APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD UNCERTAINTIES AND FACTS Furthermore, can the American Govern- ment readily spare such & quantity of grain? If so, what problems of transportation are invalved? With our pressure on Europe to do more for its own rearmament, what de- mand w-ll be made on America to make up loss of food production through diversion of manpower into war industries? Congress will want to be satisfied both on the wisdom of rallying to India’s assistance after what Americans regard as her strange behavior at the United Nations, and on the international political aspects of leaving susceptible to Russian intervention a sore spot in Asia. Congress will want to be satisfled not only on the extent of the natural calamities which the Indian government claims are responsible for the plight of its people, but also on the character and extent of any man- made factors which have contributed to the food shortage. There will be close scrutiny, too, of India’s economic conflict with Pakistan and whether American food aid at this time would weight the scales against India's relatively small Moslem neighbor—population 80 million-- which won partition from India in 1947. In the maze of uncertainties which beset the whole problem, certain facts are clear. There is no question that there has been a series of natural calamities which have cut into India’s own food production. There ig no question about the existence of a food shortage, although no famine yet. There is no question that India has had to import vastly more food this year than it usually imports. Outside these few certainties, however, the field is open and the path of the searcher for facts is beset with booby-traps of all kinds. PARTITION BOOSTED DEFICIT In support of its request for American food the Indian government presents a case substantially as follows: The people of India—now totaling 360,- 000,000 and increasing at the rate of 4,000,- 000 annually—consume each year approxi- mately 46,000,000 tons of food grains—wheat, rice, millet, corn, barley, and “gran,” which is something like split peas. Indian diets vary widely, but the great basic staple food for everyone is grain. India produces large quantities of each of the grains it needs, but the annual output of forty-three or forty-four million tons, in good crop years, is two or three million tons short of requirements. Even before partition in 1947 India im- ported food. But before Pakistan was created out of the Moslem areas the country was more nearly self-suffotent. Agricultural areas which now comprise Pakistan were then part of India’s food-producing ma- chinery. After partition, which assigned to Pakistan important wheat- and rice-growing areas, India's deficit in gratin increased to about 2,000,000 tons a year and it was forced to lean more heavily on foreign—including Pakistan—sources of food. However, im- mediately after partition India set forth on a program to wipe out the food deficit by the end of 1981. As recently as 2 years ago progress had been so good that success was believed in sight. A widespread prograin of intensified agri- cultural production was set in motion. This included reclamation of waste Jand, irriga- tion projects to put those lands into pro- duction, accelerated production of fertilizers, seed improvement, and hybridization of grains. Official figures for the 1949-50 crop year show an increase of 6,000,000 acres over the previous year in land devoted to food production, and an increase of 1,000,- 008 acres in that devoted to jute and cotton. ‘When Britain devalued the pound Ssptem- ber 18, 1949, India, like many other countries, XCVII—App.——41 followed sutt. Pakistan, however, being in an excellent financial condition in spite of its infancy as 2 nation, did not devalue its rupee. Consequently, prices of Pakistan's exports in terms of the Indian rupee rose between 80 and 40 percent. India im- mediately ceased buying Pukistan's food grains, jute and cotton. This loss of the Indian market, however, did not force Pakis- tan to devalue, and the Karachi Government has disposed of its agricultural surpluses in other foreign markets, ELEMENTS CUT HARVEST India obtained food importa elsewhere, too, The latter part of 1950 saw the occur- rence of certain natural disorders which cut deeply into Indian food production and roughly tripled the amount of food which must be obtained trom foreign sources this year, A great earthquake occurred in Assam, in Northwest India. It was weeks before full reports of the disaster reached the outside world, Indian government offictals now re- port that the quake caused extensive de- struction of croplands. Later in the year local floods in many areas conspired with larger-than-usual swarms of locusts and partial failure of the monsoon in southern India to reduce grain crops even further. The result was that when the winter har- vest was in, India found itself seriously short of food. In addition, the natural disorders which hit the winter harvest also will reduce the smaller spring harvest, mainly wheat, which begins in May. The net result was calculated by India’s food ministry. On the basis of actual and anticipated logs, India will be short 6,000,- 000—not 2,000,000—tons of grain this year, with no relief in sight until next winter's harvest comes in. India has a complex system of food ration- ing for its town and city population. For Indians it is a 12-month-a-year ration, for others it lasts only 4 months of the year. The provincial governments operate the ration system on policies set and supplies provided by the central government in New Delhi. Of India’s 350 million people, roughly one- third—110 millions who live in the cities and towns—are on full or partial ration, This ‘was 12 ounces of food grains a day, substan- tially below the 16 ounces a day considered standard for Indians. Two weeks ago the daily ration was slashed to 9 ounces. Most Indians do not live entirely on this ration, but supplement it according to their means and dietary habits. Further reduction of the ration for town and city dwellers ts regarded as impossible by Indian officials, The rationing machinery, operating with present supplies, is not suited for expansion to take on the burden of mil-~ Mons of new beneficiaries, 1.e., the marginal groups from the food-growing districts which have been worst hit by the natural calamities. CRITICAL MONTHS AHEAD The prospect for Indian officials {s grim. The months of greatest emergency will be August, September, and October, when pres- ent food stocks run low and the new harvest is not yet in. It is tn this period that the Indians fear a repetition of the great Bengal famine of 1948, which 1s reported to have taken—directly and indirectly—more than 8,500,000 lives. India has attempted to deal with this year’s 6,000,000-ton deficit in food grains with the means at hand for purchase abroad. It has contracted in world markets for the delivery during the rest of this crop year of 4,000,000 tons. It has not been able, however, to finance, with ite strained foreign exchange resources, the purohase of the remaining 2,000,000 tona which, it contends, would save - the lives of many who may die of starvation. Indian estimates are that as many as 7,- 000,000 lives may be jeopardized by the grow- A641 ing shortage of food. Present calculated shortages, caused by natural phenomena, may be aggravated if growing uncertainties over the future cause producers to hold back on deliveries out of present stocks, Not all of India’s contentions with regard to existing conditions—and thelr causes—go unchallenged. The charge has frequently been made recently—even by those who con- cede the serlousness of potential famine con- ditions—that not all of India's troubles are the work of Mother Nature and that India’s own policies have reduced to a considerable extent the availability of food from foreign sources. Although the Government of Pakistan has not intervened officially against an American grant-in-aid of food grains to India, Pakistan officials are outspoken in their criticiam of the pending Indian appeal and the prospects that the request will be granted. Pakistan claims an interest in the situation because of the loss of its traditional markets for ita jute, cotton, wheat, and rice in India, Although it has suoceeded in selling its sur- pluses in other world markets, it feels the dislocation seriously and considers that the Indian government hag gone out of its way to destroy its natural market. Pakistan's complaint is based on the failure of India to purchase 600,000 tons of wheat which was surplus from its 1950 crop and which, the Pakistanis contend, was offered to the New Delhi government at prices well below the world market. Although the price may have been sub- stantially higher than before devaluation, the Pakistanis say, it was still lower than the price India finally paid for Australian and Argentine grain. This is adduced as evidence of Indian ill-will toward Pakistan and of a determination to throttle Pakistan's economy even if it costs India money. Pakistan asserts that it now has a surplus of 360,000 tons of rice which India could purchase to help meet its food deficit, and it anticipates a surplus of 150,000 tons out of the coming wheat crop this May and June. Another Pakistan argument is that India, striving desperately to make itself inde- pendent of Pakistan's jute and cotton, has diverted to these crops portions of reclaimed lands which could have been used for food production. PAKISTAN'S ANGLE The sum and substance of the Pakistan contention is that if India is threatened with famine it is due, in part at least, to India’s own economic war which it has waged against Pakistan since partition, and that any American grant of food to India would put this country’s resources behind India's campaign to throttle Pakistan economically, Pakistan’s interest is that of any merchant who hates to see a paying customer go on relief when he could still pay for his food. It ja not clear yet, in the minds of American Government agencies, whether India could be reasonably expected to pay for food she may get from this country. Her fnanctal situation {s still under study. The Indians have expressed a preference to pay. Two hundred million dollars, how- ever, is a heavy drain on a country with In- dia’s resources in foreign exchange, and she could repay such @ sum only over a period of years. Long-term credits in payment of food which is to be immediately consumed is not a good business proposition, That is why the present trend of American official thinking is toward a grant-in-aid rather than a sale on extended payments. Mr. Speaker, it is my opinion that the foregoing statement by Mr. Mullins brings out facts and important informa- tion on the question under discussion, and I will follow this statement by read- ing another letter from Mr. J. J. Singh, president, India League of America, of
A642 New York, published in the Washington Star of this date and which gives a view- point and other pertinent facts in con~- nection with the request from India to this country for 2,000,000 tons of wheat, Mr. Singh states: Wry Inoia Must Have Gratw From Us To the Epttor or tHE Star: Zulfequar: Ali, in his letter which ap- peared in your paper of February 1, says that India’s request to the United States for 2,000,000 tons of wheat should be looked upon from a humanitarian point of view because “human beings, wherever they may be, must be saved from starvation and famine.” He adds, however, that in connection with India's request for food grains from the United States, the “food position of India's neighboring areas should be studied. Burma has been @ large exporter of rice, Pakistan ig another area surplus in food.” It is true that, before World War II, Burma used to export large quantities of rice and India was one of her best customers. How- ever, with the conquest of Burma by the Japanese, all import of food grains into India from Burma during the last war was stopped. And, unfortunately, ever since the end of the war, Burma has been afflicted with in- ternal crisis. This conflict has greatly di- minished the rice-exporting capacity of Burma. However, the Indian Government has been able to make arrangements with the Bur- mese Government for importation of 50,000 tons of rice. That is all that Burma could spare. But India faces a shortage of 6,000,000 tons. So it can be easily seen that India cannot get enough food from Burma for her needs. With regard to surplus food in Pakistan, Mr. Ali perhaps does not know that west Punjab, which usually has surplus wheat and for a long time has been considered the breadbasket of northern India, unfortu- nately suffered a tremendous loss of food, particularly wheat, because of unprecedented flood conditions in the summer of 1950. Pakistan just does not have any food what- soever for export purposes. Pakistan had contracted to supply 300,000 tons of wheat to Japan and a lesser quantity to West Germany, which contract she 1s now unable to fulfill. On October 18, 1950, the Pakistan Government issued a communiqué which clearly stated that there is no sur- Plus food available for export in Pakistan. Mr. Ali, who presumably comes from Pakis- tan, says that “while India claims paucity of funds to feed its population, it ts spend- ing millions upon millions of dollars on the purchase of arms and explosives, not against any external aggressor, but with only Pakis- tan in mind.” In 1950 Indla spent approximately $2,750,- 000 in the United States on military stores. And these military stores did not contain any arms and explosives, but consisted of spare parts for American vehicles, including trucks, Red Cross units, etc, that India bought from the United States war-surplus stocks. Compare this figure with $41,400,000 that India spent on food grains in the United States in the last 4 months of 1950, and further compare it to the $120,000,000 India is planning to spend for buying food grains in the United States in the first 8 months of 1961. It is true that India spends almoat 50 per- cent of her national budget on defense pur- ~poses. (Pakistan spends about 65 percent.) Under normal world conditions criticism for such heavy expenditures on defense would be legitimate. But with the world situation as it is today, and with India’s borders exposed as they have never been before in her history, Tndia can ill afford to reduce her defense expenditures. I suggest that even if there were no friction whatsoever between Pakistan and India, the new danger to her borders will force India to spend the same amount which she is spending today, and perhaps more. The actual food situation in India is most critical. The Government of Indias has been forced to cut its basic ration from 12 ounces to 9 ounces—900 calories a day for an adult. If this situation ts not alleviated, it will undoubtedly result in death by starvation for thousands, and great suffering for millions more, . Reports from India indicate that American observers in India and Indian friends of the United States are convinced that a gen- erous response from the United States to the appeal of India would be the most effective demonstration that the United States could make to the Asian peoples of its altruistic intentions. I would like to add thet nationals of India living in the United States, like myself, to whom this hag become e second motherland, and thousands of American friends of India in this country, most sincerely hope that this opportunity will not be lost to create stronger bonds of friendship and under- standing between the people of India and the people of the United States. J, J. SINGH, President, India League of America. New York. “ Mr. Speaker, I have placed this dis- cussion before the House, as I believe that it will be of interest to the Mem- bers, in view of this matter being prob- ably submitted for consideration in the near future. Mr. Speaker, the people of the United States are humanitarian and cenerous, and we have demonstrated this fact time and again; however, as much as this country is willing to help others, under present circumstances, and in the pres- ent situation, and in view of the billions that our Government has given away to other countries all over the world, I do not see how we can be expected to con- tinue to give away the resources of our country any further. As General Eisen- hower well said a few days ago, “The United States cannot carry the rest of the world on its shoulders.” Salute to a Hero EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. DEWEY SHORT CF MISSOURI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 2, 1951 Mr. SHORT. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I include Salute to a Hero, which appeared in the Washington Sunday Star of January 28, 1961: Sauvure To A Hero Last fall, in Soviet-occupied East Ger- many, Hermann Joseph Flade was arrested for distributing leaflets urging people to vote against the Communists. Placed on “trial” as an “enemy of the state,” he upset all the expectations of the Red “court.” He refused to grovel before it. He refused to be cowed into saying that he had done wrong. He re- fused to go through the rigmarole of reviling himself and glorifying his persecutora over the broadcasting system that had been set ‘up to carry his words to the public, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Instead, reminded by the “court” that he might be sentenced to death for the “crime” of advocating votes against the Reds, Her- mann Joseph Flade—18 years old, just out of his boyhood—declared in a clear, strong voice, “I love my freedom more than my life.” Whereupon, greatly embarrassed by the fact that his words got on the air before the loud speakers could be allenced, his “Judges” condemned him to be beheaded. That was about 2 weeks ago. In the mean- time, his story has been spread throughout the whole of Germany, and demonstrations have been staged both to honor his bravery and to protest against the decision to execute him. And up to now, as if inhibited by the popular reaction, the puppet Communist authorities have deferred the act of decapl- tation. The probability is, of course, that Hermann Joseph Flade will be put to death in a little while. Be that as it may, however, he has already achieved, in his own way and despite his brief span of life, a kind of immortality. A German Patrick Henry, he has earned the right to a high and permanent place of honor, not merely in the history of his own country but in the larger history of man- kind’s age-old struggle for liberty. Let us salute him. Let free men everywhere be in- spired by his shining example to stand firm, without ever wavering, against the vile sys- tem that seeks to devour all who dare to be Fllades. , epeennene er eenneenmmmmmunenel IV—F Athletes and the Draft EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. OVERTON BROOKS OF LOUISIANA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend and revise my remarks, I present a telegram from Hon. Don Ewing, associate editor of the Shreve- port Times, and an editorial taken from the Shreveport Times of Sunday, Febru- ary 4, 1951. Both of these documents are self-explanatory. The telegram is as follows: Sureverort, La., February 6, 1951. Representative OvERTON Brooks, House Office Building, Washington, D. C.: Regarding Tittle editorial, he has informed Times that football league announcement that he is now IV-F was in error and that he igs IN-A, being married and having 8 child. He was IV-F in War II from chronic bronchial asthma, but during part of time at L. 8. U. was not eligible for draft be- cause he had not reached the age. We brought this out in editorial Sunday. I have put story on Associated Press, stating con- tent of second editorial, and will forward you copy of editorial, It might be that you would want to insert second editorial or withdraw first editorial from final permanent publication in Recorp. Tittle case still offers good example of points at issue, but edi- torial does put him:in unjust Hght, due to original misinformation from professional football league announcements which had listed him as IV-F now. Don Ewina, The editorial is as follows: IV-F ATHLETES AND THE Drarr Defense Department insistence that 18- year-olds must be drafted to meet manpower needs has more or less automatically cen- tered public attention on professional and
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD amateur athletes who are clessified as IV-F because of inability to meet Armed Forces phyateal standards, although perhaps able to buck a football line, bit a home run, or serve repeated aces tn tennis. Most of these men obviously could serve their country well in behind-the-lines posts even if unable, through chronic affliction of some kind, to meet the standards for combat service. But until very recently the Armed Forces have made no physical differentiation between physical fitness for combat duty and physical fitness for noncombat duty. That fect is partly responsible for whatever need now may exist to go outside of present man- power draft pools. Unfortunately, this situation—which is purely one of laws made by Congress and administrative regulations made by the Armed Forces—has caused IV-F'’s to be placed, in the minds of some, in the usually undeserved light of trying to avoid military service when the fact is that they have noth- ing to say about it. There is no rofiection on any IV-F through being a IV-F. No IV-F elassified himself. Draft boards did that, and they acted under laws and regulations not of their making, either. The case of Y. A. Tittle, former LSU star quarterback and professional football player since 1948, illustrates some of the points in« volved. Acting on broadcast announcements from professional football sources that Tittle had been taken by the San Francisco Forty~ niners when his former team, the Baltimore Colts, disbanded, and that he was considered @ desirable acquisition because of being classified IV-F, the Times recently used him as typical of athletes who cannot get into military service thourh oble to earn a living in physical-contact vocations. As a public figure in the professional athletic world, and a past public figure in the LSU football world, he was subject to public discussion, and it was specifically polnted out that the reuson ho could not get into service was because he was one of the victims of laws and regula- tions which were not of his making and which he could not surmount. Actually, the Tittle case turned out to be an unjustified example, as that athlete him- self now has pointed out to the Times in a frank discussion of the matter. Tittle was only 17 years old when he first played at LSU in World War II. Most of his LSU foot- ball service was either when he was ineligible for draft by age or would not have been called because of the end of the war—entirely aside from physical exemption. Actually, Tittle was not given a draft classification until February 1945, when he was put in IV-F by 8 Dallas, Tex., board which certainly had no reason to want to help LSU athleti- cally, and the end of the war then was only afew months pway. (He isa Texan.) Tittle has been a victim of chronic asthma since he was 3 years old—he now is 25—and has to take ‘“shote” before each gridiron game; sometimes during a game he has to be sig- naled to be taken out for another “shot.” Actually, the professional football publicity announcements that Tittle ts IV-F in the present draft are incorrect for he now is jtl-A—married and with a child, There seems little question that Tittle is one of the many now exempted who would do most any- thing to get into service, but probably never will get there. The Times, of course, regrets that misinformation from seemingly official sources caused it to place him in the fore- front in an undeserved manner in an issue of great public interest. All of his detat) is essential in fairness to Tittle, tt it does not alter the fact that the Armed Forces philosophy that everyone in uniform must be physically fit, figuratively, to march 40 miles and tear a tiger apart at the end of the march is both wrong and unfair, There are nearly a million young men now classified as IV-F, Unquestionably & great portion of them are physically fit to take behind-the-lines uniformed posts and, as has been stated in these columns before, would like to be in uniform and out of TV-?, Putting them in service would release a com- Parable number of men, now in uniform, for combat duty. And, if probably would en- hance rather than depreciate over-all effi- ciency in the Armed Forces, for many of the IV-F's may have especial qualifications which the Armed Forces need in noncombat posts, Actually, the entire matter of IV-F athletes is minor, They form a very tiny part of the nearly million men now listed IV-F. The whole point is that a IV-F system that, by Federal law or Armed Forces regulations, bars men capable of normally earning a liv- ing in normal civilian occupations from stm- ilar untformed occupations is unfair to the IV-F's, to other young men of the day, and even to the military itself. It is wrong all the way through. The Defense Department now states that it will reclassify many IV-F’s through alter- ing physical standards to permit them to serve in posts they are capable of filling, Brig. Gen. Raymond Hufft has announced that in Louisiana there will be a reexamination and reclassification for men rejected for oduca- tional reasons--with acceptance of those with 9 years of school regardless of their grades on aptitude tests. All of this is on the good side—for everyone concerned. In the meantime the IV-F problem needs more study «1d perhaps more action—but with renlization from all that it’s the Washington suthoritics and not the IV-F'’s who are to blame for whatever ills exists, Idea of War Without Profit Uninspiring to Our Allies EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. DEWEY SHORT OF MISGOURL IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 2, 1951 Mr. SHORT. Mr. Speaker, because of the penetrating insight, carefull analy- sis, and vivid interpretation, I includc in the Recorp an article by Constantine Brown, which appeared in the Washing- ton Sunday Star of January 28, 1951: Ipea or Wark WirnHout Prorrr UNINSPIRING TO Our Atums—ANALYsr HoLtps Mrrcenary ANGLE May BE REASON FoR DEFENSE APATHY IN Evurors (By Constantine Brown) In World Wars I and II America was looked on by the nations which fought the aggres- sion of the Central Powers and the Axis as the savior of western democracy. At the time these wars started we had not committed ourselves to any action or assist~ ance. Statesmen of the allied countries rushed to Washington to beg us to inter- vene, They pointed out that by our inac- tivity we would permit these forces of de- struction to rule the world. We eventually joined the Allies, in both wars, on condition that they make no terri- torial or other kind of profit from the blood which American boys would shed on foreign battlefields. Now, when world war III is under way in Korea, we who have committed ourselves to defend the remnants of western civilization have to beg, cajole, and plead with our allies to prepare themselves to meet the new threat, The response, to say the least, ts hesitating and weak. The reason for this attitude is not alone the war weariness of most of our western allies and their discouragement after two heavy bloodlettings between 1914 and 1945, AG43 The real reason seems to be the fatlure of political leaders and the people themselves in Western Europe to see profit for them- selves in another conflagration. And when they weigh the alternatives—rule for a gen- eration or two by native Communists under Moscow's control, or physical resistance to a Russian onslaught with its inevitable losses in human life and property—they seem inclined toward the former. This was made very clear to this reporter during a 4-month trip through Western Eu- rope in the late fall of 1948. Politicians, men in the liberal professions, factory work- ers, farmers, and shopkeepers joined in sim- flar expressions. In Germany the slogan heard incessantly was “Ohne uns" (without us). In France and the Benelux countries the refrain was that the next conflict will be between America and Russia. Western Europe could gain nothing but utter destruc. tion by becoming involved in the struggle between the two giants, PHILOSOPHY OPPOSES OURS From many letters and other communica- tions received since there seems to be even lesz enthusiasm for any “military adven- ture” among the peoples of continental Eu- rope than there was a year ago. The Allied governments undoubtedly told Genernl Eisenhower that they could mobilize some forcesa—about 40 divisions—within the next 2 or 3 years, provided American ground-nid air forces are sent in sufficient numbers to create a protective wall against an immedi- ate Russian onslaught on Western Europe. Whether these Prime Ministers and De- fense Ministers, whose terms of office depend entirely on the temper of the man tn the street, hare been able to assure General Eisenhower that they express the temper of the public is another question. General Eisenhower will tell hia story to the execu. tive and legislative branches of our Govern. ment when he returns to Washington. The philosophy of the Europeans regarding war 18 opposed to ourown. For centuries the peoples of the world have waged wars for profit. Victory meant territorial expansion, indemnity money, and loot for the soldiers. Wars were considered like ducls—pentlemen's affairs. Soldiers fought, but the civiitan population, by and large, suffered relatively little. Since 1914, however, war has shed this gentlemanly aspect. Weapons of destruction have become more damaging to everybody, and civilian populations hnve suffered in many cases a8 much as soldiers, SOVIET GOT THE SPOILS By our participation in the European wars we introduced a new element. We attempted to remove the element of national profit. We were not particularly successful after World War I. As @ gesture toward the American people and their idealistic President, Woodrow Wil- son, the Allies did not demand that the de- feated Central Powers pay a war tndemnity. This was camouflaged, however, under the more palatable name of “reparations.” There were no direct annexations of enemy terri- tory. These were called “mandates over backward areas.” The Allies, who disbelieved our lack of de- sire for territorial expansion, offered us the German possessions in the Pacific, the Marl- anas, Marshall, and Caroline Islands. We proudly turned them down, and they were turned over to the Japanese. In World War TI the blood of 100,000 Americans was shed to remove the Japanese from these islands, which they bad turned into fortresses. But the British, the French, the newly created Polish Republic, and others who fought the German and Austro-Hungarian Empires got their pound of flesh. By and large, World War I was remunerative to the victors—except for America, which footed the bill. World War II was more bitter and destruc. tive than the first. At the end there was
A644 only one actual victor—Russia. Britain and the Netherlands lost many of their colonies, which became free and independent nations. France inevitably became a second-rate power, We occupied Japan—a financially costly proposition-—but Russia obtained vast terri- tories. She arbitrarily took over Eastern Germany, which ia of little consequence in itself, But we gave her the green light to bring under the Kremlin’s yoke entire na- tions—Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Rumania, and Bulgaria in Europe and the entire territory extending from the Urals to the Pacific Ocean in Asia. No nation in history has ever gained as much territory— containing hundreds of millions of people and untold natural resources—as Russia gained after World War II. Our gain has been involuntarily, but suc- cinctly, expressed by Gen. Mark Clark when, after the occupation of Naples, he was asked by a skeptical Italian what we expected to get out of this war. He replied: “All we hope to gain 1s a spot to bury our dead.” And, indeed, that is all we obtained at the end of World War II—burial places for hundreds of thousands of Americans killed in the crusade to destroy despotism. Unfortunately, we did not realize—all of us—that we had helped create a far worse and unhuman kind of oriental despotism, which now threatens our national existence. NO PROFITS IN SIGHT No wonder that there is a layer of ideal- ism among the American people which can- not be matched by our friends across the Atlantic. With their background it is lUttle wonder that the Europeans, especially the members of the Atlantic Pact, have been slow in responding to our frantic appeal to rearm against the threat from the Moscow dictators. There is nothing in this new war for them which even vaguely can be de- scribed as profit. When the United Nations decreed last June that the North Korean aggression must be repelled, the American people did not hesi- tate to approve the order given by President Truman for our forces to move into Korea, The fact that 90 percent of the western forces in the UN police action were American did not bother the people of this country. Nor did they complain over the 50,000 casualties which we have suffered in a faraway land in which our only interest is the United Na- tions’ interest. Our people know that this heavy toll—to which must be added an expenditure of 614,- 000,000,000 up to December 1—will yield no profit except the knowledge that we are ready to stand against an aggressor regardless of cost. Our Government and our country are willing to make far greater sacrifices to pre- pare Europe to reaist aggression and main- tain its liberties. There is only one proviso in this picture. That is that the peoples of Europe them- selves must shate our willingness to make the utmost sacrifices so that future genera- tions may remain free, A Letter to Eisenhower EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. H. R. GROSS OF IOWA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 7, 1951 Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, I com- mend to the reading of my colleagues an editorial in the February 4, 1951, issue of the Waterloo (Iowa) Daily Courier, which takes the form of an open letter to General Eisenhower. Neither in his appearance before a joint meeting of Members of Congress nor in his subsequent public appearances did Eisenhower make the slightest effort to provide answers to the searching and pertinent questions set forth in this editorial. When Eisenhower appeared before the Members of the House and Senate, he said this: Ido not believe * * * that the United States can pick up the world on its economic, financial, and material shoulders and carry it. Yet, a few moments later he seemed to imply that Marshall-plan aid—on which we have already spent nearly $40,000,000,000—should be continued, and he left no doubt that he would urge the giving of vast quantities of military equipment to Western European nations. A few hours later, before a congres- sional committee, he urged the sending of additional American divisions to Eu- rope, the transportation and mainte- nance of which, to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars, would fall upon the shoulders of American taxpayers. I have said, and I restate it here, that General Eisenhower gave Members of Congress and the American people, hun- ery for facts, a treatment in the form of glib generalities. The following ques- tions can and should be answered now: Open Letrer TO GENERAL EISENHOWER Dear GENERAL: The American people have confidence in your integrity, your judgment, and your sincere desire to protect the secu- rity of this country. Upon your return to the United States from an inspection trip abroad you declared (1) that the defense of Western Europe is essential to the defense of America, and (2) that there exists a firm will to resist Communist aggression among these Western European nations. Therefore, you advocate sending American divisions to Europe to stiffen this will to resist and shipment of American equipment to arm the troops to be trained there, Perhaps we should be willing to take pol- icy decisions on faith and accept the sacri- fices and hazards involved tf our leaders de- clare these things necessary and wise. Cer- tainly you have more authoritative infor- mation than we citizens can acquire and you are trained by education and experience to assess a military situation. Yet the tragic and largely futile entangle- ment in Korea proves that military and po~ litical leaders do make serious blunders and that public doubts about the wisdom of a policy seriously weaken the Government in carrying it out. We therefore believe that the American people are entitled to the an- swers to certain questions which inevitably arise in connection with the sending of American troops in considerable numbers to Europe. Some of these questions are: 1, Key unions of Italy, France, and certain other countries are controlled by Commu- nists. Is there any effective way to counter the national paralysis that would inevitably result in case Russia attacked? 2. Western Europe ts one of the most ad- vanced industrial areas in the world with & total capacity exceeding that of Russia and her satellites. How does it happen that euch an area cannot provide its own arms for defense? Is it because the governments and peoples involved are unwilling to make the necessary sacrifices? 8. Britain and other European countries have Plainly indicated that they want to APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD recognize and do business with the Com- munist government in China. Are we com- pelled to furnish arms and troops for the defense of Europe while the countries in- volved will not even support us diplomati- cally in guarding essential American secu- rity in the Pacific? 4. Since Western Europe possesses such an immense military potential in comparison to the danger that confronts it, why cannot these countries at least build defenses ca- pable of withstanding the first shock of a Russian attack? From the physical stand- point they are fully capable of doing that. What about morale? Frankly, we do not believe that you or any- one else has answered such questions as these satisfactorily, We think they ought to be answered before any large troop com- mitments are made. It is notoriously bad military strategy to tie defense to that of countries which are not resolutely deter- mined to defend themselves to the death. Your prestige plus the political power of the administration will be sufficient to carry through the policy which you outline. But there would be much more solid public sup- port if more detailed answers were given to the questions asked above. The public is willing to be convinced. But we do not believe it has yet received the conclusive evidence of European determination to re« sist that is needed to eliminate lingering and disquieting doubts about the wisdom of the administration's policy. For Four Chaplains EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. DEWEY SHORT OF MISSOURI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 2, 1951 Mr. SHORT. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I include the following article from a recent issue of Aerie, concerning the Four Chaplains. This is so important that President Truman appeared personally and gave his blessings upon them: For Four CHAPLAINS On the corner of Broad and Berks Streets, in the city of Philadelphia, workmen are completing a unique chapel. There on the campus of Temple University is to stand a Nation’s shrine to the dream of human brotherhood. You, as an Eagle, will have a part and place in that unique chapel of interfaith understanding. For your Aerie and the other lodges in Eagledom have the chance to join in an Eagle contribution that will erect and pay for the main chapel entrance, above which is to burn the eternal light of broth- erhood and good will. This Chapel of the Four Chaplains honors the four clergymen of three faiths, who, when the Dorchester was torpedoed in the North Atlantic, gave their life belts to the enlisted men and “arms linked as they steadied them-~ selves in prayer” went down with the ship. For their heroic sacrifice, these men of the faiths were posthumously awarded the Dis- tinguished Service Cross. The Chapel of the Four Chaplains, which the Eagles are privie leged to participate in erecting, honors these four men who died to show all how men should live. With its symbolical depicting of the three great faiths of our people—Roman Catholic, Protestant, and Hebrew—this living memo- rial exemplifies the need for solidarity among those who believe in the spiritual dignity of
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD mankind and the right of individuals to live in freedom and self-respect. Located in the City of Brotherly Love, it will be a shrine for a whole nation. Just as the Eagles chose @ living memorial—the Eagles Memorial Foundation—to honor the members who fought and died in the wars of our Nation, and more recently took the lead in seeking & continuing tribute to the Secret Service men who die or risk death protecting our country and ita public personalities, so the Eagles join pau Aprsd shrine to the memory [o) our ant chaplains who went with the Dorcheater. P down When your serie decides what it will give to the building of the universal entrance and erection of the eternal light at the chapel of the four chaplains, you will have to balance what you can afford to donate against what you'd like to do for 0 worthy & cause. Philadelphia serie led off the parade with a gift of 61,000. Since the goal of the campaign is $25,000, far more modest donations from other aeries will take the drive over the top. But whether you give $10 or 6100 or $1,000, your contribution will will be an appreciated one, for your aerle will become a partner in a most worth-while undertaking. You will join the poet, Joseph Auslander, in perpetuating the epic story of which he wrote: “Four men of God put out to sea; (Washington, Poling, Fox, and Goode) Their God was one, though their faiths were three; And the men who worshiped their God were free Where the cross and the star together stood. Four men of God went down to sea, (Washington, Poling, Fox, and Goode) Bound by a passion for liberty And a burning faith that keops men free In the bond of human brotherhood.” Address of Very Reverend Edward G. Jacklin, S. J. EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WILLIAM J. GREEN, JR. OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 7, 1951 Mr. GREEN. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- orp, I include the following address of Very Reverend Edward G. Jacklin, 8. J., President, at the alumni dinner opening the centenary year of St. Joseph’s Col- lege, Philadelphia, 1851-1951: May it please your excellencies, Right Rev- erend Monsignori, Reverend Fathers, honored guests, Sons of St. Joseph’s, Mr. Toastmaster, ladies and gentlemen, tonight as we cele- brate the opening of the centenary of St. Joseph's College I should like to express in the name of the college our deep apprecia- tion and thanks to the guests who honor us with their distinguished presence this eve- ning and to the alumni to whose generosity and devotion we owe this memorial hall. I should also like to express my warm grati- tude to the very active president of the alumni association, Mr. Joseph P. Tully; to Mr, Joseph Trainer and his committees, and last but not least to the lovely and inde- fatigable ladies of the Bellarmine Guild, all of whom have worked so hard and so ably in staging this memorable opening of our centenary year. I shouid also like to express my deep personal appreciation to three past distinguished Presidents of St. Joseph's Col- lege, Father Tallon, Father Love, and Father Long for their kininess in being with us this evening. No doubt they will share my sentiments when I say the quickest and most bewildering way to become a prominent citizen overnight, through no fault of one’s own, 1s to be named the president of a college. T am grateful too to detect in the audience this evening a number of faces of friends and classmates of mine, same of whom I have not had the pleasure of seeing in 27 years. As I note upon thelr faces the ravages of time and the surplus profits tax, an incident in the life of Ethel ore comes to mind. After one of her brilliant and exciting performances, the great actress was relaxing in her dressing room, when she was ° told a party of people wished to seo her. When she declined to entertain them, the messenger informed her they were old friends, in fact, classmates. “Classmates,” boomed Ethel, “in that case, wheel them in." On the other hand, time is relative. A few weeks after returning to the city last sum- mer, the new dean of the college who pre« serves the illusion of youth extremely well, Father Sullivan, and myself were induced by the blandishments of Father Brown to run the gauntlet at a reception and tea party given by the ladies of the Bellarmine Guild, A bit shell-shocked and shaken by the exotic aroma of tea, I noticed a stately dowager of somewhat formidable mien fixing her eye on the new administration and surveying them with the cold precision of a social scientist, “Hmmm,” she murmured in a slightly thun- derous undertone, “they look like a couple of refugees from the Whiz Kids.” If we manage to do one-half as well as they, we shall be quite content The fact that St. Joseph’s College opened its doors 100 years ago may seem a bit antediluvian; but in fact its origin may be traced back further still. In 1639, just 5 years after the Catholic colonists of Cecil and Leonard Calvert stepped ashore near St, Mary's on the lower Potomac, Father Ferdi- nand Poulton, an English Jesuit, writes back home of his plan to open a school. In 1640, at Calverton Manor and again 37 yeara later at Newtown Manor, schools were founded only to be suppressed in each case by the dominant Puritan party that seized control of the colony and repealed the Toleration Act of the Calverts. A few years later, in 1685, while Governor Dongan was in power, another English Jesuit, Father Thomas Harvey, opened the New York Latin School. This too quickly met the fate of its predecessors, However, in 1746, with the assistance of some Philadelphia Catho- lics, the Maryland Jesuits started a school at Bohemia Manor a few miles south of the pres- ent border in the no man’s land then in dispute between Pennsylvania and Maryland, Among its first students were Charles Carroll of Carrollton who would later put his name to the Declaration of Independence, and John Carroll who would become o Jesuit in 1753, accompany the congressional committee to Canada in 1776, found Georgetown Univer- aity, and be consecrated the firat bishop and archbishop of Baltimore, The story comes closer to home, however, when in 1722, a gentleman in knee breeches and buckled shoes, a broad brimmed Quaker hat and a snuff colored coat, began visiting Philadelphia. A Jesuit, Joseph Greaton by name, he established permanent residence in 1720, as the frat Catholic pastor of the city. Within earshot of the hammers erecting the State House which would later become fa- mous as Independence Hall, he built a two- stofled brick residence and @ smali chapel which to all appearances was a kitchen with a chimney atop of it Instead of a cross. In 1784, certain gentlamen, undoubtedly left- wing liberals of the day, viewing the twelfth and thirteenth law of King William with marked favor and the presence of the Popish chapel with a dim eye, objected to its exist- enos, In reply Father Greaton presented his Classic defense; A645 “We are and of right ought to be, free and independent of any civil law restricting or debarring our right to religious liberty. We Claim the right from William Penn.” The upshot of the dispute was that Penn's principle of religious Uberty for all, Catholics not excepted, continued in practice till time and usage completely confirmed it. Thus re- Ngtous independence was established in the Mttle church below Fourth and Walnut 40 years before civil Mberty wae proclaimed at Fifth and Chestnut Streets and Penn's prin- ciple of religious freedom embodied in the Constitution. To William Penn and his en- lightened view on religious freedom and to the Friends of Philadelphia, who more than once persuaded angry mobs not to demolish Old St. Joseph's, we owe the original building that housed the first classes of the college. And to Father Greaton, we owe the earliest foundations of the college still to be. That the hope of establishing a college atill engrossed the minds of the Jesuits at Ola St. Joseph's is clear from a letter to Bishop Oarroll in 1785, in which Father Robert Molyneux announced the purchase of @ property adjoining the old chapel for the sum of £600. He wrote somewhat quaintly: “Besides these advantages and that of a spot for building a house for ourselves, there is room for butlding a college, should 1t ever be necessary, without incommoding the premises.” ’ However, despite the commodiousness of the premises, some 60 by 60 feet, and despite the nearby location of the Blue Anchor Tavern and other patent advantages of Phii- adelphia, then the Nation's Capital, Bishop Carroll in 1789 founded the first Jesuit col- lege at Georgetown and opened it to atu- dents of every religious profession. Among the reasons advanced in the first prospectus for choosing the location were: “The salu- brity of the air, convenience of communica tion, and cheapness of living.” In reviewing Bishop Carroll's action with all charity, a judicious historian might insert two com- ments at this point in the record: first, Quandoque bonus dormitat Homerus (even Homer sometimes nods), and, secondly, this was obviously before the days of accurate thermometers and the Fair Deal. Despite this blow, the hope of erecting a college in the oity reared once again its bloody but unbowed head. Father Anthony Kohlimann writes on November 7, 1808: “There is the finest prospect for establish- ing a college tn Philadelphia. A certain J. W. Wellers, who by bis unremitting exer- tions has carried on very important works for the good of religion has promised to build 8 college in 1 year, provided the society fur- nish him some masters.” T regret to note that the masters were not forthcoming; and I regret even more that we have lost contact with the heirs and ae- signs of Mr. Wellers. In 1844, Father Du- buisson reports: “We are trying to build o college in Phila- delphia. The one we have fs rather a pre- paratory school than a college. A better building and more teachers are needed; and neither is forthcoming, We have great hopes for Philadelphia, but their fulfillment de- pends upon the means at our disposal.” Finally under the prodding of Father Brocard, Fr. Felix Barbelin, 8. J., the little red-headed priest who was the curé d’ars of early Philadelphia, enlarged the colonial residence of Father Greaton and built the college on a lot fronting on Willings Alley. A modest beginning in all truth but so was the mustard seed. On September 15, 1851, the school year was inaugurated with a Solemn Mass of the Holy Ghost. Ninety-seven boys, little knowing what was in store for them, happily chanted the te deum and were enrolled. Their school day ran from 8 to 5, with a modest lunch period of 2% hours in the middle
A646 of the day, a social amenity which our in- tense modern civilization has overlooked. It aeems that loud talking and noise in Will- ings Alley, playing in the neighborhood and expressions savoring of low breeding were frowned upon. That they were men in those good old days is clear from the fact that the hours of study at home were from 6 to 8 in the evening and-—an appalling item— from 6 to 7 in the morning. In addition to the courses in religion and ethical philoso- phy, the curriculum offered a commercial department and a classical department with side courses in French, German, music, and drawing. Straightway, there was born the Philome- Han Society, which fs ominously described as “composed of those students who are re- markable for possession of a fine voice or who are learning to play on musical in- struments.” The organization counted 21 charter members, who made thelr first pub- Uc appearance a few weeks later. By @ strange cotncidence, the neighborhood be- gan to lose its charm as a residential dis- trict at this time and the general exodus of the better families began. No doubt it would be not only proper but timely for me to remark here and now that I do not intend to give a blow-by-blow de- scription of the next 100 years round by round. However, suffice it to say that on January 14, 1898, the college was transferred to a new school building and a new debt at Ju- niper and Filbert Streets on the site where the present Bulletin Building now stands, At this time, the Reverend James A, Ward, 8. J., a brillfant classicist, was president, Not having the assistance of a secretary, he devised an ingenious method of reducing his correspondence to a minimum by com- posing his letters in Latin verse. A few months after taking office, he created a motto which, because of its classical brev- ity and concentrated wisdom, all subsequent presidenta of modest liberal arts colleges have made their own: “Nist Deus memor sit nostri, omnis res nostra fracta est"; “withe out a miracle, we shall be bankrupt.” Perhaps bank tellers of the day had diffi- culty with Ciceronian latinity. Perhaps the fathers wished to return to guard the fabu- lous hoard of gold buried under old Saint Joseph’s. Perhaps with customary Jesuit shrewdness, they foresaw that real estate at Juniper and Filbert had no future. At any rate the college returned to its old loca- tion in the summer of 1860, and languished through the difficult years of the Civil War and its aftermath, Father Barbelin, once again at the helm of the college, finally realized a long-cher- ished desire to obtain a suitable property for a college when on November 20, 1866, he purchased the property at Seventeenth and Stiles Streets, described as being in the highest section of the city amid sparsely settled suburbs, Father Villiger took up the task of re- building with energy and clarity of vision, though he entered upon it, as he himself said, without money or prospects, with a debt of $30,000, and nothing to rely on except the merciful providence of God. Step by step, however, the plan originally con- ceived by Father Villiger was executed in his own administration and tn those of his successors, till the quadrangle of buildings was complete. In 1886, the college received a bequest of 972,000 from the estate of Francis Anthony Drexel, a gift of princely proportions at the time for s struggling college. In 1899, Father Clark erected a new building, fronting on Stiles Street and extending back along Sev- enteenth Street; it was reserved for the cole Jege and the first step taken toward sepa- rating the college and preparatory depart~ ment. In the same year, advanced courses in literature, science, and philosophy lead ing to & master’s degree were undertaken. The golden jubilee exercises wore held tn: November 1901, a feature of which was ‘the presentation of Plautus’ Duo Captivi in the original Latin. In 1912, in the pioneer days of the science, & wireless receiving and sending station was installed, the first college station of its kind perhaps in the Nation. In February 1915, under the sponsorship of the alumni sodal- ity, evening classes were inaugurated with 054 students pursuing 22 course offerings. With entry into World War I, on April 4, 1917, the college pledged itself to the serv- ice of the Nation. So many of its students and alumni enlisted for the first Officers’ Re- serve training program at Fort Niagara that one of the daily papers truthfully reported: “In proportion to its size, St. Joseph's College has furnished more men for the camp than any other college or institution tn the State.” During the war, the institution was utilized by the War Department for military training of the Students’ Army Training Corps. From the ranks of the college came 122 officers, 381 noncommissioned officers and enlisted men, 14 of whom yielded up their lives in service. In 1919, regular courses were resumed; and for the first time, distinct faculties for both the college and high-school divisions were appointed. With the appointment of the Very Rev- erend Albert G. Brown, 8. J., to the presi- dency of the college on October 1, 1921, the college entered upon a period of vigorous ex- pansion. One of its distinguished sons, Bishop Gercke, of Tucson, Ariz., on Novem- ber 18, 1923, laid the cornerstone for the new wing on Thompson Street that finally completed the group of buildings Father Villiger had originally envisoned. During the spring months of 1922, with the gracious approval and bleasing of His Eminence, Den- nis Cardinal Dougherty, plans for a univer- sal appeal for funds to build a greater St, Joseph's College were formulated. The proj- ect was enthuslastically endorsed by a gen- eral meeting of the alumni, August 16, 1922, It was presented to the people of the arch- diocese by His Eminence in a laudatory let- ter, concluding: “I earnestly recommend this campaign to our reverend clergy and devoted laity. I ask their cooperation in this great work and I pray God to make it a success.” The drive was overwhelmingly successful, $1,147,857 being subscribed. In 1923, 20 acres of the present site were purchased for $280,- 000, and in October 1927 classes were opened in the new building. That St. Joseph's College rears itself today in Gothic strength and beauty on its lofty site is due to the courage and vision of Father Albert G. Brown, 8. J., and of Father Matthew G. Fortier, 8. J., his able and tire- less cooperator in all his plans, to the gen- erosity of the clergy and laity of Philadel- phia, to the active enthusiasm of its alumni and friends, particularly to the members of the Original Foundation Committee, some of whom are our guests this evening, and above all, to the gracious endorsement of all its plans and the hearty encouragement of its supporters by His Eminence Dennis Cardinal Dougherty. From that day onward the progress of the college was steadily matntained under the able direction of Father Tallon, Father Hig- ging, Father Love, and Father Long. Fin- nesey field and the college stadium were completed; the Lonergan School of Mechan- ios was erected. The faculty residence “and grounds, the Barry House, the Keenan House, three student halls, Greaton, Quirk, and Bimpson, were all added to the steadily growing college. In October 1985 the St. Jo- seph’s College School of Bocial Sciences was opened to combat communism. In January 1944 the St. Joseph’s College Institute of Industrial Relations began, offering tuition- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD free courses in labor-management, ifs prob- lems, and solutions, In 1946 my immediate predecessor, Father Long, inaugurated the drive for the Alumni Memorial Field House, which was to com- memorate the men of St. Joseph's College who gave their lives in both World Wars. As always, the response of the alumni was immediate and generous, and over $200,000 was raised. On November 11, 1949, the Alumni Memortal Field House and the Ed- ward J. Flanigan Auditorium were dedicated. In the barest outline such is the history of the college. Skipping over it lightly, but not irreverently, I trust I have recited in the main only external facts, “Things done that caught the eye and have the price,” in Browning’s phrase. But the real story could have been told far more tellingly and far more truly by many in the audience to- night who played key roles in the unfolding of its history. For the real drama of its birth and growth, its true significance and lasting value, lies hidden in the hearts of the men who as teachers, Jesuit and lay, down the decades created its traditions and brought wisdom and inspiration to its halls and who as students drank deep of living water at its intellectual and religious well springs, Four basic elements, the religious, the socio-political, the scientific, and esthetic, are the dominant constituents of every cul- ture. These are the stable roots from which the intellectual and spiritual life of a people springs, takes its shape and grows. Like genes and chromosomes that fix the physical characteristics of a race, these four cultural factors perpetuate the intellectual and spir- itual properties of a people. To transmit these properties from generation to genera- tion is the essential task of education. For unlike genes and chromosomes, they are not a@ native endowment, but must be slowly and often laboriously acquired. Just as it is necessary for a boy who hopes to become a sculptor to learn how his father handled a chisel and hammer before him, so it is im- Perative for a man who desires to become cultured to study the ways of his cultured forebears. Once mastery over the rudiments has been won, then, if he be graced with genius, he can devise new processes, create fresh forms, and contribute his bit to progress. Such in fact has been the story of the cul- tural growth of Christendom and of western man. Into the making of its distinctive culture, four basic elements have entered in the course of centuries. First came the heritage of divinely revealed truth in the Judaeo-Christian tradition which freed west- ern man from the bonds of pagan fatalism and revealed to him his human dignity and supernatural destiny. Next when Europe rose from the ruins of barbarism, the Roman law and its ancient socio-political institu- tions were resurrected and baptised in the Holy Roman Empire. Later in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, the scientific thought of Greece and Rome was assimilated and transformed into Christian scholasti- cism. Finally with the rediscovery of Hellenic beauty during the Renatssance, western man refashioned the aesthetic forms of his literature and art. The distinct con- tribution of the Ratio Studiorum; the Jesuit code of liberal education that was 50 years in the making and has been tried and tested for four centuries, was to integrate the aesthetic element of beauty of speech and artistic form of expression with the religious, political, and actentific elements of culture and thus to provide perfect and viable ex- pression for the wisdom of the west.’ To the transmission of this intellectual heritage of Christian culture, St. Joseph's College has made ita modest contribution for the past 100 years. For a century, in good days and 111, it has been the champion of a liberal humanistic and Christian tradition
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD which, it believes, is fundamentally the soundest and wisest ever conceived by man. Today the widespread trend toward general education indicates the correctness of its belief, and the record of its sons in medicine, law, business, scientific research, and educa tion, government, and the church, confirms its Judgment. In its educational endeavor and in its contribution to the community, the Church, and the country, St. Joseph's College boasts a tradition of which we are rightly proud. Tonight as we cross over the threshold into a new century of growth and achieve- ment, God grant us through the merits of His Divine Son the wisdom and strength to perpetuate and enrich it, Sees Inertia Endangering Financial Stracture EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. DEWEY SHORT OF MISSOURI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 2, 1951 Mr. SHORT. Mr. Speaker, Frank Kent, one of the ablest, grandest per- sons I have ever known, a newspaper- man who has written for many, Many years, has expressed his opinion, and so has Bruce Barton, a former Member of this House who has made a grand success in his own right, and I extend their two articles which speak for themselves: Brea INERTIA ENDANGERING FINANCIAL STRUC- qyURE—WrirkkR Says Wasts or Money Is Nationa. Perit (By Frank R. Kent) What kind of people are we, anyhow? Are we largely a Nation of nitwits who suptnely permit the perils that threaten us abroad to be needlessly enhanced by the idiocy and cowardice of our rulers at home? We smugly listen to the political and journalistic dema- gogues spout that old stuff about the funda- mental intelligence of the great American people but, actually, are we not a conglom- eration of fools without the gumption to avoid falling into the same pits out of which, at great cost, we have twice had to dig ourselves? A strong case for an affirmative answer to the last two questions can be made. For example, look at the fiscal facte as they now exist. Regardless of party, all men of wis- dom ,and experience agree that unchecked debts and deficits ultimately lead to financial disaster. Yet for nearly 20 years we have steadily piled up the one and deepened the other until at the beginning of the present fiscal year both had reached undreamed-of heighta and depths. Then, last summer we were catapulted into Korea and the realiza- tion driven bome that in Russia we had a powerful, potential enemy whose aggressions threaten our very existence. The urgency of arming ourselves led to Presidential pronouncements and congres- sional action. The country was responsive. All it wanted was leadership. It was pointed out that we must not repeat the mistakes of the last two wars: That delay in the regula- tion of wages, profits and prices in World War II bad cost us $100,000,000,000 and pro- longed the conflict by 6 months; that the only way to control inflation is to control it at the start. Everybody agreed about this. Nevertheless, nothing was done and for months there was a continuous spiral of wage and price raises until the cost of ving rttained heights never before approached and inflation reached vast and menacing proportions. The reason for this costly and dangerous delay is perfectly clear. Chiefly, it was the savage opposition of the labor unions to any controls until after they had gotten thelr fourth wave of wage increases through. This the administration, closely linked with them politically, permitted. This will al- ways remain an indefensible attitude which has greatly damaged the national interests. As a result, inflation has been greatly ad- vanced and the cost of all materials greatly increased. The freezlug of wages and prices now ordered by Eric Johnston, Director of Economic Stabilization, comes after long months of terribly expensive inaction. This is not Mr. Johnston's fault. The fault is Mr. Truman’s, Here is the administration asking appro- priations totaling many billions of dollars and urging Congress to levy an additional $16,000,000,000 in taxes, Conservative esti- mates fix the deficit for the next fiscal year at the unbelievable figure of $25,000,000,000. When you combine these astronomical fig- ures with an astronomical debt of $275,000,- 000,000, one does not have to be a mathe-~ matical genius to grasp the fact that they involve grave fiscal peril; that they preclude all possibility of a pay-as-we-go policy or & balanced budget; that they mean Federal finances have become almost unmanageable; that we really are threatened with a govern- menta! financial collapse that would cripple our defence effort, create a condition of chaos. If that happens—-and it can hap- pen—Ruesia could win the war without the loss of a soldier. In such pe situation it is impossible to conceive of an excuse for spending a needless dollar on nondefense ectivities. If there is any other way than rigid economy to keep the Federal financial structure from crumbling, no one has suggested it, The President himself has often spoken of the necessity for “rigid economy.” Yet he has taken no real step toward that goal. Time and again it has been pointed out that Con- gress cannot make the essential reductions by itself, Any real reduction can only be achieved under Presidential leadership. That leadership Mr. Truman distinctly has not provided. Not only has Mr, Truman exhibited no desire to lead but in his recent message to Congress, by advocating various nonessen- tial and highly costly projects to which he committed himself in 1948, he made it clear he has no intention of supplying that kind of loadership.* In light of these facte the inertia of the American people is shocking. Manrowsr on AIR POWER? (By Bruce Barton) As my friend Maj. Alexander P. de Beversky points out in his book, Air Power: Key to Survival, professional soldiers tend always to fight each new war with the strategy and weapons of the last. The United States and its Allies won World War II by invasion forces, landed under the protection of naval guns. So now, in the air age, our generals and admirals want more Navy and more millions of men to wade ashore and fight on land. The three departments of the military are jockeying for position, each demanding most men and most money. The result, says Major de Seversky, is the same as if three en- gineers were debating how to get our Armed Forces across a wide river. The first says, “I will build a ferry.” The second, “I will build a bridge.” The third, “| will dig a tunnel.” If we don't look out, our economy will be bankrupt, and the en- emy will have won the war before any one of these projects is finishec. When I was in Congress we cheerfully vot- ed every dollar for national defense that the AG47 Army and Navy asked. All of us assumed that the country was wel! protected, espe- clally in the air. Hadn't the Wrights invent- ed the airplane? Weren't our factories the biggest and most efficient in the world? It came to us with a terrible shock when we learned—first from Colonel Lindbergh— that we had only a few hundred planes, mostly obsolete, while Germany had thou- ends. Congress and all of us were shocked again when the war started in Korea. Billions and billions had been given to the Armed Forces in the preceding 5 years. What had they bought in the -vay of arms, ammunition, and implements of war? Seemingly almost noth- ng. Generals and admirals are brave men who have sworn to give their lives, 1f need be, for their country. They are entitled to our re- spect and gratitude, But before we give them universal military training, let them tell us whether they plan to win the next war with manpower or with air power, Ike and the Con Men EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CLIFF CLEVENGER or OHIO IN THE HOUSE CF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 7, 1951 Mr. CLEVENGER. Mr. Speaker, un- der leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following editorial from the Washington Times-Herald of February 7, 1951: Ise anp THE Con MEN Gen. Eisenhower has told the American people that they must send some divisions of foot soldiers to Europe but, he is careful to add, America will never be called upon to contribute more than a small fraction of the total ground force. BEFORE THE WAR Once upon a time Winston Churchill sald, “Give us the tools and we will finish the job.” We gave him the tools but we finished the job, as Gen. Elsenhower should know better than any other man alive, for three quarters of the soldiers he commanded on the west- ern front were Americans, Before that the American people were told by their own Government that if they re- pealed the neutrality act we would avoid involvement in the war. The neutrality act was repealed and before long we were in the war. Likewise, the American people were told that if they adopted conscription and mobilized the National Guard we could stay out of war. Both measures were taken and we got into the war. Lend-lease was just another of the devices which would surely keep us out of war. Then, after the shooting stopped, came the British loan. Our people were solemnly promised that the loan would put Britain on her feet and assure the stability of Europo, but before the last of the $3,750,000,000 had been squandered it waa apparent that Britain was in no better shape than before. Thon it was the turn for ald to Greece and Turkey, AND AFTER Mr. Acheson assured Senator HIcKENLOorER that the aid to Greece was not to be regarded as a precedent for loans to other European countries. Mr. Clayton said all other coun- tries’ requests for money would be handled by the International Bank and Export-Im- port Bank, thus avoiding any additional bur- den on the American taxpayers. Mr, Clayton said the Western European countries were
A648 making great strides toward economic re- covery. The implication was that the loans to Greece and Turkey would complete the job of European rehabilitation. But it was only 8 months later, in January 1848 that Secretary Marshall proposed the $17,000,000,000 Marshall plan, or ERP. In selling this project to Congress and the coun- try, General Marshall said that his scheme would spare the United States the necessity of becoming “an armed camp, regulated and controlled.” The Marshall plan billions were voted, but just & years later Congress was debating whether to draft all the boys at 18 or wait until they were 18 years and 6 months old; price control and wage control had been in- stituted; the demands of the military had absolute priority in all factories and nobody could think of any detail of ‘an armed camp, regulated and controlled” that had been overlooked by General Marshall, now Sec- retary of Defense. Another witnesg on behalf of the Marshall plan was Secretary of the Army Royall. He told Congress what would happen if the Marshall plan were not adopted. He said Army and Air Force appropriations would have to be increased by $2,500,000,000. What's more, he said, the draft would have to be instituted. The Marshall plan was adopted but so, too, was the draft; and the military appropriations rose, not by the two and one-half billions which the Marshall plan was supposed to spare us, but by twenty-five billions, which is to say 10 times as much. Still another witness was Secretary of De- fense Forrestal, who said he did not want to leave with the committee “the tmpres- sion that we were hoping to spend this money to create a great concert of militery force. That is, I think, illusory. You cannot de- pend upon that to provide us with security.” Perish the thought of a military alliance against communism, said this spokesman of the administration, but 6 months later the Vandenberg resolution, foreshadowing the North Atlantic alllance, had been rammed through the Senate and the following year came the treaty itself. THE UNITED STATES PAYS ALL BILLS General Bradley, testifying in behalf of the treaty, said it did not imply any expendi- ture but a few weeks later the appropriation was declared to be a necessity, Mr. Acheson, in reply to Senator HicKENLOOPER’s now fa- mous question, said there was absolutely no expectation that American foot soldiers would be sent to Europe as a consequence on the pact, and now General Eisenhower says American foot soldiers are the heart of the matter. Anyone who wishes to go into the record in greater detail should read a couple of articles by Mr. William L, Neumann which were pub- lished in American Perspective, from which we have drawn some of the quotations given here. The moral, of course, is obvious. There 1s no slightest reason to believe General Eisen- hower when he now says that the American contribution will be relatively small, The only conclusion that anyone cah draw from the unbroken record of bad faith and false promises by the principal spokesmen for this administration is that they are a pack of confidence men, wholly undeserving of be- Hef. The token army they now talk about is the prelude to the huge army of Americans they intend to send into the colossal war they expect to ight, The only remedy lies in the adoption of the Wherry resolution which says that no American foot soldiers may be sent to Europe without specific authorization from Congress, Address of James B. Carey EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WILLIAM J. GREEN, JR. OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 7, 1951 Mr. GREEN. Myr, Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrec- orp, I include the following partial text of a speech by James B. Carey, secretary~ treasurer of CIO and president of Inter- national Union of Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers, CIO, at the Ohio State Industrial Union Council, CIO, Colum- bus, Ohio, January 6, 1951: The world of 1951 is a world of uncer- tainty, of fear, of horrible danger, of treach- ery, of bravery, It is a year in which no one knows what the next months will bring, whether it be hope or gloom, or despair, or confidence, or life or death. Right now we have no way of knowing how far Russla’s greed for power over men's minds and bodies will carry it. We have no way of knowing whether December 31, 1951, will see Soviet locusts eating up most of Asia and all of Europe—two-thirds of the world's popula- tlon—or whether by some means, military or moral, Moscow will have lost or withdrawn its grand strategy. The world will have to decide this year. There 1s no more time for equivocation; there js very little time for let'’s-meke- another-appeal, no more time for anything but action. If we can prove to Russia that real peace pays, maybe Russia will learn the facts of life the hard way. If that succeeds quickly, we can really build a world bulwark of peace that no one could break. As I appear here today, I want to talk about the dangers that are ours, and what I think is the road to take to prevent a crush- ing defeat for the free world we love. I want to focus your attention on what are the roles and responsibilities for govern- ment, for business, for labor in this struggle. I want to talk about you and me, about yours and mine. It seems clear that we are all in this struggle together. If we lose to communism, capitaliam is done for, free enterprise will vanish, there will be no free farmers, small business wil] become part of the Soviet ma- chine, and instead of free labor there will be the kind of slave labor we now see in Eastern Europe and in China. There will be no difference between Democrats and Republicans in the Communist concentra- tion camps, and the same bullets of the firing squads will kill Hoover and Acheson. But America is coming to the parting of the Ways on the question of how our freedom ia to be preserved. There are two roads pointed out to us, and we will have to choose be- tween them. But they are completely opposite roads. By one road we can defeat Communist eg- gression, maintain and expand the free world and realize the blessings of not only liberty but also a higher standard of living for our- selves and hundreds of millions of others, By the second road, we will at best main- tain in America an armed camp that will ateadily degenerate into a semi-Fascist state, that will resemble more and more the dic- tatorship that we are trying to defeat. What are these two roads open to us? First, there is the road proposed by the McCormick-Hearst-McCarthy Taft-Hoov- er Dixlecrat axis. This group proposes in ef- fect that we abandon our democratic friends APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD throughout the world as being “unreliable”; that we hold onto the only “reliable” fighters against Communist such as Franco, Chiang Kai-shek, the Emperor of Indochina, and others of that like and that we pull back to our shores and go into our storm cellars. By whatever name this is catled, whether it is Tarr’s “reexamination” or Hoover's isolationism, the theory is the same. This group feels that it is hopeless to try to de- fend democratic Britain and France, social democratic Norway or Switzerland, or Italy. We can only fight when America itself ia in- vaded, Otherwise let the rest of the world go hang, Now this theory is not new. The same people who advance it now in fighting Com- munism advanced it in 1940 when the issue was fighting Nazi-Fascism. You remember the America First group, whose political leaders were the same people, the Tafts, Mc- Cormick, Hearst, Hoover and whose big busi- ness backers supplied millions of dollars for Propaganda. When Britain was fighting alone tor democracy these “brave men” of the America First group wanted to abandon her and abandon Europe, They had no stomach to fight for democracy. It was too expensive. Here is what your own Senator Tarr sald in 1940 after France had been overrun and Britain was staggering under the blitz. “I do not know what the Germans may do, and no one knows what they may do until they are freed from the present war and have an opportunity to show. When they do, we can adopt the same methods. We can take the same steps that may be necessary to meet the particular kind of German blitzkrieg, if there is such a blitz- krieg, at the time we find out what it is.” In plain English this outstanding state- Mean meant—"“Let the Nazis win the war and then if they attack us, we'll figure out what to do.” Isn't that exactly what Tart is saying today in the fight against communism? At that same time, in 1940 and 1941 when Roosevelt was trying to get this Nation to rearm, the big industrialists said we did not need to have more steel, more copper, more aluminum. They wanted business as usual, and profits as usual. It was organized labor that went out and demanded that this Na- tion mobilize to meet the Nazi challenge. The policy of these reactionaries, the ones who always cry “free enterprise” and “democracy” was one of defeatism when it came to a showdown. They had no con- fidence in democracy or freedom. They were willing to throw in the sponge. Today, they are pursuing the same poli- cles. While the McCarthys, Tafts, Hoovers, McCormicks, Hearsts, beat their breasts in denouncing Communism in the State De- partment or on the radio and demand purges, when it comes to really Aghting communism they want to throw in the sponge, retire to our storm cellars here. Isolationism and communism are allies today just as isolationism and fascism were allies just 10 years ago, in 1940 and 1041, To a few native souls it may still sound ex- treme to link Senator Taft, Herbert Hoover, and Colonel McCormick—supposedly relent- less foes of communism—with the Kremlin's scheme for world conquest. Nevertheless, wittingly or unwittingly, the Tafts and the Hoovers are as much in part- nership with Joseph Stalin today as they were with Hitler and Mussolini a decade ago. How? To begin with, not even an expert today can tell the difference hetween the Chicago Tribune's editorial policy and the editorial policy of the Communist Dally Worker. Since the invasion of the Republic of South Korea last June both papers have screamed incessantly for the withdrawal of
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD American troops from Korea. Both papers have demanded that American troops be pulled out of Asia and out of Europe. Both papers have declared, in effect, that both continents should be turned over to the tender mercies of Russian totalitarianiem, Both papers constantly attacked and under. mined every major decision and action under- taken by the United Nations. There are other waya in which the Taft- Hoover-McCormick axis serves the Kremlin. These American isolationists today demand exactly what they demanded in 1940 and 1941—that this country retire behind its two oceans, that it turn itself into a kind of “Gibraltar,” completely surrounded by a hostile world. Stalin himself couldn't ask for more. He couldn't ask for a more gratifying surrender then for the United States to abandon the democratic nations of Europe and desert the nations of Asia where democracy is begin- ning to move forward for the first time. We would be handing over to Stalin's slave- labor machine countless millions of men and women and giving him, by default, the price- leas natural resources of two continents to strengthen his war-making ability. Is it any wonder that even the Nation's outstanding Republican newspaper, the New York Herald Tribune, can't even call this madness “isolationism.” The Herald Tribune flatly terms it “retreatism.” I tell you as earnestly as I can: there is no place in this world today—this world of the atom bomb and the hydrogen bomb-—-where we can hide from totalitarianism. Neither the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans nor the North Pole are barriers. We can no longer mince words or insist on the niceties of etiquette when our Na- tion’s future is at stake, when democracy everywhere ts in desperate danger. We have got to see and state it openly that those men who advocate our giving up our allies in this life-and-death struggle are virtual traitors. Jsolationism today is commu- nism’s fifth column. Isolationism is as much our enemy as the communism it serves. Our own safety as a nation and the establishment of democracy and peace throughout the world depend on repudia- tion of everything that the Tafts, the Hoovers, and the McCormicks stand for, We must, for our own salvation and for the world’s salvation, wipe out the poisonous illusion that we can survive without friends or that there can be peace in a world one- fifth free and four-fifths enslaved. What would happen in America as a result of successful isolationism? I think we already see the signs of it-—I think we can see that the isolationism of this axis of defeatism is tied to a reactionary policy at home. Here is what they will aim for: 1, They will try to convert America into an armed camp for an indefinite period while the Communists nibble away at the Western Hemisphere—at Canada, South America, the West Indies. 2. Thoy will use this situation they have created to panic the American people into giving them political power in 1952. 8. Once in power, they will use the Sub- versive Controls Act and astmilar acts to stamp out anyone or any group who dis- agree with them. Free labor, free farm groups, free citizens’ groups will be piaced under fron control. The jatis will fill up with political prisoners. 4. The greater the Communist menace be- came from the outside, the tighter the con- trols would be placed on Americans until finally we would resemble the same dictator- ship we are trying to fight. This ia no wild dream. This is a grim, ghastly possibility. This is what would have happened if the Tafts had won the 1940 elections and had controlled the Govern- ment then, Only then I think they would Quve made their peace with the Nazis. T say this is a possible road. You may say that some of those who want to take us down that road don‘t believe in dictatorship. That may be true. But if we all end up in a Communist concentration camp or before a firing squad, will it make any difference to us whether Tarr or McCanrtTsy was only an ignorant fool and not a scheming Fascist? What ts the second possible road that we can take in this decisive year of 1951? ‘That road is the road of fellowship with the demo- cratic world, realizing that we are all in a state of siege, and it's a matter of all for one and one for all. As freemen we all survive or perish together. This means that we recognize that Europe, having gone through two devastating wars, is mortally afraid of a third, so instead of being impatient and dictatorial, we work with the free people of Europe in real comradeship and understanding. We let the people of Europe and of free Asia know that we will not only share military defense with them but also the possibilities of decent living standards. We make clear that this is not @ fight between the philosophy of commu- nism and capitalism, but between democ- racy and dictatorship. We let them know that to the extent of our ability we will join with them to prevent a Communist aggression and will not desert them. We let them know that America does not want to dictate but to be at one with them in partnership and comradeship. This means that in America we will not only keep our freedoms but expand them. We will sacrifice in proportion to ability to do it. We will expand our industrial capac- ity because we have confidence that now and after this emergency there will be an un- limited market for the comforts and de- cencies of life. We will make America a show place of democratic and civil rights because we are not afraid of the loyalty of Americans to freedom. In this struggle that Mes ahead, it will not be the McCarthys, the Hoovers, the Tafts, the McCormicks, who will be in the front lines in fighting communism. No, as always, it will be organized labor. For we have been fighting communt:m all over the world for 80 years, and it is the ICFTU that today is the first line of defense for democracy. It is strange and tronic, that the press is will- ing t play up these Tafts and McCarthys, yet it is labor who stands on the firing lines day after day, repelling the Communist on- slaught. It 1s an ironic and perhaps tragic thing that despite Tart's 10 years of complete blindness, first before the Nazi menace and now before the Communist menace, the press of this State of Ohio went all out for him, In its blind antagonism to Nberalism and labor, the press of this State was willing to court disaster to the Nation by having men like Tarr in our national leadership. It 1s & strange and ironic thing that these big business corporations who yell about communism in Washington refuse to join the struggle against Communists unless they are guaranteed their enormous profits. The newspapers the other day said that United States Steel is building a $400,000,000 steel plant to expand production. But United States Steel only agreed to do that after the Government guaranteed that it could write off the cost of the plant in 6 years. That means that the Government will pay United Btates Steel $300,000,000 of the cost in terms of taxes that it will save, The company will actually pey only one-fourth of the cost and it will completely own the plant, The same thing is true with regard to Alcoa in alumi- num, with the monopolistic copper come panies. You read last week end the congres- sional report on the way our defense is being held up by the refusal of the monopolistic International Nickel Co, to expand nickel production. A649 It is a strange and ironic thing that these big business corporations like General Zlec- tric, Westinghouse, and International Har- vester cannot only continue to do business with Communist unions but even try to pit Communist and anti-Communist unions against each other. Yet these corporations beat their breasts about the danger to free enterprise and the American way of life. Ana when I go to the Munitions Board to Propose that defense contracts not be granted to plants where there are Communist unions, these great patriotic American core porations and the patriotic American press remain silent. What is the difference between having the GE plant in Schenectady, whose union is run by Communists, than having the same plant located in Stalingrad where Communists are also in control? We in labor have a tremendous job to do in this year 1951. We have got to make clear to the American people the two roads that they can travel and the dangers to them if they travel the road of isolationism and reaction. We must educate them on the real way to fight communism, with arms, with ideas, with economic aid. We must show that it is fatal to appease dictatorship in Europe and Asia—since the more conces- sions we feed to it, the stronger it gots and the weaker we get. We have got to show likewise that it is fatal to feed reaction with concessions here, because the more we feed it the stronger it becomes and the weaker the forces of lib- eralism and freedom become. We have got to demonstrate to all con- cerned, that the fight against communism by this Government cannot succeed {f it is sim- ply led by men from big business. There must be, in places of equality with them, leaders of American labor, directing the strategy, the policies, the operations of this vast operation freedom. Already much damage has been done to our cause abroad by not having men from labor in the top policy and operating parts of our defense drive. We have got to realize that the fight for civil liberties, the rights of labor, decent living standards, equality of sacrifice at home is a necessary part of the fight against dic- tatorship and aggression abroad. We can only remain free in the world by being free at home. All free American labor, through the united labor committee, has presented its program to President Truman. On that program we can go to the American people, and to the people of the world. We have got to show the American people, despite the lies told about labor in the last election, that we have no interests that are separate and apart from the welfare of our country and its people. We have pot to show by our actions and our educational work that, as in the whole history of our country, it has been organized labor that has led the way in this struggle for a better democracy, And today we are prepared again, We want to unite with all men and women of gocd will no matter whether they be Republicans or Democrats, business men or farmers, lawyers or doctors, Blind or Brazen? Se centummenemened EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. DEWEY SHORT OF MISEOURI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 2, 1951 Mr. SHORT. Mr. Speaker, one of the great newspapers in our country is the St. Louis Globe-Democrat. I will frank- ly state that it is more Republican than
A650 Democratic, but regardless of our polit- ical beliefs or religious feelings I want to insert this article which will appeal to all sane thinking Americans: Burnyp OR BRAZEN? The President has revealed to Congressmen his plan for a $16,500,000,000 tax boost, the heaviest demand ever made in the history of the United States. He calls this program essential for defense. Actually it embraces not only defense needs but his whole fat Balaxy of social nostrums and Fair Deal whimsies. No intelligent American falls to recognize that great sums must be spent for rearma- ment. If Soviet imperialism is to be checked short of war, it seems possible to accomplish only by matching might. We ought to foot the bill for our mobilization on a pay-as-wee go basis, or as nearly so as possible. But Mr, Truman's budget and tax proe posals pay scarcely any attention to slashing nondefense expenditures. His few gestures toward economy are thin lip service. He fools no one and probably doesn't intend to, Senator Byrn, the capital’s most outvtand- ing champion of sound fiscal policy, has writ- ten the White House urging a cut in non- defense costs of more than 87,000,00,000, He analyzed the budget and showed specific categories where the cuts could be made. If his advice were followed, less than $10,000,- 000,000 more in tax levies would be necessary to put defense on a cash basis. The President’s comment was that Sena- tor Byrp doesn’t know very much about the Federal budget. The Senator has been studying budgets, taxation and spending habits of the Federal Government for decades. He is probably the best informed man on the subject since Carter Glass. Yet he is blandly ignored and disparaged by the White House. Mr. Byrrn’s recommendations are not polit- ically rartisan; ho is a Democrat. They are not impractical. He would increase budget allotments for price-wage control, labor training, allocation agencies and revenue collection. But he demands a slash in such purely domestic schedules as farm supports, aid to education, public housing save for defense workers, the vast public works, high- Ways and airport bounties. He wants to call a sharp halt to such Truman panaceas as the Brannan plan, lush Federal supports for the Commodity Credit Corporation, for so- Cialized medicine, and aid to education. The gigantic defense production program is going to give jobs to anyone who can do a day's work. We soon will face a labor short- age. This means social security spending can easily be curtailed. It should be. Certainly the Nation faces bigger taxes. But they should be held to a minimum of necessity. The President has no such atti- tude of mind. He has larded his budget with every scheme and program dreamed up since he has been in the White House. Now these concelts are called defense projects, This is cloaking politics under a defense mantle. The guise should fool no one, The President's demands will force people of the Nation to shoulder the greatest tax burden in our history. He insists on sacrifice for everybody—but the Government. This refusal to accept the grim require- ment for shearing economy in nondefense spending ought to meet with militant revolt of Congress. There would be no politics in a hard-boiled cut of lavish domestic expendi- ture, It is a simple, portentous matter of economics. Defense costs may continue at mountainous figures for 2, 8, 5, or 10 years. Uniess Government carves out waste and experiment and nonessential drains, the Nation can be smashed in the Kremlin's war of economic attrition, The President's fatlure vo recognize the danger and retrench indicates either blind- ness or a brazen disregard of fiecai sanity. What if Korea Were Germany? EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LEON H. GAVIN OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 7, 1951 Mr. GAVIN. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- orp, I include the following article by David Lawrence from the Washington Evening Star of February 5, 1951: WHat IF KorEA Were GrrMANy?—LONDON Economist Pokts Fun at BritTisH Pouicy BY SPECULATING ON REACTION TO ATTACK IN Wrst (By David Lawrence) Many people here have had a good laugh over an article in the London Economist twitting the British Government on its re- cent tactics in the UN in connection with the Korean situation. It is in the form of an imaginary dispatch dated about a year hence—January 22, 1952—from a British correspondent at Lake Success, It reads as follows: “Since the withdrawal of the United Na- tions forces from Bonn, opinion in the As- sembly has been veering in favor of the American view that it is necessary to aban- don Germany altogether in order to restore peace in Europe. The British delegate, Sir Gladwyn Jebb, has, indeed, continued to press for the condemnation of Russia as an aggressor, arguing that the whole purpose of the United Nations would be stultified if the Assembly refused to stigmatize the Rus- sian invasion of West Germany as an aggression. “The American delegate, Mr. Warren Aus- tin, however, {s urging caution. He matn- tains that hasty action would not be in the interest of peace and that time is needed to study the latest Russian counterproposals, which should be given the most careful consideration. “The proposal of the United Nations Polit- ical Committee for a cease-fire in Germany, to be followed by a meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers, was rejected by Russia, who insisted that Russian basic terms for & settlement must be accepted before the victorious Russian volunteers could be ad- vised to desist from their offensive. “The Russian demand is that all foreign troops must be withdrawn from Germany and that the internal affairs of Germany must be settled by the Germans themselves; as all German politicians who have not either escaped across the Rhine or joined the Com- munists have now been shot, Moscow is con- fident that Herr Ulbright will be able to han- dle the situation with difficulty. The Rus- sians are willing to accept the proposal for a meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers on condition that representatives of Italy, Iraq, and Mongolia are added to it and that the conference is held in Leningrad. “The British Army having suffered 50,000 casualties in the fighting in Germany, Brit- ish public opinion ts in a somewhat excitable mood and the Government ts being sharply criticized by the opposition for the ineffec- tiveness of its European policy. The Prime Minister has pointed out that the RAF cane not be used for bombing beyond the bound- ary of the British zone without a decision of the United Nations, but he has promised to do all he can to get the United Nations to declare Russia an aggressor, even though it is generally recognized that no sanctions are likely to be imposed. “Opinion in well-informed circles in Wash- ington, however, is that America must be wary of being drawn into an extension of hostilities; it is felt that the British are APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Mable to be headstrong in their reactions to events in Europe and that their old im- perial traditions are making them unduly bellicoge. The State Department has not yet abandoned its hope of detaching Russia from China, and deprecates any policy which might have the effect of driving Stalin into the arms of Mao. “Benator Bebop has made an important speech at Cincinnati, in which he warned the American people against allowing American troops to be tied up in Europe when there was such a serious danger of a Russo- Chinese attack on Alaska, Japan, and the Philippines. He said it was very unfortunate that nobody seemed to be able to exercise any control over General Eisenhower, who had evidently underestimated the prospects of Russian intervention when he pursued the East German invaders back across the zonal boundary. Everything should be done to restore peace as quickly as possible, so that there should be no damage to the old friend- ship between the Russian and American peoples. The Russians, he declared, were a& proud people who would not long be sub- servient to the mandarins of the forbidden city. “A deep impression has also been made by an address delivered to the Foreign Policy Association by Mr. John K. Poffenheimer of Adriatic Exports, Inc., who told his audience that he had been doing excellent business in trade from Trieste behind the iron curtain and that, if only America would do nothing to interfere with Russian expansion, there was no reason why this trade should not go on for a few years longer. He said that com- munism in Europe could not be stopped by force, and the sooner Britain realized this, the better. “The Indian Prime Minister has also given & press conference in Mexico opposing the idea of declaring Russia an aggressor. The Russians, he said, had suffered great humili- ations in the period before Peter the Great, and naturally it would take them a long time to get over it; they were very sensitive to criticism and, if they were to be branded 8 aggressors simply because they had com- mitted an act of aggression, it might spoil the chances of peaceful negotiation. The Indian delegation in the Assembly has been taking ® similar line with the support of the bloc of Asian and Arab countries. “The latest news from Germany is that the Russians have crossed the Rhine on a broad front and that an armored spearhead has penetrated into Aachen. The Political Com- mittee of the Assembly has today voted for an adjournment to consider Mr, Vishinaky’s clarification of the Russian terms for a cease fire. Sir Gladwyn Jebb strongly opposed the adjournment, declaring that the new Rus- sian statement was a transparent attempt to divide the free world and delay the exercise of the Pacific functions of the United Na- tions. Mr. Warren Austin, however, urged that delegates must have time to conault their governments about the ‘new situation’ and said that in the opinion of his Govern- ment the United Nations ‘should not at this stage take a new and important decision,’ ” The Chickens Are Coming Home To Roost EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. NORRIS POULSON OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. POULSON. Mr. Speaker, the great “do-good” attitude of the New Deal in attempting to do everything for
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the rest of the world at the expense of the United States is now bearing fruit in the form of vinegar. We are now be- ginning to pay the price. Let's take the case of manganese. Sey- eral years ago representatives of the Bu- reau of Mines and other experts in this country appeared before the Mines and Mining Subcommittee of the Public Lands Committee in executive session and told us that manzanese was a stra- tegic material of which there was a great shortage in this country. We were told that while we had an unlimited supply of low-grade manganese, and that it would produce steel with only 70 percent of the efficiency of the steel today, that processes could be developed and meth- ods of manufacture devised to utilize this low-grade manganese and still produce top-grade steel. This, of course, would mean that we would either have to place a tariff on manganese to help our man- ganese industry during this period, or else subsidize the cost outright. Of course, the “do-gooders” could not think of putting on a tariff and the President vetoed all the bills we had per- taining to a subsidy, and the adminis- tration, at the direction of the President, blocked in the various committees any attempts to subsidize mining interests. Now, let us see where we are getting manganese. We were getting approxi- mately one-third from Russia and any- one with any common sense could sce that Russia, knowing our position, would sell it to us at such a low price that we could not possibly develop our own man- ganese and compete with her price. Then, when we get into the tough spot in which we are today, Russia cuts off the supply. Our other source of supply is India and, of course, we all know India’s weak- ness, She wants our 2,000,000 tons of wheat but will do nothing for us. The third source of supply is Africa. Just see how dumb we have been. Foolishly I have supported this legis- lation in the past, but now I am going to start thinking about my own country first, whether the administration does or not. I intend to vote for all the amend- ments and then vote against the bill. Where Credit Is Due EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WALT HORAN OF WASHINGTON IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 7, 1951 Mr. HORAN. Mr. Speaker, the Sec- retary of the Treasury, Mr. Snyder, last week announced that the United States Treasury has closed all American ports to the further importation of canned crab from Russia, Secretary Snyder based this action on the ground that Russian crab is caught or processed in whole or in part by slave or forced labor. When any product is so produced the Secretary may prohibit further im- ports of it into the United States. Behind the Becretary’s action of clos- ing our ports to Russian canned crab lies the work of one Congressman, Rus- SELL V. Mack, of Washington. Our col- league, Mr. Mack, insistently and persist- ently for the past year has been carrying on a fighting campaign against the im- portation of this Russian crab meat. Of Mr. Macx’s efforts to stop these crab imports the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, one of the largest papers in the Pacific Northwest, recently said editorially: WHenre Crenit Is Dus The entire American crabmeat industry will benefit from the recont Treasury De- partment order forbidding imports of Rus- sian crab meat into the United States on the ground that it is produced by use of forced convict and indentured labor. Let it be remembered for the record that two men from this State are entitled to all the credit for this. They are Mr. Ray Webb, of Westport, spokesman for the crab fishermen of Wash- ington, and Congressman Russxiu V. Mack. Mr. Webb called the Post-Intelligencer’s attention more than a year ago to the unfair competition to which Washington crab fisner- men and packers were being subjected by Russian imports, dumped at prices which Americrns could not afford to meet, As soon as Congressman Mack learned of the matter through the Post-Intelligencer he took it up on the floor of the House. Congressman Mack’s fight undoubtedly was responsible for the Treasury D2part- ment’s acilon—as prior to that time protests fiom the American crab-meat industry had apparently fallen on deaf ears. But, Mr. Mack has not been satisfied with just stopping Russian crab meat imports. He says the importation of Russian canned crab is just a symbol of the far more extensive and dangerous practice of American citizens trading with the enemy. In a recent speech Mr. Macx pointed out that in the turst 10 months of 1950 that Britain, France, and Belgium sold Russia and her allies more than $200,- 000,000 of such war goods as iron, steel, copper, lead, zinc, rubber, ball bearings, automobile trucks, barbed wire, and such similar products. Mr. Mack said we ought to demand that our so-called allies stop this kind of trading with the enemy. We cannot, however, very effectively, Mr. Mack rightly says, demand that our allies stop trading with the enemy until we, the United States, ourselves stop trading with the enemy. Mr. Macx in his recent speech pointed out that the United States, in the first 10 months of 1950, bought more than $36,000,000 in goods from Russia and sold her less than $600,000 in goods during that same period. “In other words,” Mr. Macx said, “we have been supplying Russia about §3,- 000,000 of American money monthly which Russia has employed to buy war goods in other countries. If we want other countries to quit selling war sup- plies to Russia and her satellites,” Mr. Mack correctly argues, “we, the United States, must stop supplying Russia with the money to pay for the war goods she is buying from our allies.” Concerning Mr. Macx’s activities in behalf of the United States trading with the enemy, the San Diego Union, San . Diego, Calif., recently said editorially: ia A6é1 We Never Learn Representative Mace of Washington makes a point when he says that the United States should quit trading with the enemy before asking other nations to do so. He told hts colleagues that in the first 10 months of 1950 we imported $36,344,308 in goods from Russia, while tn the same period we sold her only $563,396 worth. By this proce ess, as Representative Mac observes, we are supplying the Russians some 3,000,000 United States dollars per month---dollars which ctussta spends to buy war goods from our so-called good friends, Britain, France, and Belgium. Russia has many things we need, but she also has some things we don't need, such as furs which compete with our own fur grow. ers’ products, with dicastrous effects In many cases. We also have goods that the Russians need but they choose to get thom elsewhere— mostly from the satellites. Senator O'Conor, of Maryland, lately ex- posed the fact that Americans up to quite recently were shipping ofl and used tires to Red China and large quantities of steel, aluminum, and copper to Russia. We never seem to learn. Prevent Rail Strikes EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. DEWEY SHORT OF MISSOURI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 2, 1951 Mr. SHORT. Mr. Speaker, three of my sisters married railroad men—con- ductors and brakemen. I happen to have a brother who is chief personnel officer of that same railroad, so I get all arguments, pro and con. Regardless of what we think, I in- clude, without endorsing everything, the following editorial from the Washington Daily News of February 7, 1951: PREVENT RAIL STRIKES This country must find a way to prevent railroad strikes. In peacetime or wartime such strikes are intolerable. Railway labor cannot fight out its controversies with rallway managements without hurting millions of innocent by- standers and gravely endangering the whole Nation. Most of the yardmen who took part in the “sick strikes” have gone back to work in response to Defense Mobilizer Wilson's ap- peal to their patriotism. The damage they have done cannot soon be repaired. The public anger they have aroused is inspiring demands for law to draft strikers into the Army, or to compel arbitration, or to authorize other drastic measures. Their controversy with the railroads is still unsettled. Senator Morse, of Oregon, urges President Truman to settle it by using his war powers and calling on unions and management to accept the decision of an arbitrator ap- pointed by the President. . ‘That might insure temporary peace on the railroads, It might produce an approxima- tion of justice. But it is not a good plan, because {t calls for more personal interven- tion by the President, wheras the need is for less, For 15 years this country did have a way to prevent railroad strikes. That way was provided by the Railway Labor Act of 1926, a law sponsored by the railroad unions,
A652 Strikes were not forbidden. There was no compulsory arbitration. The law created good machinery for conciliation and media- tion, which helped to settle a large ma- jority of controversies, Those not thus set- tied were submitted to able fact-finding boards, appointed by the President. The recommendations of such boards were not binding. There was no power to enforce them except the power of public opinion. Both sides often complained about the board’s recommendations. But both sides customarily accepted them. Labor, man- agement and the public were spared the eco- nomic loss and punishment of strikes. The Rallway Labor Act still is on the books but most of its effectiveness is gone, de- stroyed since 1941 when President Roosevelt first intervened to help strike-threatening unions get more than his own appointees to @ fact-finding board had recommended. Time efter time since then, railroad unions have rejected conciliation, mediation and fact-finding recommendations, and carried their cases to the White House, seeking and too often getting Presidential intervention, The ruin of a good law by bad administra- tion and political interference, started under Mr. Roosevelt, has continued under Mr. Truman. The fine machinery erected by the Railroad Labor Act has all but broken down, It has pecome aimost impossible to persuade enough able, fair, experienced men to help operate that machinery. Yet the principles of the Railway Labor Act are still sound. What the country needs is not stern new laws to forbid strikes or to punish strikers, but a return to those sound principles. The way that prevented railroad strikes for 15 years can prevent them again—not to the complete satisfaction of either labor or man- agement but with happier results for all con- cerned than the last 10 years have produced, Root politics and incompetence out of the operation of this law. Put ability and in- tegrity back in. Encourage and help the railroad unions and their members to recover the keen sense of public responsibility they once displayed in such great measure. Help them to regain public confidence and gain public determination that, because they must not strike, they must be fairly treated. Reciprocal Trade Agreements EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. RALPH W. GWINN OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 7, 1951 Mr. GWINN. Mr. Speaker, in the simple far-off days of 1984, the American people, tired of the arguments and squabbling in open congressional debate on the fixing of tariffs. They decided to turn tariff-making over to the President. They imagined he and his aids would sit down in an atmosphere of pure con- templation and study proposed tariffs with an eye single to the public good. Since then Congress and the public has not known what was happening under executive control of  tariff-making. Strangely enough it turned up in the State Departments. Its one-man gov- ernment is shrouded in mystery. Our colleagues are now telling us the full story of how our American indus- tries have been injured by one-man State Department tariff agreements. As the complaints grew our guides and mentors in the State Department said that a few industries might suffer but it was all for the general good. They promised that their program would bring about one economic world of peace-loving nations, all trading freely with each other. So the traditional American concept that an individual American has rights even against the Government or the world of nations was scrapped for State Department concepts of the general good. Today we see that the State Depart- ment’s one economic world has failed as dismally as their one political world. We see the collapse of their peace program in the Asian debacle, but we must recog- nize the similar collapse of their world economic Utopia. Never in all history have so many restrictions been put on foreign trade as we have seen since the State Department took over manage- ment of foreign trade from Congress, By quotas, bilateral agreements, State monopolies, import licensing, and tink- ering with the value of the currency, other nations have been closing their gates while we were opening ours wide to all comers. There was no such thing as reciprocal trade. It was all one way against us. At home we found that the innocent- appearing plan for freeing world trade had somehow changed into a purely so0- cialistic scheme for government control of all foreign transactions. The sinister result of this high-sounding word “re- ciprocal” now appears. The Soviet Union has been one of the principal one- sided beneficiaries. We got nothing in return. When the U.S. S. R. sold to us cheap furs and crab meat produced with slave labor over our lowered tariff walls, what did she take from us in exchange? She bought machine tools, chemicals, oil, and other products for her war industries to make the equipment now being used against our men in Korea. Or she took gold for her fifth column operating within our midst. Besides, she threw out of work our laborers in fur and fishing. Now as the criticisms mount, the pro- ponents of this program say the plan is good, but it has been badly administered. They will fix it directly. It is time we stopped being fooled. A bad law, which gives arbitrary power to one man, is not ever well administered. The reciprocal trade-agreements program is badly ad- ministered because it is in the nature of one-man government to be badly admin- istered. Such government is carried on in the interests of the one man in power, and the advisers, toadies, and secret rivals who surround him. ft becomes ridiculous, too. It appears that he let 10,000 carloads—or 10,000,000 bushels— of potatoes in from Canada free from tariffs. At the same time the Govern- ment burned 10,000 carloads of Maine surplus potatoes and charged it all to the taxpayers, That is why congresses and parlia- ments were invented in the first place, to make one-man rule of special favors and corruption impossible, Americans once knew exactly what kind of gov- ernment they would get if they let one APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD man or a few men with absolute power fix taxes and tariffs and do as they pleased about matters vital to the Na- tion, They fought a revolutionary war about it. Let us, before it is too late, correct the same evil, Let us say: We will no longer tolerate one-man tariff making. He shall not determine what industries are to live or die, what workers must learn @ new trade or leave home. Under the Jaw as amended he still has power to de- cide which sections of our country will have a windfall and which will be threat- ened with decay. Thus he determines the fate of industries vital to our na- tional defense, Tariffs are laws. They are not the business of the President or his advisers. They are the business of Congress, the representatives of the people. When Congress voted the first recip- rocal trade agreements bill it surren- dered that vital principle. Congress gave the Executive its legislative power. Let us do less talking about the mis- takes of the Executive. Let us face our own mistakes. Logrolling is bad, but it is out in the open, and every interest is represented. Executive logrolling is hidden in dark places, and no interest is represented unless it can pay for fa- vors with thousands of votes. The in- trigues that go on in the depths of one- man government do far more damage to the Nation than the worst evils in Congress where the citizens can see them and correct them. Let us for once boldly announce that we have faith in lJawmaking by the Con- gress. Let us decide now that we are done with lawmaking by one-man gov- ernment. He promised us peace through reciprocal trade. He brought us war and lost our trade, Let us decide we do not want Executive control of our tariff or taxes or wars, The American Congress is about ready to make the laws, and tell the Executive to obey them. ee. Mr. Truman’s Vicious Tax Program EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. DEWEY SHORT OF MISSOURI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 2, 1951 Mr. SHORT. Mr. Speaker, Thomas Jefferson once said that the power to tax is the power to destroy. This is as true today as it was when Jefferson uttered his words, and, of course, we all know that Jefferson founded the Democratic Party and that Franklin Roosevelt dumbfounded it, but I am happy to include the following ar- ticle which recently appeared in the Washington Times-Herald: Mr. Truman's Vicious Tax Procram Congress should wholly disregard Mr, Tru- man’s tax proposals, They are vicious in that they will put a premium on loafing and waste at a time
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD when the country is supposed to need greater output; and they are silly because they will raise far more money than the Government really needs. TRIMMED TO WHOSE BONE? Mr. Truman says be must have all this additional money, most of it to come from higher income taxes, because he can't cut expenses below the seventy-one and one-half billion set forth in his budget. He was vehement about that when some Republican Congressmen asked him whether he didn’t think some economies were possible. He said they weren't. He said the budget was trimmed to the bone. Of course it isn’t, either on the civillan or on the military side. So far as civilian spending goes, Mr. Tru- man hasn’t recommended even a cut in hig own vastly excessive personal expense ac- counts that he gets tax free. He hasn't called for a suspension of ail reclamation schemes and money-wasting river and har- bor improvements. He hasn't called for an end to all farm subsidies. He hasn't taken politics out of the office. He hasn't insisted that the Vet- erans' Administration cease giving service to gold bricks, but instead has allowed the arch enemy of the gold bricks, Dr. Magnuson, to be fired. Mr. Truman won't cut the routine expendi- tures of Government back to the already fantastically extravagant level established by Mr. Roosevelt. BILLIONS IN FAT Tf Mr. Truman needs his victous tax bill to balance the budget as it stands, he needs much less money than he is asking to balance a@ reasonable budget. Senator Brev, a Democrat, says he has found seven billions of fat in Mr. Truman's budget. Senator Doucias, among others, is equally confident that great economies are possible on the civil side. These are Democrats, one of them 4 con- firmed New Dealer, and if they know that Mr. Truman is the most extravagant Prest{- dent by far that this country has ever known, surely the Republicans in Congress should have no trouble in proving the case and mak- ing it stick with the belp of conservative southern Members. The military budget is an even worse of- fender against the prosperity and welfare of the people. The President pretends that the Nation must have 3,500,000 men in service and he is quite obviously getting ready to raise the ante to 4,000,000 or more as s00Nn 85 the 3,500,000 are under arms. No one has shown the need for any such numLers and nobody ever can if Congress will demand an accounting of just what all these men are to do. This country and its posseacions cun be fully protected against invasion with no more Navy than we now have, with some growth in our Air Force, and with no more troops than the Army 1ow has. There is no need for the draft. There is no need for the enormous expenditures planned for equip- ment. If Congress will adopt the Wherry resolu- tion or something Hke it, and twen restrict our contribution to Europe under the North Atlantic treaty to naval and air support and even some deliveries of munitions, the whole case for these tax increases blows up. If, in addition, Mr. Truman will exert him- self to find a way to end the war in Koreas that never should have been begun, which has already cost us more than 7,000 lives, and from which nothing is to be gained, taxes a0- tually can be reduced. Of course, if this country is to support an awollen and ever-swelling bu- rea if it is to subsidise everybody who wants a handout at home and abroad, if it is to engage in utile wars and seak other and bigger and more futile ones to fight, then no conceivable amount of taxation can balance the budget. IT WILL SOAK EVERYBODY Let there be no mistake about it. Mr. Truman’s tax plan, if adopted, will ruin the country. It will grind the poor as well as the rich. It will take so large a part of everyone’s earnings that there will be little incentive to work harder and therefore pro- duce more. And let there be no mistake, either, about the only approach to the problem that will succeed in defeating the Truman program. The only way to lick it is to slash the appro- priations, civil and military, until they are brought within the capacity of the people to pay them. That means an end to New Deal squander- ing and, more particularly, a revision of New Deal foreign policy. Everything else 1s eco- nomic and political quackery. Your Public Relations in the National Emergency EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JACOB K. JAVITS OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 7, 1951 Mr. JAVITS. Mr. Speaker, there ts appended the following statement of Edward L, Bernays, well-known author- ity on public relations of New York City, which appeared as a public advertise- ment and which I believe to be of suffi- cient general interest to be included in the Appendix: Your Pustic RELATIONS IN THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY (By Edward L. Bernays) For some time now forward-looking Amer- ieans have recognized that private interest must coincide with public interest. This 18 particularly true in the present national emergency. But some of us have not yet awakened to this truth. And unless everyone of us does, there may be no private interest left to worry about. Our national strength 1s founded on 9 unt- fied, powerful morale. This morale is built by our common belief in our national goals and united action to achieve them. The national emergency demands that all of us on all fronts work together for the general good. Complete cooperation on the home front is as vital to national survival as it is on the military front. For the sake of his own private interest, the individual must willingly sacrifice con- venience, comfort, and profit for the com- mon good, endure hardships and suffering. For unless we maintain our continuity as a free, independent nation, we shall have nothing as individuals, Bvery American is responsible for our morale. Our national morale is the sum of our individual morales. This means that all of us, men and women, old and young, cor- poration executives and employees, must be willing to serve wherever and whenever we are needed. Any man who acts at the coun- try’s expense helps the enemy. If he in- jures his country's strength, he destroys everything he values for himself, A653 Acting at America’s expense includes profs iteering, chiseling, black and gray mar- keteering, or doing anything which places personal profit above the public interest, It also includes slander, hate, rumor- mongering, and scapegoating at the expense of public officials or private citizens. Our national welfare tin this emergency requires that individuals, groups, and cor- porations give the most painstaking atten- tion to their public relationships. They must ensure, in thelr own interest and in the public interest, that every action and utterance raises morale and does not lower or destroy it. They must make certain that their poll- cles, words, and acts are dictated not by narrow immediate expediency but by the broader interest of self and country. If ever there was f time when such public Telationships were indispensable, that time ds now, The Sixth Anniversary of Yalta sc eseieten Aneel EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. GEORGE H. BENDER or OHIO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 7, 1951 Mr. BENDER. Mr. Speaker, Feébru- ary 7 should be a day of national mem~ ory. This is the anniversary of Yalta, a conference which should live in history as a day of mourning. On this day, 6 years ago, the people of Poland, whose heroic and tragic battle was the first resistance to Nazi ageres- sion, were sold into the despotism of communism. To those who say that the people of central Europe have willingly accepted the domination of Soviet Rus- sie, I give you the example of Poland. The people of Poland were not con- sulted at Yalta. They were not asked to vote. They were not considered as human beings. On the contrary—they were traded as a commodity over a counter, turned over to the Kremlin as part of a bargaining deal. By our Government's participation in this agreement, we forfeited our claim to moral leadership throughout the world. Lest we forget, Alger Hiss was at Yalta. By all accounts, he played a large role in its deliberations. Lest we forget, too, the agreements reached at Yalta have never been submitted to the Senate of the United States for ratifica- tion or examination. Our State Depart- ment does not regard them as treaties, but they are treaties in every other sense. They have bound us hand and foot in Poland. They have made it impossible for us to protest against the seizure of Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania. Thanks to these commitments, our Government has done what the armies of Stalin could never have done. We have literally pushed millions of our friends behind the iron curtain, never to emerge in our lifetime. Let Americans who are confused by the march of events remember this day. February 7 is the anniversary of Yalta, another day that should live in infamy in the annals of history.
A654 Address of Hon. John Sparkman, Sen- ator From Alabama oencomemamaesis EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. JAMES J. DELANEY oF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 8, 1951 Mr. DELANEY. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- orp, I include the following address by Hon. Jonn Sparkman, Senator from Ala- bama, at the annual Democratic dinner in New York: Mr. Chairman, Senator Lerman, ladies, and gentlemen, Democrats all, I am glad to join you tonight in this victory dinner paying honor to a great American. I may add that he is almost an Alabamian. His roots are in Alabama. Had his parents waited just a little longer about moving to New York from Alabama he wculd have been born there along with his older brothevs and sisters. This occasion is indeed an appropriate one, We in Congress have not known Senator Layman aa long as you have, but he has al- ready made 8 profound impression upon ua, We all admire hia integrity and honesty. Particularty do we like his characteristics of tolerance and open-mindedness, Never in any debate in which he was engaged, nor in any statement made by him, have I heard him tn any way impugn the motives of his adversary or fall to respect fully the thoughts of others. These are invaluable qualities. They are qualtties which we all must cultivate and practice if we are to meet succesafully the crisis that confronts us today. We recognize that the problems produced by this crisis are so numerous and possible solutions so clouded by uncertain or un- known factors that there are bound to be honest differences of opinion on the best way to get the results we want. In this land of ours, which has become the citadel of freedom and democracy for the entire world, it is necessary that the policy ‘we pursue be submitted to free and open dis- cussion and adopted by a meeting of minds, Our leaders do not, as does the Kremlin, submit only one choice and liquidate those who do not vote for It. Of course, in the policy that we follow there is delay in determining just what our actions shall be. Free and open discussion, however, is a necessary process if there is to be an understanding by the American people of the realities of the situation, and if they are to be aware of the critical issues with which our leaders must deal. There must be such understanding and awareness ff in the Jong run our relations with other countries are to receive the support of the American people. Our leaders in the executive branoh of the «Government know this. The policies sug- gested by them have been reviewed before the Congress and laid before the people with reasonable regularity. This has been done in the hope that the proposed policies would be met with reason, modified with reason, and adopted with unity. Unfortunately, in these times some who have means of reaching sizable eudiences yield to the easy temptation to give forth utterances of impassioned but confusing nature, Too often do they dwell on the past, too frequently do they seek to find official scapegonts for conditions which they them. kelves helped to create. They, and all of us, should realize that to assume public respon« sibility in these days is to accept the heavy burden of dealing with inevitable problema, fears, and failures; and from these, to chart the course to ultimate success. This re- quires penetration, tolerance, and, above all, honesty. In spite of the unnecessarily created con- fusion, it does seem to me that out of the great debate which has been raging during the past several weeks there {s emerging a national unity. We have found many points of agreement. Thus the great debate {s now entering into a conclusive and constructive phase. Even though valuable time has been lost, debate has been necessary to air our differ- ences of opinion, to bring to our people a keener understanding of the great dangers which we face, and to enable us to work out @ course which an overwhelming majority of us can follow. Isolationism and defeatism, twin sister of the disgruntled and the de- spairing, have again heen thwarted in their fight to determine the Nation's policies. Whatever discussions we have in the fu- ture, may they not be partisan, acrimonious, or selfish in aim. May our sole purpose be to bring about the unity so vital to our survival. As Senator Leman so aptly said in this same city when he addressed the Democratic National Committee at its dinner here last December, “If we are firm enough and wise enough we will avoid catastrophe. But a household divided against itself can be neither firm nor wise nor strong. We have the right to expect unity in the free world. But beyond this, we have the right to ex- pect, nay, to insist, upon unity in the worid affairs at home. if ever there was a time to merge our differences in a common cause, that time is now. United in determination as well as in action, or cause, and the cause of freedom tn the world will prevati.” The same processes which enable people in a democracy like ours to reach a common goal on the national level are not only inevitable but desirable in world forums. It is neces- sary that we be just as patient and tolerant in dealing with peoples of other free coun- tries as we are with one another if we are to reach understandings mutually helpful to us and to them. We must recognize that many barriers such as language, background, and so forth, while surmountable, make our problem of reaching a common ground more difficult. Yet in the long run, it is absolutely essential that na~« tions of the world, and especially the free nations, understand and respect one an~ other’s rights if there is ever to be a peace-~ ful world in which the dignity of man has value. We can never compromise our principles, and that is why we had to insist in the United Nations that the Communists of China be labeled the aggressor in Korea, This to the American people was a moral ise sue, and to have evaded or refused action would have caused a far greater lack of sup port for the United Nations than any mill- tary set-back in Korea. The United Nations went into Korea in the first place because it was the moral thing to do. The United Nations can suffer military de- feats and survive; it cannot sacrifice prin- ciples and survive. It is indeed encouraging that an overwhelming number of United Nations members voted last week to uphold the moral principles necessary to keep that Organization alive and virile. What was and is the best course to follow regarding Korea is not the first nor will it be the last instance in which free member na- tions disagree. In deciding our stand on problems that arize we must make every fair effort to recon- cile our differences, if any, with other free APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD nations. They expect leadership fram us, nat dictation. They say, and with much truth, that agree- ing with one another is a two-way street, They say, and again with much truth, that while they need us, we also need them. No one can deny that on the whole we have been considerate of other nations’ attt- tudes, No one can deny that there have been occasions in which we justifiably criticized the attitude of our allies. Such are some of the aspects of the Korean crisis. Yet some of us have been deeply concerned by the vigor with which some Amerioans insist that the United Nations accept completely and without any variation the views of the United States. There can be complete subservience only by nations that are satellites. Few Ameri- cans, if any, want for us in the United Na- tions this Ruseian-like situation. Rather we want other nations’ confidence. We want them to know that we have no imperiallatio designs on them and that we are only inter- ested in maintaining our freedom and help- ing other Itke-minded nations to do likewise. We want them to make their share of what. ever sacrifices are necessary to crown our joint efiorts with success, but we want to work with them in determining what these efforts shall be. These, it seems to me, are elemental pre. requisites if liberty-loving nations are to stand together to maintain liberty. We know that the appeasement of commu- nism does not pay. Certainly we should leave nothing undone to encourage other nations to resist communism. Most of them, however, are much closer to Communist armies and are in more immediate danger than are we. Their greater reluctance to make a move that might bring Communist retaliation can therefore be understood. Part of our job is to build a joint security, and to persuade these nations that further ap- peacement is even more dangerous than re- sisting pressure now. Surely, we should be foolish to give up the United Nations in despair any time a criris is upon us. What kind of a country would we have today if the Thirteen Colonies had taken a similar attitude under the Arti- cles of Confederation? History records many crises, any one of which could have been fatal, through which this Nation has passed. Instead of permitting these many threat- ening situations and differences to destroy us, wisdom prevailed and we emerged from each Crisis stronger than ever. We may do the same in the United Nations. The. possibla good is worth the try. Many forget that the United Nations ts a very young organization, It has no great body for tradition on which it can stand. Before it has discovered its own two feet, un- believably heavy burdens have been placed upon it, It is surprising when one reviews the many acoomplishments of the United Nations. That within itself would take a Jong time to relate. Some critics seem to expect from a 5-year- old organization the strength, the «endurance, the character, and the abilities of a fully mature institution. Others make the mistake of looking on the United Nations only from the standpoint of military security. It is true that this ts and should be a major function of the United Nations, I wish we all could realize, how- ever, the important part which member na- tions want the United Nations to play in building economic security. In fact, I dare say that a large majority of the 60 members would rank this No. 1 on their List of the most effective things the United Nations could do to check communism, Tt is tragic that Russia and those who follow her make it necessary for other na- tions to use for defense purposes resources
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD which oould go toward buliding a better economic life. Eeanomic security is a goal, however, which must not be lost sight of even though temporarily dimmed by the necessity of military preparation. It is one which Russia intentionally strives to block because im the long run it is an effective bar to Com- munist expansion. The importance of the United Nations working toward economic security can be ep prectai when one realizes that one-half of the world’s people have an everage annual income of leas than $100 a piece. Two-thirds of the world’s people live in poverty and suffer from hunger and disease. They are determined to make a change. The question so vital to our world ts in what direction will they go. This is a problem to which the United Nations has not yet been able to give proper attention. To condemn that organization, however, because some of its functions are not operating with perfection at the present time is as naive and dangerous as it would have been to condemn the Constitution of the United States because it failed to pre- vent the War Between the States, or because its eighteenth amendment was impossible to enforce. In an imperfect world, we have to learn to live with imperfections which we cannot immediately remedy. I am not arguing that we should not try to remedy the imperfection in collective se- curity today. I simply suggest that we should endeavor to analyze clearly and hon- estly the weaknesses in the United Nations, and then make every effort to eliminate them, If we do this and still fall, we can at least hold our heads high and honestly say that the resultant destruction was not of our making. While it may never be that we can solve all our international problems through the United Nations, does anyone believe our problems would grow less outside that organ- {zation? Of course, Russia poses many prob- lems inside the UN. Would we have less problems with Russia if either or both na- tions were on the outside? As I have indl- cated, the United Nations has solved several vexing problems, potentially dangerous to world peace. ‘Were we to abandon our goal of collective security through the United Nations, we would endanger more than moral and eco- nomic power, We would in the process jeop- ardize what limited security we might obtain through alliances with a chosen few. We would jeopardize the regional defense ar- rangementa such as the North Atlantic Pact and the defense agreement with Latin America already made under the United Nations. We would bring upon ourselves the mul- tiple dangers of a balf-hearted isolationism. Just as we have learned the high costs of appeasement, so should we have learned the high cost of isolation. It did not prevent World Wars I and II; tt would not prevent world war III, It would, however, virtually assure that the Communist would be able to take over the rich resources of Western Europe. It would also virtually assure that world war II would come as soon as the Communists had consolidated thetr ill-gotten . It would bring about the almost cer- tain destruction of our form of government and our way of life. ‘The fact has been greatly publicized that in Western Europe alone Iles one-third of the world’s industrial potential. Should Western Europe fall into Communist hands, the Communist rulers would be able to chal- lenge us on almost even terms. Their coal resources would be doubled. Their steel output would be tripted. Furthermore, their manpower would exceed ours overwhelm- ingly. How safe could the United States be in that situetion? It ls possible, of course, that with superior air and sea power we could retaliate against the conquerors of Burope and destroy a large part of the industrial might they had gained. If we were to rest our defense and our secu- rity on such a plan, we would invoke the hatred of every human being now living tn Western Europe. General Eisenhower, in his recent report, makes clear that Western Europe will resist aggression if they can be sure of our help. Recent actions of England, France, and other West European countries, actions that com- pare favorably with our own efforts, should remove doubt that the countries value their freedoms and will fight, if need be, to retain them. As General Eisenhower says, “We must give Europe assistance, not only because there is no acceptable alternative but because if we were left standing alone, isolated in a world of communism, our system would wither away.” No; there ts neither wisdom nor justice nor safety in allowing American support of the free world to deteriorate, and I cannot be-~- eve that those who have proposed such a policy have its establishment as their goal. The time draws near when we must com- pose our differences at home and enunciate & policy that will have the undivided sup- port of the American people and the respect and allegiance of the free world. I think the circumstances in which we find ourselves, and the experiences which we have already had, point clearly to the course which is in our best interest. That course is a reaffirmation and 4 strengthening of the bonds that exlst be- tween the United States and other nations in the free world. It is a policy of mutual defense, of collective security to the greatest degree possible. It is a policy of economic, political, and military participation in the defense of Europe. It is a policy of un- wavering faith in the, United Nations, and persistent and patient efforta to bring its security functions to maturity. It is not pleasant for our people to con- template such a long, hard program. It is a program that brings few cheers. But I have seen the American people respond to crises before, and I know that once again our peo- ple will endure hardship courageously to re- move another obstacle to world progress. It is the only program I know that will at the same time work to deter aggression and pre+ pare us to defeat It. Over the centuries man has dreamed of peace. Cooperative efforts by peace-minded nations to build peace is nothing new. It was tried as far back as the Greek city states and has been tried many times since. The failure of such efforts does not diminish the truth of the fact that only through interna- tional cooperation can there be built a world of freedom and justice. As long as we remain people free to dream. we must continue to work for this kind of world. We must do so because to the degree that freedom and justice do not exist else- where, freedom and justice are threatened in our own country. We must do so because it is the righteous and moral thing to do. We must do so be- cause it is our only hope for eventual world peace and for the preservation of the dignity of mankind. We must never let the hope for peace die. This, I know, {8 also the prayer and hope of the man whom we honor tonight. His whole life has been and is dedicated to hu- manitarianism, to freedom and justice for our people and for alt people. I need not relate the many honors that have been him. Few Americans have held so many positions of trust and confidence. Yet he has told me that of all his high honors and all his achievements the deepest satis- A655 faction he haa enjoyed came to him as Direc- tor-General of the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration. This was one of the most difficult tasks he ever undertook. His helping to relleve thou- sands and millions of hunger and suffering, however, more than compensated for the pain and trouble caused him. His outstanding work with UNRRA is certainly one job by which he wishes to be remembered. The people of New York have done well by themselves and by the Nation in returning him to Washington for a full 6-year term in the United States Senate. Investigate the Freeing of Nazi War Criminals EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ISIDORE DOLLINGER OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 8, 1951 Mr. DOLLINGER. Mr. Speaker, I am certain that other Members of this House must have been as shocked as I was when they learned that our American authorities had reprieved 21 Germans sentenced to death for alleged war crimes, and pardoned or commuted sen- tences of 68 others. In my opinion, these reprieves, granted to persons who committed the worst crimes against humanity in all history, have struck a death blow at the very foundation of our American system of justice and have brought down upon us the derision and contempt of the world. How dare our American authorities release these war criminals in the face of our Nation's promise that they would be punished to the limit for their horrible and unbelievable crimes? How dare they turn loose upon civilization that loyal Hitler ally, Alfred Krupp, the mu- nitions king, who heJped plan the con- quest of the world? Six of Krupp’s busi- ness directors are again free to help his new rise to power. Four former Nazi generals, thanks to us, are once again free to plot against democracy, and to advance the cause of nazism.! Others were forgiven for their monstrous massacre of American prisoners at Mal- medy, Belgium, during the Battle of the Bulge, Surely, the parents and rela- tives of those massacred must be aghast at our unpardonable action, and em- bittered by this disregard of the sac- rifices made in the name of freedom. Krupp has stated that he intends to take over the active management of his vast iron, stecl, and coal empire of the Ruhr. He will again control the tremen- dous properties restored to him by the recent order of United States High Com- missioner, John J. McCloy. This is a stern reminder that in all these years since the shooting war stopped, we have failed in one of our chief aims—the breaking up of the great German car- tels. Our objective was to prevent for- ever, their gaining control of the German Government again. Those cartels bullt
A656 up the German war machine and re- stricted our own defense production, The reprieve of Krupp restores to power German Nazi industrialists, and his strategy, wealth, and control will un- questionably aid the cause of nazism. We know that so far, our program to break up cartels has failed, and that former Nazi industrial leaders have slip- ped back into places of power in Ger- many. Now we have freed one of the greatest plotters against democracy of all time, who reaped millions of dollars of profits as a result of the wars he inspired, and whose industrial controls made them possible. It is reported that upon being questioned, Krupp said that he had not thought out philosophically the ramifications of his conduct. In other words, there is no feeling of guilt or shame on his part. His release from prison is another threat to our own liberty, for we cannot expect loyalty from such a man—rather we must fear him. His hunger for profits out of war, death, and destruction, far outweighs any other considerations, On February 1, 1950, I wrote Commis- sioner McCloy, urging that he carry out immediately the execution of the death sentences imposed by the Nuremberg courts on top Nazi war criminals, and whose cases were being reviewed. I received a reply giving weak excuses for the delay. I thereupon investigated, and found out that on March 9, 1950, official notification was sent by the State Department to Commissioner McCloy, informing him that he as High Commis- sioner, had complete and absolute au- thority to execute the death sentences, I again communicated with McCloy, in- sisting that it was his duty to obey the mandate given him, forthwith. I em- phasized the fact that the criminals had had every opportunity to protect their legal rights; that they had failed to prove their innocence in the Nurem- berg court; that their appeals had failed; and that after years of delay, the death- dealing Nazi criminals stood guilty as ever——but were still alive. The campaign of forgiveness, of dis- graceful reversal of our former judg- ments was under way then, as evidenced by the unconscionable disregard by our officials of the clear duties imposed upon them. Who can forget the gruesome reports which reached us concerning the atroc- ities committed by Frau Tse Koch— the mistress of Buchenwald, Reports of her sadistic killings of the tortured inmates of the concentration camp still fill us with revulsion and horror. Her ghoulish practices shocked the entire world. Who forgave her? Our own Gen. Lucius D. Clay, when American military governor in Germany, com- muted her life sentence to 4 years when he decided that the charges against her were not satisfactorily proved. In an- swer to that stupid decision one might ask—-Can a lampshade testify? It remained for a German court, after @ new trial had been ordered, to impose upon Ilse Koch the maximum sentence possible—imprisonment for life. Our flasco in lessening her punishment added to our list of monumental failures in dealing with Nazi war criminals. T consider the mass reprieves a boon to ali those who would destroy freedom and democracy—particularly to the Com- munists who can point a finger of scorn at us and label our about-face as bribery. I cannot countenance or condone this action by our American authorities in Germany. I am certain that countless other Americans, as well as myself, de- mand an explanation. So do many Germans who opposed nazism and who want no resurgence of it. What faith are they to place in us in the future? How can we expect democracy to flour- ish in Germany in the face of such ac- tions on our part? We want to know what motives underlie the mass reprieve order. Any good which was anticipated by such reprieves is wholly destroyed by the resulting general distrust of Ameri- can motives, and the assured rise to power of former Nazi war lords, whose dream of world conquest is now renewed. I have introduced a resolution calling for a complete and immediate investiga- tion of the United States military gov- ernment in Germany and the civilian administration which succeeded it, and a report as to why the mass clemency or- der was issued. My resolution requires an answer to the questions raised, and I shall do my utmost to get immediate action on it. I urge the Members of this House to give it their support, I have also reintroduced my resolution calling for a complete investigation of the American military government in Germany and the civilian administra- tion which succeeded it, with reference to the extent to which they have per- mitted or encouraged the reestablish- ment of cartels, the resumption of power by former Nazis and the resur- gence of fascism and antisemitism. I first introduced the latter measure on January 4, 1950. It is apparent now that such an investigation is imperative and should have been ordered long ago. Had we been alert to the danger, had we anticipated and prevented the coddling of the Nazi leaders and criminals, we would not now be confronted with such an unwise and unjustifiable decision as that recently made by Commissioner McCloy. Let us act now on this important ques- ion before further irreparable damage 8 done, Patuxent Produces Navy Test Pilots EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. MELVIN PRICE OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 7, 1951 Mr. PRICE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include herewith an article entitled “Pa- tuxent Base Skips Glamor in Training Navy Test Pilots,” which appeared in the Baltimore Sun, January 14, 1951. It de- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD scribes the activities of the naval air test center, a function of the Navy's Bureau of Aeronautics, of which Rear Adm. A. M. Pride is Chief. The article follows: Paruxent Base Skies GLAMor IN TRAINING Navy Test PILots (By Lt. Comdr. R. J. Boylan, U. S. Naval Reserve) There’s a school that isn't a school down along the Patuxent River. It has a two-story building, an air-condi- tloned classroom with desks and black- boards, a faculty with college degrees, and hundreds of young men clamoring to get in. But Rear Adm. Malcolm F. Schoeffel, the hHeadman in the area, loathes many of the connotations that the word “school” implies. So it’s known as TPT for test-pilot training at the naval air test center, a rolling 6,800- acre tract in southeast Maryland, where the third Lord Baltimore used to live. The admiral believes that TPT is certainly a place of higher learning, and he is well aware of its grueling curriculum, but he just feels that calling it a school might tend to obscure its purpose and give the place a false impression of being a. institution rather than a living organism, WAS STARTED IN 1948 TPT was started in 1948 with a high ambl- tion: To produce the best test pilots in the world. There is quite a gap in the world of military aviation between the aeronautical engineers who design airplanes and the pilots who fly them. The industry's test pilots help to bridge that gap. The Navy hopes that by training some test pilots of its own there will be a greater accord between the draw- ing board and the plane in flight. Above all, the Navy and TPT do not want to turn out anything approaching the Holly- wood comic strip or television version of test pilot—a glamour boy who risks bis neck in screaming dives and comes up with a boy- ish grin and only a vague idea of what hap- pened and why. TPT takes only the cream of the applica- tions—about 37 out of 375. It starts with the fact that the applicants are experienced Navy pilots. And in a difficult 6 months that combines academic classroom work in the mornings and flying along planned, prac- tical and problem-filled lines in the after. noon, it attempts to produce a combination pilot-engineer who can write an intelligent, clear, concise report on his test experiences with piston and jet aircraft. HIGH ENTRANCE STANDARDS Pilots come to TPT from the fleet and trom other air activities. They must have the recommendations of their commanding officer who fille out a form giving the appli- cant’s experience in aircraft, a summary of his high-school and college courses but also adding an opinion of the applicant's energy and determination in performance of flying duties, his Judgment, patience, and conscien- tiousness, and his intelligence and ability to analyze problems, After examining the papers from the 875 applicants TPT can pick the makings of a really outstanding class for its 6-month course. Although still young and currently in- structing only its fifth class, TPT has ambi- tions to extend its length from 6 to 8 months and to keep its graduates employed on test projects at the Naval Air Test Center for 2 years after graduation. It also has ambitions along other lines, One ambition, to be realized this spring, will be to invite nine manufacturers each to send a test pilot to the school to learn Navy methods of testing aircraft. Except for salary the Navy plans to bear all the expenses
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD of the test pilots while they go through the 6-month course. Manufacturers are Grum- man, Martin, Curtiss-Wright, McDonnell, Ohance Vought, Consolidated, North Ameri- can, Douglas, and Lockheed. BEGUN ON A SHOESTRING The course will enable the manufacturers’ test pilots to have broad experience in flying a wide variety of planes. The Navy also hopes it will give them increased status at their plants. Bome company test pilots do not have enough status to convince engineers that certain fight qualities must be cor- rected. TPT was started on a shoestring, with an appropriation of only $19,000. That meant that the founders had to borrow desks and beg equipment, but TPT proved its value with the first class of graduates. And although it's a school that isn’t a school, ite students behave very much like students everywhere. They have their names engraved on a metal plaque which hangs in the ready room ad- joining the single classroom and at gradua- tion they have diplomas and @ dinner dance at the officers’ club. Graduation is a happy time because it means the end of a long period of working hard from early morning until late at night. Students attend classes in algebra, trigo- nometry, slide rule, physics, thermodynam- ics, structures, engines, aernodynamics, sta- bility, armament, and other subjects from 8:15 8, m, until 11:45 a. m. with 10-minute breaks for coffee in the ready room. AFTERNOONS OF FLYING The afternoons of flying in one of TPT's stable of planes are carefully planned to complement what the pilot has learned mornings. Before lunch (for which he has @ generous half hour, whether he needs it or not) he works out a problem with mathe- matics and slide rule. In the afternoon he takes up a 600-mile-per-hour-plus Banshee jet fighter and works it out in the upper air. After 3 weeks of check-out flights in the planes, which range from a Catalina flying boat to late jets, a student advances to performance flights for 12 weeks and then “handling qualities” flights for the last 6 or 7 weeks. The first class of 20 flew 2,500 hours during their 5% months at TPT, This in- cluded 900 hours of familiarization and 850 hours of instrument flying. After a day like that the TPT student has little or no time for an eventing of relaxation at the officers’ club. One reason is that he probably either has some night flying or gome late hours with the slide rule. An- other is that it is a solid 7 miles from the bachelor officers’ quarters to the club, REASONS FOR PRIDE TPT, despite its short history, has reason to be proud of its present and its past. Its small faculty is headed by Daniel Dommasch, who has an unusual combination of aca- demic and practical background. After re- ceiving a degree,as master of aeronautical engineering from New York University, he became a structural analyst with Fairchild and later Brewster aircraft companies. Then he was a project engineer with the CAA for 4 years, a project engineer and engineering coordinator at Bell Aircraft in Buffalo, and assistant professor of Iowa State College in aeronautical engineering. Another member is Walter Hesse, who has ® master of science degree in mechanical engineering and who now is working on his Ph. D. His thesis {s based on the develop- ment of a thrust meter and a means of testing thrust meters. TPT also has been instrumental in land- ing at Patuxent an engineering extension course of the University of Maryland on the graduate level. This enables civilians and other personnel at the station to get a mas- XCVII—App.———42 ter’s degree by night study. TPT’s faculty helps out in presenting the university courses. But the best test of any place of higher learning is its graduates. And there TPT can pridefully point to Capt. Marcel Guoin, coordinator of tests; Capt. R. E. Dixon, of filght test; Capt. W. J. Widhelm, of tactical test; Commander Turner F, Caldwell, Jr., assistant director of flight test, who was one of the test pilots for the Douglas Skystreak D568-1, which surpassed Mach 1 in its early flights; and many successful Navy test pilots, Let’s Hope the 1951 Method Employed in Negotiating Contract Will Set Pattern EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. AUGUSTINE B. KELLEY OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 7, 1951 Mr. KELLEY of Pennsylvania. Mr, Speaker, under permission to extend my remarks, I am including the following editorial from the United Mine Workers Journal which expresses eloquently the sentiments of many people with regard to the contract recently negotiated be- tween the United Mine Workers and the coal operators: Let's Hopz THE 1951 MrrHop Emp.Loyep IN Neooriatine Contract Wit Ser Parrern For more than 80 years President Lewis has been pleading with the bituminous coal operators to set up a small official committee, representing their many separate organiza~ tions, with whom the UMWA could deal in promoting efficiency and peaceful settlement of wage matters. The bituminous wage agreement signed January 18 represents the nearest approach to a peaceful, intelligent method of wage negotiations in the history of the industry. The new organization of bituminous coal operators, headed by Harry Moses, is in @ large measure responsible for the quiet nego~ tiations that prevailed. Of course, Mr. Moses consulted with his membership—which 1s largely composed of captive-mine operators, but also includes the largest commercial operators in the Nation. The Southern Coal Producers Association was freely consulted after negotiations be- tween the northerners and the UMWA had weighed the situation and had reached a measurable understanding and agreement. The press and radio, as well as publicity bureaus, were equally surprised when the first news leak of progress being made toward the new agreement came 24 hours before its signing. Signing of the new agreement without fanfare or Government interference—pro- moting legal action in one form or another— and without a division among operators as between the North and the South, 1s an achievement of such magnitude that the industry as a whole can feel justly proud. It's a stand-out of collective bargaining that proves once again that the leas the Gov- ernment interferes in wage matters, and the more business organizations refrain from trumped-up misrepresentations in publicity attacks, the better off will be the lot of em- ployers, employees, and the Nation. Of course, the agreement was a sad blow to the year-round anti-Lewls, antl-UMWA A657 writers, cartoonists, and commentators. As one wag put it: “The peaceful settlement in ooal means there'll be no spring training for many in these vocations.” Both coal operators and coal miners have learned a iot during the last decade about coal wage matters and working conditions being tried in the press and on the radio. A great deal of harm has resulted from the widespread misstatements about every phase of coal production and consumption during these wildcat publicity campaigns. The war in Korea and the armament pro- gram gave impetus to the orderly procedure of negotiating both the bituminous and an- thracite agreements. The Nation is now reassured of an ample coal supply. Coal miners will not be easily lured to other jobs, The business of coal-mining communities will go ahead as best it can under whatever restrictions of price fixing and controls the Government imposes. Coal miners and their families will bury the thought that they will be singled out for inequitable treatment as regards wages and rationing as was the case on numerous occasions during World War II. President Lewis rightfully termed the agreement a “bread and butter contract” for, certainly, the increase in food prices fully justifies the 20-cents-an-hour, 10- percent increase agreed upon. Joseph E. Moody, president of the south- ern coal operators—which group was osten~ sibly organized during the war period to de- flate the UMWA at the war’s end—also joined Mr. Moses in praising the settlement. To the surprise of nearly everyone, John Battle, executive vice president of the Na- tional Coal Association, for the first time that we can recall, complimented both the industry and the UMWA. The coal industry can well rejoice in the hope that the wage negotiations of January 1951, will set a pattern which will govern the industry’s wage negotiations in the fu- ture. The time lost, the money spent, and the streaming of representatives of Government agencies and politicians into coal disputes can and should be avoided. The United States has the most produo- tive coal mines in the world. American coal miners are the most effi- cient. American coal is the best prepared in the world. Under common-sense procedure the American coal industry can continue to grow and prosper under a sound labor-manage- ment relationship policy. Anthracite operators, following the cus- tom of letting the bituminous operators negotiate in advance, quickly signed an agreement carrying the same wage increases. In recent years the anthracite industry has greatly reduced negotiating periods. This has largely resulted from the reduc- tion of negotiating committees to a mini- mum number and holding down on publici« ty releases dealing with the conference dif- ferences. This, in turn, has resulted in vastly im- proved labor relations in the region. The old game of around-the-year open-season attacks on the anthracite miners and the UMWA has given way to joint action be- tween management and miners for more ef- fictent production and bigger markets. In anthracite, as in bituminous, President Lewis has through the years preached the doctrine that cooperation between the pro- ducers and the UMWA could achieve @ re- markable result for the coal industry as a whole.
AGS Maybe some day the anti-union crowd, as well ag some prominent present-day labor lenders who have reached the heights due to President Lewis’ efforts, will appreciate his contribution in setting the pace for the betterment of American workers, Letter of James Shea EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WILLIAM B. WIDNALL OF NEW JERBEY IN THE HOUBE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 7, 1951 Mr. WIDNALL. Mr. Speaker, there re- cently came to my attention one of the most beautiful letters that I have ever read. The le.ter was written by a Ca- nadian father to the Adjutant General of the United States Army just after he had been notified of the death in action of his son in Korea. Bis beloved son, born in Newark, N. J., enlisted in the United States Army in Buffalo, N. Y., in April of 1950, and gave his fe in the month of December of that year. The beauty and thought expressed in his letter and the great faith and hope in the cause for which his son fought were so unselfishly revealed that I wrote and asked the father for permission to place his letter in the Conargsstonat Recorp, where it may be read by all. Granted that permission, the letter follows: ST. CATHARINES, ONTARIO, December 14, 1950. The ApzutTaNr GENERAL, Untted Statea Army, Washington, D.C. Dean Sm: Some months ago it was my privilege to stand in the reconstructed House of Burgesses in Williamsburg, and 8 few days later to visit the home of Thomas Jefferson at Monticello. It was on a@ cool summer morning that Mrs. Shea and I stood in the old capitol, and as we stood there time rolled back for me. As I sat on one of the benches of the house I visualized that maybe from where I was sitting Patrick Henry had made his famous treason speech, That the men gathered around him were solemn faced in the decision to resist tyranny and oppres- sion. At about the same time, as we stood there in reverence, my son, James, was in the perim- eter of the beachhead in Korea. No less a patriot than Washington, Jefferson, and Henry, because he, along with many other poor lads, was fighting the cause of liberty. And now your letter of December 11 comes to me, that somewhere in that distant land he has found his fina] resting place. Weil, let it be, and 1f need be, there are six other lives from the father of him, and the mother of him, to the youngest of his brothers, who will willingly give what he and countless others before him have given, and what countless others will give in the preservation of human rights and dignity. God bless him, and you, and the rest of our leaders, who so nobly endeavor in the right. May my fag and your flag fy in the furthermost cornera of the earth for where these flags fly shall we alwaye find liberty and justice, and government of the people. Sincerely yours, James SHEA, Who Says Statistics Are Dry?—Just Look At These EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HARRY P. O'NEILL OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 8, 1951 Mr, O'NEILL. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I wish to include the following article from Labor, a national weekly newspaper, dated February 3, 1961: Who Sars Staristics Arr Dey?—Just Loox ar THess—Nexw “No-Rvusser YARDSTICK” Proves AVERAGE AMERICAN Twice AS WELL Orr as IN Hoover 1833 From now on, there's a complete and devastating answer to the shouts that high taxes and the welfare state are ruining this country. The answer is provided by a brand new kind of statistical report, issued by the conservative Department of Commerce. Dally papers brushed off this report and distorted its significance. They tried to give the public the impression that, somehow, the new statistics puncture exaggerated claims about the economic progress made by America in the years of the New Deal and Fair Deal. What does the report actually show? Firat, let's see what the Commerce Department says about it, and why it is important. “Gross national product,” the Department explains, “is a comprehensive measure of the Nation's output of goods and services.” In other words, gross national product is a figure which shows how much the American people produced in 4 year, and, therefore, how much they can consume and enjoy in a year. It’s the best yardatick of the American standard of living. Up to now, the Department points out, gross national product has been measured in current dollars, The value of a dollar in- creased during the depression, and since then the value of & dollar has decreased. So up to now, statisticlans measured gross na- tional product by what might be called a rubber yardstick. But now, by long and scientific study, the Department's statisticians have taken all the “rubber” out of the yardstick. In the new report, the first of its kind, they measure gross national product in constant dollars— having the same value each and every year. Thus, for all tho years from 1929 through 1950, they have a real measure of gross na~- tional product—a measure making possible accurate comparison of any year's produc- tion with that of any other year. Let's compare the gross national product in 1950, the latest year, with that of 1933, the year when Hoover stepped out of the White House and Roosevelt atepped in. The propagandists who shout that high toxes and the welfare state are ruining the country want the people to forget that 1983 was a year of the Hoover hunger, when millions of Americans were tramping the strets in desperate search of jobs. They pic- ture 1933 as a glorious time of low taxes and free enterprise. Well, measured by the new “no-rubber” yardstick, the gross national product in 1938 was €61,500,000,000. That's what the Ameri- can people then produced, and had to con» sume and enjoy. In 1980, after 17 years of the New Deal and Fair Deal; the new “no-rubber" yardstick APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD shows the gross national product was $153,- 000,000,000, a 149 percent increase over 1933. tm other words, in 1950 the American peo- ple produced, consumed, and enjoyed almost exactly two and one-half times as much goods and services as they did in 1988-—-the good old days of low taxes, no welfare state, and the Hoover hunger. Let’s be absolutely fair about it. In 1933, the population of this country was about 125,000,000, and in 1950 it was 160,000,000. So gross national product would have had to increase samewhat just to keep pace with population. After making full allowance for that fact, however, this is clear: In 1960, the average American produced, consumed, and enjoyed exactly twice as much goods and services as he did in 1983. Ob- viously, he was twice as well off after 17 years of the New Deal and Fair Deal. In view of that fundamental fact—proven by the new “no-rubber” yardstick—the talk about high taxes and the welfare state ruin- ing the country is just plain nonsense. Wayne County District Commissioners’ Annual Report, 1950 EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. KARL M. LeCOMPTE OF IOWA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 8, 1951 Mr. LECOMPTE. Mr. Speaker, we have in my home county, Wayne County, Iowa, an unusually effective and efficient board of commissioners for the soil-con- servation district. The annual report of this organization sets forth a surprising- ly good record of accomplishments dur- ing 1950. Under leave to extend my re- marks, I include the report of this or- ganization that other Members of Con- gress and others interested may note what has been accomplished by the soil- conservation program in one typical agri- cultural county in Iowa: Warne County Districr COMMISSIONERS’ ANNUAL REporRT, 1950 INTRODUCTION The year 1950 is past history and we, the commissioners, are proud to relate what has been accomplished in the Wayne County Soll Conservation District. True, we recognize our shortcomings for there are many more things that could have been accomplished. We have no happenings to report more spectacular than what has been the usual trend in the past years. However, we feel that there is a movement toward a definite goal—that of accepting conscientiously a good, sound conservation program. We feel that the all-important development fs this gradual, steady movement that is apparent each year—that we have forged ahead just a little further. 4 LOOK AT THE WEATHER The growing season of 1960 was one of the coolest on record, but despite this fact the crops have been only a little less than outstanding. Excess rainfall during the month of June caused damaging soll losses. Farmers in general felt the need for more rigid erosion control practices than what
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD were in gperation at the time these rain. storms occurred. During the latter part of the summer and continuing through fall exceptionally dry weather prevailed. This prompted the building of a number of farm ponds to ease the water shortage brought about by these dry periods. We have noticed, also, that the trend is toward the building of larger and deeper ponds. This dry period has made it possible to do some conservation work that would be im- possible during the average season. An ex- ample of this is the construction of surface drains and diversions in ordinarily wet areas, However, terrace construction was almost halted during early fall because of the hard- ness of the soil caused by the dry weather, OUR DRIVE FOR LEGUMES Because of their importance deep-rooted legumes are getting more attention in our district. Since Wayne County soils in gen- eral are made up of fine particles and are run together, the need for aeration has been realized. Without the deep roots of the legumes the soil cannot be aerated; and without proper aeration another essential for superior crops will be sorely missed— that of water percolation. The increase in legume seedings has brought more hay into the district and has made better pasture, but utilization of this roughage has presented a problem. The need for more livestock is recognized, but most farmers are reluctant to pay the high prices for this livestock or are financially unable to meet this situation. While we are on the subject of legumes, let us say that successful corn yields can be traced to fields that have grown legumes. Lime and fertilizer programs are also in close coordination with legume seedings. Farmers are realizing that it is not how many acres are in corn that count, but in how many bushels there are in the crib. The raising of proper legumes is the road to this goal and our district is on this road. THE ANNUAL WAYNE COUNTY FIE£LD DAY The top activity of the year was the Wayne County soil conservation field day, which was held on the Lyle Duncan farm 314 miles north of Lineville. Attendance was limited due to rain which started in the morning when the plowing contest was in full swing, but even so an estimated 3,000 people attended the yearly demonstration. Some of the accomplishments of the day in- cluded the construction of a mile of ter- races, filling a silo with a field cutter, plow- ing of 10 acres on the contour, establishing of one-half mile of multa flora rose fence, construction of a diversion dike, blading in several] gullies, insulating the house and in- stalling a water system. OTHER ACTIVITIES Other events of the year consisted of ob- taining several thousands of multa flora rose seeds for some 60 or more farmers, assisting in the planting of the seed in establishing permanent fence, helping farmers fill out applications for fish from the State conservation commission and attend- ing various meetings held in the county. Also many groups worked together on ter- race construction and other soll conservation practices on individual farms. TECHNICAL AND CLERICAL ASSISTANCE The following states the accomplishments of the State-employed technicians’ aid and the clerical assistance in the Wayne County district. The figures given cover only the work completed for the first 9 months of each of the years 1949 and 1950. This gives a comparison during the sam part of the 2 years—before we had State aid and after State ald was in operation. A year ago as of October 1, 1949, we had 34 farm plans prepared, signed and approved by the Commissioner's. The accomplishment this year as of October 1, 1950, was 44 plans. Therefore, 10 additional plans were signed the first 9 months of 1950 as compared to the first 9 months of 1949, or a 29-percent increase. Contour lines were laid out on 1,417 acrea last year as compared to 2,188 acres this year, an increase of 766 acres or 47 percent. Last year 8 miles of terraces constructed compared with 414 miles this year gives an increase of 144 miles or 50 percent. Diver~ sions constructed increased from 2 miles to 4 miles—a 2-mile increase or 43 percent. Waterways increased from .75 mile con- structed in 1949 to 3.9 miles, an increase of 3.1 miles or 420 percent. Farm ponds constructed to date show no increase over last year. Feuce row manage- ment and planting for wildlife increased from 300 feet to 1,100 feet, an 800-foot in- crease or 266 percent. The clerical help resulted in hotter rela- tions with and more service to the public in addition to resulting in more accomplish- ment in the district. Being ab‘e to keep the office open part of the time resulted in 650 additional office visitors and over 300 addl- 1 onal telephone calls received. In addition to this applications for plans increased from 46 to 58, an inerease of 7 or 15 percent. Furthermore, it 16 estimated that we got about 160 more requests for layout assistance and information than if we had not had someone in the office. Other incidental accomplishments are the colorin » of approx'mately 65 soll maps, all of the new agreements as typewritten and as- sembled, periodic reports made up and the assemblying and distribution of newsletters, YEARLY ACCOMPLISH MENTS Listed below are accomplishments of the district for the calendar year 1950; Con- touring, 3.490 acres; pasture improvement, 1,963 acres; farm ponds, 20; terraces, 66 miles; diversions, 6.7 miles; farm drainage, 185 acres; open drains, 3.5 miles; waterways, 12.2 miles, A PUBLICITY PROGRAM Through State aid the local district has purchased 35 millimeter Kodachrome color film, with which many pictures have been taken and made up into slides for prujection purposes, With these slides we hope tv show graphically the achievements and progress of our district from year to year. The slides have been made available to many local organizations for lectures, enter- tainment, and various other purposes. At present the county superintendent of schools, W. A. Tock, has a set of conservation slides which he shows to rural schools and parents’ and teachers’ meetings in rural areas. The siides, all taken within our dis- trict, have also been shown before GI classes, high-school and grade-school groups, 4-H and Farm Bureau groups. Another device for trying to bring soil con- servation to the public eye was the proclama- tion of Iowa Soil Conservation Week by Governor Beardsley from June 12 through June 18. During thie period tours of four outstanding farms in the county (Lloyd Greenlee, Harvey Holder, “Pete” Carpenter, and Rex Devore) were arranged by the Soil Conservation Service, Extension Service, and Farmers Home Administration. These tours were arranged to show the public the ad- vantages of the different phases of soil con- servation. An interesting demonstration was held July 15 at the Wayne County Experimental Farm north of Seymour. The farm was laid off into test plots, planted, and cared for by Iowa State College representatives. On the A659 selected date (July 15) these test plots were explained to and discussed with those who attended the demonstration; and the bene- ficial resulta obtained from these experi- ments will be adopted and publicized as a part of our soil conservation in future years. EXTENSION SERVICE ACTIVITIES One of the biggest problems confronting, and recognized by, most Wayne County farm families in the area of agricultural produc- tion is the low productivity of soils. One of the twofold objectives of farm families is to prevent further soll depletion caused by soil erosion and heavy cropping and to increase family income by building up and maintaining a more productive soil. The educational program of the soils dis- trict cooperating with the extension service lies in helping farm families recognize the need for the various solutions to their prab- lems in the area of soi) conservation and tn understanding all the vartous practices neo- essary to having a productive soll. Solving problems of soll conservation is done by. people. The soils district through educa- tional and technical service helps people help themselves. The educational program on'‘soll conserva- tion pointed toward several things in 1050 and avain in 1951, 1, Use greatly increased amounts of com- merctal fertilizera where economic increases in crup yields can be obtained. 2. Une fertilizers according to recommenda- tions based on soli tests. ' $3, Greater use of supplementary erosion control practices, such as contouring, water- ways, terrace outlets, terraces, diversions, etc. 4. Use of the most efficient and productive crop rotation adapted to soil resources. 6. Increase family income and decrease labor requiremei.ts in a soil-conservation program, through better utdlization of forage crops by Hvestock and seed production. 6. Growing of righer yielding and better adapted forage crop varteties. 7. Increase of crop yields per acre by con- trolling crop insects, diseases, and noxious weeds. 8. To increase volume output on the farms by bringing unproductive pastures into a good rotation or by reestablishing in better pasture forages. 9, To increase capital input into many Wayne County farms for soll conservation purposes and to improve forage crop utlliza- tion through an efficient livestock program. This educational program was carried out in various ways, including: Soil test interpre- tation, soil sampling, and fertilizer meetings; meetings and tours at the Seymour-Shelby soll area experimental farm; newspaper pub- Heity of activities, results and approved prac- tices, helps with soll conservation tours, field days, etc.; furnishing educational material and suggestions on soll conservation for special soil conservation programs for groups such as 4-H Clubs, Farm Bureau townships, rural women's organizations, PTA, etc.; edtl- cational information on soil conservation to vocational agriculture departments, on-the- farm-training instructors; work with county livestock men and livestock organizations on sol] conservation. Arto Nos1yz, Chairman, Water HICKMAN, Maurice Goong, James H, GOODE, Secretary, Wayne County Sotl Conservation Dis- tricot Governing Body.
A660 Justice for Poland EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WILLIAM H. BATES OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 8, 1951 Mr, BATES of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my re- marks in the Recorp, I include the fol- lowing address by the Most Reverend Richard J. Cushing, archbishop of Boston: Jvuericn roz PoLAND (By Rev. Richard J. Cushing) It is almost a dozen years since the in- vasion of Poland by the Nazis. Two weeks after that barbarous invasion, the world will recall with shame the no less brutal, even cowardly, attack made from behind on the Polish Army by Soviet Russia. Under this double attack, and this double treacherous contact of the Nazis and the Communists, came the surrender of heroic Poland. With this surrender, came the division of mar- tyred Poland, between the two most ruthiess, totalitarian dictatorships of our generation. Henceforth, bitter memories were be- queathed to Polish people throughout the world. But bitter memortes are not so dis- turbing as our memories of shame, and the Polish people need suffer from none of these. The peace came to Poland; but the shame les elsewhere. No American, no citizen of any of the Allied Nations can possibly think without shame, yea, without burning shame, of what Allied diplomats and political leaders did to Poland in 1945, and 1946, and 1947. Suffice it to say, that diplomats themselves, our own diplomats, have told a dreadful story of the Allied default of our commitments, our most solemn commitments to the Polish people. The United States Ambassador to Poland was so appalled by the treatment of the victor nations that he resigned his post in pro- test—an almost unique action in American @iplomacy—and published in a book which bears the dramatic title, “I Saw Poland Be- trayed.” It is a shocking book; a book which future generations of Americans will read, I repeat, with shame. It is a story of murder, end fraud, and of double dealing, and bru- tality, and duplicity, rarely excelled in the history of these crimes, In the hope that by our prayers, we may cancel some part of the national and inter- national shame which other syes must for- ever associate with the modern history of Poland, I am broadoasting this message. The future freedom of the Polish people will surely come. We know that, because we know that there {s a God; and we know that He will not be mocked forever. We know it because we know something of the apirit of the Poland, and we know that it will not be forever trampled underfoot. We know that Poland will one day be free, if only she can survive the present enslavement; and we know that she will survive it because we know her will to survive it. Poland will only lose her identity; Poland will only be lost if she becomes a Communist nation. It is true that the state or the political re- gime in Poland has become or has been violently taken over by the Communists, But there is @ very sharp distinction, a dis- tinction greater than that between the body and the soul between a nation and its politi- cal atate. The state may be the expression of the will of the people, or it may be im- posed upon them by violence from without. A nation is the people themselves. The Polish nation will not be Communists because of the character,of the Polish people themselves. First of all, the Poltsh people are Catholic Christians. They are among the most convinced and conscientious of Catho- lics, They are Catholics in the most com- plete sense. They are thoroughly Roman in their loyalty, and thoroughly devoted to Jesus and Mary in their piety. We know not what defects in the faith of a people make them susceptible to the scourge of communism, or matertalism in any other of its forms. But thts I do know; a people who give top place in their spiritual life to Jesus Christ, top place among their earthly loyal- ties to their unity with His vicar, and top place in their devotion to Mary, the mother of God: Such a people do not become in- fected with materialism, or adherence to aethetstic communism. Such @ people are the Poles. And again, the Polish people are protected against becoming Communists because they well know the menace to their faith, and freedom of those who seek to impose upon them Red Fascist totalitarian- ism. Someone has said that experience is the school of mankind, and that men will learn in no other school. If that is true, the Polish people have abundant experience, long and terrifying, of what must be expected if they permit within their gates, those who are presently bringing such pressure upon them to become Communists and partisans. Today, the Polish are trying, under the watchful guidance of Almighty God, to main- tain the same Catholic faith under Stalin, that they maintained for centuries under the grinding heels of the czars of Russia, I hazard the statement that the Polish people are 96 percent Catholic, and 98 per- cent anti-Russian, Please God, this latter quality will be purged of all hatred, all an- tagonism, anything which might result in unchristian wrath or destructive war. Please God, the anti-Russian sentiments of the Polish people will only serve to keep them on their guard against the unchristian and inhuman philosophies by which the rulers of the Russian people have enslaved the Russians themselves, and seek now to en- slave the people of Poland. People who are anti-Russian in this legitimate sense, will not become aetheistic Communists. Such as people are the Poles. Finally, the Polish people are 99 percent passionately Polish. They love their native land. They know how communism would change its fair face. They love their national customs, and they know how communism would destroy these. They love their traditions, patriotic and Christian; and they know how inconsiste ent with these is Red aethelsm. They love their homes, and their families, and their churches, and their schools. They are re- solved that the tyrants of the east shall not defile there, Patriotism and religion are twin virtues. The passionate love of the Poles for their nation has a religious quality. Their love for their faith includes a patriotic aspect. All this ts as it should be. A people thus patri- otic and religious will not turn traitors and prove infidel. The Polish nation, I tell you, no matter what is happening, will not become Communists. God Almighty knows it will not be easy, whatever their national spirit and valor, for the Polish nation to persevere against the brutal force which has already broken so many and such great nations, It will take far more than national beroism, far more than human strength, to survive in the face of the mass materialism which strikes down and perverts mighty people so brazenly, so brutally, so systematically, as does athelatio communism. The people of Poland need atrength from on high. They need God's grace in measure over flowing. They need our prayers. I plead for this spiritual aid for Poland. Those prayers ‘APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD we promise the Polish people today. They must not cease until God Himeelf speaks to ailence the enemies of faith. Until God Himself strikes to stop the enemies of His people. Let us pray in season and out of season for Poland, for faith, for freedom, and peace. We must also pray for the political leaders of the world, for those who are © ing Poland, that their hearts may be softened; for those who profess to be friends of Poland, that their heads may be cleared. : To our prayers, we must add our practical efforts. We must be vigilant against treason in high places; and against unworthy ac- ceptance of treason among the people. We must somehow control our representatives rather than allow them to control our fates; so that it will not be possible again for them to betray a whole people against knowledge. To our prayers, we must add our practical efforts. We must be vigilant against treason in high places; and against unworthy ac- ceptance of treason among people. We must somehow control our representatives rather than allow them to control our fates; so that it will not be possible again for them to be- tray a whole people againat our knowledge and our moral judgment, as they did betray Poland. We must in all things imitate the peaceful virtues of Christ, the Prince of Peace: His forbearance, His patience, His apirit of for- giveness, His will for peace, His desire to bring together all men in concord and unity. But we must not be unmindful of His righteous wrath against those who defiled His temple, and His people; and seek to impose upon them insupportable burdens acting in their name to do those things un- worthy of men, and hateful to God. 80 I ask you to pray for Poland. I ask you to pray for ourselves. Pray that Poland may keep the faith, and that we may grow in it, That we may not lose our freedom, and that Poland may regain hers. That Poland may be made holy, and that we may be cleansed for our sympathy. That we may be restored from our shame, and that Poland may be made strong, and pure, and pleasing to God. That we may enjoy together with Poland, with all the nations whose Lord is God, the blessings of peace and piety, and Christian joy. Amen. Military Supply Operations EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. JACK Z. ANDERSON OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 7, 1951 Mr. ANDERSON of California. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my re- marks in the Recorp, I wish to include the following exchange of correspond- ence between myself and the Defense Production Administration: Janvany 25, 1951, Maj. Gen. Writim H. Harrison, Administrator, Defense Production Ad- ministration, Washington, D. C. Dear Harrison: Permit me to tell you how pleased I am that you were se- lected to head the production and materials control activities of the Government during these critical days. Experience such as yours is of incalculable value in preparing the Na- tion to defend itself against aggression, As vice president for operations of the Ameri- can Telephone & Telegraph Co., president of the International Telephone & Telegraph Co.,