APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Fight Against Philadelphia Wage Tax Must Continue EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CHARLES A. WOLVERTON OF NEW JERSEY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 12, 1951 Mr, WOLVERTON. Mr. Speaker, it is unjust, and, in the opinion of some it is unconstitutional, for the city of Phil- adelphia to levy a tax on the workers employed in that city regardless of their place of residence even though it be entirely outside the limits of Philadel- phia and the State of Pennsylvania, The fight against this iniquitous tax has been carried on in the Council of the City of Philadelphia, the Legislature of the State of Pennsylvania, and in the Congress of the United States. As yet no satisfactory results have been ob- tained. On February 22 of this year, I intro- duced a bill, H. R. 2830, which was re- ferred to the Committee on Ways and Means for consideration. On February 27 I introduced another bill, H. R. 2945, which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary for its consideration. Both of these bills sought to repeal the cffect of the Philadelphia wage tax in its ap- plication to nonresident Federal workers in the city of Philadelphia. Although drawn in different language they are nevertheless the same in purpose. In addition to these bills I have also intro- duced, on March 5, another bill, H. R. 3054, that would extend the principle of the above-mentioned bills to all work- ers, and, not merely Federal workers, This bill has been referred to the Com- mittee on the Judiciary. I hope that committee hearings will be held on the bills I have introduced and that favor- able action will be taken to relieve work- ers of these unfair and unjust taxes wherever they exist, Philadelphia, or, elsewhere throughout the Nation. As an illustration of the widespread interest that is being taken in the effort to eliminate taxes on wage earners who do not reside within the jurisdiction levying the tax, I include as part of my remarks, under the unanimous consent granted, an editorial appearing in the March 8, 1951, issue of the Courier-Post, published at Camden, N. J, reading as follows: Wace TAx Ficur SprEADING-—-HopPe oF VICTORY IMPROVING Never before has the fight against Phile- delphia’s wage tax on nonresidents raged on so many fronts as at present. The New Jersey State Senate, by a vote of 17 to 0, has just passed a resolution, spon- gored jointly by Senators Wallace, of Camden County, and Hannold, of Gloucester County, calling on Congress to outlaw the tax. A resolution by Assemblymen Neutze and Meloni is pending in the assembly which would ask Congress to relieve all persons lving in one State from paying wage or m- come taxes in another. A resolution has been introduced in the Pennsyivanta Legislature by the State sena- tor from Delaware County to outiaw the Philadelphia tex on any nonresident of the city, whether he lives in the State of not Congressman WOLVERTON has sponsored a bill at Washington to make Federal employ- ees subject to taxes only tn the State in which they reside. Congressman Howr.tt has sponsored a broader bill which would exempt all nonresi- dents of a State from its wage or income taxes, and WotverTon has said he also will introduce a similar bill. A third measure to this effect has been introduced by Repre- sentative Josery O’HarA, 8 Minnesota Demo- crat. United States Senator Smirx of New Jer- sey also has announced he will offer anti- wage-tax legislation in the Senate, the first time such a bill has been initiated there Despite all this activity against double taxation and taxation without representa- tion such as the Philadelphia wage levy im- poses on workers who do not live or vote there, the battle really is only beginning. Any action taken by the New Jersey Legis- lature can do no more than demonstrate to Congress and to Pennsylvania how deeply New Jersey resents this iniquitous tax. New Jersey cannot compel Congress or Pennsyl- vania to end !t. The Pennsylvania suburbs of Philadelphia have never gotten to first base in previous efforts to have that State's legislature ban the wage tax. Since, in the past 2 or 3 years, many other Pennsylvania municipalities have adopted a levy like Philadelphia's it 1s probably useless to hope for relief from that source. Congress has always been reluctant to intervene in tax matters pertaining to the States and curtail their taxing powers, as anti-wage-tax legislation would do. Many States impose income taxes on non- resident workers. New York has done so for years on north Jerseyites and would lose large revenues if Congress forbade the prac- tice. Hence these States can be counted on to oppose Federal legislation. Yet the national situation is changing, partly due to the very fact that so many States have income taxes and 80 many citl- zens as a result pay taxes in two States. Dispersal of Federal bureaus from Wach- ington into the adjoining States of Virginia and Maryland, confronting many thousands of Government workers with the dual tux problem, is bringing it sharply to the atten- tion of Congress as a whole for the first time. The fact that a Minnesota Congressman has introduced a bill against dual taxation 1s significant, showing that south Jersey no longer stands alone in the crusade against it as we once did. Now there is talk of a movement, if Con- gress will not act, to initiate a constitutional amendment which would bar double taxa- tion, There certainly would be widespread popular support for such an amendment all over the country. The fight may not be won this year, or the next, but it !s growing warmer and wider. It should be carried on more strenuously than ever on our part, and there is reason- able hope of eventual victory. Crescent City, Calif. EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HUBERT B. SCUDDER OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 13, 1951 Mr. SCUDDER. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- A1381 orp, I include the following article from the March issue of Good Housekeeping: CRESCENT City, CAL. The place was Crescent City, a 3,000-per- son town pocketed dramatically between the giant redwood forests of northwestern Cali- fornia and the rugged, rock-strewn coast of the Pacific Ocean. The time was October 1949. The atmosphere was one of deepest melancholy. Sixteen Crescent City busi- nessmen and businesswomen stood looking at their crescent-shaped harbor; gloom clouded every face For the fifth time in 32 years, thelr bid for a Government-fi- nanced dock had heen rejected. Why? Be- cause Crescent City didn't have the shipping business to justify such expense. The ar- gument of Crescent Citians—that they couldn't get the business until they had a dock—-was smothered under an avalanche of statistics. The brutal truth was upon them; Their town could never really prosper. Not one of those men and women remem- bers who uttered the fateful words that changed the whole course of Crescent City history. ‘“‘Let’s build our own dock,” some- body said. And, as the townspeople put It, “At that moment, civic Ughtning struck Crescent City.” That very afternoon a citizens dock com- mittee was formed. The next day, Saturday, a dozen subcommittees went to work, making @ house-to-house canvass for voluntary do- nations of money. On Sunday a volunteer engineer completed his plans for dock con- struction. On Monday morning the neces- sary rights-of-way were obtained, and that afternoon volunteer truckers started dump- ing rock into the road fill leading to the dock site. . For the next 6 months little Crescent City worked itself to the civic bone to reach its Tantastic goal. “The fever got us,” says Mrs. Emma Cooper, county clerk. “Every one of us, from 8 to 80.” A $10,000 quota was set. Within 2 weeks, $17,000 was raised. Truckers, foresters, and dockers—222 in all—donated their services. The Hotel Lauff offered lodgings, gratis, to out-of-town workers. Local businesses do- nated gasoline, water pipe, auto parts, wiring, repair services, lumber, food, and drink. The Shamrock Cafe gave free lunches to workers. Crescent City’s 55 professional secretaries worked after hours on the citizens dock books and records. The employees of Brownie'’s Cafe joined in a payroll contribution plan, The bus station served frec coffee to workers at all hours. Mrs. Tene Moore, a dairy farmer from Del Norte County, donated a 6-month-old heifer for auction. Result: @280. Paul A. Brunk, local landowner, auc~ tioned 24 lots and presented half the pro- ceeds to the citizens dock committee. Re- sult: $1,200. The local branch of the Bank of America gave, besides cash, the services of one teller each day for dock work. Crescent City’s women exhibited man- sized energies during that heart-stirring half year. Members of the Woman's Club and the Business and Professional Women went from door to door and sold @465 worth of tickets to a benefit double feature at the Mecca Theater. The Ladies Auxiliary of the Ameri- can Legion held a bulld-our-dock dance and cleared $271. The Elk Valley Club, @ rural organization, presented the committee with $100. A department-store clerk donated a bolt of red cloth which was used for danger flags. Waitresses and high-school girls toted hot coffee and doughnuts to the dock, where workers labored voluntarily through savage winds and rains. On March 18, 1950, the citizens dock was finished—a 6200,000 project that cost the town’s residents $17,000 in cash and an awe- some number of man- and woman-hours of physical work. Mayor Al Manuel declared March 18 an annual legnl holiday, and
A1382 announced a day-long celebration to com- memorate the occasion, Fishing-boat races, a parade of old-timers, a contest to name Miss Citizens Dock, a gigantic crab feed, and an official christening of the dock kept the town and its 6,000 visitors pulsing until far into the night. “On March 19," recalls Alyce Moseley, county judge, “you could shoot a cannon down Main Street and not hit any- body. The reason: Everybody was getting some sleep, at last.” Today Crescent Citians look with almost tearful pride at thelr dock—a 900-foot pier projecting into the blue waters of Crescent Harbor and right-angling into a fisherman's picr, a lumber wharfhead, and a loading plat- form. And they gaze sentimontally at the big, handsome, redwood-bound scrapbook encased in glass at the chamber of com- merce office, on Second Street. On its pages are listed the names of all the people who contributed to the building of Citizens Dock. “There are more than 700 names in that book,” says Bill Mason, local realtor. “It reprezents, without a doubt, the most stu- pendous example of civic cooperation this region has ever known" Already the town js realizing many happy returns from its labors. A fishing ficet of 130 boats uses the dock; 3,000,000 board feet of lumber and 120,000 tons of of] are shipped each month through the harbor; and oil tank furm Is being constructed at the south shore of the bay, new lumber mills are moving {n. More than $1,500,000 worth of cargo has already left Citizens Dock, slipped past Pelican Rock, and headed for ports all over the world. The town that “could never really prosper” is, within a year, boom- ing beyond its citizens’ dreams Crescent Citians are taking their pros- perity in exuberant stride. “We weren't exactly loafing before,” they say, and point to their other projects, such as the Business and Protessional Women’s 2-year-old plan for Crescent City’s high-school girls “The women of this town,” says Alice Mather, housewife and professional bookkeeper, “dis- covered our girls weren't fitting themselves properly for after-school professions" So in 1948, members of the club invited the town’s high-school girls to spend a week inspecting local businesses. Last year, 80 girls signed up fur this tour; they watched the inside workings of department stores, restaurants, motor courts, public-health Jaboratories, law offices, schools, and hos- pitals. At the Seaside Hospital, 16 girls visited the laboratories, surgeries, incubator rooms, and kitchens. Four of these girls thereupon chose nursing as their careers, and plotted their schooling accordingly. The plan has also led to congenial part- time work for some Sixteen-year-old Gail Barnum, who was elected Miss Citizens Dock on gala March 18, learned she adored secre- tarlal work, and now spends 18 profitable hours a week at the local food-locker plant. A lot of new things are being planned for Crescent City, There's a greensward to be planted along the scrubby 2-mile shore line. There's a highway-beautification plan pres- ently under way, in which Crescent City's women, working ln teams, are clearing under- brush and planting seasonal blossoms s0 that throughout the year color and beauty will beckon motorists toward the little city. Downtown, too, is being spruced up. One section of Second Street has become a gay stretch of green, blue, pink, and yellow store fronts, “Yes, we have a nice town,” says Bill Ma- son, who forsook his real-estate business to serve as the Citizens Dock Committee's un- paid financial chief. “We have our river. We have our trees. We have our rugged shore line and our crescent-shaped bay. Now all we need to do is make ourselves as good- looking as our surroundings. We will, too. Our dock has made us town-proud.” Procurement of Paint for the Federal Government EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THRUSTON B. MORTON OF KENTUCKY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 13, 1951 Mr. MORTON. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- orp, I include the following letter: MERCHANT'S & MANUFACTURER'S Paint Co, INC, Louisville, Ky., March 5, 1951. Hon THruston B Morton, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. Dear Mr. Morton: A most serious matter has come to the writer's attention which I desire to convey for your consideration and possible action. Through conversation with suppliers of paint raw materials and other palnt manufacturers the writer learned that the Navy Department, Aviation Supply Offices, Philadelphia, had bid forms on requisition EP 3727-51 out for quotation. This bid is Tor 6,487,000 gallons of paint I have been told this is larger than any bid requested durlng World War II. The story which is a general topic of con- versation in the paint industry is that the Aviation Supply Office is procuring this tre- mendous quantity of paint for the United States army engineers and that it i3 to be Packed in quarts, 1-gallon and 65-gallon containers. The procuring agency went to four large paint companies and asked them to take the business When informed It was too much business for them to handle the procurement agency then opened it up to 50 large manufacturers to bid on. On February 23 our company wired for coptes of this requisition. Today we re- ceived the following letter dated February 28° “Your wire request for bid forms on requisition EP 3727 is acknowledged The solicitation of bids under this requisition is closed The writer's gripe over this manner of do- ing business is as follows: Isn’t this incon- sistent with the Government’s stated posi- tion of helping the small companies to stay in business during this national emergency? The writer checks dally the United States Department of Commerce Field Service, Con- solidated Synopsis of United States Govern- ment Procurement Information and has never seen this bid advertised. This is prob- ably the largest paint bid ever released for quotation, and it is being handled as a nego- tiated bid amongst the select and chosen few. While here we are a small manufac- turer trying to obtain D. O. business so as to aid in the defense effort, and at the same time have enough business to make up for the loss of civilian business and are fever- ishly quoting on formal and negotlated bids for a few hundred or thousand gallons of business, it looks like the big boys get the cream and the little boys the milk. Our company has been a bidder on various paint requirements of the Aviation Supply Office in the past. Now here is probably the biggest paint bid of all times and we are not given the opportunity of quoting. When the Federal Government in one bid requesting delivery in 120 days for 6,487,- 000 gallons of paint does this, it affects every paint manufacturer. It upsets the already aggravated market of paint raw materials. It is reported that this bid will require over 3,000,000 gallons of synthetic alkyd resin. It is estimated, working day and night, it would take 20 days to produce this quantity APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD if every manufacturer of alkyd resin tn the United States were to devote their full plant facilities. This one bid will take away from the civilian trade approximately 1 month's production of alkyd resin. This means that the small paint manufacturer's quota on alkyd resins will be cut and we have had no chance to quote on any of the paint under this bid invitation. Is this fair and equal treatment? Hoping that some good will come out of this, we remain, Very truly yours, MERCHANT'S & MANUFACTURER'S PAINT Co. Wo. D. MENEFEE. aeapaitatateeneeeeeeneecenmneaaanl St. Lawrence Seaway EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. SIDNEY R. YATES OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 13, 1951 Mr. YATES. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the REc- orD, I include the following resolution in regard to St. Lawrence seaway project, adopted ky the City Council of the City of Chicago, March 2, 1951: Whereas for the past 100 years the naviga- tion of the St, Lawrence River by ocean-go- ing commercial vessels has been possible on a limited or restricted basis; and Whereas ciespite the hazards and limita- tions of said navigation, commerce has con- tinued on an increased basis through recent years; and Whereas by this commerce, the practica- bility of a navigation route for maritime commerce between the Atlantic Ocean and the Great Lakes has been demonstrated to a degree which would assure that in the future, navigation on said water highway will in- crease in a manner commensurate with the improvement of locks and channels which govern the navigable capacity of the St. Lawrence River; and Wheicas the construction of the Panama Canal and the operation of commerce through said canal has placed the Mississippi Basin at a disadvantage in the over-all com- merce of the United States and has to a cer- tain extent retarded the industrial and commercial growth of said Mississippi Basin, and Whereas the improvement for barge navi- gation of the Mississippi system of water- ways has demonstrated the need for the addition of water transportation and the commerce resulting therefrom has grown steadily to the present volume which is far in excess of the original predictions based on reliable studies and estimates; and Whereas great as the development of the Mississippi system of waterways has been, it is not completely adequate, the inadequacy being apparent in an analysis of the eco- nomic needs of the upper mid-continental area of the United States which is still sorely in need of an adequate outict by water to the ocean and to the markets of the world; and Whereas over the past 30 years the United States engineers, economists, and other au- thorites have made complete analysis with regard to the economic desirability of the improvement of the rapids section of the St. Lawrence River for modern ocean-ship navi- gation and have repeatedly confirmed the judgment that such a water highway is needed and that Its cost can be economically justified; and
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Whereas during both world wars and in the present national emergency it has been re- peatedly and forcibly demonstrated that the upper mid-continental area of the United States has grown in stature and importance because of its productive capacity in agri- culture, minerals, industry, and manufactur- ing, and that satd area of the United States is Indispensable to the economy of the coun- try as 8 whole, both in wartime and in peace; and Whereas due to the heavy drains on the iron ore deposits in the Lake Supertor region during the past 35 years it has come to light that a depletion of said ore supply Js not an improbability; and Whereas there has been established along the southern shores of Lakes Michigan and Erie a tremendous investment of private capital amounting to many hundreds of mil- lions of dollars in plants and industries for the manufacture of steel and its subsidiary products, which steel industry is vital to the United States, both in times of peace and in times of war, and which industry must be maintained at all costs for the security of the United States; and Whereas the discovery of rich deposits nf ore in Venezuela and Labrador assure a con- tinued supply of raw materials, which in the n. tural course of events should be directed to supplying the afore-mentioned steel plants located in the region of the Great Lakes to permit their continued operation and manu- facture of vital materials and products; and Whereas the President of the United States in a recent declaration has stated that the development of the St. Lawrence senway fs a must for the future security of the United States from the standpoint of self- defence and also productive capacity in time of national emergency, which declaration has caused the Congress of the United States to hold hearings on the advis. bility and imme- diate objective of bringing about the St, Lawrence development; and Whereas a former mayor of Chicago has appeared at Washington at congressional hearings concerning the St. Lawrence seawty and has, in the name of the City of Chicago, argued in favor of the construction of the seaway; and Whereas the city council is on record as having adopted a resolution calling for Fed- eral endorsement of the waterway project and the early completion thereof: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the City Council of the City of Chicago does hereby again record itself in favor of the development of the rapids sec- tion of the St, Lawrence River and other channels and harbors to accommodate mod- ern commercial ocean-going vessels an order that the midcontinental area of the United States be supplied with this additional trans- portation to insure its future development and to safeguard the economic stability of the United States in peace and in war; and be it further Resolved, That the city clerk be and he 1s hereby directed to forward copies of this resolution to the President of the United States, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, and Members of both Houses of Congress from Illinois. Sratge oF ILLINOIS, County of Cook, ss° I, Ludwig D. Schreiber, clty clerk of the city of Chicago, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct copy of that certain resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Chicago ata regular meeting held the 2d day of March A. D. 1961, ‘Witness my hand and the corporate seal of the said city of Chicago this 6th day of March A. D. 1951. [sxar] Lupwic D. ScHRETsER, City Clerk. What Should Be Our Policy With Respect to Our Reservists? EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. CHARLES A. WOLVERTON OF NEW JERSEY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 12, 1951 Mr. WOLVERTON. Mr. Speaker, there is considerable dissatisfaction with the manner in which Reserves, active and inactive, have been called into service. The complaints seem to be based: First, upon the injustice of ex- pecting men who served in World War II to serve in the present emergency when there are thousands of individuals who did not serve in the last war and are physically fit to do so at this time; second, the failure to take into consid- eration the family status or other per- sonal considerations that heretofore have controlled the calling of men into service under the selective service pro- cedures. e As an illustration of the kind of com- plaints being received, I include as part of my remarks, under the unanimous cansent granted, the following letter re- ceived by me from a young man now in service in the Korean campaign. I have for obvious reasons eliminated his name and station of service. The letter reads as follows: The Honorable C1#arLes WOLVERTON, Congress, Washington, D.C. Dear Mr. Wotverton: Undoubtedly your office has been the focal point for numerous letters written by reservists. I assure you that each and every one of us has broached the subject ot Reserve policy with an ob- jective attitude. However, there are occa- siong when it is rather difficult to arrive upon justifiable conclusions without preju- dice. Ostensibly, the Navy Department has recalled Reserves in order to fulfill the press- ing urgency demanded by mobilization It is the opinion of this writer that the Navy Department has lost sight of its original purpose. The present naval complement (composed to a great extent of Reserves) is in excess to the number actually needed. This condition {s manifested not only on this station, but also on other bases as well. It 1s quite obvious that the Navy Depart- ment has overmobilized. Let us consider the facts. Not long ago @he Navy Department waged &® campaign to recruit men for the Reserve program. At the time the contract was consummated, we were assured that Re- serves would not be called unless a national emergency was declared. I suppose this was to be taken as a gentleman's agreement, for Many of us were recalled 6 months prior to such declaration. Moreover, those of us who were in the inactive Reserves were told we would not be recalled until the ranks of the Organized Reserves had been depleted. Evidence strongly supports the falsity of such a statement. Not only do I question the integrity of the Navy Department, but also the constitutionality of such a move. It seems to me that decisions of such magni- tude should rest with Congress and not within the individual powers of one man— at least, that 1s my conception of democracy. Secondly, the Navy Department has re- pentedly stated that there ts no need for drafting men—that the Reserves and volun- A1383 teers have satisfied the personnel require- ments. Who, then, is going to relieve us? Why should we, men who have served 2 or more years duty in World War II, suffer for the lack of perspicacity and the cupidity of the Navy Department? Many of us are 25 years old or more and have families. Is it fair to deprive us of our valuable and pro- ductive years when there are 18-year-olds and men who served less than a year in serv- ice in the last conflict walking the streets? Perhaps I’ve permitted cynicism to warp my thinking; however, I assure you that these opinions coincide with those of fellow reservists. Another point which warrants promulga- tion is the fact that these same Reserves would probably be the first to volunteer their services in the event of all-out hostilitics. What we do object to is the involuntary recall to active duty Just for the sake of mobillza- tion, when already there are two and three times as many men as ore actually needed. May I further state that this is at the taox- payers’ expense—a gross misuse of Federal funds. The entire situation seems to be one of confusion and incompetency on the part of the Navy Department. It seems as if they—the Navy Department—were interested only in their own expediency, regardless of the cost to the people. Thirdly, is it too much to ask for the for- mulation of a Reserve plan whereby we will be released? As it stands now, our future is uncertain—clouded by the fear of war. Cer- tainly, enough time has elapsed for some steps to have been taken regarding this matter, Inasmuch as I am a member of the com- munity of . Tam familiar with your past congressional record, I implore you to cunsider the facts as I have endeavored to present them and to render a just and fair decision. May I further ask how you intend to vote regarding the impending extension of enlistment? Very truly yours, Teaching of Moral and Spiritual Values in Our Public Schools EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. AUGUSTINE B. KELLEY OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 13, 1951 Mr. KELLEY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my re- marks, I am again including an editorial from the Latrobe (Pa.) Bulletin on the important subject of teaching moral and spiritual values in our public schools. It is most important today, for a dangerous situation is arising, and the time to com- bat it is now. The editorial follows: To a chaplain who administered the final sacrament an hour before her execution at the hands of the Germans in Brussels in 1915, the British nurse Edith Cavell made the remark ‘Patriotism is not enough.” The truth of this observation the world must learn anew. Americans must learn it because this is a world in which moral and spiritual values are under grave challenge. Of those values, patriotism can be & part, or not a part. In the name of patriotism, Mussolini con- quered Ethiopia and Hitler conquered most of Europe. The moral and spiritual values in fascism and nazism defled detection.
A1384 Communism denies the existence of a moral order. Patriotism without moral and spiritual roots can be a noxious growth. That thought without doubt animated the 100-page state- ment on moral and spiritual values in the public schools issued at the annual convon- tion of the American Association of School Administrators, which 14,000 teachers, super- intendents, college officers and other educa- tors attended The report warned there could be no social eurvival without a moral order. No im- provements in’ government structure, no statutcs and ordinances, however elevated their aims, could produce a good and secure social order if personal integrity, honesty and self-disclpline were lacking, it was found, The social effect of recent war has without doubt been more severc than most persons imagine ‘They see the trees of their indi- viduel environment and fail to see the forest which composed the atmosphere of the na- tional scene The increasing amount of aimless leisure, the changing patterns of home life, and the current international ten- sions, all represent challenges to moral strength In the public school the child is taught the facts about the origin, progress and ideals of the United States. It would be hard to learn about Washington without becoming aware of elements of moral grandeur, The child is quick to recognize what is good. It should be the task of all educators to in- crease his awareness of the moral and spir- {tual values on which civilization rests and upon which its survival depends. The national defense can rest upon no stronger foundation. Nation-Wide Publicity Received by Phariss Family Over Radio Today EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. DEWEY SHORT OF MISSOURI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, March 7, 1951 Mr. SHORT. Mr, Speaker, the beauty of the Ozarks of Missouri has been recog - nized by novelists, poets, artists, photog - raphers, and vacationists. Those of us who are natives of the Ozarks and have grown up in those hills love them—but we take a special pride in the people, and are happy when recognition comes to any of us. My faith in our American family life has been strengthened to know that the Phariss family, of Monett, Mo., has re- ceived the W. G. Skelly agricultural award. Raymond Phariss was born at Mount Vernon, Mo. His father died when he was 7 and his mother died when he was 13. He started farming for his uncle when he was very young. He has continued to farm, and now owns 160 acres—and rents another 40 acres. He 1s a scientific farmer, who can talk about nitrogen and phosphorus needs of the soil as an experienced chemist. He understands rotation of crops—and a farm in the Ozarks is not a one-crop farm—he produces barley, oats, corn, hay, and pasture—and has dairy cattle, hogs, chickens, to say nothing of a straw- berry patch. Raymond Phariss is a real farmer— not afraid of work, and always eager to keep up-to-date in farm methods—but the award was given to all four members of the Phariss fumily. He and Mrs. Phariss were married in 1932—during depression years. They have two daugh- ters now in high school. Mrs. Phariss considers the chickens her pet project, but from the information I have been able to obtain, each member of the Phariss family can handle any part of the operation of their now modern farm. Mrs Phariss and her daughters make their own clothes—and even find time to help neighbors and friends. Much hard work, careful planning, and a fine Christian home have contrib- uted to the success of the Phariss family. I am happy to join their many friends in the community in paying tribute to them. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I include the following article from the Monett Times of March 3, 1951, which includes the radio program de- scribing the winning of the W.G Skelly apricultural achievement award: MONETT AND Barry CouNTY COME IN FoR COM- MENT—NATION-WIDE PUBLICITY RECEIVED BY PHarIss FAMILY Over Rapio Topay Monett, Barry County, and Roaring River cume in tor some good Nation-wide publicity this morning when the Raymond Phariss family was honored by achieving the W. G. Skelly Agricultural Award Recoguitton was given over the National Broadcasting Co Skelly-sponsored program, which is heard in this area over KOAM at Pittsburg, Kans., and KGBX at Springfeld The broadcast was heard at the breakfast here and a complete transcript tollows A wire recording was made of the broad- cast by Kenneth G Meuser, publisher of the Times. It will be transferred onto a wax record and will be presented to the Phariss family. Here is the broadcast: “Mr, BURLINGHAM Good morning This is Lloyd Burlingham greeting you on behalf of your Skelly jobber dealer, Skelly farm service man, and Skelgas dealer. Alex Dreier is here with highlights of the morning news. “Yoday’s agricultural achievement award goes to a fortunate quartet of fine people far toward the southwest corner of Missouri. There in the rugged hills of the Ozark Moun- tain country is Barry County. There Roar- ing River, a tremendous underground stream, bursts from the base of a beautiful bluff, duily pourtng out 28,000,000 gallons of crystal-clear water, forming two lovely lakes, tumbling over three waterfalls and flowing away through a most pleasant valley. “Mr. DrerER. Roaring gRiver. Wonderful rainbow trout. Lloyd, we ought to be there— not here talking about it. “Mr. BurLincHamM. You've bad some grand times there, I know, Alex. And we've been invited for today, by J. F. Black, of the Barry County Bank. He tells of last year’s 200 cars of strawberries shipped from Cassville and a new industry—"poke greens," and asks us to try both—strawberries and poke greens with sow belly. Canned, now. “Mr. Drergr. I can wait, “Mr, BurRLINGHAM. Give us your summary of what goes on in the world and ‘waiting.’ We'll try to make ourselves believe we're in Barry County, Mo. s Cd * 2 * “Besides being a great vacation area, southwestern Missouri, turns out a lot of food. It has to, in order to take care of all its visitors. It is important in its dairy and poultry productions and in ita harvests of fruits and vegetables. Last year's strawberry crop totaled more than 1,000,000 quarts, Barry County ulone producing well more APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD than a third of the million quarts, May's the time to be there. Alex. s * * * ° “Mr, Drerer. The hills of Missouri are penutiful. Clifford Newlin wrote of them: “The Lord pushed up the Ozarks to the sky, Then, through the ages, humbled them to hills, The stubborn granite never could deny. The constant grinding of the silent mills. Then, over all the ve:dant billowy muss, He planted dogwood, oak, and sussafras.’ “It's a great thing when an area can be so attructive as the Ozarks country and, at the same tine, highly productive “Mr BurRLINGHAM Today’s award story 1l- lustrates that It tells of the work of the Raymond Phariss family on 200 acres on Kings Prairie near Monett “There are four of the Pharisses—Ray- mond, Lols, and their two daughters, Nora Lee, 17, and Noveta, 16. They own 160 acres, rent 40 mote, and turn out these totals: 145,000 pounds of Guernsey milk, 2,800 doz- en eggs, 4,000 pounds of pork, 8450 of poul- try meat, $1,800 of beef. They market 275 crates of strawberries. Field crops include 15 acres ot red clover, 10 of oats and lespe- deza, 11 of oats and red clover, 10 of barley and sweet clover, 5 of barley, 16 of lespedeza meadow, 24 of coin, 6 of Atlas sorga, and 114 acres of strawberries. “The crop yields are highly satisfactory, which Mr Phariss credits partly to his use of clover in rotation with other crops. Though the farm is in Kings Prairie, some of it slopes That part of the farm is kept in grass and not plowed up. As fisurance against soll erosion, strip cropping is fol- lowed. Fertilizers used are those recom- mended following soil tcsts “That’s a good job Alox? “Mr. Dreirre. Mr. W. V. Davis, Monctt banker, speaks up tor our awardee—-better for him than our bankers would for us, Mr, Burlingham, “Mr. Davis has watched Raymond Phariss since he was a small boy and says, ‘I have perfect confidence in his ability to make good on any commitment. He has bullt slowly but substantially, earning the money with which to pay for his constantly improving enterprises.’ That from his banker. “Mr BURLINGHAM,. His neighbors do quite as well by him—in fact, they first drew the attention of the Committee on Awards to the fine Phariss record. “These neighbors tell of the good Ray- mond Phariss and his family do for those about them. Mr Phariss is a director of the Monett, Mo., Farmers Association Exchange and of the Ozark REA board. He has served for 15 years as a commissioner of the Kings Prairie special road district. He is a board member of the First Christian Church in Monett, all four Pharisses being members. Mrs. Phariss is vice president of the Kings Prairie home economics extension club. Nora Lee and Noveta are in Future Homemaker work in the Monett High School. Nora Lee has been a member of the high school debating team for 2 years, the team winning the big eight championship both years. “That's the story authenticated by Coun- ty Extension Agents M. B. Carpenter and his successor in Barry County, Robert Kel- ley. “Here 1s a man who started with a small acreage and enlarged his land holdings grad- ually. He developed a 853 pound dairy herd and sells a quality product, grade A milk. He has handled his land in strict conformity with sound conservation prac- tices. He has made his home modern and comfortable and his livestock structures convenient and practical. And in the entire Phariss record the good will of neighbors has been earned and maintained. Best of all is
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD tre Phariss success as a family. All four are interested and all four pitch in and work together. Raymond Phariss credits the prog- ress accomplished to the cooperation and careful playning by the family unit. This last in the feeling of the Committee of Awards ts the climax of the substantial ac- complishments by Raymond Phariss. “The agricultural achievement award is therefore made to the quartet, to Raymond, Lois, Nora Lee, and Noveta Phariss, the award including a 8100 United States Sav- ings bond, a@ gold lapel pin and handsome scroll. Many, many friends have the Phar- isses——good friends who rejoice in this rec- ognition of the fine Phariss record. 90 of these neighbors are in Monett right now, at the Hatchers Cafe. There they are break- fasting together, celebrating the fine works of the four Pharisses. Mr. W. G. Skelly sends his best wishes to the four. His personal representative, Mr. A. Vavra, of Joplin, is at the breakfast and will present the award.” State Department Blind Spot—The Middle East EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LAWRENCE H. SMITH OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 12, 1951 Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. Mr. Spcak- er, our military leaders tell us that the Middle East area is highly important for strategical reasons ‘The State Depart- ment, however, refuses or ignores 200,- 000,000 people in that part of the world who want to be our friends and without cost to the taxpayers. Mr. Speaker, that outstanding military man, Gen. Bonner Fellers, retired, calls attention to some important facts in a leading article that appears in the March 12 issue of the Freeman, which I include as part of my remarks at this point: THE STRATEGIC MIDDLE EAST (By Bonner Fellers) Lenin once said that the road to commu- nism is through preaching nationalism to subject peoples. Today Communist agents in the Middle East are busy preaching this Lenin doctrine Unfortunately for the freo world, their audience is receptive. A million Arab refugees, homeless, under- nourished, living in caves; 30,000,000 non- independent north Africans smarting under French domination; peoples of Iraq, Jordan, and Egypt irate under occupation by British troops, are all making the going easy for the Communist agitators. The negative policy of the United States toward these critical areas serves to aggru- vate the situation. The fault lies largely in the fact that we deal with the Middle East through the eyes, interests, and prejudices of our European allies. Britain is accorded pri- mary interest; it is British policy which we follow there. The United States is repre- sented not by traditional American love of freedom but rather by those European powers, especially Britain, which tell us where to stand so as best to further their own aims. The unfortunate part of our policy is that the allies who influence us are colonial pow- ers, interested in the exploitation of the Middle East and north Africa. Conse- quently, their position there is most un- enviable. Since 1882 the British have dominated the Egyptians by force. British troops on the Suez are unwelcome. The Egyptians want to guard their own territory. The dispute over the Egyptian Sudan remains unresolved. The failure of the UN to act on these issues drives Egypt from closer association with the Western Powers. In North Africa the situation 1s worse than in Egypt There the French maintain a colonial administration which amounts to serfdom. Morocco had been independent of European domination for more than a thou- sand years It was not until the nincteenth century that the French, British, and Span- ish made heavy inroads of emptre In 1912 Morocco became a French protectorate with loss of Nberty and individual freedom. Tu- nisia, under French domination, is stricken with poverty, and the people have been crushed by force While passing through the Mediterranean in 1943, President Roosevelt—-possibly with tongue in cheek—promised the Sultan of Morocco “I will never allow this state of things to exist after the war. This exploita- tion by foreigners ts not in the interest of the pecple.” And the Sultan of Morocco is still loyal to America, hoping constantly that this pledge will still be honored by the freedom-loving Amcrican people. Yet when th> oppressed Arabs and Jews of North Africa protest their troubles, they find that the United States is strangely silent and, behind th: scenes, supports the European powers. Communists from France and Russia, pro- testing their objective to be liberty for all, are pressing for an Arab alliance. And thus, in spite of the sulemn commitment of the United States to contain communism, our policy In the Middle East and North Africa actually furthers its extension. The incomprehensible part of this policy 4s that it {1s contrary to our own best inter- e.ts, for the Middle East is critical, key ter- rain, vital to our success against Communist expansion The Middle East is a fabulous land which has been fought over for cen- turies. It is the bridgehead to three con- tinents In it le vast ofl flelds, the Suez Canal, and potential strategic bases. If war comes, the collapse of our 60-divi- sion European defense would appear certain. Against it Stalin can hurl a formidable Red army which can be stepped up readily from its present strength of 200 divisions to 500 or even a thousand, should he need them. Only an extreme optimist would count on our being able to hold air bases in Western Europe. Spain, however, may be enabled to resist by her Pyrenees barrier. We hope that Britain would offer an unsinkable aircraft base, but again the fortunes of war might deny us its use. We must have flexibility to our plans. There are excellent potential atr base sites in Libya. Possibily“these are the closest to Russia which we would be able to hold with small ground forces. Here the water and desert barriers of the Mediterranean and Middle East would prevent Russia from throwing the full weight of the Red army against us. From these bases, which offer unlimited dispersal areas, medium bombers and long-range fighters can strike deep into Russia; from them they can deny Russia the oil of Rumania and Saudia Arabia. When one realizes that 40 percent of the known oll reserves of the world lie in the Middle East, the necessity of being able to deny this oll to Russia becomes imperative. Today the Middle East has been caught physically and ideologically between the surging, irreconcliable forces of the East and West. Communists tell these nonindepend- ent peoples that European colonial imperial- ists, backed by America, seek only exploita- tion. Western propaganda warns them against the Communists who seek to en- slave the world, Each of these forces is so A1385 overpowering that the people must yleld eventually to one or the other. In view of the strategic importance of the Middle East we can not afford to lose the ideological struggle there. Africa, also, is part of Stalin’s program for world communization. Once in possession of the Middle East, the extension of Red domination over all Africa would be greatly facilitated. Loss of Africa would be a tragedy to the western powers, for this unde- veloped continent, rich in natural resources, Offers to Europe and America a vast potcn- tial market. The African people number fewer than 200,000,000; they are wretchedly poor. But provide them with better food and medical care, and the population would doubtless double in two generations. The natives, be- ing inclined essentially to agriculture, could help feed Europe in exchange for manufac- tured goods. Thus abundance could be created readily both in Europe and Africa. The fly in the olntment lea in the fact that free Europe, still stunned from World War II, is unable to devote its energies to Africa, where the Communist threat is real and im- mediate. The key to the solution of our problem in the Middle East and Africa lies in Egypt. Egypt exercises a strange mystic control over the Arab and Moslem worlds. If the United States policy toward Egypt were direct from Americans to Egyptians; if our attitude con- tained warmth—and I do not mean money; if Egypt could count on a close relationship, culturally, economically, and militarily, the Arab and Moslem worlds could be alined closely with the free peoples of the world. A series of fortunate events in history makes this Egyptian leadership possible. For centuries, either the Ottoman Empire or Germany—and sometimes both—served to keep the great Russian hear from wander- ing over Eurupe and the Middle East. The Ottoman Empire had held together because its people possessed a common culture and a defiant, compelling religious faith. Like Austria-Hungary, it was a binational em- pire in which the Turk and Arab were united by an indigenous politicul-religious ideology. But gradually, as the Ottoman Empire met the impact of western influence, its com- ponents became weak Then World War I collapse " the empire, The Turks and Arabs separated, The Turks became independent and looked to the matertalisin of the west. The Arabs broke up into tribes which fell under the domination of France, Spain, Great Britain, and Italy. 1 1923 Turkey threw away tho Caliph cloak and declared for westernized methods without reservation. She held that Islam and modern civilization were incompatible, and she elected to be modern. To the mos- lem this act amounted to a renouncement of hig faith. It offended his sensitive feel- ings; it troubled his conscience. He pon- dered. Is it true that I cannot be modern and progressive and yet keep the faith of my fathers? On the other hand, when Egypt firmly ac- cepted western matertalism and at the same time firmly retained her old faith, it caught the Mosiem's imagination. The stand glade dened his consctence. Egypt became his Mecca—a progressive state by eastern stand- ards, with a flavor of western methods, and still a Moslem state to which the same 400,- 000,000 Moslems of the world could turn with pride. Here was a country tolerant toward religion; free of inquisition, stanch for personal Mberty—democratic—yet Mos- lem. To anyone who dreams of a close union of all Arabic and Moslem peoples, Egypt, especially Cairo, represents his ideal. Here he finds everything he likes from religion to political intrigue, from art to prostitution. Egypt's victory of tolerance was a victory for Moslems everywhere.
A1386 Leadership in Egypt may not always be good, but it is accepted by the Arabs and Moslems who follow blindly and who like to commit the same mistakes. Egypt en- joys such an enviable position that the most convincing proof to a Moslem that a thing is correct is—if it is done that way in Egypt. But Egypt is more than a Moslem state where East meets West. Since the nine- teenth century Egypt has been a Mediter- ranean power. Her population exceeds 20,- 000,000; her annual imports amount to half @ billion dollars, No longer bound by the sterling bloc, Britain repudiated her Egyp- tian war debt of half a billion pounds; Egypt is free to turn to the United States. Egypt seeks no money from us-——only trade, cultural relations, and mutually beneficial defensive measures. She cannot turn to Russia, which has nothing to offer in trade, culture, security, or freedom. Although Egypt realizes the strength of her leadership in the Arab and Moslem worlds, she does not Know how best to exercise it. The hand we extend to her is guided by European colonial powers. Consequently, Egypt is not free to throw her welght with us Yet the United States sorely needs the support and friendship of the Arab and Moslem worlds to which Egypt 1s the key. This is essential to the success of our policy of containment. The next move must be ours. To effect the support we need to contain communism, deter war, and win if war comes, the United States should: 1. Stop underwriting European colontal- ism. (Communism cannot be defeated by support of colonialism.) 2. Adopt x policy of dealing directly with the Middle East rather than blindly follow- ing the British. 8. Endorse the principle of self-govern- ment—everywhere. 4 Encourage the formation of a defensive Mediterranean Alliance, to include Spain. 6. Help equip, if requested, local forces for the defense of air bases. 6 Extend the Monroe Doctrine over those Members of the Alliance which are vital to our security. Such a new and better relationship with the Middle East could be achieved merely by a change in our attitude. This would not destroy our firmly established relation- ships with France and Britain because, in the long run, our stand would benefit them in the furtherance of world peace. In the final analysis communism, which is an ideOlogy, cannot be destroyed by force and bayonets. It can be destroyed only by another and better ideology. We possess this better ideology, but in the Middle East we have permitted it to become submerged. It ts still not too late to correct our mistakes Mf we decide to fight communism by further- ing the cause of freedom. American Peace Crusade at Washington EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. ALBERT P. MORANO OF CONNECTICUT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 13, 1951 Mr. MORANO. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- orp, I include the following telegram: Makcu 13, 1961, Dr Jerome Davis, American Peace Crusade, West Haven, Conn.: Concerning your telegram requesting that Ireserve time Thursday, March 15, for Con- necticut constituents attending the Ameri- can Peace Crusade at Washington, I wish to inform you that I have not done so nor doT have any intention of doing so. While all my efforts and all my prayers are dedicated to world peace, I am not con- vinced that your group and your efforts are s0 dedicated. You, Dr. Davis, have been cited personally by the House Un-American Activities Com- mittee as belonging to trom 41-50 Commu- nist-front organizations. Your American Peace Crusade has been cited as an organic part of the Communist peace offensive and once again as organized by Communists While the door to my office is always open to my constituents, while my time is de- voted entirely to fulfilling the responsibili- ties to my constituents and to my country, I cannot devote any portion of my time to @ cause such as you represent Rather, I prefer to utilize these moments I might spend with your group continuing my en- deavors to bring about a real and just peace in the world, the sincerest form of peace whose basic foundation is the antithesis of Communist ideology—a peace based on the dignity of man. Until such time that I am convinced your aims are constant with the best interests of the Nation, I must refuse to meet with you or any of your group. ALBERT P. Morano, Member of Congress. ae naan ee ereemanemnaaael Can # Congressman Serve 900,000 People? EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. EMANUEL CELLER OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, March 1, 1951 Mr. CELLER, Mr. Speaker, under leave granted to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I wish to include an article I wrote which appeared in the New York Times of Sunday, March 11, 1951: Can A CONGRESSMAN Serve 900,000 PropLr?— THIS ExTREME Poses PROBLEMS FOR THE House TACKLING THE DECENNIAL JOB OF REAPPORTIONMENT (By Hon. EMANUEL CFLLER) WasHINGTON —Once again the size of the House of Representatives is up for considcra- tion by Congress—as it has been every 10 years since the First Congress met in New York City in 1789 This is because, under our Constitution and the laws made to carry out its provisions, House seats mrust be reap- portioned among the States every 10 years to reflect population shifts shown by the decennial census. Inevitably, unless the House is enlarged, some States stand to lose one or more seats; and, inevitably, those States wage a battle to maintain their repre- sentation by providing more seats. The President, in a special message to Cons gress on January 8, listed seven States which will gain and nine States which will lose, a total of 16 House seats, as a result of gains or losses in population, actual or relative, between 1940 and the census of 1950, Notice of these changes has now been transmitted to the States affected. They will take effect automatically with the Congress to be elected next year—unless the present Congress takes affirmative action to raise the ceiling on the size of the House that hag stood at 435 seats since 1911, Already States which stand to lose seats are vigorously agitating for a larger House to preserve their present numerical repre- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD sentation, and bills have been introduced in Congress to achieve that end. One proposal would reduce the individual losses and in- crease the compensating gains by enlarging the House to 450 Members. Another would save the seats of all present Members and reward the faster-growing States by adding 74 new sets to make a total of 509. Well, how big should the House be? Any answer entails a choice, or compro- mise, between conflicting answers to two more basic questions: How many people can a Representative really represent? How large can a National Legislature become be- fore it becomes too unwieldly to get its work done? For specific suggestions as to the practical range within which a compromise might be worked out we can look to our own history and to the varying choices that have been made by other democracies of the world. The Constitution set the size of the House temporarily at 65 seats and provided that thereafter the number of Representatives shall not exceed 1 for every 30,000 people. The Second Congress, accepting that figure as an approximate maximum as well as a strict minimum on the population of any congressional district, increased the member- ship of the House, following the Firet Census in 1790, to 106: One for every 338,000 of population. Through 1910, as the country grew and new States were admitted to the Union, the House was enlarged every 10 years (except in 1840, when a mathematical peculiarity re- sulted in reducing the number of seats de- spite an increase tn population). Even so, the average Member's constituents grew to 210,000. Since then the country has grown another 60 percent, but the House has remained at the statutory Mmit of 436 set 40 years ago. With the population now standing at 150,- 687,361, according to last year’s census, the average House Member represents almost 350,000 people, and because of inequities within the States the actual population of Bingle districts ranges up to more than 900,- 000. At the 1790 ratio, the House today would have some 4,560 Members. In a dozen other countries with demo- cratic governments and two-house national legislatures, the figures run like this: Member- Avorago ship of loaisteut ive | Count ttue assembly ency Australia 2.2... 0..02 fee ee eee 121 4, ONO Helgium 202 42, 000 Britain wens - 625 KI, 000 Canada. ..2.2. 2222-22 -- eee . 202 2, O00 France we cee O19 66, 000, OG | ee - 500 684, 000 Israeli... - - 120 11,000 Italy 9 L222... five BU, O00 Meco - M47 166, GOO Netherlands. . 100 100, 000 BRweden +e -- - 230 30, OOO Switzerland. .........22. -...ee- 1d 21, 000 Two generalizations stand out: In all but four of those countries the membership of the so-called lower house of the national legislature is smaller than ours But in all except one—gigantic India—each member represents far fewer people. The argument for enlarging Congress starts with the obvious fact that the House, which the founding fathers held should be close to the people, has not grown up with the country. A hundred and sixty years ago & Congressman could actually maintain a personal relationship with a god portion of his constituents, Plainly, a Congressman today cannot mainta’n that same intimate Telationship with a constituency that has grown tenfold. The Congressman, according to those who favor enlarging the rouse, has become less and less acce: .ible to the people
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD who elected him and Jess and less responsive to their interests. Besides having more people to represent, it js argued, the Congressman ts further tm- peded in the opportunity to consult them by the increased burden of his work, which has grown even faster than the number of his constituents. In the First Congress, a cen- tury and a half ago, 142 bills were introduced in the House; for an average Congress of the last 10 years the flood of bills has risen to more than 6,000. Laws finally passed in a session have gone up at least 10 times Moreover, bills today are frequently tech- nical and extremely complicated in their economic ramifications. More and more time must be spent studying them tn com- mittee as well as threshing out complex fs- sues on the floor. The length of annual meetings has more than doubled from 4 or 5 months to almost continuous sessions during the crisis-ridden pa3zt decade. The time available for grass-roots refreshment and home-town contacts has steadily lessened al- most to the vanishing point. At the same time, the demands of indi- viduals for special services and of pressure groups for immediate decisions on pending issues have been intensified immeasurably. One Member of the House testified before a congressional reorganization committee a few years ago that his work as Washington errand boy for the folks back home was con- suming up to 80 percent of his time A Congressman’s mail may run from 200 letters a day up to 1,000 when some critical issue 1s being debated. A member who kept track of telephone culls to his oMice for a week re- ported an average of 82 a day. Another counted 48 callers who sought interviews with him in a single day—46 of them on matters not even related to legislation, _ Several years ago Representative Luther Patrick, of Alabama, made a speech in the House that still stands as only a slightly ex- aggerated listing of some of a Congressman's extraconstitutional duties: “A Congressman,” said Representative Pat- rick, “has become an expanded messenger boy, an employment agency, getter-out of the Navy, Army, Marines; ward heeler, wound healer, trouble-shooter, law explainer, bill finder, issue translator, resolution interpre- ter, controversy oil pourer, glad-hand ex- tender, business promoter, convention goer, civil-ills skirmisher, veterans’ affairs ad- juster, ex-serviceman's champion, watchdog for the underdog, sympathizer with the upper dog, namor and kisser of babies, recoverer of lost baggage, soberer of delegates, adjuster of traffic violators, voters straying into Wash- ington and into the tolls of the law, binder up of broken hearts, financial wet nurse, good Samaritan, contributor to good causes— there are 0 many good causes—cornerstone layer, public building and bridge dedicator, ship christener. To be sure, he does get in a little flag waving—and a little Constitu- tion hoisting and spread-eagle work, but it is getting harder every day to find time to properly study legislation—the very business we are primarily here to discharge and that must be done above all things.” In an effort to keep in touch with the people of their districts, and to fulfill their yeciprocal responsibility for informing pub- lic opinion, Congressmen conduct post-card surveys, subscribe to scores of community newspapers, provide letters from Washing- ton free to local editors, They mail out copies of their speeches and Government documents by the bushel. Many maintain offices in their home districts to which con- stituents who can't get to Washington may bring their complaints, suggestions, and re- quests for assistance. Indeed, the cartoon of the old-fashioned Congressman enjoying his leisure in Wash- ington, or on his front porch back home, is today a myth, This I can vouch for on the basis of 26 years in Congress. The average Representative is a hard worker. He puts in long hours under severe tension. His re- sponsibilities—and, more, his chores—weigh upon him. His arduous tasks make him a poor insurance risk. The argument against enlarging Congress also starts with the obvious: that the House would have to be expanded beyond all rea~ sonable bounds to restore the intimate con- tact with his constituents which each Mem~ per enjoyed in the early years of the Repub- Cc. But even in its present size the House is generally considered by its more experienced members to be too unwieldy, and it has been criticized for lack of orderliness. Those criticisms were cited when the present celling was adopted and when a proposal to add 36 seats was defeated following the census of 1920 If the habit of enlarging the membership with each 10-year increase in population were resumed, where would the trend ever end? Imagine, if you cen, the effect on the expedition of important business of 74 more Members—and perhaps another 74 after 1960—making speeches for the Rrcorp to impress the folks back home Or, contrari- wise, the increased frustration of an indi- vidual Member striving to make his voice heard on the determination of a critical issue. The British and French Parliaments are sometimes cited as horrible examples of what might bein store forus In the House of Commons, with tts 625 members, many on the back benches (when they can get seats at all) must endure enforced silence during the sessions; because of their great number they cannot effectively participate in debate. Similarly, the very size of the French Na+ tional Assembly (formerly Chamber of Depu- ties), with its 619 members, diminishes the value and power of each member. The equivalent of our Speaker in the Frenc’: lower house does not use a gavel to keep order. He has a buge bell. The great num- ber of members makes it difficult to quell disorder. If the continued ringing of the bell falls to stop the tumult, the presiding officer pute on his hat as a warning that, if the turbulence continues, he will leave the chamber. If after these warnings order is not restored, he clamps on his hat, atrides out of the chamber in high dudgeon and calls it © day. Already the House of Representatives must rigidly curb debate, in comparison to the op- portunity for full discussion allowed in the Senate, with its 96 Members. Sometimes even members of the House committee han- dling a bill do not have sufficient time to discuss ihe issues as thoroughly as might be desirable. Often freshman Congressmen receive no opportunity to speak on bills of great interest. To the question of the proper size for an efficient legislative assembly, Winston Churchill offered one expert's answer—an arbitrary one, to be sure—in arguing against enlarging the chamber of the bombed-out House of Commons when it was rebuilt after the war. To preserve the intimacy and con- versational form of debate conducive to carefully deliberated yet expeditious action, he urged, successfully, that the chamber be held to ite prewar accommodations for only 487 of ite 625 members. Perhaps it is worth nothing that our lower House comes remark- ably close to that figure at its present size of 435. Is it true, moreover, that increased pres- aure of work has made the Congressman less accessible to the people who elected him and less responsive to their interests? And, sd- mitting the pressure, does an increase in the A1387 number of Members offer the only—or even the best—means of alleviating it? Few public officials and certainly few pri- vate business executives are, in my opinion, more accessible or more responsive to the people than the Members of the House of Representatives. Most Congressmen still manage, somehow, to keep their office doors open to any importunate constituent or vis- iting fireman who chooses to walk in. No Congressman who wants to stay in office ig- nores letters from his voters, Few tail to follow the editorial pages of the influential newspapers of thelr districts. Faster means of travel and communica- tion make it easier for a Congressman to keep in touch with bis district than It was in 1790. Administrative assistants, in- creased clerical staffs and the resources of the Legislative Reference Service of the Library of Congress have made it possible for conscientious Members to avoid becom- ing engulfed by the detailed demands of their offices. Additional possibilities for relieving the burden—more practical, it seems to me, than enlarging the membership of the House— have been suggested: Elimination of the private calendar of bills for the payment of small claims against the Government, which could be handled by adininistrative agencies; home rule for Washington, D C.,, which is now governed directly by Congress; electric voting machines in the House, which could tabulate a roll call in a few seconds instead of half an hour; fewer and smaller committees; delegation of minor Jaw-mak- ing authority to administrative agencies and regional authorities; delegation of some con- gressional investigative missions to ad hoc public committees such as the new Nimitz Commission on Security and Civil Liberties. A more drastic solution was proposed by Representative Robert Ramspeck, of Georgia, on the eve of his retirement from Congress in 1946. He suggested splitting the Con- gressman's job into two parts: the legisla- tive part, to be handled hy elected repre- sentatives in Congress; the administrative, or errand-running, part by elected represent- atives before the executive branch of the Government, The House of Representatives, under the Ramspeck plan, would have been reduced to half its present size, and its Mem- bers would have been prohibited by law from contacting the executive branch except in regard to legislation. There was, and 18, no realistic possibility of any such plan being adcpted—as Mr. Ramapeck himself knew best, after 17 years in Congress. The thought behind it, how- ever, 1s pertinent today to the decennial dis- cussion of the size of the House of Repre- sentatives. That part of the Congressman's job which has become most burdensome with the in- creasing size of his constituency, and the only part of it which enlargement of the House might somewhat reduce by distribut- ing it among more Members, is his job as Washington lobbyist for the spectal political, economic, social, and cultural interests of the individuals in his district. His primary job, which ts to participate in the shaping of wise policies and the writing of sound lawa for the general welfare of the Nation, could only be impeded by enlarging the House to still more unwieldy proportions. The question, should the House be en- larged, comes down then to this basic issue: Whether the Congress shall be organized as @ lobby serving a diversity of local intercsts or as an efficient national legislature, placing the good of the whole country above favor- itism to any of its parts. If this issue is seen clearly by the American people, and by their representatives in Congress, there can be no doubt of the choice that will be made.
A1388 Justice for Poland EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HAROLD D. DONOHUE OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 13, 1951 Mr. DONOHUE. Mr. Speaker, under Jeave to extend my remarks, I wish to include the following radio address, re- cently delivered by Mr. Eugene Lyons, roving editor of Reader’s Digest, on the Justice for Poland radio series spon- sored by the western Massachusetts branch of the Polish American Con- gress, together with the introduction by Attorney John P. Zaremba: INTRODUCTION BY ATTORNEY JOHN P. ZAREMBA to Mr. Evaene LYONS Through the appeasement of Stalin at Tehran und Yalta we have, during the last 6 years, lost one-half of Europe and a lurge part of Asia. We have betrayed our friends, we have sacrificed country after country, deprive ing them of their freedom and their inde- pendence. We have recognized satellite Com- munist stooges as legitimate governments and degraded Washington by their embassies, But we have not quenched the appetite of the great imperialist aggressor of the Krem- Jin. Now that our own security is threatened by the rapid growth of Communist-domi- nated countries and a vital confiict is en- vistoned, we pour billions of dollars in the industries and military assistance of western democracies but with very disappointing results. In our perilous situation we are placing our highest hopes in the people he- hind the iron curtain, in Russia proper and more so in the satellite countries suffering under the ruthless oppression of Communist tyranny. We are hoping that more internal unrest, resistance and revolt might initiate the crumbling of the Communist gtant. But how can Poland, for instance, the largest in territory and most numerous in population of all European satellite nations, respond to our appeals sent by the Voice of America or Radio Free Europe, knowing that it was our appeasing diplomats who betrayed her and deprived her of independ- ence? Only by the outright repudiation of the Tehran and Yalta agreements can we restore the confidence of freedom-loving people in American democracy, for deeds speak louder than words So It is high time to blot out the infamous secret agreement of Yalta that turned out to be the curse of the United States, the curse that produced the cold war; cost thousands of lives in Korea and instigated dangerous inflation with expenditures of untold billions of dol- Jars It is indeed doplorable that such catastrophic agreements of our highest diplo- mats are known only to a small percentage of our tellow American citizens. Our speak- er today is Mr. Eugene Lyons, foreign cor- respondent, author and editor, at present roving editor of Reader’s Digest, formerly editor of American Mercury. He is the author of Assignment Utopia, The Red Decade, and other works, of which the most recent is Our Unknown Ex-President. So it 1s with pleasure that I present to you Mr. Eugene Lyons, of New York. AppRESS BY EvceNnr Lyons, Rovina Eprror or Reaver’s Dicést Our country is at this time in the throes of & great debate on foreign policy and military strategy. It rings through the press, the airwaves, the Halls of Congress. More im- portant, its arguments are echoed tn millions of homes, factories, mines, farms—as ordi- nary Americans try to understand the grim, fear-ridden world we live in. It is, I think, a wholesome debate. It means that America at long last is facing up to the life-and-death threat of Red imperial- ism It means that the American people are coming to grips with the challenge of the cruel and godless dictatorship enthroned in the Moscow Kremlin. To those who are not familiar with our democratic processes and traditions, the clash of opinions may sound like division and chaos. You and I, however, know that our America is merely hammering out a new unity with which to confront the looming mensce. But in the great flood of oratory and edl- torial comment, it seems to me, one element has not been given the attention and the emphasis it deserves. That element was hinted at by Governor Dewey and John Foster Dulles, both of whom referred to the wretchedness and the discon- tents under the seemingly smooth totali- tarlan surface of the Soviet empire. It was highlighted also by Governor Harold Stassen. Returning from a world tour, Mr. Stassen reported wide disaffections and a spirit of rebellion in the satellite nations—and in Soviet Russia itself It was made even more explicit by Senator Roserr Tarr, who de- clured—and I quote—-"'We need to study the methods by which those millions who yearn for liberty in satellite countries may be or- ganized to seize power ” Well, the Ohio Senator would have been closer to the truth if he had not limited his study to sutellite areas, if he had realized that the same yearning for liberty exists also inside Russia. All the debaters, indeed, would be closer to the rewlity if they gave more thought to the hundreds of millions of men and women suffering under the iron heel of Bolshevik tyranny. For those people, in the long run, are destined to be our mast valuable allies in the struggle against Red bar barism. Some of us try to view the world situation also from the vantage point of the popula. tions within the Soviet sphere. And from that point of view we are worried, even alarmed, by the failure of American leaders to deal with this crucial fact. Nowhere do we hear a torthright pledge ot the ultimate liberation of the countries already swallowed by the Communist nightmare Nowhere do We see any genuine concern with that phase of the over-all problem. All the recent policy speeches—those of President Truman and cx-President Hoover included—seem strangely indifferent to the fate of the teeming peoples behind the tron curtains and in Russia proper. Not one of our top leaders has as yet proclaimed, in ringing words, that the free portion of man- kind will never reconcile itself to the perma- nent enslavement of the populations in the Communist portion; that we shall not con- sider our job completed until the Soviet dragon has been slain by its victim. No- where do we find a solemn promise that those who rise against ‘the Bolshevik despots can count on our moral and materfal support. In short, there has been no serious and em- phatic offer of an alliance to the enemies of communism inside the Communist sphere. Suppose that Soviet citizens, or Poles, Czechs, Hungarians, could read all sides of the American debate, Would they find any~- thing to encourage them, to raise their hopes? Unfortunately the answer is No. On the contrary, they would more likely feel themselves abandoned, forsaken, written off as expendables, They would have a sense of being callously condemned to eternal servi- tude—lf only the West can somehow save its own skin. The American speeches are filled with fervor about saving the freedom of the free; but they show little if any interest in freeing the unfree. From the moral standpoint, this indiffer- ence to the fate of the captive peoples seems to me utterly shabby and shocking, There APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD was a time in history when the ordeal of any oppressed people was the concern of decent, democratic men everywhere, even if it did not pack a threat to their own survival, Now, we seem willing to wash our hands of the oppressed, provided we can somehow con- tain or come to terms with their oppressors. Pause to think how all the talk of stopping Stalin and containing the Soviets must sound to, let us say a Pole living under the whip of Communist tyrants. That talk, af- ter all, implies an acceptance of the status quo, which 1s to say & permanent division of the globe into free and totalitarian portions. It denies to the enslaved peoples all hope of outside sympathy, let alone assistance. our calculated silence on the issue of liberating those millions amounts to an attitude of neutrality in relation to the great struggle between the Kremlin and its subjects now under way in Poland and in every nation under the hammer and sickle. But morals aside, that attitude of neu- trality is stupid in terms of the psycholog- ical warfare to which more and more Amcre ican minds are turning. It throws away the powertul, and perhaps decisive, weapon rep- resented by the explosive discontents, by the aspirations for freedom, in the sovietized part of the world Psychological warfare makes no sense un- Jess it is geared to a crusading determina- tion to help the subjugated peoples throw off their hateful yoke—unless it is com- bined with an honest pledge to overthrow the Soviet regime and liberate its victims. We are stepping up our propaganda to the multitudes behind the iron curtains, and that's all to the good. But that propaganda will remain meaningless as long as it rests merely on a desire to safeguard our own freedom—rather than a decision to restore freedom whencver it has been expunged Where, in all tho recent American pro- nouncements, can the Kremlin’s long-suf- tering subjects find a ray of hope, a token of comradeship? Where are the expressions of solidarity with the oppressed peoples which we could transmit to them in radio messages or leaflets? Where are the ring- ing words that could rally fugitives from communism~—-of whom there are hundreds of thousands—for a finish fight against our common foe? I submit that even on the level of simple political expediency, our seeming disinter- est. in the fate of the unfree population is self-defeating. It can only weaken the spirit of resistance where it exists, and deepen the pessimism of those who have renounced hope. It can only serve to rally the Krem- lin's captives around Stalin and his puppets in sheer despair. To the hundreds of millions in the Soviet Empire, our discussions about ground troops, air power, rearmament, are of secondary im- portance. What interests them is our basic approach to the Communist mulignity. They search anxiously, in our words and acts, for portents of our long-range view of the Red caucer. Is the west, and America in particular, committed to bringing about the destruction of Soviet power, and thereby the liberation of its victims? That is the only question that has any direct relevance for those already confined in the prison states. Had our spokesmen, whatever their politi- cal color, added this long-range objective to their programs, they would have laid a foun- dation for collaboration with the sovietized peoples. They would have brought closer an alliance of freedom-loving populations on both sides of the iron curtain—an alli- ance of the utmost value today in the propa- ganda duel, and our strongest single weapon tomorrow in short-cutting a war if it comes. The great American debate, alas, has as yet done nothing to break down their awful sense of isolation from the democratic world. It has done less than nothing to apprise them honestly that we recognize our share of the guilt for their sad plight; that we
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD realize how, through ignorance and through the machinations of traitors in our midst, we helped rivet the Communist chains alound their necks, Our aloofness from their fate, our seem- ing willingness to barter their freedom in order to save our own, are the products of confusion, political cowardice, and moral weakness. Our task, from this point forward, is to let the enslaved peoples know that we consider them our friends and allies in a common cause. Let us say to them, in a voice that will penetrate the thickest iron curtains, ‘‘We shall not rest until Stalin and his system have joined Hitler and Mussolini in the limbo of history. We shall not rest until Soviet barbarism has become an ugly memory.” And words alone will not be enough. They must be backed by deeds—dramatic, forth- right, unequivocal. As a beginning, we must repudiate the shameful bargains struck at Teheran, Yalta, and other such conferences, The betrayale compounded in those places were not mistakes. They were crimes against humanity, the American humanity included. Whatever our motives, those crimes must be frankly acknowledged and fully expiated. Only then shall wo come to the great con- flict of our era with clean hands and clean consciences, We are aware that the victims of com- munism despite their tormentors and dream of the hour of Nberation. This 1s the most significant factor in the whole world equa- tion. It is the factor that can serve as a lever to overthrow the Soviet regime and make possible a new world--a world from which the obscene shadows of Kremlin pow- er and Kremlin ambitions will have been lifted by the combined might of freemen on both sides of the iron curtain. Urge MacArthur’s Return EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. PAUL W. SHAFER OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 5, 1951 Mr. SHAFER. Mr. Speaker, the American people are hankering for the truth of what is going on in the world. They have been starved of facts by the Truman administration in regard to the world situation. I agree with John 8. Knight of the Detroit Free Press that Gen. Douglas MacArthur could clarify many misunderstandings in the minds of the American people, if he were per- mitted to come home and report to Con- gress. Under permission to extend my remarks, I include the following editorial by Mr. Knight which appeared in the Detroit Free Press, Sunday, March 11, 1951: MacArruor’s ReTuRN Urcrp (By John 8. Knight) Several times within recent weeks, this newspaper has urged that Gen. Douglas Mac- Arthur be brought home to make 4 full re- port on Korea to Congress and the American people. We reasoned that the Eisenhower report on Europe had been useful and informative, although vague In a number of particulars; that a MacArthur report on Asia would help to clear away many misunderstandings and bare the truth. Why such a report is so necessary can be gathered from theze two dispatches, both published Thursday last on page 1 by the Miami Herald and other newspapers: “WasHINGTON.—The Defense Department reported Wednesday that American casual- ties in the Korean War rose to 52,448 last week, the biggest weekly increase since mid- January. “Suwon, Korga.—Gen, Douglas MacArthur sald Wednesday continued Nmitations upon our field of counter-offensive action means the Korean War cannot fail to end in a stalemate.” General MacArthur said further that the great casualties suffered by the enemy would shake the Red China regime and dampen its ardor for any other aggressive adven- tures in Asia. Yet he offered no hope that his military forces, barred from attacking Communist war production tn China, and without rein- forcements, could achteve more than a con- tinulng stalemate. 80 the “meat grinding” process, as Mac- Arthur calls it, goes on without decisive re- sults, and the American people are unable to understand clearly why their sons are in Korea or what they are fighting for. They are entitled to a full explanation. THE STORY OF A POLICE ACTION Told chronologically, the story of Korea is this. Last June President Truman suddenly de- cided to take a firm stand against the North Korean Soviet puppets who had attacked the Republic of Korea, which was that section of Korea lying below the thirty-eighth parallel, For this action President Truman received widespread commendation. Even men who had bitterly opposed the President said: “This is the first time in years I have been proud to be an American.” The view was taken that while we might be risking a third world war by resisting ag- gression in Korea, it would be a lesser risk than permitting Russia to proceed unhine dered with her plans for world conquest. However, when the news from Korea turned sour, the very people who had been praising Truman to the skies for moving with dispatch began chanting a different tune. As our limited American forces withdrew to the tightened Pusan defense perimeter, there were grim days when it seemed almnrt certain we would be driven into the sea. What had started as a limited police action found the outnumbered Americans clinging precariously to an area less than one-tenth the size of Florida. MacArthur could not fight an orthodox war and bomb the North Korean arsenals of supply in Manchuria for fear of involving the United States and the United Nations in a full-scale war with Red China. UN Secretary-General Trygve Lie’s appeal for ground troops to ald the embattled Americans fell upon deaf ears. Our allies in the United Nations either could not, or did not, show the stirring enthusiasm with which they voted for the resolutions committing the United Nations to a full share in the Korean crusade. At this stage, United States public resent- ment against the sit-it-out countries was running high. WHAT I8 OUR FUTURE BELOW PARALLEL 38? Months later, when the tide of battle turned with MacArthur's brilliant strategy at Inchon, brooding passimisam turned to exultation over our successes. As our forces pushed far north to the borders of Manchuria, even the great Mac~ Arthur volunteered the iJl-fated prediction that United States troops would be on their way home before Christmas. Then the Chinese Reds struck in such vast numbers that UN troops were once again Griven below the thirty-eighth parallel in a crushing defeat. A1389 There we stand today, with Gen. Matthew Ridgway's defense line strong and firm and showing signs of being able to hold cut indefinitely. The strategy at the moment has taken the course of killing as many Communists as pos- sible and keeping our casualties to a mini- mum. But what of the future? What ts our long- range policy? What objectives do we have in mind? These are some of the questions that a MacArthur report would help to resolve. At present, the solutions—if they have been de- termined—are carefully guarded secrets known only to President Truman, Defense Secretary George Marshall, Secretary of State Denn Acheson, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The rest of us are expected to make sacri- fices, give our sons and be patriotic, but we are told nothing. WHAT ISN'T TAUGHT AT WEST POINT These disturbing facts stand out in bold relief: 1. MacArthur has said that he is fighting the Korean War under restrictions “unpar- alleled in military history.” 2. He has tronically described Manchuria as a privileged sanctuary, safe from the devastating blows of his heavy bombers. 8. When questioned recently about the probability of recrossing the thirty-elghth parallel, MacArthur said: “I want to make it quite clear that if and when the tasue ac- tually arises, I shall not arbitrarily exercise that authority if cogent political reasons against crossing are then advanced and there is any reasonable possibility that a limitation 4g to be placed thereon. I repeat that at this time, the question is academic.” Phrased in simpler terms, what Mac- Arthur means is that he does not again in- tend to be put in the middle. He js still smarting over British criticism that he was responsible for bringing the Chinese Reds into the war; still insists that his disastrous November offensive in North Korea was approved by the Joint Chiefs of Stam. 4. MacArthur's latest statement that con- tinued “limitations upon our field of coun- teroffensive action” means the Korean War cannot fail to end in a stalemate, is in effect serving notice upon the American public and the United Nations that he is unable to win & war where military strategy is dictated by political considerations. This is something they didn’t teach at West Point in MacArthur's day. OUR ORIGINAL POLICY IN KOREA DISCARDED It seems fairly obvious that MacArthur ls in the awkward position of neither being able to press the Korean campaign to ulti- mate victory, nor to give it up as a bad job. It is no secret that our Allies, including Great Britain, shrink from “antagonizing” Communist China and want no part of & major conflict with Chinese Reds. It is equally true that a decision to pull out of Korea would mean a terrific loss of face. Buch a decision would also serve notice upon the European nations who have been encouraged to stand up to Russia that United States and UN policy is weak, irreso- lute, and undependable. The announced purpose of the UN resolu- tion of last October 7 was to establish by arms “a unified, independent, and demo- cratic government in Korea.” This noble objective has long since been discarded, and for the reasons which Mac- Arthur bas so clearly expressed. Where, then, do wo go from here? Should we stay in Korea to prove that Communist aggression can and will be re- sisted? are we staying in Korea to pin down Com- muntst forces who otherwise might be used against Indochine and other coveted areas in the Par Exst?
A1390 Do we hope that a stalemated war in Korea will lead the Communists to seek a nego- tiated peace? These questions are being asked daily in millions of American homes where sons of draft age are being called to the colors. It is easy to understand official reluctance to discuss these subjects honestly with the American people because the answers would require some rather complicated and diffi- cult explanations. That is why the Detroit Free Press believes a report from General MacArthur would help to crystallize public opinion; to spell out the incontrovertible facts; to tell us, as the British say, “which side is up.” We could then get somewhere near the truth. Come; We Need You; Throw Away Your Education, Your Home, Your Loved Ones; Fight, Fight to Preserve—We Know Not What EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. HOWARD H. BUFFETT OF NEBRASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 19, 1951 Mr. BUFFETT. Mr. Speaker, under permission to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I wish to include therein the following article. This is an excerpt from an address be- fore the American Legion Child Wel- fare School in Grand Island in February. The youth who made the address was Governor of Boys’ State in 1950, and World-Herald's Teen of the Week last August 21. A Central High Senior, he ts son of Mr. and Mrs. L. O. Burke, 1004 South Fifty-first Avenue. The sentences quoted were so designated in the text of the address: When I was asked to speak today, I was informed that the talk should in some way enlighten you about the way in which the young citizens of today are “taking the bit’—are accepting their responsibilities, Always, adults are worried about the atti- tudes of young people. Afraid they are not up to par—worrted for fear they do not uphold the things which ought to be up- held, and attack the things which ought to be attacked. To you who wonder what the youth of to- day think about their future in terms of the citizen’s duty to his country, I can only say—-the outlook is pretty grim. Ask them yourself. Ask Jim there—the tall young senior about to graduate from high school. Find out what he thinks of the Job he finds on his shoulders. He says: So, if the Army doesn't get me right away, I'll go to college. If it does, and war breaks out—well, I may not have to worry about what I'm gonna do for an education. A bullet’ll take care of that”, Question Jack—the school’s top athlete— want to hear a nice outlook for a 17-year- old kid? Listen: “As far as I'm concerned, I'm gonna have one devil of a good time till I'm 18. I'm gonna do all the things that are wrong, 80's I can say at least I lived for a little while. By golly, I'm gonna live for a year. After that—what's the difference.” Talk to the school “brain"—a boy with ® brilliant mind, capable of doing innu- merable things. How does he regard his duties as a citizen? “85, what good are my brains—and all the knowledge I've accumulated—and the desire I have to learn, and to do great things? With a uniform on, you don’t look much different than the town bum.” Exaggerated? Scattered examples? Sup- positions? No. Before writing this paper, I sat in on 6 lot of “bull sessions” and heard a lot of opinions expressed. These were only three. They all ran about like that. WHY THESE ATTITUDES? Why do they have this outlook? What has happened to the pioneer spirit and determi- nation to keep this country free? Why have these attitudes pervaded the minds of the young folk whose duty it is to preserve democracy? Here’s my opinion, formed after listening to a lot of friends and acquaintances expound on the subject. Reason No. 1: The kids of today are tired of wars, True, they never have fought on the front lines—they may never have seen military service. But consider the fact that the youngsters of 17 and 18 today have never, never, known a year in which there was not war, or rumors of war, or hatred in the air. This young person is not the innocent that went off to serve with the AEF in World War I. Neither is he the young heroic who marched off to save world peace in World Wer II. He has seen war, read war, heard war, since he was old enough to understand what it all meant And because of this vi- carious experience understands what war does. Don’t get me wrong. These same kids realize that there are nations in the world where the young people have seen a lot more conflict than right here in the United States. And they also realize that a lot of sacrifices have been made for them by men in the past and that they owe a lot to these people, In addition, they are not cowards. They merely pose a question. It is one which they deserve to have answered. It is—is this the end? Must the United States be the police force of the world forever and ever? Do the other nations of the world really crave peace, or is the world so pent up with hatred and fury that each peace will be just a breathing spell before the next confilct? SIXTY-FOUR-DOLLAR QUESTION And above all—now get this one well, for it 18 important if you are to understand the young problems. The 864 question is: “Are the officials now in the chief offices of our Federal Govern- ment really the high-caliber individuals that they should be, and are they working for the best interests of the American people to- day, regardless of poHtical ties and ambi- tions?” The majority of those young people I know believe that they are not. Most young folks in my school and my town have even a high disregard for people in public office. If these young men and women cannot trust and respect the supposedly leading citizens of the nation, then it is fatr to expect high standards of citizenship from them? If bungling in Washington causes and stretches out a war in which nothing 1s gained in material, in which no moral ob- jective is reached and in which we are vir- tually betrayed by those supposedly our supporters, then is it fair to call to the stout young men of the Nation: “Come—we need you. Throw away your education, your home, your loved ones, fight—fight to preserve—we know not what.” This, then, is what the young person must hear from you, the adits he looks up to. Is it wise? Will it get us somewhere? APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Will my personal sacrifice—-whether it be my life, or a I'mb, or merely some of my time, be to a good end? Will generations yet to come benefit from what I do, or will my part in history be an embarrassing synapse in the history of America—from which it will es- cape? If your answers to these questions can be right, if you—the voting adults of America— can make it right with your sons and daugh- ters—then never fear. They will show you that they know how to fight as well as the ones that came before them. They will gladly take up their re- sponsibilities and carry them out. It is not a lack of patriotism that ails our youth. It is a lack of meaning to what they are asked to do. Once this has been cleared up—all will be well. Opponents of Congressional Participation in Military Policy Are Inconsistent EXTENSION OF REMARKS o HON. PAUL W. SHAFER OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 6, 1951 Mr. SHAFER. Mr. Speaker, both by informal action and through a formal vote of their policy committee, Repub- lican Members of this House have re- cently called for full participation and approval of both Houses of the Congress in decisions on national military policy. If there had been any doubt as to the need for such a declaration, it is removed by the response of opponents of this policy of full congressional participa- tion. Assertion of the right and duty of the Congress to pass on the matter of troops for Europe in particular, has aroused those who want a free hand for the ex- ecutive and the military. They have launched an all-out campaign to dis- credit this effort to secure full partici- pation by the Congress and to vilify those responsible for the effort. They have not hesitated to insult a former President of the United States. They have invoked the ghost of the commit- tee on the conduct of the war of Lin- coln’s day. They have accused the ad- vocates of such congressional participa- tion and contro] of wanting our country to turn tail and run. The opponents of congressional par- ticipation in these decisions have charged that the purpose of such con- trols is to betray our partners in Europe and to violate the spirit and intent of the North Atlantic Tréaty. They have gone so far, even, as to insist that rati- fication of this treaty by the Senate, July 21, 1949, gave the administration carte blanche in the matter of furnish- ing troops to Europe. These allegations with respect to the North Atlantic Treaty have prompted me to review, in detail, the hearings and debate in the other body which preceded ratification of that treaty. I want to report some of the high lights of what that analysis reveals. The findings have a direct and urgent bearing on the need to recapture full parucipatica anl approval cf the Con-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD gress. These findings stand, either as @ powerful rebuke of those who today seek to deny or limit the participation and approval of the Congress, or as an indictment of the integrity and good faith of those who took the lead in urg- ing ratification of the North Atlantic Treaty. Here is finding No. 1: The idea or suggestion that the treaty contemplated—much less obligated— sending troops to Europe prior to an actual outbreak of war was emphatically denied by every supporter of the treaty who commented on, or was queried about, that point prior to ratification, In some instances the suggestion of that possibility was scornfully dismissed. In one instance, at least, it was scorn- fully and sarcastically dismissed by a Member of the other body who now turns the same vials of scorn and sar- casm upon those who would have the Congress assert control over the process of committing American troops to Europe. The question regarding the prospect of American troops being required or expected for Europe, prior to aggression, was raised—when {t was raised—in con- nection with article ITI of the treaty. This article states that— In order more effectively to achieve the objectives of this treaty, the parties, sepa- rately and jointly, by means of continuous and effective self-help and mutual aid, will maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack. The question of the prospect of Amer- ican troops for Europe was first raised during the public hearings of the Com- mittee on Foreign Relations. On April 27, 1949, the senior Senator from Iowa, Mr. HICKENLOOPER, addressed the follow- ing to Secretary of State Dean Acheson: I am interested in getting the answers as to whether or not we are expected to supply substantial numbers—by that I do not mean a thousand or two, or 500, or anything of that kind, but very substantial numbers—of troops and troop organizations, of American troops, to implement the land power of Western Europe prior to aggression. Is it contemplated under article 3? In other words, are we going to be expected to send substantial numbers of troops over there as a more or less permanent contribution to the development of these countries’ capacity to resist? Secretary Acheson replied: The answer to that question, Senator, is a clear and absolute “no.” A few minutes later, the senior Sen- ator from Missouri {Mr. Donne.) asked Mr. Acheson whether the phrase ‘“effec- tive self-help’ in article ITI contained within it the idea of sufficiency—suffi- cient self-help. Mr. Acheson replied: No. It cannot mean that, because prob- ably the proviston of sufficient forces at the present time ts impossible for everybody. Otherwise if you were trying to get sufil- cient forces you would have to maintain military establishments which would be quite impossible both for Europe and for ws. On April 29, Senator Donne. asked W. Averill Harriman, special United States Representative in Europe for ECA, an- other witness for the supporters of the treaty: In your study in Europe, have you con« sidered whether or not it would be neces- sary for American troops to be stationed in Europe in order to prevent Russia from over- alia Europe, should an attack be made by ussia This drew the flippant reply: All I know ts that I do not know any coun- try that wants to have an armed occupation of United States troops. After rebuking this answer, Senator Donney later asked: Why haven't you given consideration to the question ef whether manpower must also be sent over? The answer was: Because I have never heard anyone in Europe suggest it. * * ° It is not in the European mind at the present time as I seo it. I have said they do not like armies of occupation. Pressed further, Mr. Harriman said: You should ask that question of our Mill- tary Establishment. So far as I am con- cerned, I have never heard anyone discuss that mattor in the discussions I have had regarding the Atlantic Pact and the tmple- mentation of article 3, I might add that there are grounds for reasonable doubt as to Mr. Harri- man’s insight into the European mind in view of his earlier testimony that day that the European nations “are so keen to get themselves in a stronger position that it does not occur to them that they can rely upon the United States.” Would that that were true. On May 2 the former Under Secretary of State, Robert A. Lovett, was a witness. Senator DonngELL asked Mr. Lovett: Do you know whether or not it was con- sidered by the negotiutors, and particularly the United States, as to whether, in order to stop Russia in her tracks, if she should come across the borders of the other Euro- pean countries, 11 would be necessary or ad - visable that there be United States troops on hand in addition to the troops of the European countries? Mr. Lovett replied: I have an accurate recollection of the nego- tiations in which I participated, but I do not recall that question being raised by any- one. No suggestion was made to us that we sbould have United States troops spotted around Europe. On May 3 the senior Senator from Michigan [Mr. VANDENBERG] questioned Gen. Omar Bradley, as follows: Senator VANDENBERG. In connection with any discussions of implementation of this treaty, is there any thought that we must contribute mass manpower under any cir- cumstances connected with the implementa- tion of the treaty? General Brapizy. I do not gee how it is implied in the pact itself. In case of war you probably would act in concert with them, and that would of course depend upon the circumstances and eventually would be at the will of the people, expressed through their Congress, after due consideration. Senator Vanpensgeara. I am asking whether our contemplated contribution does not ex- clude mass manpower at the beginning, be- fore there is any fracas? General Braniry, I do not see that it ex- cludes or includes. I do not see how it is involved at all. A1391 Senator VANDENBERG. Is it involved in your plans on the subject? General Brantey. No, sir. it is not involved. Later this line of questioning was con- ducted by the junior Senator from Utah (Mr, Watkins !: Senator Warxins. I have noticed from time to time statements by some people who are more or less responsible, that a part of our program contemplates the sending of considerable detachments to members of the Atlantic Pact not only for the purpose of in- struction but also to bolster their forces, What can you say about that, General? General Brapiey. If any decision has been made as to sending any particular size group and for any purpose to these nations, I do not know about it. Senator Watkins. It 1s not contemplated at the present time? General Brapiey. It may be on some levels—— Benator Warkins. I mean an far as you have been advised. General Braver. Certainly we have not been tn any planning for sending any par- ticular groups. Does this suggest that General Bradley was a reluctant witness, momentarily lifting the veil of secrecy on already con- ceived plans for troops for Europe? One wonders, certainly. By far the most interesting discussion of this subject occurred during the testi- mony of Mr. James P. Warburg, finan- cial adviser to the American delegation to the World Economic Conference in London in 1933 and Deputy Director of the Office of War Information during the war, who appeared as a private witness to urge certain reservations and clarifi~ cation of the treaty. He testified on May 10. i Some of the most pressing questions raised in the Congress today regarding troop commitments to Europe and de- velopment of a sound security program for the United States were anticipated by Mr. Warburg in his testimony. He said, in part: If the Atlantic security program means what our European friends think it means, either Western European recovery will have to be halted in its tracks, ur else the United States will have to undertake a vastly greater commitment than the American people realize today. * * * What good will it do to build half a de- fense force [in Europe]? Twenty divisions are no better than the 10 or 12 which exist in Western Europe today, if it takes 40 to do the job. Surely it is folly to think that the French or the Dutch, or the Belgians would fight a delaying action for the benefit of Britain and the United States, if they knew in advance that their countries would be overrun and occupied. , Here are some of the questions and answers developed during his testimony: Mr. Warsura. Unless the treaty is clarified, I think it is a highly dangerous instrument. Chairman ConNALLY, You mean clarified the way you want to clarify it? Mr. Warsura. I do not mean it has to be in those particular words. 1 think it has to be made clear whether we are or are not un- dertaking to secure the frontiers of Europe against invasion. Senator VANDENDERG. I certainly agree with you * * * that * * © the great and real operative power of this treaty can- not be forces in being, but must be the potential force of the combined invincible In my opinion
A1392 resources of those who notify prospective ag- gressors of what they are up against. Mr Warsura. Yes, sir. Senator VANDENBERG. Well, we are in com- plete agreement in that thesis. Senator VANDENBERG added later: I certainly concur in your thought that we must not permit our friends [in Europe] to be deceived [regarding our intentions as to troops for Europe]. That would be the last possible crime we could commit. Senator VANDENBERG continued: If all of our treaty friends sit in together and agree tentatively on a military-aid pro- gram of $1,000,000,000, isn’t it inevitable that they must understand that they are agreeing to a program which does not contemplate any attempted Maginot line, or something of the sort? Subsequently, Mr. Warburg observed that— If we did mean that we were going to at- tempt to hold the frontiers of Western Eu- rope, then unless we made sure we could hold them we would be embarking on a gi- pantic Dunkirk. We would be starting off with a guaranteed initial defeat. There then developed this highly in- teresting exchange between Chairman CONNALLY and Mr. Warburg: Chairman ConnaLyy. The treaty docs not contemplate the sending of an army now to string along the Rhine. It only means that when they are the victims of an armed at- tack, we act. * * © [Addressing Mr. Warburg|: Do you favor sending an army over there now and keeping it there to protect their borders? Mr. Warsurec. I would say that would be a very foolish thing todo. * * * Senutor CONNALLY. That is what we are not going to do. We do not plan to do that. But I judge from some of your statements that you thought that was what we ought to do. Mr. Warsura. I do not think I made any statement that could be so interpreted. Senator CONNALLY, I apologize. So much for the testimony before the Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs on the subject of troops for Europe. Is it surprising that the report of the com- mittee did not even mention the subject? There were few references to the sub- ject during consideration of the treaty in the other body. There was absolutely no debate on this point! Here is the record: In his opening address on the treaty, the senior Senator from Texas, Mr. CONNALLY, chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations, did not refer di- rectly to this point. But he did say: We have not committed ourselves to any particular type of military-assistance pro- gram. There were no secret agreements at the negotiation of this pact. That was on July 5. The next day the senior Senator from Michigan [Mr, Van- DENBERG] repeated his earlier remarks at the committee hearing, saying: Article III bullds no illusory Maginot lines. And he added: Frankly, I should have much less interest in this treaty if I thought its repressive in- fluence for peace is measured by or depend- ent on any such [physical] implementation fof the pact]. * * * It is not the mili- tary forces in heing which measure the im- pact of this “knock-out” admonition, impor- tant though they are. It is the potential which counts, and any armed aggressor knows that he forthwith faces this potential from the moment he attacks. The junior Senator from Massachu- setts [Mr. Lopce] who early announced his support of the pact, said on July 8: I do not hold with those who say that we are committed to building up a military es- tablishment xbroad that is sufficiently large to repel any kind of un aggression which might come. That would be an enormous commitment. We have not any concept of dispatching an expeditionary force here and there. And Senator Lopce made a particular point of criticizing those who in the past have talked about having 100 divisions in event of another war. He added: The idea that this country is a bottomless pit, so far as manpower is concerned, should be completely dispelled. The senior Senator from Florida, Mr. Pepper, admitted that the pact con- tained “elements of danger,” but pointed out that “the United States is separated by 3,000 miles of ocean, and it is not contemplated that we shall establish in Europe military forces of this country other than our occupation forces, so far as I know at the present time.” That statement was made on July 15, A new Member of the other body also spoke on the subject. He was the junior Senator from New York, Mr. Dulles, newly appointed to that office by Gover- nor Dewey, It was Mr. Dewey who the other day demanded defeat of the Wherry resolution “by as large a vote as possible—so that the world will know we do not intend to turn tail and run.” And it is Mr. Dewey who now is demand- ing that the United States immediately mobilize 100 divisions. Well, Mr. Dewey’s appointee spoke on July 12. He was listened to most at- tentively. He had aided in drafting the North Atlantic Pact. He had testified for it before the Committee on Foreign Relations. Here is what he said: I have supported the treaty because, in my opinion, it will make it possible tu re- duce the very heavy burden of military ex- penditure which our Nation 1s now carry- ing. * * * If I thought the treaty meant that we had to build up on the continent of Europe a Military Establishment sufficient to with- stand an all-out assault by the Soviet Union, I certainly would not vote for the treaty. What does all this establish? Certainly it establishes that the strongest supporters of the bill believed, or purported to believe, that there was no commitment, implied even, under the treaty, to send American troops to Eu- rope before an act of aggression. More- over, from the record, they believed, or purported to believe, that such a move was neither contemplated, desirable, nor, in terms of providing sufficient security against aggression, even feasible. Well, but you say that conditions are now completely changed, especially as a result of the aggression in Korea. I think that may be questioned. I think it may be questioned whether any- thing has happened in Europe since July 1949 to warrant doing now what the authors of the pact then avowed was not contemplated or feasible. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD In testifying before the Senate com- mittee, Will L. Clayton, vice president of the Atlantic Union committee, said that one of the principal objectives in the cold war is to frighten democratic governments into excessive expenditures for defense. I think that may still be Russia's main strategy despite the hot war 1n Korea. But even if changed circumstances do justify a change in our position, the very stand taken by the supporters and au- thors of the pact emphasizes that such a change involves a new situation, call- ing for new debate, new decisions and commitments by constitutional proc- esses, that is by the Congress. Certainly this record rebukes those who charge we are threatening to turn tail and run if we today question what 2 years ago was professedly repudiated. Certainly the whole record reenforces the proposition that by all means ‘‘what- ever our future military or political policy is to be, it must be determined with the full participation and approval of the Congress.” And that leads to finding No. 2: This current insistence upon the “full participation and approval of the Con- gress” is the self-same principle upon which was placed the very greatest em- phasis during the hearings and debate on the North Atlantic Pact. And let it be noted that this empha- sis upon the night of the Congress to make the final decisions as to what it would do to implement Article ITI was directed, not to the question of furnish- ing manpower for Europe, but to the question of furnishing arms for Europe. It is amazing the amount of unctuous insistence upon “the power of Congress to decide’ which can be given by the executive branch when it wants the ap- proval of the Congress. Even when the treaty, as in this case, had already been signed by the member nations, including the United States. And even when the debate on the treaty was closed with a bludgeoning telegram from a former Cabinet Member, Secretary Henry L. Stimson, that the adding of any reser- vations ‘‘would be a disastrous repudia- tion” and that votes for reservations “will weigh in the scales against (the) cause of peace with freedom.” But be that as it may, there were earnest protestations that after adoption of the treaty there would be full right remaining to the Congress to decide how it was to be implemented. Both Secretary Acheson—at the hear- ing on April 27—and the committee re- port stated that— The pact does not bind the Congress to reach that same conclusion (the same con- clusion, that {s, as the executive branch, that the arms aid proposal should be adopted), for it—the pact—-does not dictate the conclusion of honest Judgment. * * * There is [under the treaty] an obligation to help, but the extent, the manner, and the timing is up to the honest judgment of the parties |to the treaty]. And so up to the Congress. Said the senior Senator froia ‘sexas (Mr. ConnaLty]: There {8 no obligation to furnish arms How dves the United States obligate itself? It obligates itself by a vote of the Coaate
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD on the treaty, or by the passage of a law. There {is no man tn the Government, not even the President of the United States, who can obligate this Nation on this, that, and the other thing. The Constitution provides the way. That, it should be observed, was be- fore Korea—before the President of the United States demonstrated that he could. constitutionally or not, obligate the lives of thousands of Americans in an undeclared war. The junior Senator from New York, My. Dulles, said July 12: I find in the treaty no obligation, legal or moral, to vote for any armament program or for any item of any armament program un- less 11 be meritorious in its own right. The senior Senator from Ohio [Mr. Tarr! was skeptical and invited the jun- ior Senator from New York to accept a rescrvation to the treaty putting his sen- timents into black and white. The an- swer was; No; such a reservation is both unnecessary and untimely. The senior Senator from Florida, Mr. Pepper, speaking July 15, said he did not regard any reservations as necessary, and continued: Why? Because we already have a reserva- tion of the most effective character in the pact itself, What is it? It is that whatever is done under article ITI must be authorized by the Congress of the United States That is the reservation that is important, * * * Whether we give economic ald or whether we give military assistance, the final arbiter of what we give shall be the Congress of the United States—not the State Department, not the President of the United States, but the Congress of the United Statics, where we shall have the privilege of debate and con- sideration, and where public opinion may muke itself munifest, ' That, too, was before the undeclared war In Korea. The committee report on the treaty stated that the North Atlantic Council, set up under the treaty to enable it to function, has only “advisory powers,” since final decision presumably is left to the member nations “in accordance with the respective constitutional processes.” That reads fine. But it is noteworthy that last December 22 Secretary of State Acheson reported on “matters acted upon” by the Council. These matters “acted upon,” mind you. included “struc- ture of the European army, how it should be composed, of what troops, where should the troops come from,” and so forth. That does not sound exactly like an advisory role, But the whole point of this is that there was abundant insistence prior to ratification upon the powers of the Con- gress, upon the role of the Congress as the “final arbiter.” This was in the mat- ter of exportation of arms for Europe. Now it is being contended with no little emphasis and even bitterness that Con- gress is not the proper “final arbiter” in the matter of the exportation of men for Europe. What a presumptuous and tragic claim. How terribly important 1t is that the Congress reassert and recapture its right and duty of “full participation and approval.” XCV1I—App ——£8 Here is the third finding in my review of the hearings and debate on the North Atlantic Pact: The hearings and debate disclosed— perhaps it would be more accurate to say failed to conceal—the fact that there has been opened, by the provisions of the treaty, a completely new and immensely enlarged area of discretionary power whereby a President may directly and completely involve the Nation in war without authority or consent of the Con- gress. A great deal of lip service was paid, during the debate, to the reassuring doc- trine that the power to declare war is Still vested in the Congress, Secretary Acheson, in his speech March 19, 1949, announcing the North Atlantic Pact, denied that the treaty means that “the United Slates would be automatically at war if one of the nations covered by the pact is subjected to armed attack.” He said the decision on the “prompt action” the United States would be bound to take in event of agercssion— “will rest where the Constitution has placed it,” that is, in the Congress. Senator ConnaALLY said—July 5-——in the debate: The full authority of the Congress to de- clare war, With all the discretion that power implies, remains unimpaired, But both Sceretary Acheson and the committee report frankly declined to “define the authority of the President to use the Armed Forces.”” More specifical- ly, they evaded the question of whether the President was free to act in the same way—without, and prior to, action by the Congress—if a member nation were at- tacked as he is free to act if the United States or our nationals are directly at- tacked. The treaty provides, in article V, that— An armed attack against one or more—of the nations—shall be considered an attack against them all. This plainly opens the door, as several opponents of the Atlantic Pact pointed out during the debate in 1949, to the pos- sibility of the President enlisting this Nation in a war, and of his thereby pre- senting the Congress with a war “already in being,” in event of an attack by any aggressor on some other member of the Atlantic Pact. This conclusion is reaffirmed not only by the method used to involve the United States in the Korean War—although Korea was not, of course, a member of the Atlantic Pact—but also by a recent pronouncement by the administration. A document issued by the executive branch under date of February 28, 1951, places the administration on record as to how it feels about the role of the Congress in the matter of a declaration of war. It brazenly asserts: Use of the congressional power to declare war * * * has fallen into abeyance be- cause wars are no longer declared in advance, The constitutional power of the Commander in Chief has been exercised more often be- cause the need for armed international ac- tion has grown more acute. The long de- Jays occasioned by the slowness of commu- nications in the eighteenth century have given place to breath-taking rapidity in the tempo of history. Repelling aggression in A1393 Korea or Europe cannot wait upon congres- sional debate. That amounts to an assertion that through “practical necessities” the power of the Congress to declare war has been “repealed” by its transfer to the Pres- ident. This, of course, is vastly more than even President Franklin D. Roosevelt ever openly claimed. As the senior Sen- ator from Ohio |Mr. Tarr] recently pointed out, Mr. Roosevelt sent a mes- sage to Prime Minister Churchill, through Ambassador Kennedy early in World War II, stating that his earlier message of encuuragement to Premier Reynaud, of France, must not be con- strued as committing the United States to military action against Germany be- cause “there was no authority under the Constitution except the Congress which could make any commitment of that nature.” The pretense maintained during Sen- ate debate on the Atlantic Pact is now completely abandoned. Instead, it is flatly asserted that “repelling aggres- sion in Korea or Europe cannot wait upon congressional debate.” That amounts to a claim that aggression by anyone, anywhere, at any time and under any circumstances, may by presi- dential discretion alone be regarded in the same light as a direct attack on American territory or nationals so far as the presidential power to commit this Nation to war is concerned. There is general agreement that the President has a constitutional right to use American armed forces instantly to repel an attack on American territory or nationals, without wailing for con- gressional approval. It is something vastly different to claim that the Presi- dent has the right to enlist this Nation in any war, in Europe or Asia, without the prior authority of the Congress, and that modern circumstances make it necessary that this power be vested in the President. Unless the President 1s barred from maintaining and hereafter acting on this preposterous claim, unless he is barred from this cither by udoption now of a restraining resolution by the Congress or, if necessary, through a constitutional amendment, we will be permitting re- peal of a basic constitutional provision b, default. And we will be virtually guaranteeing more Koreas. Certainly in this fleld, above all, the need for recapturing and firmly estab- lishing the “full participation and ap- proval of the Congress” is a matter of the gravest urgency. Appropriation for Southeastern Power Administration EXTENSION OF REMARK35 or HON. LAURIE C. BATTLE OF ALABAMA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, March 14, 1951 Mr. BATTLE. Mr. Speaker, undcr leave to revise and extend my remarks, f£
A1394 would like to include a statement by Mr. 'Tom Martin, of Birmingham, Ala., in op- position to the requested appropriation for the Southeastern Power Administra- tion for the fiscal year 1952. Mr. Martin, chairman of the board of the Alabama Power Co., and union representatives, agree that such expenditures are unwise and unnecessary. I am glad to call Mr. Martin’s statement to the attention of the Members of the House of Represent- atives because it expresses so clearly how duplication of facilities can be eliminated. STATEMENT oF ALABAMA Power Co. In OFfPro- SITION TO REQUESTED APPROPRIATION FOR SOUTHEASTERN PowreR ADMINISTRATION FOR Fiscat YEAR 1052 This statement is filed in opposition to the request of the Southeastern Power Ad- ministration which is seeking en appropria- tion of $4,500,000 for the fiscal year 1952 to be used generally for the purpose of con- structing electric transmission lines. The appropriation sought includes funds which must be provided by this company and other American taxpayers, with which to build, among others, electric transmission lines in the State of Georgia. The report of the Southeastern Power Administration to the Congress which seeks to justify the request- ed appropriation refers to a proposed Clark Hill-Macon, Ga., electric transmission line as follows: “This feature will initially provide service at 115 kUlovolts to the load center at Macon, Ga., and will ultimately provide a 230,000- volt tte between the Clark Hill power plant and power developments in the Alabama- Coosa Basin, three of which, totaling 249,- 000 kilowatts are authorized at the present time.” Alabama Power Co. is and has been for more than 40 years an operating electric utility in Alabama. It operates an electric generating, transmission, and distribution system which provides the electric power re- quirements of the public in most of the State, except in the Tennessee Valley area. As of December 31, 1950, the company, which has more than 4,000 employees, was providing electric service directly at retail to 355,282 customers in 585 communities. The company had in operation 17,600 miles of rural line serving 99,377 rural customers, of which 83,716 are farms. In addition to the rural customers served from its rural lines, the company is also serving approximately 50,000 customers in rural communities. The company is now serving 95 percent of the Yarms within its service area, and by the end of 1951 will be serving 98 percent of the farms within its service area. It follows that of the 355,282 customers served directly by Alabama Power Co. approximately 150,000 are located in rural areas and rural com- munities. The company is also providing the power supply to other utilities, municipalli- ties, and cooperatives for distribution and resale to some additional 227,000 customers. Therefore, at the end of 1950 the company was providing most of the power require- ments for a total of 582,000 customers throughout the State of Alabama, except within the Tennessee Valley area. The company has six large hydroelectric plants in middle Alabama and four large steam plants located in different parts of the State to enable it to render the very best service that skill and foresight can produce. Anticipating the growth of toad in this area, it is bringing in 140,000 kilowatts of new plant capacity in 1951 and another 156,000 kilowatts in 1952. On completion of these Plants it will have in hydroelectric and steam installed capacity a total of 1,135,560 kilowatts. In addition the company has on order two other steam electric generating units, each with a capacity of from 40,000 to 150,000 kilowatts to be installed for operation in 1953, location of which ts now under con- sideration. There ig no question of the company’s ability to meet every load requirement in any part of the territory it serves now and in the foreseeable future. Alabama Power Co. has constructed and now operates a network of 4,762 miles of electric transmission lines interconnecting with its generating plants and extending throughout the company’s entire service area so as to provide an adequate and de- pendable supply of electric power for its various customers. The company also owns and operates approximately 22,250 miles of electric distribution lines. Alabama Power Co. is associated with three other electric companies in adjoining States, namely, Georgia Power Co., Gulf Power Co., and Mis- sissippi Power Co. The four companies con- stitute the integrated Southern Co. electric system in Georgia, Florida, Alabama, and Mississippi. Attached to this statement is a map show- ing the interconnected and integrated sys- tem of the Southern Co. These four associated companies have been integrated in respect to their power supply and transmission systems for a great many years. The subject was fully presented to the Securities and Exchange Commission when that Commission had under considera- tion the dissolution of the Commonwealth & Southern Corp., of which this and its asso- clated companies were subsidiaries. The Securities and Exchange Commission, dn its order issued under date of August 1, 1947, found that the electric properties of these four operating companies were retain- able under common control as an integrated public-utility system under the standards of the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935 and that the continued existence of the Southern Co. as a holding company over such retainable properties is appropriate un- der such standards. In this connection, it was shown that there are substantial sav- ings in operating costs and fixed charges, resulting from coordinated planning end op- eration; that power supply economies are achieved through sharing of reserve capuc- ity and through joint planning of generat- ing facilities so ns to stagger construction; further that power supply economies re- sult from central load dispatching whereby, by the control of reservoirs, run of river and fuel-electric plants, substantial amounts of water which might otherwise be wasted are conserved and thereby the need for addi- tional generating facilities with accompany- ing fixed changes may be averted or de- layed. Based upon these findings, the Southern Co. was organized; the four companies were taken over by the Southern Co. The meth- Od of integrated operation has been carried On as in the past years; and it 1s estimated that the annual savings to the companies and hence to the public served by them is in the order of at least $6,000,000 a year. The electric tranamission facilities of the company are interconnected with the trans- mission facilities of the southern system by means of heavy duty high voltage lines in such a manner that in effect power generated at any point on the entire interconnected southern system in Georgia, Florida, Ala- bama, and Mississippi, may be utilized at any other point. Additional interconnec- tions make power available from the Ten- nessee Valley Authority, other utilities, and 8& number of industrial and miscellaneous sources. The company has electric transmission lines in close proximity to each of the pro- posed Federal reservoir projects within its service area. This company has jointly with the other three companies of the Southern Co. system submitted a proposed contract to the Southeastern Power Administration, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD This proposed contract fulfills and carries out the congressional mandate os contained in section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 1944 providing for the distribution of surplus power from the Federal reservoir projects in such manner as to encourage the most wide- spread use thereof at the lowest possible rates to consumers consistent with sound business principles, and giving preference in the sale of such power to public bodies and cooperatives. The proposed contract submitted by Alabama Power Co. and its as- sociated companies to the Southeastern Power Administration would accomplish these purposes fully and completely. If such proposed contract is accepted by the Southeastern Power Administration, there would be no occasion for the use of Federal funds as is now proposed by the Southeast- ern Power Administration for the construc- tion of electric transmission lines and facili- ties which, if built, would not only dupli- cate existing facilities but would necessitate @ waste of critical materials, manpower and Federal funds at the expense of the Ameri- can taxpayers and at a time when all such materials, manpower and funds should be most zealously safeguarded and conserved for the defense effort. There are some 10,000 stockholders of Ala- bama Power Co., of whom approximately 7,000 are residents of Alabama. The com- pany has made an investment of more than 8225,000,000 in its electric plants and facil- ities in Alabama. In 1950 the company ac- crued from income $10,592,410 for payment of taxes, of which more than $6,000,000 con- stituted Federal income tax. Taxes by the company also included more than 82,000,000 in real and personal property taxes in 64 of the 67 counties of the State. Alabama Power Co, has over the years con- structed and is now operating an electric generating and transmission system which is providing at reasonable rates an adequate and dependable supply of electric power suffi- cient to serve the public in its service area, All rates of the company have been approved by the Alabama Public Service Commission, a State regulatory body which, under the laws of the State of Alabama, has general supervision and control over the company’s rates and service. The company now has planned or under construction additional facilities to meet the growing requirements for electric service in its area. Unless pre- vented from so doing by shortages of critical materials or by other things beyond the con- trol of the company, Alabama Power Co. will continue to provide the necessary facilities for transmitting and distributing electric power to meet all future requirements with- in the company's service area. The company can do this while still functioning as a part of the American free enterprise system. The proposed appropriation of 84,500,000 for the Southeastern Power Administration for the fiscal year 1962, if made, will be used generally for the purpose of constructing duplicating electric transmission lines which are absolutely unnecessary. Such an appro- priation is not only unnecessary but it would result in waste of critical materials, man- power, and Federal funds at a time when such materials, manpower, and funds are so sorely needed for the defense effort. The proposed appropriation is not only tnexpe- dient, unnecessary, and wasteful, but such an appropriation, if made, will lead even- tually to a needless duplication of the elec- tric transmigsion and generating facilities of this company. It will lead also to an effort on the part of the Federal Government, act- ing through the Southeastern Power Admin- istration, to take from thls company and from its employees and its stockholders, the business and the customers which have been built up through the joint efforts of this company and its employees and stockhold- ers over a period of many years. Such effort will of necessity be financed and paid for by this company and by its employees and
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD stockholders and by the other American tax- payers, all at a time when such use of funds, materials, and manpower would be highly prejudicial to the defense program. Could anything be more unnecessary, inequitable, unfair, and unjust? Respectfully submitted. ALABAMA POWER Co, By THomas W. Martin, Chairman of the Board. The Problems of Agriculture EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WESLEY A. D’EWART OF MONTANA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, March 14, 1951 Mr. D’EWART. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I wish to call attention to a report on the prob- lems of agriculture prepared by Dr. John Lee Coulter, an eminent consulting econ- omist, of Washington, D. C., under the sponsorship of the National Reclamation Association. The report has special ref- erence to conservation, reclamation, and irrigation in the 17 Western States of the United States. The full text of the re- port will be printed in the hearings of the Committee on Interior and Insular Af- fairs, and has been made available to many Members from the Western States. I include with my remarks the following synopsis of the report and commend the full report to all who are interested in this vital problem: Do We NEED RECLAMATION?—SYNOPSIS OF A REPORT ON THE PROBLEMS OF AGRICULTURE By Dr JoHN Lee COULTER During the past 35 years the population of the United States has increased 60 percent — from 100,000,000 in 1915 to 150,000,000 in 1950. While during the same period the total avall- able farm land has remained about the same—450,000,000 acres. How, then, were the additional 50,000,000 people fed, clothed, and sheltered? How were we able to meet the demands of this increased population for food and fiber, and at the same time main- tain our highest standards of living? Several factors made this possible: 1. A TREMENDOUS REDUCTION IN ACREAGE DE- VOTED TO COTTON PRODUCTION The cotton acreage from 1925 to 1929 aver- aged 45,000,000 acres, while at the present time it is less than 20,000,000 acres. Thus, 25,000,000 acres have been made available for the production of food and fiber for human requirements. 2. THE SHIFT FROM HORSES AND MULES ON THE FARMS AND ELSEWHERE TO AUTOMOBILES, TRUCKS, AND TRACTORS Prior to World War I there were more than $0,000,000 horses and mules on farms and elsewhere throughout the country. By 1949 this number had been reduced to less than 10,000,000—a reduction of more than 20,- 000,000—thus making available for human consumption the food and fiber produced on 60,000,000 additional acres, 3. EXPANSION OF WHEAT PRODUCTION IN THE GREAT PLAINS AREA It has been estimated that at least 35,- 000,000 acres of grasslands in the Great Plains area has been plowed up and planted to wheat since World War I. Dr. Bennett, Chief of Soil Conservetion Service, has re- cently stated, “There are probably as high as 8,000,000 acres in these Plains States that should be gotten out of cultivation and put back to grass—and kept in grass.” These shifts and changes tn our farming practices have made available the products of more than 100,000,600 additional acres to meet the requirements of our rapidly in- creasing population during the past 35 years. But what about the future? With our popu- lation increasing at the tremendous rate of more than 2,000,000 per year what would be the situation if during the sixties or the seventies we were again confronted with a drought such as we experienced in the thirties? Our population is not only growing but it is moving westward. By 1975 there will be 50,000,000 or more people in the West. A balanced economy for these people will re- quire the full development of all the re- sources of that area, particularly agricultural. This, in the arid and semi-arid West, can be accomplished only through reclamation. But reclamation is a slow process requiring many years to accomplish, Furthermore, the total remaining area to be developed is only about 17,000,000 acres or less than 4 percent of our present area available for farming. These increased irrigated acres, if brought under cultivation by means of rec- lamation during the next 25 years, would largely be offset by the present wheatlands of the Great Plains that should revert to grasslands and by lands going out of produc- tion because of soil eroston, which is an im- portant and critical factor Thus, if during the next 25 years we bring under irrigation all of the remaining unde- veloped irrigable Iands of the West, it is possible that the total farming area of the United States may not be as large as it is today. But during the same period our population will increase by 60,000,000 peo- ple—or by 33! percent, A Soldier Writes From Korea EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. LAWRENCE H. SMITH OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 12, 1951 Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. Mr. Speak- er, considerable interesting correspond- ence is being received by families who have boys fighting in Korea. As part of my remarks, I am inserting at this point a letter from a boy who writes from the depths of his heart as to conditions in that unhappy land. Dear ——-: Your letter was most inter- esting. Am sorry the Powers moved away, but maybe I'll see them again some day. About this island we're on. This is one of the reasons that the people back in the States are paying some awful figures in taxes, This island could run and do every- thing expected of it with the manpower of 300. But we have over 1,000 GI's, officers, and other personnel stationed here. When you move a man into a place like this you have to have just about another man some place taking care of him, and also the more men come in here, the more officers and men have to be sent in to run and take care of them. So you see it can get in a cycle in a way. Food isn’t too good, but it won't kill you if you eat it. Shows here are about 6 months to a year old. * © * Seeing a show for the tenth time is nothing new around here. This doesn’t seem to hang too hard on my mind, as we have a lot of personal things to A1395 relieve just loafing around. Have a small but widely used library and spend a lot of time there. Reading books like classics, Ja- pan Today, Inside Russia, the Reds and Rus- sia, World Peace, and things like that. Also other books, such as on medicine, Legion, and custom, I do a lot of writing. Write short stories, also a lot of articles on Japan, Korea, and things I've seen. Just for myself, but it’s fun. Right now I’m writing a story for the squadron commanding officer to publish in the newspaper that is sold over the South Pacific. As far as trying to say, “Why are we fight- ing in Korea” ts a good question but try to answer it when you see your buddies all shot up and some even pretty badly tortured. Well it makes you think a little. There wasn't much use of even going into Korea in the first place as I can see it because the United States couldn't even take Japan. After we get all through, we will be spread all over the world and we will be wide open then. But such is life. Most of the guys out here believe as I do on this subject. I didn’t know that we had exploded A-bombs in Arizona. Nobody tells us guys anything. Hear news at night once in a while short-waved from Los Angeles but not too often, I thank you for the book and will read it when am teeling sorta out sometime. If you honestly want to know how I feel about the whole mess we're in now, if I was a millionatre, I'd buy the biggest rocket ship and take off for parts unknown. Right now the guys on this island are living from day to day. There have been unidentified air- craft and underwater craft around here sev- eral times, nnd if ever anything happens, a lot of people are going to cash in on Western Union. It would be a second Wake Island. We have light machine guns here, three to be truthful, and a hundred or so rifles, which is about it. No place to go if anything did happen. One rifle shot would blow this place wide open, as we have large 180-octane gas tanks all over the island. Me, I’m swimming out to a small coral reef if anything does hap- pen. I may not be a hero but I'm not a fool either. The only aircraft stationed here is a C-47 and a B-17. The former is used for flying protocol to the nearest base. Well, really can't think too much of any- thing else to write about so will eign off for now, wishing to hear from you soon. As ever, Too Long in Power EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. GLENN R. DAVIS OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, March 14, 1951 Mr. DAVIS of Wisconsin. Mr. Speak- er, for the consideration of my col- leagues, and of others who may read it, I am inserting, by unanimous consent, the pertinent and thought-provoking editorial from a recent issue of the Wis- consin State Journal, of Madison, Wis.: ‘Too Lona 1Nn PowERr Senator James E. Murray puts the pres- sure on the RFC to approve a Government loan to the Saxony, a lush Milam! Beach hotel, The Senator's son gets a $21,000 fee after the million-dollar loan was made. Is anyone around here surprised? He shouldn’t be. It’s only part, and un- doubtedly a very small part, of the pattern
A1396 of graft, influence, and cheap politicking running wild in Washington today. And it’s nothing new, either in the RFC or in Washington generally. Even in the days of Jesse Jones, & paragon of statesmanship and integrity when compared to the crowd running the show today, one had to have an “angle” or a “friend” to get an RFC loan. The worthiness of the loan was not enough to get a foot in the door. It's all part of the atmosphere which sur- rounds a party—any party—too long in power. The mink coats, the deep freezers, the Donald Dawsons, the Merle Youngs, and the Harry Vaughans are just the window dress- ings of a deeper political philosophy of smugness, venality, and indifference to the public good Too long in power. The Republican Party blew up in the twenties. The personal honesty and high purpose of Herbert Hoover was not strong enough to live down Tea Pot Dome and War- ren Harding. The country needed a change of party—and it got it. Does anyone dare to suggest that America does not need a change today? Isn't it time to start at the top and sweep out the slimy crowd that surrounds the White House? The walls and pillars of that old structure are not all that termites de- stroyed. When the Pendergast protégé moved in a heap of the spirit of Pendergast moved in with him, Too long in power. There’s little use in rattling dead bones, but it’s important to know where these things start. F. D. R. owed nothing to Tammany Hall, but he used Tammany methods. His revolution—good or bad— safely launched, himself anchored and un- beatable, and there began to appear the same smugness, the same willingness to use influence to achieve personal profit that has reached a climax in Washington today. His son sold insurance policies that your son and mine could not sell. His son got loans—ones that were never repaid—because papa entertained the right people at dinner, or put in phone calls to the right men. And the Roosevelt revolution itself, which history may tell us saved this country from economic chaos, nevertheless started the growth of a spirit new to America—some- thing for nothing. Get out your Mark Twain and read The Man Who Corrupted Hadleyburg if you are interested in prophetic allegories. We don't like 1t, We don’t believe Amer- ica likes it, We don't like Senators whose sons got big fecs because pops helped their clients get & loan. Think how honest old Thomas J. Walsh must be rolling in his grave. He was the man who smoked out Teapot Dome. And Senator Jrm Murray, from the same State of Montana, is sitting in his Senate seat, We don't like the percentage boys whose White House wives get $8,000 mink coats in trade for influence. We wish Jon McCartny would stay away from the race tracks, and quit having friends cash checks—and concentrate on the job of smoking out the commies. We wish * * * but there’s no use wishing that Harry Truman will clean house and start playing President instead of king. Anyone who has read about him knows he's a stubborn man. He likes what he has, and even what he has created, and he's going to keep !t. The answer? Clean out this administra- tion while there's still time to save the country. There are honest men and able men who can take over the job and do it right. If it’s done in time, it may be possible to combine statesmanship with integrity. If there's much more delay, we predict the great, honest mass of our people will rise up in their wrath and put their candidates to only 01¢ test: They may be dumb, they may vote wrong, they may stand for stupid things, but, by God, are they honest? The Late Paul H. Ballard EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WILLIAM M. McCULLOCH OF OHIO IN THE HOUSE CF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, March 14, 1951 Mr. McCULLOCH. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, last, death came to Paul Bal- lard, a great and good man. For 14 years he was a member of the Ohio House of Representatives, and for 10 years he was chairman of the powerful finance committee of the Ohio House. He voluntarily retired from the house to become business manager of Ohio University, reputedly the oldest uni- versity west of the Alleghenies. Paul Ballard was a strong yet humble man, He was able, courageous, honest, and sincere. He really believed that public office was a public trust and his every act conformed to his belief. In these days, when it might appear that strength and character in public office, are at so low an ebb, America, as never before, desperately needs men cf his qualities in high positions. Although Paul Ballard died without great wealth, an editorial in the Cleve- land (Ohio) Plain Dealer leaves to his wife and family a priceless heritage. The editorial is as follows: Pau. H. BALLARD It has never been possible for us to reflect on Paul H. Ballard's distinguished record of service in the Ohio Legislature without won- dering why some men think that they have to stoop to cowardly compromise of princi- ples or engage in the shoddy tricks of the demagogue in order to be politically suc- cessful. No man who has served in the legislature in the memory of living Ohioans was any more influential and any more respected than was Paul Ballard. And that it was so because he was a politictan who didn't frighten easily, who could be persuaded by reason but never by threat or enticement, and who believed that occupancy of political office should be for public service, not for the advancement of special interest or for personal aggrandizement. Because of his integrity and because of the intelligent way in which he decided issues that confronted him during his 14 years of service in the house, Ballard enjoyed the confidence of legislators from the urban areas in the same degree that he was given the implicit confidence of those from the rural sections, Fittingly enough, he was chairman of the important house finance committee, Ballard retired from the legislature in 1948 In order to become business manager of Ohio University, where he served with the asamp exceptional competence and inflexible probity that characterized his legislative career. Mr, Ballard's death at Athens is a genuine lows to this State. The public service in Ohio could never have enough men lke him, for he imparted strength and character to the government he served, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Foreign Policy EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. RALPH W. GWINN OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, March 14, 1951 Mr. GWINN. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I include herewith the very excellent letter of Robert B. Dresser to the editor of the Providence Journal: Our Forrtcn Poricy EpiTor, PROVIDENCE JOURNAL, Providence, R. .: The Sunday Journal for February 4 con- tained a letter to the editor, signed His- toricus, quoting from a letter written under dute of March 22, 1903, by Henry Adams, the historian. I quote from the Adams letter as follows: “My statesmanship is still all in China, where the last struggle for power is to ccme China ts bound to go to pieces, and every year is a long step to the bad. The only country now on the spot is Russia, and if Russia organizes China as an economical power, the little drama of history will end in the overthrow of our clumsy western civilization. We never can compete with Asia, and Chinese coal and labor, organized by a Siberian system. In that event I allow till 1950 to run our race out.” It is remarkable that this view, expressed almost 50 years ago, agrees so closely with the present views of a number of those most familiar with China and its affairs. In 1923 Lenin wrote, ‘In the last analysis, the outcome of the world struggle will be determined by the fact that Russia, India, and China, etc., constitute the overwhelming majority of the population of the globe.” On January 6, 1948, former Ambassador William C Bullitt said in a Town Hall debate on China: “If we permit the Soviet Government to control the Chinese and the Japanese, we shall finally go down under the assault of hundreds of millions of Communist serfs. If our Government permits Soviet control of China, we can all count our country as doomed and our children as dead.” In July 1950 Dr. Walter H. Judd, one of America’s leading authorities on China, said: “What other task, I ask you, could be so important to the Kremlin's plan for the conquest of Asia, then of Europe and then of ourselves as beguiling America into stop- ping effective assistance to China? “Foster [William -Z. Foster, head of the Communist Party in this country} summed it up in this sentence: ‘The war in China is the key of all problems on the international front.’ “Not Japan, not Germany, not the Medi- terranean, not the Balkans, not the oll of the Middle East, not the North Atlantic or any of the other areas where we have focused our efforts, but China. The Kremlin 5 years ago instructed its followers that the war in China is the key of all—I repeat, all— problems on the international front. While we were seeking to forget China and its trou- blesome war against Communists, the Krem- jin was already working to win that war and the crucial victory which that would repre- sent in its never-ending warfare against us and all the free world.” In this same statement Dr. Judd quoted the following observations by Gen. Dougias MacArthur, made in the fall of 1047: “Our failure to help the Government of China effectively at the end of the war, with its otherwise insuperable problems, particu- larly th» Communist rebellion, will turn out,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD I fear, to bs the single greatest blunder in the history of the United States.” The current debate regarding the sending of a land army to Europe raises many serious questions. The debate seems to be center- ing largely on the question of whether West- ern Europe is important to us. Its impor- tance seems to be generally conceded How- ever, the vital question really is not that, but whether it 1s possible at this time to save Western Europe from Russian domination by the use of land forces It seems to be ad- mitted on all sides that Russia has such vast superiority in land forces that she could overrun Western Europe at will If this is true, is it likely that she will delay using this power until it 1s too late? Brig Gen Brice P Disque (U. S. Army retired) in an article recently published in the Spotlight Publications of the Committee for Constitutional Government, has this to say on this subject “The Politburo sits on Europe's eastern boundary with a fully equipped land army of about 200 divisions. If it is the Polit- buro's purpose to war in Europe with troops, is there an American so ailly as to believe that the Russians will accommodate us by holding back until we create a bigger force in Europe, so as to insure their defeat? “We may have leaders that silly, but the Politburo is not Quite likely it will wait, and if events dictate a military advance Into Europe, it will overrun the place before we can set up a force to stop it The chances are 100 to 1 that everything we have sent or may send eventually will become Russian property.” It should be observed that according to re- liable reports there are large numbers of Nationalist Chinose who are willing and eager to fight the Communists in China They need, however, arms, equipment, and train- ing. In the language of General Chennault: “It |China] ts the one key area of the world where international communism can still be licked without the involvement of a single American infantry soldier" Rosert B. Dresser. Fesrvuary 6, 1951, canines ereremeemeanmmnael Nineteen Hundred and Fifty Cut-Backs in Mail Service Unjustified, Ex-Official Says EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THOMAS E. MARTIN OF IOWA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, March 14, 1951 Mr MARTIN of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Appendix of the Recorp, I include the following article which appeared in the Washington Post for Sunday, Febru- ary 25, 1951, relative to postal service cut-backs: NINETEEN HUNDRED AND Firry CuT-Backs IN MAIL SERVICE UNJUSTIFIED, EX-OFFICIAL Says A former Chief Inspector of the Post Office Depurtment criticized Department manage- ment yesterday and sald it “is on weak ground in trying to convince anyone” that postal rates should be substantially in- creased. James M. Doran, who retired October 1 after 44 years, challenged last April's econ- omy in service. He said the Department could have made major operation changes and thus have done away with any need for service cut-backs. Doran, Chief Inspector between 1945 and 1949 and then Director of Budget and Plan- ning, expressed his views in the March Postal Record, published by the National Association of Letter Carriers. The union has criticized Postmaster Gen- eral Donaldson’s cutting residential mail deliveries to one a day, curtailing window hours and pick-ups from matling boxes and cutting down on nighttime processing of other than first-class mail. APPROPRIATION REQUEST CUT Donaldson based his actlon on a directive from the House Appropriations Committee to effect economies after it had cut. his appro- priation request He failed to get through Congress suggested increases in all postal chaiges except first-class (letter) rates Doran said that about 94 percent of the Nation's 41,000 post offices, located in smaller communities and having small receipts, always have and always will require a sub- sidy This, he contended, is justified by the essential service they perlorm, “Congress can never be expected to hike rates sufficiently to wipe out the deficit in these district {small] offices, and it should not attempt to do 50,” Doran said. Donaldson's cuts, he said, fell most heavily on the other 6 percent of the offices in large communities, which regularly return a profit. WOULD RAISE SOME RATES “Certain rates should be ratsed,” he said, “particularly those on second (publication) and fourth class (parcel post), but all con- cerned phould be certain of the equity in- volved in the increases requested " Doran said the Department’s Cost Ascer- talnment Division last March submitted a report on operating expenses 1n 20 of the largest post offices which suggested a broad field for saving. “On one item, the cost of handling first- cluss mall, one office showed a cost of 133 percent more than the one that operated at the least cost,” he said. “It the report accurately portrays present conditions and costs in the 20 offices in ques- tion, a saving of 845,000,000 a year could be made in the handling of first-class mail alone,” he added. Statement of Guy George Gabrielson EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOSEPH W. MARTIN, JR. OF MASSACHUSErTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, March 14, 1951 Mr. MARTIN of Massachusetts. Mr, Speaker, under leave to extend my re- marks in the Recorp, I include the fol- lowing statement by Guy George Gabri- elson, chairman of the Republican Na- tional Committee: Let Representative Hays clean up his own party, and his own national committee, be- fore he tries to talk about something which he knows nothing about. The hearings of the Fulbright subcommit- tee show that the Reconstruction Finance Corporation loan to Carthage Hydrocol, Inc., was negotiated before I became president of Carthage, and before I became chairman of the Republican National Committee. The printed hearings of the subcommittee show, on page 440, that under questioning of Senator Fu.sricut on July 10, 1950, a former RFC director, Mr. Harvey Gunderson, testl- fied as follows: “I had never talked to Mr, Gabrielson, and I know of no one in the RFC who had ever A1397 talked with him until after the loan was made, at which time he was elected president of the company.” Mr Gunderson’s testimony further makes it clear that the loan was negotiated by Mr. P C (Dobie) Keith, an outstanding chemi- cal engineer, through Mr. Jesse Jones, former Federal loan administrator. I have been Mr. Keith’s attorney for many years Becuuse of its value to national defense and the development of natural resources, the loan was endorsed by the Secretary of the Army, the Secretary of the Navy, and the Secretary of the Interior The record shows that I have no financial interest in Carthage Hydrocol, and that the only compensation I have received has been for my services as president and counsel. The last installment of the Joan to Care thage Hydrocol was made April 25, 1949. I became chairman of the Republican National Committee August 4, 1949. These facts ure all a matter of record, and were available to Congressman Hays I can only conclude that this deliberate smear is an attempt to divert attention from the rascality rampant in Washington under the administration of the political party to which Mr. Hays is affiliated And no amount of misrepresentation or mud-throwing will deter me from continuing to urge that we turn these rascals out in 1062, >tecords of Applicants for Public Assistance EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. EDGAR A. JONAS OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, March 14, 1951 Mr. JONAS. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Appendix of the Recor, I include therein a reso- lution adopted by the State Senate of Iinois. In substance, the resolution is a pro- test against the provisions of the Fed- eral Social Security Act, which provides that information and records concerning applicants for and recipients of assist~- ance under public assistance programs, and so forth, are not open to public scrutiny and inspection. I wish to add that the resolution in question is meritorious and is worthy of further study and consideration. In my opinion the members of the State Senate of Illinois are to be commended for their forthright and courageous position which they have taken, evidently in the hope that it ultimately will be the means of unmasking the many frauds and false pretenses that are imposed upon the Government of the United States be- cause of the unreasonable and uncon- scionable clause contained in the pres- ent Social Security Act, and which defi- nitely appertains to the subject matter so ably portrayed in the resolution. A copy of the resolution follows: Senate Resolution 24 Whereas the Congress of the United States by amendment to the Federal Social Se- curity Act has provided that information and records concerning applicants for and recipients of assistance under public assist- ance programs operated by the various
A1388 States in confunction with the Federal Gov- ernment under provisions of the Social Se- curity Act shall be limited to purposes di- rectly connected with the administration of there programs; and Whereas this injunction of secrecy imposed on the States by said amendment to the Federal Social Security Act is a matter which causes great public concern, and is directly responsible for numerous injustices, abuses, and fraud by permitting many individuals not actually in need to receive assistance and to escape detection because of the stringent regulations guarding the names of recipients of public assistance, thus creating dissatis- faction with the public-welfare program in many communities of the State; and Whereas said secrecy provision violates the fundamental principle that any ex- penditure of public funds should be subject to public audit; and Whereas members of the General Assem- bly of the State of Illinois repeatedly have expressed themselves as favoring an amend- ment to the Public Assistance Code of INli- nois which would make available to public Inspection and sound use a list of names of all recipients of public assistance in each county of the State, only to be advised that such an action would be in conflict with the Federal Social Security Act and would re- sult in loss of Federal funds for public assistance purposes, and Whereas the so-called Federal funds were collected from the taxpayers of JUinois to the extent of almost 3,340,000,000 dollars during the last fiscal year ending June 30, 14.0, while less than @3 out of every $100 collected from the people of Iltnois was re- turned to the State of Illinois in so-called Federal ald for all purposes: Therefore be it Resolved by the Senate of the Sirty-sev- enth General Assembly of the State of Mh- nois, That we go on record as recommending to the Congress of the United States that legislation be enacted at the earliest possible date amending pertinent sections of the Fed- eral Social Security Act in such a manner that State legislative bodies desiring to do 60 would be permitted to remove restrictions in State laws concealing the identity of pub- lic assistance recipients, and to provide that &@ list of the names of all recipients of as- sistance be available for public inspection in a proper public office; and be it further Resolved, That a copy of this resolution be sent by the secretary of state to the Cl.rk of the House of Representatives and to the Secretary of the Senate of the Eighty- second Congress and to each United States Senator and Representative from Ilinois, Adopted by the senate March 7, 1951. SHERWOOD Drxon, President of the Senate, Epwarp H. ALEXANDER, Secretary of the Senate. F.. 1 March 8, 1951 Epwarp J. Barrett, Secretary of State. On Low State of Morals EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CECIL M. HARDEN OF INDIANA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, March 14, 1951 Mrs. HARDEN. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following editorial from the Terre Haute (Ind.) Star of March 12, 1951. This editorial, touching as it does on the current RFC investi- gation, is particularly pertinent to to- day’s debate on the floor of the House. “Ig ANYTHING Wrona In THAT?” QUERY SuHows Monat DECLINE From the moment the RFC disclosures began hitting the headlines, the words “il- legal” and “improper” have enjoyed the cur- rency of popular songs. White House attachés, RFC officials, Sen- ators, these and others have time and again defended the exercise of pressure and in- fluence on the ground that what they did was not illegal. Senator FuLsricut, of Ar- Kansas, pursuing the inquiry, has often in- sisted that while this might be so, their ac- tions were nevertheless improper. Faced with this moral gage, the prin- cipals in the RFC story have then usually gone on to assert that they have done noth- ing improper, either. There is no need here to discuss the Issue of illegality. If any be demonstrated, it is @ matter for the courts and that's that. What is of much graver concern to the Nation is the strange idea so many of our public officials seem to have of what is proper and what is improper. An examiner for RFC sees no harm in ac- cepting free hospitality from a Florida hotel Owner who has won an RFC Joan. Senator Murray, Montana Democrat, says it’s quite “routine” for lawmakers to plug loans for ap- plicants who happen to be constituents, even when a Senator’s son is the applicant's law- yer. White House personnel feel utterly free about accepting favors of all kinds, as well as dispensing them. Maj. Gen Harry Vaughan, President Truman’s military aide, doesn't have a single qualm whether he’s taking in deep freezers or getting a special law pushed through Congress to allow entry from Australia of a woman acquaintance he wants as secretary. In all these instances, the principals have one standard reply’ “Is there anything wrong in that?” That they even find it necessary to ask the question tells us how insensible many pub- lic men have become to any lofty code of propriety in official life, By any reasonable measure, no man who occupies a position of responsibility in Government ought either to accept or grant special favors to anyone. There was a time when such an elementary ethical standard was universally revered and widely observed In the Washington of 1951, it appears as outmoded as celluloid collars and knee-length bathing suits. Nothing unearthed so far has bracketed the Truman administration with the scan- dalous Harding regime. Yet in some ways the offenses against the moral code today are worse They have tended to haul the National Government down to the level of petty, tin-horn courthouse politics. They have robbed the White House and the Prest- dency of dignity They have made Washing- ton life spineless, boneless—a shambles of competing influences and pressure and friendships in which moral values are burted underfoot. Only one thing is still lacking. No one has yet put vending machines into the White House, the Capitol, and assorted Government halls to dispense favors easily, mechanically, and for a fixed price. “Is there anything wrong in that?" Toronto Stock Frauds EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. FRANK M. KARSTEN OF MISSOURI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, March 14, 1951 Mr. KARSTEN of Missouri. Mr. Epeaker, under leave to extend my re- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD marks in the Recorp, I include the fol- lowing article which is one of a series published in the St. Louis Star-Times: Toronro, ONTaRIO.—Albert Edward De- Palma, the one-time St. Louis waiter who became one of Toronto's most notorious pro- moters, reigns over his ramshackle empire of moose pasture stock enterprises at 185 Bay Street, in the heart of the financial district. The legend on the translucent glass of the matin office door recites some of DePalma’s activities as follows: “Tantalum Refining & Mining Corp. of America, Ltd., Indigo Con- solidated Gold Mines, Ltd., Petromine Ex- ploration & Finance Co, Ltd., Dominion Re- sources Publications, John W. Hammond Co.” Tantalum, Indigo, and Petromine are branded as stock frauds by the United States Securities and Exchange Commmission and the United States Post Office. DePalma says he has no connection with Dominion Resources Publications or the John W. Hammond Co. These concerns, he says, are entirely separate, Hammond writes and prints the literature for DePalma's stock promotions, however, and Dominion Resources Publications pro- duces a tabloid newspaper entitled “The Financial Observer’ which is always report- ing big developments at DePalma’s prop- erties in the Yellowknife. DePalma said he would receive me and Willlam C Rosenbaum of the St. Louis Bet- ter Business Bureau “in a few minutes” A secretary, who was rushing a bundle of lter- ature from the rear of the establishment to a front office, told us the chief was tied up for the moment. Since DePalma’s business is mail order, there were no chairs for customers Rosen- baum and I stood tn a corridor about the width and length of a bowling alley. It was broken along its length, however, by doorways leading into cubby-hole offices, from which we could hear the whir of mim- ecgraph machines and the clackety-clack of typewriters. At the far end, there was a large room lined with filing cabinets, a refrigerator and a@ gas stove. No one was doing any cooking then, but girls were running back and forth along the corridor with stacks of literature, wrapped up in copies of the Financial Ob- server. Old copies, we presumed. It seemed as though you had to be sound of wind and limb to work for DePalma. Everyone we saw moved on the double. The girls brushed past us breathlessly, as though someone was timing them. The bundles of literature they were rush- ing into the front room were being folud and stuffed into envelopes by a half dozen women sitting around a table. The printed matter, we learned later, consisted of prog- Tess reports on the Indigo mine, sent out monthly to each stockholder. With all these people running back and forth and the clatter of multigraph equip- ment, the place had the tempo of a merry- go-round. Photographic murals showed rugged, square-Jawed men standing on bar- ren hillsides examining gold-bearing rocks. There was one painting of a square rigger forging ahead in a stormy, dark-blue sea. It symbolized something, we guessed, but we never found out what. Finally we were summoned into the pres- ence of DePalma by one of the slightly winded runners who said: “The Chief will see you now.” DePalma got up from behind his ma- hogany desk to greet a couple of fellow St. Louisans. A large-framed man, he has wavy, iron-gray hair, somewhat protruding blue eyes which stare at you with deep sin- cerity and an easy-going, American manner of speaking. He was wearing an expensive looking gray sult with big, blue checks, a light blue tie to
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD match the color of the checks, gray suede shoes. He was expansive and friendly. “I loved St. Louis,” said DePalma. “Came, let’s see, about 30 years ago. I'm 50 now. So I was about 19 then. Sold knitted ties a while, went broke, had to eat, went out and gotta job slinging hash at Autenrieth’s in Clayton, just across from the courthouse. “Used to talk to Billy DeBeck, you know, who did Barney Google. Wonderful bunch of people there. Wonderful bunch of people in St Louis. Wonderful people ” In the old days DePalma recalled court- house employees used to eat at Autenrieth’s and many a jury was fed there Today, however, DePalma ts shy of Ameri- can juries. It cost him 665,000 by his own reckoning to avoid one in Cleveland, where he was indicted 3 years ago on 14 counts of mail fraud in connection with the tantalum and gold mine promotions. Unaware of the indictments, DePalma said he flew down from Toronto into New York State in his private airplane, to market some more of his mine stock which he was selling in those days to the public in $10 lots. This was no surreptitious journey since his name was printed all over his airpline as a form of advertising. Consequently, no one was more amazed than DePalma when Federal agents arrested him in a quiet hotel on Park Avenue, New York City, « few days before Christmas, 1947, and hustled him off to a cell to await extra- dition to Cleveland. Although the United States district attor- ney requested $100,000 bail bond for De- Palma, the bond was set at $40,000. Thts sum the promoter raised through his Toron- to bank Then he climbed back into his airplane and flew like a homing pigeon back to Toronto, He has never set foot into the United States since. DePalma told us it cost him a total of $65,000 to liberate himself trom the clutches of United States authorities This included the $40,000 bond he forfeited, the additional cash he had to put up because of the differ- ence in rates of exchange and attorney fees. “That wasn't all," he said “I lost a mil- lion dollars worth of business, too” In Toronto, DePalma is safe. The United States can't touch him there because the Canadian Parliament has refused for 8 years to include stock fraud as an extraditable offense. His misfortune in New York DePalma as- cribes to an article written about him in 1946 by Lester Velie of Colliers. Velie de- scribed DePalma’s boiler-room operations 80 well that even the Ontario authorities got after the promoter and took away his license as a broker-dealer DePalma sued Colliers for $100,000, but ultimately dropped the sult “Tt was a dirty trick,” he said. “My whole life for years has been dedicated to Canadian mining” Like the Broker-Dealer Association and some of the officials of the Ontario Securt- ties Commission, DePalma believes the SEC takes an old-womanish attitude toward the lusty development of Canadian mining, in which the axiom is that to make a dollar, you take a dollar’s worth of risk While {t appears that the risk has been taken by the suckers, not the promoters, DePalma’s views on the matter are held here by most of the promoting community. The attitude of the SEC, DePalma told us, has prevented him from bringing his mines into production, But he'll show them, he said. “J am devoting my life to Indigo,” he said. ‘Believe me, I’ve been with these deals 6 years and I'm going to continue to battle for their success to my dying breath.” While the Tantalum is stalled just now, due to the difficulty of separating this rare metal from the earth, Indigo is “going like a house afirc,” DePalma said. The market on Indigo stock, he said, was 82 bid and 87 ask. Neither Rosenbaum nor I could find Indigo sted on any market. We asked DePalma about this. “Oh,” he said, “I delisted it from the stock exchange myself.” The promoter was vague about his reasons for this, but it had something to do with his fecling that if people didn't trust him he wasn't going to let the public make a Killing on his gold mine. Throughout our conversation, DePalma tossed a piece of quartz about 2 inches in diameter into the air and caught it with one hand. “Know what this is?” he said finally. He handed it tome. The rock was studded with slivers of yellow metal Gold “Picked it up at the mine site,” said De- Palma casually. “Use this stuff as paper weights around the office.” Because of the bad publicity attending his ventures, DePalma said he was forced to change the name of his Progress Diversified Minerals, Ltd, under which his gold mines promotion operated last year, to Indigo. The stuck transfer was done on a share- for-share basis, so that no stockholder lost anything by the switch, he said. Indigo also absorbed his Palamino gold mine enter- prise The Indigo promotion is underwritten by Mining Financters, which is DePalma, His name, however, never appears in the promo- tional literature. Promoting a gold mine, DePalma told us, 1s a difficult and often thankless task. “We figure to sell a stock issue we have to send out a million pleces of mail,” he said. “When I was promoting Palamino at $10 a customer, my replies were so small even I was surprised, and I'm accustomed to the risks in tnis business “I figure that only one-fourth of 1 per- cent of the send-oult responded, that is, sent in the $10 You can see that the promoter doesn't make as much money as you think” DePalma closed his eyes and sighed The walls of his office are plastered with mottoes. One says: “A fitend is a person who says nice things about you behind your back" “Th tell you something,” said the pre- moter. “I would have had Tantalum and Indigo in production if the SEC hadn't in- terfered. Let me show you what's happen- ing at Indigo now.” He pressed a buzzer. A young man in shirtsleeves, whom we had seen bending over a desk in a rear office, appeared and said snappily. “Yes, Chief?” DePalma told him to bring up the prog- ress reports on Indigo. The clerk raced out of the office and in a moment was back. He unrolled & map of the diggings on DePalma's desk and with enthusiasm began to in- terpret it. “The chip sample assays here,” he said, “show up to 82040 a ton That's an avernuge Of $11 88 over 3 feet or 50” He pointed to an extension of the tunnel the map showed. “They're drilling in here. The crosscut enters here. Now, over here, the ore shoot is 120 feet long and 51 incher and some wide. The average value here is $21 95 a ton" I couldn't be sure what all of this meant, but it certainly sounded encouraging what- ever it was. I asked DePalma when he would start hauling this gold out of the ground, Well, he said, he has to get power and then buy a mill some place. Then he can start. Although this mine has been on the verge of making people rich for 5 years, DePalma and his staff are sure production is at hand. Sometime later, DePalma told me he was @ great and good friend of Preston Tucker, the would-be automobile magnate. “If Tucker had listened to me,” said De- Palma, “he wouldn't have had that trouble. A1399 You know, I bid for a Tucker dealership here. But I couldn't get it.” I asked him if he would have quit the gold mine business if he had managed to get the Tucker distributorship. “I sure would have,” said DePalma. “That distributorship would have been a gold mine.” Manor, Tex., Adopts a Hospital EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. HOMER THORNBERRY OF TEXAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, March 14, 1951 Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Speaker, a big thing has happened down in Manor, Tex.,a really big thing. This small town in central Texas has adopted a hospital, One day the mayor of the town scrib- bled a message on the blackboard out- side his store. “‘Let’s all go to Fort Hood with a cake and entertain the wounded soldiers. They are waiting for us. Let's not disappoint them" The response was volcanic—every man, woman and child in Manor remembered the soldiers whom they had visited the previous December at this same hospital. These soldiers might have been their own fathers, sons, or brothers, but, more significant, these were the boys who had gone out to fight that the people of Manor and all over their great America might have the se- curity of living in a free Nation. The ladies responded with their cake baking, the men took care of the trans- portation problem to Fort Hood, and the children added their gay enthusiasm to this new experience of adopting a hos- pital. And everyone dusted off his tal- ents to see what might be produced in the way of entertainment. ‘iManorites knew they were not glamorous Holly- wood stars or notable world figures, but they did know they were home-town folk whose friendly company the boys in the service yearned for more than anything else in the world—for there is nothing so filling to both the heart and soul of an individual than the knowl- edge that someone really cares about him. When you, the Members of the Con- gress, have read the following excerpt about Manor which appeared in the Austin American-Statesman of March 4, 1951, I think that each of you will sit back quietly for a moment and feel quite humble indeed that it is our privilege here in Congress to represent people such as these all over America May I, therefore, respectfully request that this article be inserted in the CoNGRESSIONAL RecorD: Manor Moves EN Mass¥ To Fort Hoop Topay To ENTERTAIN HOSPITAL (By Mark Batterson) You couldn’t find a place in Manor last week where the tolks weren't talking about the trip they're going to make Sunday to their adopted hospital at Fort Hood. Every place you went-—the Johnson's gro- cery store, or across the street to w. c. McCutcheon’s Manor Cate or even at the combination domino hall-barber shop next
A1400 door to the post office—they were all talking about it. Most of the actual planning was going on at the Johnson's store. Mayor Luther John- son and his wife, two of the town’s leaders in the project, had sickness in the family, but they continued to hold court over their counter all week. And helping them out was W. H. Wentland, Manor’s Red Cross chair- man who has had a lot to do with the project since its start, The three realized there were a lot of prob- lems still to be solved, and they soon found out that everyone else in town had every intention of getting them out of the way by Sunday. A couple of wecks ago, Mayor Johnson scrawled a message on the blackboard outside his store “Let’s all go to Fort Hood with a cake and entertain the wounded soldiers,” it read. “They are waiting for us, Let's not disap- point them” As events revealed, no one had any idea of disappointing them. Every day, people showed up with more problems to prove their intentions. The biggest difficulty has been transporta- tion. There just isn’t enough to go around. Mrs. J. E. Beeson, who is the wife of Manor's Chamber of Commerce president, put it this way: “Everyone in town wants to go, but we simply have a lot more people than cars, We've finally decided that some of the ones who got to go last time will have to stay behind and give somo of the others a chance to go.” Z. Kemp, Manor's postal carrier who is also the village’s leading impresario when it comes to amateur shows, had a lighter problem, but a problem nonetheless. All of the girls, it seemed, were willing to wear evening dresses, but Kemp found a minor rebellion on his hands when it came to deciding on what the uniform of the day would be for the boys. He finally came up with a sporting propo- sition. “If we can hog-tie the boys long enough, they'll wear neckties,” he said, straightening his own neckpiece determinedly. “Even if they are already kicking like a_ steer about it.” At least, Kemp said, the entertainment ts shaping up. There will be about 30 enter- tainers going up this trip, and their director thinks they’ll make even a better showing than they did the last time they entertained the wards. Kemp, who carries himself with the air of another P. T. Barnum, also had some Bar- numlike words to say: “I think the show’s going to be bigger and better this time. It’s more organized, more of a unit. Anyway, we're having a dress re- hearsal at Manor High School for the folks who can’t go up. We'll know for sure then.” No one had any real doubts, however, They remembered the first time they went to the hospital at Fort Hood, in December. The patients didn’t know them, and they didn't know the ratients, but they felt like old friends in a matter of minutes. Then they passed out cake and conversa- tion, and the entertalners went through their routines. By the time they left they had adopted the hospital and the patients had adopted them. Most of the hamlet’s citizens see eye to eye with a farmer who gave his opinion of the trip coming up while he was sitting around the Manor Cafe the other day. “It’s bound to be twice as good this time,” he explained. “We just had 36 cakes last time—probably have about 75 this trip. Just had 80 people who went up last time—if we can get the care, we'll have twice as many going up Sunday. “It’s all just a matter of one plus one making two.” The “Big Grab” EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. J. FRANK WILSON OF TEXAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 13, 1951 Mr. WILSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Reconp, I include the following series of articles by Allen Duckworth, from the Dallas Morning News: THE “Bic GRAB” (Installment 1, March 4) (By Allen Duckworth) Oil is messy stuff—especially when you m1x it with politics. Nasty odors of petroleo-politics have raked the nostrils of American citizens off and on jor half a century. The Teapot Dome scandal, involving a Republican Departmént of the Interior and assorted political hangers-on who didn't mind a bit of stealing, rocked the Nation during Harding days. Republican Harding’s administration con- tributed Teapot Dome—''the big steal.” Democrat Truman's administration has given us the Federal tidelands claim—‘“the big grab” There are some parallels. Oil riches were involved in both cases. The Department of the Interior was involved in both cases. Someone was trying to take something from somebody else in both cases. Outright bribery and lying were factors in the ‘big steal.” In the “big grab” the factors were double- talk, political influence, and a long-range campaign to build a more powerful central government and strike another blow ut local rights and property ownership. Justice caught up with the boys in the “big steal.” The “big grab” plotters haven’t had any- thing to worry about along the justice line. No less than the Supreme Court of the United States, in a peculfar opinion that astounded the leading legal talent of the world, has given its blessing to the “big grab.” Simply stated, the “big grab” is the story of how the Federal Government confiscated through a well-plotted campaign that led right into the marble halls of the Supreme Court, the submerged coastal lands that be- longed to the States of Texas, California, and Louisiana. In the case of Texas these particular lands had belonged to the State, without dispute, for more than a hundred years. They were retained in the annexation agreement be- tween Texas and the United States. These lands were important to every Texas school child, for all revenues from oll leases went into the school fund. That revenue for school purposes is im- portant enough. But more important is the new, rather socialistic philosophy the 8u- preme Court has written. It is a philosophy that makes a mere citizen, “a mere property owner,” to use the Court's language, second- ary to centralized authority. Under pre- vious philosophy, Americans had thought that the Federal Government existed as a servant of the individual. Now, if this new philosophy is extended, Just the opposite will be true. There is no doubt that the Supreme Court has weakened the titles to all properties. The late Gov. Beauford H. Jester, of Texas, feared that the new theory, as expressed by the United States Supreme Court, might lead to nationalization of basic industries, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Other Texans fear that even individual property rights no longer are as strong a8 they were before the Supreme Court dreamed up an opinion so filled with errors that even such a liberal old waddy as Mr. Justice Felix Frankfurter gave up in disgust—he couldn't understand what was going on. Americans who realize the long-range dangers of the new and strange doctrine of the Supreme Court haven't given up. There still is a chance for the Congress to put the brakes on expansion of Federal powers at the expense of local interests. Congress can do this by slapping down the Supreme Court outrage in the tidelands case. Congress has ruled for the States before, but President Truman vetoed the resolution that would have confirmed existing State ownership. There is a lot of propaganda to overcome, however. One reason that the “big grab” boys have been successful so far in the submerged- lands seizure is that the entire case is diffi- cult for the average citizen to understand. The “big grab” campaign has been accom- panied by false flag waving and a smoke screen which convinced many citizens that it was only a battle between the Govern- ment and the big oil companies. “Big grab” instigators influenced Federal officials to wage a highly technical legal battle against the States, and the plain citi- zen got lost in lawyer talk and Latin phrases. Technicalities of the tidelands controversy between the individual States and the Fed- eral Government have overshadowed some peculiar angles of the case. Americans could understand the “big steal” of Harding days because anyone can grasp the meaning of outright individual lying and bribery. This story hasn’t anything to do with lying and bribery of the “big steal” nature Rather, it will try to show the subtle style of the “big grab” plot—which used double- talk, political influence, misleading state- ments, injustice at the highest bar of justice in the land. Such as— How “Honest Harold” Ickes, as Secretary of the Interior, said flatly that the States had legal title to their submerged lands off their coasts, where oil was being found. How “Honest Harold” changed his mind later on, after hearing arguments of Federal- lease applicants, and launched a campaign against the States. How “Honest Harold” encouraged a friend to file an application for a Federal tide- lands lease. How an attorney who drew Federul Gov- ernment pay under Ickes in the Interior De- partment later represented a group trying to get Federal leases. How admitted speculators have offered “shares” in an oil gamble based on the United States Supreme Court decision. How one of these speculators admitted he hoped to make a killing by selling lease interests to the big of] companies, How one of the applicants for Federal leases carried his influence with the admin- istration direct to the White House. How Texas was told prior to the 1948 elec- tions that it had a special case and would never be sued and how the suit was filed within 60 days after President Truman was elected, getting from Texas the biggest ma- jority of any State in the Union. How Texas was hustled in and out of court and denied a chance to present evi- dence in her defense. How the United States Supreme Court, famous throughout its history for majority opinions, was able to defeat the taxpayers and school children of Texas with a minority Opinion. How and why those in favor of getting cheap Federal leases prefer them to State leasing systems that would cost them more money.