bigness, that the people might be free to do for them- selves what no corporation was willing or able to do. They were discoveries of ways and means of stimulating and expanding our free competitive enterprise system, injecting into @ naturally monopolistic, major American in- dustry an element of competition. Free com- petitive enterprise—not merely free enter- prise, for free enterprise without competition is monopoly—free competitive enterprise is what has made America great. You know the story they tell on Ben Prank- lin, how in his youth, he was stalking down that narrow street in Philadelphia—if he was stalking down any Philadelphia street it was a narrow one—with a long loaf of bread un- der his arm, and a beautiful lady poked her head out of a window—I don’t know whether she smelled the bread or heard his hobnails on the cobblestones—and she made a sar- castic remrrk about how comical he looked. Well, it struck his fancy—or at least helped him get acquainted—so he got even with her. He married her and discovered electricity. Benjamin Franklin may have discovered simple electricity, but it took Franklin Roosevelt and George Norris and John Ran- kin to discover competitive electricity. REA followed TVA as logically as night fol- lows day. Any government interested in capturing for its pecple vast rescurces of low- cost hydropower wasting itself away to the sea—nonprofit wholesale power-——would also be interested in seeing it reach those people through nonprofit distribution systems, at least to the extent of providing competition. Had there not been a TVA there might never have been an REA. Senator Norris, in what some regard as perhaps his greatest speech, because, in a sort of farewell and good-by to man, it records for posterity jew- els of his intellect and eloquence which would otherwise have been lost—and I refer to his address on his way home at the end of his long career in the Senate, delivered at the first annual meeting of the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association at St. Louts, January 19, 1943 extemporaneously and without notes, in his 82d year-—Senator Norris in that masterful address said: “And I would like to remind you, my friends, we never would have had a Rural Electrification Administration if we hadn't first had a Tennessee Valley Authority, and we never would have had either one of them if it had not been for our President Roose- velt.” Why wouldn't we have had an REA without TVA? What the Senator probably meant was that except for the TVA experiment in farm distribution of electricity cooperatively be- ginning with, to quote Dave Lilienthal’s TVA—Democracy on the March, “a particular kind of TVA-inspired cooperative born in 1934 in the back of a furniture store in Cor- inth, Miss.,” Roosevelt would not have cre- ated REA by the Executive order of March 11, 1935, and without the TVA experiment and the REA experiment with cooperatives under the Executive order the REA Act of May 20, 1936, could not have been passed. Particularly because we are assembled to- night in the heart of the great crescent of the Tennessee Valley and in the birthplace of REA, both of which have captured the im- agination and inspired the hopes of mankind throughout the civilized world, it is interest- ing to observe the separate courses that TVA- financed and REA-financed co-ops have taken, These eourses have been largely par- allel, but a brief comparative analysis of a few points in contrast will best serve our purpose here. First, I want to list six advantages which TVA-financed co-ops—in and out of Tennes- see—have enjoyed over the others. Perhaps there are more, as well as disadvantages. 1. Generally, those that were TVA financed got an earlier start, thus avoiding some of the higher wartime and postwar construction costs and thus being able to cash in on more of the accelerated wartime farm revenues, 2. They enjoyed more adequate financing, for the TVA revolving fund kept them well supplied until they began borrowing from EA. 8 They were able to do a better planning and system-designing job, because of this more dependable financing. (The last three advantages apply not only to TVA-financed projects, but to all co-ops which purchase power from TVA; to those in the old Tennessee Electric Power Co.—and other acquisition—areas. For handy refer- ence hereafter, let us call them all “TVA co-ops."’) 4. TVA co-ops have enjoyed from the be- ginning an exceptionally favorable wholesale power source: adequate TVA power at cost without restrictions as to its use. 5. TVA co-ops have been less subject to the economic hazards of commercial company spite-lining and cream-skimming of their projected territories, especially after the TVA purchase of TEP Co. 6. TVA co-ops got a head start with a much higher percentage of good load centers around which to build rural lines—especially after the acquisition and division of TEP Co. and other companies. REA co-ops generally, by contrast with the TVA's, have had a terrific struggle in most Os the country, beginning long before the all-out opposition and divide-and-conquer campaigns of last year and this. 1, REA co-ops got less construction com- pleted, if, indeed, they got started at all, before the war; they lost valuable wartime revenue, and many of them, less able to absorb the burden, paid interest for years on partially completed, non-revenue-producing construction, 2. Their growth has been retarded because as a whole they have never had adequate loan funds in a single year. 8. Because of inadequate and uncertain financing they have never been able to plan scientifically. This has retarded construc- tion and is resulting in more expensive re- designing and rebuilding. 4. With the exception of Bonneville and a few smaller areas, REA co-ops have never had an adequate source of unrestricted, low-cost wholesale power, 5. In practically every other State, except Nebraska, REA co-ops have been forced into expensive, time-consuming local battles by their neighboring power companies, con- stantly harassed by foreboding threats of spite-line destruction, threats of disastrous State legislation, threats of inadequate power supply except with unmerciful restrictions— these and many others that in far too many instances have been carried out. 6. On the national front the struggle of the REA’s has been even more titanic: for loan funds, for administrative funds, for an even break in war-construction regulations, for reasonable power sources, and to stave off restrictive legislation. The inevitable result on both State and national levels was organization, primarily for purposes of defense at first. NRECA began to take form during the copper hearings in 1941. Co-op leaders had gathered in Washington from several States to deny the charge of Congressman Winter and others that the co-ops were hoarding precious copper. I met them there when, as 8 Member of Congress from Arkan- A249 sas, I appeared before the same committee to deny Winter's charges, but I knew nothing then of their discussion to form a “national.” The first I knew of NRECA was the day it was incorporated in Washington, March 20, 1942, under the Cooperative Act of Congress. I was honored to be one of a dozen or 80 invited to meet the incorporators at a little reception that evening. George Norris, John Rankin, and Bob Poage were there. Norris, RANKIN, and others had long urged such an association to organize and give concerted voice to the people back home in the ever-increasing battles. I remember the beam of happiness that radiated from Mr. Norris’ face when he in- quired how they had organized and was told that they had incorporated in exactly the same manner as REA co-ops do, by a few individuals becoming the incorporators and the first board—as required by law—but pro- viding for the democratic election of their successors at the first meeting of members and for complete, autonomous, and demo- cratic contro] thereafter. NRECA is even more democratic now, for today it has a director from each State, elected annually by the members. It is the most democratic national organization of any Kind that I know of. NRECA’s accomplishments have exceeded our fondest hopes. Many of them are intan- gible and cannot be listed, as, for instance, the good derived from day-to-day contacts with official Washington. You who attended the first annual meet- ing at St. Louis in 1943 will recall that a strong resolution was passed asking permis- sion to resume construction. A committee was appointed to follow through, and, in cooperation with REA, we got results—then and several times thereafter. All co-ops, including TVA's, benefited. In 1943, when the national board became convinced that the co-ops were being penal- ized on certain types of insurance and that there would be advantages in pooling it, they employed an insurance executive and got results. Co-ops benefited to the tune of at least $150,000 a year. In 1943, NRECA determined that the Gov- ernment was making more than $2,000,000 @ year clear profit on REA loans; that the amortization period of 25 years was too short; and that REA should be extended be- yond 1946. So it set out to get the law changed. We initiated and led the fight, and, with the help of REA and our friends in Congress, we got the interest rate reduced from an average of more than 2.6 percent to @ flat 2 percent. We got the amortization period extended to °5 years and the act made permanent. All co-ops benefited—to the ex- tent of more than 82,400,000 a year as of their September 1944 advances—and, of course, the annual saving far exceeds that today. Here is where the separate paths of TVA and REA co-ops come together. TVA co-ops had been paying a flat 344 percent on their TVA loans. Their paths had come close previously when TVA co-ops started obtain- ing their new loans from REA. Now there was no good reason why they should go on paying 314 percent on the TVA loans when they could borrow from REA at 2 percent under the McCord Act and the NRECA 2 per- cent amendment and pay off the TVA loans. TVA made loans to seven Tennessee co- operatives. Six of them have paid off those loans with funds borrowed from REA. We have computed the resulting annual savings of all Tennessee cooperatives on both old and new loans. Incidentally, we have also listed the one county public-utility dis- trict and the several valley towns which enjoy corresponding savings. Yes. they could join the National, too. On the TVA loans the savings are 114 percent a year. On all REA advances in Tennessee, as of Sep- tember 2], 1944—the effective date of the