APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSION The reduction of mail delivery, espe- cially in Los Angeles, will be a great in- convenience to the public because of our increase in population, and the unprece- dented growth and expansion since the war. We are proud of the fine services ren- dered by the Los Angeles Post Office, and we will resist and oppose any plan or at- tempt to reduce its efficiency, curtail its services to the public, or reduce the mo- rale of its employees. I have written a letter of protest to the Postmaster General which reads as follows: . Aprin 21, 1950. Hon. Jess= M, DoNALDSON, The Postmaster General, Post Office Department, Washington, D.C. Dear Mr. Donarpson: In reference to the propcsed order to reduce mail service to one a day in residential areas and a proportion- ate reducticn of parcel post and mail deliv~ eries in business districts, I desire to regis- ter my opposition to this proposed change believing that it will not bring about econ- omy commensurate with the reduction in service and convenience to the public, and that it will increase unemployment. Iam confident that the public’s reaction to your new order will be strong opposition, es- pecially in the Los Angeles area with its tre~ mendous expansion and increase in popula-~ tion. , In my opinion, the mail-delivery service to the public, which has become so appreciated and so efficient, should be the last place to economize in attempting to reduce the post- al deficit, making the public and the postal employees the victims. I am confident that other means can be found in the Department to bring about economy rather than reduc- ing the service in this manner to the public. Very truly yours, Gorpon L. McDonoucH, Member of Congress, Fifteenth Dis- trict, California. The American Way—How May We Improve It? EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. J. HARRY McGREGOR OF oHTO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES . Monday, April 24, 1950 Mr. McGREGOR. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I am insert- ing an essay written by Mr. Charles Philip Bolin, of Mansfield, Ohio. Mr. Bolin is one of the winners of the annual essay contest sponsored by the Depart- ment of Ohio American Legion and the Auxiliary. Approximately 75,000 essays were written and 12 winners were chosen. Philip Bolin was one of that 12. The title, Mr. Speaker, this year was “The American Way—How May We Im- prove it?” The work of this young man certainly merits the time of every Mem- ber of Congress to carefully analyze his recommendations. I am indeed very thankful, Mr. Speak- er, that the American Legion and the Auxiliary sponsor such a program and I am grateful that somany young people— the youth of today and the manhood and womanhood of tomorrow—will’ devote XCVI—App.——186 ration of an essay of this type. Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Mr. Philip Bolin, of Mansfield, Ohio, for his en- deavors and his achievement, and I am happy to submit his essay for your consideration: THe AMERICAN Way—How May WE IMPROVE Ir? (By Charles Philip Bolin) After the great debate had ended and Jef- ferson had completed drefting the Declara- tion of Independence, une Members of the Continental Congress signed one of the most important documents of all times. It and the Constitution, which was drafted 12 years later, cast the mold for the American way— the way of democracy. The foundation of democracy is this famous phrase of Jefferson’s. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their Just powers from the consent of the governed.” The American way can be improved by studying these words in the light of today. I. All men are created equal. To improve our American way, we must believe that one American is basically as good as another, regardless of race, creed, or color. We should support the civil-rights pro- gram that both political parties are backing. We should each individually fight intoler- ance. When remarks are made intending to cast suspicion on our fellow Americans, purely on the grounds of race or color or religion, we should denounce them as un- American. II. Men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. Communism, nazism, and fascism all preach that the only rights the individual has are those given him by the state. We, too, believe that if a man has rights, those rights must come from somewhere. Our forefathers taught that they come from God. We must do a real educational job in the schools, in the churches, in our political parties and through the press and radio, as to the importance and rights of the in- dividual. Since we believe that those rights come from God, we should strive to increase religious interest in America. : Long ago William Penn said, “Those people who are not governed by God will be ruled by tyrants.” The founding fathers believed this so strongly they risked their lives to de- fend it. If we preach that same thought to all America we can overcome that active minority which is trying to sell communism -' and destroy the individual. «ei IID, Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happi- ness. To improve the American way of life we should take additional steps to protect those rights, such as: 1. Better study of the causes of crime, and combined drives by educational and reli- gious institutions to improve morals. 2. Active interest in the civil-rights pro-< 7 gram that our Government has started. wy, 8. Greater interest by individuals in the poor and the unfortunate, so that the whole . Job is not left up to public agencies. wt! 4 A program providing greater financial incentive to teachers who, after all, must ‘ carry a part of the responsibility of teach- % ing children about life, the importance of ; AL RECORD + ont many hours of time and study i in prepa- io A2941 We believe that government is for the We do not believe that the child is The individual is the people. born for the state. important thing. The American way of life will continue and expand only if our fellow Americans be- lieve it as strongly as did Jefferson, Washing~ ton, Franklin, and Adams. If Hollywood and the combined radio and television net- works could plan a program assuring a cer- tain number of motion pictures and broad- casts a year featuring plays built around this fundamental idea, much could be done to stir interest and enthusiasm. To sum up, the way to improve the Amer- ican way of life 1s to take sericusly the slo- gan, “Freedom 1s everybody’s business.” A Century of Progress EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. PHILIP J. PHILBIN OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, April 18, 1950 Mr. PHILBIN. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- ORD, I include, in part, a recent editorial from the Clinton Daily Item entitled “A Century of Progress,” written by the edi- tor, Mr. Orra L. Stone: As we turned the caiendar for March the picture was not pleasant with strikes across the country strangling production in basic industries, shackling communication and transportation, with the headlines screaming the news of trouble at the coal mines, with workers on welfare, freight cars standing idle and householders suffering from empty bins; with our gigantic steel mills notify- ing their customers “‘no coal, no steel” in the second quarter of 1950; with 10,500 dealers of one auto concern alone, employing more than 200,000 persons, idled by a strike, with more pay, less working hours, seniority, pri- ority, slow-downs and pensions demanded; with millions of man-hours lost and billions of dollars wasting down the drain of chain- action walk-outs, coupled with delusion, confusion, personal and group hatreds, mis- understanding, political influence, bargain- ing and bickering, injunctions and law ac- tions, union factual fights, referendums and negotiations, all seemingly the price of peacetime production. And yet, at heart, the men and women who are parties to this apparently unending con- flict are all good Americans—at least, almost all. Sometimes it makes many Clintonians wonder if this is America after all, and to “inquire if it is the fruit of two ghastly world ' wars in a single generation, or whether it is the concept our founding fathers who left us a heritage of freedom to be preserved and ‘defended. We stop and ask are we doing * Justice to this land of opportunity? *” The freedom of enterprise which guided Erastus Brigham Bigelow to sow the seeds of progress in our midst never visioned that a sucessors would be virtually handcuffed and victims of misapplied rights. aries All of us admit that strikes are legal, but -y most of us question whether they are loyal to “America when they throw this community fi and all others and the Nation’s total econ- omy out of gear. To many it seems they sah constitute the virus that is slowly poisoning liberty; and the pursuit of true happiness, as igthe minds of men and women whose toil against mere pleasure. . IV. Governments are instituted among . Say nS * agntanys hye 8 and skill are critically needed most in the struggle for world survival. men, deriving their just powers from the ‘ds Neither this community nor the Nation consent of the governed. 4." . at large can withstand the repeated impact
A2942 and shock of constantly recurring strikes which constitute positive proof of a crum- pling strength for employer, er'oree ard America itself. Could it be .b - Mov vs fifth column is setting the United States up for that “Sunday punch”? More and more we are awakening to the dangers of regimentation of any kind and Getecting the evils of pitting one class against vrermer and many believe it is high time that we Americans “stop, look, and listen” be- fore our economy runs off the track and is wrecked completely. Today erxploz er and employee appear to be deadlockec in .tcusinds of industries and stand impotent due to the peculiar phrase- Clogy in cry lews covewning labor relations and totes’: .. 4%, Go u.- and misinter- pretations of meaning. Sure.y mo progress can be attained without confidence between employee and employer and no pay checks, dividends, new producis, er -~+‘om of raw materials can flow SG ur. >. the convulsion of strikes is eliminated and employee and employer sit duwn to develop a set of “ground rules” for cooperatively working together. The latest and biggest riddle seems to be the writing by Congress of tho new ticket for social security, and until that eventuates no American emvlover knows what he faces and neither do the umior.s, This much ap- pears to be certain, all of us must keep work- ing while a better and firmer bridge of under- standing is being built. It is apparent to the man on the street that some evil influence is jeopardizing the sacred rights and privileges to earn an honest dollar by an honest day’s work. It probably is of foreign origin at its root because it can~- not be purebred American policy. Great industries are imperiled, great cities - are idle, purchasing power is frozen from coast to coast, with wives and children, the putcher, the baker, and the candlestick maker all feeling the pinch when the head of the household is not working. Let’s all stay on the job while employees and employers figure out a practical solu- tion to the complicated problems of pen-« sions and the like. Any other course spells disaster for all of us because losses now occurring will never be regained. Let’s not let our Nation down. We are advised that we are in a period of prosperity, but it seems strange that if at such a time the Government cannot live within its income, what will it do if we suffer a serious recession in business? ‘With a public debt of more than a quarter of a trillion dollars which is daily being added to we are informed that the interest alone on it is 5% billions of dollars annually, @ total more than all the expenses of Gov- ernment in 1933. To justify spending more than our in- come, some people allude to what the Gov- ernment is doing for the little fellow, but it is well to look at what the Government is doing to the little fellow and to note that it is making the small man smaller. If the little fellow uses a telephone he pays a tax; if he travels by rail or bus his ticket includes a tax; if he buys gasoline for his car he pays a tax; if he goes to a baseball game he pays a tax, and if his children go to the movies they pay a tax. If the program now proposed is adopted the average workingman will have to work 67 days each year to earn the money to pay his taxes to the Federal Government alone and that is what the Government ts doing to the little fellow. If the spenders really want to help the little fellow, they should allow him to keep more of the money he earns for his labor so that he can spend it as he pleases Instead of having it taken from him and sent to Washington to allow bureaucrats to spend it as they think best. Men intoxicated with power will never voluntarily surrender the power to spend the money of other people and the Government will not repeal a single war tax now being collected until forced to do so by public sentiment. The Nation’s plain trouble is debt and taxes and we cannot cure it by more debt and more taxes. The only way out is to cut current expenditures. The so-called good old days were not so rough, at that. The first year Federal in- come taxes were slapped on the American public, in 1913, Uncle Sam snatched only $71,880,000 from our pockets and that sum is not enough to cover what the Federal Government blew in last year to support potato prices. It is a vastly different picture that presents itself to this year’s graduates of Clinton High School, and from other educational institutions as they enter upon their life work as go-getters, than that which faced the young people of this town, in 1900, when the semicentennial was observed. That year, the Nation had a debt of $1,263,- 416,918 or a per capita debt for each man, woman, and child of $16.60 which was a pret- tier picture than that presented 30 years be- fore, in 1870, when the national debt totaled $2,436,453,209 or $61.76 per capita. The generation that came upon the scene between 1900 and 1930 saw its per capita share of the Nation’s debt rise from $16.60 three decades previously to $315.45 but that was merely a bagatelle compared to the 1949 per capita debt borne by each of us which reached the astronomical height of $1,695.46 last year. In 1900, Congress appropriated $698,912,~ 982.88 to run the United States Government, but in 1949 Federal appropriations totaled $48,272,280,457.59. The young men and women who step out of our schools, this centennial year, face a situation entirely different from that which was met by their parents and with the bleak fact before them that the United States will have no Marshall plan backed by a generous nation on either continent to help them. They see many of the countries of western, Europe and Great Britain, which have em- braced socialism, unable to stand on their own financial feet with the very existence of these nations entirely dependent on the taxpayers of the United States. The only hope seems to be that these young people will plainly discern that it will be prudent for this country to hold fast to its democratic system of government and to put our financial house in order and aid in warding off the concentration, in Wash- ington, of the powers of local governments, including police powers and to halt the im~ position of creeping but ever-advancing socialistic programs. They must ever keep in mind that the peo- ple who came here from foreign lands in the beginning did not arrive to establish a gov~ ernment, but rather to escape the tyrannies of government. They did not seek security but rather an opportunity to enjoy the free- dom of being let alone. They cannot fail to sense that the spirit of self-reliance that inspired the early settlers of Clinton to exercise their initiative and develop the town, while preserving their independence, is being halted by too many persons who seek to lean on the Government and too many who are thinking more of security than they are of opportunity. It is perfectly obvious to the generation now coming on the scene that to pay for the costly programs that have been adopted, with others planned, we shall have to borrow more money, and it is well for them to sense that if we stumble no Marshall plan aid or lend-lease will aid us, but rather we will all be on our own. The new generation cannot but appreciate that we would not have an ever-expanding Government if the American people were conscious of the taxes they are now paying APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD and surely they will recognize that when the Federal Government required employers to withhold income taxes from employees, the plan put the worker to sleep. Ask any Clinton wage earner the amount of money he earns and he will tell you the sum of money he receives in his envelope or pay check and not the amount his em- ployer actually pays for his services before Federal withholding taxes are deducted. Excise taxes are so well hidden that their burden is not appreciated by the taxpayers and the coming generation can easily discern that the best-kept secret in the United States today is the program of excise taxes that hit every family from coast to coast every day in the year. Such taxes, included in the price of every~- thing you buy, exceeded $700 per family in 1948. The fact remains that only half of the Federal Government’s revenues and less than 10 percent of State and local tax re- ceipts flow from direct taxes on personal incomes. The rest comes from taxes on business en- terprises which, in turn, are passed along to the consumer in the form of higher prices. As a result, for all with annual incomes of $5,000 or less, which includes better than 9 out of every 10 persons, the hidden burden is heavier than the Federal income tax. Taxes accumulate all along the way from the raw materials to the finished products on the store shelves and at that point many States and cities add a retail sales tax. If you buy a pack of cigarettes you pay 1144 cents in taxes. If you purchase an auto you pay between $300 and $500 in taxes on a $2,000 car which is the big reason, according to the manufacturer, why the $1,000 auto is out of the question today. The coming generation scarcely realizes that total tax collections in the United States today are now two and one-half billion dol=' lars higher than in 1945 when this country, was engaged in a global war and that four~, fifths of the present tax collections go to- ward Federal spending. The Boom Goes On EXTENSION OF REMARKS Or HON. CHARLES B. DEANE OF NORTH. CAROLINA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, April 24, 1950 Mr. DEANE. Mr. Speaker, it was with a great deal of interest that I read,the excellent editorial in the April 24, 1950 issue of Life Magazine. Under unani- mous consent I insert this well-written editorial entitled “The Boom Goes On,” as a part of my remarks, since it reflects, in my opinion, the general feeling that this great country of ours continues to move forward: Tue Boom Gors on—Livine Brerrer THAN Ever, THE UNITED States Must Now Lzarn How To Livre Two years ago, four years ago, the United States was hip-deep in a postwar boom—and the news today is that it is still smack in the middle of the same boom The darned thing goes on and on and on. Mr. Sewell Avery of Montgomery Ward has been predicting the worst for years, but it is the hopeful Gen. Robert Wood of Sears, Roebuck who has made the money. Even that increditable Mr. Faint Heart of the long boom period, the stock market, has at last decided that valor may be the better part of discretion. With high boom dividends going on and on and
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD on, market valuations of st-cks have finally returned to the originally hopeful ground of 1946, even pushing through in certain key “industrials” to the highest averages since 1930. Even with its new high, the stock market still has a long way to go before it can pose as an accurate register of the actual physical goocc-end-services boom, which has been * yerrific for the first quarter of . > President’s economic advisers have recently pointed out, the country has been on the upsurge in practically every- thing. Personal incomes, swelled by the veterans’ insurance refunds, have been at a new peak. People have been buying furni- ture, refrigerators, television sets at a pace mever set before. The home building rate this year has hit an all-time high; a grand total of a million or more homes are sched- uled for 1950. The steel production rate hums along at 97 percent of capacity, In Detroit they are busier than ever: nearly 2,000,000 motor vehicles rolled off the pro- duction lines during the year’s first quarter, and this despite the crippling Chrysler strike. The boom has developed such a solid impact on all fronts that both the Federal Reserve Board and Secretary of Commerce Charles Sawyer see it rolling at least until 1951. The conventional editorial response to all this would be to let the story carry itself— or at most to observe, truly and tritely, that all booms end sometime. You don’t look a gift horse in the mouth, and you don’t usu- ally ask “so what?” of prosperity. Never- theless, we can think of at least three points that ought to be raised, and we herewith raise them. Most paradoxical of the points is that the boom, big as it has been, just hasn’t been big enough. It has been big in production, big in consumption, and big in earnings in relation to market valuations of stock. But with population rising, with 4,000,000 cur- rently unemployed, with 1,700,000 job-seek- ing college and high-school graduates com~ ing on the labor market this year, and with business efficiency increasing (meaning that fewer workers are needed to do a given job), new enterprises just aren’t being born fast enough to soak up the available manpower. An approach to the $300,000,000,000 economy is a must if the boom is to go on. But the $300,000,000,000 economy won’t come into be- ing unless Washington makes i» more re~ warding for a man to risk his capital. As we have said before, one way to stimulate the creation of the necessary new enterprises would be to end the present short-sighted practice of taxing dividends twice. Our second point has to do with the rela- tion of the internal American boom to the opinion of the rest of the world. People of other nations have doubted that the United States has the intellectual and moral power to sustain its part internationally. They have also been looking for a big physical bust in the United States for a long time now. But the boom, which is one of solidly built Oldsmobiles and Budd trains and Allis- Chalmers tractors and Frigidaires and Zenith television sets and Westinghouse generators, multiplied endlessly for five solid years, should be sufficiently tangible to convince anybody from Batavia to Zeebrugge that the United States has the sheer physical vitality to stay the course in the push to a better world community. As a matter of fact, some of the dividends earned on United States home production must push for investment outside the country—which means that Mr. Truman’s point-4 program is physically there for any nation to take advantage of the moment it makes conditions attractive to United States investors. States lacks something in foreign-policy brains, the United States boom is for export to any country that cares to use brains on its own. Even if the United , The third point which interests us centers on the relation of means to ends. Americans in recent years have had fewer worries than other people about making a living. But do _they know how to lve? Or what to live for? These are still big questions, and they obvi- ously haven’t been answered. In many ways the United States people are a morally rest- less and unsatisfied lot. They are, however, learning something, and their behavior during the boom shows it. Making all allowance for the different cir- cumstances of today, the negative fact that the postwar boom has not be accompanied by the suicidal stock market splash of 1929 is some indication that Americans are a wiser and steadier people now than they were then. Other things about the boom at- mosphere are heartening. No one has col- lated the statistics relating to such diverse things as the increase in churchgoing, the sale of china-painting sets at the 15-cent stores, the growth of art museums and local symphony orchestras, the number of people reading the great books, the popularity of garden clubs, the upgrading of the type of lecturer heard at Rotary luncheons, and so on. But if someone were to do this neces- sary statistical investigation, it Just might prove that the United States citizen is learn- ing what prosperity is for. He is at least beginning to learn that prosperity, once the primary needs of life are cared for, is only good as underpinning for the good life. In 1929 the United States valued prosperity as an end and it disappeared. Are the Amer~= ican people really coming to value prosperity as @ means to the larger good? We hope so, and we propose a toast: “Here’s to pros- perity—and here’s to keeping it in its place.” Dewocratic-Dominated Congress Wins Do-Nothing Prize EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. WALTER E. BREHM OF OHIO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, April 24, 1950 Mr. BREHM. Mr. Speaker, during the 1948 election campaign President Truman proceeded to lJambaste the Eightieth Congress not only from coast to coast, but from center to circumference, I felt, as many others did, that in his desperation for reelection he was making statements which in his more sober mo- ments he would not have made. I felt that the heat of battle had perhaps raised his blood pressure and somewhat as a drowning man clutching for straws, that he in desperation was attempting to clutch and tear down the straw man which he was at the same time trying to build up. However, now as time has gone by and the heat of battle somewhat subsided and still Mr. Truman and some of his administration zealots continue to try and lambaste the Hightieth Congress rather than let it rest in peace, I feel perfectly justified in submitting the fol- lowing article by Mr. Louis Bromfield regarding the present Highty-first Con- gress: President Truman and Democratic Chair- Y man Boyle, both graduates of the Kansas City Pendergast machine, have been looking worried lately and they have reason to be as ‘ time and the record catches up with them. A2943 Mr. Truman referred to the Eightieth Con- gress as a “do-nothing’” Congress and the worst in our history. He demanded a Con- gress dominated by his own party and he got it. In comparison with the Democratic Eighty-first Congress, the Republican Eight- ieth Congress was a ball of fire. Mr. Tru- man’s own Congress has not passed a single measure in his welfare state program and indeed nothing at all but the routine usual appropriations bills and one or two bills to take the taxes off oleo or admit some in- dividual being held up by the immigration department. One fact is certain—that Mr. Truman’s ex- isting Democratic Congress holds the world record for emptiness and unkept promises. The curious fact is that Mr. Truman and his Pendergast-dominated national committee have shown little inclination to get any of his emergency bills through both Houses, Each time one comes up, the administra- tion support of it seems to fade away and rumors follow that Mr, Truman and his friends do not really want the bill passed. They want to keep the issue open for the 1950 elections. Of course, this sort of tactic can go on forever, or until the Democratic Party is thrown out lock, stock, and barrel. At the CIO convention in New Orleans, organized labor rose in wrath and demanded of Mr. Truman and Mr. Boyle that some of the promises which were used as Democratic campaign material in 1948 be brought before Congress and an effort made to get them passed. It may just be dawning on organized labor that Mr. Truman and his friends have been treating them as they might a local union in Kansas City, stringing them along On promises put off year after year, getting their votes and giving nothing in return. The ugly incident of the murder of the two Kansas City bosses, Binaggio and Gargotta, who had virtually whipped the Pendergast machine in Kansas City, came at a most in- opportune moment when the administration and the Democratic machine were doing their best to suppress or draw the teeth of the proposed congressional committee investi- gation of the Nation-wide corruption of the gangster and slot-machine mob. The move to investigate came from one of the finest members of the Democratic Party, Senator Kurrauver, of Tennessee; but Mr. Truman's and Mr. Boyle’s cohorts have done everything to stop it or render it innocuous, Why? Some honest Democrats in Washing- ton will tell you under cover that they are afraid of what will be revealed and the effect on the Democratic Party fortunes. The Binaggio murder in Kansas City brings up a long-standing unsavory smell which the administration cannot shake off. It should never be forgotten that one of the first acts of Mr. Truman was to grant wholesale par- dons to Pendergast stooges convicted by good American juries for criminal frauds having to do with voting. A little later when a second investigation, deeply incriminating, came up in connection with Mr. Truman’s Pendergast backing, the evidence, apparently unguarded, was stolen and destroyed and nothing came of it. The FBI was called off and the case was mysteri- ously hushed up. But the votes that were stolen were used to defeat Mr. Truman’s own enemy, Congressman Roger Slaughter. The situation smells and should not be tolerated either by the people of Missouri and Kansas City or by the people of the whole Nation. There is a curious parallel between. Mr. Truman’s loyalty to Tom Pendergast and Mr. Harding’s loyalty to Harry Daugherty. Of the two, Daugherty was undoubtedly the less offensive. In any case the whole record, as time “eatches up, should prove again that the greatest nation in the world cannot afford ‘to find itself run by third- and fourth-rate ., Men.
A2944 Teamwork in Soil Conservation EXTENSION OF REMARKS 01 HON. BEN F. JENSEN OF IOWA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, April 24, 1950 Mr. JENSEN. Mr. Speaker, I have been very favorably impressed with the progress being made in tying down the soil and holding back the water in all 14 counties of my district. A very interesting and informative re- port was sent me by my friend, Mr. Ted Turner, chairman, Adams County Soil Conservation District, which states they are now working out their program by small watersheds—each farmer work- ing with his neighbors, taking in 9 or 10 farms at a clip, building terraces, grassed waterways, contouring, and other needed soil-conservation practices. It makes me feel good to know the farmers of my district are proud of their work. What they are doing for their land will not only give them a better living and make their farms more productive as time goes on, but this is the kind of thing that will make and keep America strong. Turner’s report tells how the State of Iowa is contributing $2,500 to assist their district in getting more soil conservation on the land. Also, it points out how the Soil Conservation Service is assisting them with guidance in planning farms and applying soil-conservation practices. Turner points out how the Extension Service and other farm agencies work smoothly with them in getting the job done. . Turner includes interviews he has had with two farmers in his district that hit the nail on the head. Not only are these farmers satisfied they are doing the right thing in conserving their soil, but they know why and they know it is money in their pockets. No one needs to worry about these fellows; they know a good thing when they see it. So that others can learn of the success in Adams County, the following is their report of progress: Corning, Iowa, April 7, 1950, Hon. BEN F. JENSEN, Washington, D. C. Dear Mr. JENSEN: Enclosed is a copy of the 1949 annual report for the Adams County Soil Conservation District. I think you will find it interesting. We will welcome any suggestions you may have that will help us get better land use in our district. We also wish to thank you for any help which you have given us in the past and ask your continued cooperation in the future, Very truly yours, . Trp TurNer, Chairman, Adams Soil Conservation District. Apams Sor CoNsERVATION District (lowa)— ANNUAL REPORT ror 1949 Nineteen hundred and forty-nine was another good year for soil conservation in the Adams Soil Conservation District. Al< though our growth in interest and practice of soil conservation has not been phe-~ nomenal, still it has heen steady and is in- creasing. A review of the statistics at the end of this report will give you a fairly good picture as to just how much progress has been made. Worthy of special mention is the fact that the Soil Conservation Service personnel in our district completed more field lay-out work in April than in any previ- ous month in the history of our district. We were also able to establish our first watershed-control demonstration this year. Conservation plans were completed with nine farmers living in the Lincoln Center water- shed of Sin Creek. All of the 1949 crops were planted on the contour and six of the nine farms completed terraces during the first year. It will be very interesting to watch the developments on this watershed. Spray Lee, one of our assistant commis- sioners and at that time also the newly elected president of the Farm Bureau, at- tended the district commissioner’s short course which was held in January at Ames. Spray came back thoroughly pepped up. He made a full report of his schooling at a special meeting arranged for our commis- sioners, assistant commissioners, and their wives. In February we held a district com- missioner’s election in cooperation with the Extension Service at a county-wide meet- ing on fertilizers. I spoke a little about our district activities and Ralph Krenzin, ex- tension. specialist from the college, talked on fertilizers. Lester Watt, of Nodaway, was elected district commissioner for a 6-year term. He succeeds Paul Flowers who had so ably served the district since it’s organization. in 1943. Paul did not choose to run again this year. The district continues to enjoy good work- ing relationships with local groups and or- ganizations. Also, the other county, State, and Federal agencies concerned with farm programs. Educational work with schools in the dis- trict included talks on conservation and a tour of farms for the Corning eighth-grade pupils, Also, work with the vocational agri- culture classes and Cub Scout packs. A plow terrace building demonstration was held for the GI farm training classes this spring. The Corning Free Press has been very gen= erous in their publicity on conservation proj- ects. Conseryation lost a very able and stanch supporter in the recent death of Mr. Gauthier, the local editor, Radio Station KSIB at Creston has also been very helpful in their reports on con- servation activities. The Adams district submitted the Harry Reese, Tom Dougherty, and the Coleman- Flower farms as our entrants in the Omaha World-Herald contest. The final results showed that the Adams district ranked third in Iowa, with only 541% points less than the winners, Our farms scored 2,83614 points out of a possible 3,000. We plan to be a winner next year. We named Gene Schwartz, Ernest Blazek, and Kenneth Calkins to compete in the Good~ year contest. These men were honored at the Goodyear award dinner held in Des Moines. Both of these contests showed the inter~ est and concern for our most important re- source, the soil, Our district again cooperated with the three adjoining districts in putting on a four-county soil conservation field day and plowing contest. The program consisted of a tour over the Tom Dougherty farm, where we had our field day in 1948. This farm has made a lot of progress in 1 year’s time and is an excellent example of what can be accomplished through conservation farm-= ing. The second part of the field day was the making over of the Frank Maharry farm which joins the Dougherty farm. The field day was well attended, and we feel very successful in showing how to do the job and also the results that may be expected. L. L. Henderson held a husking bee type of field day on some of his land this fall. Six APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD neighbors whe *o77a~"r exchange work were invited in to “su. dG U'':.¢+, diversions, and waterways. There was considerable interest and we considered it a successful field day. Your district commissioners invite other neighborhoods to get together and work out their conservation construction. This sys- tem has much merit. Our technicians will be glad to work with you. Kenneth King, working out of the Ames Soil Conservation Service office, recently as- sisted our district in the location of natural neighborhood groups. This proved to be very interesting. The theory is that if we can promote and develop soil conservation by working with natural neighborhoods, ra- ther than individuals or artificial groups, we can expect to get more rapid and permanent soil conservation on the land. Mr. King demonstrated that it is possible to locate the natural neighborhoods; this we are go- ing to try to do whenever possible. When some members of a group show interest in conservation we will promote that interest by working with the entire group. . One of the major developments in con~« Servation during the past year was the ap-_ propriation of State funds for soil-conserva~’ tion work in the district. In July our $500 and $2,000 budgets to the State committee’ were sent in for approval. These budgets | have been approved and State money has al~| ready been used in paying for additional! technical help, travel expenses of the com-~! missioners and some of the expenses of our, four-county field day. We feel that we are’ getting value received for this money. Our State legislature is to be commended for making this money available to soil-con< servation districts and we feel a definite re- sponsibility to you, our neighbors, to see that your money is well spent. This year, to add a little variety to our report, I interviewed a couple of farmers to try and get their reaction to the services offered and being current given by the Adams soil-conservation district. The first inter-~' view was with Mr. Harry Reese, a master farmer, whose farm is located near String- town: { “Trp, Harry, how long have you had your farm. plan? { “Harry. Since 1944. | “Trep. What soil conservation practices are you using? { “Harry. One very important one I use is a@ good rotation. This is a 4-year rotation’ using 1 year of corn, 1 year of oats, and 2: years of meadow. | “Trp. How is this different than your pre- vious farming? ' “Harry. Farming now seems so much easier since I have a definite guide to go’ by. 1 “Trp. What happens to your rotation when’ the weather man causes you to lose a! seeding? { “Harry. That is no problem because when. you are using a rotation with at least 2 years of meadow it is easy to hold that meadow over for another year when neces-<' sary. i “Trp. Have you built any terraces or structures? { “Harry. Yes. I have two terraces and a large pond which I built this past summer,’ “Tap. Harry, what are some of the benefits you have received from our Soil Conservation District? “Harry, They are numerous. Specifically,’ I have a soil map of my farm showing me just what types of soil I have and where they are located. It also shows how thick this layer of topsoil is, and what the average slope is in each field. Then I have my crop-=; ping plan which is a 5-year plan showing how I plan to operate my farm for the next 5 years. There is also space here to keep track of any special practices such as lime
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD and fertilizer applications. Then my fields have been rearranged so that the same types of soil are farmed together and also my fields are adjusted in size so that I have a balanced farming program giving me approximately the same acreage of crops each year. Be- sides this I got considerable help in my pasture improvement program. “Trp. How much better is your pasture now than before your renovation program? “Harry. There is no comparison. I now pasture at least three or four cattle on good pasture where before I had only one on a very mediocre pasture, mostly poverty grass. “TED. How many head per acre now? “Harry. At least three head for the pasture season. : “TED. When do you turn in in the spring? “Harry. When the grass is 4 inches tall. This gives it a chance to get a good start. “Trep. What pasture mixture did you use? “Harry. Re& clover, alfalfa, brome, ladino clover, and birdsfoot trefoil. Six months before seeding I put on 2 tons of lime per acre. At seeding time I put on 200 pownas ct 0-20-0. The pasture had been :#¢°. ut ty torn up with a spring-tooth harrow and a disc. “Tp. Would you care to make an estimate of the dollars per acre returns from this pasture in 1949? “Harry. A good cow will produce $50 per acre at current prices. This is much better than grain, and I’m building up my soil at the same time. “Trp, That was certainly better than try- ing to farm that particular field. Thank you, Harry. I’m sure hundreds of other farmers in our district could do as well with their pasture land.” Following is an interview with L. L. Hen- derson of Corning: “Tep. How long have you had a farm plan on your land, L. L.? “LL. L. About 4 years, I think. “Trep. What in your farm plan impressed you most? *L. L. Knowing the different types of soil and how much of each was left on the land. “Tep. What can the average farmer hope to gain from a farm plan? “1. L. With it he can make more efficient use of his land by knowing better Just what he has to work with. “Trp. In what ways have you been bene- fited from our local soil-conservation dis- trict? “L. L. In advice and technical help, always given very willingly. You’ve got a good bunch of fellows here. They take an inter- est in your farm just as if it were their own. “Ten. What would you suggest needs to be done to make our program more effective and to speed up the process of getting more con- servation on the land? *l.. L. We need more educational meetings. It will take a series of meetings with the same group to get the job done. “Trp. What do you think about steward- ship of the land? *L. L. What do you mean? “TED. I mean, do we have any obligation to preserve our farms for future generations? “L. L. We certainly do. Just because we have a deed to our farm should not mean that we have the right to waste our precious top- soil. Unless the farmers come to realize this they will likely find themselves subject to a land-use program. Many of our other natu~ ral resources, such as oil, are already under Government restriction. “TEp. How can we get more farmers and landowners to regard their land as a trust? “L. L. It will have to be through a process of education. “Teo. Thanks, L. L., for a splendid inter~ view.” Apparently we have two well-satisfied cus- tomers among our district cooperators. I only hope that our district can render equally good service to all the farmers in the district. Following is a brief report of the part taken by the agricultural extension service in soil conservation work as given me by the extension director, Mr, Homer Thiel; “The agricultural extension service of Adams County and Iowa State College has assisted the work of the district in several ways. “In line with common practice, the exten- sion director has served the district as secre- tary, attending all meetings of the district commissioners except where other extension activities demanded his attention. “With the beginning of consideration of new problems attending the most profitable use of the finances appropriated by the last legislature in Iowa, the extension director drove to Red Oak with the commissioners and work unit conservationist for an after- noon meeting. “Robert Moorman, Ralph Krenzin, and Otto E. Hoffman of the State staff, appeared at the four-county field day in September, presenting information on corn~-borer con- trol, forages and weed-destroying chemicals, respectively. ‘In April the extension director assisted Don Lovely, Ralph Waage, Erwin Birt, and Kingery brothers with contouring problems on their own farms, spending 2 days in all in the field with them. In all cases the men were instructed in locating contour lines. Four of the men were trained to operate and operated hand levels during the period spent with them. This assistance was given at the period of the peak load of local S. C. S. personnel. “Assistance with publicity for the district was contributed by the extension director. Some of these releases appeared in the Adams County Free Press. Others appeared in the Farm Bureau World. Some of the fea- tures dealt with were: the structure on the Harry Reese farm, the L. L. Henderson Soil Conservation Day, the Sin Creek water- shed area and other small incidental projects. “Reports of accomplishments of the dis- trict were included in the account of agri- cultural activities of Adams County. This statement appeared in the annual agricul- tural extension report.” As previously stated, we feel that 1949 was a@ good year. We have every reason to be- lieve that the year 1950 will be better. Apams Som ConsERVATION D1sTRICT, Trep TURNER, Chairman, District Governing Body. Our Problem—Maintaining a Stable National Economy EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. COMPTON I. WHITE OF IDAHO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, March 22, 1950 Mr. WHITE of Idaho. Mr. Speaker, we hear much about maintaining a stable national economy, price parity, and we receive many communications criticiz- ing the Government’s policy of providing support prices for agricultural products, Many of the communications come from businessmen and commercial organiza-~ tions, who apparently have forgotten the problems that arose affecting the finan- cial security of business and the stabil- ity of our national economy during the depression years. A2945 There has recently come to my desk a letter from the president of the Western States Meat Packers Association, to- gether with copy of a resolution adopted by that association, which I have ac- knowledged with certain inquiries. There is inserted herewith the corre- spondence mentioned above and the let- ter from the president of the Valley Packing Co., received in response to these inquiries: APRIL 12, 1950. Mr. E. F. ForsBes, President, Western States Meat Packers Association, Inc., San Francisco, Calif. Dear Mr. Forres: Thanks for your letter of April 11, with the attached resolution re- ferring to our Government policies affecting free enterprise. Now, just what is the purport of your let- ter and the resolution adopted by your as- sociation? From your letterhead, it appears that you are president of the Western States Meat Packers Association, Inc. Does your organization include in its mem~ bership the big meat packers? Under exist- ing conditions, how do you propose to achieve and maintain a balanced national economy and parity of prices in our price structure? By what method do you propose to eliminate unfair trade practices and un-~ fair competition? Do you have any plan to protect and safeguard free enterprise and small business in this country? Do you sanction the present exorbitant prices the consumer has to pay for barbed wire, farm implements, and the products of our manu- facturers in general? Did you observe the effect on the business in this country when credit was withdrawn from the people en- gaged in our basic industries, particularly agriculture, with the result that these people lost their purchasing power? Do you want that to happen again? Do you advocate the abandonment of the principles of price par- ity by withdrawing the price support of agri- cultural products? Inasmuch as you have set out to educate the Congress of the Dnited States, we would like to have your answer to these questions. Sincerely yours, Compton I. Wurtz, Member of Congress. WESTERN STATES MEAT PacKING ASSOCIATION, INC., San Francisco, Calif., April 11, 1950. Hon. Compron I. Wurst, House Office Building, Washington, D. C. Deak Mr. WHITE: The most important problem facing Congress is to decide whether the tested concepts of free enterprise and individual liberty are to be discarded by our Government and replaced by socialistic measures which fallaciously purport to pro- vide security. Even if such security could be realized it would ultimately be at the ex- pense of regimentation, loss of freedom, and a reduction in the standard of living. Attached is a resolution on this subject - adopted by the members of the Western States Meat Packers Association at its re- cent annual convention in San Francisco. We trust that the Congress may make the proper decision. We feel that the purpose of the attached resolution will have been accomplished if it serves to remind Members of Congress of the dangers that underlie the new paternalistic philosophies that have been advanced in this country in recent years. Accordingly, no reply is necessary. Thank you for allowing us to bring this to your attention. Very truly yours, E, F. Forsss, President.
A2946 RESOLUTION OF THE WESTERN SraTes Mzat PackERS ASSOCIATION, Inc., SAN FRANCISCO, CaLrr. There impends today a threat to our coun- try and the freedom of its people which so menacingly overshadows the future that we, American citizens of all shades of political belief, feel it our duty to speak out in un- mistakable terms. This threat lies in the fact that our coun- try—without conscious choice on the part of its people—is rapidly and unmistakably drifting toward the consummation of a false concept—the socialized state. Tokens of this danger are everywhere and undeniable. The growing power and expan- sion of wasteful government; the colossal public debt; the heavy burden of taxation; the malicious attempt to substitute an arti- ficial economy for the natural economy which alone can function in freedom; the gradual assumption by the State of financial re- sponsibility for every hazard incident to life—hazards which should be personally met and borne by every human being who has the instinctive will to survive and the inherent impulse to be free; the arraignment of eco- nomic and social groups, one against the other, and numerous other conditions and proposals similarly inspired and equally false. Government produces nothing and has no means by which to support these false and destructive theories except by exacting from its citizens the fruits of their labors. The course the Government is now taking, unless it is promptly reversed, must inevitably lead to national bankruptcy. In a vain effort to prolong a specious sense of security, more similar expedients will be applied until we become mere numbers in a completely so- cialized State: Therefore be it Resolved, That we, the members of the Western States Meat Packers Association, Inc., in convention assembled at San Fran- cisco, Calif., February 28, 1950, reaffirm our solemn conviction that the future health, strength, and prosperity of our country de- pends on the reestablishment and mainte- nance of free and competitive enterprise and hereby pledge ourselves as individuals and as an association to work diligently and ac- tively toward this objective and toward the defeat of the fallacious philosophies that are beguiling our country into socialism. VALLEY PACKING Co., Salem, Oreg., April 20, 1950. Hon. Compton I. WHirr, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. Dear Sim: Before me lies a copy of a letter dated April 12, 1950, which you addressed to Mr. E. F. Forbes, president of the Western States Meat Packers Association. This was in reply to his letter of April 11, which ac- companied a resolution adopted by the as- sociation on February 28, 1950, and Mr. Forbes sent me a copy of your reply because I happened to have the privilege of intro- ducing this resolution to the convention. I do not presume to speak for Mr. Forbes, nor a5 @ Member or Officer of the Western States Meat Packers Association, but as a humble citizen and taxpayer I am indeed happy to make some observations in reply to your truculent letter. First, as to the resolution—it is an exact copy of a resolution adopted by the American Cattlemen’s Association at their convention held in Miami in January 1950, with the only changes being in the names of the associa- tions, places of meeting and dates. I believe Idaho lays some claim to being quite a cattle State and I would suggest you contact some of the leading members of the A. C. A. in your State, and ask them what they meant by supporting such a resolution. Frankly, Mr. Witz, I cannot give the cor- rect answers to all the weighty questions asked in the third paragraph of your letter. It is a safe assumption that the leading minds of our country are concentrated in the Con- gress, and even they have not come up with all the correct answers, when we face the fact that our deficit for the current fiscal year ending June 30 will surely run over $5,000,000,000. I lay no claim to being an economist, but common sense tells me that no one—whether it be an individual, a corporation or the Government—can borrow itself rich. Now, Mr. Were, I do not believe the adop- tion of this resolution was any attempt to educate the Congress of the United States, but simply an effort to strengthen the desire of most Members of Congress to do a con- scientious job for the welfare of all the people based on the fundamental principles that made this country great. Incidentally, speaking of education, have you read John T. Flynn’s great book, “The Road Ahead?” Sincerely yours, G. F. CHAMBERS, President, Valley Packing Co. Ireland EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THOMAS J. LANE OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, April 20, 1950 Mr. LANE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I wish to include the following letter ad- dressed by Mr. William J. Conlon, one of my constituents, to the editor of the Telegram-News, of Lynn, Mass.: ‘ Eprror, TELEGRAM-NEwS: Sm: I have been a reader of your paper for over 30 years. Your paper has at all times given the true facts on all questions and upheld the rights of oppressed peoples everywhere. There was an editorial in the Boston Post of March 31 on Congressman Fogarty’s amendment in Congress recently to withhold ECA funds from England as long as the partition of Ireland by England is continued, was true to the point. Con- gress has intervened in Italy, France, Greece, and Turkey and several other European coun~ tries and asked for a government by the peo- ple. Can any Congressman in the House of Representatives tell the public of the United States why Ireland is not entitled to a gov- ernment by her own people? I am writing this letter, Mr. Editor, at a time when the United States Government is loaning mil- lions of dollars in Marshall-plan funds to England, and what is England doing with- out having the diplomatic courtesy of tell- ing us what is going on behind the British iron curtain? England is using these Mar- shall-plan funds to finance the Arabs against the Jewish State of Israel, because of oil fields involved in Arab countries. She is also giving thousands of dollars to Red Godless Russia in exchange for what? She had rec- ognized Red Godless China. And in my native city of Belfast she is financing an il- legal army of occupation in the city where I was born. And who, may I ask, knows what England is doing in northern Ireland than the man who was born there? I was born on July 22, 1890, at 116 Corporation Street, Belfast, Ireland, and I can prove this with my birth certification which I hay in my possession. ' APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The Irish people in Ireland are only asking for our assistance in getting the British authorities out of Ireland, as did the Honor- able Benjamin Franklin, Washington’s first ambassador, when he pleaded with Henry Grattan’s Parliament in 1800. The Irish Government sent shiploads of foodstuffs and rebel generals to assist the young American republic in shaking off the British yoke that bound them. Congresmen of the United States, why don’t you reciprocate and assist a small mutilated country of only 32,000 square miles total area, 300 miles long, and 200 mules wide? Two governments in a country this size is a laughing stock for the world. Congressmen, demand for us a free and un-~ trammeled election and this will settle everything. Sincerely yours, WiLLtaM J. ConLon. Hall Demands Donaldson Return Postal Service to People EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWIN ARTHUR HALL OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, April 24, 1950 Mr. EDWIN ARTHUR HALL. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my re- marks in the Recorp, I include the fol- lowing letter: HovusE oF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D.C., April 24, 1950. Hon. JEss—E M. Donapson, Postmaster General, Washington, D.C. Dear Mr. Donartpson: I wish to inform you of the indignation and disgust being ex~ pressed back home over your recent order to cut the services of the Post Office Depart- ment. As one Member of Congress who has always voted for all funds necessary for efficient run- ning of the postal service, I cannot condone or approve your action, If the post office needs more funds, I am ready to vote for them. The American peo- ple must have their mail go through. This is one place in our Government where false economy would be tragic. I refuse to agree with your contention that the users of penny post cards should be taxed 100 percent. I voted against this increase and will never go along with doubling this post- age. Millions of our citizens now depend upon the penny post card to get important mes- sages to their loved ones and to carry on their necessary business affairs. Thousands of our worthy religious, fra- ternal and small enterprise groups find the penny post card a necessary part of their programs and they should not be compelled to pay any more for mail service. I have always voted for every pay raise the postal employees have received because I feel they are underpaid for the tedious work they perform. If more money must be had to pay them, we can afford to save somewhere else. You ask me where we are to get the funds if you are not permitted to double the penny post card. I will tell you here and now. I find that four daily newspapers in my district shipped out more than 31,000 pounds of postage-free material during 1949. This may seem small but the taxpayers had to pay the shot. Moreover, these newspapers are getting rich from advertising. They are also using
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD their columns for smearing Members of Con- gress which is a far cry from news gathering. Last year, the cost of handling the coun- try’s newspapers which went postage free, was $11,173,870. Nearly $1,000,000 more would have been received by Uncle Sam if these ~c—nrpers Had paid for their free- in-couw’ (| cwlioM. A recommendation from you to make the newspapers pay their proper cost of having Uncle Sam carry their material would prob- ably cause Congress to raise twelve millions more dollars to make up the deficit you claim your department is carrying. I stand ready to vote for such a revenue raising scheme and I hereby propose this to help bring the Post Office Department out of the red. Sincerely, Epwin ArTHuR Hat, Member of Congress. The American Way—How We Can Improve It EXTENSION OF REMARKS ra HON. ALVIN F. WEICHEL OF OHIO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, April 24, 1950 Mr. WEICHEL. Mr. Speaker, the American Legion of Ohio sponsored an essay contest among the high-school stu- dents of the State of Ohio, from which 12 winning essays were selected and the winners are here in Washington this week. The essay was on The American Way—How We Can Improve It, and I want to include the essay of James Alt- wies, of Tiffin, Ohio, one of the winners of the American Legion Essay, Contest of Ohio: Ture AMERICAN Way—How WE Can Improve Ir How can we improve the American way? There are many answers to that question. The best answer seems to be action. The old saying, Action speaks louder than words is a very true one. It is a very common fault to plan certain objectives, then do noth- ing about them. One of our first endeavors should be to live in peace with our neighbors, those we meet in everyday life. We should all strive to better ourselves and our Nation. If there were a bond of love and unity among all men, not just in the material sense but also in the spiritual, our Nation would operate like a well-oiled machine under a trained mechanic. As a result the country would be rid of its most menacing enemy, commu- nism. The object of this Godless organiza- tion is to break apart and divide the whole world so its force can move in and dictate as it sees fit. It is Just selfishness and greed that causes international confusion, such as coal strikes whick disrupt the world. We, the people, should do something about this and prevent our enemies from undermining our Nation with alarm and confusion. Be- sides relying on the Government, the peo- ple should start some action. They should screen the magazines and papers they buy and investigate the movies. These channels influence public opinion, since most people use these outlets for their daily recreation. Whether we know it or not, our enemies spread propaganda if we are not alert. Besides our interest. in our neighbor and our own welfare, we should voice our opin- jons of all public officials and see that they really serve the country; for after all free- dom of speech is one of our foremost liber- ties, for which many of our ancestors died. We students in school also have the obli- gation to improve the American way by get- ting a good education while we have the op- portunity. We will then have a sufficient training to help operate,our country later on. Perhaps the State could offer better induce- ments for a better education in the form of ° scholarships, contests, etc., as is done for athletics. This would encourage those who have no means for higher schooling. Of course, the very first way to improve the American way lies right in our own homes—the Nation’s outpost. We should live daily lives worthy of the name America. By obeying the laws of God and country, all citizens might eradicate from the daily papers the scandals that disgrace the Ameri- can system. The divorce rate, considered the greatest in the world, is the downfall of the American home. If everyone is chari~ table and considerate of his partner, there would be no cause for this. These are some of the solutions to the Nation’s betterment. Our way of life has always been respected and envied by nations less fortunate. By talking less and living better everyday lives we can bring honor to our country before God and man. Partition of Ireland EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. THOMAS J. LANE OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, April 24, 1950 Mr. LANE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I wish to include herein a resolution re- cently adopted by the Massachusetts State Boards of the Ancient Order of Hibernians and Ladies’ Auxiliary: Whereas the unjust partition of Ireland is a continuing factor of disturbance and dis- trust to the peace of the world; and Whereas such partition, against the will of the people of Ireland, is also against the principles of justice expressed by the Con- stitution of the United States of America; and Whereas such partition is against the best interests of the people of the United States, since Ireland, a divided nation, cannot take its proper place in the councils of the nations of the world; and Whereas Ireland’s absence from the North Atlantic Pact weakens the military defense of the United States as therein expressed and weakens the efforts of the United States to aid in the economic recovery of all Europe; and Whereas Ireland’s absence from the United Nations, to which the United States sub- scribes as a member, results from the veto of Soviet Russia, due to the hostility of Ire- land to communism and its evils: Therefore be it Resolved, That the State Boards of the AOH and Ladies’ Auxiliary urge the Foreign Rela- tions Committee of the House of Representa- tives of the Congress to report forthwith a suitable resolution expressing the sentiment of the people of the United States against the unjust partition of Ireland and demanding a plebiscite of the people of all Ireland on the matter of a united Ireland; and be it further Resolvucd, That copies of this resolution be ‘forwarded to the Foreign Relations Commit- A2947 tee of the House of Representatives, to the President of the United States, to the De-~ partment of State, and to the members of the Massachusetts congressicnal delegation. The Massachusetts State Board of the AOH and Ladies’ Auxiliary: Rev. Michael J. Houlihan, Chaplain, Water- town; Paul E. Tierney, President, Somerville; Thomas C. Phillips, Secre- tary, Worcester; Hugh P. Caffrey, Organizer, Brockton; P. Frank Kean, Director, Brighton; William J. Ronan, New Bedford; Daniel J. Clifford, Water- town; Richard Fitzmaurice, Brockton; Mary Curran, Lynn; Mary Hurley, Bel- mont; Mary Kinsella, Salem; William P. Sullivan, Vice President, Holyoke; James P. McCarthy, Treasurer, Mal- den; Thomas H. Murray, Mission Chair- man, Brighton; Thomas F. Hall, Sr., Pittsfield; Joseph P. McKenna, Me- thuen; Daniel F. Slattery, Norwood; Hugh A. Moriarty, Worcester; Helen Condrick, Weymouth; Kathleen Roche, New Bedford; Mary Gleason, Wellesley. A true copy: THOMAS C. PHILLIPS, State Secretary. The American Way—How We May Improve It EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. JOHN M. VORYS OF OHIO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, April 24, 1950 Mr. VORYS. Mr. Speaker, I wish to present to the House the prize-winning essay written by Miss Marilyn Reed, of Columbus, Ohio, on the subject The American Way—How We May Improve It? This essay was submitted in a con- test sponsored annually by the Ameri- can Legion, Department of Ohio. This contest stimulates patriotic thought and study by thousands of students. The 12 prize winners receive a trip to Washing- ton. They were luncheon guests of Ohio Members of the House today in the Speaker’s dining room. Miss Marilyn Reed is an eleventh- grade student in Columbus, Ohio. Her essay contains food for thought for every one of us. The essay follows: THE AMERICAN Way—How Wr May ImMpzove Ir (By Marilyn Reed, Columbus, Ohio) Our American way of life may be im-~ proved on home, community, and national fronts by a development of an enthusiastic sincere appreciation of our American herit- age, its wealth of opportunity and fulfilment of ambitions. This may be accomplished by the education of our youth to the amazing advantage they inherit from their pioneer fathers, by publicity through newspaper, radio and drama, and lastly, by a country- wide revival of spiritual growth. . Too much of a “taken for granted” atti- tude has created a lethargy in our thinking habits. The youth of today, our citizen voters of tomorrow, should be taught thor- oughly the rudiments of our Government. The construction of our Government, local, State, and national; the intricate functions of all three branches, judicial, legislative, and executive, should be as familar to everyone as the list of last week’s Hit Parade
A2948 tunes. Youth from the ages of 18 to 21 should be intensively trained to analyze the issues of the ballot, so that as they approach the day of suffrage privilege, they will enjoy the duty of voting as much as they enjoy receiving their diploma. . Our present way of life needs no radical improvement—it just needs a more thor- ough living of it. Americans are the best salesmen in the world. We cannot sell a product about which we know nothing; - therefore, we need to gain as much knowl- edge of our freedoms as we possibly can, so that we can sell the idea to the world through intelligent living. Our newspapers and radio, our great outlet of the press freedom gives emphasis to the good, con~ structive principles of our way of life, through publicizing our agriculture, mndus- try, trade, health programs, drama, and arts. With a little less emphasis on the sensa- tional headlines, we can sell ourselves to the world, through knowledge of the good things of our freedoms. Local, State, and national issues of the pallot should be the subjects of family dis- cussions. As individual voters, we send our representatives to Congress; we are privi- leged to continue our contacts with them and to vigorously express our views on national and international questions on which they are required to vote. We, as men of the streets and voters, should express our views to our Congress on the crucial ques- tions of present-day problems. Many of us neglect. this privilege, yet criticize vocifer- ously when the legislation does not please us. Revival of spiritual growth will improve our way of life by shaping our thinking toward the original ideals of our forefathers, freedom of worship. ‘This privilege, like the others, suffers from ennui and indifference. Beginning in the homes, spreading to com- munities, worship habits should be revived. Community sings, neighborhood socials, stimulated by church associations, will nur- ture our spiritual growth as communities. Good citizens make good communities, good communities make good nations. Closer relationship with our chosen religions will develop our sense of gratitude for our wealth of blessings in our way of life, our homes, churches, schools, farms, and industries. In conclusion, our way of life may be im- proved by development of our initiative, to learn our government while young, to sup- port it with our votes when we have gained that privilege, to teach it to those who will follow us, and to sell the whole idea to the world by exhibiting the happiness to be found in the American way of life and our freedoms, Curtailment of Mail Deliveries EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ANTHONY F. TAURIELLO OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, April 24, 1950 Mr. TAURIELLO. Mr. Speaker, un- der leave to extend my remarks in the REcorp, I include the following letter: APRIL 24, 1950. The Honorable Jesse M. DowaLpson, The Postmaster General, Post Office Department, Washington, D.C. Dear Mr. Donatpson: The instructions is< sued by your office on April 18, curtailing mail deliveries and reducing other types of essen~ tail postal service, can scarcely be considered as anything but a distinct disservice to the American people. I, personally, am of the opinion that you have greatly exceeded the scope of your responsibility in issuing orders that have the effect of denying equal postal facilities to all families and all segments of pusiness in the Nation. During the discussion of chapter IV, H. R. 7786, pertaining to the appropriation for the operation of the Post Office Department for the next fiscal year, it was pointed out on the House floor that your Department was being cut approximately 1 percent, or $28,000,000, in actual expenditures. In your opinion, does an approximate cut of 1 percent justify the sweeping reductions in your serv~- ices to the general public? My attention has been invited to a state- ment you made before the Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives on January 16, 1950. You are quoted as saying: “I consider it of paramount importance to continue to give the public good service. Any economy campaign which would go so far as to destroy the present standards would bring on reac- tions that not only would nullify economy, put, in the end, would result in greater costs,”’ Do you still hold the same opinion as ex- pressed in the above-quoted remarks made by you? If you do, how do you reconcile the cuts in service that your instructions of April 18 order? If you have had a change of heart since your testimony of January 16, may I suggest that you inform the Congress and the American public that you no longer consider “good service’ to be of “paramount im- portance”? Have you or your staff given any considera- tion to the excessive delay in delivery that might possibly result because the bulk of mail will be beyond the ability of the carrier to deliver in a one-delivery-a-day arrange- ment? Postal employees in my district have ad- vised me that sort of delay has been not un- common for months prior to your April 18 orders. Your instructions will compound the seriousness of that type of situation. I will appreciate any expression you care to give to the several questions posed in this letter. Your reply will assist 1n serving as a basis for my own response to the many inquiries and protests received from the busi- ness firms and individuals in my district. Sincerely yours, ANTHONY F', TAURIELLO, Member of Congress. Our Election Laws EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. THOMAS J. LANE OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, April 24, 1950 Mr. LANE. Mr. Speaker, I wish to in- clude a very interesting article that ap- peared in the Lynn Telegram-News, Lynn, Mass., on Sunday, April 16, 1950, written by the very able and studious member of the bar of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Attorney Charles H. McGlue. Mr. McGlue served for some time as the chairman of the Massachusetts State Ballot Law Commission and also as chairman of the Democratic State com- mittee in that State. This item which deals with the system of proportional representation is one that is very close to the heart of the writer and is a sub- ject matter with which Mr. McGlue is APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD well acquainted. He has been an out- standing student of the primary and election laws, and the workings of that legislation in the Commonwealth of Mas- sachusetts for a great many years. I know of no one who has a better insight on our election laws in Massachusetts than Mr. McGlue. Time and time again he has spoken and fought for legislation to improve those laws dealing with the conduct of our primaries and elections, and suffice to say he knows the weakness of some of our State laws. I submit this thoughtful article to the Members of the Congress for their study and consid- eration. Attorney McGlue’s statement contains a great deal of material that could be effectively used to prevent the further decimation of Democratic ma- jorities in our Democratic cities by the means of this communistic techniqte known as proportional representation and by the un-American system of plan E whereby minorities control majorities in cities: Doers PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION PLEASE Russt4? Is Puan E, PLAN EvROPEAN? (By Charles H. McGlue) “In all countries, even the freest, legal and peaceful in the sense that the class struggle is less acute in them, the time has fully matured when it is absolutely neces- sary for every Communist Party worker sys- tematically to combine legal with illegal work. . “It is necessary immediately for all legal Communist Parties to form illegal organiza- tions. “The absolute necessity in principle of combining illegal with legal work is deter- mined, not only by the sum total of the specific features of the present period, the period of the eve of proletarian dictator- ship, but also by the necessity of proving to the bourgeoisie that there is not, nor can there be, a sphere or field of work that can- not be won by the Communists.” (Dictator Nicolai Lenin, Communist leader, in his Thesis on the Fundamental Tasks of the Second Congress of the Communist Inter- national.) MULLINS’ RED SALAMANDER In these days of “Reds” and “red her- rings,” it was rather surprising to me to find that a political writer of the supposed stat- ure of William Mullins of the Boston Herald, would take time out from his prolific, polit- jeal plottings in order to drag a “Red sala- mander” across the Old Bay State trail. Of course, the politically wise realize that Bill Mullins is quite a master of creative fiction who does not hesitate to make up his own atmosphere and surroundings in order to give quasi-reality to a mere figment of his Gaelic imagination. His recent crea- tion, the Red Salamander, in his latest interpretation work, McGlue’s Blueprint of the 1951 Congressional Gerrymander, fell as flat as a flounder, if it is possible for a sala- mander to fall as flat as that. “Ole Bill” was up to his old tricks of try- ing to scare the Republican Senators into line so that two bills most vital to the con- tinuance of our American system of voting would meet defeat in the Massachusetts Senate. IS MULLINS’ FACE RED? The two bills in question are house No. 2369, an act relative to the appointment of a city manager in cities having a plan EH form of charter and senate No. 216, a bill repealing the laws authorizing the election of certain city and town officers by propor- tional representation. Both bills were await- ing action in the Massachusetts State Senate when “Ole Bill” did his stuff,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD » OCR pe was * wo hery pale rae ate i“ And what happened? House No. 2369, based on bill filed by the writer, House No, 1571, took its final reading in the senate by a vote of 23 yes to 16 no. Upon engrossment by the senate, it was sent over to the house of representatives for final enactment (it previously having passed successively through its three readings). It was enacted both by © the house and the senate, and is now on Governor Dever’s desk, where in all proba= bility, it will receive gubernatorial signature cn Monday next. WHITTLING WITH WHITTIER For some unknown reason, the chief op- ponent of this very sound and important piece of legislation was Senator Sumner Whittier of Everett. This bill (house No. 2369) removes the very unfair and un- American provision in the plan E city char- ters which prohibits all elected public offi- _ czais in Massachusetts within 2 years of their : election, from being selected for those juicy-" “i job plums as city or town manager, ranging from $9,000 a year in Saugus to $20,000 a year | in fair old Cambridge. Now, with the pas-" sage of my bill, any elected official is eligible at once for them, except a member of the city council during his term of office, or any other person who has within 2 years been elected to or served in any elective office in the city or in the county in which the city is located. So that today men like former Gov. Robert F. Bradford, former Lt. Gov. Arthur W. Coolidge, and former Governor and Mayor James M. Curley are eligible to serve as city or town managers in any city or town out- side of their own county. This is democratic progress. SENATE VOTES FOR BILL Some idea of the effectiveness of the propa- ganda put forth by Bill Mullins and his Red Salamander, and Senator Sumner Whittier and his Whittling Theme (borrowed from an editorial in the Boston Herald of recent date) can be gleaned from a cursory glance at the 23 for, 16 against, roll call on this measure, Five staunch GOP senators joined with 18 Democratic senators to give this bill an over- whelming endorsement. These five Repub- lican stalwarts were Senator Ralph Lerche, of Northampton; Senator Ralph V. Clampit, of Springfield; Senator John D. Mackay, of Quincy; Senator Charle~ G. Miles, of Brock= ton; and Senator Charles M. Olson, of Ash- land. No person can question the party regu- larity or patriotism of these representatives of the people. PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION SHOULD BE OUTLAWED On Monday next the Massachusetts State Senate will have up for consideration the question of passing to its third reading Sen. ate No. 216, an act repealing the laws author~ izing the election of certain city and town officers by proportional representation and preferential voting. This bill is sponsored by Senator Daniel F. O’Brien, of Cambridge; Miss Edna Lawrence Spencer, of Cambridge; and Charles H. McGlue, of Boston. This im- portant piece of legislation has already re~ ceived a majority vote in the State senate, and in all probability will be passed in the senate during this coming week and then sent to the house for action there. PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION VERSUS UNITED STATES PRINCIPLES Prof. Ferdinand A. Hermens, who is head of the department of political science at the University of Notre Dame, has made & very thorough study of the proportional rep~% q resentation system of voting. His analysis of its dangers and fallacies is well worth reading and is as follows: “The system of proportional representa- tion constitutes a denial of the very founda. # tions on which our representative Republic is based. For the founders of this country representation meant integration; for the it means fragmentation. The Constitution of the United States was established in the belief that it was the task of the people in elections to establish broad areas of agree« ‘ment and to select the best man available to public office. Under proportional representa. - tion any coherent minority bloc of sufficient - size can elect a member of a parliamentary body without attempting in the least to se- cure agreement with citizens belonging to other groups. For the men elected, it suffices to be the mouthpieces of such a bloc; they need not be the political leaders who can lead us all on the basis of our common devotion to the general welfare, and who, as James Madison stated in No. X of the Federalist papers, should be elected under the Consti- tution. STRONG MEN OPPOSE PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION “There has been no lack of men prominent in our political life who realized how deeply proportional representation threatens the very vitals of our Republic. Newton D. Baker, Wocdrow Wilson’s Secretary of War, belonged to them. He emphasized that ‘proportional representation invites these groups (reli- gious, racial, language, social, and other con~ tentious minority groups) to seek to harden and intensify their difference by bringing them into political action where they are irrevelant, if not disturbing.’ Senator RoBerT A. Tarr has expressed himself similarly in a talk given in 1924 while he was the Republi- can floor leader in the Ohio House of Repre- sentatives. He is known not to have changed his views in the matter. Senator Lopez stated on the floor of the United States Sen- ate on January 25 of this year: ‘Proportional representation is a means of reflecting every shade of popular opinion in a legislative body. It does encourage splinter parties, of course, and thus makes it more difficult for any dominant group to carry out a con- sistent policy. In a city council or a legisla- ture there could be a perfect rainbow of parties. That is true in some European countries.’ “In American local government propor- tional representation has been an element of confusion. It has led to deadlocks in Cin- cinnati, in New York City, in Yonkers, in Cambridge, and in Lowell. It has, on sev- eral occasions, including the latest election in Cincinnati, had the result that more bal- lots were either invalid or exhausted than constitute the quota. As it was put after the latest election held in Wheeling, W. Va.: ‘Old Man Invalid came out on the top of the poll.’ PROFORTIONAL REPRESENTATION HURTS MANAGER PLAN “The city-manager plan, that splendid in- strument of reform, has done magnificently in hundreds of American cities. About 900 of them now apply it. the vast number of cases, that a satisfactory record was established, and opposition was nil. When manager plan was combined with proportional representation, there has been no end of civic dissension. After almost every election under proportional representa- tion, dissatisfaction has manifested itself, resulting in many cases in attempts to repeal this system of voting. Millions of dollars have been spent needlessly on such contro- versies, which the traditional American sys- tem of voting would have avoided entirely. ‘It should never be overlooked that the " proponents of proportional representation in the United States propose it for local elec- . tions only in order to have it adopted later -in State and national elections. This is clearly stated in the writings of the leaders + in this field, such as in the concluding pages “" of Mrs. George H. Hallett’s booklet entitled + dhie : proponents of proportional representation Wherever the major-. ity system was used, the experience was, in“ A2949, Democracy.” Nor have the proponents of proportional representation left us in doubt as to the consequences which might arise in our national legislative bodies as a result of the application of proportional representa- tion. The book by Hoag and Hallett, for ex- ‘ample, entitled “Proportional Representa- tion,” is, as shown on pages 114-117, clearly critical of the two-party system. It contem- plates a situation in which Congress would be divided into minority parties, which would have to make decisions in a process of bargaining. They state: Such a situation, which might often occur under proportional representation is essentially a wholesome one. Thus, the House of Representatives would become representative in fact as well as in name. It is obvious then that repre- sentation is identified with fragmentation, which 1s welcomed. PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION DANGEROUS DOCTRINE “Where proportional representation leads us if applied to State and national elections can clearly be seen from its contemporary European record. The daily press has been reporting the scandals caused by Commu- nists in the Parliaments of several European countries, in particular France and Italy, where they have produced the most shame- ful scenes in order to protest, among other things, against American assistance to their countries. These Communist Parties know very well that under the majority system the number of their members in National Parlia- ments would be reduced catastrophically, as it was reduced when in France the latest Provincial elections were held under the ma- jority system. This gave to the Communists little more than 2 percent of the total num- ber of seats in comparison to the nearly 30 percent which proportional representation had given them in the National Assembly.’ For this reason Communist Parties all over the world fight for proportional representa-~ tion. If proportional representation favors Communists this is merely a logical conse- quence of its generally undemocratic char- acter. It has favored Nationalists, Nazis, and Fascists in the past, and does so again at present. The small Nationalist groups which are at present causing so much turmoil in the German Federal Parliament in Bonn owe their seats to proportional representation. Without that system those parties and the mew ones which have been formed or are about to be formed simply would have to be liquidated, and their voters would be in- duced to rally to the cause of more moder- ate and more responsible political parties. “Proportional representation in Europe is, therefore, a threat to the objectives which this country pursues at the expense of bil- lions under the Marshall plan and the mili- tary assistance program. If extended into State and national elections 1t would end the political stability which we have enjoyed under our two-party system. Its use in local elections is intended to pave the road to this goal. It is apt to dull our apprehensions as to the true nature of the threat to our insti- tutions involved. It is also, as has been stated by such a prominent proponent of municipal reform as Dr. Don K. Price, one of the greatest threats to true progress in the ‘improvement of local government in general, and to the progress of the city-manager plan in particular.” The above is the studied opinion of the world’s greatest authority on this subject, Professor Hermens of Notre Dame. FRAUD FACTOR IN PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION ‘ The plan E system is a fraud on the voting public. It is based on the theory behind the European bloc system which combined with ‘proportional representation produced Hitler in Germany and Mussoliniin Italy. It is the same system that New York City repealed ‘2 years ago last November by a 2-to-1 vote ‘Proportional Representation, the Key to , in order to get rid of a system that elected
A2950 four avowed Communists or left-wing sym- pathizers to their municipal council of 23 members. The public does not yet understand the communistic set-up of plan E and propor- tional representation. The fraud factor in this system has not yet been thoroughly ex- posed. The so-called reformers stress very much that proportional representation vot- ing gives the voter a chance to express their choice of candidates by voting for their first choice, second choice, etc., ad infinitum et ad nauseam. What these reformers do not stress is the fraud factor, the proportional represenation deception, that no matter how many choices a voter may make on his ballot, whether it be 2 or 86, the voter never votes for more than one councilor. He only votes once and for only one councilor. In other words, propor- tional representation takes away from every voter eight-ninths of his voting power and leaves him with only the right to vote for One councilor when 9 are to be elected. This is the so-called plan E and proportional representation fraud factor that relies upon religious and racial tensions to produce the results which are generally pleasing to the overlord of the Kremlin. Pian E should be called plan European and proportional representation is a communistic device which, in reality, stands for the phrase “please Russia.’ PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION REPEAL EDITORIALS New York Journal-American, under date of April 3, 1947, wrote as follows: “ABOLISH PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION “The drive to abolish proportional repre- sentation as the means of electing our city councilmen should and will have the sup~ port of every fair-minded voter. “How it got on the books in the first place is something that even the politicians are puzzling over now. “Proportional representation has certainly proved itself the most disproportional sys- tem of representation that has yet been de- vised. “Tt has forced down the throats of dis- gusted citizens two actual Communist Party members, and two more who are Communist wolves in sheep’s clothing, masquerading under other party labels. “Four out of a council of 23 members who consistently vote for governmental disrup- tion and disharmony whenever the oppor- tunity presents itself. “Ninety-nine percent of New Yorkers are American voters who want no part of this wrecking crew and their foreign ideologies. “The time has now come to rid the city government of representatives who do not represent the people. “It won’t take much of a push to put the drive over. “So far proportional representation has cost the city $1,600,000, another factor which must not be disregarded in these years of billion dollar budgets. “Once in a while politics and politicians can be constructive. The move to liquidate proportional representation is constructive politics.” Boston Evening Record, under date of No- vember 7, 1947, said: “LESSON FoR MasSACHUSETTS “The emphatic rejection of proportional representation by New York City’s voters should be a lesson for the people of Massa- chusetts. “This complicated and confusing method of balloting was proven beneficial to Com- munists and for that reason, more than any other, it was abolished in the Nation’s largest municipality after 11 years of trial. “We do not want Communists and their ilk. in our Bay State city and town govern- ments, “We have faith and confidence in the tra- ditionally American two-party system. “We therefore feel that New York City’s commendable example will be generally fol- lowed.” Boston Daily Record, in its issue of No- vember 25, 1947, stated: “Toe OUTLAWING OF PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION “Several senators and representatives will ask the legislature to outlaw proportional representation and preferential voting in Massachusetts. “These legislators are confident that this Commonwealth will be sufficiently practical and democratic to follow the good example of New York City, which repealed the pro- portional representation system after long and unsatisfactory experience with it.” Following the repeal, a few weeks ago, the New York Sun made this rather typical observation: “The Communists and their fellow radi- cals lost their foothold in the city govern- ment with the defeat of proportional repre- sentation.’ “There should be no foothold for Com- munists and their ilk in our Massachusetts city governments.” The Boston American on March 22, 1949, asked the legislature to repeal proportional representation in the following language: “REPEAL IT “The Massachusetts Legislature should welcome the opportunity to repeal propor- tional representation which Senator Melley’s popular bill presents. “The fact that this complicated method of selecting public officials has proved bene- ficial to Communists in New York City and other places discredits it for all time so far as most persons in this Commonwealth are concerned. “With a cold war embracing so much of the civilized world and a hot war threatening, we cannot afford to risk the danger of hav- ing more Communists and fellow travelers in any branch or segment of the American Government. ‘ “The legislature made a serious mistak when it sanctioned proportional representa- tion a few years ago. “The only way to remedy the unfortunate situations which have resulted from that mistake is to take proportional representa- tion off the statute books.” ‘ The Boston Daily Record in its editorial column on March 11, 1950, made the follow- ing plea: “LET’S STAY AMERICAN “The survival of our democratic form of government and the very existence of our Republic demand the retention of the 1949 law banning proportional representation in all cities and towns of the Commonwealth except in the few which adopted this con- fusing method of electing officials before the prohibition was enacted. “And it would be a good idea to get rid of this proportional representation thing in them, too. “Election methods ought to be so simple that they can be readily understood by all the people. ‘ “That is an elementary requirement of good government. “A system of voting that baffles the average citizen cannot inspire his confidence, and it is neither honest nor honorable for anybody to contend that it will do otherwise. “Our people must have complete faith in their Government and particularly in that of the cities and towns, which is closest to them. “Furthermore, proportional representation has enabled Communists and fellow travel- ers to win election in many places. “We do not want them to repeat their suc- cesses in Massachusetts, certainly not in this period of critically cool war, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD “The United States became the strongest and best Nation on earth, because it trusted majorities and allowed them to determine the results of free elections, “Instead of relaxing the ban on propor- tional representation, the Massachusetts Senate, which will take up the matter Mon- day, should, therefore, intensify it and make it more extensive and binding. “Persons who are dissatisfied with the traditionally American election methods which gave us our greatest statesmen, in- cluding George Washington, Abraham Lin- coln, and Theodore Roosevelt, may continue to clamor for the new-look system of ballot- ing. “But the citizenry as a whole will applaud Senators who refuse to yield to the pressure of minorities and splinter parties with their transient fads and fancies and obvious selfishness.” WHENCE AND WHAT IS PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION? Proportional representation is a system of voting and counting votes, which was in- vented by an English schoolmaster on the theory that it would give minority groups individual representation in government. It Was never adopted in England for the Eng- lish. However, to make sure the Irish would never get together, the English Parliament shrewdly incorporated proportional repre- sentation in the constitution it forced upon the Irish Free State. : HOW PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION HAS OPERATED Proportional representation was intro- duced in Italy in 1919, and in just a little over 3 years it had so disintegrated the polit- ical life of the country that the situation was ripe for a man on horseback, and Mus- solini stepped in. Hitler’s rapid rise to power, aided and abetted and financed by major industrial- ists and big taxpayers in Germany, was even more clearly due to proportional representa- tion than the triumph of Mussolini. Austria was the next victim of propor- tional representation. Proportional representation worked sim- flar havoc in Greece, Czechoslovakia, France, and in the countries of eastern Europe which abandoned democracy and are now satellites of Russia. WHY PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION IS DANGEROUS Proportional representation is dangerous because it reverses the democratic principle of representative government by the ma- jority. Proportional representation is dangerous because it breeds dissension, fosters racial and religious antagonism, arrays class against class. Proportional representation is dangerous because it destroys political unity by creating a multitude of political parties, all clamor- ing for more power and special privilege for their respective minorities. Proportional representation ridicules “E Pluribus Unum” and rallies to divide and conquer. (Divide et empera.) THE PROPORTIONAL-REPRESENTATION METHOD OF VOTING This method is a lottery system of voting which favors organized minorities seeking their own advancement to the detriment of the majority and the city. A complicated system of counting votes whereby each voter elects only one candidate although he may have voted forseveral. The proportional rep- resentation method of voting is based on the theory that a proportionate number of peo- ple elect each candidate as compared with the American system under which the ma- jority of the people elect all the candidates. Under proportional representation you vote ' for only one candidate and it is an impossi-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD bility for your ballot to count for more than one candidate. CONCLUSION TO CONFUSION When Gov. Paul A. Dever signs house pill No. 2369 on Monday next, and the sen- ate votes to send along senate bill No. 216 to the house of representatives, we may truly say that the elected representatives of the peopie of this Commonwealth are still on guard in the preservation of the historic rights of its citizens. It has been a long hard fight but victory is in the offing. Plan E(uropean) and the P(lease) R(ussia) style of voting are on the way out in Massachusetts. P(arlor-Pink) R(egimentation) won’t hap- pen here! CHARLES H. McGLuz. Address by the President Before the Federal Bar Association EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ESTES KEFAUVER OF TENNESSEE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, April 25 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. KEFAUVER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Recorp the address of President Truman at the dinner of the Federal Bar Association on April 24, 1950, at the Stat- ler Hotel, in Washington, D. C. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Rzcorp, as follows: Mr. President, distinguished guests, mem- bers of the Federal Bar Association, I am delighted to be at this dinner tonight, and to join in commemorating the thirtieth an- niversary of the founding of this fine organi- zation of Federal lawyers. It would be hard for me to deny that I am friendly to lawyers. The record would speak against me if I did. Six of the nine members of my Cabinet are lawyers. So are quite a few other top Officials of the executive branch. When you couple this with the fact that over half of the House of Representatives and about two-thirds of the Senate are law- yers, as well as all our Federal judges, of course, you can see that—so far as the Gov- ernment of the United States is concerned— the legal profession is not just a passing fancy. It is probably here to stay. Our lawyers have a primary responsibility in the maintenance of justice. This is par- ticularly true of the Government lawyer, whose first devotion must be to the public interest. The public interest does not mean only the interest of the Government. It means also the protection of the rights of individual citizens. Our concept of justice represents a basic difference between our system of government and that of the totalitarian states. Justice .is the foundation of true democracy. Our system of justice preserves the freedom and dignity of the individual, and his right to think and speak as he feels and to worship as he pleases. It protects him in the asser- tion of his rights even against his own gov- ernment. It makes certain that his asser- tion of those rights will be fairly considered and justly decided. But there is in the world today a tyranni- cal force which does not recognize justice as we know it. It is a force which crushes the minds and bodies of those under its control, _ and seeks to enlarge itself by aggression and by false promises of freedom and cconcmic security. Wherever this force extends, there is no freedom of speech, no freedom of religion, no freedom even of opinion. The state is the all-powerful arbiter of men’s words and acts. Human dignity and human freedom are meaningless. Against this tyrannical force, which we know as communism, the United States stands as the great champion of freedom. Against this force, the United States has de- veloped and put into effect a positive pro- gram to strengthen freedom and democracy. Our program is shaped to strengthen the United States and to help other free nations protect themselves against aggression and subversion. Since the end of the war we have taken far-seeing steps, unprecedented in the his- tory of the world, to help other free nations rebuild from the destruction of war and strengthen their democratic institutions. Our programs of foreign aid have made it possible for these free nations to resist Com- munist agercssion. The Greek-Turkish aid prozram, the Mar- shall plan, the North Atlantic Treaty, the military assistance program, and our support of the United Nations are major elements in our central policy to work for a peaceful and prosperous world. We have taken the lead~ ership in aiding underdeveloped areas, and in reducing trade barriers between nations. We are keeping our military forces strong and alert, and we are giving meaning and strength to our joint defense arrangements with other countries. _ We have done all this because it represents enlightened self-interest. We know that the greatest threat to us‘does not come from the Communists in this country, where they are a noisy but small and universally de- spised group. The greatest threat comes from Communist imperialism abroad, where the center of its military and economic strength lies. The real danger is that com- munism might overrun other free nations and thus strengthen itself for an ultimate attack against us. But although communism is not a major force in this country, we are taking no chances on its becoming strong here. On the one hand, we are working to create con- ditions in the United States in which com- munism cannot possibly thrive. On the other, we are striking hard blows at Com- munist subversion wherever it is found. We are vigorously pressing domestic pro- grams to improve the standard of living of our people, to assure equal opportunity for all, and to promote their health and educa- tion, and their security and freedom. These programs were not specifically designed as anti-Communist measures. We would have had them even if there were not a single Communist in the world. Nevertheless, they are among the strongest anti-Communist weapons in our whole arsenal. Communism has little appeal for people who are healthy, well-educated, prosperous, and free. Moreover, there are few things that will do more to prevent the Communists from winning followers in other lands than a demonstration by the United States that Gemocracy truly means a better, freer life for everyone. While we have been working to improve our democracy, we have been fully aware of the threat of Communist subversion within our own borders. Through the Federal Bu- reau of Investigation and our other security forces, through prosecutions in the courts by the Department of Justice, through our Fed- eral employee loyalty program, and in many +, Other ways, we have vigorously attacked , Communists wherever their activities be- came a threat to our liberties. There has been so much confusion re« ce A2951 communism in this country, that I think the record should be set straight. This administration has fought commu- nism with action and not just with words. We have carried on this fight with every law on the statute books, and we have recom- mended new laws when we found they were necessary and could be framed without im- pairing the very freedoms we are seeking to protect. i No known instance of Communist sub-' version, or any other kind of subversion, has gone uninvestigated. No case where the facts warranted has gone unprosecuted. : We have presecuted and obtained convic- tion of 11 top-ranking members of the Communist Party in this country. We have successfully prosecuted many other persons for crimes related to communism. We have also prosecuted and obtained conviction of a large number of alleged Communists on charges of contempt for refusing to testify before Federal grand juries or congressional committees. We now have under investigation the cases of over 1,000 citizens to determine whether steps should be taken to revoke their citizenship on grounds involving sub- versive activities. One hundred and thirty- eight persons are under orders of deporta- tion on grounds involving communism. There is no area of American life in which the Communist Party is making headway. The Communists have done their best to penetrate labor unions and the Government, but they are being successfully fought on both fronts. Labor has been doing a splen- did job of cleaning its house. In the Federal Government, the Employee Loyalty pro- gram has been an outstanding success, and Government lawyers have contributed greatly to that result. I set up the employee loyalty program 3 years ago with two objectives in mind. I was determined, as far as it was humanly possible, to see that no disloyal person should be employed by our Government, whether he was a Communist or a native American Fascist of the Silver Shirt or Ku Klux Klan variety. I was equally determined that loyal Government employees should be protected against accusations which were false, malicious, or ill-founded. The loyalty program was drafted by able and experienced people to protect the secu- rity of the Government and to safeguard the rights of its employees. It is the first time in the history of this country that we have had such a program. The Communists and their friends, as well as some sincere ideal- ists, say that it is too drastic. The false patriots and even some honest reactionaries say that it is entirely too mild. They want . us to dismiss employees on the basis of un- supported charges. They actually resent the democratic safeguards of the loyalty program. All this confirms me in the con- viction that it is a sound and effective pro- gram conceived and carried out in the American tradition. The FBI, the agency loyalty boards, and the Loyalty Review Board have quietly and effectively carried out their job of protecting the integrity and security of our Govern- ment. The Loyalty Review Board is the cen- tral organization which directs the whole program. It is divided about half and half between Democrats and Republicans and is headed by a distinguished Republican lawyer, Mr. Seth Richardson, who served as Assistant Attorney General of the United States under President Hoover. Under the supervision of this Board the loyalty program has rid the Government of all employees who were found to be dis- loyal—and they were only a tiny fraction of 1 percent. : Not a single person who has been adjudged to be a Communist or otherwise disloyal re< cently about_who is doing what to defeat », Mains on the Government pay roll today. ~~
A2952 The able men charged with carrying out the loyalty program know that keeping dis- joyal persons out of the Government is a bus-~ iness which must be done carefully and ob- jectively. They know that the job cannot be done by publicly denouncing men as Communists without having evidence to support such charges, or by blackening the character of persons because their views are different from those of the accuser, or by hurling sensational accusations based on gos- sip, hearsay, or hunch. They know that no one whose principal concern was the security of this country would try to do it that way. They know that anyone who had informa- tion about Communist activity, and who placed the security of this country above selfish or partisan considerations, would turn that information over to the FBI, so that it “could be properly investigated and the necessary action taken. I have been surprised to see how much ignorance and misunderstanding there is about the loyalty program—even on the part of people who should know better. It has occurred to me that perhaps they do know petter—that perhaps there is some element of politics in their accusations. A large part of the hue and cry about the loyalty program has centered on my refusal to turn over to a congressional committee confidential loyalty files concerning individ- ual employees. I have already stated several times the reasons why these files must not be disclosed. I want to restate them briefly now. The preservation of the strictest confidence with respect to loyalty files is the single most important element in operating a loyalty pro- gram which provides effective security for the Government and justice for the individual employee. The disclosure of these files would not only destroy the whole loyalty program but would seriously damage the future usefulness of the FBI. Information is given to the FBI in confidence, which the FBI has sworn to protect. Breaking the confidence would not only greatly embarrass and even endanger the informants involved but would gravely impair the FBI’s ability to get future infor- mation from other confidential sources. Opening these files would reveal FBI pro- cedures and methods. It might reveal highly secret information vital to our national secu- rity and of great value to foreign nations. Disclosure of the files would result in seri- ous injustice to the reputation of many in- nocent persons. This is true because the FBI investigative files do not contain proven information only. They include unverified charges and statements, as well as mere sus- picions, which, upon investigation, are found to be untrue. If I should now open these files, I would create a precedent for future cases in which access to these files is demanded—and there would be many of them. This would com- pletely destroy the loyalty program, since, as experience shows, it would mean an attempt to try all loyalty cases over again in news- paper headlines, although they had already been carefully considered and fairly decided by a bipartisan board of loyal and distin- guished Americans. This question of maintaining the confiden- tial character of information which the Presi- dent determines it would not be in the public interest to disclose is not new. It goes back to the beginnings of our Government. Wash- ington, Monroe, Jackson, Cleveland, and Theodore Roosevelt are only a few of the Presidents who have taken the same posi- tion which I am taking. Despite the historic precedents, with which I was thoroughly familiar, I gave the most careful consideration to the recent request of a Senate committee for access to the loyalty files. I obtained the views of Attor- ney General McGrath, Loyalty Review Board Chairman Richardson, and FBI Director Hoover before I reached my decision to deny this request. All three were unanimous in recommending to me in the strongest pos- sible terms that I refuse to make the files available. The decision was mine and I made it. I am confident that no President, whatever his party, would have acted other- wise. The Federal employee loyalty program has demonstrated that the United States has the most loyal civil service in the world. Itisa splendid organization which I am proud to head. Of course, in an organization as large as the United States Government it is always possible, despite the greatest precautions, that there may be a few bad individuals. We shall not for one minute relax our vigilant efforts to protect the security of the Gov- ernment, The present Attorney General and his pred- ecessor have repeatedly asked that if any person has any information about the pres- ence of any Communist in the Government it be furnished to them. I now repeat that request. If any citizen knows of the presence of a single Communist or other subversive person in any Federal job, let him furnish that in- formation, and the evidence which supports his belief, to the Attorney General or to the FBI. Any information that may be fur- nished in response to this request will be promptly, investigated and will be acted upon if the allegations are found to be true. The fact of the matter is—because of the measures we are taking—the internal secu- rity of the United States is not seriously threatened by the Communists in this coun- try. There are proportionately fewer Com- munists in this country than in any other large country on earth. They are noisy and they are troublesome, but they are not a major threat. Moreover, they have been steadily losing ground since their peak in 1932, at the depth of our greatest depression, when they polled the largest number of votes in their his- tory. There is a right way and a wrong way to fight communism. This administration is doing it the right way, the sensible way. Our attack on communism is embodied in &@ positive, threefold program: One, we are strengthening our own defenses and aiding free nations in other parts of the world so that we and they can effec- tively resist Communist aggression. Two, we are working to improve our de- mocracy so as to give further proof, both to our own citizens and to people in other parts of the world, that democracy is the best system of government that men have yet de- vised. Three, we are working quietly but effec- tively, without headlines or hysteria, against Communist subversion in this country whereever it appears, and we are doing this within the framework of the democratic lib= erties we cherish. That is the way this administration is fighting communism. That is the way it is going to continue to fight communism. . Now I am going to tell you how we are not going to fight communism, We are not going to transform our fine FBI into a Gestapo-like secret police. We are not going to try to control what our people read and say and think. We are not going to turn the United States into a right-wing total- itarian country in order to deal with a left- wing totalitarian threat. In short, we are not going to end democ- racy. We are going to keep the Bill of Rights on the books. We are going to keep APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD those ancient, hard-earned liberties which you lawyers have done so much to preserve and protect. If we all work together to maintain and strengthen our democratic ideals, commun~ ism will never be a serious threat to our American way of life. The example we set for freemen everywhere will help to roll back the tide of Communist imperialism in other parts of the world. I have outlined for you my program against communism. That is the way I have worked against it. That is the way I shall continue to work against it. I call on all fair-minded men and women to join in this good fight. The Preservation of Private Enterprise EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. A. WILLIS ROBERTSON OF VIRGINIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, April 25 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. ROBERTSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Rrcorp the ad- dress entitled “The Preservation of Pri- vate Enterprise,’ which I delivered at the annual coal convention of the Amer- ican Mining Congress, in Cincinnati, Ohio, on Monday, April 24, 1950. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: THE PRESERVATION OF PRIVATE ENTERPRISE To live in these midyears of the twentieth century is to be aware that civilization is passing through one of the great critical pe~ riods of history. The present epoch has, in« deed, few parallels in the past. Today, un~ der the pressure of dramatic and far-reach-' ing changes in the technical, cultural, politi- cal, and economic dimensions of existence,’ men are conscious that the fundamental structure of society, the most profound bases of government and personal life are at issue. Confronted by challenges of such immense scope and gravity it becomes necessary to see clearly and steadfastly the aims and prin-' ciples which underlie free economy and free government. ' The anti-God ideology of communism now dominates the lives of 200,000,000 people in the Soviet Union, 100,000,000 people in the so-called satellite countries of western Eu- rope, and 400,000,000 people in China. Lead- ers of the Soviet Union are applying constant pressure both in western Europe and in the Orient to expand their area of influence, with total world domination their ultimate goal. In that struggle a free and economically sound America is the hope of humanity. The principal difficulty of democratic lead- ers in trying to reach an agreement with Soviet leaders to end the cold war stems from the fact that there is no fundamental pre- mise of human rights and ethical conduct upon which the conflicting interests can agree. Fortunately, there are certain fundamen~ tal premises which if not overlooked may readily be accepted by thinking and patriotic American citizens. Such a list would include the following: ‘ 1. Our conception of human rights and ethical principles is based upon the teach- ings of the Bible and the teachings held in
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD common by all the great religions of man- kind. 2. The American system of competitive en- terprise is unique in the world. 8. Private but properly regulated enter- prise in a capitalistic system and personal freedom in a representative democracy are handmaidens, and if one be lost the other is doomed. In selecting my topic today, the preserva- tion of the American system of private en- terprise, I had in mind the 8,000-mule trip I tock last fall through 14 countries in west- ern Europe, from Oslo on the north to Ath- ens on the south, where on every hand I saw the debilitating effect of that misnomer called democratic socialism. I likewise had in mind the numerous measures presented to the Congress during the past 3 years whose ultimate effect would be to substitute the same type of socialism for American constitutional freedom and the American system of private enterprise. The methods, the cbjec. ives, and the con- ditions necessary for the functioning of po- litical freedom depend in their essence upon economic freedom. To recognize that the present era contains dangers which can jeopardize the framework of a free society is to realize that, in fact, there can be no genu- ine political freedom which is not sustained and nourished by the strength, the flexibil- ity, and—most important—the legal insti- tutions and practices of an economy of free, private, competitive enterprise, The whole history of the last two centuries demonstrates with a certainty beyond cavil that where economic opportunity for initia- tive is blocked, where competition is stifled or suppressed by monopoly or governments, where the right to choose a trade or profes- sion, or to move from one field of endeavor to another is nullified, the loss of political lib- erties becomes an immediate threat, and in time a most probable, even inescapable con- sequence. In the stark contrasts between the experience of this country and much of the rest of the world it is sharply apparent that many of the peoples who have lost their liberties already, or are struggling against odds to retain them, have been misled into a fateful error—the belief that it is possible to maintain political democracy and repre- sentative government in full vigor while ylelding freedom of enterprise, and with it the power of control over their economic des- tinies. It is not possible for this to be done. Political and economic freedom are root and branch of the same tree. How did freedom of enterprise originate, but as the mainspring of the struggle for liberty? Our American system of govern- ment, unique in that our Declaration of Independence said for the first time in re- corded history that government derives its just powers from the consent of the gov- erned and unique in the possession of a written Constitution in which without Spelling it out the principle of private en- terprise is firmly embedded, has some roots in the ancient culture of the Jewish people through whom the Ten Commandments and the principles of the Sermon on the Mount were handed down to us. He does not know his American history who does not know that our founding fathers were deeply re- ligious, asking the Father of Light to il- luminate their understanding and firmly believing that if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice a new and enduring republic could not rise without His aid. It has roots in the Greek system from which the name “democracy” was borrowed. It has roots in the culture of Rome which brought system and order into the realm of law and it sprang directly from the ex- perience of the British people who had cone stantly enlarged the area of rights assured to the common man by Magna Carta, “ A2953 bale oy But our American constitutional Govern~ * ment cannot be said to be the same as the governments from which it drew inspiration any more than the atomic bomb can be said to be the same as the various incendi- ary, fragmentation, or penetration bombs which were in use before it was developed. Something akin to nuclear fission oc- curred during our struggle for freedom from the ancient doctrine of the divine right of Kings. The ideal of liberty, of economic and political rights guarded by law, transformed a colony of empire into a citadel of democ- racy for the world. The trigger which set off the chain re- action may be found in the words of Thomas Jefferson who wrote, in the Declaration of independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” The preamble to the Constitution started with the significant words ‘we the people.” There were some patriots, including Patrick Henry, who feared those words indicated too strong a central government but in spite of their protests a document whose drafting was guided by the hand of destiny was rati- fied. Ratification came, however, only after James Madison and others had promised that amendments would be offered which would perpetually prevent the Government from following the historical pattern of usurping the rights of the people. In keeping with this promise, when the first Congress met in 1789 it approved 10 amendments which were adopted the follow- ing year. These amendments, which we know as the Bill of Rights, set the boundaries beyond which the Federal Government must not go in interfering with individual liber- ties and property rights. They mentioned certain rights specifically but concluded with the flat assertion that the enumeration of these rights “shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the peo- ple,” and the added statement that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited to it by the States, are reserved to the States respec- tively, or to the people.” From the hurried survey which I have just given of the basis of our Government the fundamental truth stands forth that where, as in Europe, freedom of enterprise never achieved its full stature, political freedom has been correspondingly warped and in-~ hibited. Even in Britain, where Adam Smith became the greatest spokesman for the “sim- ple and natural system of economic liberty,” the conditions of free competition were al- ways circumscribed. As Lionel Robbins, the British economist, has said with reference to English experience, “Liberalism—is not a plan that-has been tried and failed. Itisa plan that has never yet had a full chance,” It may be said, indeed, that only in the United States at the time of its establish- ment was there a profound comprehension of the significance, even the identity, of free- dom of enterprise with free political institu- tions. In this respect, the Government and Constitution formed by men with wide per- spective and realistic vision were unique, and produced a society uniquely free, uniquely capable of growth, and now, almost the sole example of a nation able to meet its prob- lems and master them with the strength of democracy and the support of a free economy, . Many eminent authorities agree that it is this quality of the work of those who brought a new nation into being which has been the major factor responsible for America’s eco- nomic development. What is more, there is almost complete accord of opinion that it is the striking differences between this setting of American industry, with its free and com- petitive basis, and that of shackeled Euro- pean industry, which have meant the great disparity between ways of doing business here and abroad. Moreover, these differences have spelled the perpetuation and increase of opportunity and constantly rising stand- ards of living for the American people, and a tragic spectacle of bitterness, class conflict, deprivation of liberty, and the ultimate drift away from all freedom for the populations of Europe. It is well to understand that the system of free enterprise and representative govern- ment have the same historic sources, and that in many basic respects American free enterprise represents as much of a contribu- > tion to the growth of civilization as does the American form of government. Thus, for example, a former Assistant Attorney Gen- eral, a recognized student of the question, has said: “The convictions which form the frame-. work of the American economy rank high among the social inventions of modern his~ tory. It is no accident that the idea of free enterprise emerged from the age of reason. The same period which conceived and estab. lished political democracy was logically com~ pelled to foster enterprise as the indispensa- ble economic cornerstone of a free society. Before that time there had been neither political nor economic freedom for the great majority of mankind. Status, privilege, and power governed both the political and eco- nomic destinies of the ordinary man. To displace this feudal order and to construct the foundations of a democratic society re- quired the determined efforts of several gen- erations during the industrial revolution. “At the outset it was realized that repre- sentative government in order to survive must rest upon the bedrock of political free- dom, the ethical and legal equality of all citizens, and the integrity of a public interest which embraced every member of society. It was appreciated that the economic life of democracy must be rooted in the fertile ground of initiative, of equal opportunity, the right of choice in occupation, the guar- antee that no artifice of exclusion would con- trol the market, and the assurance that the economic interests of the public would not be narrowed by privilege. “The essence of political democracy is the free election. The essence of economic lib- eralism is the free market. These freedoms are both the products of reason. Both are systems of liberty under law.” It is necessary to distinguish carefully both the economic and legal concepts involved in the relationships between Government and enterprise under the American Constitution and, in contrast, under the British and Eu- ropean types of government. It is possible, perhaps, to crystallize these facets of the problem by summarizing certain considera- tions: First, there is a distinction between cer- tain interpretations of laissez-faire and the freedom of enterprise as an organizing prin- ciple of economic activity. Second, there is a distinction in theory and in fact between regulation and planning of economic activity. Third, the American Constitution, as a sys- tem of checks and balances, contains safe- guards against the loss of the right of enter- prise which are not present in other consti- tutional systems, such as that of Great Brit. ain. Fourth, the principal characteristics of 7 American industrial enterprise, both in its relation to governments and its functioning in practice are inherently, as well as his- torically, different from European industry.
A2954 Fifth, the approaches made toward prob- lems arising 71cm i: Cusir.v change and in- dustrial behavior must necessarily be dis- tinct in the United States from the theories and assumptions derived mainly from Euro- pean experience. Sixth, both economically and politically, the American form of government and the American economy possess basic techniques and conceptions, grounded in tradition, law, and practice for the correction of undesirable effects or mistakes which are not present in European countries or in Britain, in fullest measure. There is, it may be observed, a broad and mobile area produced by these premises of action which makes possible an adaptive ad- justment, a moving balance in the relation- ships of government, industry, and labc> un~ der a free enterprise system which reciprocal- ly strengthens and is dependent upon rep- resentative democracy. American industry as a@ whole is dynamic, the most highly ad-~ vanced as it is generally the quickest to change where there are no barriers to inno- vation, of any comparable industrial com~ plex in the world. This genuine spirit of achievement is reflected in the confidence with which American industry undertakes long-range and short-range improvement programs, from the development of 4 match- less machine-tool industry or the perfection of a new household appliance to the manu~ facture of the innumerable gadgets which change with every fancy of the consuming public. No other economy endeavors as does American enterprise to discover the desires and needs of consumers and to satisfy them. There is a respect for the individual, for the human personality, which permeates the free enterprise system to a degree not equaled by any other economy of the past or present. American industry is always responsible and responsive, necessarily, both to law and opinion of the public. This point and coun- terpoint of incentive and reward for the assumption of risk, the acceptance of oc- casional loss, the impetus toward benefi-~ cial improvements and high standards of efficiency, behavior, and service, all subject to the legal and social scrutiny of conduct, are essential attributes of the free enterprise system. They are so central to its meaning that they can be said to converge with the meaning of free government. The loss of either one would signalize the loss of both. At the outset of my remarks I referred to the spread of socialism in western Eu- rope which is sapping the vitality of indus- try and gradually impinging upon the lib- erties of the people. I am convinced that western Europe could not have stemmed the tide of communism without the ECA aid and Iam not convinced, notwithstanding marked progress in production, that western Europe will be self-supporting when our aid ends in 1952 in the absence of economic integra- tion, which means the creation of a freer system of trade. When the nations of western Europe and notably Great Britain to whom we are in- debted for our first conceptions of the fundamental rights of man, chose to go down the road to socialism by nationalizing basic industries, there was nothing in the structure of their governments to prevent such action. Magna Carta does not say that the government shall not take over the rail- roads. The Statutes of Praemunire offer no court remedy to the owner of a steel mill who is reluctant to give it up to the government. The whole hody of the common law contains nothing to prohibit nationalization of coal mines. On the other hand, the Constitution of the United States does not authorize such ac- tions and the’ Bill of Rights prohibits the assumption by the Federal Government of powers not delegated to it, The founding fathers had listened to the words of Thomas Jefferson who said: “In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.” They framed a government designed to protect individual enterprise as well as personal lib- erties. Certain concessions have been made in time of war on the theory that the Govern- ment can assume certain additional func- tions to provide for the common defense. But in time of peace the boundary protect- ing private enterprise has up to now been Clearly, marked. Thus, when the Federal Government wanted to build roads, it was allowed to do so only on the theory that this was a reasonable extension of the con- stitutional function of providing for delivery of the mails. And, although action of the Government in building a steam power gen~ erating plant was upheld by the courts, this was done on the theory that it was to be used as an adjunct to the development of natural water resources and was not an in- dependent business enterprise. Today, however, we see constant efforts to push back the boundary line between gov- ernment and business and we need to rec- ognize that these efforts may constitute a creeping socialism, which can undermine the Constitution and do by indirection what cannot be done directly. We are asked to approve a social security system. which cannot be self-supporting and which ultimately would make all of our aged, disabled, and unemployed wards of the Fed- eral Government, We are urged to approve a system of Fed- eral aid to education which would lead ulti- mately to Federal control aver our school systems. We are confronted with proposals for compulsory health insurance which would result in the medical profession receiving most of its compensation from the hands of the Government and which would rapidly lead to socialized medicine as it is practiced in Great Britain. Under the deceptive label of civil rights, we are placed under pressure to approve a program which would permit Federal officials to supervise local elections and to pass on the competency of local law-enforcement officers and punish those whose actions were not approved. This program also would set up a bureaucracy which could intervene in the relations of employers and employees and which would deprive individuals gener- ally of one of the most basic of their in- alienable rights—the right to pick their per- sonal associates. In fact, this proposed FEPC, to which I am now referring, would specifically violate at least half of the Bill of Rights amendments to our Constitution. Such legislative proposals as I have men- tioned constitute only one attack on our system of private enterprise. They would enable the Central Government to assume powers exercised by those earlier govern~ ments which we drew from but did not copy. Another line of attack consists of the ef-« forts of those who would invade the rights of the individual to obtain special privileges for certain groups or segments of our so- ciety. Sometimes this effort involves de- pendence on active protection by the Gov- ernment and at other times it is based on the assumption that the Government sim- ply will not interfere to prevent abuses. For example, the Congress is asked to ap- prove lending or other aid programs for hous- ing which will make it possible for a small segment of our population to obtain shelter with less effort on their own part than is » required of all the rest of the population. We are asked to give exemption to labor groups from laws which have been estab- lished to prevent exploitation of the public APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD by abuse of monopoly powers, regardless of the fact that when a Government permits a labor monopoly to abuse its powers one of two things necessarily results—the Govern- ment must then either permit industry to counter the labor monopoly force with an industrial monopoly force or nationalize the industry. To be specific about that last point: Last summer the Senate Banking and Currency Committee authorized me to conduct an in- quiry into the effects of economic power of labor organizations upon small business and consumers. Our inquiry was a general one but we gave particular attention to the problem as it was exemplified in the coal industry. The conclusion which we reached, and embodied in our committee report, was that the United Mine Workers, under the direction of John L. Lewis, were using their power in an attempt to control prices and production and that if this usurpation and abuse was tolerated, its unbridled use would spread from union to union and industry to industry and that Congress would never regain its narrowly circumscribed power to guide the economy consistently with the Constitution of the United States. Studying the evidence given at this hear- ing, which amounted to approximately 1,000 printed pages, I concluded that the trouble came from the fact that a 1941 court decision had upset the balance between antitrust laws originally enacted for the protection of all the people and the Norris-LaGuardia Act which was designed to protect the struggling labor movement against improper use of injunctive powers by powerful corpo- rations, I therefore introduced in the Senate my bill, S. 2912, which would not interfere in any way with legitimate collec- tive bargaining but which simply said that when labor organizations made unreasonable use of their monopoly powers—which they still would retain—and in doing it restrained trade or commerce essential to the national economy, health, or safety, they could not hide from prosecution behind a court inter- pretation of the Norris-LaGuardia Act which was contrary to all previous decisions and contrary to the clear intention of the Con- gress. I was told by many of those with whom I consulted before drafting this bill that it was too mild and would not adequately pro-~ tect the public. I agreed that a prohibition against industry-wide bargaining would he more effective but said I wanted to try some- thing which would at least offer some hope of protecting our private-enterprise system together with some chance of favorable con~ gressional action, When hearings were held on my bill, however, it was denounced by labor leaders as a lynch-labor law—a shib- boleth on a par with (or slightly below) a slave-labor law. In view of this, I think I am justified in saying that in addition to being threatened today by big government and by big busi- ness, our individual enterprise system is threatened by the short-sighted policies of big labor. I say that as one who always has favored fair and generous treatment of labor but also as one who recognized the ne- cessity of retaining the delicate balance on which our constitutional Government rests, We need today to recall the words of Ben~ Jamin Franklin, who said: “They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little tempo- rary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety,” and the words of Daniel Webster, who said: “God grants liberty only to those who love it, and are always willing to guard and defend Such a program involves a periodic review of the history of our own Government, a comparison of it with foreign governments that have failed, and a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD As a descendant of a Virginia family that furnished one signer to Jefferson’s Declara- tion of Independence and three members of the Virginia Convention that ratified the Philadelphia Constitution I take a pardon-~ able pride in the contribution made by colonial Virginia to the birth of a Nation. I want to see passed on to generations yet un- porn those precious principles of political and economic freedom that were born of the prain and purchased by the blood of our founding fathers. But down through the ages comes the warning of the Hebrew pa- triarch Job, “Remove not the ancient land- mark, which thy fathers have set.” May that motto be inscribed upon the heart of every lover of American constitutional liberty. Spreading Socialism EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. GEORGE A. DONDERO OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, April 25, 1950 Mr. DONDERO. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Con- GRESSIONAL Recorp, I include therein an editorial which appeared in the March 30, 1950, issue of the Chickasha Star, published in Chickasha, Okla. It will be noticed that a representative of the Department of the Interior has stated that within 10 years the Federal Government will operate a power system stretching from New Orleans to Seattle. This indicates the widespread encroach- ment of socialism in competition with private investment and private enter- prise. It is worthy-of note also to point out that this statement is printed in a news- paper located in an area where public power apparently has the upper hand. This editorial should be read by every Member of Congress. If public owner- ship is so desirable in one field, perhaps it can be justified in all others. The end of the trail, however, is the Russian philosophy of government and not the American. The editorial follows: Tur Tam Wacs THE DoG A press dispatch quotes a Department of the Interior expert to the effect that within 10 years the Federal Government will be in a position to operate a power system stretch- ing from New Orleans to Seattle. After that, the expert continucd, it would be compara- tively simple to tie in the Tennessee Valley Authority, and make the Federal system stretch from coast to coast. ‘All that’s needed,” he declared, ‘“‘is congressional au- thority and money to build tie-lines should we need them.” The irony and political du- plicity behind this short press dispatch is beyond the comprehension of a lot of plain American citizens. In 10 years, if the planners have their way, a basic industry will be nationalized and the Nation will be irrevocably advanced on the read to state socialism, despite the fact that there is no announced public policy sanc- tioning the program. On the contrary, avail- able evidence indicates that the people in this country are opposed to it. Where they have had an opportunity to express an opin- ion they have indicated that ownership and operation of industry should stay right where - it is—in the hands of private citizens. La Tle URE AT But the day may not be too far distant when the private citizen will be forced to step aside—while countless do-good alphabetical Federal agencies harden into an interlocking’ administrative dictatorship. That is what has been happening in the case of the elec-- tric industry. At first there was the alleged “yardstick” of the Tennessee Valley Authority to measure the efficiency of the investor owned electric companies; then their evolved’ a@ conglomeration of schemes such as REA’s’ BPA’s, and SPA’s. And now these scattered Federal projects are beginning to “cooperate” with each other to circumvent safeguards and restrictions imposed by Congress and to drive out of business the heavily taxed and regulated private companies. As far as the electric industry is concerned, unless the “experts” timetable is upset, an~ other 10 years will see the firm establish- ment of an unbreakable Government mo- nopoly in this vital service. After the electric industry there would be other industries. That is the pattern. It is being carried for- ward under a false label without the express consent of the people. Curtailment of Postal Service EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWIN ARTHUR HALL OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, April 25, 1950 Mr. EDWIN ARTHUR HALL. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my re- marks in the Recorp, I include the fol- lowing letter: BINGHAMTON, N. Y., April 20, 1950. Hon. Epwin ARTHUR Hau, New House Office Building, Washington, D.C. Dear Ep: Probably no governmental func-. tion has become so essential over the years to the growth of our country and has con-- tributed more to ease and facility of com< munication than our Post Office Department. It has become a symbol in our minds of utter reliability. Wise as it is to encourage economy in governmental functions to work toward a drastic reduction in our present excessively high tax rates, it does not necessarily fol- low that the first drastic cut in expenditures should take place in so essential a govern- mental service as the post office. Some of us wonder if the decision to cur- tail service in the Department came after every other avenue of economy had been explored, such as the high subsidies the De- partment makes to air and rail lines and (in many cases) the out-of-line high rents paid for working space and storage facilities. If this is not the case, then we can only assume that the order to cut services is a form of ‘political pressure, and if that is the case everyone has a right to insist that the post office is one department that has been and should remain free of any taint of politics or political pressure. It is too vital a service to tamper with politically. Even before this latest development, there seems to have been a gradual break-down of post-office service. We have had more smashed parcel post this year than ever before, the more noticeable since our volume has been jess than for the same period 1 year ago. There is one more item of importance I want to mention in this letter: the matter of employee morale. When morale is high our shipments are handled better. This is so true of any group of workingmen that I need not elaborate. The present curtail- A2955 ment order is going to lower the morale of postal employees when they compare the rigid conditions imposed on them in compar- ison to others in boondoggling Government bureaus. We all of us want and pray for economy but not at the expense of our most vital governmental department. With kindest personal regards, and hop=« ing to see you soon, Very truly yours, Burt (Burton T. Wilson). Selection of Unknown Soldier of World War II EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. JACK Z. ANDERSON OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, April 25, 1950 Mr. ANDERSON of California. Mr, Speaker, under leave to extend my re- marks in the Rrcorp, I am enclosing a self-explanatory and somewhat shock- ing editorial which recently appeared in the Santa Cruz Sentinel-News. : The policy of designating the Unknown Soldier of World War II is arousing a storm of protest throughout the country. I trust that my colleagues will give at- tention to the editorial and the news- paper article entitled “The Anonymous 8,000” and join me in an effort to change the announced policy of the Depart- ment of the Army with reference to the Unknown Soldier. The editorial and article follow: [From the Santa Cruz Sentinel-News of April 16, 1950] Dieniry Is Lost In simplicity lies dignity. The dignity of man should be preserved even in death. Press dispatches from Washington last week described the process by which the Unknown Soldier of World War ID will be selected. It becomes so complicated as to border on the ghoulish. When the Unknown Soldier of World War I was selected, a body of an unidentified war veteran was disinterred in October 1921, from each of the four United States Army cemeteries in France. The caskets were taken to Chalons-sur-Marne, where a wounded and decorated veteran, Sergeant Edward F. Younger, selected one casket by placing on it a spray of white roses. The casket then was shipped to Washington to lie in state in the Capitol and then to be buried at Arlington National Cemetery No- vember 11, 1921. The unknown soldier of World War II will be chosen in historic Independence Hall at Philadelphia May 26, 1951, as a climax to the long-drawn-out process which will begin October 1, 1957. There are 8,000 unidentified Americans who lost their lives abroad during the last war. Code numbers representing them will be placed in capsu‘es on containers designated for each of the 16 permanent United States cemeteries and national cemeteries over- seas. Six capsules will be drawn from each container. The first will be that of the “principal unknown” in a given ‘cemetery, the remaining five will be listed as “‘alter- nate unknowns” in that cemetery in the order drawn. ‘Then from these will be selected six bodies to represent the Alaskan command and five
A2956 overseas theaters—Europe, the Mediterra- nean, Africa-Middle East, West Pacific, and Mid-Pacific. ; . The bodies drawn as “principal unknowns will be exhumed and examined to make cer- tain that there is no possibility of identi- fying them. Records available in each theater will be studied for evidence on the ame point. . If the remains of the “principal unknown” in a cemetery fail to meet these tasks, they will be reburied. Remains of alternates will then be examined until one is found which all requirements. ee six unidentified dead representing the different areas will be taken to Philadelphia. There someone, as yet not designated, will select the Unknown Soldier of World War Ty, to lie in state in the Capitol and on Memorial Day in 1951 be entombed at Arlington. , The five unknowns who are taken to Phila~ delphia but not chosen will be returned to cemeteries overseas for reburial. The process could mear the exhumation of at least 36 bodies, which already have been listed as unidentified and reexamination of which would benefit no one, least of all the memory of the man who gave his life for his country or the feelings of the families of the 8,000 unknowns. As for the so-called requirements, surely all 8,000 have met all the requirements of God and man. ; There must be a simpler, more dignified way to select one of the on to receive the "s greatest memor onors. oy ace conduct the entire selection by the capsule method and exhume only the final designate? Let the other 7,999 rest in peace. [From the Santa Cruz Sentinel-News cf April 20, 1950] THe ANONYMOUS 8,000 (By W. F. Alder) On October 1 of this current year will begin a labored process of selecting an Un- known Soldier of World War I for final interment in Arlington National Cemetery. As now planned, this selection is to be a complicated procedure involving the _ x= huming of at least 36 of our unidentified war dead. Of these, six are to be selected and brought home. From that number, 1 will finally be chosen to represent or symbol- ize all of the 8,000 who now lie buried in overseas war theaters. The remaining five are te be returned to their overseas resting places and reburied there. ‘ It is difficult to understand the ghoulish and devious thinking of those responsible for this involved plan. Were all to be exhumed and brought home, here to be interred at our national shrine, it would be quite a different matter. But under this plan we propose to disturb the last resting places of 36 of our dead and go through a specious mummery over 6*men whose only sin was that of the supreme sacrifice of life and identity as well, in the service of their country. Bring back 1 anonymous representative of the 8,000 by all means. But select him by drawing one numbered capsule from 8,000 identical in appearance and leave the re- maining 7,999 in undisturbed slumber. Spare this Nation the macabre spectacle of rejecting any one of them. What is this to be—a contest of elimination with home- coming as the grand prize? Staged with a. showman’s idea of stark drama and Gold Star Mother’s suspense. This is too sacred a service for theatricals. As the Sentinel-News has already pointed out in a thought-compelling editorial—there ts dignity in simplicity. And the graves of our dead must not be profaned. The Unknown Soldier is a symbol of all 8,000. How better it would be to make his homeland shrine an all-embracing one. How better it would be to make it a factual com- posite of them all by bringing back from each of the 8,000 graves a cubic inch of the coverlet of earth spread over these name-~ Jess dead in one bronze urn filled with the grains of sacred soil reverently lifted from each grave and thereafter enshrined in a columbarium within the monument to memory raised at Arlington by a grateful people. Unknown, the one is a symbol of them all. They served and died together in a common cause. Let us now bring their graves together, in reverent symbolism, to Arling- ton. in hallowed rendezvous that we and our children’s children may stand, conscious of their sacrifice, in silent, critical self-appraisal before them all. Address by the Attorney General Before the Federal Bar Association EXTENSION OF REMARKS Fr HON. ESTES KEFAUVER OF TENNESSEE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, April 25 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. KEFAUVER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Recorp the able and informative ad- dress delivered by the Attorney General, Hon. J. Howard McGrath, before the Federal Bar Association, on April 24, 1950. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Mr. President, Mr. Chairman, distinguished guests, members of the Federal Bar Associa- tion, ladies and gentlemen, I deem it a high honor and a distinct privilege to be here this evening and to welcome you, Mr. President, in behalf of all gathered here and those whom the delegates to this national conven- tion represent. As you know, Mr. President, the member-= ship of the Federal Bar Association is com- posed of men and women who are employed in the service of the United States and who are performing the work of a legislator, judge, lawyer, or member of a quasi-judicial body or commission; in short, all lawyers who par- ticipate in the business of Government. Accordingly, the men and women who con- stitute this association are necessarily your coworkers and assistants in the important and significant task of governing the people of our country. And no segment of our citi- zenry is more conscious of your immeasur- able burden than are the members of this association, You are manifestly familiar with the con- tribution that the members of this associa- tion are making in that task. May I say in their behalf and as a member of their na- tional council, that under your able leader - ship we pledge to increase our efforts and dedicate ourselves to the greatest extent pos- sible to see to it that our democratic insti- tutions, as they have been preserved to date, remain ever potent so that we may retain for all people those rights and privi- leges, opportunities, and benefits which make our country the greatest and most powerful on. earth. The role of the lawyer in Government serv- ice is significant. The lawyer plays a de- cisive part in almost every function which constitutes the Government of our United States. The service rendered by the lawyer APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD to the Government reaches every branch of governmental activity. As in the past, the lawyer in the Government service provides the catalytic service which makes our democ- racy one where the rule of law is basic. Many parts of the world today are in the throes of chaos and confusion. Fear fills the hearts of many in those areas. There no one dares prophesy the events of the morrow. Science and mechanical progress have nar- rowed the areas of the world. Men have been brought closer to each other. The changes in our social and economic life have added many difficulties to our problems. It is recognized, however, that there can be no end to this tension until we learn the art of human relationship—the art of getting along with one another. We must adjust amicably the relations of mankind, their order, and their conduct in a world in which the goods of existence, the scope for free ac- tivity, and the abjects on which to exert free activity are limited, and the demands upon those goods and those objects are infinite. Today the whole mechanics of human gov- ernment is undergoing a reexamination, Thoughtful people everywhere wonder whether democracy can bring peace and se- curity to a troubled and distressed world. There are some who believe that democracy is decadent. Our vibrant, virile, and work- able democracy is proof of the fallacy of this assertion. The most essential function of any government in the long run is the main- tenance of law and order; the principal duty of any government is the protection of its citizens in the orderly conduct of their lives; and any government that is derelict in that respect is doomed. The government lawyer, as a member of the bench or as the ordinary attorney, is the guarantor of that security and can be truly said to be the maintainer of law and order. We are now going through a transitory period of social and economic change. Hu- man relationships have become more com- plex than ever. It is justice properly ad- ministered which will bring about a moral regeneration, which the world needs to achieve a lasting peace. The dislocations caused by the last war in our social and eco~« nomic life, the tensions created in our for~ eign relations since the end of the war have brought a challenge to our genius and to our loyalty to the principles enunciated by our fathers who framed the Constitution: “To form a more perfect union, establish justice, and insure domestic tranquillity.” There are many political philosophies to- day; there are many schemes for the regener-~ ation of society; panaceas and paradises of all dimensions are urged upon a worried hu- manity; but I submit to you that none will work unless equal justice and the majesty of the law is provided in that form of govern- ment. Our common-law doctrine of the su- premacy of law and our insistence on the security of individual rights against any of- ficial unauthorized action is a gospel which we must preach to all and practice with sin- cerity and effectiveness. There are systems of government in this world where the power of the state is su- preme. We do not adhere, and never shall adhere to any theory of that sort. The greatest contribution that America has made to the science of government has been to provide a system which guarantees to every individual his rights not only against the executive, but against the entire state. There can be no democracy where the state is all powerful and the individual is of no account. This concept of the rights of the individual is challenged today as it has not been at any time in our history. It is not only threatened by foreign dictators, but by false philosophies and enemies from within. The government lawyer has the responsi- bility and the duty of taking an effective and leading part in upholding and safeguarding the nghts and liberties of individuals and
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD dsfending the majesty of the law. The gov- ernment lawyer guides, counsels, and helps in the dvafting of legislation so that the activi- tiles cI men in their endeavor to get their demands is so ordered as to enable satisfac- tion of as much of the whole scheme of de- mands with the least friction and waste. The wills of freemen in action are recon- ciled by a universal law giving a maximum scope for free activity to each, reconciling instincts in action, bringing about a maxi- mum cf happiness, satisfying the wants of each other so far as compatible with satis- fying the wants of all. This is what the lawyer, and the government lawyer especially, must continue to do. The lawyer, as well as the judge, must serve as an agent of organ- ized social control. The law has done much in the past for the science of society. It must continue to do so. History of civiliza- tion has demonstrated how law has operated to maintain and further civilization, how it has grown out of civilization, how it has adapted itself to new types of civilization; it must continue to do so. The Federal Government in recent years has been given many new responsibilities involving the enactment of a great mass of legislation of far-reaching importance. Ac- cordingly, the burden of law enforcement upon our Federal Government has increased tremendously. We, as Government lawyers and public officials, must be more alert today as to our responsibilities and opportunities than ever before. The great mechanism called the machinery of justice must be made to function more successfully. It must be made to serve an ever wider and in a more intimate fashion the needs of an influential and growing country like ours. The world looks upon this country as the Jeader in the pursuit of a justice that will pring peace, tranquillity, and security. We, as law officers of the executive branch of the Government, by reason of our general experi- ence at the bar and through our daily sys- tematic appraisal of legal problems, can do considerable to promote the general efficiency of the application of our laws. In this man< ner we are fulfilling our responsibility, not only as lawyers, but as citizens of this great Republic. Lawyers have always made tremendous contributions to the development of our country, spiritually, economically, culturally, not only in the domestic field, but also in the realm of international relations. Our task today is far more trying. It calls for more extensive knowledge, skill, vision, and effort. We have a great heritage as lawyers. Let us prove worthy of it and let us preserve it. The American system which has as its founda- tion the liberty of the indjvidual and the equal opportunity to every man to enjoy rights and privileges with his fellow man, can be perpetuated only through our efforts. In this manner, Mr. President, can your watchword be fulfilled—the admonition of Thomas Jefferson when he said: 1 “That the flames of freedom kindled in 1776 and spread over the globe shall never be extinguished by engines of despotism.” ‘ With God’s help and with the full coopera- tion of all citizens and with the sincere and ‘renewed efforts of all those in Government ‘service, we of the democratic world will see @ new day when ancient bitterness and ywrongs will be purged. We feel that hu- Manity, conscious of its unity and strength, will march forward to a new opportunity. Out of the welter of blood, tears, and sweat now sweeping parts of the world, mankind with God’s help will set foot on a brighter future and bring a better life. Our own ‘country, by a strict adherence to its funda-. yoental laws of fairness and justice, will serve the cause of universal peace. We must all have faith that things can be arranged on this earth to form a reasonable society. XCVI—App.——187 There is yet love in this world. There is yet a sense of justice among men. There is @ desire to render mutual aid. There is stored in mankind a reservoir of good in- tentions and pure thoughts. All that is re- quired is the mechanism with which to effec- tuate these ideas. That is the hope of all peoples all over the world, and if we but keep our faith in the Lord and in His goodness to mankind, we shall be worthy of this blessing, Ladies and gentlemen, I know of no one who has dedicated himself with greater zeal and effort toward the achievement of the ideals I have just described than your guest of honor this evening. I am delighted and privileged to welcome the President of the United States. Our Far Eastern Policy EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. WILLIAM F. KNOWLAND OF CALIFORNIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, April 25 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. KENOWLAND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp a speech on our far eastern policy, which I made yesterday noon before the Chicago Coun- cil of Foreign Relations, at Chicago, Ill. There being no objection, the speech was ordered to be printed in the Rrcorp, as follows: Mr. Chairman, distinguished guests, fellow Americans, in this day of the airplane and the atom, we must face the fact that both peace and war are global in character. If we are to help maintain a free world of free men, we cannot achieve our objective by closing the door to Communist aggression in Europe while the door is left wide open in Asia. The families of American fighting men who died at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, or at Iwo Jima and Okinawa, almost 4 years later, must wonder how it came to pass that the Soviet Union, in the Pacific war for less than a week against an enemy already defeated and asking for peace, could take our old-time friend and ally China, with its 450,- 000,000 people, into the Communist orbit. The United States was catapulted into World War II because we would not allow the domination of China by Japan. Yet as we meet here today the Soviet Union has a vast new satellite with more population and nat- ural resources than the satellites of eastern Europe put together and is on a springboard from which communism can overwhelm southeast Asia and endanger the Philippine Republic, Japan, India, and Pakistan. Can this Nation afford a diplomacy that loses that which our fighting men have won? Coalition with communism is no more workable in China or Korea than it is in Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, or Rumania. Com- munism is destructive of human liberty everywhere in the world. Last November in Chungking a Chinese official clearly put it to me in this way: “Senator, there can be no coalition with a tiger unless you are inside the beast.” Our Government has had ample evidence of the aims of international communism in China as far back as 1928. It was made clear in. the meeting of the Sixth International that China and the Far East was to be given @ high priority. I quote from the theses and resolutions of the Sixth World Congress of the Comunist International published under date of December 12, 1928: A2957 "33. In China, the future growth of the revolution will place before the party as an immediate practical task the preparation for any carrying through of armed insurrection as the sole path to the completion of the bourgeois-democratic revolution and to the overthrow of the power of the imperialists, landlords, and national bourgeoisie—the power of the Kuomintang.” . On January 7, 1947, Gen. George C, Mar- shall issued a statement relative to China which includes the following: “To the first place, the greatest obstacle to peace has been the complete, almost aver- whelming suspicion with which the Chinese Communist Party and the Kuomintang re= gard each other. “On the one hand, the leaders of the Gov- ernment are strongly opposed to a communis- tic form of government. On the other, the Communists frankly state that they are Marxists and intend to work toward estab- lishing a communistie form of government in China, though first advancing through the medium of a democratic form of government of the American or British type.” Between these two dates and up to the pres- ent time there has been an abundance of evi- dence that the Chinese Communists were closely allied with the Soviet Union and with international communism. Despite this fact a vast amount of propaganda was directed at the American people by those holding posi< tions in and out of government to the effect that Chinese Communists were in fact only “agrarian liberals.” The official position of the State Depart- ment and the Government was that we should wait for, the dust to settle. It has now settled sufficiently so that the Ameri- can people can clearly see the debacle that has taken place which jeopardizes the peace of the world and the security of the United States. The Far Eastern Division and those who advised them from the outside or supported them from the inside have a great responsi< bility to the people of the United States and to more than 400,000,000 Chinese, living and dead, who are now behind the iron cur- tain. To paraphrase Mr. Churchill: ‘Never have so few contributed so much to destroy the liberty of so many.” During the 5 years I have been a Member of the United States Senate I have supported our foreign policy in Europe and been crit- ical of it in the Far East. The general objectives of our foreign pol- icy have been clear to the American people and to the Congress. We have sought to establish a system of international law and order so that the peace of the world will be secure for this and future generations. Yet with this worth-while objective in mind we were not so naive as to believe that all nations would forego the use of military power to enforce their will on others. The United Nations, it was hoped, would not only be a world forum for discussion but would also be an effective instrument for collective security. , It has not yet been put to the test of act- ing against an overt aggression of armed troops of one nation crossing the borders of another. That test may come this year or next in Yugoslavia, Iran, Viet Nam or Burma. We do know that the Soviet Union, by its abuse of the veto in the Security Council, has put the world on notice that there will be no hesitation in blocking effective United Nations collective security action against ag- gression by another veto. It was for this reason that our Govern- ment and those of western Europe clearly recognized that Marshall plan economic aid to help rehabilitate war-torn Europe was not sufficient in and of itself. The fear of aggres- sion restricted the recovery so necessary if
A2958 the free way of life was to have a fair chance for survival against totalitarian pressures, Within the United Nations charter the At- Jantic Pact came into being. By its terms an attack against one of the North Atlantic nations would be recognized as an attack against all of them. Qutside of the North Atlantic Pact, by reso- lute action, Greece was saved from being en- gulfed by communism; Turkey, Iran, and Korea were given the tools with which their independence might be preserved. In China our post World War IT policy has contributed to the debacle in that area of the world. For more than haif a century our historic policy had been to encourage and support a free and independent Chine. Today’s realities clearly mean that this must also be a non-Communist China. Yet at Yalta in 1945, without consulting China our wartime ally and friend, we gave the Soviet Union a stranglehold on Man- churia. It was done without consultation with the American Congress or the American people. Playing a prominent part as an ad- visor to the American delegation at Yalta was Alger Hiss. Our State Department urged a coalition with the Communists. The Government of the Republic of China quite properly refused. The United States placed an embargo against the shipment of arms and ammunition to the legal Government of China while at the same time the Soviet Army of occupation in Manchuria was turning over captured Japa- nese stocks of arms and ammunition to the Chinese Communist forces. ‘- In July 1947 Gen. Albert C. Wedemeyer was sent out to China on a mission. He wrote a significant report dated September 19, 1947, which contained a constructive program to save China from communism. That report containing information of great import, was suppressed for 2 years, and access to it was denied to Members of Congress. Until quite recently some of those who helped shape our China policy were speaking of Mao Tse-Tung’s followers as agrarian lib« erals. It makes little difference whether this fatal miscalculation was because of design or ignorance. The end result is no less damag- ing to the future peace of the world and the security of this country. » Our China policy has helped to undermine the Republic of China. While that govern- ment was with its back to the wall the State ‘Department issued the China white paper. Never before had we struck such an almost fatal blow at an historic friend during its darkest hour. During the last 2 years a substantial part of the help that the Congress voted as aid to the Republic of China has been delayed or nullified. This can be and has been amply documented. Even purchases, military and civilian, with Chinese funds have been obstructed. On January 5 of this year the President announced that no further military assist- ance would be given to the Republic of China, We now know that this had been preceded on December 23, 1949, by a State Department memo to its officials overseas stating that the island of Formosa had no strategie value. The interesting thing about that memo is that the State Department had no such ad- vice from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, from Admiral Radford, commander in chief of our naval forces in the Pacific, or from Gen. Douglas MacArthur, our supreme commander in the Far East. In fact, the statement ran directly counter to a State Department bulletin of June 3, 1945, which stated with reference to For- mosa that “with the exception of Singapore, no location in the Far Hast occupies such a controlling position.” The difficulty with the State Department is that they have been more interested in China in saving face than saving freedom, However. I do not want to spend too much time on the past. Where do we go from here? In California recently Secretary of State Deen Acheson made two significant speeches. If implemented, they furnish the basis of having a policy in Asia that will be consistent with our policy in Europe. While the door to negotiation is left open, the Soviet Union must reestablish its diplo- matic credit standing. There are too many pieces of paper floating around to warrant reliance on a new one until the others have been redeemed. It is clearly underscored that aggression in Asia is of no less ecncern to the law- abiding nations of the world than it is in Europe or the Middle East. The nations of Asia are given hope that those who are willing to help themselves to maintain their freedom will be eligible to apply for and receive various types of assist« ance from us. Standing by itself, the speech of Secretary Marshall at Harvard on June 5, 1947, without congressional implementation (bipartisan in character), would not have bolstered for long a single tottering, war-weary government of Europe. Nor will Secretary Acheson’s speeches be more than a temporary whiff of oxygen until and unless implemented by the Congress. Up to now there has not been the consul- tation with the majority and minority par- ties on far-eastern policy that there has been in recent years on our European policy. There has never been a bipartisan far-eastern or China policy during this administration. As has been pointed out before such con- sultations must be on the “take off” and not merely on the “crash landings.” There is one great void in the speech of the Secretary of State dealing with our Asia policy. He treats the islands of Formosa, Hainan, Kinmen, Chosun and the Pescadores with their 8,000,000 people under the juris- diction of the legal Government of the Re- public of China as though they were ships which had been sunk beneath the waves of the China Sea and the Pacific. Since Formosa alone has more population than either Australia or Greece, this is hardly realistic. Formosa is closer to the Philip- pines than the island of Luzon is to the island of Mindanao. It is hardly conceiv- able that this Government can now view with unconcern the moving of international communism off the Asiatic land mass on its first major island-hopping venture at Hai- nan. An American missionary with years of ex- - perience in China recently said to me: “Sen- ator, I cannot understand how Chiang Kai- shek can be the No. 1 target in the Far East of international communism and at the same time be the No. 1 target of the Far Eastern Division of cur own State Department.” In China free people are staking their lives on keeping what is left of their country out of the Communist orbit. With some moral support and a limited amount of arms and ammunition they will be able to prevent international communism from moving off the Asiatic land mass out onto the strategic island of Formosa. There has been a lot of misinformation relative to the amount of postwar assistance given by this Government to the Republic of China. The facts of the matter are that China, our wartime ally and long-time friend, has had less material assistance than any of the three wartime Axis partners— Japan, Germany, and Italy. Out of this les- ser amount must be deducted a charge of approximately $600,000,000 for the transpor- tation of their troops by American planes and ships subsequent to VJ-day. My au- thority for these statements comes from offi- cial Government reports which can be checked by any person having the desire for facts rather than for propaganda, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD On December 18, 1946 President Truman | issued a statement on United States policy toward China. As of that date this is what he had to say relative to the postwar pe- riod: “From VJ-day to the end of February, shortly after General Marshall’s arrival the total was approximately $600,000,000—most-~ ly in transportation costs. Thereafter, the program was reduced to the fulfillment of outstanding commitments, much of which was later suspended.” ' A great deal is made in some quarters of the vast quantities of military assistance which had been furnished to China in the postwar period through the war surplus sales to the Chinese Government. In this connection it is interesting to quote from the same statement of the President: “It was imperative that this matter be concluded in the Pacific as had already been done in Europe, especially in view of the rapid deterioration of the material in open storage under tropical conditions.” A little further along in his statement the President has this to say: “Aircraft, all nondemilitarized material, and fixed installations outside of China were excluded. Thus, no weapons which could be used in fighting a civil war were made avail- able through this agreement.” The fact of the matter is that the help the Republic of China received in the post- war period was largely out of title four of the 1948 ECA Act passed by the Hightieth Congress. Of the total amount made avail- able $125,000,000 was for military assistance. This particular provision was approved in April of 1948 and the first shipments did not arrive in China until October of that year after some of the crucial battles of North China and Manchuria had been fought. It is largely this equipment which is today making possible the defense of Formosa, Kinmen and Chosun Islands. Out of this one-hundred-and-twenty-five- million appropriation provided by the Hight- jieth Congress, China received less military equipment than an equal sum of money provided out of larger Greek and Turkish aid funds. This is because the Chinese Gov-~ ernment was put on a lower priority and had to pay replacement costs for their equip- ment while the same items were sent to Greece and Turkey at a fraction of their cost. In the letter from Secretary of State Ache- son to the President, dated July 30, 1949, transmitting the China white paper, Secre- tary Acheson has this to say in attempting to excuse our conduct at Yalta: “At Yalta, Marshal Stalin not only agreed to attack Japan within 2 or 3 months after VE-day but limited his price with reference to Man- churia substantially to the position which Russia had occutpied prior to 1904. We, for our part, in order to obtain this commitment and thus to bring the war to a close with @ consequent saving of American, Chinese, and other allied lives were prepared to and did pay the requisite price.” I wish to emphasize that this price we paid at the expense of China was done with- out ker knowledge or consent and without the knowledge or consent of the American Congress or the American people. Contrast this doctrine of expediency rather than principle with the statement contained in General Wedemeyer’s report of September 19, 1947, which was not made available to the American Congress or the American peo- ple until the publication of the China white paper on August 5, 1949. In this report General Wedemeyer said: “The Nationalist government has consistently since 1927, op- posed communism. * * * ‘Today the Same political leader and same civilian and military officials are determined to prevent their country from becoming a Communist- dominated state or Soviet satellite. “Although the Japanese offered increas- ingly favorable surrender terms during the course of the war, China elected to remain
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD steadfast with her allies. If China had ac- cepted surrender terms, approximately 1,000,- CoO Japanese would have been released for employment against American forces in the Pacific.” I cannot believe that history will be kind to those responsible for the betrayal of an ally at Yalta when contrasting 1t to a stead- fast devotion to loyalties and principles shown by Chiang Kai-shek. The imperative need of the moment is to determine whether a policy can be developed in the Far East which will save that whole area from faliing into the orbit of interna- tional communism. No one should under- estimate the complexities of the situation. Nor would it be realistic to ignore the fact that whatever action we take involves cal- culated risks. In my opinion, however, the risk of taking affirmative action to prevent the further spread of communism in Asia is far less than the risk of waiting for the dust to settle, revealing a billion and a quar- ter people and the vast resources of Asia allied with Soviet Russia against us and the free worid. There were risks involved in the Berlin air- lift, there were risks involved in our aid to Greece and Turkey. Had we not taken those risks it is not unlikely that most of western Europe and the Middle East would today be under Soviet domination. In China the Benedict Arnolds, the quis- lings, and the fair-weather friends have long since departed. The new cabinet of Presi- dent Chiang Kai-shek contains many young and able administrators who are men of integrity. The civilian governor of Formosa is K. C. Wu, graduate of Princeton with an outstand- ing record as wartime mayor of Chungking. The premier is Chen Cheng, a man of life- long integrity and one regarding whom most Americans, including the late General Stil- well, have spoken most highly. The com- mander of th ground forces is General Sun Leh~jen, ¢ -e of the Virginia Military Institute und a L s.ims soldier of the first rank. Time does not permit me to name them all but I can assure you that they are as deter=- mined to maintain a China outside of the Communist orbit as we are to maintain our own freedom. In developing a program for the economic and military assistance to the free nations of Asia, the non-Communist Republic of China should not and must not be overlooked. To permit our tried and true friends of more than 50 years standing to go down the drain of communism while we concentrate on new Asiatic continental countries that have many more internal problems than free China has today, can hardly be the basis of a@ policy warranting the support of the Con- gress and the Nation. It is not realistic to ignore the fact that the Republic of China has approximately 500,000 men under arms, 300,000 of whom are excellent soldiers. This total number is greater than the combined troop strength of Korea, the Philippine Republic, the United States of Indonesia, Siam, Viet Nam, Burma, Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, and the United States forces in Japan. The island of Formosa is not needed by the United States as either an air or naval base. In the friendly hands of the Republic of China, it presents no problem to our own defenses, In the hands of international communism the many Japanese-built air strips and the excellent harbors would drive a wedge into our Pacific defense line that runs from Japan through Okinawa to the Philippines. In unfriendly hands it would be a strategic loss that no competent military, naval, or air commander would or has overlooked. We need a policy in the Far East and in China. We need it now, not a year from now, when we can do nothing but look back on what might have been done. When the China white paper was issued in August 1949, the Chinese were north of the Yangtze River and the Republic of China still em- braced more than half of China’s land area and almost two-thirds of that Nation’s pop- ulation. Many of us were urging a policy then that was consistent with our policy in Europe. We pointed out that while blocking the expansion of communism in western Europe our policy, or lack of it, in China was accelerating the spread of com- munism in that area of the world. As far as the State Department was con- cerned, our voices were but cries in the wil- derness. But slowly and relentlessly the American people have come to realize that after the great sacrifices of manpower and material wealth to win the war in the Pa- cific, our diplomats have lost the peace in that vast area of the world. Once again I urge an affirmative policy. I sincerely hope that this recent talk of bi- partisan consultation is not merely window dressing to quiet congressional criticism un- til adjournment. Prior to the development of substantial criticism in Congress the Far Eastern divi- sion of the State Department was steering our China policy toward ultimate recogni- tion of the Communist regime and its ad- mussion into the United Nations. It is time we developed some new diplo- matic techniques to combat the interna-~ tional conspiracy aimed at the destruction of human liberty throughout the world, The recognition of the Communist regime in China or its admission into the United Nations as a result of Soviet pressure would be as great a blow to free institutions and the ultimate peace of the world as was the pact of Munich. Why am I so concerned? There has just recently come to my attention the text of a speech by Ambassador Loy W. Henderson at New Delhi, India, on March 27 (less than a month ago). He was officially speaking for this Government on far-eastern affairs. With reference to recognition of the Com-~ munist regime in China he said that it was our desire to wait “until that Government has given a clear indication of its intention to live-up to its international obligations and to treat American diplomatic and con~ sular representatives and other American nationals in a manner prescribed by interna- tional custom * * What would such assurances be worth, if given? Have the Soviet satellites in eastern Europe treated either our diplomats or citi- zens with respect? Are our memories so short that we have forgotten the Angus Ward case? Why should we even consider recognition until the Communist regime has waited at least the same 2-year period that an American sailor and marine have been held in jail though their only crime was flying a mission for the Navy and being forced by engine trouble to crash land in the Communist area. Why should we con- template at this time the opening up of the Chinese Embassy and consulates to addi- tional Communist espionage and fifth col- umn activity? This Government should make it clear now that: (1) We have no intention of rec- ognizing the Communist regime in China or in any other area of the world where such a regime takes over by force of arms unless the people themselves have a chance to select their own government under elections super- vised by the United Nations. (2) We will actively oppose the replacement of the Re- public of China by the Communist regime until the will of the people of that country can be adequately determined. Many who favorably contemplated communism as a theory now know that its practice of brutal * destruction of human dignity, freedom of A2959 religion, speech, and press, and its under- mining of the family institution and its obvi- ous subservience to Moscow has destroyed any broad basis of support among the people of that country. (3) We should give the same kind of supervised aid to the Republic of China that we gave to Greece. The legal Government of China has requested such assistance and desperately needs it now. Are we to quiver and shake and continue to “fiddle and faddle” because the satellite Mao-tse or Stalin, the master, are displeased? The Kremlin was displeased at the Mirshall plan, the Berlin airlift, the North Atlantic Pact, the arms implementation bill, and MacArthur’s administration in Japan. (4) Our Government should serve notice cn the Communist regime in China that until and unless they release W. C. Smith, chief ma- chinist mate, United States Navy, and Elmer Bender, sergeant, United States Marine Corps, who have been held prisoners by the Com- munists for 18 months, until all of our diplo- matic personnel are allowed to leave the mainland of China, unless all of our other citizens in China who desire to leave are allowed to do so, that we will enforce a naval blockade of the China coast to see to it that until and unless our American citizens get out that nothing that would contribute to the military or economic development of Red China gets in by sea from the United States, Great Britain, the Soviet Union, or any other nation. Our secret weapon against any aggressor is not the plutonium or the hydrogen bomb whose secrets can be stolen from us by a Dr. Fuchs. Our real strength is that which Communists dare not steal to take to the Soviet Union or its European or Asiatic satel- lites. I refer to the liberty and the deter- mination of a self-reliant people to be in= formed, make their own judgments, choose their own leaders, and having the ability to rally overnight if their free institutions are threatened from within or without. This priceless ingredient, which we possess, the dictators understand less than they do the intricate blueprints of a superweapon, In itself our free way of life is a time bomb which will destroy any dictatorship once their people know the truth. This may ex- plain the frantic lowering and sealing of the iron curtain. It should renew our deter- mination to penetrate the darkness and bring renewed hope to millions who love freedom, yet find themselves temporarily behind the iron curtain, from the Elbe to the China Sea, Let us help freedom to become a dynamic force in the lives of men and women every- where, not excluding those in the Soviet Union or any of its satellites. If we show the same courage and common sense that motivated the men who sat in constitutional convention at Philadelphia and who traveled across the continent to settle in the West, there is no domestic prob- jem that we cannot solve and there is no foreign foe that we need fear. Foreign Relations and Domestic Politics EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWARD L. LEAHY OF RHODE ISLAND IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, April 25 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Rrecorp an address by my colleague the senior Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. Green], delivered at Providence,