APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD put Tecumseh on a parity with glorious old Benjamin Franklin, and other great Americans I have suggested for these places, Tecumseh was a traitor to the United Btates in the War of 1812. He went down into Mississippi and tried to induce the Chickasaws and Choctaws to join the British in their war against the United States. Pushmataha, a Choctaw chief of Chickasaw descent, who was perhaps the greatest Indian America ever produced, answered him. Iam go- ing to put an account of their debate in the Recorp for all of you to read. In 1921, Hon. Charles D. Carter, a Member of Congress from Oklahoma, who was part Indian himself and knew more about the history of the Chickasaws and Choctaws than any other man I have ever known, made a speech at the tomb of Pushmataha, out here in the Con- gresstonal Cemetery, in which he said: The War of 1812 was impending and the British authorities were doing all in their power to stir up antagonism between the Indians and the Americans. The astute Shawnee chief, Tecumseh, was sent on 4& tour by British agents to organize all In- dians west of the Alleghentes with the pur- pose to expel the white American beyond the mountains. One of the first tribes he visited was the Choctaw. After his mission had been explained to Pushmataha, the wise old chief advised Tecumseh that he was only one of the three chiefs of the Choctaw Nation; that the Choctaws could only take part in any war upon the decision of the general council of the tribe; and that before this was done they would probably desire to consult their Kindred tribe and ally, the Chickasaws. Tecumseh then requested that both tribes be called together in order that he might lay his plan before the council. After s consultation with the other two Choc- taw chiefs, Masholatubby and Apuckshinub- by, and the principal chief of the Chicka- paws, & general council of the two tribes was called. Tecumseh was Classed by many of his con- temporaries as the most powerful debater of his generation, and this was saying much, for {t was during the day of Clay, Calhoun, and Webster. Realizing the full power of his oratory, Tecumseh surmised if he could get to speak to the Choctaw people in gen- eral council they would not be able to resist his magnetic logic and eloquence. The council was assembled, and Tecumseh, with his suite of 30 warriors bedecked in panoply of paint and feathers, filed in before the council fire to deliver his address. We must bear in mind that the Shawnees spoke an entirely different language from the Choc- taws and Chickasawa, the Shawnees belong~- ing to the Algonquin stock and speaking their dialect, while the Choctaws and Chick- asaws are of the Appalachian stock and spoke the Muskogeon dialect. Therefore it was necessary for each speech to be translated by an interpreter so all might understand. The great Shawnee chief was thoroughly familiar with past relations between all In- dian tribes and the whites, and he began by recounting all the wrongs perpetrated on the Indians by the palefaces since the land- ing of Columbus. He related how the white man had beguiled the Indians along the At- Jantic coast to part with their lands for a few trifling beads, and @ Httle fire water, leaving them beggars, vagabonds, peona, and in their own land, to be scorned and despised by their paleface neighbors. He told how the Shawnees and other vorth- ezn tribes were being stripped of their pat- timony. He laid down the principie that the Great Spirit had given the Western Hemisphere to all red people in common and that no particular tribe had anything more than the right of possession to any lands, and therefore asserted any relinquish- ment of title by one tribe to be null and void, because many of the owners had not Joined in the transfer. These wrongs dis- cussed, he declared, hac been made possible by the ingenuity of the whites in attack- ing only one tribe at a time, but if all In. dians would join and combine their forces in one attack at one time, the white man could be driven back over the mountains whence he came; that the golden opportu- nity was now at hand to join hands with the British and scourge from their revered hunting grounds eternally the hated pale- face. He closed his eloquent address with @ stirring appeal to the patriotism of the Choctaws and Chickasaws, asking if they would await complete submission or would they now join hands and fight beside the Shawnees and other tribes rather than submit? Evidently Tecumseh’s purpose had been fully accomplished. His magnetic words seemed to arouse every vindictive sentiment within the souls of the Choctaw and Chicka- saw warriors; their savage enthusiasm had been stirred to white heat when Pushmataha calmly strode before the council fire and began his wonderful reply to Tecumseh’s speech. What a pity that no accurate ac- count of this wonderful debate between these two giant primitive orators was at that time peeserved, Lincecum, Pickett, Randall, and other historians have left us brief excerpts; Cushman undertakes to give Pushmataha’s speech in full, but his recital does not even do faint justice to the original and in no measure conforms to the Choctaws' account of it. For many years it was handed down from generation to generation by tradition to the Choctaws and Chickasaws, but it can be easily understood how that method mignt fail to preserve all the virile force and elo- quence of this wonderful addreas. I will undertake to give it to you in part as nearly as I remember hearing it told by some of the old Indians many years ago. Pushmataha began his address as follows: PUSHMATAHA’S REPLY TO TECUMSEH “Omiske, tushkahoma ho chukma hashche yumma. Anumpa tilofasih ish hutlo.” (“‘Attention, my good red warriors. Hear ye my brief remarks.’’) “The great Shawnee orator has portrayed in vivid picture the wrongs inflicted on his ar.a other tribes by the ravages of the pale- face. The candor and fervor of his eloquent appeal breathe the conviction of truth and sincerity, and, as kindred tribes, naturally we sympathize with the misfortunes of his people. I do not come before you in any disputation either for or against these charges. It is not my purpose to contra- dict any of these allegations against the whitc man, but neither am I here to indulge in any indiscreet denunciation of him which might bring down upon my people unneces- sary difficulty and embarrassment. “The distinguished Shawnee sums up his eloquent appeal to us with this direct ques- tion: “Will you sit idly by, supinely awaiting complete and abject submission, or will you die fighting beside your brethren, the Shaw- nees, rather than submit to such ignominy?’ “These are plain words and it is weil they have been spoken, for they bring the issue squarely before us. Mistake not, this lan- guage means war; and with whom, pray? War with some band of marauders who have committed these depredations against the Shawnees? War with some alten host seek- ing the destruction of the Ohoctaws and Chickasaws? Nay, my fellow tribesmen. None of these are the enemy we will be called on to meet, If we take up arms against the A1099 Americans, we must of necessity meet ‘in deadly combat our dafly neighbors and asso- olates in this part of the country neer our homes. “If Tecumseh's words be true, 7d we doubt them not, then the Shawnees' experience with the whites has not been the same as that of the Choctaws. These white Ameri- cans bur our skins, our corn, our cotton, our surplus game, our baskets, and other wares, and they give us in fair exchange their cloth, their guns, their tools, implements, and other things which the Choctaws need but do not make. It is true we have befrierded them, but who will deny that these acts of friend- ship have been abundantly reciprocated? They have given us cotton gins, which sim- plify the spinning and sale of our cotton; they have encouraged and helped us in the production of our crops; they have taken many of our wives into thetr homes to teach them useful things, and pay them for their work while learning; they are teaching our children to read and write from their books. You all remember well the dreadful epidemic visited upon us last winter. During its dark- est hours these neighbors whom we are now urged to attack responded generously to our needs, They doctored our sick; they clothed our suffering; they fed our hungry; and where is the Choctaw or Chickasaw delegation who has ever gone to St. Stephens with a worthy cause and been sent away empty handed? So in marked contrast with the expertence of the Shawnees, it will be seen that the whites and Indians in this section are living on friendly and mutually beneficial terms. “Forget not, O Choctaws and Chickasaws, _that we are bound in peace to the Creat White Pather at Washington by a sacred treaty and the Great Spirit will punish those who break their word. The Great White Father has never violated that treaty and the Choctaws have never yet been “riven to the necessity of taking up the tomahawk against him or his children. Therefore the question before us tonight is not the avenging of any wrongs perpetrated against us by the whites, f-r the Choctaws and Chickasaws have no such cause, either real or imaginary, but rather it is u question of carrying on that record of fidelity and justice for which our forefathers over proudly stood, and doing that which is b st calculated to promote the welfare of our own people. Yea, my fellow tribesmen, we are’a just people, We do not take up the warpath without a just cause and honest purpose. Have we that just cause against our white neighbors who have taken nothing from us except by fair bargain and exchange? Is this a just recompense for thelr assistance to us in our agricultural and other pursuits? Is this to be their gracious reward for teaching our children from their books? Shall this be considered tao Choctawse’ compensation for feeding our hungry, clothing our needy, and administer- tng to our sick? Have we, O Choctaws and Chickasaws, descended to the low estate of ruthleesly breaking the faith of a sacred treaty? Shall our forefathers look back from the happy hunting grounds only to see their unbroken record for justice, gratitude, and fidelity thus rudely repudiated and abruptly abandoned by an unworthy offspring? “We Choctaws and Chickasawe are & peacee ful people, making our subsistence by honest totl; but mistake not, my Shawnee brethren, we are not afraid of war. Neither are we atrangers to war, as those who have under- taken to encroach upon our rights in the past may abundantly testify. We are thoroughly familiar with war in all ite details, and we know full well all its horrible consequences. It is unnecessary for me to remind you, O Choctaws and Chickasaws, veteran braves of many fierce conflicts in the past, that war is an awful thing. If we go into this war against the Americans we must be prepared to accept its inevitable results. Not only will it foretoken deadly conflict with neighbors
Ai100 and death to warriors, but it will mean suf- fering for our women, hunger and starvation for our children, grief for our loved ones, and devastation of our beloved homes. Notwith- standing these difficulties, if the cause be just, we should not hesitate to defend our rights to the last man, but before that fatal step is irrevocably taken it is well that we fully understand and seriously consider the full portent and consequences of the act. “Hear me, O Choctawsa and Chickasaws, for I apeak truly for your welfare. It is not the province of your chiefs to settle these impor- tant questions. As a people, it is your pre- rogetive to have either peace or war, and as one of your chiefs it 1s mine simply to coun- sel and advise. Therefore, let me admonish you that this critical period is no time to cast aside your wits and let blind impulse sway; be not driven like dumb brutes by the fren- gied harangue of this wonderful Shawnee or..tor; let your good judgment rule and ponder seriously before breaking bonds that have served you well and ere you change con- ditions which have brought peace and happi- ness to your wives, your sisters, and your children. I would not undertake to dictate the course of one single Choctaw warrior. Permit me to speak for the moment, not as your chief but as a Choctaw warrior, weigh- ing this question beside you. As such I shall exercise my calm, deliberate Judgment in be- half of thoze most dear to me and dependent on me, and I shall not suffer my reason to be swept away by this eloquent recital of al- Jeged wrongs which I know naught of. I deplore this war, I earnestly hope it may be averted, but if it be forced upon us I shall take my stand with those who have stood by my people in the past and will be found fighting beside our good friends of St. Ste- phene and surrounding country. I have fin- ished. I call on all Choctaws and Chickasaws endorsing my sentiments to cast their toma- hawks on this side of the council fire with me.” The air resounded with the clash of toma- hawks cast on the side of the Choctaw chief and only a few warriors seemed still un- decided, Tecumseh seeing the purpose of his mission thwarted and thinking Push- mataha could not understand the Shawnee language, spoke to his warriors in his native tongue, saying: “Pushmatahe is a coward and the Choctaw and Chickasaw braves are squaws,” but Pushmataha had traveled much and knew a smattering of many Indian dialects. He understood Tecumseh and turning upon the Shawnee with all the fire of his eloquence, he clinched the argument and settled the decision of the few wavering Choctaw braves by saying: “Halt, Tecumseh. Listen to me. You have come here, as you have often gone elsewhere, with a purpose to involve peaceful people in unnecessary trouble with their neighbors. Our people have had no undue friction with the whites. Why? Because we have had no leaders stirring up strife to serve their selfish, personal ambitions. You heard me say that our people are a peaceful people. They make their way, not by rav- agea upon thelr neighbors but by honest toil. In that regard they have nothing in common with you. I know your history well. You are a disturber. ‘You have ever been a trou- blemaker. When you have found yourself unable to pick a quarrel with the white man, you have stirred up strife between dif- ferent tribes of your own race. Not only that, you are a monarch and unyielding tyrant within your own domain; every Shaw- nee man, woman, and child must bow in humbie aubmission to your imperious will, The Cadetaws and Chickasaws have no mon- archs. ‘Thelr chieftnins do not undertake the mastery of their peopie, but rather are they the people's servants, elected to serve the will of the majority. The majority has spoken on thie question and it has spoken against your contention. Their decision hes therefore become the law of the Choctaws and Chickasaws, and Pushmataha will see that the will of the majority so recently ex- pressed is rigidly carried out to the letter. If, after this decision, any Choctaw should be so foolish as to follow your imprudent advice and enlist to fight against the Ameri- cans, thereby abandoning his own people and turning against the decision of his own council, Pushmataha will see that proper punishment is meted out to him, which 1s death. You have made your choice; you have elected to fight with the British. The Americans have been our friends and we shall stand by them. We will furnish you safe conduct to the boundaries of this Na- tion as properly befits the dignity of your office. Farewell, Tecumseh. You will see Pushmateha no more until we meet on the fateful warpath.” As I said, Pushmataha was a great American, a brave and heroic patriot. He was never a Member of Congress, but I would not object to seeing his figure placed on these walls, or a monument erected to him 1n a prominent place here in the Nation’s Capital, because of the great services he rendered to his country. He fought with Andrew Jackson at the Battle of New Orleans, and when he finally died, here in Washington, where he came to confer with President Jack- son about matters concerning the mem- bers of his tribe, he was buried with military honors out here in the Congres- sional Cemetery, at the end of East Capitol Street. If he could press back the veil that hides us from that mysterious realm where he has taken his place in the silent halls of death, look down the century that has passed since his exit from this world, and see his likeness being placed by the side of that of Tecumseh, or even by that of Hammurabi, or any of those other ancient aliens, he would probably arise and shout: “Ex sho! Ex sho!” in righteous protest against such humili- ation. What Are We Fighting for in Korea? EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WAYNE L. HAYS OF OHIO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, March 1, 1951 Mr. HAYS of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, un- der leave to extend my remarks, I include a column by Mr. W. H. “Bi Waters” Mc- Williams, published in the Martins Ferry (Ohio) Times-Leader. It gives in clear language the answer to the question, “What are we fighting for in Korea?” The column follows: Riour Apounp Home A lot of letters have come to me recently. They say, “What are we fighting for in Korea?” As near as I can say, it’s thie: It seems a lot better to stop communism on the slopes of cold Korea than on the sunny streets of Adena, Ohio. Communism is a little like cancer of the big toe—unless ‘you stop it below the ankle it will kill you above the shoulders later. We're hacking off the short weeds in the garden of humanity now in Korea 80 we APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD won't reap a full crop in our backyards in the fall. It's the old story of the rotten apple in the barrel. We're removing it from the top to- day so we won’t have to throw out everything from the bottom up tomorrow. The boys who slave and die by regiments to stop com- munism in the East are doing it so that we won't slave and die in the West—by millions, Because as sure as the daylight in August, if communism gathers strong in the Land of the Rising Sun it will mean a hurricane over the plains across the world at eventide. We are pinching off the bean stock as it peeps through the ground in distant Korea s0 that it won't harbor a giant when it grows big and entwines over the Statue of Liberty here. That, in brief, is why we are now fighting a@ hard war on the other side of the world and must fight it to a finish—it'’s self-pro- tection by remote control. Our Communists Can Cripple Our Industry EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CHARLES E. POTTER OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, March 1, 1951 Mr. POTTER. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I wish to commend for your reading an editorial which recently appeared in one of my district's leading daily newspapers, the Escanaba Press, titled “Our Communists Can Cripple Our Industry:” Our CoMMUNISTS CAN CRIPPLE OUR INDUSTRY Half a million native-born fanatics, loyal to Moscow and entrenched in Key American industrial areas, are ready to strike from within if Russia attacka from without, says Changing Times magazine in its February issue. The Communists will try to sabotage factories, break down transportation, dis- rupt communications, create panic in the cities and crush our morale says the maga- gine. Will such attempts succeed? It all de- pends, says Changing Times, on how well loyal Americans are prepared to meet the Communists’ attacks. If the Russians make a surprise attack, as the Japs did at Pearl Harbor, it is like- ly that top Communists here will try to or- ganize a simultaneous blow from within. Then it will be a split-second race between the Communists and the FBI. A few hours, or even minutes, might make the difference as to whether the FBI nabs the leaders before serious damage is done. Be suspicious of anyone who asks a lot of questions about local conditions, especially questions haying to do with manufacturing, electric power, transportation, or communica- tions. Report it if you notice trespassers in defense plants, power plants, transformer plants, or ratlroad yards. Suspect anyone who tells you Communist-line stories that reflect on your country, its leaders, or its war aims. Be security conscious especially if you work in a defense plant. Remember that red tape such as fingerprinting and filling out of forms is only a means of preventing sabotage and espionage. Be careful about joining a strike movement in a defense plant unless you are sure you have a legitimete grievance that outweighs any slow-down you may cause im the armament program. Inspired strikes are one of the Communists’ chief weapons,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. Don't sign petitions unless you know what you are doing, The Communists would love to get millions of mothers to sign a petition d@emanding repeal of the draft law. Perhaps a mother might conclude that the draft law ‘was @ bad thing but before she signs a peti- tion she should be eure she is speaking her own mind and not.being a dupe. Don't join groups unless you have first investigated them. The Communists are continually forming shadowy organizations for propaganda purposes. If you can't find out just what the specific purpose of the or- tion is, or exactly who is behind it, give the whole thing a miss. Be ready for an attempt to terrorize your- s.)f and your family if war ahould come suddenly. Wheat do you do? Be calm and ait tight. If you have taken the proper pre- cautions in advance you will have right in your own home light, food, water, heat, medi- cal supplies and means of getting correct in- formation on what is going on. If war comes, says Changing Times, it may bring with it an all-out terrorizing attack on industry and civilians, The two qualities that will stand the country in best stead are coolness and old-fashioned courage. Unified Atlantic Defense Program EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. FRANK E. SMITH OF MISSISSIPPI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, March 1, 1951 Mr. SMITH. of Mississippi. Mr. Speak- er, under unanimous consent, I include the following letter addressed to Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower by 22 prominent American businessmen coneerning the necessity of a unified Atlantic defense program: We, the undersigned members of the Na- tional Council of the Atlantic Union Com- mittee, carry responsibility for the adminis- tration of @ wide variety of American busl- ness enterprises. ; Our experience in attempting to encourag the growth of national and international commerce, and to broaden the horizons of economic opportunity for all men, has given us opportunity to gain wide perspective on the organization of free society. It is our view that there la among free na- tions an urgent and immediate need for a common democratic authority. We therefore noted with deep interest your statement on your departure for Atlantic capitals: “There is power in union,” and your statement on your return urging that “first Priority" be given to achieving “the unity of en.’* We wish respectfully to extend to you our sincere appreciation of the dedicated spirit with which you have accepted the supreme responsibility of commanding the forces of the free world. We are encouraged by the directness with which you have surveyed and reported on the transatlantic resources that must be pooled to preserve freedom, ‘We are not among those who misinterpret as defeatiem the reluctance of European ploiting the divisions among the North At~ lantic alites. 8 “ Even without the injection of Russian propaganda, the uncertainties of American foreign policy, and the contradictory state- ments of some American statesmen must themselves give rise to doubt around the world as to how far the United Btates in- tends actually to pursue the goal of total de- fense against the forces of tyranny. We believe, with you, that the speedy con- struction of an adequate joint military de- | fense in Western Europe, including Ameri- can and Canadian troops, is the best medi- cine for the feara—both real and imagined-— of the allies on whom we must depend. We believe that the Atlantic democracies should agree to an unqualified pooling of all de- fense resources, in order to turn blueprints into troops and build an Atlantic Army capable of deterring, or if necessary, rebuke ing Communist aggression in Western Europe. The Atlantic Union Resolution, introduced last month in the Eighty-second Congreas, provides the best opportunity for such agree- ment. It requests President Truman to call a convention of the democracies that spon- sored the Atlantic Pact to see how far they can apply among them the prineiples of the union to which you have referred. The full text of that resolution is enclosed and we should appreciate your comment. It Js our belief that a single Atlantic policy of defense and foreign affaira—instead of the present welve—is vital to prevent repetition in Western Europe of the Korean misadven- ture. It 1s our hope that the effort to create a single policy will help the United States to meet peril with characteristic American boldness and decision, and thus aid you and your associates in expediting the defense timetable for the free world. Albert C. Agnew, Attorney at Law, San Prancisco, Calif.; Percival F. Brund- age, Price Waterhouse & Co, New York, N. ¥.; Harry A. Bullis, Chatr- man of the Board, General Mills, Inc,, Minneapolis, Minn.,; W. R. Burwell, Chairman of the Board, General Mulls, Inc,, Cleveland, Ohio; Will L. Clayton, Anderson, Clayton & Co,, Huuston, Tex.; Gardner Oowles, President, Cowles Magazine, New York, N. Y.; W. B. Harrison, former officer, Union National Bank, Wichita, Kans.; Le- land Hazard, Vice President, Pitts- burgh Piate Glass Co., Pittsburgh, Pa.; Ernest M. Hopkins, Chairman of the Board, National Life Insurance Co., Montpeller, Vt; P. W. Litchfield, Chairman of the Board, Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Akron, Ohio; Hugh Moore, Chairman of the Board, Dixie Cup Corp. Easton, Pa.; Edmund Orgill, President, Orgill Bros. & Oo., Memphis, Tenn.; H. W. Prentis, Jr., Chairman of the Board, Armstrong Cork Co., Lancaster, Pa.; Gwilyn A. Price, President, Westinghouse Elec- tric Corp., Pittsburgr, Pa.; Alezander P. Reed, President, Fidelity Trust Co., Pittsburgh, Pa. Hatry Scherman, President, Book-of-the-Month Club, New York, N, ¥.; Walter W. Schroeder, Vice President, National Bank of Oom- merce, New Orleans, La; William Stern, President, Dakota WNat'onal Cotton Miss.; Darryl F. Zanuck, Vice Presi- dent, Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp,, Beverly Hills, Calif, A118. A Parable About the Pilot Fish Points Up Dangers of Red Hunting EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. ABRAHAM J. MULTER Of WEw TORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATTVES Wednesday, February 28, 1951 Mr, MULTER. Mr. Speaker, let us stop, and look, and listen. Here is a warning given to us by Ernest Lindley in his column which appeared in the Brooklyn Eagle of February 25. His article is as follows: A ParaBiy Anovr THE Prior Fiem Ponts Ur DaNncrns or Red HUNTING (By Ernest Lindley) Among the interesting people to be found in Washington—and elsewhere—are the pilot fishermen. The pilot fish are the fish which swim in front of the shark to guide him to hi prey. The pilot fishermen are, of courte, the men who fish for the pilot fish. We have had active pilot fishermen in Washington for at least 15 years. In recent years, the sport has become quite populer. A number of the pilot fishermen have become well known and have a gallery of admirers. It would be generally admitted, of course, that the pilot fish js a very undesirable variety of fish. We certainly don’t want the pilot fish nosing around in sensitive places. Many of us would lke to exterminate them. Undoubtedly, eome people were very slow to recognise that there is such a thing as a pilot fish and even slower to realize how dill~ gently and faithfully he works for the shark. Many others who knew of the pilot fish did not realise for a long time that the pilot fish is often very skillful in concealing his stripes. When the net is cast for the pilot fish, it {a likely to bring up a lot of other fish. Some of them may look suspiciously odd and may not be very desirable even though they are not pilot fish. Many of them are quite innocent creatures—indeed so inno- cent that they probably didn't even know that there were any disguised pilot fish in thetr vicinity. It takes experts to distinguish a well- camouflaged pilot fish from harmless and altogether respectable varieties of fish. Among the amateur pilot fishermen in Con- gress and elsewhere, there are not many such experts, Belng unable to distinguish camouflaged pilot fish from harmless and respectable fish, some of them conclude that every fish they bring up with their neta fs a disguised pilot fish. Also, like other zealous fishermen, the amateur pilot fishermen like to boast about their catches. They are not above describing a 6-inch minnow as a leader of the pilot fish. Nor are they above spinning tales about the big ones they saw but which got away. Some of the pilot Ashermen have become fanciers of pilot fish—of reformed pilot fish, that is. They keep them around as pets and seem to regard them as the finest species of marine life. A reformed and repentant pilot fsh undoubtedly is much to be pre- ferred to an unregenerate one. But it fs not easy for objective observers to comprehend why s reformed and repentant pilot fish should be regarded aa nobler than all the millions of fish which had the ordinary common sense—and patriotism—-never to work for the shark. Another curious characteristic of some of the pilot ashermen is that they evince so Uttle interest in the shark. Some of them have been opposed to buying a supply of
Al102 harpoons to kill the shark and even to éropping a net around the beach to keep him away. They have protested at the ex- pense or acoffed at the idea that the shark ‘would really bite. (Perhaps they fear that if the shark were killed or cornered, there would be no more pilot fish for them to have the fun of catching.) Some of them wouldn't even toes a life line to a man over- poard. They seem to regard the pilot fish as more dangerous than the shark. Let Peace Not Die of Neglect EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LOUIS B. HELLER OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, January 24, 1951 Mr. HELLER. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- orp, I include the following article by George F, Kennan in the magazine sec- tion of the New York Times: Ler Prace Nor Dir or Neoiecr (By George F. Kennan) The air vibrates with controversy about America’s proper course with respect to Rus- sia. Much of it, it seems to me, is shallow or prejudiced or ill-conceived. It is hard to imagine that ever at any time in history has more error ever been poured out upon @ single subject. And one enters with mis- givings into this disorder. Where so much confusion Mes about, what can we do in a few brief moments to disentangle the snarled akeins, to assemble and sort out and put together again the broken pieces of thought, to bring order out of the chaos—even assum- ing, which is not proven—that we might have some greater clarity in our own minds? How can we avoid adding to the bedlam, heaping confusion upon confusion? The only hope I can see of avoiding these pitfalls lies in attempting to rethink our problem, but with a Mttle greater depth in time than we are accustomed to give to it these days. Thirty-three years ago—not two or three, mark you—thirty-three—there was a revolu- tion in Russia. That revolution brought into power a political movement already com- mitted and long and deeply committed, to an attitude of hostility toward our own so- celal and political system and to many other things elsewhere which we believe to be essential to world stability. It 18 important to recognize that we did not create that attitude, nor was there really much we could do to prevent its rise or to alter it after it appeared. It arose out of ideology and preconception, out of things which were not our doing. To say that it stemmed only from the Allied intervention in 1919, or from the way we Westerners treated the Soviet regime generally in the early years of its power, reflects a very super- ficial view of the origins of the Bolshevik movement. Lenin and his associates, IT am sure, would not have been grateful for the implication that their views about the capitalist world were so shallowly rooted that they could be basically altered by subjective reactions on their part to the actions of capitalist governments in the period immediately fol- lowing the revolution. They would have rejected with resentment and contempt the implication that they could have been glad- handed into the abandonment of ideologi- eal principles to which they had devoted their lives, This new political power, while not en- tirely a Russian phenomenon, did succeed in establishing itself in Russia and in bring- ing under a form of effective and stable con- trol the energies of the peoples and the natural resources of that area. This fact— namely, that those energies and resources should have fallen under the control of a power hostile to western civilization—was a serious and disturbing thing. It presented a major complication in the progress of the west. Those of us who were professionally occupied with Russian affairs in the twenties and thirties were very much aware of that tact. Perhaps that is why we are somewhat jess than impressed when we are told today, by agitated and vociferous people, that this is the fact and that we ought to be much more excited about it than we are. The Bolshevik leaders, in accordance with their ideology, did their best, in the years that ensued after the revolution to achieve the breakdown of non-Communist power in Western Europe, in this country, and else- where, They operated Communist fifth- column organizations in practically every area in the world. They unleashed civil Wars and revolutions wherever they saw a chance, They sowed confusion and sus- Ppicion. They peddied bitterness and bewilder- ment and despair. They earned a great deal of resentment in return, and no doubt a certain amount of subversive activity di- rected against themselves and thelr system, though nothing near what they claimed. They were a nuisance and a danger to every- one else. In these circumstances everyone else—inevitably and unavoidably—was a nuisance and a danger to them. Their re- lations with other countries faithfully re- flected that fact. Yet for over two decades nothing fright- fully crucial happened in these relations. The Bolsheviks didn’t succeed in destroy- ing anybody; nobody succeeded in destroy- ing them. Life was awkward—unnecessar- ily so—but not impossiole. The impact of this Bolshevik hostility and dissatisfaction upon the mellow old democracies of the west led to many remarkable and usually unpleasant things; but it did not lead to war. It was not until another violent and neurotic political movement had raised its head in a neighboring country, Germany— & movement as hostile to Saviet Russia by preconception as Soviet Russia had been hostile to the capitalist west—that major war ensued. But then, it was not a war between Russia and the western democracies. The blow struck both Russia and the western de- mocracies together—like # bolt of lightning, like a reminder to them, from some dis- gusted deity, of the tragedy and unhappi- ness of their division. The war that ensued had two main conse- quences which we ought to note here. First, by eliminating the armed power of Germany and Japan from certain very important areas of human habitation it opened up new and delicate sources of difference and contro- versy between the Soviet leaders and the west. These geographic areas, which had been placed by the outcome of hostilities in what might be called a power vacuum, in- cluded certaln of the world’s most sensitive spots, from the straegic and political stand- point. There was no reason to suppose that agreement about their future disposition, as between Russia and the west, would be easy to achieve. There was particularly no rea- gon to assume this, because in a totalitarian regime like that of the U. 8. 8. R. defensive and offensive motives are always inextricably intertwined, and the anxieties of such a re- gime for the safety of ita own internal power prevent it from reacting normally, or even from speaking frankly, in problems of this APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD kind, All that was known long before the ‘war. Go there these new problems were; and they proved, indeed, to be anything but easy; and because of them it even turned out to be impossible, in the immediate post- war years, to negotiate peace treaties at all. And meanwhile the disputed territories lay there, completely vulnerable in each case, as 1t happened, to the armed strength of the U. 8. 8. R., which wholly overshadowed that of the western powers in the immediate vicinity. And there were many foreign min- faters’ meetings, many disputes, many dis- appointments, and much tension—but there ‘was no major war. The second consequence of World War II that I wish to mention ts the establishment of the United Nations. We Americans took a leading part in this. The Russians reacted to proposals from us. You will recall that they were quite emphatic in their insistence on the veto power in the Security Council. This meant an insistence that the UN should not be used to settle security problems ex- cept where the great powers were in agree- ment. This applied particularly to precisely the problems we have Just noted—the ones arising from the immediate dislocations of the recent war; and this was given indirect recognition in the Charter of the UN itself. Now some of us liked these veto provisions and others didn't; but no one can say that the Soviet Government was not frank in stating its position at the time, or that we were not warned that there might be cate- gories of problems which would be less sus- ceptible than others of treatment in the UN forum. Finally, we should note that when we established the UN we placed no barriers to the membership in it of Communist govern- ments. We raised no objection to the Soviet Government's belonging to it, oven though we knew it was a Communist government. We didn't ask how it had come by its power— whether by fair means or foul. We didn't ask it to disavow its ideology. We didn’t even object to the admission of some of its satellites. It was clearly our view at that time that the UN was to consist of both Communist and non-Communist powers. And we were plainly warned, I repeat, of what logic should have told us anyway: that there were distinct imitations on what such @ universal organization, embracing both Communist and non-Communist govern- ments, could be expected to achieve in this immediate postehostilities period, and that among the things it could not be expected to do would be to serve as an invariably suc- cessful forum for the settlement of the prob- lems arising out of the war, or for the reso- lution of the ideological differences betwcen communism and all opposed to It. Now we have on our hands today a situ- ation the seriousness of which no one would deny. We find ourselves involved in a local military confitct, replete with the most grievous implications, over the problem of disposal of one of those disputed areas from which we required that the power of our recent adversaries be withdrawn. We are indignant over the refusal of Communiet China, which 1s not a member of the UN, to recognize the authority of that body in the dispute, and over its action in onposing that authority by force of arms It is worth noting that, whereas we introduced our forces into the conflict, and I think properly and wisely so, the Soviet Government did not. It has preferred to operate, to date, with the forces of its puppets. Meanwhile, we have come to the conclu- sion that the general world situation ts one which requires a major effort of rearmament on our part and on the part of other Western nations. With this, again, I have no quarrel, T have long believed in the necessity for such rearmament. I think it should have come, to some extent, much earlier. But what I
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD want to get at is not the fact of rearmam it is the rationale of it, ent, We know many people in this country are to believe that war ts not only un- avoidable but imminent, and that the rea- sons for rearmament lie not even possibly in the long-term requirements of a relationship with Communist power short of major war, but in some new and recent developments, some new elements of menace in the Soviet attitude, which entitle us to despair alto- gether of avoiding major war for any con- siderable further period. Now this is 4 very dificult thing to put forth, because anyone who tries to urge caution and sobriety in the judgment of these matters is apt to be accused of having sald that war is definitely not coming, that we are not going to be attacked, that our foars are baseless, that we can relax and go home. Let me make it plain. I am saying none of these things, Of course war ts possible. Of course no one can say that we will not be attacked or that major war will not de- velop from the impetus and the cumulative complications of this situation. Who can say for sure what is in the minds of the So- viet leaders? Who can guarantee their‘ be- havior? Who can asesure that they, peering out at the world through the muddied and myopic lenses of their bitter and fear-ridden ideology, have not come to the conclusion themselves that war is unavoidable? From géuch a concluaion anything could flow. My purpose is not to make a plea for any certainty of a continued absence of major war. It is to make a plea against the as- sumption of any certainty that war cannot be avoided. It 1s to plead that before we as- sume that the world situation has turned basically and irrevocably against the chances af peace we make absolutely sure that we know what we're doing—that we test our views and retest them, putting aside all emo- tion and irritation and everything subjec- tive—that we take care to see that we are not being carried away here by false as- sumptions or short memories or emotion. Let us look carefully at these things which ate often cited as the sources of despair. It ig true that the Kremlin is hostile and secretive, and a constant source of worry, danger, and annoyance to us all; 1t has been that way for 38 years. It is true that Western Europe is over- shadowed by Soviet armed strength; it has been that way since 1945, and to some ex- tent even earlier. It fs true that Russia has the atomic bomb. Did we then lack warning of this develop- ment? Does anybody suppose that we were in a position to assume, let us say 3 years ago, that they would not have it; that they would refrain from developing it out of some delicate regard for our feelings? I am not saying that these things are pleasant. I am asking whether they are new or unexpected. Tt is true that the Kremlin unleashed its Korean puppets against the South Korean Republic. But there is nothing in this fact which is out of accord with the pattern of Soviet behavior we have known for three decades. At no time bas there been any rea- son to suppose that they would not do this sort of thing, if circumstances seemed pro- pitious. The assertion was made in @ maga- gine article $ years ago that the main concern of the Kre ‘was to make sure that it has filled every nook and cranny availiable to it in the basin of world power. There was no ob- jective reason to assume that the Soviet leaders would leave the Korean nook un- filled if they thought they had a chance of Alling tt at relatively minor risk to them- eetves and saw time running out on them. I am not trying to justify their action. I am challenging our right to be surprised about it or to call it a manifestation of some new aggressiveness on the part of the Soviet Union. Finally, it is true that Communist Chins has defied the United Nations. It te true that Communist China has committed acts in Korea which no one can condone and for which ite leaders bear the gravest re- sponsibility. If anyone needed that these Chinese Communist leaders are behav~ ing hysterically and violently, with a dis- torted concept of the interests of their own people, and with no understanding at al! for the nature and ideals of the non-Communiat world, they have it, of course, in these events in Korea. But the question at iseue here is not, and has never been, whether the Chinese Com- munists were nice people. The question lies in the amount of damage they are ca- pable of doing, and are apt to do, to world stability. The question iles, for us, in the extent of the threat: in the measure of what we might call the intrinsic tolerances of the Tar eastern area againat the effects of these tortured and neurotic attitudes we see in Peiping, and of what then remains to be done, and can only be done, by outside forces, and how much of that is within our capabili- ties. Are we sure we have this #0 carefully fig- ured out? Are we sure we have calculated correctly all the factors involved? China is a strange entity. She is called a world power, and doubtless deserves that designation from the standpoint of cultural and spiritual re- sources in her people. Actually she is the only country so considered which does not have the wherewithal to manufacture the sinews of her own military strength on a greaot-power scale, She has to get her major weapons from outside. I dare say that to date a considerable portion has come from us. Must that always be? It is true that China's resources a8 of today, while Mmited, are not negligible, and that they are in the hands of people who are foolish and excited and trresponsible. That is a dangerous and worrisome fact. But let us measure realisti- cally the actual extent of this danger; let us be guided by that alone, and not by irrita. tion over the fact that they are foolish and excited and irresponsible. They are not the first people that we have Known that were that way, and they will not be the last; and we are not the keepers of their souls. Now all of this might conceivably add up to the necessity for another world war; but before we decide that it does, let us be ter- ribly, terribly sure we are right. In the old carpenter guilds there was a principle that you should measure seven times before you cut once. Are we sure we have measured here for the seventh time, or even for the third or the second? This is no time to make a false incision. The material will bear no more than one mistake. A major American weekly recently devoted an article to combating the theory that co- existence with the present Soviet system may be possible. It attacked the Secretary of State for adhering to what it called "this pernicious fallacy.” It called upon the President to drive from his councils at long last “all who have sold and fed him on the pap of coexistence with Soviet commu. nism.” Now these are tricky words, and no one can ever be entirely sure what they mean. But if they mean what I take them to mean, I would range myself squarely and emphat- ically with the culprits; with the objects of these attacks and oriticlams, Wheat is the phenomenon of extremiam and despair with which we are confronted? Can this be realism, or fs {¢ a shrinking away from the first harsh implications of world leadership? Whoever said that world Jeadership would be easy or comfortable? Coextensive with Soviet communism, as we have seen above, has been possible for 38 years. I do not know whether it will con+ tinue to be possible for a long time to come. But I would submit that these people who A1l168 wrote this article do not know for sure that xt won't; and in attempting to persuade the public that it won't they have taken upon thelr shoulders a grievous responsibility and one which I should never wish to have on mine. They should not try to comfort them- selves and their readers with the flimsy pre- tense that this counsel of despair does not mean war. It does; and if this ia the view they are going to take, let them have the forthrightness with themselves and with others to Come out and say that what they are talking about is war and tell us how and to what ends and with what resources they propose we conduct that war, and how we are to assure the agreement of the members of 4 great coalition to a course founded on pre- conceptions which they do not share, and how a better world is supposed to emerge from the other end of this entire process, But better still, for them and for all of us, would be not to take this view at all; to ad- mit that the dimness of our vision gives us the right neither to a total optimism nor to @ total pessimism, and that our duty to ourséives and to the hopes of mankind lies in avoiding, like the soul of evil itself, that final bit of impatience which tells ws to pela the last positions of hope before we ave been pressed from them by unanswer- Bbie force. 4s long as there is a one-thousandth chance that a major world conflict can be avoided—and I hold the chance far greater than thet—let us guard that chance like the apple of our eye—let us remain considerate of the hopeful possibilities as well as the dis- couraging ones—let it not be said of us that we allowed any hope for the avoidance of war to die, like an unwanted and unappreciated child, by abandonment and neglect. I know that this is the view which has been held by my former associates in the Depart- ment of State, and that they will continue, despite all discouragements and opposition, to act on this. If these efforts succeed, the ‘world will have been apared 9 great catas- trophe. If they fall, there will always be time for the other things, the unhappy things, later. Resolution of Society of Old Brooklynites EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ABRAHAM J. MULTER OF MEW TORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 28, 1951 Mr. MULTER. Mr. Speaker, the fol- lowing is a copy of a resolution adopted by the Society of Old Brooklynites, which T am pleased to commend to the atten- tion of my colleagues. I heartily endorse this resolution. Verraana’ ADMINISTRATION Orricn Must Bs MairrsineD IN BRookLyN Whereas it has been stated on reliable au- thority that the Veterans’ Administration in Washington plans to remove the Brooklyn regional office of the Veterans’ Administra- tion from Brooklyn; and Whereas the present Brooklyn regional of- fixe is located at 33 Ryerson Street, in a building which may have to be taken over by the Mergenthaler Linotype Co, for war work; and Wheress nothing should interfere with speedy mobilization measures, and no ob- jection is interposed, so long as the Brooklyn regional office remains in Brooklyn: There-~ fore be it
A1104 . Resolved, That the Soctety of Old Brook- lynitea, in meeting assembled, Wednesday evening, February 7, 1951, goes on record as objecting to the removal of the Veterans’ Administration regional office from Brooklyn. Labor Leaders Balk Efforts To Halt Inflation EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. PAUL W. SHAFER O¥ MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 27, 1951 Mr. SHAFER. Mr. Speaker, in spite of the eminently fair, if not dangerously soft, wage control formula determined by Economic Stabilizer Eric Johnston, the AFL-CIO United Labor Policy Com- mittee continues to balk at any partici- pation whatsoever in efforts to halt infla- tion and get the Nation on an adequate war basis. The United Labor Policy Committee has taken this attitude obviously because labor leaders in the United States intend to dictate, if they can, the whole war- time economic policy of the Federal Gov- ernment. What other interpretation can be put upon their action, when it is universally conceded that in a free Nation like ours, no really effective attempt can be made to create a wartime economy, without the consent and loyal support of labor, as well as of business and industry? We ‘are either a Nation united, or a Nation disunited. There can be nothing half- way about it. The vote to continue and make com- plete the labor boycott of participation in the war effort—for that is what the vote amounted to—was taken by the AFL-CIO United Labor Policy Commit- tee. It was not taken by the vast mem- bership of organized labor. I do not think for an instant that the action of the committee represented the attitudes or opinions of labor’s rank and file. If the United Labor Policy Commit- tee persists in its present attitude of sabotaging the effort to create an effec- tive national defense, and thus to pre- serve the Union, I believe its members soon will feel the wrath of labor union- ists throughout the country. Especially will this be true if the United Labor Policy Committee passes the word to union officials everywhere that now is the time to call a strike, and help to assert the complete political as- cendancy of labor unions in the United States. Ballot results in last fall's election proved beyond any doubt that American labor unionists consider themselves Americans first, and unionists afterward, Labor leader members of the AFL-CIO United Labor Policy Committee would show good judgment, if they should refer this question of policy back to the mem- bership of all union locals. It ls my conviction that the answer they would get would cause them to re- verse themselves in a hurry. The rank and file of labor would tell them to get back in there and pitch. At the same time, no doubt, they would be instructed to keep up the pressure, by legitimatdé means, for greater labor participation in the councils of Government boards and agencies responsible for mobilization and the economic controls of temporary value in making that mobilization pos- e. Stalin and his Politburo must be watching with broad grins this evidence that American labor leaders are think- ing first of political power, and last of all the welfare of their country. If this attitude is continued for long, the Amer- ican people may begin to doubt the prot- estations of labor leaders that the unions have been purged of communism, The American people are likely ‘to doubt, because they know that Eric Johnston has provided in his formula for cost-of-living escalator wage con- tracts, for fringe benefits in the way of health, welfare, and pension plans, and for adjustment of hardships and inequi- ties on a case-by-case basis. These concessions are greater than those being granted to any other seg- ment of the American public. What more can the labor leaders ask? A Prayer of Thanksgiving EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. HOMER E. CAPEHART OF INDIANA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, March 1 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. CAPEHART. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp a poem en- titled “A Prayer of Thanksgiving,” which was composed by Irvin E. Perigo, Indiana's poet-pianist, and read on Lin- coln’s Birthday, February 12, 1951, at Lincoln City Park, Ind. There being no objection, the poem was ordered to be printed in the Rrc- ord, a8 follows: A PRAYER OF THANKSGIVING Where our flag of freedom files, "Neath the soft blue Hoosier skies; Where the birds sing songs of cheer, O'er the grave we hold so dear, We would look to God to pray In our own true Hoosier way: “God of heaven and of earth, Thanks! to Thee for Lincoln's birth; Thanks! to Thee for holy love Sent this mother, from above; Gullding Abe in childhood days; Keeping him in wholesome ways, That he might fulfill each task; Do whatever Thou might ask, "God of heaven and of earth, Thanks! to Thee for Lincoln's birth.” So, we bring our flowers today, Over this mother’s grave to lay; As we look through grateful tears, Back through all those stirring years; Back to Lincoln’s humble birth— Love’s gift to a needy earth. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD So, our joys and tears today, Bind us, as we humbly pray: “God of heaven and of earth, Thanks! to Thee for Lincoln's birth. Amen.” —Invin E. Perio, Indiana's Poet-Pianist. Modern American Heroism EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ABRAHAM J. MULTER OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, March 1, 1951 Mr. MULTER. Mr. Speaker, many stories of bravery have come out of Korea during the past 8 months. Since these acts of heroism on the part of our boys occur in our own days and under the tension of world events, it is per- haps a little difficult for us to evaluate them fully and to realize how each of these heroic deeds contribute to the safe- guarding of our freedom. Many nations are fighting side by side in Korea against @ common and ruthless enemy. Men of different religious beliefs and different races have joined in the struggle for a free world. This, in itself, should be encouraging to all of us. A story depicting the experiences in Korea of an American marine of the Jewish faith was recently written by Billy Rose in one of his famous columns Pitching Horseshoes. I think it is one of the great stories of bravery to come out of Korea, a story of sacrifice involv- ing a Jewish corporal and his Irish cap- tain, It is also a story of faith. I am sure my colleagues will enjoy reading this brief but very human and characteris- tically American story of present-day heroism. It is as follows: Yom Krppur in Korea (By Billy Rose) When Eleanor and I were in Tokyo a little over a year ago, we got to know Col. Anthony Story, General MacArthur's pilot. This morning I got a letter from Tony with a Korea dite line and it contained a story which I think is worth pass‘ng along, In one of the Marine Corps regiments which recently slugged into Inchon theré was @ corporal named Abraham Geller who had been brought up a nickel phone call away from Delancey Street. Abe is the son of a rabhi, and even at the front where sleep is the most important thing in the world, he never failed to wake a half hour before his buddies and go through the ritual of the orthodox morning prayers. On September 20, Abe’s regiment crossed, the Han and cut the Seoul-Kaesong road and, what with snipers in every rice paddy, by dusk the men were glad to dig in and catch a few hours of clammy sleep—especiale ly since they knew that the drive for the Korean capital itself was scheduled for sunup. An hour before dawn, aside from the sen tries, only two men in the company were awake: Corporal Geller, bent over his prayer book, and Capt. George O'Connor, surveying the terrain and figuring out how best to dee ploy his troops in the coming action. When Abe was finished, the captain “Go tack to the chow truck and get yourse 8 cup of Coffee.”
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD a Oe ee ean,” said Geller, “but to.« jay’s Yom Kippur, and I’m not eat Youn sundowt." OF HBposed to “You mean to say you're going to fast t! day we bust into Seoul?” ald the captain. ne The Hast Sider grinned. “I figure I’ve got enough calories packed away for 24 hours,” he sald. Well, as the papers have told you, the marines ran into plenty of trouble the first day of the drive, and along about sundown Captain O’Connor’s men were inching their way across a field littered with dead North Koreans. One of the Commies, however, though badly wounded, was only playing dead, and as the officer came within range he rolled over on his side and aimed his Pistol. Abe, who was only a few feet from his commanding officer, saw the body move. He jerked his bayonet out of his belt and made @ dive for the enemy soldier, but in finishing him off he got the three bullets which had been intended for O'Connor, The captain did the best he could for Abe, but at this stage the situation was what military commentators called “fluid,” and it ‘was almost 3 hours before the corporal got a shot of penicillin and was carried to a hos- pital tent. The operation lasted over an hour, and when the surgeon finally came out Captain O'Connor was waiting for him. “How does it look?” he asked. “The Kid's doing fine,” said the surgeon. “T figured he was done for,” said O'Connor. "So did I,” said the surgeon. “The bullets went through his abdomen and several loops of intestine and wounds like that are gen- erally fatal if penicillin isn’t administered pretty fast. The spillage almost always causes peritonitis.” “I don’t get all the words,” said the cap- tain, “but his pulling through seems like something of a miracle.” “In a manner of speaking it is,” said the surgeon. “Geller owes his life to the fact that when he was shot there was hardly any food in his stomach.” Resolution of the New York Young Democratic Club EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ABRAHAM J. MULTER or NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 28, 1951 Mr, MULTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to direct the attention of my col- leagues to the following resolution, adopted on January 31, 1951, at a regu- lar meeting of the New York Young Democratic Club. I heartily endorse the views expressed therein. The resolution reads as follows: The New York Young Democratic Club, Inc., resolves, That the United States should give to the people of India the 2,000,000 tons of wheat it needs to prevent famine. This food should be sent at once and with no political strings attached. | Regardless of any differences we have with India over China or otherwise, let us not defame ourselyes by giving even a shred of ‘Justification to the charge that we could let peonte die of hunger because their govern- ent did not yote as we would like it to vote, XCVII—App.———70 Let ws not as a government do what no decent American would do himself if it were his personal responsibility to give or withe hold out of his surplus food for men, women, and children dying of hunger. Let us rather hereby reaffirm our belief in the dignity of the individual man, Proposed Amendments to Selective Service Act EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LYNDON 8. JOHNSON OF TEXAS IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, March 1 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi- dent, I ask unanimous consent to insert in the CoNGRESSIONAL REcorp Several edi- torials regarding the proposed amend- ments to the Selective Service Act, These include editorials from the Washington Star, Indianapolis News, New Orleans Item, Christian Science Monitor, and Newark News. There being no objection, the edi- torials were ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: [From the Washington (D. C.) Star of Janu- ary 19, 1951] We MicHt Neen THEM To SURVIVE The Department of Defense has gone about as far as it reasonably could be ex- pected to go in the direction of sparing 18- year-olds from combat service. The bill which Defense Secretary Marshall has pro- posed would guarantee that no draftee un- der 19 would be sent into combat without adequate training. This provision, General Marshall assured Congress, “would virtually wipe out, except in time of dire emergency, the probability that any young man brought into the service in the early days of this pro- gram would go into combat before he was 19.” Presumably the Department's policy will be to give every draftee considerably more than the minimum 4 months of basic training before he becomes eligible to be sent overseas. This is a sensible modification of the Dee partment’s original plan for induction of 18 year-olds for training and service. The pro- gram combines universal training with se- lective service in such a way as to provide not only the men needed to build up our present forces to required strength, but to provide 4& permanent pool of trained citizen-soldiers in reserve. Strong reaction had developed in Congress, however, against lowering the draft age without a statutory restriction against sending the younger men into combat. The congressional reaction reflected an under- standable reluctance of parents to having ouths of 18 thrust into the midst of war's orrors, Conditions being as they are today, how- ever, the time conceivably might come when ‘we would need the services in combat of every able-bodied citizen, regardless of age. Secretary Marshall was not stating an empty fear when he warned that a legislative pro- hibition against use of men under 19 could “oripple the services in meeting a sudden, ruthless, and violent action by our pogaible enemy.” If such an extreme emergency should develop, the Army’s hands should not be tied by well-meant but risky limitations on use of younger men. A1105 [From the Indianapolls —" of January 12, Tye Bast Ace ror Smavice Building projected Army Ground Forces of 8,500,000 men will require drastic expansion of the present exemption-hedged Selective Service Act. A Senate Armed Services sub- committee now 1s being acquainted with the hard fact that unless 18-year-olds are made eligible for service young married men and v.terans of World War II, up to 38, will have to be called. In the interests of equity, of physical and mental capacity, and of obtaining the maxi- mum amount of service at an age which would cause the minimum of disruption to individual lives and to the national economy, ths Defense Department's proposal to build up the Armed Forces with 16-year-olds 1s inescapably logical. The proposal, as out- li .ed by Secretary of Defense George Mar- shall and Assistant Secretary Anna Rosen- berg, properly would not only fill present emergency requirements but also would cre- ate a long-needed, permanent reserve of trained manpower, Secretary Marshall told the Senators that & system of ‘Universal military service and training represents what I believe ts the best wey to meet our immediate need for enlarged combat forces and at the same time to pro- vide an enduring base for our military atrength.” In other words, the combination of immediate draft authority and universal youth training on & reserve basis would end the dangerous cycles of complete demobili- gation of strength which have so weakened the Nation in the last generation. Since 1945 this newspaper has been a con- sistent advocate of universal military traine ing for the Nation’s youth. It probably is not too much to say that had an adequate system of this kind been in operation, giving the United States a ready reserve of trained men, the Reds would not have dared to ate tack in Korea. Instead, our weakness in- vited attack and our reverses can be traced to our own blindness and unpreparedness, With or without total war, the next decade will be for our country one of constant threat and alarm, in which we can afford no longer not to be prepared for the worst. It is with common prudence, therefore, that the De- fense Department is urging on Congress manpower-skill training legislation broad enough to take care of the future, as well as the urgent necessities of the moment, The resultant law should not be of the piece~ meal character of past efforts. Too long the United States has suffered from short-term military policies, expedients, and improvisa- tions. Universal service, at the age when !t can most easily be borne, is the best answer. [From the New Orleans (La.) Item of Janu ary 17, 1951] New Drarr Request—For Bors or 18: A Unmrorm The immediacy of the danger we face is driven home again by secretary Marshall's urgent request for the drafting of 18-year olds. The simple fact is that the Armed Forces are working for a goal of 3,500,000 men in uniform within the next 6 months, And the present draft law can’t supply that many. A substantial proportion of the 9,000,000 men registered in the 19-through-25 bracket are subject to deferment. This group ine cludes veterans, reservists, those who hold essential jobs in industry, those responsible for the support of dependents, and those qwho fall short phystcally or mentally. ‘+ The deferment policy can be tightened, and the length of service for draftees, now ‘30 months, can be extended. Still the cure rent reservoir will not supply the necessary manpower,
A1106 ' or this reason the Defense Department is requesting immediate military service for 18-year-olds, starting with a draft of 450,000. ‘(More than a million youths reach 18 an- mually, but present standards would permit calling only 700,000.) Secretary Marshall says “Universal mili- tary service and training represents what I believe is the beat way to meet our imme- diate needs for enlarged combat forces and at the same time to provide an enduring base for our military strength.” Marshall is speaking of permanent legis- lation designed to provide the greatest long term security with the lowest cost in men and money. The general's proposal is not pleasant news, But we are facing a fight for sur- vival—a fight that calls for both immediate and long-range strength. It is clear, as the nonpartisan Committee on the Present Danger recently declared, “the time has come for a new concept that universal service in defense of our freedom 4a a privilege and an obligation of our young men.” Marshall's plan is designed to further this concept and yet create the least possible in- terference with family life and with the Nation's ability to produce for defense. There would be hardships, of course, pare ticularly in education, although the plan includes these provisions: For the first 3 years, 76,000 youths a year would be deferred—after basic training—to study medicine, the sciences and other needed specialties. Others already studying in these fields would be deferred upon grad- uation in sufficient numbers to meet civilian requirements. The Navy's officer training program in Civilian colleges would be expanded to cover the other services, The services would send another 50,000 to colleges for training that would help the military, Many of those drafted would probably go to college after their tour of duty; others would not resume their education. Any way you look at it, colleges would be herd hit, and some might be forced to close their doors. But, in a sense, that is only another side to the sacrifices that must be made by the hundrede of thousands of individual boys who normally would be thronging the clase- rooms. We must face up to the fact that preserve ing the peace or winning the war, if it comes, will require many harsh programs. Free- dom does not come cheap or easy. [From the Christian Science Monitor, Bos- ton, Mass., of January 28, 1951] Somzsopy Has To Sxave These are times when the human mind finds few painless answers to the challenges end all of the answers cali for courage. ‘These are times, also, of decision. And the necesaity of decision brings all the con- tradictions of wishful thinking out tn the Open, It ig not a happy season for Congress. Congress knows it dare not fail to provide the Nation with military manpower sufficient to mest today's crisis and the probability of continuing crises over an unknown number ‘of years. Yet 1t 1s being bombarded by constituents who urge earnestly thet 18- year-olds are too young for actual military service, by others who demand that neither veterans nor fathers shall be drafted, and “by colleges which, fi an unbridgeable period devoid of male atudents, plead for broad deferments, Marshall's order permitting stu Secretary dents to enlist in the service of their choice even after being called for preinduction ex- amination should end the currsnt wave of patie enlistments, But the long-term out- look for the colleges 1s still undecided, and the struggle between the champions of the 18-year-olds and of the veterans and fathers still goes on, Yor the immediate build-up it is hard to detend further exemption of young veterans of brief noncombat service who have not ac- quired family responsibilities. Perhaps their inclusion in the draft might permit assuring 6 months’ training to 18-year-olds before they are sent outside the country. As for the needs of the long haul: We have yet to hear of any system other than near-universal service for at least 2 years and beginning at age 18 which would maintain the Armed Forces’ ranks in a ready condition and build the pool of tratned reserves against &n all-out war, and do both jobs with eo little disruption of the Nation's social and eco- nomic structure. One thing 1s certain: Any answer to the military services problem will demand sac- rifices of many. We think the American people are readter to make them than Con- gresamen’s mail may indicate. [From the Newark (N. J.) News of January 18, 1061) UMSET ann Tas CoLLEces Nn the same da: that Secretary of Defense Marshal] introduced before the Senate sub- committee on preparedness the plan for compulsory universal military service and training, the Association of .’: 1erican Col- leges in Atlantic City was drawing up a “declaration on manpower.” The Defense Department's pian was for 27 months of training and service by all able-bodied youths from the time they reached the age of 18. The colleges, representing 650 inati- tutions, were for keeping the induction age of 19, and for keeping the draft out of certain professional schools. The Department of Defense in its UMST plan has taken cognizance of the need to “keep the educational pipeline from drying up.” As the plen was discussed before the same subcommittee by Mrs. Anr~ M. Rosen- berg, Assistant Sec: xtary of Defense, it does not meet the wish of the colleges to keep the induction age at 19. But it does provide that in each of the first 8 years, after 4 months of preliminary training, the President may suspend temporarily the rest of their service to 75,000 youths to permit them to complete college courses, at the conclusion of which they would have to put in their remaining military service. Further, there is the im- plication that the colleges may get as many as 50,000 military personnel not connected with UMST, to pursue “specialties of value to the military.” Admitting that national welfare must come first, the oo! the view that there should be deferment for students in pro- fessional schools of theglogy, medicine, den- tistry and releted health fields, and in the graduate schools in mathematics, engineer. ing, and physical and biological sciences, They urge also that youth, generally, after basic training, be furloughed to the colleges of thelr choioes for further training. Tt is obvious that as this proposal by General Marshall is crystallized tnto legis- lation, the colleges cannot get all they want, But it ts plain that the attitude of the Gov. ernment toward them is sympathetic, and that some way may be found whereby weak- er private institutions will not be driven to the wall by depletion of their student bodies, The very emergency that projects universal military training cannot be adequately met at the price of a partial educational collapse. The Marshall-Rosenberg program repre- sents 4 real advanoe, from the point of view of the colleges. Onoe in effective At would be far better than the present t, inchoate mixture of draft, enlistment, Re~ gerves, and National Guard. But ooll administrators and trustees will, for the visible future, face enormous difficulties, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Delaware Senator, Foe of Waste Se enammenenamead EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. J. CALEB BOGGS OF DELAWARE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, March 1, 1951 Mr. BOGGS of Delaware. Mr. Speak- er, under unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the Appendix of the Rec- ord, I am pleased to place in the Con- GRESSIONAL RecorD & newspaper article concerning the very distinguished and able senior United States Senater from the State of Delaware, the Honorable JOHN J, WILLIAMS. This article was written by the very able columnist, Herman A. Lowe, and ap~ peared in the Philadelphia Inquirer of February 24, 1951: De.awaas Senator, For or Wastz, Sxows UP Cost.iy Crgrsr NONSENSE (By Herman A. Lowe) WasHIncTon, February 24.—They pay cone siderable attention in the Senate when JoHN J. Wriurams, the thin man from Delaware, begins to speak, This grain dealer-solon from the second smallest State in the United States of America, talks in a dry, slightly harsh voice and with hardly more oratorical gesture than a cigar store Indian. What counts is not how he says it, but what he has to say. For he’s a quiet Galahad on behalf of the taxpayer's buck, He tilts endlessly against waste and extravagance and, unlike some of his colleagues, votes the way he talks. He was up again, briefly, this past week with a typically WiuLraass piece of informa- tion, He had learned that the 60,000,000 pounds of Cheddar cheese which this Gov- ernment sold at a price of 15 cents per pound although our Government had purchased it as surplus for about 31 cents a pound, But it was the second part of what he said which was the snapper. At the same time our Government was holding this cheese off the American market to keep up prices to the American house- wife, and selling at half cost to a foreign nation, American food firms were forced to tmport about 13,000,000 pounds of the very same kind of cheese. They got it from the British Common- wealth units of Canada and New Zealand at prices ranging from 21 to 37 cents per pound, as contrasted with the price at which we were selling it to Britain. It was similar to the instance brought up recently by another Senator that we were exporting surplus butter at 17 cents a pound while American housewives paid up to 80 cents. Wittiams frst teed off, a couple of years back, against the Federal pension system which was then—and probably ia yet-—shot full of inequities, He brought out such exampies as the sub- atitute mail carrier who contributed $116.11 to the fund. On the basis of his normal life ¢@: , Wiuiiama pointed out, he would get a total of $17,850 from the fund. Another employee, who had contributed a total of $72.86 to the fund, was drawing an annual pension of $261.64. books of the Commodity Credit Corporation showed a of more than $366,- and accounte were straightened out with other Federal depart- ments and agencies which owed CCU.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD By mid-1060, unaccounted-for items were down to $96,440,407; the administration felt it ought to just write this off so as to get the books back into balance. Wru.rams raised the roof and the work of trying to clear up the accounts goes on. WitiiaMs has attacked the Maritime Com- mission, whose records rival those of the Oommodity Credit Corporation. Thanks to his goading, the Commiesion collected for the taxpayers several million dollars owed by private business firms. Although a dealer in grain and from a State with considerable agriculture, WiL- LIAMS has fearlessly attacked what he regards as wasteful farm subsidies. H's quite a guy. One Hundred and Fiftieth Anniversary of New York Naval Shipyard EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LOUIS B. HELLER OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 28, 1951 Mr. HELLER. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- orb, I include the following article from the New York World-Telegram and Sun of February 17, 1951: MIGHTIEST FLEET HAILs Navy YarD, 150 Years O.p—Irs First Warsnip, Fricate, Hap 74 Guns, anp Now IT Converts HuGE CARRIERS (By Edward J. Mowery) A workman in a yellow helmet surveyed the ‘2eming, 288-acre New York Naval Ship- yard today, threw out his chest, and ob- served: “Next Friday we're goin’ to be bustin’ out all over. Team work—-that's the answer.” Across the network of streets, ways, and drydocks which punch their way into the brine of Wallabout Bay, Rear Adm. Paul B. Nibecker, commander of the world’s largest shipyard, agreed. “Yes, because of excellent teamwork through the years, we'll proudly commemo- rate this yard’s one hundred and fiftieth anniversary February 23, and at the same time try to dispel the element of mystery inside our gates. “There's a lot of big stuff going on in here, but we don't use any mirrors.” CARRIERS STRESSED The admiral—an expert naval architect— conceded that a lot has happened to the seagoing silhouette since Robert Fulton's 2,000-ton “floating teakettle” first slipped down the Brooklyn yard ways in 1816. “The emphasis,” he said, “is on carriers, which have more than demonstrated their value in Korea. And this is the Nation’s lead design yard for carriers. We've modern- ized one, two other similar jobs are under way—-Wasp and Bennington—and we have information that we'll take care of others. “It's a 3-year converting program and each modernization costs around $38,000,000. We're removing gun turrets to equip the fiat-tops with escalators, installing stronger catapults, arresting gear, and flight decks to handle bigger planes. “And * * * one of these days we're golrig to put a new slogan on our letterhead. We'll call this the Can Do Yard. SLOGAN JUSTIFIED Glorious tradition, accompanying Amer- iea's rise in sea supremacy, more than justi- fies use of the slogan et the New York base, established in 1801 on 9 42-acre plot of land purchased from John Jackson, a shipbuilder, Three yeurs before, Jackson built a amall frigate (the Adams) for the Government in the tiny yard made up of swamps and mud flats. The yard didn’t mature until 1812, when the Nation's second vital conflict thrust the construction of more than 100 vesselg upon its IMmited facilities. The challenge was met and conquered by ingenuity, improvisations and sweat. And in 1817 the yard began work on its first, naval vessel—the 74-gun frigate Ohio, larg- est ship built in this country up to that time. In the ensuing years of peace the navy yard flexed its muscles with new shops and & $2,000,000 drydock (completed in 1861). Then came the Civil War's unprecedented demands for 16 new fighting craft and 416 conversions of merchant ships. Again the New York yard, employing 5,500 trained workers, spewed forth fighting oratt. With the ebb and flow of peace and war, the New York shipyard responded with ap- Propriate facilities and personnel. Lawns and trophy halls which delighted sightseers gave way to larger shops, railroad tracks, and piers. Fast building ways blossomed and gargantuan drydocks, which overcame substrata quicksand, dotted the cavernous water front. When the rumble of war swept the Con- tinent in 1917, the yard was one of America’s top naval workshops, Employment jumped to 18,000. One herculean task was con- struction of 40 submarine chasers to meet the U-boat threat. And as American sea power grew, 80 did the kecls of powerful dreadnaughts. Up to this time, the yard had launched 50 vessels of varying tonnage and armor, starting with the line ship Ohio. They included sloops, cutters, paddle-wheel steamers, torpedo boats, cruisers, and the venerable but deadly battleship New York (1912). BIG BATTLE WAGONS From 1915 to 1922, eyes of the naval world focused on activities in the Brooklyn yard, where five first-class battleships with tre- mendous fire power were taking shape, They were the Arizona, New Mexico, Ten- nessee, South Dakota, and Indiana. Then came the disarmament conference which halted work on the last two vessels, February 8, 1922. They were one-third finished. As air power became more potent in the late 1930's, the New York shipyard kept abreast. From December 7, 1941, t> 1945, the yard repaired more than 5,000 ships, converted 250 others and turned out these battlewagons— North Carolina, Iowa, and “Mighty Mo,” on whose deck the Japs signed their uncondi- tional surrender. PARADE OF CARRIERS The carrier parade picked up immediately. Three were of the Essex class (Bennington, Bon Homme Richard, and Kearsarge). The Franklin D. Roosevelt followed, and the last, the Oriskany, has just undergone complete modernization. At the peak of the yard’s World War IT production, 69,000 workers manned the maze of building ways, drydocks, and foundries. Next week, national, State and city offi- Cials will pay tribute to the rich traditions of the New York yard which has contributed so much to America’s safe’y and strength, 48 A WORKER PUTS fT Gazing at one of the grayish hulks in dry- dock, Robert E. Hanlon, 49, of 1517 East Twenty-ninth Street, Brooklyn, put it another way: “I came to work here 46 years ago and I've watched all kinds of ships slide down the ways, They've been awfully good to me—the Navy personnel, And we've always tried to do the job well, "U’Nl never forget working on the first ot! engines for the battlewagon Arizona; We bullt ’em under the supervision of Adni. Chester Nimitz. And when I read about him in the last war, I wasn't surprised Ho's bril- liant and has a fine personality” “You know," the public works foreman added softly, “I get just cs big a thrill at seeing a modern craft launched as I did the Older type vessels. You get sort of a patriotic chill that runs up and down your apine.” History of the Touro Synagogue in Newport, R. I. ee EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ABRAHAM J. MULTER OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 20, 1951 Mr. MULTER. Mr. Speaker, the story of the Touro Synagogue in Newport, R. I., has been told many times. It is appropriate, however, that we repeat it today, I am therefore placing in the Racorp the story as told in the Metropolitan Star of February 1951. Uncie Sam Goss To SyNaGocvE: History oF 4 NewrorTt SHRINE (We celebrate Washington's Birthday this week. The Touro Synagogue in Newport 1s now a national shrine, Its worshipers played important parts in our revolutionary cause and in 1790 Washington visited the synagogue. It was in a letter to thia syna- gogue that he quoted hia never-forgotten words: “For, happily, the Government of the United States gives to bigotry no sance tions.” It is fitting therefore, that we re- view the history of this national shrine in Newport during the week of Washington's Birthday.) One hundred and eighty-eight years ago & small group of Jews gathered for thelr first service in thelr new synagogue in Newport, R. I. This was their first temple in their new land. Most of their fathers and mothers and some of them had fied religious persecu- tion in the Old World and had found respite and a new home in this newest of lande— America. For over a hundred years now they had lived in freedom and tolerance in this land and had wofshiped God in their own fashion—in the same manner as had Abraham and all his seed. But previously the worship of God had been carried on in one or another private home. The members of the congregation had prospered in the new land, and now they decided to butld a new temple to praise the Almighty. One of the finest architects of the day, Peter Harrison, was called in to design the synagogue, This firet house of worship of the Sephardic Jewish colony in Newport weath- ered many of the storms breaking over the handful of colonies, which later became a federation of States, and today stands out as one of the spiritual, moral, and physical leaders of the world. Recently the Govern- ment of the United States, recognising the fact that the temple had lived the history of this country and survived as the oldest synagogue in America, designated the Touro Synagogue a national historic site. TOURO FIRST RABBI After the founding of the synagogue, in 1768, the congregation asked Isaac Touro, an immigrant from Holland, to act as its first rabbi. He led the congregation until
' 1760, when the Revolutionary War caused the temporary closing of the temple. Touro left Newport and went to New ‘York to act @a rabbi for the Shearith Israel congregation. Later he migrated to Kingston, on the West Tndian island of Jamaica, where he died. Many members of the eps ta took part in our Nation's early for . They inchuided soldiers, businessmen, and financiers. Aaron Lopes, one of the lat. ter, sacrificed hts entire personal fortune to further the American cause. In 1790, George Washington visited the synagogue and later wrote its congregation an expression of religious liberty, which is as ‘valid today as it was on the day Washington 4 wrote it, It reads: “The citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for having given to mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy, a policy worthy of imitation. All possess alike lib- erty of conscience and immunities of citizen. ship. “It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of ‘one class of people that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights.” NO SANCTION TO BIQOTRY “For, happily, the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, re- quires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens, in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.” Although Touro had left the country, his family remained associated with the temple, Both sons became leading citizens of the country as well as of the Jewish community, After Isaac Touro’s death, his wife, Reyna, and his sons, Judah and Abraham, returned to Boston. The youngest brother remained in the Bast, but Judah, after one business voyage for his uncle, decided to set up in business for himself and went off to New Orleans. Here, despite the fact that Jews were theoretically barred from the city, un- der an old colonial law, Judah became a suc- cessful businessman and @ prominent civic leader. In the defense of the city against the British during the War of 1819, he was one of the 18 men wounded among the Amer- ican forces. During his convalescence, Judah, who had by this time become a wealthy man, de- cided to use his wealth for philanthropic purposes. Hie first act was to purchase the land and building of the local Unitarian Church, whose minister was his friend. After the sale, which was forced by the church's indebtedness, he turned it back to the Unt. tarlan congregation. Some years later after a fire had destroyed the building, he sup- plied the Christian congregation with another house of worship. His donation of $10,000 toward the com- pletion of the Bunker Hill Monument re- ceived great publicity—so great, in fact, that Touro told his old friend, the Unitertan minister, that he would like to take back the money because he had been promised anonymity, and the publicity disturbed him, HELPED ALL FAITHS Under Touro’s inspiration, New Orleans es- tablished, in 1858, a Hebrew Foreign Mission Society to help Jews abroad. A year earlier, he had bought a large estate and built a hospital there, which he left to the city upon his death. During the last years of his life, he donated « cdtisiderable sum to Mount Sina! Hospital in New York. His will provided for over $200,000 for Jewieh pur- poses and another $160,000 for various Chris tian and nonsectarian charities. Both .Fudah and hia brother donated funds for the | of the Touro Synagogue, which was for thelr father. In his will Judah left $75,C0) to the congregation for the cemetery and the salary of the rabbi ofthe synagogue, while Abraham left 610,- 000 to the State of Rhode Isiand to main- tain the buliding and another 88,000 for the city of Newport to repair the street leading to it. The building itself is considered one of the finest examples of colonial architecture. Tts designer had previously built King's Chapel in Boston and Christ Church in Cam. bridge. The woodwork in the synagogue is all hand carved and the masonic structure of the building follows the Temple of Jeru- salem. Twelve columns, each » solid tree trunk, represent the 12 tribes of Israel. The central candelabrum is wrought of sliver and is a beautiful example of contem; art. No metal was weed in the building, every unit was dovetatled and foined by dowel. Although the National Park Service of the Department of the Intertor will aid in caring for the synagogue, the ownership of the bullding will remain with the congregation and it will continue to be used as a place of worship. Bled White by Taxation EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. PAUL W. SHAFER OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 19, 1951 Mr. SHAFER. Mr. Speaker, under permission to extend my remarks, I in- clude an editorial from the Michigan Tradesman, a widely read semimonthly business publication which well ex- presses opinions of business and pro- fessional people of my State. This edi- torial, “Are We Being Bled White by New Taxes To Protect a Europe That Won't Defend Itself?” should be read by every Member of Congress. The editorial fol- CH Ags Wr Berna Ruzp Waite sy New Taxes To Protect a Evrope THat Won’r Derenp Once upon a time we had a President who told us “all we Lave to fear is fear itself.” Through the years this advice has given the people of the United States a Kind of false courage to undertake and do things beyond their capacity and beyond the bounds of common sense. Wishful thinking by the man who thought up the nifty saying and on the part of others whom he influenced, has helped to get the country into its present nightmare of contusion. i E mentals of law. We have followed leaders, who, doubtless with good intentions, led us into uncharted courses fraught with unseen dangers, started with the faulty notion that peoples are like Americans and that they will APPENDIX TO. THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD when all history teaches us that mankind seldom is without wars. 4 And 80, today we have a United Nations’ organtzation which is supposed to represent all nations but doesn’t, because Communists cannot join in any endeavor with non-Com- munists. And worse, those who formed the United Nations guve the Russians a veto on its decisions, Even while long-winded orators speak non. aense at meetings of the members of the United Nations, an army supposed to rep- resent the world organiration but really ts about 80 percent American, is at war with Communists of Korea and Chine, while Com- munist Russia decries the United States and encourages the armies opposing Yankees in Korea. BLED WHITE BY TAXATION The United States Government 1s bleeding its own white through taxation to finance an unprecedented program of pre- paredness against war. The Government has tried to persuade us that to protect our- selves from Russian aggression we must go to meet the Communists inside the conti- nent of Europe. Our frontier has been placed even beyond the Rhine—on the Elbe. Our President claims he has the right to send American fighting men wherever he thinks they should be sent. It was he— and he alone—who sent American boys to fight in Korea, where we already have had & casualty lat of around 50,000. The thought must occur to every good American: “Why would any man crave the authority to send American soldiera to their destruction?" It seems that every good American would shud- der to have and to exercise such fearful authority, In conditions as they are and our Federal Government demanding such shocking sums as 870,000,000,000 for defense purposes, our domestic situation becomes confused, The Government wants ever more control of the people, and especially of their purse. It seeks contro) of prices, of metals, foods, im- ports, exports, distribution, manufacture, wages, hours, living condittons. And it plas- ters a tax on everything we make, handle, use, consume. Rarely, and probably never in history, has any country struggled under such crushing taxation as the United States of today. GIVE US OUR DAILY SCARE How can any people be at ease when forced to go through the scares as daily come to us via our newspapers or are thundered at us over the radio? We read that “the family food bill is going up again, perhaps March 1.” At breakfast we read that another big strike 1s looming in the automobile industry. Again we are told wool manufacturers will be forced to boost men’s wearing apparel 30 to 50 percent by the spring of 1952, or that carpet manufacturers have stopped tak- ing orders because they can’t survive under controlied selling prices but no control over prices of imported wool they have to buy and use in manufacturing processes. In Government positions of importance are blundering jobholdere who drive the public into scare buying because they pre- dict a shortage of production in automobiles, television sets, textiles, plastics, wearing ap- parel, shoes, etc. etc. They place more stringent controls on credit to hold down purchasing. They express thetr fears of infla- tion, which only add to the fear the public already has of the shrinking value of the dollar. INFLATION 38 A REAL THREAT As a matter of fact, inflation really is the of the threatea that stultify progress in this country right now. How to stop it claims the attention of good business and sane men in public offices. ’ Most men who are trying to think and act straight are of opinion that deficit financing
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD by the Federal Government lies at the base of inflation. They are of opinion also that to best fight inflation the Government must formulate and stick to @ “pay-as-we-go” pro- gram. They say we can pay ag we go, no matter how high the price of preparedness against war may be. Some of these men are advising resort to the sales tax. Unfortu. nately, the sales tax itself suggests unrest and leads to a new Eind of fear. However, a sales tax hits everybody—even those who foolishly think “a little inflation is a good thing.” Some people In Washington suddenly have been struck with the thought that it might be a good thing if the Federal Government itself exercised a little economy, although our Kansas City President challenges any- body to cut his latest proposed $71,000,000,- 000-plus budget. A great many other people have been suddenly struck with the thought that possibly all this present war scare may have been just imagined and that we, the people, ought to have a little more informa- tion on the whole big problem confronting the public. WAVE ANOTHER EMERGENCY Somehow, some of the people holding big jobs in Washington manage to build up an “emergency” at just the time when they need one to carry out their own programs. This country was going along at a fairly even pace before our President, on all but a sudden impulse sent our fighting men into Korea. If there hadn’t been an “emergency” before that time, there certainly has been one since then. The sad fact is that the mutual calling of names by the United States and Soviet Rus- sia cannot go on forever without ending in a hot instead of a cold war between the two nations. The Secretary of State informed the Senate Foreign Relations and Armed Services Committees that the Federal Admin~ jstration intends to send 100,000 additional American Army troops to Burope as part of a combined defense force against Commu- nist aggression. Defense Secretary Marshall disclosed plans to double 100,000 of American ground troops in Europe this year. MINORITY REPUBLICANS ALERT There is definite indication that the Re- publican party opposition to the Democratic Administration’s policy is getting stronger. Recently 118 of 199 Republican members of the House of Representatives, signed a decla- ration of foreign policy which asks for a re- examination and a revision of the so-calted bi-partisan policy which has clamped a silencer on much needed criticism of our for- eign policy as fixed by Roosevelt, Truman, et al. These Republicans believe that American foreign policy should be based on protecting the safety and welfare of the American people at home, more than on protecting foreign peoples. Ten of Michigan's 12 Republican Congressman have signed this declaration, which says that our foreign policy has been “in large part a costly failure.” The declara- tion makes the following as a suggestive basis for our foreign policy: “1, Whatever our future military policy is to be, it must be determined with full partici- pation and approval of the Congress. “2, Make this country impregnable to ate tack. “3, Reduce nonessential civilian expendl- tures. “4, Build a strong defense system in the Western Hemisphere. "§, Build a strong defense line in the Atlantic and Pacific. Refuse further ald of any kind to western Europe unless persuaded that western Europe is carrying its full share of the burden. In any case, invite Britain and the British Government to participate fully in this program. “6. Conclude peace treaties with Germany, Japan, and Austria.” A reexamination of the whole situation in Europe might reveal that the people over there are more or less reconciled to a Russian invasion and are not eager to rearm and fight the Communists, because they dread most of all another bombing in which both friend and enemy might engage in case world war IIT is fought. We must not be misled into committing ourselves to fight in a Europe laboring under this impression or delusion. BIPARTISANSHIP A FAILURE We need, and must have, an alert, ener- getic, determined opposition party. We have had entirely too much of the so-called bi- partisanship that proved to be so ineffective. The party in power commits the Government to a policy and sets a course that cannot be altered, then asks the opposition’s approval. Only “me-too-tsm” can result from that kind of bipartisanship, Note: Members of the Michigan Re- publican delegation in Congress who signed the foreign-policy declaration re- ferred to in the above editorial are: PAUL W. SuHarer, Cuare E. HorrmMan, WILLIAM W. BLackney, Jesse P. Wo.cort, Frep L. CrawFrorbD, RutH THOMPSON, CHARLES EB, Potter, JOHN B. Benwert, Georce A, Donpero, and Roy O. Wooprvurr, Leave Voice of America in State Department EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KARL E. MUNDT OF SOUTH DAKOTA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, March 1 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an editorial from the Louisville (Ky.) Courier-Jour- nal of February 22, 1951. This editorial, entitled “No Need to Change a System When It Is Working Well,” sets forth clearly some of the cogent and compelling reasons for keep- ing our overseas information program in the Department of State where it can maintain close working relationship with the policy-forming branch of the Government on foreign policy. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: [From the Louisville Courier-Journal of February 22, 1951] No Nexp To CxHAnce a Syvatrm WHEN Ir Is WorkKING WeLL When Senator WrLLtam Benton first pro- posed, 2 or 3 years ago, that the Voice of America and other media of our official infor- mation program be taken out of the State De- partment, the Courier-Journal was attracted to the idea. It seemed to offer something along the line of the British Council, a semiofficial agency which does a major part of the British Government's cultural and propaganda work abroad. Although he has offered no concrete plen in connection with his recent advocacy of his idea in the Senate, what the Senator had previously proposed, and it may be assumed what he will propose in a bill, was that a A1109 | public-private corporation, be set up, com- posed of about 15 leading citizens of the country and a representative of the State Department. The Senator’s idea is that, al- though the State Department must always be responsible for foreign policy, it would be easier for a distinguished group of public citizens to draw support from high-powered propagandists than it would be for an Assist- ant Secretary of State to command such talent. That is perhaps a valid argument, but it does not seem to us to be the overriding consideration. The President’s Advisory Commission on Information. set up under the Smith-Mundt Act, studied the opera-~ tions of the old OWI and came to the con~ clusion that there should be a much closer Naison between policy making and policy ex- position than ever existed between OW! and the State Department, As a matter of fact, OWI got most of its policy lines from the White House and not the State Department. The Advisory Commission has consistently contended that representatives of the Public Affairs Branch of the State Department, which controls the information program, should sit on the major policy-planning group, participate in all meetings at which policies are considered, have access to all ma- terials concerning policy, top secret tneluded, if it was to be an intelligent voice of the American Government. Over the protest of some of the traditionally minded Foreign Service officers, the Commission won its point and there exists now the very closest relationship between all polloy officers of the Department and the information specialists, It works well, too. Foreign Service officers who never had any understanding of public reaction and consequently made policies in a vacuum, now take into consideration what that reaction will be, what the proper tim- ing of a statement might be, and other mat- ters that go into influencing people to think our way. There is no need to change the system and there is no apparent benefit to be gained from changing, Soil Conservation Challenges the Church EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CARL T. CURTIS OF NEBRASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 26, 1951 Mr. CURTIS of Nebraska. Mr, Speaker, one of the most outstanding speeches on soil conservation that I have ever heard was delivered by Rev. John Fred Streng, pastor of St. John Ameri- can Lutheran Church, of Beatrice, Nebr. This address was delivered before the Nebraska Town and Country Church Conference held last month on the cam- pus of the College of Agriculture at the University of Nebraska at Lincoln. I wish to extend my remarks to in- clude this fine address: Sor. CONSERVATION CHALLENGES THE OnURCH The struggle for survival tops the world’s 1951 agenda. Victory will come to that side which can best answer the question: “When do we ent?” Here les the difference be- tween Europe and America, between pov- erty and prosperity. Aud that’s a matter of Ife and death, It involves both church and state. Bo both had better get down to earth, coordinate their marvelous resources, and then look from clod and sod to recognise Almighty God. Bringing Jesus Christ to
A1110 rural Nebraaka {s the theme of this con- ference. That clearly defines our subject matter. Where Christ goes, His method and meseage inevitably intervene. In His pro- gtam and prayers we note an enduring em- asis upon man's stewardship of the soil. 7: asks us to pray: “Give ua this day our daily bread.” God’s answer to that petition is seen today in the miracle of modern crop surpluses and world consumption. The church's people—priority--and pros- perity depend directly upon soul and soi) conservation, Notice the “u" and “i” rela- tionship in soul and soll. So the church's basic institution for teaching understanding and appreciation of the soll, tts meaning, capacity, and Mmitation, is the Christian home. Parents and children must learn to love the soil. Children are the most tm- portant bumper crop; they love to learn, We adults won't change our minds, When little Ruthie dusts window sllls and furniture, and exclaims: “Mother, I hate this old filthy dust,” it’s time for mother to begin & 8-minute rest period, and utilize it for a capauled course in soil conservation. Says mother: “Look, honey, that isn't really filth, God made the dust; it's part of our soil. It’s our bread and butter. We belong to the land. If we take good care of it, it will take care of us.” Here ts the heart of soil conservation, and the church's future depends on what her God-fearing members do to, and with, God's good earth in time. For, soul and soil erosian are twins. Man end soll are of the aust of the earth. To it we shall return when our work is done. “The earth is the Lord's"—that’s what God said. It does not belong to us; we are but God’s farm man- egers, His stewards. Whether we disk, one- way, cultivate, plow, or duckfoot the land, we elther bequeath a garden spot or a mix- ture of gumbo and gullies to the next gen- eration. How must soil conservation challenge the church. Ninety-five percent of Nebraska churches are rural. And since main street is but the business end of a country road, we may say thet all churches in the Corn- husker State are directly affected by changes in agriculture. Roughly, Nebraska has 1,825,000 citizens. Only 2 cities are above 25,000; only 8 others above 10,000. Shifting populations in 20 countries chosen at ran- dom, and recently published in the Ne- braska State Journal, show one-half gained, one-half lost. Only 16 percent is engaged in farming; the remainder are country ladies and gentlemen living in town. With this minority, sgri- culture @s a means of prosperity takes on a different angle. Strangely, the canning in- dustry and truck gardening are rising levia- thans. Overmechanisation of farm equip. ment has led to excess borrowing. We de- mand @ higher standard of living than our income can maintain, If time saved by machinery can develop other farm opera- tions, they will pay out. But equipment that can be used only 1 or 2 weeks ont of the year, may not be very profitable, espe- cially tf purchased on time payments. Other factors complicate this modern pus- wle even more. (1) The church, like other agencies, has wrongly emphasised produc- tion more than distribution. (2) The poor farmeys are not poor because they are ex- ploited, but because they are un uctive. Some are just plain lazy; they don't care how they farm. (8) In 1948 almost 10,000,000 people in the U. 8. A. were over 65 years old; in 1970 we expect over 16,000,000. This vast army of ativer-hairett pioneers can no longer help conserve, but must be conserved. (4) In recent years we've heard much about specialined farming. The church must em- phasize that prosperity is not so much farm culture, as common senas and reverence for. and knowledge of the sotl, The earthworm knows more about keeping soil clean and aoft than a one-way, (5) The modern four horsemen to plow under the rural church, farm, and family, tnolude: Corporation farming, the canning industry, the giant truck-garden syndicates, and aoil- less farming. One inch of topsoil, valued at $1 per ton, when once lost through erosion, costs the owner 615,000 to replace per acre. No wonder some farmers ure poor. Six out of every 10 people in the U, 5. A, live in cities; they are consumers, not producers. They do long-distance farming which ofttimes does not help the rural church. The clean property around the little white church used to be the pride and joy of father and son; today much of it is owned by someone liv- ing thousands of miles distant, who has no interest whatever in the church. The farmer has a strategic position in- this immense hierarchy of country community welfare. The church must encourage the Christian farmer to recapture the security of his God- given status as steward In the proportion that man loses sight of the idea that the world is here for his profit and pleasure by c‘vine right, the more greedy, arrogant, and destructive he becomes in working with natural resources. The church’s duty ts to inform man of his divine prerogative as ruler over the ani- mal world. Thus man must seek to con- serve the earth as a medium of happiness for both. The church is built on the land; lives off the land, and cannot prosper without good farmers. No magic or mineral will save precious top soll; just common sense mixed with the fear of God will work wonders. If we keep it fresh, clean, and productive, our children will not be paupers Man fs just beginning to use science to help him study the effect of soil and {ts products on the human body, on industry, on national and International relations. Behind tt all he will find the guiding hand of God. A thousand and one things depend upon common sense grass-roots democracy, and appreciation of God’s miracle of life. Every church denomination might well establish soil conservation districts, alert and active to preserve high Christian stand- ards. Every clergyman should subscribe to 4 good farm magazine, attend county soil meetings, and insist that the congregation choose @ committee on agriculture, The Lutheran church, among others, operates an efficient church-wide placement bureau which directs Nation-wide activities within its denomination. There is no lmit to con- structive surveys and service of a church council or board of elders, as pertains to re- habilitatton of souls and soil, Landowners and tenants joining hands and hearts in church on Sunday morning will boost more peaceful relations during the week. The whole congregation must mobilize against ite common enemies; erosion and depletion, Parm owners beet know their land troubles; these might profitably be discussed by church societies from the standpoint of the Christian steward. Ailing humans call a doctor; ailing land needs the careful diag- nosis of a conservation specialist. The church should be deeply interested in how drainage ditches, county, State, and Federal highway construction, irrigation canal d » tallroad tracks, and other de- vices cutt: through chureh territory, will affect the future of the congregation. There are only two weys to make conservation ‘work; passing laws, or voluntary practice of the Golden Rule. Putting such a plan and Program into effect cannot be accomplished in one day. The church is a long-range spiritual adviser. Her members came and go, at last to asleep beneath the sacred soll of God’s acre. But the church teaches one generation after another that when isnd is treated as God on e ebare-and- share-alike basis, drives will not be necessary. No government can subsidize God's land into ity. Only the family that owns and honors the land will demonstrate by its APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD progressive methods that church and com- munity are priceless. The owner-operator must realize that rain, sunshine, and good crops are not his doing alone. And the ten- ant must remember that he owes the bossa and God an account of how he treats rent ground. Let the church's voice be heard in these days of high prices, greed, and aelfish- ness, that cause overproduction and ruina- tion of the land. No Jand can bear more than its share; therefore intensive cropping without rotation is dangerous, When buge corporations and foreign financial interests destroy family size farms, they annibilate church, public school, and community, And where there is no community life, people cannot live, love, or labor together. The church must stress the meaning of cus- todianship and trusteeship as a matter of self-respect. Each farm has its problems; it may be the soll, or water management, or mineral de- ficiency, or topsoil contour. Anyone can ruin a farm, but only a good steward can improve it. Experimenta and experience show that the so-called 10-year farm improvement and development plan works best in most cases. This plan is geared so that an average farm improvement will pay for iteelf, when f- nanced as follows: 59 percent for minerals; 23 percent for erosion control; 10 percent for fences; 5 percent for buiiding repairs; 8 per- cent for pond and shelter. Somewhere in this program, proportionate giving to the Lord must be added. Detailed costs and in- creased returns are necessary for the land and the good Lord in successful forming. As stewardship in the church 1s a slow pro- gram, so is soil conservation. Tithing for the land and careful conservation of soil are on the same side of the fence. As the human body is able to do twice the work after a good night’s rest, £0 soll needs @ Sabbath, too. What summer vacation is to t'e human body, summer fallow is to ex- hausted soil. Balanced farming means shar- ing with the Lord. He makes soil produc. tive; we work it, and live like kings from it. The economic impact of 10 to 20 farmers practicing soil conservation in a group is tremendously important; like, when 10 to 20 church members begin using Lord’s treas- ury boxes to introduce proportionate giving. That means all church debts liquidated, de- ent living for pastor and parish, well-kept church premises, including care of the silent acre of God's permanently retired saints. Why enthuge farmers of America when their eldere ruin the home place because they look for the dollar sign on every fence post? If one-third of the productive soil in the coun- try is conserved, new production increases by a million dollars. The way to make money is to take God in as partner. He who would osper cannot park on Main Street all day. t’s simple to raise corn and hogs; it takes @ lfetime, however, to train intelligent Christian farmers who remember that they are tilling holy ground that belongs to God. The more a government pushes parity, the lesg it relies on God, Church people need to ponder our strange modern mode of living. A soll expert recently made the statement that here once virgin soil produced 150 bushels without fertilizer, only 58 bushels now grow aided by aftificlal respiration. ‘Worn-out sof] results in higher prices, aky- high taxa, increased relief rolls. Depleted land produces mineral-deficient crops, mal- nutrtioned livestock, resulting in low-qual- ity milk, butter, cream, and eggs,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Allll dam has lost its value; dams are not the answer to goil erosion, Every ruined farm anywhere in the U. 8. A, costs us all money, Conservation means to live happily and use« fully. It’s a way of life. God gave us earth, water, air; these three. We must live in harmony with them or lose our birthright. Even the climate becomes a pattern factor in the use of the land. When, for instance, elyilzation makes a mistake about a rain. drop, history records the eviction of man from the landscape. Historians draw maps of lost countries. That wasteland began with an army of innocent raindrops that splashed to the ground. One thousand five hundred cubic miles of raindrops fall on the U. 8. A, per year, One-half evaporates, one-fourth flows off in surface streams; the remain~ der works its way into the earth crust and staves off starvation. The raindrop is either man's terrible enemy, or friend; depends on where and how it fails. If we would harness the raindrop we wouldn’t need expensive dams. Terraces, contour plowing, strip crop- ping, and similar methods, make the rains drop walk instead of run away. The mud- Bplash of the raindrop is a blasting force, The soil becomes puddled and flonts away; only sterile ground remains. So the rain- drop must be intercepted before it strikes home. Since Nebraska slopes from west to east, lowlands in southeastern Nebraska should be seriously interested in  flood-control measures. Development of the North and South Platte River beds, the Missouri River Basin, the Republican River watersheds, are of prime importance. Citizens of Lincoln and Beatrice should be alert about what goes up Salt Creek or down the Blue River. Un- derground water moves in an easterly direc tion also. Floods have gone far beyond the occasional stage. Dams completed in west- ern Nebraska will be a great blessing, but smaller water coutses must be controlled also if we are to escape serious damage. In passing, let me use this illustration just to show that we are our brother’s keeper, The life of a New Orleans citizen depends upon the change of a water stream hundreds of miles away, namely, whether a sheepherder in Montana overgrazes bottomland, or a lumbermill in Minnesota overcuts its quota, or some farmer in Illinois overplows his Jand, which mistake in either case permits watcr to escape and converge on helpless, inno# cent inhabitants down Mississippi River way, flooding them out of their homes. The church must preach vigorously against soi] erosion, Every clergyman ought to make an inspection tour of the farm land in his parish. Soil erosion has evicted nations with more finality than any invading army. We are told we lose the equivalent of 10,000 100-acre farms each year from water erosion alone. A thimblefull of topsoil contains well over 2,000,000 particles necessary to keep soil sweet and fresh. If a certain soil can produce only 30 bushels, it must not be over~ farmed. A good deal of what {e called agri- culture is really mining, just plain exploita- tion for quick profits, That is contrary to God's law. Human erosion is just as bad. God intends for man to live with dignity in accord with his high calling and destiny. The gully on the neighbor's place is a danger signal that ought to be disoussed in a Ohris- tian manner, before it crawls under the fence and across the township line. The rape of the land has been horrible; 100,- 000,000 acres lost; 100,000,000 acres depleted seriously; 560,000,000 to be conserved. With huge areas across the world today totally arid, conservation ia the only answer to stare vation of increased world population. Shift ing populations and civilizations move only because of ruined land. The marvels of the eighties here in the Middle West include the rise of teeming ‘eities, With then came new agriculture, farming ideas, and the institutional church. v Nas ‘The pioneer broke up the tough prairie sod, fore farms must ever remain in the hands of hardened by cowboy horse hoof, Indian * worthy people, The great majority of bad stampede, wagon wheels, and thundering farmers hate farming and livestock, and herds, Today the church must remind her 4 their neighbor, In the years gone by a people of the hardships, and the return to ° thrifty, farsighted farmer bought six quarters homesteading unless we learn to appreciate for his s!x sons; thus six new members joined what God gave us, * the church later on. Today the picture has Christ in His parable recognized that soll changed. Deserts and dust dunes do not is not all alike; neither are people. Butthe feed hungry people, for lost soil always means sense of the responsibility remains the same, thinning of population. Too many farm Twenty-seven million of 68,000,000 rural boys are employed in factories to be healthy people are unchurched. Only 53 percent of for the future of the country church. the people tn the United States of America History shows that Babylon, Greece, Persia, attend church; 39 percent of the rural pop- China, and other nations were once world ulation, and 48 percent of city people in powers. Today they are international Nebraska are church members. Most un- corpses due to land hunger. Doping and churched people live in the rapidly expand- drugging the soll with all types of atimulat- ing suburban areas, The rural parish must ing fertilizer will never keep alive the earth not die. It is of basic fiber to American life that breathes. Each square inch is & minia- and living. Though some rural areas never ture beehive, Milltons of tiny bacteria live will be self-supporting, the church should there; this is their home and grave, and they persuade more fortunate communities to give back to Mother Earth their life and subsidize the less fortunate and lend & = enrich her. The unaffected soils of the helping hand. This is God-pleasing to both. tropics or prairie or forest primeval all have Christian countries have always been the a harmonious communion of life. Nowhere, most destructive of soll. Records show that at no time, are deserts a natural phenome= civilization has nearly always raped the non. Nature knows no waste places. To- land and treated it inhumanly. So-called day’s arid areas are monuments to man’s heathen countries do not seem to have much mighty blunders, Beneath thelr sands sleep trouble with depression or starvation, except once thriving civilizations. Where soil where the white man has come, not to bring changes, climate changes, people change. the Gospel, but to tap virgin resources in In the smallest clod of earth is more live order to get rich quick at the expense of and creative activity, than in the highest primitive people. skyscraper, Surely the farmer knows nature and Mfe The Christian farmer cannot approve of better than anyone because he lives so close unsound, deliberate ruination of soll. He to the soil, He should live closer to God improves his farm 80 that others may admire also because his living and livelihood are so hig industry and integrity. He makes home, closely related to God's handiwork. The church, and school the very center of his church cannot live without her rural con- family life. He is active in all of them, and stituency. From the country parishes have thus undergirds the spiritual life of the com- come most of our church leaders in pulpit munity. He knows that it 1s more blessed and pew. Country congregations have bet- to give than to receive. His cows may not ter records for benevolences because they know it's Sunday, but he and his family do, are not slaves to budgets and salaries and and they aim to keep the Sabbath day holy. wage control. Cities maintain themselves Country-church worship might well take only because farmers retire. No city ever into consideration the work schedule of the thrives of itself or {ts industry without farm farmer. He becomes an irregular attender, support. But when we remember that 65 not for lack of desire but because there are percent of the people in the United States no short cuts to good choring even on Sun- of America are unchurched, then what about days. There is need for study toward a cons Christian leadership in the future? If our  ventent timetable especially during winter. rural churches are permitted to close their The Christian farmer should be affiliated doors, where shall the Mfeblood of the with progressive farm organizations and church at large come from in the next marketing groups, not as a pressure union decade? but to develop and promote general welfare. Nor will the rural church be saved through He ought to make his voice heard against co-ops, which seem to become necessary to unfair practices, unsanitary methods, and maintain our modern standard of living. unwise regulation, The Christian farmer Restricted membership make it an isolated elects to office such men and women as serve institution to which not all members of the the community best without bribe or prese church may belong, thus creating differences. gure. All this is a part of soil conservation, The most successful co-op is the one which Volumes have been written on the actentific gradually absorbe all competitors. Thereby angie of soil conservation, The church must it becomes a monopoly and defeats its pur- speak out in simple terms about God's glori+ pose. Soil conservation teaches us, oddly ous earth and His divine laws which govern enough, that man does not live by bread gummer and winter, sowing and harvest, rain alone. A better understanding between and sunshine, day and night. God wants owner and operator is the churches’ duty; man to exercise dominion over the earth, that’s where brotherhood begins, Thereils a And that's a mighty big responsibility. It's definite connection between empty pews and —, high calling to preside over the mystery of sour soil. A golden era of agriculture lies growth in nature. ahead for the Middle West according to soil In less than 300 years, under God's provi- and watershed experts. dence, America has grown from a tiny set- The church should speak more of s0!l  tjement to world leadership. Happiness and bullding than soil conserving, because 80 welfare of today's world depend 60 much much of our Midwest land is torn by deep ypon Christian principles and attitudes. ditches. Many a gully was once an innocent = giuccessful churches are not only those polled wagon track or cow path that someone left ang publicized; others have made just as unguarded, Good farms, beautiful yards, endguring an impact upon community and painted bulldings, adequate machine sheds, national life. A successful church cannot be usually point to a well-kept church. It's a g.ged by size; it’s the spiritual life that good sign of faith in God and the good earth. Colitis There are features that tend and In the wake of continued demolition of the . trend to keep rural churches from experienc. farm home follows the little white school- ing that growth which progressive city house in many areas. Mechanization of the " farm eliminates much human labor; chain churches normally expect because of citizen farming and land harons ignore the God- influx. Too many young men cannot rent intended owner idea. We must preserve the & small farm because some rich man has family-size farm. When the church is the bought up everything and mechanized It. hub of community life, allare happy. Theree So many farmers already belong to city
A112 churches. The rural church and commu- nity wre the very backbone of the American wey of Ufe, the one everybody hopes will remain for centuries to come. By 1076 there will be 7,000,000 more chil- dren in American elementary and, we hope, Sunday church schools, than today. They must be taught about soul and soll con< servetion as & means of survival. A care- ful analysis of sotl, self, and soul, are im- portant to keep America spiritually sweet and clean. That's our job, and it’s a mighty serious one in which church and State must work together, or hang separately. There isn't a more wonderful place on earth, none closer to paradise, than a well- kept, peaceful countryside. On such farms the day is never long enough to complete all the tasks that demand attention, But that’s where people really live. And when near that farm stands the sturdy country church, rearing its tall white spire unto God, calling its members together for prayer, praise, and parting, surely this is a bit of heaven on earth, Of such is the Kingdom of God, of such faith and fiber is the stock of Christian citizenship in America, May God graciously protect and prosper it. “O look upon Thy garden, Lord, the one which Thou hast planted, According to Thy promised word, on plain and hillside slanted. Enrich the soil, Thy light bestow, and soften it with rein; Let everything that il] winds blow result in strength and gain!" Appeasement and Blackmail EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WALTER H. JUDD OF MINNESOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 28, 1951 Mr. JUDD. Mr. Speaker, in the dis- cussion of our foreign policy, the Amer- fean people are entitled to know the truth. It is our duty to give it to them. What is happening in Asia today vitally affects the freedom and security of our Nation. It is for this reason that under leave to extend my remarks, I include the statement made by our former col- league in this House, the former Presi- dent of the General Assembly of the United Nations, the Foreign Secretary of thse Philippines, Gen. Carlos P. Romulo, when last January before the political committee in Lake Success, he fought the passage af a resolution on Korea that to him, as to most of us, seemed to be both craven appeasement and blackmail. The position taken by General Romulo has elicited the admiration of the American people, and it has shown once more that we have in him a true and loyal friend. General Romulo’s state- ment follows: Srarauerr or Ger. Cantos P, Roarw.o, Sec~ thirty that, In thé meantime, measures might be explored for ‘the peaceful settlement of the problem of Korea. Subsequently, the Philip- states @ resolution creating. a committee of three to formulate the basis for a possible cease fire in Kores. Both the 18-nation appeal and the proposals of the committee of three have been rejected outright by the Peiping regime, We supported these efforts in good faith in the context of the circumstances obtain- : ing at that time—-cire which gave some hope that the stabilization of a line somewhere along the thirty-eighth parallel would have permitted a juat and honorable settlement of the Korean problem. How- ever, the Peiping regime has ignored our ropeated entreaties and its soldiers bive pressed their assault againet the armed forces of the United Nations. The political and moral basis for a cease fire has thus been altered by Peiping’s rebuff of our proposals and by its continued hostility toward our troops and aggression against the Republic of Koree. Though the time for a just and honorable settlement of the Korean problem is not past, we must clearly recognize that the margin of success has become pitifully email. However, believing that this narrow margin still exists, the Philippines continues to sup- port the principle of unconditional cease fire—a cease-fire al at subsequent nego- tiations but not extorted at the point of a gun. We submit, Mr. Chairman, that the prin- ciples set forth in the supplementary report of the committee of three and now embodied in th> draft resolution submitted yesterday by the delegation of Israeli do not envisage this kind of a cease fire. The report, in its parag‘aph 6, represents a retreat from the position taken by the Security Council on June 27, u retreat from the position taken by the General Assembly on October 14, ‘and yet a further retreat from the position estab- lished in our resolution of December 14. How far, sir, can the United Nations keep retreating from established sound moral po- sitions without courting final disaster? A retreat in the course of battle is under- atandable and sometimes inevitable, but & retreat from right principles while a battle is betng waged for those very principles can- not be justified on any ground whatever. Paragraph 6 represents, in our opinion, a surrender to intimidation and blackmatl, The Peiping regime has made it utterly plain that it would not stop fighting the United Nations until we have agreed to hand over Formosa to it and allowed ft to sit in the United Nations. Petping has had the temer- ity to demand these conditions even while it continues to ignore our entreaties and proposals and while it continues to soak ite hands in the blood of our soldiers. My country, sir, knows the nameless terror and agony of war as few countries around this table do. Therefore, we understand the anxious desire of many delegations to ex- haust every possibility of avoiding a general war. But we also know that there is at least one thing that is worse than war itself, and that ts the degrading enslavement that would surely follow an abject surrender before the threats of a fanatic and implacable aggressor. We hold that paragraph & constitutes just this kind of abject surrender. Having turned our right cheek to Peiptng, and the left cheek also, we now say to Peiping in paragraph 5: “You may stop hitting me now and Killing my boys 60 that we can disouss how to reward you with the gift of Formosa and @ seat in the United Nations.” 1 the honorable delegatea who have or supported this paragraph to cor- rect me if I am wrong in thinking that this is the essential impression that lingers in the mind after a careful perusal of this aph, agraph & attempts’to purchase peace at the prive of and encoutaging a power that may be expected to take the full- est advantage of any sign of weakness that APPENDIX TO THE. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD pines also sponsored Jointly with the same | we show. The history of totalitarian aggres- sion teaches us that this 4s the road to dis- aster. The march of Communist aggression cannot be arrested by @ policy of moral re- treat and surrender. fivery such retreat from. @ position of moral strength end every such surrender of basic principle but serve to whet the appetite of the aggressor and to egg him on to further adventures. ‘ The goal of international communism is the domination of the world, and no show of weakness or attempt at appeasement like that which is evident in paragraph 5 will deter its leaders from that ultimate goal. Communists may change their tactics and modify their methods, but their final goal of world domination stands unaltered through all such cunning wiles and opportunistic stratagems. They will, as they did tn the last war, accept very eagerly the benefite of lend- lease and the benefits of UNRRA, and they will even abolish the Comintern in order to mollify their allies and set their suspicions and fears at rest. But as soon as the crisis is over and the free world is completely dis- armed, the Communists take off the mask of peaceful coexistence and resume their re- lentleas march toward their goal. This, sir, ia the kind of force we are con- tending with, and Peiping merely happens to be the latest and most formidable tnstru- ment of that implacable force. A show of weakness and the surrender of Principle will encourage, not deter, the ag- gressive designs of Peiping and its allies, The only thing that can deter them is a con- vincing demonstration of the firmness and solidarity of the free world. Munich showed the way to appeasement and disaster. But the United Nations has since blazed a new road of nonappeasement that rune through Iran, Greece, and Berlin, Because we stuck firmly to this road, the line against aggression was held. Today the road of nonappeasement has been extended to the valleys and jungles of Korea. Upon this road the United Na- tions stands today. If it abandons this path and out of misconceived prudence takes the tragio road back to Munich, it accepts defeat and loses its reason for being. We have heard moving appeals to the free nations of the world to close ranks. Such appeals to solidarity cannot be met on the basis of an admission of weakness and abject surrender to the aggressor. Our solidarity must rest on strength and firmness, on readiness to resist aggression, to identify it as such, and to name its perpetrators. There is no other basis for the common faith and common action of the free nations of the world. The only just and proper demonstration of solidarity which, in our judgment, the free world ought to make at this crucial hour 1a to approve 4 resolution containing para-~ graphs 1 to 4 of the supplementary report of the Committee of Three. If thie is re- jected by Peiping, we must then approve forthwith a resolution pinning the label of aggressor on the Pelping regime and provid- ing for further collective measures as may be required to check the aggression. However, having made sure that this is the plane of principle on which the Philip- pine delegation stands, and having regard for the views expressed by many delegationa, we shall not stand in the way of this reso- lution. Accordingly, we shall abstain on paragraph &, and if this is adopted, we shall abstain on the whole. Our attitude is not in any way influenced by the anticipation of Peiping’s possible ac- ceptance or rejection of these principles. It may well be that Peiping would accept para- graph 5 and reject the rest, Surely, what some consider to be prinatples acceptable to the aggressor cannot be zegarded as the Propet measure for the action of the United ttn te the purpors wd prince tthe ac are an nciples of United Nai pxpone Prine
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Krupp: What Price Expediency? EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ABRAHAM J. MULTER OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, March 1, 1951 Mr. MULTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to place in the Recorp an ar- ticle entitled “Krupp: What Price Ex- pediency?” written by Joseph W. Kauf- man, and which appeared in the Febru- ary 26, 1951, edition of the New Re- public, Mr. Kaufman ts a New York lawyer who was formerly deputy chief counsel for war crimes at Nuremberg, and chief United States prosecutor in the Krupp case. During World War IT he served as general counsel of the Smaller War Plants Corporation, and in 1949 and 1950 was chief counsel of the House Small Business Committee. The article follows: Krupp; Waat Price EXPEDIENCY? (By Joseph W. Kaufman) (Joseph W. Kaufman is a New York lawyer who was formerly deputy chief counsel for war crimes at Nuremberg and chief United States prosecutor in the Krupp case. Dur- ing World War II, he served as general coun- sel of the Smaller War Plants Corporation, and in 1949 and 1950 was chief counsel of the House Small Business Committee.) The recent freeing of the Krupp defendants by United States High Commissioner John J. McCloy in Germany and the restoration of the Krupp industrial properties to Herr Krupp have come as a real shock to the Amer- tcan people. Americans who remember World War I ettll have not forgotten the stories of “Big Bertha,” the monster gun named after Bertha Krupp, defendant Krupp’s mother. And Americans of World War II cannot forget the awesome reality of the main Krupp works at Essen until the pinpoint demolition of these plants; nor can they forget the other formidable mining and induatrial properties of the far-flung Krupp empire. When the Krupps are not only set free but restored to their largess, apparently rehabilitated with ECA funds, ordinary American folks throughout the country in- tultively feel that the whole thing must be wrong. Perhaps they vaguely remember that it was from the same Landsberg prison that Hitler and Hess were freed under the Ger- man Republic, The wholesale clemency now being prac~ tised toward war-crime defendants cannot be justified even as expediency, The Krupp action, on the contrary, suppiles the Russtan Communists with new propaganda material to the effect that we are now playing ball with the group which led the German {n- dustrialists in putting Hitler into power and in subjecting to Nazi control not only the labor unions but also the rest of German industry. Still worse, if we have freed the Krupps in order to be assured of their sup- port against the Communists, the Russians may actually be laughing up their sleeves. As proved in the war-crimes trial, the Krupps freely and actively collaborated with the Russian Communists, For about 3 years prior to Hitler’a rise to power they were able to develop and perfect their bittzkrieg tanks secretly from the rest of the world only be- cause Ruasta permitted them to do so in Ruse sia, In return, Krupp experts, wearing Rus- asian officer uniforms, taught and instructed Russian cadets as well as German personnel, Finally, in 1939, when Hitler signed up with the Russian Communists he had lambasted, and commenced World War II, the Krupps, unlike Frits Thyssen, did not leave Ger- many and forfeit their properties, but found it congenial to he on the side of the Com. munists. The prosecution and trial of the Krupps was no mean undertaking to be set aside lightly by the atroke of a pen. The trial lasted over 6 months, ‘There were 250 wit~ nesses called by one side or the other, and 4,500 documents were introduced into evi- dence. Each of the 12 defendants was per- mitted two German lawyers, and Krupp had an American lawyer also. Three judges from American courts presided. Significantly, if only in connection with the sweeping clem- elicy now accorded the defendants, no Krupp defendant ever took the stand to defend him- self or to submit himself to crogs-examina- tion on the charges. Eleven of the twelve Krupp defendants were convicted, and all received jail sen- tenoes. They were convicted on the basis of personal guilt, not guilt by association, and they were convicted by proof beyond a reasonable doubt as required by the best American standards. The 11 defendants, in- cluding Krupp, were convicted of the in- famous crime of using and abusing slave Jabor. Six of them, again including Krupp, were convicted of spollation and plunder- ing-—of using the German war to enlarge and extend the Krupp industrial and economic empire. None of the defendants was convicted on the aggressive-war count, charging the actual planning of aggressive war. However, the Krupp indictment charged the agressive- war allegations not only as a separate war- crime count by itself but also as part and parcel of the slave labor and the spoliation counts. This was for the purpose of showing that the Krupps, by indulging in their slave labor and spoliation activities, were not in the category of patriotic citizens obeying orders in time of war or acting under Hitler’s duress; that, in view of the Krupp part in secretly planning for war hefore Hitler and then boosting Hitler into power, the Krupps committed their war excesses with malice aforethought and criminal intent; and, most important of all, that in view of this past history they were not entitled to any mitiga- tion of punishment on a plea that they acted under higher orders. The judges were en- titled to give weight to the aggressive-war proof for this Mmited purpose, and perhaps this helps explain why the sweeping prop- erty-confiscation decree was added to the prison sentences, Judge William J. Wilkins wrote a concur- ring opinion stressing the point that the prosecution’s aggressive-war proof was 80 convincing and so compelling that there was “pullt up a strong prima facie case, as far as the implication of Guatav Krupp and the Krupp firm is concerned.” Gustav waa de- fendant Alfred Krupp’s father and could not be tried because of his senility. Judge Wilkins also stated that he concurred in dis- missing the aggressive-war count against the defendants only by giving them “the benefit of what may be called a very slight doubt, and although the evidence with respect to some of them was extraordinarily strong.” The judge summarized the high lights of this uncontroverted proof—the Krupp firm's clandestine development of armament, tanks, and submarines in violation of the Ver- sailles Treaty; its actual war plans and prep- arations, even before Hitler came into power, “in order that Germany may rise to fight again,” as stated and fully described in the firm’s own files; and Gustav Krupp’s leader- ship of the industrialists’ financial fund, which played such a vital part in boosting the then tottering Hitler into power. De- fendant Alfred Krupp sterted with the firm in 1925, was a deputy board member in 1936, and a full board member in 1938, He cer- A1113 tainly had knowledge of this background, and as a board member he participated. Moreover, as an early member of the Nazi Party and @ colone] in the Nasi fiying corps, he could not have been unsympathetic. could hardly ciaim that he perpetrated his slave labor and spoliation crimes only be. cause of Hitler and was, therefore, entitied to mitigation of punishment. The prosecution also proved that defend- ant Alfred Krupp received a very handsome reward from Hitler for his continued partic- ipatton in international criminality, This reward was the Krupp industrial properties. They had never belonged to Gustav, his father, who was not really a Krupp but had married Bertha, the Krupp heiress, and had adopted the Krupp name, And it was not Preordained under Krupp tradition or by the firm’s set-up thet Alfred would take over the properties even on his mother's death, Hitler, however, iasued a special decree tn 1943, the Lex Krupp, which placed the properties in Krupp family ownership in perpetuity, much like a kingdom of its own, and stated that this was done in recognition of Krupp’s incomparable efforts to boost the military potential of Germany. With Nazi approval Alfred took over. The proof against the Krupps, including detendant Alfred Krupp, on the slave labor count in the trial was devastating. It was shown that the Krupps employed 75,000 foreign workers, 25,000 prisoners of war and 6,000 concentration-camp workers. Their crimes against foreign workers were not only against Russians and Poles, whom the Ger- mans frankly treated as slaves and “sub- humans,” but extended to western workers— Dutch, Belgian, and French. Many of these workers were picked up in their own coun- tries in manhunts, sometimes right off the streets, and required to go to Germany to work for Krupp. Those who attempted to escape would find themselves 'n one of the Krupp “penal camps.” A Catholic priest was an inmate—and prosecution witness. Other recalcitrants would be sent to the Gestapo, All the pertinent provistor.s of the Geneva Convention for prisoners of war were vio- lated, and Alfred personally participated in instigating violations. Defendant Alfied Krupp cpproved and signod an appropriation of 2,000,000 marks for constructing a Krupp plant at Auschwitz, where concentration-camp workers would be freely available. At Essen, where he and his colleagues in crime could be eye-witnesses, 620 “Hungarian Jewesses,"" imported from concentration camps, were forced to engage in cruelly heavy labor outdoors and indoors, The girls, shorn of their hair and almost all clothing, lived a life of horror—with a bare cellar or worse for lodging, an open trench for air-raid shelter and filthy starvation rations for food. On this record—and on a record of spoliation and plundering activities of gigan~ tic dimensions and ruthless scope which will not be described here—tefendant Alfred Krupp received a sentence of 12 years in jail, which does not seem excessive; and all his property waa ordered confiscated. Great pressure was brought on Gen. Lucius D, Clay to disaffirm all the Krupp sentences, particularly the confiscation, But after pro- tracted study by his legal department and careful consideration, he affirmed; the prop- erty, however, “to be subject to” confiscation. During the administration of John McCloy, who, as high commissioner, succeeded Clay, nothing was ever done to put the confisca- tion into effect. In now annulling the con- fiscation, McCloy asserts that confiscation was not decreed in any other Nuremberg case, that nothing special was proved against defendant Krupp to warrant such discrimi. Nation against him, and that American tra« dition doss not favor confiscation. He for- that the proof against Krupp was very epecial—that Krupp obtained the industrial
Alll4 properties with Hitler's aid as a reward for ctiminality, that he used them as the Instru- mentality for perpetrating his elave-labor orimes, and that he enriched them by crimi- nal spoliation and plundering. What price expediency? Krupp has been welcomed back by the Germans as & war hero, instead of a war criminal, The Eng- lish, including conservative newspapers, have expressed bitter indignation, and so have the French. The Russians have been arm- ing themselves with this new propaganda material, perhaps while wondering tf they can make another deal with the Krupps. We, who criticize the UN on China, have created a new kind of international crime— crime without punishment. H.R. 1, Veterans’ Insurance Bill EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN E. RANKIN OF MISSISSIPPI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 19, 1951 Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Speaker, under permission granted me several days ago to extend my remarks, I am inserting a joint leiter of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the Disabled American Veterans, and AMVETS to each Member of the United States Senate, which makes quite clear the views of these veterans’ organ- Jzations on the amendment of H. R. 1, the veterans’ insurance bill, which passed the House on January 24, 1951, by a vote of 390 to 0. The letter referred to follows: My Dear Srnarorn: We, the undersigned, are concerned and confused by the an- nouncement made on the Senate floor on February 22 that a motion is to be made by Senator Wattsr F. Groner, probably on Monday, February 26, to substitute the bill 8. 64 for the twice House-passed H. R. 1 which was also unanimously reported by the Benate Finance Committee. It is our opinion that 8. 84 is merely stop- gap legislation and highly discriminatory against the service-connected disabled ex- serviceman. We concede that 8. &4 will take care of the able-bodied veteran. We are convinced that H. R. 1 1s good and meritorious legislation. It provides (1) uni- versal, automatic, gratuitous protection for all persons entering into the Armed Forces after June 27, 1950, in the amount of @10,- 000, (2) it provides protection for those individuala who are disabled by reason of service-connection disability by granting them the right to procure insurance at stand- ard Government rates after discharge, (3) the bill will result in substantial savings to the United Stetes Government of an esti- mated $60,000,000 per year and will, in the final analysis, remove the Government from the insurance business, (4) the bill would eliminate the need for excessive civilian and military manpower in administering an in- surance program in time of national emer- gency. The Assistant Administrator for In- aurance of the Veterans’ Administration, Mr. Harold Greining, has stated that we should mot repeat the experience of the last war where manpower was not available to ade- quately administer this program. The principles outlined in H. R. 1 have been advocated by the President in his budget message for 1951. They have heen endorsed by the Hook Coramission, which ‘was specifically eutablished to stidy ways and theans of the efficiency of the military service, Trey were also proposed by the Hardy subcommittee of the House Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Department, after 9 months’ extensive in~ vestigation, H. . 1 is endorsed by the un- dersigned three major veterans’ organiza~ tions who have specific mandates from their membership urging the passage of the bill. H.R. 1 ts endorsed by the General Account- ing Office and the Bureau of the Budget as well. Finally, H. R. 1 received extensive consid- eration over a period of about 6 months in the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee, which on two occasions wnanimously re- ported a bill carrying out the general pro- visions of a gratuitous indemnity approach. As ao result of their recommendations on two occasions, the House of Representatives has approved the proposal unanimously, It ig moonceivahle to us, in view of all the endorsements which H. R. 2 has received, that we could be very wrong in urging its passage. We therefore urge your serious con- sideration in opposing S. 84 which ts to be offered. Should 8. 84 be adopted by the Senate in licu of H. BR. 1, it is our consicered judgment that the House conferees will not accept this proposal and thus kill all chances of vitally necessary insurance legislation in this Con- gress. The adoption of 8, 84 in lieu of H. R. 1 would be a method of killing with kind- ness & progressive and meritorious piece of veterans’ legislation. In the firm belief that the primary respon- sibility of the Federal Government insofar aa subsidized insurance is concerne is to the service-connected disabled and does not extend to the able-bodied veteran, we urge that H. R. 1 be passed by the Senate as re- ported by the Senate Finance Committee, Sincerely yours, Omar B. KercnHum, Legislative Director, Veterans of Fore eign Wars of the United States, Francis M. Sutitvan, Legislative Director, Disabled Ameri- can Veterans. Acting Legislative Director, AMVETS. American Taxpayers Reduce National Debts for European Nations EXTENSION OF REMARES HON. PAUL W. SHAFER OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 27, 1951 Mr, SHAFER. Mr. Speaker, under permission to extend my remarks, I in- clude o radio talk broadcast over Michi- gan stations this week: My fellow Americans, only once in the past 19 years has our Federal Government made a payment on the national debt of the United Bta That was done by the Republican Rightieth Congress, which reduced the national debt by $6,000,000,000. Jt was done over the protests of the Truman administration, and was one of the reasons the President so vigorously denounced that Congress, In view of this record, it is a startling thing to learn that, in the past 34 yeara, American tax money haa gone to reduce the national debt of five Buropean countries to the tune of $1,200,000,000. You who are taxpayers in the Third Con- greasional District of Michigan have a share in this amazing bit of administration gen- erosity to foreign countries—even though it APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD was done without your consent and, very likely, without your knowledge. ‘Your share in this unau gift, figured conserva- tively on a per capita basta, was nearly $3,000,000. Today I want to tell you how it has hap- pened that the administration’s only debt- reduction program has been one for the ex- cluasive benefit of foreign countries and foreign taxpayers—-at your expense. In order to make Clear just what I am talk- ing about, let me ask you to suppose that you hed given a friend or relative a certain amount of money with which to start in business. Understand that you gave him the money—not merely loaned it to him. And your purpose in giving him the money to atart the business was to enable him to be tndependent and earn his own way there- after, Then suppose that you found that, instead of using the money to start in busi- ness, he had used all, or a large part, of that money to pay off old debts. I do not need to put your reaction to that into words. That, in simplest terms, is exactly what has been happening under the so-called Mar- shall plan, Since 1948, the United States hes given ths countries of Western Europe some $10,000,000,000. These gifts were in- tended, primarily, to help these countries restore thetr productive capacity and so earn their own way. Instead, five Euro- pean countries have used part or virtually all of the money to pay old debte. The story of what has happened {s dis- closed in the latest report of the Economic Cooperation Administration. As you know, ECA is the Federal agency responsible for carrying out the Marshall plan. Here’s the record of the payments made in this manner on the national debt of these five foreign countries: Norway has paid off $73,500,000 of its na- tional debt: Denmark, $88,300,000. Austria, who was our enemy in both world wars, had paid $85,000,000 on its national debt. France has paid $1'71,400,000. Britain’s socialist government has cut its national debt in this manner a total of 8784, 100,000, or more than three-quarters of a billion dollars. That's a grand total of foreign debt reduc- tion of $1,202,300,000. All by courtesy of the American taxpayer. And this has been done with the approval of ECA—the Federal agency created by the Congress to supervise the Marshall plan and direct expenditures made under that plan. Perhaps you will be interested in knowing just how this has been worked. Under the Marshall plan, ECA makes avail- able from funds voted by the Congress— that ts, from American tax moneys or from money borrowed py your Governmen cific amounts to the countries participating in the plan. These foreign governments, in turn, use this money to buy specific items of ma- chinery, raw materials, and other goods. The governments then sell these materials to the individual oltizens or business con- cerns of their respective countries. These individual purchasers pay their government for these materials in the currency of their country. This currency ts depostted in a special fund, called a counterpart fund. Five per- cent of this counterpart fund is set aside for the United States, to pay the EOA ad- ministrative expense and to buy atrategic materials which our country needs, Inol- dentally, the United States has found it very dificult to get the countries we are helping to sell us the strategic materials we need. But that is another sorry story. The remaining @5 percent of the moneys deposited in the counterpart fund Js given particular coun-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ductive purposes—that 1s for inyestment in industry and business which would help stimulate economic recovery and put the Buropean countries back on their feet. That sounds fine, doesn't it? Yet a former ECA official admits that in certain countries almost the entire amount of counterpart funds has been used for the retirement of debt—that is, for paying off the national debt of those countries. The latest ECA report bears out this state- ment. It shows that of the total counter- part funds which had been approved by ECA for use by foreign countries as of November 30, 1950, 28 percent—nearly one- fourth—was used to reduce the national debt of those governments. The excuse offered for ECA approval of this use of Marshall plan funds is that it would have increased inflation in these countries to use the money to build up productive en- terprises. Apparently it never occurred to the planners in Washington that this money could have been paid back to the United Statec and used to reduce our national debt of $256,000,000,000. Moreover, these very countries, whose national debt has been re- duced by American taxpayers’ money, are now looking to the same hard-pressed Amer- ican taxpayers for many more billions to help finance their military defense program. It’s interesting to note, in this connec- tion, that the per capita national debt of every one of these five European countries was already lower, in 1948, than the present per capita national debt of the United States. In fact, our country’s national debt, per capita, is 22 times that of Denmark’s— one of the beneficiartes of the administra- tion’s generosity. The administration always has one stock answer, one threadbare plea, whenever it is proposed to cut ECA appropriations, or whenever objection is raised to Marshall plan nations diverting products to iron curtain countries, or whenever any other criticlam of the Marshall plan 1s offered in Congress. We must not, we are told, “do anything to cause the people of Europe to feel that the United States no longer cares for their well-being,” or that “we are no longer stand- ing in their corner in the fight against com- munism.” They offer this plea, despite the fact that admittedly the people of Europe either are largely unaware of the @10,000,000,000 thus far spent under the Marshall plan or are re- sentful of American “charity.” ’ ‘There are some of us in Washington (in Congress and not in the executive branch of the Government, I can assure you) who have felt for a long time that some of this tender concern for people’s feelings should , be directed to the American taxpayer. Isn't it just possible that he sometimes wonders whether anyone cares for his well-being? \ I believe thet more and more American people are feeling that way. I believe that their mounting concern and anger arises not primarily from hurt sensitivities but from grave alarm over the threat which this and _myriad other forms of the administration's wastefulness hold for the solvency and secu- rity of the Nation. It was that very concern which prompted me, among other reasons, to vote against the Marshall plan in the first place. It was just because of this urgent need for concern for the American taxpayer—and the American economy—that I introduced a Joint resolution in the House this week, call- ing for revival and permanent establishment of the Hoover Commission on Reorganiza- ‘tion of the Executive Department. I believe the Nation, and the Congress, are in des- lperate need of the continuing counsel and aid of this highly competent national “citi- gen’s committee.” That need is under- scored by the President’s grandiose 1952 budget proposals. Yes; concern for the American taxpayer and his burden of national debt is long over- due. At stake are all of the things we cher- ish; at stake are our economic stability, our freedom, our military seourity, the preserva tion of our republic form of government— and even our cherished, and ofttimes mis-« Guided, desire to be a good samaritan to the Test of the world, Appeal for Unity EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ABRAHAM J. MULTER OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 20, 1951 Mr. MULTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to place in the Rrcorp the fol- lowing petition received by me from the Citizens Conference on International Economic Union, together with the sup- porting statement signed by its directors: APPEAL ror UNITY A PETITION TO THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES January 11, 1951. There is such disunity and cross purpose in our country today that it ts the duty of organizations such as ours to express their views to those who hold in their hands the destiny of our country and the peace and welfare of the world. We believe that both in and out of Con- gress free expression of views should be en- couraged, and that those who state their opinion should not be subjected to personal attack or intimidation. Bitter personal attacks upon our Preasi- dent and Secretary of State have seriously ‘undermined the influence of this great Na- tion, particularly in carrying out its foreign policy. Our billions and the young men we are calling to the colors at great sacrifice will lose much of their effectiveness if these at- tacks continue. The attacks against Woodrow Wilson be- gan much as those on the President and Secretary Acheson. They grew out of honest differences of opinion, but soon developed into a shameful orgy of misrepresentation and villification. In the end the peace was lost, the League was hopelessly crippled, and a Second World War was in the making. It would be a catastrophe if the United States should for the second time within the memory of living men forfeit the leadership of the world. This could easily come about. Other nations are not unmindful of our his- toric about-face following World War I, when the polictes of Woodrow Wilson, which had won almost universal support and had liter- ally become the hope of the world, were re- pudiated. We doubt if democracy, as we have known it, could survice another and more terrible world wat. This appeal is addressed to Con- gress in the hope that the representatives of the people will stand firm for those funda- mental policies which have the approval of @ vast majority of Americans and represent our best hope for avoiding another world war, Lovis H. Pinx, Chatrman, CLEVELAND RODGERS, Vice Chairman, Eenzst L. Bocart, Treasurer, Lenxorr Tonnre, Secretary, Citiaens Conference on International Economic Union, AI1I5 Nowpartigan Svreorr of ENLIGHTENED Formien Policy United States: We have asked the nations to put their faith in us but we do not trust each other. The personal attacks which have been made upon our Government, and our Secretary of State, in carrying out the man- date received from the Congreas and the President, have weakened the confidence of the world in our leadership and our ability to carry on conelstently and courageously a guided, desire to be a good samaritan to the democratic nations. United Nations: When the United Nations was born at San Francisco we believed that world unity had been achieved; that peoples would plan together and work out their problems; that there would be an end to major wars. Despite the many advances made through the United Nations and the great hope which atill clings to the possibilities of that body there is far leas unity and understanding today than at San Francisco in 1945. Not only are the nations further divided—they are compelled to choose between two bitterly hostile blocks. But we must not lose faith in the United Nations. It is still our best hope for peace. Korea and China: While our main problem lies with Russia and Europe, the Korean situation causes grave disunion in Congress and among our allies; it affects the sound development of all fundamental policies. We should have done a better job in rehabilitat- ing South Korea, as the Citizens Conference pointed out over 3 yeara before the attack by the North Koreans. If the United States had bullt up a stronger South Korea and had made it clear when we removed our Armed Forces that we would return to defend the Republic against military aggression, there might have been no attack. Mistakes have doubtless been made in ap- praising the strength and will of Communist China. If we had admitted the Peiping gov- ernment to the United Nations as our allies wanted us to do, and had not backed a re- gime which no longer governs China, events might have been different. If our forces had stopped at the thirty-elghth parallel, or with the taking of the northern capital, the Chinese might.not have attacked. But de- spite errors of judgment, the United Nations and the United States made no mistake in going into Korea to repel the aggressor and succor the Korean Republic which we had jointly created. Had we not done so, we would have sacrificed almost at its birth the power of the United Nations and its future usefulness. Had we failed to take the risk, small nations everywhere would have given up hope and made the best deal they could with the great powers. The strength and influence of the League of Nations was sapped when it allowed Italy to attack Abyssinia and Japan to take over Manchuria. Then and there the hope for the League as a world order which would protect amali peoples against aggressive war ended. In principle we did the right thing in Korea, though we have not yet succeeded in this difficult humanitarian adventure. We must see it through, but in dolng so we must realize that Ohina is not a natural enemy of the United Nations or the United States. We should not appease. Neither should we sacrifice civilization in North and South Korea and the lives of our own youth and of our allies to save the face of any individual, or the United Nations, or the United States, The solution of Korea must be evolved at the council table. Shall it be now or after more blood has been spilied? Obviously we cannot admit China to the United Nations #0 long as {t is at war with the body {t seeks to join. But to shed more blood to uphold procedure will not be tolerated by our people or our allies. All vital matters aif Korea and Asia can and should be
‘AlTIG } over the table. The discussion should in- elude the future admission af the Chinese Government, when it is no longer at war, and has agreed to a program approved by the United Nations. Aggressive communism: The sid we are giving to Yugoslavia baa had a sobering ef. fect upon that opinion in the United States which sought to combat communism as an anti-religious force. Can we not now say that as a matter of national policy it is not communism as such we are arming to com- bat, but revolutionary, expansionist com- munism which seeks to spread ite doctrines not by legitimate example, but by terror and force. A religious war against communism as such would be as futile as the religious wars of Europe which ravaged the Continent, brought hunger and misery, set back civili- zation, and promoted neither Catholicism nor Protestantism. For the North Atlantic Defense Treaty: Mr. Hoover's appeal, which has received con. sideration because he speaks above political partisanship, offers an easy but unthinkable retreat from the responsibilities we have as- sumed. The United States must go through with the obligations which it has pledged to Europe. We have covenanted not only support to the UN, which we must continue in ell honor, but (with the almost unani- mous ratification of the Senate) to carry out the North Atlantic Defense Treaty, along with Canada and 10 European countries. The treaty has been implemented at Brus- sels by the appointment of General Eisen- -hower as Supreme Commander. General Eisenhower cannot succeed unless he is backed by & large majority of Congress. Such arms and aid as these nations need we must help to supply. Our allies must be assured that they can rely upon the United States to carry out its obligations in good faith and full ‘measure. Tf there is any doubt of our commitment and our in- tention, Russia may consider our weakness ;an invitation to aggression, as happened in Korea. Rearming of Germany: There is great per- plexity in the public mind regarding the re- arming of Western Germany, not only in the United States but in the United Nations }and among our aliles. We must not forget that we fought the biggest war in history, ;at untold cost in human life and money, \to disarm Germany and Japan and bring them as partners into a society of self-gov- /erning nations devoted to peace and intere ‘national cooperation. Neither can we over- look the fact that the rearming of Germany j Wil be a direct challenge to Russia which ‘may help to promote a shooting war. More {than military strategy is at stake. The ‘decision so far as Germany is concerned ‘should be made primarily by the European nations close to both Germany and Russia, and by the Germans themselves. | Point 4: The development of technical as- Bistance for backward areas known ee point 4 ,and carried on in cooperation with the jUnited Nations is one of the most necessary and hopeful activities in which we are en- g! . Revolutionary communism is the [product of hunger and misery more than of ‘Marxian doctrine. To secure peace we must [tackle the fundamental causes of war and ifallow up technical asaistance with capital. European recovery under the Marshal) plan ds a tangible example of what may be ac- complished under point ¢ on a more ade- quate scale. Support for President and State Depart- iment; If our President and Secretary of State ere strengthened by support at home and ‘we provide sound leadership we can build up the defense forces of the free nations to ettective strength and jointly provide for the jcommon defense of our homes and those bu- man rights without which life is not worth diving. , \ Woe canot succeed in this great undertaking if the carping personal attacks upon our Bec- retary of State are continued in rancor and to serve party purposes. All peoples pray against resort to war. Only a strong and unified United States, in full cooperstion with the United Nations, can preserve the peace. Signed by the following directors of the Citizens Conference on International Eco- nomic Union, 60 Lexington Avenue, New York, N. Y.: Louis 8. Pink, chairman of the board, Associated Hospital Service of New York; Cleveland Rodgers, member, Olty Plan- ning Commission, New York City; Ernest L. Bogart, professor of eoonomios emeritus, Uni- versity of Illinois; Arthur #. Albrecht, chair- man, Department of Business Administra- tion, OONY; Harry Best, professor of eco- nomics, University of Kentucky; George Boas, professor of philosophy, Johns Hopkins Uni- veraity, Baltimore; Gladys Boone, chairman, division of social studies, Sweetbriar College, Va.; Louis E. Fine, lecturer and lawyer, New York City; Rt. Rev. Charles K. Gilbert, suf- fragan bishop, Protestant Episcopal Diocese of New York; Karl W. H. Scholz, professor of economios, University of Pennsylvania, Phila- deiphte; Charles J. Turck, president of Maoc- aleater College, St. Paul, Minn,; Lenore Tur- ner, secretary, Citizens Conference, New York City. Tribute to Thomas A. Edison by George E. Stringfellow EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HARRY FLOOD BYRD OF VIRGINIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, March 2 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Rsecorp an editorial entitled “Gratefully We Honor Thomas A, Edison,” published in the Call, of Paterson, N. J., on February 10. The editorial makes reference to the tribute paid to Mr. Edison by Mr. George E. Stringfellow, of East Orange, N. J. There being no objection, the edito- rial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: GaaTeruLLy We Honor THomas A. Enison Tomorrow is the birthday anniversary of New Jersey's illustrious inventor, who is still in the forefront of the great inventive gen- juses of America and the world. Thomas Alva Edison first saw the light of day 104 years ago, and while etill in his teens began his phenomenal inventive career thet was to bless humanity with the marvels of electric light, power, and heat, and with hundreds of other inventions that brought us such universal joys as the phonograph, the talk- ing mation picture, and the improved tele- phone. Paterson Rotary, which believes with the Call that Edison's birthday should be hon- ored and commemorated by every American, especially here in his home State of New Jersey where these modern miracles flowed from his inspired brain, practiced what it preached at Thursday’s meeting by devoting the program hour to pay homage to this truly heroic American, And no more appro- priate way could this outetanding Rotary Club find to high-light the occasion than to have as the orator of the day, George &, Stringfellow, vice president of Edison In- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD dustries, who worked side by sids with the ‘wisard of Menlo Park with tireless devotion to produce and mske available the products of Edison’s genius to every home and to every nation in the world, Biringfellow inspiringly recounted the ob- atactes and , which would have made most men give up in despatr, but which Edison with his never-give-up phi- losophy turned into stepping stones of suc- cess. One of these misfortunes was his deafness, caused by a conductor who picked him up by the ears at the age of 12, an affiic- tion which instead of crushing his optimistic spirit goaded him on to the discovery of the phonograph and an improved telephone transmitter that first made the telephone commercially practical, because Bell's mag- neto receiver was too weak for long dis- tances, The spirit of Thomas A. Edison, the eter- nal optimist and champion of free Amer!- can enterprise, is needed today as never be-~ fore to lighten our way and lift us through the world’s encireling gloom victorious, Through his inventions and scientific dis- coveries, this beloved genius and benefactor of mankind has placed in our hands unlim- ited possibilities, which if rightly utilized by an appreciative citizenry, all working to- gether, in a spirit o. patriotism to step up production instead of pulling apart and lay- ing down our tools in a spirit of selfishness to cripple it, will once again bring us safely through the shadows and dispel tyranny's latest threat in the guise of godless com- munism. The St. Lawrence Seaway EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THEODORE FRANCIS GREEN OF RHODE ISLAND IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, March 2 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. GREEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Rscorp a statement dealing with the St. Lawrence seaway, made by Charles E. Wilson, Director of Defense Mobilization, verore the House Committee on Public orks. There being no objection, the state- ment was ordered to be prinied in the Recorp, as follows: STaTEMENT BY CHARLes E, WILSON BEFORE THE House ComMitrzx on PuBLIC Woaks Iam here this morning to support legista- tion that will enable construction to begin as soon as possible on the St. Lawrence seaway and power project as one that is both vital to our national economic strength and urgent in terms of our mobilization require- ments, My remarks this morning will be brief, the details concerning this project being sup- plied by other witnesses who will appear before you or have already done so, I wish |
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD examined these studies and concur entire}: in their conclusions and recommendations, The mobilization problems we face today have been set forth very clearly and suc- cinctly by the President. In his recent Eco= nomic Report, he said: “In the first place, we must achieve a large and very rapid ine crease in our armed strength, while helping to strengthen our allies. This means more trained men in uniform, more planes, tanks, ships, and other military supplies. Second, we must achieve, as rapidly as possible, an expansion of our capacity for producing mili- tary supplies. This * * * must be large enough to enable us to swing rapidly into full-scale war production !f necessity should require. And third, we must maintain ana expand our basic economic strength * * * so that we can continue to grow stronger rather than weaker if it should prove neces- sary to continue a defense effort of great size for a number of years.” I need not elaborate on the central and critical importance which steel has tn a pro- gram to step up our military strength, ex- pand our industrial capacity, and strengthen our industrial base generally. At all times— in peace, in war, and in every stage of pre- paredness for war-—steel is fundamental. Our entire industrial economy is based upon it. Stee] is required for producing munitions and military supplies of almost every char- acter and it is required for the expansion of our capacity to produce these vital items. Moreover, during periods of emergency many of our most critical shortages are traceable to the fact that large quantities of steel must be diverted to the defense effort. With re- spect to problems resulting from the steel shortage during World War II, the Special Senate Committee Investigating the National Defense Program, said: “Steel, always the backbone of America’s economy, is the keystone of our war produc- tion. But it has come very close to being the stumbling block. Almost all of our stra- tegic material shortages today could be re- leved sooner if we had steel. The aviation gasoline program, the synthetic rubber pro- gram, the shipping program, the aircraft pro- gram, all have suffered for lack of steel. We have been short of both gross tonnage and the specialized types of steel. Our fuel oil and gasoline shortages, our farm machin- ery shortage, our railroad problems, our hous- ing difficulties, could be relieved if sufficient steel were available.” With this recent experience in mind, the expansion of steel capacity and related facili- ties is being pushed to the fullest extent possible. As this expansion proceeds, we face a steadily growing problem of securing a sup- ply of tron ore that is adequate for the ex- panded steel-making capacity. Without a matching increase in the supply of tron ore, an increase of capacity, whatever its size, can do us no good. At this critical juncture we must face the fact that the reserves of high-grade ore which have been the mainstay of the steel industry for 60 years are running out. Whether their practical exhaustion is only a decade away or will not overtake us for two or three decades more, we face the hard fact that the annual supply which they yield is dwindling year by year. Meantime our re- quirements of ore are moving up sharply. This means that our dependence on foreign ore will increase year by year. It means that because of this growing dependence we must be concerned with the development of for~ eign sources and with means of insuring that supply from these sources actually reaches American steel mills, The dimensions of this problem can be quickly stated. The ingot capacity of the American steel industry is now being expand- ed to an expected total of 115,000,000 tons by the end of 1962, it is believed that fur~ ther expansion at 8 rate of about 2,000,000 tons a year is feasible thereafter, provided the necessary ore can be brought in. Our thinking, therefore, must be in terms of a Capacity of 130,000,000 ingot tons by 1960. The NSRB report before you sets forth the compelling reasons to believe that to Operate a 130,000,000-ton steel industry in 1960 might require as much as 160,000,000 gross tons of ore, Furthermore, if the ore Tequirements run that high, we would be forced to look to sources outaide the United States for more than 40,000,000 tons of ore a year. Unleas we plan now to assure & sup- ply of this size in 1960 we may find ourselves unable to utilize the steel industry we can have by then, vital as it is sure to be to our economic strength and military security. We are using 1960 as a goal simply because this represents about the longest look ahead that we can reasonably take in staking out our plans for the longer pull. It should be emphasized, however, that the task of ob- taining sufficient ore in 1960 is but a pro- longation of the task of obtaining sufficient ore during the intervening years. It is widely felt in the industry that as early as 1955 we shall begin really to feel the pinch of our dwindling domestic supply. Other witnesses will testify to the efforts that have been made by a number of our steel companies to discover new reserves of iron ore. One such reserve—very large and very promising—is now in process of develop- ment in South America to meet the growing needs of American stee] mills, Another im- portant and promising reserve has been dis- covered on this continent in Labrador, These iron ore reserves lie close to the sur- face, which makes them of particular im- portance in a situation where other sources may be cut off either partially or entirely. Once active production is under way, it can be rapidly expanded by the simple device of putting additional scoop shovels to work. This ts a characteristic possessed in the past by much of the Lake Superior reserves, where open-pit mining continues to be the pre- dominant method. As the operation pro- ceeds, however, less and less of the remain- ing reserves is capable of being immediately opened up. That is why our annual supply of iron ore from these reserves is dwindling and why we must look elsewhere for the readily expansible supply that we must have in time of emergency. These are the fundamental considerations that have brought me to the conclusion that the 8t. Lawrence seaway—in addition to its undoubted general contribution to our trans- portation system—is essential if we are to put our steel production, which ig to say our entire mobilization effort, on a solid and secure foundation. Without the seaway we shall become steadily more vulnerable in this most strategic of all strategic industries. We must not permit that to happen. This is a dual-purpose project, however, and the seaway is only one of its purposes. In my own thinking this phase alone provides the overwhelming case for approving the project and rushing its construction. But electric power is also essential to defense pro- auction, At the outset of World War II the private and public power systems of the Nation had substantial reserves of electric generating ca- pacity. By contrast, however, recent esti- mates indicate that In many regions margins of reserve capacity are now relatively small and in certain areas there will continue to be shortages for several years tn spite of major capacity expansion programs. Moreover, experience in 2 years has demon- strated that although capacity may be ade- quate to mest civilian loads, the impact of mobilization requirements must be expected to make an additional cheap power supply essential, Increased production of the aluminum, ferro-alloys, and other electro- metallurgical and electrochemical products which mobilization requires can be achieved only by increased use of electric power. That Ai117 is why electric power projects throughout the country are being pressed to early com- pletion and new ones are being planned. None of these 1s more important than the 8t, Lawrence proj-*t which will furnish large quantities of auditional power to important industrial areas where critical shortages were felt in both wars. We need the seaway and we need the power too, both for the special needs of defense and for our economic strength over the longer pull. In all this our Canadian neighbors have a joint interest. We all realize that the na- tional security of our two countries is cloasly linked. Our defense plans have to a sig- nificant degree been worked out jointly and it is the joint operation of our free economies that gives this continental defense effort ite essential industrial base. The new trans- portation route and the additional power supply that the St. Lawrence dual-purpose project will make available will contribute to the development of Canada's huge re- sources and to making her an even stronger — partner of the United States, whether in peace or in war. As Director of Defense Mobilization, I have had to weigh the advantages I have dis- cussed against the cost, in terms of man- power and materials, -vhich the construction of this project would impose. My support of the project, therefore, takes into account tnis important consideration. To explain my judgment on this let me point out that none of the materials re- quirements set forth .n the NSRB report constitutes as much as one-half of 1 pers cent of our annual supply. For example, the 30,000 tons of steel a year required for the project is something less than three one- hundredths of 1 percent of our current tne got production. The copper requirements of 600 tons a year amounts to one-twentleth of 1 percent of the annual supply from domestic ores alone. Even in the cage of cement, where the fraction is largest, 750,000 barrels a year is approximately three-tenths of 1 percent of the annual supply that can be counted on during the 6-year period of construction. In each instance, therefore, the amount of materials required is 80 small as to be negii- gible in the total mobilization framework. The same ie true in the case of manpower. In addition to the manpower engaged in producing and movinr the materials needed for the project, its construction will require 7,000 American workers on the gite. This is equivalent to hardly more than one one-hun- dredth of 1 percent of the civilian labor force. It is with these insignificant fractions of our available supply of materials and man- power that we can purchase, if we act wise~ ly and promptly, the vital and strategic ad- vantages that construction of the St. Laws rence seaway and power project can confer. It is my hope that promptly upon conclusion of these hearings the committee will over- whelmingly approve this legislation and send it to the floor of the House for early action. Gre-t Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway and Power Project EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. GEORGE D. AIKEN Or VERMONT IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, March 2 (legisiative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. AIKEN. Mr. President, yesterday I had printed in the Appendix of the Recor> a statement by Mr. Small, Chair- man of the Munitions Board, before a
All18 House committee, in regard to the St. Lawrence seaway. I neglected to ask consent to have printed in that con- nection General Marshall's introductory statement, which should have been printed preceding the printing of the testimony of Mr. Small, I now ask unan- imous consent to have General Mar- shall’s introductory statement printed in the Appendix of the Recorp. The testi- mony of Mr. Small, to which General Marshall referred, was printed in yes- terday’s Recorp, There being no objection, the intro- ductory statement was ordered to he printed in the Recorp, as follows: GREAT Laxgs-ST. LAWRENCE SEAWAY AND Powsgr Prosxcr (Statement of Secretary of Defense General Marshall before the Public Works Com- mittee of the House of Representatives, Wednesday, February 21, 1951) Mr. Chairman, gentlemen, the Department of Defense, including the Joint Chiefs of Staff, supporta the House joint resolution now before your committee which would permit implementation of the St. Lawrence seaway and power project and recommends its adoption by the Congress. Our support is based on the advantages to national defense that this project offers. First, the seaway, when completed, will in- crease the fiow of high-grade iron ore for the production of steel for munitions and other purposes from the Labrador-Quebec area, which ia now being developed. Unless the seaway is built, obtaining ore from this new source will present serious problems of transportation, including the hazards of war- time sea transportation. On the other hand, the accessibility of the Labrador-Quebec area made possible by the seaway would sup- plement our present supply and would fur- nish a substantial additional source if our present primary source should be seriously reduced. Freedom from submarine attack does not, of course, mean full security. The riak of interruption of the new seaway by enemy sabotage must be faced. The danger of sabotage, however, ts already of critical importance at the locks at Sault Ste, Martie, through which our Lake Superior ores are brought in such vast quantity. Until the seaway is built, almost the whole of our fron-ore supply ts subject to interruptions by a single act of sabotage there. Second, the power project in connection with the seaway will provide additional sources of cheap and independent power so necessary, especially in the case of an all-out mobilization. Third, the seaway will facilitate the trans- portation of munitions to overseas bases. Moreover, in case of atomic attack, transpor- tation could be diverted from one city to another. It is realieed that the seaway will be closed for montha every year beonuse of ice conditions, but that is equally true of the present Great Lakea transportation route fram the Mesebi Range to which ali inter- ested parties have successfully adjusted their operations. Fourth, the seaway will afford access to additional shipbuliding and repatring facili- ties always very necessary in time of war to tho maintenance of our supremacy on the high seas. Finally, it should increase the capabilities of mutual defense between Canada and the United States. . I have brought with me Mr. Small, Chair- man of the Munitions Board, who can ex- plain in some detall the industrial mobiliza- tion aspects of the project. For the record, I want to add that the project has had the approval of the Depart- ment of Defense in the past and that I sup- ported it before a committee of Congress as Secretary of State. We are atill in the fortunate position of being able to buy time, insofar as this project ia concerned. We have not yet run short of iron ore in continental United States. Our annual supply from the Lake Superior region Ys declining, however, in a period when our requirements are mounting rapidly. We must have other sources readily available. It is urgent that this project be begun promptly, so that by the time we must de- pend heavily on foreign sources of ore supe ply it will be ready. Negro GI Record in Korea EXTENSION OF REMARES HON. HENRY CABOT LODGE, JR. OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE SENATE OP THE UNITED “TATES Friday, March 2 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. LODGE. Mr. President, one of the most encouraging military develop- ments in our history has been the par- ticipation of colored Americans in the fighting in Korea. My own experience both with the American and the French Armies, long ago impelled me to urge that colored and white soldiers be inte- grated as much as possible. In th.s con- nection, the dispatch by Mr. Robert R. Brunn in the Christian Science Moni- tor, which has been called to my atten- tion by Mr. Clifford C. Douglass, of Bos- ton, is of particular interest. Therefore, I ask unanimous consent to have it print- ed in the Appendix of the Recorp. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Recorp as follows: Nearo GI Record in Korza ComsBats For's “Bras” TUNE (By Robert R. Brunn) SAN Franoisco.—The record of American Negro troops in Korea has been of tremen- dous value in combating Communist racial discrimination nda against the United States in Asia, reports Thurgood Mar- shall, special counse? for the National Asso- ciation for the Advancement of Colored People. Mr. Marshall had just returned to the United States after more than a month in Korea and Japan where he completed the firat nongovernmental investigation of treat- ment of American Negro soldiers at the front ever made. OUTSTANDING RECORD Negro troops have established a record that defies comparison with whites, Mr. Mar. shall believes, despite segregation in Korea which he claims has led to hurried, unfair courts martial and heavy sentences which have amounted to discrimination. ‘ Through the NAACP, Mr. Marshall will continue to press for the reversal of all but $8 of 50 court-martial convictions of Negroes to date. This follows front-line talks with troops involved, the men them- selves, and examination of court records. He makes a plea for the complete integra- tion of Negroes into Army Unite, defining this as fitted in as to merit, wherever & man is needed. At present, he said, Negroes in American forces are usually not integrated below a battalion level. That ts, the small- est mixed anit is a battalton with ali-Negro and all-white companies. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD LONG BATTLE SERVICE He reports that the all-Negro Twenty- fourth Infantry Regiment, with predomi- nantly Caucasian officers, has been fighting at the apex in its United Nations sector almost slways since entering battle in July last year. It is his conviction that an equally trained and educated Negro soldier will run no faster and no slower than any other man in battle. He told of Negro bravery, devotion to duty, and staggering casualties. As for the courts martial of 50 Negroes, $2 of them for misbehavior in the presence of the enemy, he believes this an unreal- istic figure. This figure ts for the Twenty- fifth Division, of which the Twenty-fourth Infantry is a part. In this division the ratio is one Negro to between every three and four whites. Yet, he says, only 2 white sole diers were convicted compared with the 32 Nogroes. UNEQUAL PENALTIES CHARGED He gave parallel cases \ hich, he sald, were typical. One was that of a white soldicr at a forward position who disappeared and later was found way behind the lines. He was given a 5-year sentence, later lowered to 1 year hy the division commander. J. P. Morgan, a Negro, was charged with being absent from his outfit and sen- tenced to life imprisonment. He had shown he was hospitalized at the time, during a period of manpower shortage when only great need would have allowed hospitaliza- tion. On NAACP protest, this sentence was commuted to 5 years and suspended by the Army review board in Washington. WANTS MASS TRIALS ENDED Mr. Marshall told of many other cases of court martial in the heat of battle where he feels discrimination, which he traces to seg- regation of Negroes in the Army, operated to bring @ finding of guilt and unusually long sentences that were not justified. In his to Gen. Douglas MacArthur, Myr. Marshall asks that what he calls mass trials be ended—that is, a practice which he describes as running them through one after another. He asked more time for the preparation of defense cases, and trial in an atmosphure where justice is more posatble. He told of several trials which lasted less than 50 minutes, including all arguments, statements, and formalities, Most of these brought life sentences. NEGRO COURT AIDES Without waiting for a complete report from Mr, Marshall, the NAACP has repre- sented 21 Negro servicemen before the re- view board In Washington. Four men who received 10 years each were exonerated. Six others had life sentences commuted to 20 years, another to 15, another to 10, four sen- tenced to 20 years were reduced to 5 years each. There were other reductions. In Korea, he said, the men Nave had the right to ask for enlisted men on the court, and Negro enlisted men have sat, One de- fense counsel was a Negro officer. Some of the charges have been preferred by Negro officers. He said that both the Navy and the Atr Force in Japan have racial integration, and, to the best of his knowledge, the Air Force is the most complete of all. Thia inte- gration includes officers. But, from his observation, the Army in Japan has absolutely no integration. He said there was not a single Negro among the hundreds of soldiers and officers in the Su- preme Command, Allied Powers headquar- tere in the Daichi Building. He also re- marked the absence of Negroes in the elite military police force which guerds General martial conditions, d to the smallest de- tall, is being made by the Judge Advocate General's offive in Tokyo.