APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD There is a reference before the Commission calling for investigation of air pollution from industries and vessels along the inter-= national section in the vicinity of Detroit, Mich., and Windsor, Ont., with recommenda= tions as to remedial measures. These and similar matters now before the Commission give an indication of the scope and character of its work today. The Commission itself derives consider- able satisfaction from noting th- growing faith and'confidence of both countries in its even-handed justice, bearing out the state- ment of former Canadian Premier Mackenzie King that in this “International Court” the Governments of the United States and Can- ada have “established a set of general prin- ciples, and an international tribunal en- trusted with the high task of applying these principles to specific questions arising from time to time between the two countries with @ fair assurance that the: would be deter- mined with something of the finality and certainty which the domestic courts in each country achieve in their sphere.” Enlisting Public Opinion in the Fight Against Crime EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ESTES KEFAUVER OF TENNESSEE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, May 25 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. KEFAUVER. Mr. President, if we are to have better respect for the laws of the country and more efficient law en- forcement, it is, of course, necessary that public opinion be enlisted in the fight against crime. The special Senate committee investi- gating interstate crime is, of course, aware that investigations and enactment of legislation is not going to prevent the operation of large-scale organized crim- inal activity unless the public really wants it prevented. In 1934, Joseph B. Keenan, a promi- nent lawyer of Washington, who was at that time Assistant Attorney General of the United States, delivered a note- worthy address to the American Bar As- sociation at Milwaukee. The ideas set forth by Mr. Keenan and the remedies suggested by him are equally applicable at the present time. In order that the Members of Congress and the public may have the benefit of his thoughts, I ask unanimeus consent that his. speech be printed in the Appendix of the RrEc- ORD. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the REcorp, as follows: ENLISTING PuBLIC OPINION IN THE FIcHT AGAINST CRIME (Joseph B. Keenan, Assistant Attorney Gen- eral of the United States) Crime has been designated by one writer as the great sewer of society. Not a pleas- ant subject, certainly, to receive emphasis as a feature topie of the national bar pro- gram. And, yet, because of its very stench and misery and sordidness, it is a subject which must receive the careful study of American lawyers and American laity. So long as the problems of crime and: its repression are left to those small groups that come most closely in touch with it—the social workers, policemen, prosecutors, judges, and prison wardens—and so long as the great body of citizenry remains indif- ferent, hostile, or ignorant, we can look for little improvement. I would not be misunderstood as to the part which the public must take in this cause. There have been some who have urged that the primary obligations relating to the operation of the machinery of law enforcement should be referred back and placed squarely upon the public. This would be a convenient escape for those officials charged with law enforcement. But there can. be no such shift of responsibility. The law enforcement machine, after it has been selected, assembled, and committed to the care of enforcement officials, must be lu- bricated, operated, and kept in working order by them. Occasionally a slight repair must be made, but that is a task which a mechanic must perform. On the other hand, the na~ ture and texture of the fabric which such a machine produces is a matter of primary public concern. Whether the machine shop shall be scrapped and a completely modern one installed is again a problem which may be referred back to the public. But the func- tions and responsibilities of the two groups are distinct and should be kept distinct. Some weeks ago an unarmed English bobby Was covering his regular beat when he had oceasion to arrest a law violator. The sus- pect resisted arrest, and in making his escape shot the policeman. The common occur- rence of a routine arrest was suddenly trans-~ formed into an incident of national and even world-wide importance. .The wound was superficial it is true, but to an Englishman that shot represented a challenge to law and order which could not pass unheeded. It Was as though 40,000,000 shots had been fired at 40,000,000 separate Englishmen. Aroused citizens joined with the police in a gigantic man hunt whose only counterpart in this country was the search 70 years ago for John Wilkes Booth. The offender was surrounded and killed himself rather than face his in- furiated pursuers, Here in the United States another drama was being enacted. <A young farm boy who had served 5 years in a reformatory and 3 years in a State penitentiary set out on a career of bank robbing. He was returned to the penitentiary. On October 12, 1933, in collusion with friends on the outside, he made his way to freedom over the dead hody of a sheriff. After three raids on police stations and a bank robbery, the farm boy was responsible for the death of another policeman. When trapped in one of the Western States some months later with an arsenal of death-dealing weapons, he was re- turned—not as a cowardly killer, not as a ruthless criminal, not as one who had coldly stood ovet the prone body of a law-enforce- ment Officer, and, with a machine gun, pumped a shower of lead into the helpless Official, Rather, he was greated with the smile of the sheriff, the encircling arm of the prosecutor, and the morbid, grinning, curious stares of the crowd. Strange as it may seem, he broke away from this reception. committee some weeks later, and within the course of 5 months took a revolting toll in human lives and property. One of the men who fell before the guns of the bandit’s gang was Carter Baum of the Department of Justice, taken in the prime of life. When a person gets close up to the tragedy and cruelty involved in the career of this criminal it is beyond his power to com- prehend what actually happened in a Wash- ingtom theater before the killer was cap- tured. When Dillinger’s picture was thrown ‘upon the sereen the audience broke into ap- plause. | Applause, mfad you, for a coward: and killer—applause for a man who had snuffed A4027 out the lives of husbands and fathers with~ out the blinking of an eye—applause for one of tiie most loathsome creatures in the an- nals of crime. And at just about that time the suspect who had the temerity to defy a British bobby was taking his own life rather than suffer the inevitable punishment and dis- grace resulting from his act. In further contrast to the activities of British subjects in supporting their police, we find certain members of the medical profession treating known gangsters for seri- ous wounds during the period of pursuit, and performing operations with a view of concealing fugitives’ identity. -How are we to account for this striking contrast? Perhaps it is to be explained by the century-old traditions, the pride of na- tionality, and the pride of race which so characterizes the British people. But we simply cannot rest back, while the years roll by, with the hope that eventually a tradition will develop—a national pride emerge. The problem calls for action now. We are afflicted with an inertia, which has been the best weapon of the criminal. So long as he can expect a cheer instead of a jeer, applause instead of denunciation, he will ply his trade and rely, at the day of reckoning, for support from a worshipful public. The problem of molding a public opinion which will demand that crime be stamped out is perhaps the most funda- mental problem before us. What is the state of American public opin- ion and American standards today? Can we judge it by the quality of the offerings of the American press, stage, screen, and radio— institutions which have a marked inftuence on public opinion? Certainly, it must be recognized the moving-picture companies, for example, are in a business, and that they will do everything to Keep that business on the black side of the ledger. If, as they have indirectly asserted, it is true that to produce pictures which appeal to people of culture and refinement would run their business into red ink, and if it is true that the greatest returns are from the pictures which have a primary appeal to those whose tastes are on a lower level, then perhaps, we should admit that the people are getting what they ask for, and that current offerings not merely shape—but actually represent American taste and American public opinion. If that be true (and, of course, there is still room for debate in this field as to which came first, the chicken or the egg; I leave that question open) then American public opin- ion, on the issue of law enforcement, must be challenged, modified, and finally har-~ nessed for constructive results. Convenient as it might be to generalize concerning public opinion and crime, it is nevertheless dangerous to do so. The atti- tude of mind varies with the individual. On the other hand, I think it is helpful to group attitudes of mind. The public opiniom may then be better analyzed and consequently ‘better understood, and if it be destructive, rendered constructive. The first group is made up of those persons who are simply indifferent to the whole prob- lem. I suppose there are many reasons for indifference. It seems obvious, for in- stance, that an individual who has been blessed with a sheltered existence which does not bring him in contact with crime and its repression would quite naturally be indiffer- ent to crime problems. Human nature Is such that ‘interest is more easily captivated when the evil strikes close. home—or at least when it is known that it is striking close home, If every property owner could he made to see that crime concerns him just as vitally as taxes, and that, in fact, a good share of his taxes are going toward the payment of the crime hill, there would be no need to awaken him from his sleep with an appeal to his citizenship.
A4028 I feel sure that the indifference of some people is a direct result of that first re- action which any unsavory subject produces. Crime is essentially a disagreeable subject. There are sO many more pleasant things to which one may devote his thoughts. An- other reason for indifference grows out of a false sense of security and a childlike con- ception of the nature of crime. It is oc- casionally evidenced in the naive assumption that, when the excitement of a reform ad- ministration in a city or State has subsided, when new legislation has been passed, or when the local police chief has made a score or more of transfers within his department, somehow the community overnight becomes safe for the law-abiding, and crime is no longer a problem. There is a second group of the public whose attitude is disconcerting. I refer to those persons who for one reason or another glorify crime and the criminals who commit it— those to whom a greater appeal has been made by the dramatic qualities of crime com-~ mission than the dramatic qualities of crime repression. Some of our agencies of public intelligence are partly responsible for the at- titude. A few years ago the president of one of the large news services issued an order to all writers for the service which read in part as follows: “The cowardly silence maintained by an arrested crook who fears underworld ven- geance is neither brave, heroic, nor noble. _ “When astute criminal lawyers arrange in- terviews with real or faked maudlin mothers of machine-gun murderers, in order to arouse public sympathy for outlaws, the story is only half told unless the reader is reminded of the brutal facts of the murder. “Moron murderers who display animal stolidity cannot truly be said to have ‘per- fect control over their nerves of iron.’ “Tf the gunman’s woman does not happen to be a girl of notoriously loose morals, this exception does not make her a@ society girl. If brutal companionship and the intimida- tion of her gunmen friends close her mouth to the authorities, underworld intimidation does not make her a romantic heroine, faith- ful to death. “There is nothing mysterious or occult about the workings of the underworld to an experienced reporter. Only fiction-writers put a glamour of mystery about the sordid- ness, avarice, brutality, and cowardice of the underworld. Fiction-writers do not belong on press association staffs. “Please test your crime stories by the fol- lowing rules: Does the story cast such ro- mance and glamour about the criminal that it will influence 16-year-old boys and girls to follow in the footsteps of the gunman, gangster, thug, or crook?” I honestly believe that one flippant remark by a comedian on a radio program or in a daily newspaper column can do more to shape the public attitude on problems of law en- forcement than all the learned treatises on civics and sociology. It is a tremendous power—and it should be directed in a proper channel. Too often it has been used, unin- tentionally and thoughtlessly I am sure, to create sympathy for the underserving, to glorify lawlessness, and to ridicule those sworn to uphold the law. The attitude of the third group, and I be- lieve it to be an extremely smail one, may be characterized as one of hostility to any use of coercion by the Government which tends to restrict personal freedom. When, however, it is considered that most of our population is made up of descendants of men and women who resisted Old World con- trols—dissenters, in other words—it is sur- prising that we are as amenable to law as we are, A fourth division of the public which must be reached includes those persons who, being unfamiliar with the many-sided problem of crime, are prone to offer the one solution— the one sure cure, the one panacea. It is a remarkably interesting fact that in the flelds of the so-called exact sciences, such as math- ematics, chemistry, and physics, an unin- formed layman rarely ventures an opinion, put that in the field of the social sciences any bootblack will speak with the conviction which only years of study and training would justify. Many letters come daily to the De- partment of Justice, each containing some cure for the evil. And many authors of these letters will dispose of crime causes with a single word foreign-born, or Nnem~ ployment, or insanity, or slums, or liquor, or firearms. Obviousty, before this group can be enlisted in any worth while pro- gram, there must be an intensive effort made to impress upon its members that no one explanation will suffice, and that no one simple remedy will prove to be a cure. There is a fifth group of the public—the group which lends cheer to those persons who must lead in any movement for the prevention or repression of crime. I. have faith that in this group are to be found most of our citizenry. It is composed of those who are aroused against lawlessness, who are ready and anxious to help, who insist that they be given a part in the fight against crime. They have come to law enforcement officials with offers of assistance. I regret to say that we have not even begun to utilize the energies of this group. The militant attitude of the individual citizen is just as essential to successful law enforcement as is the militant attitude of the officials charged with such enforcement. A well qualified writer who has recently made a study of British police methods makes a significant observation that the greatest ally of British policemanship is Brit- ish citizenship. A community never secures effective law enforcement unless it not only wants it but demands it. As we come to the close of the year, in this association—a year which has been devoted to the emphasis of criminal law and its administration—it is es- sential that we think concerning the meth- ods by which the problems of law enforce~ ment may be brought forcibly to the minds of not only lawyers, but the lay citizen with- out whose cooperation we cannot function. It would be nothing short of tragic if, with this session, the American Bar Association ceased its emphasis upon the subject of the administration of criminal justice. As the first step in the formulation of an aroused public opinion against crime, I should like to see the great agencies which communicate intelligence, such as the press, the stage, the screen, and the radio, apply to their offerings this three-fold test: (1) Does this offering tend to glorify crime and make heroes of those who commit it? (2) Does the offering hinder law enforcement, such as by giving to a fugitive information as to the progress of the search for him? (3) If the offering is critical of law-enforcement officials, is it fair and balanced, giving credit where credit is due and placing blame where ‘plame honestly deserves to be placed, or is it so phrased as to cause persons to ridicule law enforcement generally? As the second step in the formulation of an enlightened public opinion emphasis should be placed upon the study of crime, its cause and prevention, in the schools and col- leges of the country. The insignificant place allotted in the curriculum to the subject of crime is far out of proportion either to the space devoted to the subject in news organs or to the vast toll in life and property rep- ‘resented in the cost bill of crime. It is prob- ably safe to assert that if the proportions were reversed the result would be strikingly beneficial. A lack of information in the field of the administration of criminal justice is one of the ‘basic reasons for most of the public’s APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD indifference and the misdirection of its ener- gies. This field must receive in educational institutions the share of expert study to which it is entitled before we can hope to have a public opinion which can be classed as enlightened. No neat trick will bring about the enlight- enment of public opinion. On the contrary, it is going to be necessary for each individual to revive a few of those old-fashioned civic virtues before results will be apparent. The citizen who righteously asserts that he does not want a corrupt administration in his city but who, nevertheless, returns to office, men from whom nothing better can be ex- pected, must be reminded that the power to vote has never been taken from him. The citizen who castigates a jury which acquits a notorious criminal but who, when summoned for jury service, claims an exemp- tion, must be reminded that both the priv- ilege to serve and the duty to serve upon a jury has never been abolished. . The citizen who happens upon the scene of a crime but who, in order to avoid pub- licity and the bother of a court appearance, does not volunteer information but makes a hasty departure, must be reminded that criminais are only convicted upon infor- mation such as he possesses, and that such information must be produced through the medium of witnesses at a criminal trial. These are fundamental obligations of citi- zenship, so fundamental that to enumerate them is to become trite. At the same time they are obligations which if not assumed will render law enforcement increasingly ineffective. Every civic and service organization in this country which boasts of a program for human betterment will do well to make the subject of crime and its control a topic for major emphasis. Every bar association should broaden the scope of its criminal law or procedure section so as to permit em- phasis upon all phases of the administration of criminal justice. Every school must assume some responsibility for acquainting its students with the complexity and enor- mity of the crime problem. Every organ of public information must consecrate its offer- ing to the building of a more wholesome public opinion on the subject. Every citi- zen must reexamine the so-called civic obli- gations, assume them, and, casting aside flippancy and indifference, resolve to make American citizenship the ally of American law enforcement, The citizens of our country have never failed to render effective service demonstrat- ing their sincere patriotism in any attempt to overthrow our Government in time of war. The hardy pioneers who courageously built up our country would never think of affording succor or relief, sympathy or sup- port to those who were attacking their home- stead and threatening or attempting to mas- sacre, members of their families. Even so today there is needed the same support of governmental authority. I am confident that to bring this about we need only a ‘fuller and clearer realization of the problem to enlist the needed public support. Tke World-Wide Communist Conspiracy EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. PHILIP J. PHILBIN OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 24, 1950 Mr. PHILBIN. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent to extend my re- marks in the Recorp, I include a speech
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD I delivered recently at Americanism Night exercises conducted by the Hud- son, Mass., Lodge of Elks. I also delivered these remarks in sub- stance in a speech I made at the recent Knights of Columbus communion break- fast at Leominster, Mass. I am greatly honored and highly privileged to join tonight 1n this great manifestation of American patriotism and loyalty to the Nation. The E:ks of Hudson are to he heartily congratulated for arranging this magnificent meeting. It is but another in- stance of long faithful service rendered to the country by this great pro-American or- ganization. For some time past I have been profoundly disturbed by the manifestations here and abroad by the world-wide Communist con- spiracy. Day by day it 1s becoming increas- ingly apparent that powerful forces are work- ing for the destruction of American de- mocracy and freedom throughout the world Evidences of Communist conspiracy are wide- spread and most impressive. The extent to which Communists have made headway in gaining vital objectives is truly alarming. Americans can no longer afford to be indif- ferent or apathetic toward this growing menace to the security and well-being of the Nation. The time has come for every true citizen to rally to the support of free in- stitutions to declare undying allegiance to our Constitution and to move actively, vigor- ously, and energetically to protect and de- fend the principles upon which this Govern- ment is founded. The question of communism is directly connected with enduring peace in this world. That the Kremlin is in a very strong position territorially and militarily mo one can deny. It is rich in resources and manpower. It has embraced widespread territcries. This great world power has accomplished these re- sults principally in three ways: 1, diplo- matic concessions; 2, aggression; and 8, in- filtration. At the moment the latter seems by far the most effective—and Trojan horses stand in many countries preparing to seize the first opportunity to conquer and subju- gate in the name of the great totalitarian slave state which is world communism. This situation is getting worse, not better. Wide areas of the Asiatic Continent are al- ready involved and others are slated for in- volvement. What is our Nation doing about it? Well, to begin with, we have been blocked on the diplomatic front so far as the Soviets and its puppets are concerned. It is impossi- ble to bargain or reach agreement with na- tions which refuse to sit at the council table in a spirit of good faith and sincerity of purpose. That is why not only our own Nation but the:United Nations organization has not been able to arrive at understand- ings with the Soviets concerning a wide va- riety of questions such as universal dis- armament, international control of atomic power, territorial arrangements based on democratic principles, liberation of sup- pressed peoples, the ending of world-wide propaganda and conspiracy and many other questions upon which enduring world peace must essentially rest. So we have not been able, acting by ourselves alone or through the United Nations, to treat successfully with the Soviets in usual diplomatic manner. This has made it necessary for us in the name of self-defense and security to try to organize the democratic world to check the spread of communism and mobilize coopera-~ tive forces which will be ready to resist ag- gression if it should come. The ECA, the Atlantic Pact, and the military-assistance program are parts of this plan. Unquestion- ably ECA sas been effectual to a marked degree in reviving the languishing economies of democratic-minded European nations, al- Teviating privation and hunger, providing XCVI—App.——254 employment, stabilizing economic and social conditions and thus neutralizing the spread of Communist ideas and infiltration. How- ever, there are still mory snotty places in this picture and the : .us".9n :: not satis- tactory m that 1t must be clear that this Nation cannot indefinitely maintain and sup- port so many nations and so many peoples at the expense of the American taxpayer and by the dangerous expedient of overbur- Gening the American economic system much less extend this type of relief and assistance to even more remote parts of the world that have come under the pall 1f imminent Com- munist domination. Moreover, the military-assistance pregram also contains some obvious inconsistencies. We are told on the one hand, and I per- sonally believe it, that jet planes, guided missiles and scientifically devised modern weapons have outmoded conventional types of military equipment, strategy and tactics, etc” We are told on the other hand that furnishing certain arms and equipment to the democratic nations will b? **'r*-1 ‘1 the event of war. Most military:. «» . wall agree that should war start the Soviets could move across the face of Europe to the chan- nel ports within a matter of 20 or 30 days and in 60 days consolidate strong positions throughout all of Europe. If this is so, there would be real danger that the equip- ment and supplies we delivered might be taken by the Soviets and evon be used against us and cur allies. In addition, the situation in the Far East would be exceedingly difficult. Consequently, with these things in mind we have proceeded to build up the strongest peacetime armed force in the history of the Nation. Let there be no doubt about it, we have a mighty and well-balanced war machine which embraces on land, sea, and in the air the most powerful and awful of modern weapons. [I cannot go into the de- tails of this vast organization. It is enough to state that it is up-to-date, well coordi- nated, ably led and ready for instantaneous action. I hope and pray we will never have to use it but, if war is to be avoided, there is little time to lose. We should and must move on a broad front in a vigorous, sincerely-moti- vated all-embracing peace offensive. We must try to mobilize the spiritual, the moral, the civilized instincts of our own people and of peoples everywhere, not in the spirit of uplift or bravado, but with a real, genuine determined effort through affirmative, straightforward, and strong-worded declara- tions of policy, urging peace and offering peace to the Soviets and the whole world, posing the questions of universal disarma- ment, atomic power control, and all the other raany questions that will have to be met and solved to clear the atmosphere for discussion and settlement of these grave issues, In this quest to prevent war, our states- manship should be wise and patient but also and above all firm, unyielding and uncom- promising on matters of principle because the outcome will inevitably affect for good or evil not only our democratic ways of life but the very existence of freedom in the world. The destiny of many as a free being under God is at stake. There can be no further delay in meeting these issues. Every month, every day, every hour is strengthening the potential enemy, enabling him to consolidate his resources, to implement new weapons of horror which he has secured through duplicity and treach- ery. If we walt to resolve these questions, the time will come when we may rue the day. Acting now with earnestness, sincer- ity and courage involves certain risks to be sure but these risks are far less than those involved in waiting for the enemy fully to prepare and savagely to strike out of a clear sky in devilish ways and with incred~ ible means and with such force and effect that our own great Nation in one fell swoop A4029 might well te paralyzed and disabled from defending itself against those who propose to enslave us. We can permit no divisions to beset us at home during these crucial days. <A thor- oughly united people we must have, a thor- oughly determined people we must have, if we would avoid espionage and sabotage at a time when the internal security of the Nation will be paramount. And clearly we can tolerat® no subversion either cutside or imside the framework of the Government. If there are Reds in the Government let us fearlessly expose them and drive them out and let us do that job without conducting witch hunts or smearing expeditions against anyone. Peace will not come until we have made it abundantly clear that we are willing and able to insist upon justice for ourselves and other free peoples. Fight Cancer—Help Science He'p You EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CHRISTOPHER C. McGRATH or NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 25, 1950 Mr. McGRATH. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rzc- orp, I inciude the following from the New York Journal-American: Ficut Cancer—Hertp Scrence Here You By Harry H. Schlacht Oh, heavenly Father, help us to respond to this appeal 1n a manner that will deserve Thy blessings. Conquer cancer. It is the prayer of hu- manity. It 1s the cause of the American Cancer Society. It is our great problem. cause. It is as holy as the Master’s command to heal the sick. What a stirring challenge. What a splen- did opportunity for service. What an in- spiration to enlist in the war against this horrible malady. Cancer 1s the cruelest killer. It is the foe of mankind. It is the common foe. This is our common fight. Cancer does not wait for the convenience of man. It cannot be dismissed with the comment “It cannot happen to me.” It strikes all ages. It strikes rich and poor alike. The ACS is on the march to conquer can~ cer. Cancer can be counted out. It can be done through the ACS. It is our great ACS is in the forefront of the fight. It is lifting the curtain of hope to millions. It is encouraging research on all fronts. It is directing a finish fight against this enemy of humanity. We must protect ourselves. We must pro- tect our loved ones. : Let us not say this fight is impossible. It is not only possible, it is being done by the ACS. There is every reason to believe that with proper financial support we shall yet find something like sulfa or penicillin that will destroy the enemy of man. This problem is no more impossible than the atomic bomb. This enemy is more de- structive than any foe we faced on any battlefield. * Hear, America, the plea.of Elmer H. Bobst, leader of the American Cancer Society cru- sade: “Won’t you join that ever-growing list of Americans who have thrown them- selves into this work? If you do, I am sure God will bless you.”
A4030 Every minute of the day and night millions of prayers are pouring forth from agonized souls—for relief. By heeding cries of suffer- ing, it is within your power to become the true servants of the Lord. Let’s go—America! Let us all rally to the ACS cause. It is our cause, It is our fight. Its success depends on us. Its success is as good as we make it. Let us help science help you. Let us give to conquer cancer. the fight. e Let us win International Refugee Organization EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HERBERT H. LEHMAN OF NEW YORE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, May 25 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. LEHMAN. Mr. President: I ask unanimous consent of the Senate to have printed in the Appendix of the Concrzs- stonwat RECORD a speech made by Mr. J. Donald Kingsley, Director-General of IRQ. This speech was made over Sta- tion WNEW, New York, on May 21, 1950. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Rxcorp, as follows: “TI SPEAK FOR PEACE” The refugee is just as explosive—and even more dangerous, in many ways—than the atomic or the hydrogen bomb. As long as we have peace the bombs are reasonably safe. But peace depends in part upon our ability to solve the refugee problem, and therefore every man, woman, and child has an immediate and vital stake in it. Yet, of all the tremendous issues which confront us, this is one of the most difficult prob- lems to visualize, to understand with clarity, to solve with assurance. But we must iry. Americans are most familiar with the prob< lem in terms of the DP. The United States already has accepted as immigrants under the Displaced Persons Act well over 160,000 DP’s. Many of you have them as neigh- pors. Some few have turned out badly, and you read lurid accounts of their shortcom- ings in the letters to the editors column. But most of them—almost all of them, in fact—have become good, hard-working, self- supporting, and productive citizens. I, too, am chiefly concerned with the DP’s, as Director General of the International Refugee Organization. The DP’s sre the people displaced from their home countries either during the war or in its immediate aftermath. Originally they included all the people Hitler brought from the four corners of Europe to work as slave labor in Germany. They included the inmates of concentration camps. They included the anti-Communist refugees from eastern Europe who fied before the advancing Red armies to find asylum in the west. There were 8,000,000 of them when the war ended. With the help of UNRRA and the Allied armies, most of them returned to the homes they came from. But by the summer of 1947 more than a million remained, mostly in Germany and Austria. Most of these came from eastern Europe, from countries taken over by the Communists, and they re- fused to return. .Most of them had suf- fered under nazism, hated all that Hitler stood for, and prayed for a chance to emi- grate to some free, democratic country in the west. The only practical solution for most of these people was to transfer them to new homes in countries willing to accept them. That is the job IRO was established to do. It has been, and still is, a tremendous task. IRO 1s supported by only 18 of the 59 mem- bers of the United Nations. Neither the Soviet Union nor any of its satellites has ever taken part in the work of IRO or con- tributed to it. They have constantly op- posed it. Yet in spite of this small member- ship, IRO is by far the largest of all United Nations agencies—almost three times as large as the United Nations iteslf and all of the other specialized agencies combined. To accomplish our task, we have maintained as many as a thousand camps scattered throughout western Europe and the Middle and Far East. That number is now reduced to about 300. We have organized and main- tained the largest civilian shipping fleet ever operated in peacetime. We have transport- ed overseas more than 700,000 people. Meanwhile, we have housed and fed them, looked after their health, educated, their children, taught them new languages and trades. Now we have about 300,000 left in’ our camps, and many more outside who look to us for help in finding new homes, or for le- gal and political protection in a world where refugees often find the cards stacked against them. We must do all we can for these people within the next 12 months, because IRO will go out of existence at the end of March 1951. Above all, we must find homes in democratic countries for all we possibly can—for those who will not or cannot re- turn to their homes in the east and have fear for the future in Germany and Austria. They—the last of the DP’s—deserve first priority. It was they who suffered first, jongest, and most severely under the lash of totalitarian inhumanity. They should lhave priority, also, because they are the most bitterly resented minority in Germany, and if left there will constitute a fuse which might well explode the most dangerous bomb in the world—the refugee bomb. The refugee bomb is not a technical in- vention that you can store away in a vault and use or not use at will. But it is Just as real, just as explosive, and far less con- trollable. Moreover, it might well be capa~ ble, if it once gets out of hand, of setting off all the others. It is this problem—the refugee bomb and how to control it—which is so vitally important and, at the same time, so difficult to visualize. In addition to the DP’s cared for by IRO, there are now approximately 12,000,000 refu- gees in Germany alone. About eight and a half million of these are in western Ger- many—more than 14 percent of the normal population of the American, British, and French zones. More are swarming across the border into the western zones every day, add- ing to problems of housing, feeding, and employment that are already staggering. Most of these people were uprooted from their homes in eastern Europe and forcibly expelled to Germany, with nothing more than the goods they could carry on their backs. In the western zones, they live, for the most part, in camps maintained by the Government, in conditions of indescribahle squalor. Some of them are outright Nazis or Nazi sympathizers, who gave Hitler all the help they could. ‘They deserve to suffer. Some are both anti-Nazi and anti-Commu- nist. Some few, undoubtedly, are spies and agitators. Some, like the children, are Just plain nonpolitical. But all of them are resented by the Germans—not as bitterly as the DP’s, who are living reminders of German atrocities, but simply as unwanted strangers feeding and living on German soil. And all of them are a constant threat to the peace of western Europe, and therefore of the world, for they are a steady drain on the economy and a focal point of un- rest. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Similar explosive concentrations of refu- gees have been built up since the war in other parts of the world. There still are some 375,000 in Greece, 900,000 in Palestine, 18,000,000 or 14,000,000 in India, more than half a million in Burma, not to mention the uncounted millions in China. The total is somewhere between 30,000,000 and 60,000,000. The refugees are not only a human and an economic problem. They have become & political weapon as well—a formidable and expanding time bomb. It is a weapon which cannot be used by democratic countries, put which must be understood, recognized for what it is, and neutralized. Even the wealthy west cannot care for all these millions and give them services and. transport on the scale we provide for the DP’s through TRO. But we must first pull the fuse of the bomb, by completing the work in which IRO is still engaged. In this, Americans can help directly by provid- ing sponsorships for DP’s through the United States Displaced Persons Commission. This, J repeat, must be our first priority. I dread to think of what will happen in Ger- many if any large numbers of the displaced are left there when the IRO goes out of existence early next spring. Already, Ger- man newspapers are beating the drums against them—against these people who suf- fered for so long at their hands. Already, discrimination against LP’s on the part of local courts and minor German Officials has become a serious problem. Those who are left behind next year will find life hard in- deed, and the more there are of them, the greater the danger of a fearsome new out- burst of hate and vengeance. ‘The fires of arrogance, of pride, of hatred, and intoler- -ance, which were fanned for so long by the Nazis in the hearts of a whole generation, are not dead. And try as they might, with the best of good will responsible German leaders cannot damp them completely. In the name of peace, as well as in the name of humanity, we must find new homes in new lands for as many as we possibly can in the time remaining. In this, with your help, we can succeed. But even then, our task will not be fin< ished. Then through continued international ac- tion, we must find effective means by which all the rights of man, including political asylum, the right of movement and the right of work, can be assured to legitimate refu- gees. We must develop effective means of preventing the exploitation of refugees by nations callous enough to use them as politi- cal pawns and weapons of cold warfare. And we must organize machinery to facilitate the international movement of workers, whether manual laborers, skilled craftsmen, or spe- cialists, so as to avoid the colossal waste of skills as well as the threat to peace which results from great concentrations of stagnant manpower. All this can be done, either by the whole world in cooperation or by the west alone. And we must do it, for our own sakes and for the sake of peace. Civil Rights EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. PAUL W. SHAFER OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, May 19, 1950 Mr. SHAFER. Mr. Speaker, in these times there appears to be much con- fusion and a complete misunderstand- ing of the forces which have operated
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD to prevent any real action on civil-rights legislation in this session of the Fighty- first Congress. In the public prints, Democrats blame Republicans and Re- publicans blame Democrats for the fail- ure of Congress to act. Because of this, I believe that a brief summary of civil- rights legislative history, at this time, may clear the air and place the respon- sibility where it belongs. I believe that all will agree with me when I say that the thirteenth amend- ment to the Constitution of the United States is the basis of all civil rights. It was this amendment, made possible sole- ly by the Republican Party—the party of Abraham Lincoln—which overthrew human slavery in this country of ours. The Democratic Party—the party of President Truman — opposed this amendment to the last man. Yet if the Democratic Party had accepted the thirteenth amendment, the acceptance would have ended, for all time, the con- troversy over the status of free men. If the Democratic Party had accepted the thirteenth amendment, there would have been no necessity for the four- teenth and fifteenth amendments. The thirteenth amendment overthrew the institution of human slavery; the four- teenth amendment made our colored cit- izens actually citizens of the Republic; and the fifteenth amendment to the Constitution guaranteed the right of every citizen to vote, regardless of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. But the Democratic Party—the party of President Truman—accepted none of these amendments; indeed, fought them with utmost bitterness. All fundamental rights now enjoyed by our colored people were given them by the Republican Party, whether the right to education, the right to work, to individual human dignity, or to protec- tion of the ballot. Because in some sec- tions of the country, under a Democratic one-party system, the thirteenth, four- teenth, and fifteenth amendments to the Constitution have continued to be nulli- fied by legislative subterfuge and evasion, we now have with us, even today, the need for further action to guarantee.the civil rights already explicit in the Con- stitution. The first civil-rights bill introduced in Congress was the work of Lyman Trum- bull, Republican Senator from Illinois, and one of the great lawmakers of that period. He introduced the bill in 1866. It provided that— There shall be no discrimination in civil rights or immunities among the inhabitants of any State or Territory. As the debate on this measure pro- ceeded, Senator Reverdy Johnson, of Maryland, now a Democrat where a few years earlier he had been a Whig, urged that the word “inhabitant” be changed to “citizen.” Thereupon fol- lowed the first consideration of suffrage for the newly freed Negroes. The word was changed, as Senator Johnson had urged. The civil-rights bill was passed, and promptly vetoed by the President. Whereupon the Republican Congress voted to override the veto by a heavy majority. But the civil-rights legisla-~ tion proved impotent against opposition in Democratic Southern States. There- after Thaddeus Stevens, parliamentary wizard, speaking for the Republican Party, put the civil-rights measure into the form of the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution. As with the fourteenth amendment, which made our colored people actual citizens, the fifteenth amendment was urged upon the country by Republican President Ulysses S. Grant, who was Abraham Lincoln’s great Civil War gen- eral. The fifteenth amendment, as I have said, guaranteed suffrage to all, regardless of race, color, or previous con- dition of servitude. So it was, that Re- publicans gave the colored people of the United States that measure of civil rights they now have, and thus made possible the great strides the Negro race has mate in the United States over the past three generations. From beginning to end the Democratic Party—the party of President Truman— fought the civil-rights legislation and fought the civil-rights amendments to the Constitution. The Republican Party, led by such political giants as Lincoln, Grant, Trumbull, Fessenden, Stevens, and Sumner, led the fight for civil rights and won. That civil rights have been stultified in more recent years can be laid to nothing but the refusal of Democrats to recog- nize the validity of the thirteenth, four- teenth, and fifteenth amendments to the Constitution. In the light of this great Republican tradition of equal rights for all men under the Constitution, can there be any real question as to the responsibility for inaction by the present Fair Deal Democrat majority in Congress on the civil-rights bills? Address by Hon. Burnet R. Maybank, of South Carolina, at Annual Meeting of Surgeons of the Southern Railway EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. BURNET R. MAYBANK OF SOUTH CAROLINA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, May 26 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. MAYBANK. Mr. President, it was my privilege last night to address the annual meeting of the Surgeons of the Southern Railway at the Statler Ho- tel. I ask unanimous consent that my remarks on that occasion be printed in the Appendix of the Recorp. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Rrcorp, as follows: It is always a pleasure for me to be among a group of doctors. Associations with medi- cal men bring back many fond memories. I think it was my boyhood admiration for both my father and my grandfather, who were doctors, that led me to study and gradu- ate im pre-medicine at the College of Charles- ton -just prior to the First World War. A ‘A4031 tour of duty in the Navy postponed my entry into medical school, and by the time I got back, it didn’t seem practical to continue or even begin over as the case may have been, Otherwise, I might well have found myself seated among you tonight listening to some other Senator, Professional men such as you seldom at- tend convention meetings and lectures for the purpose of having an outsider talk to you about the problems with which you are most familiar. You are afforded other op- portunities to discuss your everyday experi- ences with learned men of science. I, there- fore, would not presume for 1 minute to in- fringe on your hospitality in such a manner. We do have, however, a number of com- mon interests over which we may meet satis- factorily and to our mutual benefit. There is not one of us who is not vitally concerned with the state of our Union and the condition of our economy generally, During the early days of each new session of Congress it 1s customary for the President to address a joint meeting of the Senate and the House on the state of the Union. In this address we are advised of the general condition of the country, both domestically and internationally. This is simply a report to the Nation with certain recommendations upon which the Congress is urged to act. This leads me to the first of two conditions I intend to discuss with you tonight, The most prominent universal interest among our people at this time with relation to our domestic affairs is the state of the budget. There is mounting interest and concern over the high cost of Government as compared to the incoming revenue. It is easy and popular to attack expendi- tures. It is not quite so easy to meet the day-to-day demands upon the Federal Treas- ury with a workable alternate plan. The Congress is being constantly assailed and pressured to cut expenses on the one hand and to initiate new and greater spend- ing programs on the other. This latter, I find, is not particularly hard to resist, However, a quick glance over the spending program to which this Government is com- mitted will immediately reveal the difficulty we face in cutting the major appropriations. Those who suggest cutting expenditures can readily name one or more appropriations which could be cut. These recommenda- tions, when analyzed and boiled down, amount to nothing more than—‘He can get along on less money, but I will need more.” In order that you may be better acquaint- ed with the problem, I am going to give you a brief résumé of proposed budget expendi- tures for next year. In the fiscal year 1951 the cost of past wars and of preserving national security will account for 71 percent of the Federal expend- itures. In that one statement, gentlemen, you find yourselves face to face with a cold reality when you realize that 71 cents out of every tax dollar is used to pay for past wars and as insurance against future wars. How much, I ask, can we afford to trifle with our national security? To go a step farther, this 71 percent, in terms of dollars, amounts to $13,300,000,000 for national defense, $6,100,000,000 for vet- erans, $4,700,000,000 for international af- fairs, and $5,600,000,000 for interest on the national debt. The direct budget costs of World War II amounted to nearly $350,000,000,000. Ap- proximately 60 percent of this amount was financed by borrowing. Interest on the debt, therefore, in accordance with the fig- ure I just gave you, has become a heavy fixed charge in the budget each year. The $6,100,000,000 for veterans will pro- vide services and benefits for 19,000,000 ex- servicemen, including medical care, pensions, and readjustment benefits under the GI bill.
A4032 After cutting these four large slices from the budget pie, there is a little more than a quarter wedge remaining. To be more ex- act, 29 percent, or about $12,509,000,000, re- main for all other expenditures of the Gov-= ernment. Compare, if you will, the large amount of money expended annually on national de- fense and international security with that remaining portion which may be applied to our Nation’s domestic welfare. This 29 per- cent must be distributed over programs in- cluding the development and conservation of national resources, promotion of health, housing, education, and economic security, assistance to transportation and the flow of trade and commerce, and many other gov- ernmental services. Out of this 29 percent the largest item is for atomic energy and stockpiling of strategic materials which, of course, is a direct war expenditure. The small slice of the pie—the 29 percent— must be spread over many general programs. 1. SOCIAL WELFARE, HEALTH, AND SECURITY More than half of all expenditures under this heading in 1951 will be grants to States to help them provide public assistance to the aged, to the blind and to dependent chil-~ dren. At the present time more than 4,000,- 000 persons are receiving this public assist~ ance compared with 2,700,000 drawing bene- fits from the old-age and survivors insur- ance trust fund. This fund presently totals about $12,000,000,000, most of which is paid by the beneficiaries. The 1951 benefits under the present law will total about $800,000,000. The Public Health Service, another recip- jient under this general program, gives both financial and technical help to State and local governments for many health activi- ties. From your own experience, you know that these include such services as. control of communicable diseases, hospital construc- tion, and mental health. It also sponsors research programs into the causes and cures of such diseases as cancer, arthritis, and tuberculosis. From this same budget of approximately $2,700,000,000 must come expenditures for crime control and correction. This includes the costs of the Federal Bureau of Investiga- tion, the Secret Service, narcotics control, the work of the United States district attor- neys and marshals, and Federal prisons. 2. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT In the field of housing, your Federal Gov- ernment assists in furnishing credit to home builders, home buyers, mortgage lenders, and local communities. Gentlemen, I urge you to take note of the fact that I use the word “assists” advisedly. While the Federal Government does make some few direct loans, its principal role is insuring or guaranteeing private loans and purchasing mortgages from private holders. If you have any doubts about the Gov- ernment’s role in housing, I ask you to check the true figures on financing methods for last year. Of the record number of homes constructed in this country in 1949, more than 51 percent of all new private housing construction was financed with mortgages qonred by the Federal Housing Administra- on. The Home Owners’ Loan Corporation will have an excess of receipts over expenditures of $134,000,000 in 1951. By the end of 1951 all of the more than 1,000,000 loans made to home owners during the depression will have been repaid or sold. 3, AGRICULTURE You have heard much of price supports. Of course, I opposed price supports on perish- able goods. The Government has lost con- siderable money on this part of the program, and it is to be liquidated. In the meantime, the price supports on the main agricultural Products—cotton, wheat, tobacco, and pea- nuts—have shown a profit to the Govern- ment, and the loans have practically all been repaid. In cotton alone the Government made $75,000,000 last year, There have also been substantial profits on other Government loans on major commodities. 4, TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATION To help assure adequate transportation and communication industries, the Federal Government furnishes many facilities and services. It regulates economic and safety aspects of these industries, and, in some cases, assists in their development through direct or indirect subsidies. A system of grants-in-aid to States assures our country of a basic system of national highways. Our Coast Guard operates lighthouses and other navigation. aids. It maintains search and rescue facilities. It engages in law en- forcement related to maritime activities. Since 1939 airline traffic has increased by over 800 percent, and private flying has in- creased in similar degree. This growth has required a corresponding expansion in the program of the Civil Aeronautics Admin- istration. Our national security demands that our merchant marine be maintained at cost on an equal basis with lower foreign costs. Two hundred and twenty-five million dol- lars will be used for shipbuilding and ship- operating subsidies in order to meet the minimum requirements estimated for na- tional safety. At present postal rates, it is estimated that postal operations will suffer a deficit of $555,000,000 in the next fiscal year. This is because of an enormous loss by the Post Office Department in carrying second-, third-, and fourth-class mail. The taxpayer is really subsidizing the distribution of newspapers, periodicals, magazines, catalogs, and circu- lar mail. On second-class mail and on cir- cular mail which goes at the minimum rate of 1 cent there has been no increase in rates for over half a century. On the other hand, the railroads arid other carriers have been faced with changing conditions. They have had to raise the salaries of their employees and generally increase their overhead. Also, the costs of equipment and maintenance, plus the costs of handling the mail, have increased manyfold. The railroads, of course, are not making any money in these opera- tions, even though the taxpayers are paying the subsidies to carry this class of mail. This is likewise equally true of the airlines where the operating costs of many of the lines to carry passengers and freight to all corners of the world are subsidized. Now you have had in a general way a brief look at the many services and benefits demanded of our Government. I hope you will keep these various programs in mind as we turn now, for just a few minutes, to the second part of my discussion. It is a popular pastime among certain static-minded individuals and groups to in- discriminately label every forward move by the Government as socialistic. In a recent radio interview, Vice President Barkley recalled that he was labeled a Social- ist back in 1912 for advocating Federal aid to road building. As you well know, such @ program has been the law of the land since the Wilson administration. I have no personal knowledge of any advocates of States’ rights refusing Federal grants for road-building programs. I told you in the beginning that I did not intend to discuss with you any of the pro- fessional problems of your daily lives. How- ever, there is one item in which you are vitally interested and which would, if it came to pass, have a direct influence on you pro- fessionally. I refer, of course, to the fear . and apprehension over any proposed pro- gram of so-called socialized medicine. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECGRD Let me state to you categorically, here and now, that I shall fight with every weapon at my command any effort to establish so- cialized medicine or socialized anything else—including FEPC. We have the same objectives, you and I. We work and strive to promote the health of the people of America. We can best pro- mote the health of our people by preserving and building and strengthening the tradi- tional American free practice of medicine. We do not need to tinker with strange and untried devices to bring health to our people. We have at hand the tried and tested prac- tices of American medicine—the fruitful products of our free American way of life that have brought to our people the highest quality of medical care to be found anywhere in the world. We must continue to preserve the freedom of the individual doctor. We must preserve the incentives of our free medical system— the incentives for individual effort, initia- tive, and resourcefulness—the incentives to give the best that we have. These incentives are not merely material rewards. They are the satisfactions that come from a job well done, that flow from the personal relationship between the doctor and his patient. We must never destroy the American doctor’s unique place of trust and confidence. The present system of medical care has been too valuable, too effective, and too useful to be abandoned. It is deep in these principles that men such as you, my father, my grandfather, and the doctors before them have laid the corner- stone of American medicine. But let me warn you,-doctors, we cannot preserve the free practice of medicine by simply denouncing socialized medicine or by a stand-pat opposition to socialized medicine, We can best preserve our free-enterprise sys- tem in the field of medicine by offering a still better solution to the Nation’s medical prob- lems than any socialized program might of- fer. We must go forward with affirmative, constructive medical programs that will meet the health needs of the great rank and file of the American people—programs in which, I am proud to say, the American Medical Association is making rapid advances. Now, let me issue a warning—a word of caution, If you remember nothing else that I say here tonight, I beg of you to carry this thought back to your home, your community, and to your office. I do not know, and I am confident that you cannot name, one instance in which the Government has voluntarily invaded the ranks of private enterprise. There is not a field into which the Federal Government has been injected except where private enterprise was either unable or unwilling to render a necessary service. I will support that state- ment from the information which I have already given you with respect to next year’s budget expenditures. In 1951, as I told you earlier, almost a bil- lion and a half dollars in grants to States will help them to provide public assistance to the aged, to dependent children, and to the blind. From that same program nearly a half-~ billion dollars will go to the Public Health Service. Ninety-nine million dollars will support our efforts at control and correction of crime. Is this socialization? Does any State decline these grants be- cause the program interferes with their State’s rights? I have never in my entire political life voted for the expenditure of Federal funds to States without the State having control of the distribution of the money and having the programs run by the State officials who are closer to the people and who can better realize their needs. What about the 80 cities which will re- quest loans from the Federal Government
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD during 1951 to assist them in attacking city slums? The Federal Government has noth- ing whatever to do with initiating this com- munity development. The need must be as- certained and the request must be made by the city or its recognized housing authority. I have already told you that more than 51 percent of the new private-housing con- struction in this country last year was fi- nanced with mortgages insured by the FHA. Let me tell you that this program has not only been grabbed up by private lending institutions—its continuation has been de- manded. It is, indeed, a strange paradox to sit at the table in the Banking and Currency Com- mittee and listen to witnesses berate, con- demn, and roundly damn the Congress for interfering with private builders and lend- ers—even though the Government, except in rare instances such as a few war-housing projects, has not built, does not own, and does not operate a single dwelling unit. Even though built under a Government-insured program, the cement, the lumber, the nails, and the fixtures were bought from private sources by private build>rs and contractors. The money was borrowed from private lend- ing institutions. Except in municipally owned, low-cost rental units, the operation of every dwelling has been privately ad- ministered, Is this socialization of an industry? I say it is nothing more than the consti- tutional functions of a union of sovereign States in discharging its responsibilities to the people who live, work, and fight for its continued free existence. I could cite for you instance after instance in which the Federal Government has car- ried its load in a mighty effort to preserve, continue, and extend these basic rights. I hope you recognize by now that I am not talking to you primarily as doctors. I aim talking to you as citizens—leading and influential citizens—in the communities which make our States and, in turn, our Union. On the other hand, I have cited some of these examples to you because you are doc- tors. Doctors across the Nation seem to be united in their stand, evén as you and I, in opposition to any proposal to socialize your own honorable and respected profes- sion, or any other profession, for that mat- ter. I urge you, my friends, to think long and carefully. -Consider what I have said. You have many friends. You have influence. Over all the Nation a vast effort for health is being put forth by individuals and private institutions, by the States and their com- munities, and by the Federal Government. We must push ahead with these efforts. There is so much yet to be done. Diseases of the heart and arteries cause one out of every three deaths in the United States and disable 8,000,000 Americans every year. The terrible death toll of cancer is rising steadily year after year. Mental sick- ness affects more people than any other ill- ness. The very progress of our civilization brings new hezards to health. We are only hours by plane from the fevers of the tropic jungle, less than 2 days away from the sleeping sick- ness of equatorial Africa, less than 3 days from cholera and bubonic plague. The ramparts that you, the doctors, must watch are as essential to our strength and security as the military ramparts we guard. All that we know about the human body, all that we know about nutrition and pre- ventive medicine, all the wondrous drugs and chemicals, the medical and surgical equip- ment we have—these are only the sinews and the tools of medicine. The doctor is the mind, the spirit, the genius of medicine. Our hopes rest finally upon you. Yours is the challenge. I know that you shall meet that challenge. Is Competition Worth Saving ?—Monopoly and Competition EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CHASE GOING WOODHOUSE OF CONNECTICUT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 24, 1950 Mrs. WOODHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, un- der leave to extend my remarks in the Record, I insért herewith a speech de- livered by Mr. Joseph E. Sheehy, of Groton, Conn., Chairman of the Plan- ning Council of the Federal Trade Com- mission before a workshop on economic education sponsored by the Baltimore City Public Schools on Wednesday, May 10, 1850: Is CoMPETITION WortH Savinc?—MoNoOProLy AND COMPETITION In my comments this evening 1 shall be expressing my personal views and shall not be speaking for or expressing the official views of the Federal Trade Commission. * * * If there is one certainty in the maze of legal and economic problems pre- sented in this field, it is that in our coun- try everyone professes opposition to monop- oly. D:fficulties arise when we seek to define monopoly, to segregate those practices which tend toward its creation and to determine just what this thing is that we are opposing. When a single company dominates an in- dustry, the problem of definition is greatly simplified. The Aluminum Co. of America presents an outstanding example in this field. The evidence in the antitrust suit against that company showed that during the 5-year period from 1934 to 1938 it produced on an average more than 90 percent of the virgin aluminum ingot available for sale in the United States. The court held that under the circumstances of that case this was a monopolizing of interstate commerce within the meaning of the statute. * * * The court was considering not only the percent- age of control but the use that was made of it. One such use was the limiting of imports under a system of quotas and roy- alties. Another was the “squeeze” put on . independent sheet manufacturers by hold- ing the ingot price unfairly high and setting the aluminum sheet price so low that the independents were unable to operate at a profit. Another phase of the Aluminum Co. deci- sion that is particularly pertinent concerns the consideration given by the court to the philosophy underlying our laws against monopoly. A substantial volume of evidence was introduced in the lower court in an ef- fort to establish that the Aluminum Co. had not used its position to extort excessive profits. In fact there was a finding that over a period of a half century, the profits upon the capital invested, after payment of income taxes, had Leen only about 10 percent. With regard to this phase of the defense, the ap- pellate court stated in part as follows: ‘ “Having proved that Alcoa had a monop- oly of the domestic-ingot market, the plain- tiff had gone far enough; if it was an excuse, that Alcoa had not abused its power, it lay upon Alcoa to prove that it had not. But the whole issue is irrelevant anyway, for it is no excuse for monopolizing a market that the monopoly has not been used to extract from the consumer more than a fair profit. The act has wider purposes. Indeed, even though we disregarded all but economic con- siderations, it would by no means follow that such concentration of producing power is to be desired, when it has not been used ex- tortionately. Many people believe that pos- session of unchallenged economic power - A4933 deadens initiative, discourages thrift and de- presses energy; that immunity from compe- tition is a narcotic, and rivalry is a stimulant to industrial progress; that the spur of con- stant stress is necessary to counteract an inevitable disposition to let well enough alone. * * * In any event the mere tact that a preducer, having command of the domestic market, has not been able to make more than a fair profit, is no evidence that a fair profit could not have been made at lower prices. (United States v. Corn Prod- ucts Refining Co., supra, 1014, 1015 (234 Fed. Rept. 964).) True, it might have been thought adequate to condemn only those monopolies which could not show that they had exercised the highest possible ingenuity, had adopted every possible economy, had an- ticipated every conceivable improvement, stimulated every possible demand. No doubt that would be one way of dealing with the matter, although it would imply constant scrutiny and constant supervision, such as courts are unable to provide. Be that as it may, that was not the way that Congress chose; it did not condone good trusts and condemn bad ones; it forbade all. Moreover, in so doing it was not necessarily actuated by economic motives alone. It is possible, because of its indirect social or moral effect, to prefer a system of small producers, each dependent for his success upon his own skill and character, to one in which the great mass Of those engaged must accept the direc- tion of a few. These considerations, which we have suggested only as possible purposes of the act, we think the decisions prove to have been in fact its purposes.” (148 Fed. (2a) 416.) Sometimes I fear we are inclined to con- sider monopoly as occurring only in con- nection with the type of single company domination illustrated by the Aluminum case. * ™* * Whatever the cause, there has been reluctance even in some of the courts to discover monopoly in the absence of such domination by a single company or a very limited number of companies. * * * * - The Federal Trade Commission’s case against the Cement Institute and its mem- bers presents an excellent-example of the multiple-company type of monopoly. In that case there were in addition to the Ce- ment Institute and its officers and agents about 80 cement-producing companies op- erating about 150 mills. Ten of those com- panies controlled more than half of the mills, and there were substantial corporate affilia- tions among many of the others. There was, however, ample productive capacity and an adequate number of independent producers to have furnished substantial competition had they elected to compete. The record in that case showed that there was a belief general throughout the industry that the standardized nature of cement made price competition unsuited to the needs of the industry. This attitude was summed up by an official of one of the companies. Com- menting on the claims being made in the industry that the pricing system in use was necessary to preserve free competition, he characterized them as sheer bunk and hypocrisy. He went on to state: “The truth is, of course—and there can be no serious, respectable, discussion of our case unless this is acknowledged—that ours is an industry above all others that cannot stand free com- petition, that must systematically restrain campetition or be ruined.” * * * The court found that this type of think- ing in the cement industry had promoted concerted activities to devise means and measures to do away with competition and that out of these activities there had come the multiple, delivered-price, basing-point system. The evidence showed that it was a handy instrument to bring about the elimi- nation of any competition. Through its use over a period of several years with but rare
A4034 exceptions, cement was offered for sale in every given locality at identical prices and terms by all producers. During that period thousands of secret, sealed bids were received by public agencies which corresponded in price down to a fractional part of a penny. It was not unusual to find prices identical to the ten-thousandth of a cent. Even dur- ing the depression of the 1930’s, price com~ petition appeared infrequently, and when it did, corrective or punitive action was taken promptly to bring the recalcitrant producer pack into line. The Supreme Court made mention of the fact that a rather high degree of concen- tration of productive capacity in the cement industry made concerted action far less difi- cult than it would otherwise have been. This whole question of concentration in industry is tied in closely with the monopoly problem. It is not possible of course, to state at what point concentration becomes inconsistent with competition in any given industry. It is always possible for a few large concerns to control a substantial portion of an in- dustry’s production and at the same time compete vigorously among themselves. It is equally possible, however, in such situa- tions for these dominant concerns to 50 control an industry as to eliminate competi- tion. Without attempting to determine in any particular mdustry the degree of con- centration that may be considered destruc- tive of competition, it is obvious that in those industries where the trend is toward greater and greater concentration of pro- ductive facilities, it is quite likely to be ac- companied by a trend away from the harsher competitive practices. In a report on the concentration of pro- ductive facilities, 1947, made by the Federal Trade Commission, it was shown that con- centration varied greatly among different in- dustries. One of the tabulations in that report depicted the degrees of concentration, measured on the basis of capital assets, among the three largest companies in each of several industrial groups. In aluminum three companies controlled 100 percent of the capital assets; in tin cans and other tin- ware, 95 percent; in copper smelting and re- fining, 88 percent. Three companies .con- trolled 77 percent of the cigarette-producing capacity; 72 percent of distilled liquors; 71 percent of the plumbing equipment and sup- plies; and 70 percent of rubber tires and tubes. In each of 138 major industries the control of the three largest companies was in excess of 64 percent. In still another group the six largest companies controlled in excess of 60 percent. This does not mean that competition has disappeared from those industries, nor that business is conducted in them in an unfair manner. It does mean that the possibilities for restricting competi- tion are more readily available than in the industries where the ownership of productive capacity is more widely distributed. Fur- thermore, it means that a trend toward a higher degree of concentration in those in- dustries should be carefully noted by the agencies responsible for the maintenance of our competitive system. * * * These comments concerning concentration should not be misconstrued as an attack upon bigness in industry as such. Despite the charges we sometimes hear, the enforce- ment agencies of Government are not at- tempting to put steel making back in the blacksmith’s shop or return the kitten to the cracker barrel in the corner grocery store. In our complex economy big business in many lines of endeavor is essential. However, en- tirely aside from the legal and economic con- siderations involved in concentration there are other values at stake. As we have seen in the aluminum case, the Court recognized that preference might be shown for a system of small producers rather than a few large ones because of the indirect social or moral effect resulting from such a system where each is dependent for his success upon his own skill and character. The kind of concentration that facilitates the adoption of trade restraining practices such as those that the court found in the cement industry must be restrained before it reaches the monopolistic stage or it must be regulated by the State after it has be- come too late to do otherwise. This latter situation is one which I presume none of us would care to see come about. It would mean the abandonment of our effort to maintain a competitive system and the sub- stitution for it of the public-utility concept. This would place the Government in the position of regulating prices and quality in an effort to give the protection no longer made available by the competitive system. As we all know, this has been tried out in varying forms in several of the European countries. None has achieved the degree of success that would prompt us to imitate that example here. Regardless of the weak- messes apparent in our competitive system, its preservation is essential 1f we are to con- tinue to enjoy the fruits of an abundant economy as freemen. There is always a fascination about con- templating a well-ordered existence. In our everyday lives we feel that if we could just get someone to do the worrying for us—to take the multitude of little problems off our shoulders, everything would be finé. So in the economic field, when we encounter depressions and business cycles, people in- variably begin to wonder why this thing can’t be planned better so as to produce and dis- tribute an abundance for all. We begin to think in terms of Government planning or at least some -2rm of over-all Government regulation. We have seen it function with varying degrees of success in our public util- ities and we begin to wonder why it couldn’t pe extended to cover other fields of business endeavor. Such regulation, of course, sub- stitutes for competition an elaborate sys- tem of administration with the complicated rate hearing processes and other methods used for the establishment of prices. The efforts made during periods of national emer- gency to apply anything approaching these methods to the general business field have fallen somewhat short of complete success to say the least, and yet if competition is removed as a means of protecting buyer and seller, there will remain only some such form of governmental control to furnish that pro- tection. The competitive system with its constant reaching for new markets increases produc- tion and maintai~s high levels of employ~ ment. Here again Iam not contending that the situation in this regard is perfect. The records in our cases show that restriction of production is not an unusual means of at- tempting to maintain prices, but it dces not follow that if we were to succeed in eliminat- ing this and all other artificial restraints, that full production might be maintained and unemployment eliminated. These are inherent weaknesses in our system, if you will. The remedy, however, is to continue our efforts to overcome them within the framework of our competitive system rather than to permit groups to exercise their mo- nopolistic power by unlawfully restricting production, fixing or enhancing prices, or otherwise restraining trade. Another form of restriction is the curtail- ment of industrial progress. The results of activities in this field may not he so readily apparent as in price fixing, for example, but the long-range effect may be fully as dis- astrous. The practice may take many dif- ferent forms in those industries where com- petition has been restricted. Possibly a new product is kept from the market for a period of time in order to avoid disruption in exist- ing production facilities. Another method is the pooling of patents or the deliberate shelving of a patent so as to keep a new or APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD improved product from the market. If the competitive system is to function, the field must be kept open for the introduction of new ideas and new products as rapidly as they are developed and as promptly as men are willing to risk capital in their promotion. The patentee, of course, is granted definite monopolistic rights for a specific period of years to make, use, or vend the patented product. * *  % * * * “ * In the realm of moral values the need for preservation of our competitive system is of major importance. One of the outstanding characteristics of the American way of life is the belief that anyone with ability, initia- tive, and determination may achieve any goal he sets for himself. It is my firm conviction that this belief on the part of our young men and women entering the employment market each, year has contributed more than any single factor to the success of this Nation. There is no other country and no other eco- nomic system which offers the reward of suc~ cess so freely to those who are willing to make the fight for it. If monopoly power is permitted to be concentrated in the hands of a few and the opportunities for building up individual success restricted accordingly, this spirit will pass out of our economic picture. * * * No discussion of the competitive system should fail to acknowledge that it is harsh. There can be no guaranty that each who embarks on that sea will be successful. For just as the rewards are for the efficient and competent, so the penalties fall heavily upon those lacking these qualities. Competition to be effective must be constantly weeding out the inefficient and those ill-equipped to make their contribution to the system. This type of selection, however, is far different from the arbitrary selection made by mo- nopolistic groups as to who may or may not engage in a particular industry or in some phase of that industry, such as was done, for example, in the glass case, to which I re- ferred previously. There likewise can be little question that with all its harshness it is much fairer to the individual than any system by which officials of government are given the power of life or death over indus- trial endeavor. The universal danger in any monopolis- tic situation is the ease with which illegal activities may be introduced into the plan and the fact that in most instances the ultimate scheme is the result of gradual growth at some times scarcely perceptible on an over-all basis even to those partici- pating in it. This, of course, does not apply to deliberate acquisitions of competitors for the purpose of eliminating competition or other acts of a simular direct nature. In such cases the purpose is obvious and the effects sought to be achieved equally well known. In the average multiple-company monopoly group, however, a start is seldom made by representatives of all companies sitting down and fixing prices or agreeing to liquidate certain competitors. Initially the objectives may be to eliminate trade practices which are in fact bad for the in- dustry and consumers alike. Success in this regard, however, frequently encourages addi- tional activities until the cumulative effect results in an unlawful restriction upon com- petition. If I seem to be placing undue stress upon price fixing, please do not get the impres- sion that it is the only adverse effect flow- ing from the exercise of monopoly power. It is clear, however, that price being of major importance in determining the success or failure of business, its control is always pres- ent in the thinking of those who achieve monopoly power, and it is a rare case indeed where such power having been achieved is not used to affect price. In this connection I should like to stress that it is not necessary for a monopoly group to agree upon a fixed
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ultimate price in order to violate the law in this regard. The Supreme Court in the Socony-Vacuum Oil Co. case in 1940 had this to say on the subject: “Any combination which tampers with price structures is engaged in an unlawful activity. Even though the members of the price-fixing group were in no position to con- trol the market, to the extent that they raised, lowered, or stabilized prices they would be directly interfering with the free play of market forces. The act places all such schemes beyond the pale and protects that vital part of our economy against any degree of interference. Congress has not left with us the determination of whether or not particular price-fixing schemes are wise or unwise, healthy or destructive. * * *” * * * * * In the Temporary National Economic Com- mittee Monograph No. 21 the section on trade associations as a means Of monopolizing the market has subheadings which deal with cost accounting, statistical activities, price reporting systems, standardization, credit bureaus, and patent pools. Under these subheadings cases are referred to in which each of these classes of activities was used. as a device to restrain trade. * * * #* * Those who participate in a plan are the only ones who really know what its purpose is or in what way it is to be carried out. If 1t is actually injuring others, there seldom is doubt in their minds as to this point. Moreover, those who develop a pro- gram of lawful, constructive activities are in the most favorable position to prevent it from becoming combined with illegal ac- tivities. The responsibility properly rests on them to avoid the illegal purpose and not upon the Government to forbid practices absolutely, even though they are sometimes innocent, or to condemn practices absolutely, even though they are sometimes the instru- ments of an unlawful scheme. The law en- forcement agencies constantly encounter cases in which there is documentary evidence of an intent to violate the law and to cloak , the violation with innocent activities or with a@ profession of ignorance about the proper interpretation of the law and about the con- sequences of the illegal acts. ; * * - * * The struggle between competition and monopoly 1s as old as commerce itself. * * * Our theory of opposition to combinations in restraint of trade comes to us through the English common law, but it has been devel- oped very differently in this country. In England the principal concern was to see to it that the Government did not grant exclusive privileges to preferred groups. The fact that those groups adopted restrictive practices was not considered offensive. * * * Pere haps the difference in viewpoint between the European and American systems can best be summed up in the statement that the former is primarily an alternative to state control while in this country it is an alternative to private monopoly built upon combination and conspiracy. Nowhere else in the world will we find the emphasis upon competition as an essential element in a free-enterprise system. * * When monopolistic groups of any kind neck to substitute with combination, collusion, or conspiracy the corrective forces of a free, competitive market, they are performing a distinct disservice to their own industry and to the economy as a whole. Competition is a harsh, demanding task master. It is human nature to rebel against it. * “ ™* We have further found that monopoly in private industry leads to abuses which force government control. I trust that none of us will ever see conditions in this country reach the point where our Gov-~ ernment will be obliged to operate the in- dustrial machine in order to protect its peo- ple. The alternative in my opinion is a sane, rigarous enforcement of our antitrust laws which will insure a fair opportunity to buyer and seller alike. The choice in the final analysis, it seems to me, is not between mo- nopoly and competition but between private enterprise and Government conirol and op- eration, Tolerance EXTENSION OF REMARE HON. WILLIAM BENTON OF CONNECTICUT IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, May 26 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. BENTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to insert in the Con- GRESSIONAL Recorp a letter from Stephen Schneck, age 17, of the Cheshire Acad- emy, of Cheshire, Conn. This moving and original letter was the prize winner in a radio contest I conducted for Connecti- cut high-school students. I asked them to write me their thoughts on the subject of tolerance, coincident with the Senate debate on the FEPC bill. This letter is one cf scores of remarkable letters which I received and which showed the deep in- terest of our young people in the prob- Jems involved in racial and religious dis- crimination. A number of the letters I received pointed out that young people instinctively welcome all people as friends, and that intolerance is only in- stilled into their hearts by their elders. I think there is a worth-while lesson in that thought for those in Congress who have opposed the President’s civil-rights program, and I commend the letter to their attention. There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: My name is Stephen Schneck; I’m 17 and a student at Cheshire Academy. After reading those 13 words, just what do you know about me? Can you say that I’m dishonest, miserly, a loud-mouth? In my mind there is no one foolish enough to make these assumptions on the basis of the information I have given you. Now let me add four more words: I am a Jew. Many will feel now that I have given enough data to certify to all these qualities— and more, When you read the next few lines, please understand that I am not making a plea. Nor am I making an assumption. I am stating a fact. My race is not—any more than are Negroes, Protestants, Catholics, or Chinamen—cast from the same die. Some men are good, some men are bad, some are a mixture of both. Notice, I say men, not races. Whether he worships Christ, Jehovah, Buddha, or @ stone, he is first a man. He breathes like you, reproduces like you, and if you beat him hard enough he will die, just like you would. Throw him into the sun for a few thousand years and he turns black. Keep him in the shade and he’s pale. Still and all, he’s a member of the species known as homo sapiens, of the vertebrate class and the pri- mate order. Can you get away from that? Don’t ever say, “He’s the wrong sort of person,” or hate a man because he dips his fingers into water before he prays, wears a skull cap, or is your darker brother, There A4035 are no sorts, types, or breeds. There is only the individual. Mr. Senator, please tell your friends that when they’re judged He won’t take us by categories. It’ll be alphahbetically—with Abraham first and Zacapopolis last. Smith and Cohn and Jackson will be standing to- gether. And when their names are read off trey’d better have a better excuse than “I was @ white man” The Lord God, I’m afraid, is going to look down and answer, “So what?” If we’re going to be judged as we’ve judged others, then a great many people are going to get the book thrown at them. The gates of heaven are going to open a lot faster to him who can shout, “I was a good man.” The Fog Deepens as Truman Heads West EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. OWEN BREWSTER OF MAINE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, May 26 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. BREWSTER. Mr. President, 1 ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the RrEcorp an edi- torial entitled ““The Fog Deepens as Tru- man Heads West,” published in the Louisville (Ky.) Courier-Journal of May 15, 1950. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: THE Foc DEEPENS aS TRUMAN Heaps West If the American people have just now a sense of groping in a fog, it is not hard to see why this is so. A kind of unreality settles upon the events which take over the head- - lines. It is as if the President and Con- gress were moving in separate worlds, con- cerning themselves with problems that have no relation to one another—with ideas, in- deed, that seem touched with futility even as they are stated. The Senate occupies itself with a time- wasting ritual, a debate over the FEPC bill which already is frozen in a filibuster and which nohody may doubt is headed to the inevitable end of a stalemate. Mr. Truman is off smiling over birthday cakes, talking of the Teapot Dome of another generation, the technicalities of atomic research and the starving Chinese. After much pious clamor for economy, the lower House completed an appropriations bill after haggling whether to increase or decrease it a half to a billion dollars. (The decrease won.) One wonders where are the assurances that the people have a right to expect—if not assurances of solutions sought, at least assurances of an effort to find solutions. The President’s jaunty confidence and gen- ial visitations at the whistle stops are hardly enough. Nor is his glibness in snatching great issues out of the bag, holding up each one briefly to the public view, either com- forting or educational. A major statement on foreign policy, for example, seems almost casual, a single item in a road-show repertoire. In a brief stop at Laramie, \vyo. (1940 population 33,651), there is what might have been a major treatment of the Far East situation, of the vast, chaotic problems of circumventing communism in China, India and Indonesia. Instantly it merges into a discussion of Republican iniquities of the Harding era, of greed and special privilege, the National Science Foundation and the atomic project
A4036 on the Snake River. Pocatello, Idaho (1940 population 18,1383), becomes the setting for a declaration, almost incidental, of the proadening program for atomic energy devel~ opment. It is far from certain that the President could do anything with any effect to bring order to the chaos that threatens in the rail- road strike. But that it is a grave, immedi- ate danger, that the influences and responsi- bility for order fall first upon him—and now perhaps only upon him—gives a great propaganda advantage to his political op- position, shouting now for him to hurry back and put his hand to it. But he will not be hurried, of course. The trip is charted. The stops must be made and the confident smile must be bestowed pending the turn back eastward and the all-important stop at the Democratic Party’s massive carnival at Chicago next Monday. Meanwhile this same party pulls and tugs against itself in Washington, its factions divided on an issue of civil rights, divided and irreconcilable. Here are unreality and confusion confounded: the leader promising all “if the right kind of government is kept at Washington,” the elements of that govern~ ment drawing farther apart in incompati- bility. It-is a strange season for the Truman travels. Continuation of Rent Control EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HERBERT H. LEHMAN OF NEW YORK IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, May 26 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. LEHMAN. Mr. President, there have lately appeared editorials in a num- ber of very influential newspapers fa- voring the continuation of rent control. These editorials favor rent control neither as strict nor for as long a period as I, myself, favorit. Buta great many of these newspapers have previously been in opposition to any extension of rent control. Hence, I believe these edi- torials are highly significant. I ask unanimous consent of the Senate to in- sert in the Recorp at this point an edi- torial from the May 20 edition of the Washington Post and an editorial from the May 22 edition of the }hiladelphia Inquirer. There being no objection, the edi- torials were ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: [From the Washington Post of May 20, 1950] Renr ContTRoL . By delaying action on rent control legisla- tion Congress has greatly strengthened the case for its extension. For the present Fed- eral rent control law expires June 30, and some form of local control is still needed in many parts of the country. Local control can only be obtained, in the absence of Federal rent control, by calling special ses- sions of State legislatures to act on pro-« posals to substitute State systems of con- trol. By the time the fate of Federal rent control is decided, it will be too late for the States to take the necessary steps to protect communities where acute housing shortages still exist from excessive increases in rentals. Of course, the States should have been prepared to assume responsibility for rent regulation in anticipation of the abolition of Federal control. The Washington Post stated last February, housing shortages have become a local problem that should be the responsibility of State and local govern- ments rather than the Federal Government, Unfortunaiely most of the States have fal- Jen down on the job—no doubt in the belief that the Federal system of controls would be extended. For only New York and Wiscon- sin have substituted State rent control for Federal control. Four States, however, have entirely removed controls by action of their legislatures and in two other States all con- trols have been lifted either by local option or by the Federal Housing Expediter. As a result of this deplorable inaction im- mediate abolition of Federal rent control would creat serious hardship in many de- controlled areas in which housing vacancies were far below what it considered a normal average. In Chicago, Detroit, Boston, and Pittsburgh, to take only a few examples, the rental vacancy rate is only a half of 1 per- cent or less. In other words, there is prac- tically no vacant accommodations available for tenants. Other large industrial cities are in similar plight. In these circumstances we conclude that the rent-control bill just approved by the House Banking and Currency Committee meets the needs of a critical transition period by affording protection against rent gouging to those communities that would be left de- fenseless by the immediate abolition of Fed- eral rent control. This bill would extend control for another year, but only in those cities and other localities that voted to re- tain it. If they failed to take affirmative ac- tion, either by local referendum or legislative action, controls would be removed at the end of 1950. In addition, the authority of city governments to remove local controls at any time would be retained, while whole States could be decontrolled by their legislatures as under the existing law. Legislation of this kind would emphasize the local nature of the problem of rent can- trol and in effect serve as a warning to States and municipalities that the end of Federal rent control is in sight. They would be given time to prepare for its abolishment and meanwhile they would be compelled to de- cide whether they wanted and needed such control for another full year. [From the Philadelphia Inquirer of May 22, 1950] Low-Cost Hovusine Srinz Scarce; Keer Rent CurRBs One compelling reason for continuing Fed- eral rent controls, due to expire next June 30 unless Congress acts in the meantime, is the fact that the shortage in low-bracket housing for sale or rent has not been overcome by the postwar building boom. This fact, emphasized once more by I. Her= man Stern and Charles Melchiorre, members of the city housing rent commission, ought to prod Congress into prompt action on the legislation extending rent controls which was approved last week by the House Banking and Currency Committee. It is unfortunately true that in some in- stances rent controls have worked hardships on landlords. Costs of renovations and re- pairs have gone up, and if they cannot be covered by modest increases in rents, owners of. rental space suffer. But it is equally true that the new housing being constructed is usually far beyond the means of a large segment of the population. While it tends to reduce the strain of the housing shortage, it offers little hope for those who simply cannot pay the high rents or high sales prices involved. Most of the cases coming before the rent commission in the past 2 years had little to do with upper-bracket rents. They con- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD cerned tenants living in dwellings in the $15 to $50 monthly range, according to Stern and Melchiorre. It is for these people that rent control is a necessity. They cannot pay the $70 to $90 monthly rents customary in newly built housing, and public housing accommoda- tions, presumably with lower charges, will not be generally available for some time. The rent bill reported by the House com- mittee is milder than the present one. It contains provisions for cases where the land- lords are undergoing severe hardships, and it makes it easier for any locality to get rid of controls whenever the voters or the local authorities deem them no longer necessary. That time has come in many communities. It hasn’t yet arrived in Philadelphia, espe- cially for the low-bracket income families which can barely pay their present rents. Congress should protect these families in Philadelphia and other places by extending the modified rent-control law. Congress Opened Barn Door—“Horse” Was Stolen While American Boys Fought, Died—War Contracts Report Reveals Shocking Crookedness by Busi- nessmen, Some in Uniform EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. GEORGE G. SADOWSKI OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 25, 1950 Mr. SADOWSKI. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrec- orD, I wish to include an article that appeared in the national weekly news- paper Labor, as follows: ConcREss OPENED Barn Door—“Horsn” Was Storen WHILE AmERIcan Bors Foucur, Drep—War CoNnrTRACTS Report REVEALS SHockING CROOKEDNESS BY BUSINESSMEN, Some in Unirorm Congress left the barn door wide open, so the horse was stolen. Now nobody can do much about it, but Congress should learn the lesson and never leave the barn door open again. That’s the moral of a scorching report sent to the Senate and House this week by Lind- say C. Warren. As Comptroller General, he heads the General Accounting Office and is “watchdog” over the money appropriated by Congress and spent by the executive branches of the Government. Warren was an influential Member of the House before he became ‘“‘watchdog,” and is highly respected on Capitol Hill, but back in 1944 Congress opened the barn door de- spite his earnest and repeated protests. PUT ON UNIFORM American boys were fighting and dying on the battle fronts. The Army, Navy, and other Government agencies were signing war contracts by the billions of dollars. Often the signing was done by big-business men who had temporarily put on uniforms. Uncle Sam had no time to check up on de- tails. The war had to be won in a hurry. In the midst of that situation, big-business spokesmen in Congress popped up with a bill which directed the Army, Navy, and other agencies to settle and pay their war con- tracts without any independent audit by the watchdog of Congress or by anyone else. As Labor reported at the time, Warren almost got down on his knees pleading against passage of the bill. He pointed out
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD that an independent audit, before final set- tlement of any war contract, was vitally necessary to protect Uncle Sam and the tax- payers against frauds and improper pay- ments. TELLS RESULTS Nevertheless, the big-business lobby was strong enough to put through the bill, con- taining provisions which limited the watch~ dog to a hasty search for the horse after it was stolen. Warren’s report now tells some of the results. The Army, Navy, and other agencies have settled a total of 323,983 contracts, practi- cally all of those made during the war, the report says. Of these, the General Account-~ ing Office has been able to investigate only 26,566, or about 1 of each 12, and only after final payments were mace. Even this small sampling revealed exces- sive or fraudulent payments in 1,233 settle- ments, or more than 1 our of 7 of those examined, with a loss to the Government exceeding $25,000,000. Warren said he would hesitate to hazard a guess as to the full extent of fraud or overpayments. He gave Congress numerous actual and shocking examples of the frauds and crook- edness perpetrated by war contractors. He pointed out that not a single case was dis- covered in which the contractor got less money than was honestly due him. It was always Uncle Sam who got gypped. Most war contractors, Government officers, and employees made a glorious record in the war, Warren said. It 1s unfortunate that their accomplishments—in support of the boys who fought and gave their lives—should be clouded by the shadows of men of low eharacter, including some in uniform, who took advantage of the opportunity afforded them by Congress, and feathered their nests. Can Our Freedom Be Preserved? EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. KARL E. MUNDT OF SOUTH DAKOTA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, May 26 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an address delivered by Mr. George N. Craig, na- tional commander of the American Le- gion, at Chicago, Ill, on May 16, 1950. I make the request not only because Commander Craig comes out forcefully in favor of the Mundt-Ferguson-Nixon bill, but because it is also a great speech, in general, dealing with the subject of patriotism. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Can Our FREEDOM BE PRESERVED? Tonight I am happy to extend to your association 4,000,000 congratulations upon the occasion of your silver anniversary, for that represents the membership of the American Legion and the American Legion Auxiliary. We of the Legion know how you feel about socialism, the cunning consort of commun ism, and your fraternity know how we feel. It is good to know that 85 percent of your membership are veterans of one or both of the late world wars. You and we are com- rades, fighting side by side against “comrats” that are trying to gnaw their way into the very foundations cof America. The American Legion is absolutely in ac- cord with your declaration that 1f we value our health and if we value our liberty, we must agree that compulsory health insur- ance—political medicine—is bad medicine for America If some of the crackpots should have their way—God forbid—socializing this and s0- ciahzing that—they eventually would com- munize America. They tell us in honeyed words that more concentrated Government control of every- thing will do something for us. They don’t tell us what it would do to us. Not only would they create a socialized state, but there well might follow a hypo- chondriac and neurotic siate. Since 1943, national conventions of the American Legion have gone on record as opposing socialized medicine and compulsory health insurance. We stand on corm  crovrd fighting a common enemy: -¢.«.'°, » advance guard of communism. On the great American highway we have approached an intersection, at which is a pold warning sign: “No left turn.” And ico many of our people are mentally indulging 'n the old wisecrack that they don’t believe in signs. Our Nation today is surely in need of uni- fication of thought cnd purpose, unification of all 1ts people in a firm determination to banish the enemy within our midst. While above our heads, like the sword of Damocles, hangs the threat of atomic de- struction, right under our very feet the ter- mites of communism, with their allies the weevils of socialism, are biting their way into our schools, into our sacred institutions, into the governing bodies of our communities, our States, and now even into some of the high- est departments of our National Government. It isthe honest opinion of many Ameri- cans that our Department of State fairly reeks with deceit, depravity, and double-talk; that it is a veritable snake pit in which pow- derpuff dinlomats are playing at a game of demimond diplomacy. HIDE THE FACTS—SEEK THE PEOPLE It’s a new national pastime: hide and seek; hide the facts, then seek confidence of the people. The American public has indicated increas- ing concern, and rightly so, over the whole question of loyalty in our Department of State. Why has not the public the same confidence in those directing our foreign pol- icy, upon which the security and the very life of our Republic depends, that it has in the FBI and in our Armed Forces? A naval commander losing a ship, or an army officer ignorantly leading his troops into disaster would undoubtedly have his career jeopardized, if not terminated. A Sec- retary of State, however, who is in charge of our first line of defense, and who loses whole areas of the world through mistakes of judgment, is not even open to Official crit- icism, much less replaced by a more com~ petent person. Instead, he is given the task of attempting to salvage the very situation he helped to produce. Our military high command does not trust even a handful of troops or the smallest Naval unit to anyone but a trained and qualified officer who, normally in peacetime, attains his rank and even extremely limited responsibility only after 4 years at West Point and Annapolis or comparable expe~ rience and training. However, in our State Department today there are many top-level officials, reputed to be experts but who, on the record, are shown to be totally devoid of any significant train- ing or experience. Here are two State De- partment aides considered incompetent, to say the least: A4937 Walter M. Kitschnig, a native Austrian, was hired by the State Nepertment at the start cf World War II. He ecu dnt go into military service because he was classified as an enemy alien. United States citizenship was granted him hurriedly. Today he heads the Department’s entire cultural relations policy with respect to foreign countries at an annual salary of $10,0C0. Then there is Haldore Hanson. This 37- year-old, $10,C00-a-year man has no military record and no background of industrial, fi- nancial, labor, or economic experience. Yet he is in charge of planning the disbursement of billions of dollars to backward economic areas. There are many other such cases. What American businessmen would con- sider fcr one moment the operation of any department of his business along the lines that some of the most responsible depart- ments of our Government are being run to- day? The time has come when we must he as practical and just as hard-headed in our international affairs as we are in our private business dealings. Our diplomats should be hand-picked at an early age, so that their training for spe- cific assignments would make them special- ists in those particular posts. They could then hold their own with the diplomatic representatives of other nations instead of being amateur society bridge players at the international poker table, where the stakes are high, for they would have been selected and trained for their jobs, not floundering through important missions and endanger- ing the very life of their country because their posts were plums picked in the over- run orchard of politics or because of financial or other backing. The American Legion has had introduced in Congress a bill to create a National Acad< emy for Training in Diplomacy. Communist eradication in governmental office should never be treated as a political pawn. There should be no political pride in discovery, either by Democrats or Repub- licans. Only a common and mutual desire on, the part of both parties can render that public service which all citizens are justly entitled to expect from their Representa- tives. American principles and the desire to pre= serve them rise far above party politics. Those who use politics either to cloak or prevent such discovery do an irreparable dis- service to their Nation. The time is past when our people can treat lightly any further foreign-born ideologies. To combat them we need a positive Ameri- canism. The time has come when we must get tough. Here in Chicago over the past week-end was held the second All-American Confer- ence in which delegates from leading patri~ otic, religious, civic, and other organizations, representing more than 80,000,000 citizens of the United States, gathered in a great united effort to stop the Red tide that is creeping over our land. From long and sometimes bitter experi- ence, we of the American Legion have learned how cunningly the Commies con- trive their plans. True, the ranks of the Communists are interspersed with criminals, cranks, and crackpots, but they have a plan, Events of the past weeks have afforded us ample evidence of the ramifications involved in pressing charges against those in our Government’s highest offices who palpably are enemies of the American way, and the immediate resignation of whom should be demanded by the American people. The difficulty of proving that a State De- partment official, or a former State Depart- ment official, is or was in fact a Soviet spy was proven in the Alger Hiss case. An ex- traordinary chain of favorable circumstances and accidents was required to convict one
A4038 man after two jury trials of having “com- mitted perjury m connection with Soviet espionage.” If Alger Hiss had not made the mistake of challenging Whittaker Chambers to repeat his charge publicly so that he (Hiss) could sue for libel, it is doubtful that Chambers ever would have produced the now famous pumpKin papers. HISSES IN THE STATE DEPARTMENT Evidence is that there still are Hisses among the snakes crawling through the high grass of our State Department. Incidentally, it required too many years to convict the Communist Harry Bridges, whose trial and deportation as an enemy alien the American Legion has been urging ‘upon our Government since 1938. The entire festering Amerasia case should be reopened. They have been vague promises that it will, and we are hopeful. Two in- dividuals admitted that they stole classified State Nepartment documents, and they were fined in a Urited States court. Four others, one of them still a top-level State Depart- ment official in a critical post—John Stewart Service—were involved in the same case. Upon recommendation of a representative of the Department of Justice, no charges were pressed against these four. Why? Our peo- ple have a right to know who was responsible. We have the right to demand that all the disgraceful circumstances surrounding those recommendations be brought out into the open, EFormer Ambassadors Joseph Grew and William C. Bullitt should be asked to tell their stories to the Congress. As Under Secretary of State, Grew was largely respon- sible for the arrests in the Amerasia case. Then he was relieved of his post, and suc- ceeded by Dean Acheson. All Americans, regardless of political be- liefs, must stand together in the common defense, and the approach must transcend even so-called bipartisanship and be divorced as completely from politics as can be made possible in a democracy. ‘Unfortunately the present investigation before the Tydings committee is filled with bickerings, mostly along party lines. There are charges and countercharges of hit-and-run propagandist from one side and operation whitewash from the other. When charges were first made of commu- nism in our Department of State, Secretary of State Acheson himself should have de- manded an immediate investigation. He, of all people, should have been most eager to learn the truth. If there is communism in the State Department, the public is entitled to know it. If there is no communism in the Department, the public should know that. The public does not understand yet who recommended and who hired Alger Hiss, Ju- lian Wadleigh, John Stewart Service, and others, including the 91 homosexuals whom John Peurifoy recently admitted had been dismissed from the State Department. The Department of State presently em- ploys more than 7,000 persons. Competent authorities are of the opinion that at least half of them serve no useful purpose and that many of their jobs were invented and are purely synthetic and unnecessary, and should be eliminated in the cause of secu- rity, economy, and efficiency. The Depart- ment should be returned to its constitution- alfunction * * * that of studying and devising American foreign policy. And, for what significance it may have, permit me to inject here the statement that the present Secretary of State, Dean Ache-~ son, was Vice Chairman of the Hoover Com-~ mission, whose report contained no recom-= mendations for economy with respect to the State Department. Why? The very life and security of this Nation depends upon the State Department, and the Chinese catastrophe and our increasing wor- - ries over the Soviet Union tend to high light tris cuccticn more and more. Neither po- aul sccanets 2. nor facetious wisecracks vio. y, °@ %» erican public as the final solution or the answer to the cvic**77: What is wrong with our State Drew: ? They want the unvarnished facts, and they are entitled to them. A restoration of con- fidence demands it. When the people know the facts they will demand the riddance from every govern~ mental office of all disloyal subversives, per~ verts, incompetents, and cocktail strategists. It is now apparent to the American peo- ple that our Department of State is a centi- pede for putting its foot in it. MUNDT-FERGUSON-NIXON BILL SHOULD BE ENACTED In combating Communist influence here, a step in the right direction would be pas- sage of the Mundt-Ferguson-Nixon bill now before Congress. This bill would require the Communist Party (1) to register and identify itself, (2) to list its front organizations, (3) label its literature and broadcasts, and (4) make fiscal reports to the Government, much as both the Democratic and Republican Par- ties are required to do under the clean poli- tics act. Moreover, it denies Communists the privilege of working for the Federal Gov- ernment under penalty of law, and denies them the right to get Federal passports to travel abroad. This bill was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee by a vote of 12 to 1 and now is before both House and Senate. Your letters and telegrams to your Senators and Representatives might be an effective means to get this bill passed by Congress. This is, quite appropriately, National De- fense Week, which will culminate in demon- strations here and throughout our land on Saturday. And, it comes when the Ameri- can people are being more and more confused by conflicting appraisals of the world situa- tion. At a news conference the other day (and I quote from the Associated Press) our Presi- dent said he doesn’t feel the cold war is close to turning into a shooting war with Russia. In fact, he said, he thinks the international situation is much better now than it was in 1946, the previous low point in American- Russian relations. M*, Truman said the Na- tion’s defense budget will be smaller for the 1951-52 fiscal year, and he is not alarmed in any sense of the word. At the same time, the United Nations Sec- retary~General, Trygve Lie, while en route to Moscow on a peace mission, said things have not been so bad since 1945. Secretary of Defense Louis A. Johnson, after a year’s effort to economize in defense spending, has asked Congress for an addi- tional $350,000,000 for defense, most of it for the purchase of planes. He based the reversal of his stand on a number of alarm- ing elements in the world situation. But, he did not recommend universal military training, which he always has espoused. Why? . President Truman himself has rightly asked for universal military training year after year since he has been in office. How then can the Secretary of Defense so ignore the wishes of his Commander in Chief? Secretary Johnson’s request for more de- fense money followed on the heels of an expression of concern by General Eisen~ hower over some defense cuts. About the same time Gen. Omar Bradley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, asked the House Armed Services Committee to extend the military draft 2 years because, he said, “cold war developments have be- come worse in the last 5 months.” In Indianapolis last week, Kenneth C, Royall, last Secretary of War and the first Secretary of the Army, got back into cir- culation by saying he thought there would be no shooting war for about 8 or 9 years APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD and that the United States is (and I quote) “as well prepared as we ought to be,” the next war, he said, ‘‘won’t be won with the weapons we have on hand; it will be won with weapons not yet created.” On the other hand, W. Stuart Symington, shortly before he was moved upstairs from the post of Secretary of the Air Force to the position of Chairman of the National Se- curity Resources Board, delivered this warning: “Today Russia has an air force whose strength is the largest in the world, and growing relatively larger month by month. Russia is steadily increasing the strength of its long-range strategic bombing force, a type of plane it did not have in World War II. The Communists do not need long-range strategic bombers in order to conquer Eu- rasia. Should we not ask ourselves there- fore, why are they being built?” In the light of such conflicting opinions by our leaders, 1t is little wonder that fear mists are clouding many minds. We of the American Legion are not proph- ets of fear, but neither are we exponents of smug complacency. And, we admit that right now we are seeing red, too much red for the good of the American people, and certainly too much of it in the sacred pre- eincts of our Department of State, which too many of our citizens believe has the hammer and sickle tattooed all over it. Communism, with socialism its accessory before the fact, is devoid of morality, devoid of spiritual belief, devoid of culture or com- mon decency. Verily, it is not only a fifth column, it is a filth column. Socialism is a will-o’-the-wisp. When you follow it you sink into the bog of despotism before you know it. Socialism is like the camel’s nose in the Arab’s tent. The members of your fine association, and all good American business and profes~ sional men, not only have the right to make a living, but the right to make that living worth while. We cannot permit “pink” planners to infringe upon our copyright on life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. ‘We cannot be fugitives from faith, our faith in our God and faith in our country. Our Nation was built through hard work and perseverance, It stands foremost among all the nations of the world because of that spirit. We ned a revival of the old American principles of hard work, thrift, and self-re- liance as an antidote against socialism and communism in the United States. We must have a plan. We must pay for it with confidence, with labor, with dollars, and with sense. We must accomplish it. In the words of a great American editor, “Let us maintain the Americanism which makes us free, and the freedom that makes us American.” Foreign Study With American College Credit EXTENSION OF REMARKS fo) HON. HUBERT H. HUMPHREY OF MINNESOTA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Wednesday, May 24 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, there is a great deal of interest in for- eign travel as an educational medium evidenced by the American people. I am particularly proud of the fact that the American Federation of Teachers is one of those organizations playing a
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD most constructive role in developing a sound appreciation for international co- operation. The American Federation of Teachers has cooperated with the Insti- tute of World Studies and with teacher organizations all over the world in con- ducting resident study centers in which our teachers may become acquainted with the rich traditions, culture and heritage, as well as with the great sccial and economic problems, of foreign coun- tries. In cooperation with the Natherlands Teacher Federation, such an institute was held last summer at the University of Amsterdam. Iask unanimous consent to place in the Appendix of the Recorp a brief report by one of the teachers who attended that institute. In my opinion the report more than justifies the high regard in which we in America hold our friends in the Netherlands. There being no objection, the report was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: [From the American Teacher of April 1950] ForgIGN STuDyY WiTH AMERICAN COLLEGE CREDIT (By Roxie Lodge, president, East Cleveland Federation of Teachers, Local 719) For those who want a delightful summer vacation—inspiring, gay, yet challenging and educational, I can suggest nothing better than the Institute of World Studies in Amsterdam, Netherlands. A selected group of teachers from the United States studied there last summer and earned graduate credit. This was the seventh annual session of the Institute of World Studies. It held its 1949 session at the University of Amsterdam, July 10-80, in cooperation with Syracuse Uni- versity. Dr. Donald Bishop, of Syracuse Uni- versity, was the American director, and Mr. William Hooykaas, representing the NOV, the Dutch Teachers Federation, was the Dutch coordinator. The Institute was originally a part of the World Federation of Education Associations, but is now chartered as a nonprofit organi- zation to help teachers study in other coun- tries under the most favorable conditions, Its educational policies board includes Amer- ica’s top-flight authorities in the field of in- ternational education: Robert Ulich, chair- man, Graduate School of Education, Harvard University; Donald Bishop, Syracuse Univer- sity; Selma M. Borchardt, Washington Col- lege of Law; George S. Counts, Teachers Col- lege, Columbia University; Roy Deferrari, Catholic University of America; Uel Lamkin, State Teachers College, Maryville, Mo.; Ken- dric Marshall, Division of International Edu- cational Relations, United States Office of Education; Ruth McMurray, UNESCO, Rela- tions, Department of State; Albert Prince, Connecticut State Board of Education; Car- son Ryan, University of North Carolina; Henry Lester Smith, Indiana State Depart- ment of Education. The group of Americans attending the Amsterdam Institute last summer included teachers from Colorado, Iowa, Ohio, New York, North Carolina, Georgia, Illinois, Flor- ida, and Texas. The purpose of the institute is to help teachers learn something about the people and country in which they are traveling, to make informed, appreciative tourists of all who go, and to enable Americans to study abroad for credit or for audit. For us who went to Holland, the objective was accom- plished through the university lectures and the planned tours of cities and excursions throughout the country. We had brilliant lectures from eminent scholars; and we had much more. We were accepted guests of the people, and the Dutch were warm and kind friends. Institute members had ample opportunity to observe the people of Holland at work and at home We shared their rich cultural and historical background. We learned to resnect these people deeply. Sturdy, trustworthy, courageous, they showed us a gayer side, too. The first Sunday evening in Amsterdam, we were guests of the Dutch Teachers Union at the American Hotel. A delightful program of folk dancing and folk music gave us a taste of what we were to enjoy during the entire term. Even our study trips were made happy for us. On our first day of school, with Mr. Hooykaas in the lead, we wended our way over the copble-stoned streets, alongside canals, to the university. Here we were received and welcomed by the president of the university. We met our three English-speaking Dutch professors, who were to lecture and accompany us on our excursions in Holland. There was Dr. H. A Enno Van Gelder, who taught us some of the history of Holland. He made it live for us. But it wasn’t only a lecture course in a classroom; we visited the places where history was made—and is still being made. Our first excursion in connec- tion with his class was a trip by motor launch through the main canals of Amsterdam, down the Amstel River to the harbor with its shipbuilding industry. We were particularly impressed by the speed with which the Dutch had rehabiltated their harbors, which were scenes of havoc and destruction during the war. That same day we were guests of the city officials at a tea in the town hall. The burgo- master of Amsterdam gave us a most cordial welcome to his city and to all Holland. We felt we were wanted, wanted as Americans, wanted as students of European social his- tory. It was thrilling. In this gay and serious tempo the summer school opened. So the pace was set. So the pace was maintained, day after day. We visited the old churches of Amsterdam and the cathedral at Delft. Delft blue, Delft china took on a new meaning from that day on. The Queen’s Old Palace, the Court of Jus- tice, the “Little Church in the Loft” where catholicism was practiced during the Refor- mation, and Riik’s Museum were just a few of the famous buildings visited under excel- lent guidance. In the Riik’s Museum we saw and we felt the greatness of the paintings of the great Dutch artists. The cultural his- tory and the social history of the people were stressed. On another tour, we were taken to the ruins of Charlemagne’s castle on the Rhine. Then we went to another medieval castle, and to the famous Hertogenbosch Cathedral. Each ancient monument has its story, and these stories were told us colorfully and with a dash of humor and a zest which only a na- tive could add. We shared their modern history, too. We were taken also to the pattlefields at Arnhem and Nijmegen. We saw the ruins at Wageningen where the Ger- mans signed the peace treaty. Our Dutch hosts showed remarkable restraint. They are a great people. Dr. J. Zijlestra lectured on the economics of Holland and the benefits of the Marshall plan to its recovery program. We saw the Marshall plan in action. We were impressed with the use the Dutch had made of the United States help in rebuilding their economy. We visited the diamond centers in Amster- dam and saw good craftsmen at work—good union craftsmen. And oh, we saw and en< joyed the famous cheese market at Alkmaar. The splash of color at the flower market at Aalsmeer intrigued us. The fishing fleets of Vollendam, the Island of Marken, where the. traditional Dutch costumes are still worn, gave what the orthodox sightseer wants. A4039 But we combined sightseeing and study. We spent a morning at the International Air- port, the home of the Dutch airline KLM. Here we saw in some detail how the Dutch have repaired the damage done by the Ger- mans to the airfield. We visited the Phillips Manufacturing Co. at Eindhoven, a subsidiary of General Elec- tric Co, United States of America, where we were guests of the company at a luncheon followed by a tour of the plant. Phillips was the largest industry visited. There we £aw radios being assembled, plastic cabinets and insulators being manufactured. The place held by labor unions in a national economy—a place of dignity and power, and ip2 matter-of-fact acceptance of their roles in promoting the national welfare, made us appreciate the social maturity of the nation and we wished that we might have had a period in which to interrogate labor leaders. A school similar to General Motors ap- prentice schools in our country is a part of the Pihillips vocational educational pro- gram. Young Dutch and Belgian boys of promising ability are accepted for training in this school. A comparison with a similar school in our country would be significant. Our third professor, Dr. B. H. M. Vlekke, lectured on “International Relations.” The Hague, the seat of the International Court of Justice, gave us a laboratory approach to international cooperation. But our Dutch hosts dared no more. Dr. Viekke devoted sev~ eral lectures to the Indonesian question and frankly and freely indicated that Dutch citi- zens were in full sympathy with the Indo- nesians. The present government’s response to the will of the Dutch people would, he felt, lead to the early recognition of the Indo-= nesian Republic—with the help of the pres- ent Dutch government. Now, his prophecy has come true. The teachers of Amsterdam were surprised to find elementary, secondary, and college teachers in our institute studying and worke- ing together, all accepted by each group on an equal basis. The inherited traditional snobbishness of Dutch secondary teachers toward the primary teachers is sure to be overcome by the increase in power and pres- tige of the elementary teacher. Possibly we American teachers have contributed to the spreading in Europe of an appreciation of the single-salary schedule and the recogni- tion of the equal worth of' all qualified teachers in every part of the system. The strict academic standards of the Dutch schools, the ever-growing social conscious- ness of the teachers and the school officials, the passionate zeal of the Dutch teachers for world democracy impressed us greatly. Cne example of the social program of the Dutch teacher is that, aided by a govern- ment subsidy, they sponsor a summer camp for school children of Amsterdam and Rot- terdam. A teacher takes her class to this country camp for 2 or 3 weeks. Here the child gets physical, social, and moral train- ing in an atmosphere which stresses the spiritual values of a free people. Several teachers and their classes are at the camp at one time. The camp is for both public and church school children. The nation as a whole benefits. Before and after the institute we took advantage of our free time in Europe. We traveled in a number of countries. To those who wanted them the institute gave cards of introduction to UNESCO House in Paris and to other educational centers. Tours through England, Belgium, Switzerland, Italy, and France were planned by the in- stitute, and optional with the members. Even if one could nov take these optional trips to other countries, there are volumes one could write about each day spent at the institute. The institute gave us the happiest, most profitable credit-earning sum- - mer school imaginable. We'd all like to go back. .
A4040 Messengers of Reconciliation EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. WILLIAM BENTON OF CONNECTICUT IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, May 26 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. BENTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have inserted in the Appendix of the Recorp a sermon by the Reverend Galen E. Russell, of the Southport Congregational Church, of Southport, Conn., which is my home community. I am indebted to Mr. Russell for many ideas in this sermon, but I call the par- ticular attention of the Senate to his quotation from the Screwtape letters, the quotation of the Devil when he said, “It is when the church Jets her banners fly that all hell trembles.” This, it seems to me, is the moral for Congress today. How do we let our banners fly? There being no objection, the sermon was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: MESSENGERS OF RECONCILIATION (A sermon by Galen E. Russell) Text: “God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not counting their tres- passes against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation.” thians 5: 19, revised version.) I. INTRODUCTION Last Thursday was Ascension Day. In Lloyd Douglas’s book, The Robe, there is a beautiful and simple account of the disciple Bartholomew’s experience of the Ascension. Bartholomew says to his friend: “One morning we were asked to a meeting, shortly after sunrise on a hill. We know the place, for we had often spent the day there with Jesus. Knowing it was dangerous to go as a company, we went singly. When we were about halfway up the hill suddenly someone exclaimed, ‘Look; there He is.’ I looked up, and there he was wearing His white robe. The sunshine made it appear dazzling. He was standing on a big white rock waiting. “The crowd bowed their heads and waited, and after a while there was a murmur of voices. We looked up, and he was gone.” “Where do you think he went?” asKed one huskily. “I don’t know, my friend, but I only know He is alive. Iam always expecting to see Him. Sometimes I feel aware of Him, as if He were close by; it helps to keep me honest. I am not tempted to cheat anyone, lie or hurt anyone, when, for all you know, He is close by.” Christ is close by this morning. He is not bound like Prometheus and compelled to watch His loved ones in silent-agony. Christ is released from time. He is alive, and God through Him is calling on us to be messen- gers of reconciliation. What a message. What an ambassadorship. To reconcile the contending forces in our lives, in our homes, in our congregation, and in the world. We are called upon to do just this. Christ shows us the way. We can take an illustration from nature. Day and night the recurrence of hot and cold air—meeting each other in conflict takes place somewhere above this earth. When the conditions are right the conflict of these air currents causes a precipitation which we call rain. (I am not now talking about the rain makers. Some one said this week that they had gone too far; that they had no business to be monkeying with the Lard’s work.) I am now talking about the forces (2 Corin-, of nature. Rain waters the earth for the service of man. In like manner, the con- flict between good and evil as we see it dramatized before our eyes has been rain- ing refreshment on the souls of men year after year, and age after age. We can truly sing with the poet, “The one eternal God, whom earth and heaven adore, for thus it was, is now, and shall be ever more.” Il. PERSONAL MINISTRY OF RECONCILIATION We have been given a ministry of recon- ciliation. How much do we use it? Is our difficulty a lack of faith, or a lack of tech- nique? Do we find it easier to be mad at some one than to love him? Is this anger, at least the continuation of it, the work of the Devil, or the work of God? As dis- ciples of Christ we are called upon to witness for love, truth, and kindness. As Bartholo- mew said “Now I feel that Christ is near. Now I do not want to lie, or hurt anyone.” Family squabbles need to be reconciled. Church divisions need to be healed. Unity and harmony need to be resolved in the formula, “Agree to differ but resolve to love.” The Christian way is to walk to- gether, respecting each other, and trusting each other. This can happen when we are committed to the way. Is this way difficult? ‘Yes, Christ never said it would be easy. He did say that we could live victoriously. He did say He would help—‘Lo I am with you always, even to the end of the world.” There is a story in C. S. Lewis Screwtape Letters, which I understand was told in this pulpit before my arrival as pastor and teacher. The Devil had his agent Screwtape on earth seeking to win converts. Screw- tape reports that one of their hopefuls has just recently joined a Christian Church. He was quite concerned. “Never mind,” said the Devil. ‘Don’t let it bother you. Just follow him. Go to church with him, Keep his mind on little things—the squeak in the deacon’s shoes, the cut of the minister’s hair, thé hat of the minister’s wife. Just keep his mind on little things and we will win. It is when the church lets her banners fly that all hell trembles.” Are we concentrating on the little things and forgetting the big and central issues? Is it our lack of vision that causes so much trouble in the world? Is there a need for reconciliation between individuals? There is a crying need for a reconciliation in Con- gress. In the Senate we behold the spectacle of time, money, and energy being thrown away by one Senator McCartTHy with his irrespon- sible charges. Committees of investigation are appointed to investigate those things which have been investigated two or three times before. Someone has said that Sen- ator McCartHy is the Communists’ best friend. At least this can be said without equivocation. He is using Communist tac- tics and is holding up good and constructive legislation. I have been deeply impressed lately to note one of the most creative and far-reach- ing ideas to come out of the Senate Chamber. I refer to the nonpartisan bill in the Sen- ate—a bill sponsored by both Republicans and Democrats—called the Marshall plan of ideas. This creative plan was outlined in a speech by our Senator from Southport, Sen- ator WiLtrAM BENTON, early in March. It is creative in its own right. It is dramatic in the manner it lifts our thoughts above the confusion of low politics and charts a course into the future. In the field of politics this Marshall plan of ideas points the way toward @ splendid ministry of reconciliation. An explanatory word is in order. Senator Benron says, and he speaks from experience in the State Department, that the Communists are mere efficient in telling lies about us to the rest of the world than we are in telling the truth about ourselves. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD With the use of radio day after day and night after night the propaganda line is the same. The propaganda line revolves around five themes. They are the same every day. First, the United States is headed for a cata- clysmic clash. Second, the rulers of the United States are warmongers and Fascists. Third, in the United States the rich are get- ting richer, and the poor are getting poorer. Furthermore, the poor are showing an in~ creasing sympathy for the Soviet Union. Fourth, America talks about freedom, but their statements are contradicted by racial and religious discrimination. Fifth, our character is bad. We are culturally bar- parous, money-mad, and lawless. Do you recognize yourself in this description? Do you feel it is fair, or in any degree honest? Does your sense of injustice become keen to realize that these lies about the United States are spread throughout the world via the radio? Do the people of the Near East believe these stories? Many of them do. Why wouldn’t they believe in them, in the absence of any other information? To be sure, we don’t pretend to he per- fect. We have our problems. We do, how- ever, say that democracy arrives at a greater degree of justice than the other forms of government. With a knowledge of these evil forces, what do you propose to do about them? With a frank recognition that you can’t kill ideas with bullets, no matter how many you shoot, what is the constructive solution? Senator Brenton has proposed an answer. His plan is headed in the right direction. The plan has six steps. First, a steadily increasing pressure on behalf of world-wide informa- tion. “Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” Secondly, a speeding up of the work of UNESCO—the United Nations Seientific and Cultural Or- ganization. The work of this Organization should be expanded so that it can make its rightful contribution for peace. Thirdly, an expanded program of foreign student ex- change and movie films, showing the truth about America. Fifth, convening of a con- ference of non-Communist nations now, to create a better understanding. Sixth, the encouragement of a nongovernmental agen- ey to guide American citizens in sharing their cultural and their scientific informa- tion with other countries. God has given us a ministry of reconciliation. As an filustration of the soundness of this plan Senator Bentown cites the experience of last year. The ECA, under its technical- assistance program, brought 600 people from European industry and agriculture last year to study our methods. Two among the 600 were influential Italian labor leaders. When these two had seen American labor- management relations at first hand, when they had seen that our workers share in the benefits of increased productivity, and from the use of labor-saving machinery, when they had seen that competition is not without its economic value to our workers, they went back to Italy, pulled 700,000 work- ers out of the big Communist-dominated general trade union and launched an inde- pendent one. Mr. Hoffman, of the ECA, vouches for this story. Just yesterday a letter came to our family from China. It was written by Miss Helen Smith, who visited our Women’s Guild a few years ago. I wish to read you a few sentences from this letter: “We hear that some groups are wiping China off the map. We want to ask if Christians can wipe their brothers and their sisters off the map? We feel that if the world is to be held together at all, it must be held by Christians, and boy—we need a little cement these days. The future for us missionaries grows a little more dubious, but that is beside the point. We feel that the biggest concern is for our fel- low Christians here. They are facing ter- rine odds, and we simply cannot let them own.”
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD These words from Miss Helen Smith, of Fukien, China, are instructive. Here is Sen- ator BENTON, with his colleagues, offering a constructive program in the field of politics, and Nero fiddles while Rome burns. Yeu and I can do something about it. We can wriie our Senators and express our opinions as American Christians. On the other hand, the political prograrn cannot and does not pretend to take the place of a Christian missionary pregram. Are we going to let the Helen Smiths ard our fellow Chinese Christians down in the hour of trial? In the words of Professor Scott, of the Chinese University, Chinese Christians have an unprecedented oppor- tunity to witness before Communists for the Christian way of life. Cod moves in a mysterious way His wonders to perform. Granted that the Communist program is treacherous. Granted that there is personal danger for those of the Christian faith to remain in China. Do we not need to ad- mire those who say they are going to re- main? Should we not uphold their hands in prayer, and support them out of our funds? The divine commission given to the disciples on the first ascension day was “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel.” Preaching the gospel means sus- taining those who do preach it with some~ thing to keep body and soul together. God was in Christ, reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting us with the ministry of reconciliation, May we be faith- ful to that trust. Extension ef the Draft Law EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. MILLARD E. TYDINGS OF MARYLAND IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, May 26 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. TYDINGS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record two editorials advocating the ex~ tension for 2 years of the Selective Serv- ice Act. One editorial is from the New York Times of May 26, 1950, and is en- titled “A Reassuring Vote.” The other editorial is from the Washington Post of May 26, 1950, and is entitled “Sense On the Draft.” There being no objection, the editorials were ordered to be printed in the REcorp, as follows: [From the New York Times of May 26, 1950] A REASSURING VOTE ; We welcome the emphatic majority by which the House of Representatives has voted to extend Selective Service for 2 years. The tally was 216 to 11. Seldom does so im- portant a measure come so near to achieving unanimous approval. The bill provides for continued registra- tion and classification until June 1952 of young men between the ages of 18 and 26. Actual induction into the Armed Forces would wait upon further Congressional ap- proval. But the machinery of the indispen- sable Selective Service System is kept intact; a@ guaranty is provided for adequate man- power in case of need, and the American peo- ple, and our democratic allies abroad, now know that we have insured ourselves in this important respect against the risks of a sud- den emergency. The bill now goes to the Senate. It must be acted upon before June 24 if there is to be no interruption of the present system. We look forward confidently to prompt and favorable action, [From the Washington Post of May 26, 190] SENSE ON THE Drart In voting to extend the draft for another 2 years, the House has faced the realities of the cold war. Significantiy, the 213-11 vote reflected none of the indecision and i. ision that very nearly paralyzed this country in the summer of 1941. In that respect the House determination is an im- portant gain. The draft may never be used; the armed forces are now abie to fill their quotas without resorting to conscription and under the House bill actual conscription cannot take place unless Congress declares a@nationalemergency. But the continuation of draft machinery and the registration and classification of young men when they turn 1% can help save valuable time should an emergency arise. On this point, the new term “Manpower Registration Act” (instead of Selective Service Act) more accurately describes what is intended. Aside from the insurance that the retention of such legis- lation will provide, it will be a symbol to this country’s allies in Europe and Asia, and a warning to the Russians, of America’s intention not to abandon its commitments or to slip back again into military weakness. We hope the Senate will promptly follow suit. The Man in the Middle EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN J. WILLIAMS OF DELAWARE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, May 26 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an editorial entitled ‘“‘The Man in the Middle,” pub- lished in the Baltimore News-Post of May 15, 1950. There being no objection, the edi- torial was ordered to be printed in the ReEcorp, as follows: . THE MAN IN THE MIDDLE President Truman’s farm-policy speech in Lincoln, Nebr., the first of nine sched- uled political talks on his current campaign tour, seemed to assume that the American people, including the farmers, are very simple folk. The President spoke specifically in behalf of the so-called Brannan farm plan, which he quite frankly described as having two main objects. One of these objects is to assure farmers of high prices for their products. The other object is to make the same prod- ucts available to consumers at low prices. In order to do this, under the Brannan plan, the Government would make up the difference between what the consumer paid and the farmer received—out of taxes, of course. The very unhappy man in the middle of this picture, obviously, is the taxpayer. But since both farmers and consumers are also taxpayers, it is not hard to understand that the high prices to one group and the low prices to the other are largely illusory. What does it profit the farmer to get an excessive price for his products if taxes take the major part of it? What does it profit the consumer to pay a relatively small part of his income for the A4d4 necessities of life if the tax collector seizes the greater part? in actual fact, since the farmers and con- sumers would pay the bulk of the excessive and exorbitant taxes to give high prices to the one and low prices to the other under the Brannan plan, they themselves would be the compesite man in the middie. President Truman did not explain or even mention these aspects of the Brannan pian in his Lincc!n speech. In fect, in accordance with his past cam- paighn methods and with his personal politi- cal philosophy, he refrained from telling the farmers the truth about the Brannan plan, well knowing that it would not be good politics to do so. And he very obviously takes it for granted that they are not smart encugh to figure out the truth for themselves, Actually, there are even greater objections to the Brannan plan than its excessive cost from the viewpoint of the farmers. Aside from the fact that they would have to pay the high prices to themselves out of their own pockets, the farmers would have to qualify for the dubious benefits of the Brannan plan in another and particularly cdious way. Only by submitting to a program of crop and acreage control—specifically, by sacri- ficing the right to decide for themselves what and how much to grow—could the farmers ever have even the illusion of high prices paid out of taxes. That is the essence and the substance of the Brannan plan, the oldest political fraud in the world—that of promising something for nothing in return for votes, and of wip- ing out the major portion of the earnings and savings of people after the votes are won. The Press and the CVA EXTENSIOY OF REMARKS HON. HUGH B. MITCHELL OF WASHINGTON IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, April 6, 1950 Mr. MITCHELL, Mr. Speaker, much is written inquiring as to the reasons for the current loss of prestige suffered by the Nation’s press. It is not difficult to detect a number of reasons, the most ba- sic of which is the fact that the press no longer keeps ahead or even abreast of public opinicn. Four times, in 12 years, the press stri- dently opposed the election of Franklin D. Roosevelt to the highest office of the land... Only a few months ago, the press attempted to defeat President Harry S. Truman through the use of ridicule. On important issues of the day, the press is more and more frequently found in a negative position. This is certainly the case with the proposed Columbia Val- ley Administration. Not all newspapers ox periodicals are to be so considered, however. The Ore- gon Democrat, edited by Monroe Sweet- Jand, has been given national attention several times during the past year for its excellent reporting and fair and im- partial editorializing. The following ar- ticle by Richard L. Neuberger, from the March edition of the Oregon Democrat demonstrates why this publication has been so honored, and points out fairly
A4042 and clearly how the Nation’s press stands on this important issue. Tur PRESS AND THE CVA (By Richard L. Neuberger) (The Oregon Democrat herewith repro- duces a most significant analysis of North- west journalism. It is reprinted in part, with special permission of the Nieman Founda- tion for Journalism at Harvard University. The Nieman Foundation each year brings the outstanding young newspapermen of Amer~= ica to Harvard for a year’s academic training. The foundation is endowed by the will of the late Lucius Nieman, publisher of the illustrious Milwaukee Journal. Richard L. Neuberger, well-known Oregon writer and legislator, undertook at the request of the Nieman Foundation a survey of the press’s attitude regarding President Truman’s pro- posed Columbia Valley Administration. Neuberger found that, while very few daily papers within the Northwest support CVA, nevertheless CVA is advocated and backed by some of the leading newspapers of our time, including the great New York Times, the Scripps-Howard chain, the crusading Pulitzer Post-Dispatch and other outstanding medi- ums of American public opinion. Readers of the Oregon Democrat will be interested in the following portions of Mr. Neuberger’s detailed analysis, which appeared in full in vol. IV, No. 1, of Nieman Reports, printed by the Harvard Press.) In the majesty of a cathedral-like grove of Douglas firs, I covered the recent dedica- tion of the Gifford Pinchot National Forest for the New York Times. To prepare myself for the event, I read the great forester’s autobiography, Breaking New Ground. The night before the dedicatory ceremony, in a little mountain lodge in the Cascades, I had reached the chapter telling of Theodore Roosevelt's efforts to set aside the last upland solitudes of the West in Government reserves. PINCHO'T’s FIGHT Pinchot described how opposition to the proposal centered in the very region where the trees stood. The Oregon Legislature begged Congress not to turn over the woods to “hands unknown and untried and recom- mended only by theoretical learning.” Pin- chot added hopefully that “eastern Con- gressmen believed in forestry as a general proposition and were perfectly willing to protect western forests against the depreda- tions of western men.” , My wife long since had gone to sleep but Iread on, fascinated. Hadn’t I been through this somewhere before? In the distance a creek trilled over a rocky riffe. Always Pinchot and Teddy encountered their an- griest hostility from the area whose mag~ nificent timber they wanted to protect. And at last the thread of the tale unraveled. “In the long run,” wrote Pinchot, “it was the votes of eastern Senators and Representa- tives that saved the national forests of the West.” LIKE CVA “Why,” I said to no one in particular, “it’s exactly like CVA.” And s0, sadly, it is. Harly in 1949 President Truman proposed. @ regional authority patterned after TVA for the vast basin of the Columbia River. The new agency would conserve soil, gen- erate water power, provide irrigation, im- prove navigation and check flcods. Imme- diately, CVA was smote hip and thigh as “communism,” “dictatorship,” and “tyr- anny.” This assault has been led by the Republican Party, substantially financed by the utility companies and, unfortunately, carried on to a considerable extent by the press of the Northwest, This partition described by Gifford Pin- chot is being repeated. NORTHWEST NEWSPAPERS ANTI-CVA With merely a few exceptions, the news- papers of the Columbia Basin are solidly alined against CVA, Yet many of the out- standing dailies outside the Northwest re- gard CVA with high hopes and undiluted praise. Some documentation is in order. Among the large metropolitan newspapers of the Co- lumbia Basin, only the Oregonian of Port- land is not determinedly opposed to CVA. It has taken no definite position on the issue, other than to decline specific indorse- ment of the President’s bill but to add that “some sort of over-all regional agency” is apparently necessary. With this neutral ex~ ception, the area’s larger publications can detect only evil in CVA. Four small dailies favor CVA. They are the Wenatchee (Wash.) World, the Pendle~ ton (Oreg.) East Oregonian, the Hood River (Oreg.) Sun, and the Lewiston (Idaho) Trib- une. Combined circulation of these adher~ ents of CVA totals 35,454. Once the granite confines of the Colum- bia’s watershed are left behind, however, there is no difficulty in finding impressive circulation figures committed to CVA. GREAT JOURNALS BACK CVA The New York Times, the Washington Post, the Washington Star, the Scripps-Howard papers, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the Chicago Sun-Times, the Louisville Courier- Journal—these and many other dailies of notable reputation have indorsed CVA with- out equivocation. Indeed, the Oregonian has commented on the phenomenon: “The trend is support of CVA by such in- fluential and nationally known publications as the New York Times and general opposi- tion from editors of newspapers within this region.” Preponderantly, the press of the North- west regards CVA as the ultimate in “stat- ism" and radicalism. Yet the imaginations of Edgar Rice Burroughs and Jules Verne would not be long enough to consider radi- cal the Eastern newspapers which have gone all-out for CVA. For example, the Star of Washington, D. C., and the Scripps-Howard papers are staunchly Republican and heavily conservative. The Star has editorialized that “the weight of logic and common sense seems to be on the side of President Truman’s proposal for the creation of a CVA to unify Federal activ- ities connected with the development and conservation of resources in the Pacific Northwest.” TRUMAN “SOUND”? ON CVA No less fulsome has been the approval of the Scripps-Howard Washington Daily News: “President Truman has made an excellent case for creation of a CVA, * * ™ Among United States rivers, the Columbia ranks second only to the Mississippi in the volume of water carried to the sea. Congress should give earnest consideration to the President’s plan for its better development.” Consider, by contrast, a sample of opinion from inside the Northwest, The Capital- Journal of Salem, Oreg., looks upon CVA as “a three-man dictatorship,” and Boise (Idaho) Stateman is even less complimen- tary. It calls CVA “an unjustified intrusion upon the affairs of the region. * * * an abandonment of the rights of self-govern- ment.” Ordinarily the press of a hinterland region would be proud to unite in the company of such papers as the New York Times, the Post-Dispatch, and the Washington Post. What excuse is given for this regional dis- conformance? APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ALIBI FALLACIOUS The excuse, at best, is a shabby one. Numercus Northwest dailies claim that papers in New York, St. Louis, and Wash- ington are friendly to CVA because they themselves would not have to live under it. The implication is that the country’s leading newspapers are so cavalier as to suggest for fellow Americans elsewhere in the Nation an undesirable form of government, merely be- cause it would be beyond the circulation scope of those papers. The charge is untrue. The Missouri scours the city limits of St. Louis, and the Post-Dispatch has led the fight for a Missouri Valley Authority. The Chattanooga (Tenn.) Times, substantially owned by the New York Times, has supported the TVA, which operates throughout that paper’s realm. All the Chicago and New York dailies endorsing CVA have been con-= sistently for the somewhat parallel St. Law- rence seaway. WHY A BIASED PRESS? Why, then, is the press of the Northwest hostile to CVA while leading papers outside the region favor the President’s proposal? I believe we must go back to Pinchot’s era for the answer. Opposition to the setting aside of the national forests came principally from the great lumber barons, who wanted to convert these fastnesses of fir and pine into profitable ships’ decking and into two by fours. The influence of these men within the Northwest was great. Their minions filled the commercial organizations and the boards of trade. Their lobbyists were omni- present in legislative halls. These currents rippled out into editorial offices. Pressures closed on Northwest Senators and Congress= men, BETTER PERSPECTIVE AWAY FROM LOBBYISTS But the power of the lumber barons dimin- ished with each passing mile from the North- west. Unquestionably, the timber magnates convinced some sincere editors and politi- cians that the fate of the sawmills and the destiny of the region were one and the same. If the forest reserves were snatched from ax and saw, how could the Northwest prosper? Outside the Northwest, editors and politi- cians were able to afford the luxury of a somewhat longer perspective. If the uplands were laid bare, what of erosion and floods? Where would the drinking supply of Seattle and Portland come from? Could salmon spawn in creeks choked with logging slash? What of recreation? People could not pitch camp in a charnel house of stumps and dead branches. And so Pinchot, first chief forester in America’s history, wrote: “The conservation bill was attacked by Members of Congress from the West, who were directly concerned, and supported by Members from the East, who were not. In the fight for the national forests we were to sce much more of that same partition.” POWER TRUSTS LEADS ANTIS Today, the basic, underlying opposition to the CVA emanates from the power companies of the Northwest. A clause in the President's bill would give the new agency the right to buy out utilities operating in the Columbia Basin. Obviously, the bill is not attacked from this exposed salient. Public ownership of power is far from unpopular, as witness municipal plants in such communities as Seattle, Tacoma, Cleveland, and Sacramento. The main assault stems from the alleged fact that CVA would take away the people’s liberties. A pamphlet financed by the utili- ties warns that Russia has a CVA. This concern for liberty on the part of the power companies is regarded with wry faces by
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD residents familiar with the supineness of these companies to the Ku Klux Klan in the 1920’s, when that unholy organization had sufficient strength in Oregon to secure pas-~ sage at the polls of a bill closing Catholic schools.! No elaborate brochures then were issued urging the populace to act “lest our form of government be changed.” PHONY DEVELOPMENT FRONT The organization ostensibly leading the op- position to CVA is known as the Pacific Northwest Development Association. It sends gaudy 48-page booklets through the mails by the tens of thousands, heralding the material as “proof that we don’t need the CVA dictatorship here.” No effort has been made in the press to analyze Develop- ment Association sources of financing, al- though one can guess at considerable inter- est if, let us say, brochures of equal extrava- gance and anonymity flooded the region with an attack on utility companies. Congressman Hucu B. Mircutun, of Seat- tle, contends that from 1945 until 1948 four power and light corporations paid to the Development Association $18,610. “The tab- ulation is partial,” he adds, ‘‘because all com- panies have not filed detailed reports for all years.” : A memorial endorsing CVA was introduced in the Oregon Legislature. It was over- whelmed 19 to 10 in the senate and that was the end of it. But what chance did it ever have? One utility company spent $5,000 lobbying at the session, a sum only $1,000 short of the annual legislative pay of all 30 State senators. GOVERNOR M’KAY’S BLUFF CITED Utility money can hire advertising agencies, skilled writers, and printed material - by the bale. Speakers on salaries and ex- pense accounts appear before every civic organization. Conversely, debates are dis- couraged. Why give both sides? Governor McKay, of Oregon, who came out against CVA the first day Mr. Truman proposed it, said sanctimoniously he might favor CVA if the people were allow-d to ballot on the idea. I suggested a special session of the legis- lature to conduct a referendum in Oregon on CVA and promised, as a member of the senate, to cooperate with the Governor in framing a fair statement for the ballot. The reaction of a number of hewspapers was to charge me with trying to put our Governor on the spot. YOUNG REPUBLICANS CORRUPTED The Hood River Sun, published by a founder of the Young Republican Clubs of Oregon, has declared: “It is unfortunate that a power company or any other special inter- ests should move in on a political party and force its beliefs on a group such as the Young Republicans.” A climate is created against CVA. This conservatism, in the words of William Allen White, “goes thrilling down the line.” It becomes fashionable in many circles to op- pose CVA. Editors often move in these cir- cles. The Republican Party has made antag- onism to CVA so much a touchstone in the Columbia Basin that even Senator Wayne Morse, of Oregon, & liberal who has hailed TVA in the most enthusiastic terms, has felt it politically advisable to denounce TVA’s blood brother, CVA, as “a strait-jacket for the Pacific Northwest.” E. B. MacNaughton, 69, president of the Oregonian Publishing Co., has come out for CVA. “Business interests once voiced bit- 1 Happily declared unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court. Pierce et al., v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1924) .— R.L. N. ter opposition to Grand Coulee and Bonne- ville Dams,” he said. “But if Roosevelt had not given Bonneville and activated Grand Coulee, where would we be today?” Mac. Naughton, chairman of the board of one of the richest banks in the region, confesses that some erstwhile business associates are icily cool because of his views on CVA. EDITORIAL VENALITY DOUBTED Some adherents of CVA, no less guilty of Overstatement than the adversaries of the project, have accused various editors of ve- nality. I doubt this, although I always have felt regional self-interest required support of CVA. It is my opinion that the editors who think CVA would destroy personal l1b- erty are as mistakenly sincere as those editors of long ago who feared establishment of the forest reserves would destroy the Northwest economically. OUTSIDE HELP NEEDED The tragedy to me, as a westerner born and bred, is that our majestic region again must be saved from itself. Our fellow citi- zens in the East, the Middle West, and the South must rescue us from our own sub- servience to local vested interests. Bernard De Voto of Boston did not exaggerate when he wrote in Harper’s under the title of “The West Against Itself.” I look at the water in the tumbler at the dinner table. It is clear, cold, and pure. It foamed off the ramparts of the Mount Hood National Forest. As I write these words, thousands of men, women, and children are skiing in the national forests of the West. Next summer many times this number will swim in blue lakes and camp beneath cavernous evergreens. But what if the Na- tion almost half a century ago had listened not to the young forester with the handlebar mustache but to the political, civic, and journalistic leaders of the Northwest? Where would the Northwest be today? I think of the devastation where the ax has cut clear. I recall how the lumber industry has moved inexorably southward from the British Columbia border nearly to the -Cali- fornia line, as the stately trees have gone to satisfy the hunger of saber-toothed power saws. What would have happened to the uplands of Mount Hood and Mount St. Helens and Eagle Cap, if Teddy’s forester had not lined up faithful allies on the other side of the continent? NORTHWEST PLUNGING INTO CRISIS Today the Northwest faces a different kind of emergency, but an emergency neverthe- less. Although it contains as a region 42 percent of the Nation’s potential hydroelec- tricity, it also is the part of the country with the most critical power shortage. Population has soared nearly one-half since 1940, and many of the newcomers are going on unem- ployment rolls. The rate of joblessness in the Northwest is three times the national average. Yet the bulk of the region’s press cries out that CVA will bring dictatorship and tyranny. People who were silent when religious schools faced compulsory closure now fear that pub- lic development of the Columbia River may threaten individual freedom. This is the circulation line-up in the Northwest: Pro-CVA ...-.~---~---------------- Neutral ~~. Anti-CVA ~.-.~..------.----~------ Of course, the eastern press and politicians may save us from ourselves. Iam no seventh son of a seventh son, so I merely can ponder and not predict. But half a century from now, when many hearts of men have been sifted before the judgment seat, I wonder what some Gifford Pinchot of the future will write about the great fight against the CVA? A4943 he New Idolatry: State Worship EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWARD MARTIN OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, May 26 (legislutive day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. MARTIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Rrecorp a sermon delivered last Sunday by Dr. Harrison Ray Anderson, of the Fourth Presby- terian Church, of Chicago, Ill. The ser- mon is entitled ‘“‘The New Idolatry: State Worship.” There being no objection, the sermon was ordered to be printed in the Rzcorp, as follows: The theme: The New Idolatry: State wor- ship. The text: “Before Him all the nations are as nothing; to Him they are but empty and inane, then whom can you compare with God? What can you put beside Him?” Isaiah 40: 17, 18 (Moffatt). Here is this prophet of old, Isaiah, wres- tling with the problems of his day and seek- ing to call his people away from idols and to the living God. He takes them behind the scenes; shows them an idol; where it comes from; how it is fashioned of metal or wood by a mere man, and how it will fail. Surely it is of such a ridiculous nature that men will not set it up in place of God nor give to it—this hideous thing—the worship which God alone is worthy of. But the author of the text is aware of a: greater idolatry than that of a wooden image. It is the worship of and trust in the nations of his day as over and against their devotion to the living God. God is the eternal One, Creator of stars and of men. Before Him nations are as a drop in a bucket. He bring~ eth princes to nothing. As for men, they appear as they actually do from a plane— as grasshoppers. Nations are made up of these human, fallible, finite creatures. Can you compare such creatures or their crea- tions with God? Can you put over and against God something made up of men? Yet this is our problem today. The mod- ern. power state has come to be for multi- tud-s of people an idol—something to which they give that which God alone is worthy of. The ever-growing state is not ultimately an economic issue or a political issue. If it were merely this, it would not be in this pul- pit this morning. It is a moral and spiritual issue. Dr. Emil Brunner, of Switzerland, one of the best of the living theologians, sees state worship as the modern challenge to God. Dr. Albert Schweitzer says, “The great conflict of our times is personality versus collectivism.” I was surprised to find the German Christians at the Amsterdam con- ference more alarmed about state worship than almost any other group there. They had seen it work out in the German Socialist state, which had promised them so much and had ended by taking over their souls and minds and bodies, except for those, like Martin Niemoeller, who stood up as Chris- tians suffered and died. I quote from a re- cent letter read in the church pulpits of Berlin and East Germany, signed by Bishop Dibelius and other German Christian leaders: “Our Lord Jesus Christ states: “The truth will make you free.’ This truth is no other than Himself, the crucified and resurrected; He is our consolation and our strength. We« proclaim Him to all men even in the great
A404 needs of our time. More than ever we see ourselves today surrounded by depressed aad disturbed consciences. Without ceasing there come to the church kreac ~"crs to the pastors and other church ci: ii’ calls of members of the congregation. They say, ‘Help us, we are being required to say what we cannot say in truth. We are being forced to participate in actions in which we in good conscience cannot take part. We must agree in decisions which we canont approve. We stand in constant danger of losing freedom, Office, and bread if we refuse to participate.’ ” Why are we so intrigued by the worship of the state? Why do we so readily surrender the blood-bought rights of freemen? Have we not seen the promises of the German socialist state fail? Do we not have before us this tale of horror in Russia of a great people who fell for a high ideal and wound up behind an iron door? Prisons have iron doors. Then why, with these and other ex~ amples before us, 1s state idolatry a threat in the America of Washington and Jefferson and Lincoln and Wilson? It is a threat be- cause of the deception with which unthink~ ing people are handled. They are told they will be given something free, and so they come and exchange their free manhood for the manna from Washington. They are given back some of that which was theirs, but they do not get back their souls, Why else is state idolatry possible? BeCause a great company of Americans have abandoned the God who made them free. They are secularist men and women without God. They cannot stand to be without God. They cannot bear the burden of a world like this alone. They cannot because they do not bow down to God. So they turn to the state and say, “Be my father; be my mother; care for me.” The idol hears and winks, and says, “Brother, I will care for you, and how—for your votes.” There is a place for the state, a great place, but it’s not first. Some of us here have been hurt for our country, and we love her. Therefore, we speak. Nor is one word of what I am saying a dodge from social justice or a plea for the status quo There are liv- ing conditions and inequalities in this Na- tion and in our world that need righting. This can be done, and should be done, with-~ out erecting in one central power-loving gov~ ernment thr worst injustice of all. Thomas Jefferson and Woodrow Wilson can speak. Our social justice will not be achieved that way. It will only be promised as cheese to the mouse. We will nibble and get caught. We will become mice—not men. If you do not think there is a living, spir- itual issue in what I am trying to say, look at the interest with which all things political are treated today. Each hour of the day the radios tell of politics until many of us eat Washington three times a day. The daily press and the columnists carry on with things political. Commentators scream about it and mold opinion and pressure Con- gress in a shocking way. When the politician realizes that he is slipping and becoming a mere man, then the build-up boys come along. I call your attention to the advertise- ment appearing in the Chicago papers yes- terday. “For the biggest Sunday in your life see and hear Vice President ALBEN W. BarK- LEY.” So the politicians give us our biggest Sunday. My Bible says God gave us the Sab- bath, and told us to keep it holy. Jesus Christ, whose day this is, rose on this day, and the Holy Spirit came to the church on this day—but the biggest Sunday of your life is today, say the promoters of the State show. <A carload of Hollywood beauties: are produced, and even Hopalong Cassidy will probably have to yell “yippee” on a white horse near a White House in Washington. The interest might lag. In other words, the minds and interests and waking thoughts of men become State-controlled and man-cen- tered. Christians know that this place be- longs to God. “Except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain.” Now all this stimulated interest takes more than interest; it takes capital. The show costs money. The Capitol is well named, only we must change the spelling. People brought their gifts of old to the idol and lavishly decorated the mute thing. Some biessing would follow. So, to support the modern power state billions must be gathered by every conceivable tax. In the 156 years of America, from 1784 to 1940, the Government of the United States scent $179,000,000,000. In the 4 years from 1916 to 1949, inclusive, which were the first full 4 years after the close of the war, the United States Govern- ment spent $191,000,000,0C0. You see, it costs to worship the state. And with all, there is not enough to balance the budget, but widow Jones must balance hers. There is not enough to cut the debt, but farmer Brown must cut his. And this is not all. Schemes which no man can estimate are not only advocated, but promoted, at the peo~ ple’s expense, for billions of additional spending and millions of added state jobs. And a great American people who have been taught to work and earn and pay their bills and save, have bought bonds with a prom- ised increase, only to find after 10 years that the $75 they put into the bond is worth in nyrgheame nouer about $60, and not the se Le sh they were promised. To- morrow they will buy more, and they should. But what a commentary on statesmanship 10 penalize thrift and to betray those who save. President Roosevelt was reported to have told the late bishop of Washington that if he wanted money for his cathedral he had better get 1t soon. Just so. How much do you give to your Government in taxes and how much to God and His Kingdom? It’s primarily God’s money and your money—not the state’s. Caesar has his claim, but God's claims are first. But the worst feature of the modern power state, which absorbs our interest and takes our money, is neither of these. It is its power. Men grow afraid to he men in such a state. They are afraid all over the world to stand up and speak out. I debated long about preaching this sermon. Would it bring trouble to this flock? Then I thought of John Knox. I heard him say, “I am in the place where conscience bids me speak the truth. The truth therefore I speak. Im- pugn it, whoso lists.” But Iam a clergyman surrounded by a session, and while pastors and priests are victims abroad, so far they are not here. Businessmen are afraid, and laboring men are afraid. Do you talk back to the state when it can raise your income tax and in a dozen other ways penalize you? They are afraid of two things. First, they are afraid of what the state will do to them. For the first time in my life I believe that American men are afraid of their Govern- ment. That’s something to ponder. The idol is doing its work. The living God sets . men free from fear because they trust God. But the rea) fear is not for some personal danger or cost. Let the gangsters blast us. If we die, it is glory; and 1f we live, it is grace. What men are afraid of 1s what the lust for power is doing to the men who run the state. They see humble, finite men become masters. They see their lust for power go to any length, for some few men must run the state. The idol must have his attendants, and the at- tendants are jealous. They see sound princi- ples of finance thrown overboard. They see men and women lose their willingness to work hard and save, and instead see people expect the state to care for them. William Law, the mystic, who wrote A Serious Call to @ Devout and Holy Life, and who so influ- enced John Wesley and Alexander Whyte, was made the treasurer of a fund which he dispensed to the people of Kingscliffe, the English town in which he lived. What was the result? He raised up a flock of depend< APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ent loafers. So today men who once expect- ed to support the state now expect the state to support them. And they see more. They see leaders be- come careless with the truth. They see poli- ticians involved with gamblers and gangsters. They do not like to see that influence in Washington, It 1s bad enough in Chicago. They know of the drinking in Washington and they remember the drunkenness of trag- ic Yalta. They remember a man named Har- ding and his administration and his trip west. The Republican Party has not even yet recovered from that. They remember that power corrupts, and they see it at work, It adds up to this: that Government, which is to be a servant, has become a master, and men are afraid as they were afraid in Ger- many in 1936. To be more specific, some of you may rember that I acted as a chaplain at the convention that nominated Mr. Truman Vice President. He was a humble man that day, with a terrible burden about to come upon him. I stood by his side and prayed for him and for the Nation, and I liked him. I have prayed from this pulpit for him ever since. As the man who prayed for him years ago, I counsel the President to quit playing with truth. The earnest people of America have too great a respect for the office of Presi- dent, and they are getting weary of being kKidded. President Truman would be wel- come in any American city or town, either on a political trip or a nonpolitical trip, but why call this last Journey and this Chicago week end anything other than what it 1s. The conscience of the Christian people of this Nation 1s being offended these days in a dozen other more serious ways. When the state be- comes a god, morals seem to go. John Bu- chan—Lord Tweedsmuir—the late Governor General of Canada, wrote: “My fear was not barbarism, which is civilization submerged or not yet born, but decivilization, which is civ- llization gone rotten.” Just so. Let us see once more that God alone is God. Let the nations know themselves to be but men. Let us remember that “righteousness exalteth a nation; but sin is a reproach to any people.” ‘For Thine is the Kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.” Record of John S. Service EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. STYLES BRIDGES OF NEW HAMPSHIRE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, May 26 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. BRIDGES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have inserted in the Appendix of the ConcressronaL Rec- ORD a Speech which was broadcast by Mr. Henry J. Taylor on the record of John S. Service. This speech is in con- nection with the investigation now be- ing conducted by the Senate Subcom- mittee on Foreign Relations on subver- sive activities in our Government today and the Amerasia case, which is one of dark, black spots in the history of the United States. In this connection Mr. Taylor’s broadcast is particularly in- teresting. There being no objection, the broad- cast was ordered to be printed in the Recor», aS follows: ReEcorD ON JOHN S. SERVICE The same forces for protection which closed in around the then unknown Alger
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Hiss are now closing in around John S. Serv- ice. All of which makes me leery. For I love this country as you do. But it is being eaten out from within. STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIALS BLEED Just as Secretary of State Acheson promptly bled for Alger Hiss, so the Deputy Under Secretary of State now promptly takes it upon himself to announce—and I quote—that the sympathy and good wishes of the entire State Department go out to Jonn Stewart Service. Why all his big stir of defense, this bleed- ing, because John Stewart Service is to be questioned? Who is he? Let me give you some first-hand facts I obtained from a man Service worked for— the United States wartime Ambassador to China, Patrick J. Hurley. I verified and con- firmed these facts over the week end, with Mr. Hurley himself. I first met Alger Hiss at the Dumbarton Oaks international conferences some months before I ever heard of John §. Service. This was in 1944. CHUNGKING DOUBLE-CROSS When I did encounter this man Service I was in China. There, toward the end of the war, I was with Ambassador Hurley at Chung- king. Hurley told me then that State Department officials in his own American Embassy stafi— and he named them—were, in his opinion, double-crossing him with Stalin’s stooges, the Chinese Communists. He said they were trying to put American policy into the Communist camp. I can see him now, pacing the floor of his Chungking house, a worried and frustrated patriot. Behind the closed door he named these men to me, one by one. Among others, he named John 8S. Service. Now remember, this was in 1945. That was nearly five long and fateful years ago—fate- ful for the security of your land and mine, our homes, our future, our very lives. ELEVEN COME HOME Shortly after I left him, Hurley ordered back to Washington from China 11 Embassy officials who, in his opinion, were so cosy with the Communists that he pulled them out. John S. Service was included in this group. This is what Hurley said about them, pub- licly, in the New York World-Telegram, on November 28, 1945: “Most of them have continued to side with the Communist- armed party and, at times, with the Com- munist imperialist bloc, against American policy.” But Mr. Hurley, as you recall, was smeared at once by all the political forces of pro- tection. He was given a cold shoulder by highest State Department authorities, in- elutiing Mr. Dean Acheson. Then came the famous saying, “It’s all a red herring.” Yet you see how truthfully and courage~ ously Ambassador Hurley spoke—albeit how thanklessly. For today’s whole outcome was foreseen and foretold by Hurley and others five long years ago. But nothing was done to save us. THE ROYAL WELCOME As for the men Hurley threw out, what happened to them when they got back to the State Department in Washington? Let’s be exact about this. John D. Davies, 1 of the 11, was ap- pointed to the top planning board of ‘the State Department, which is the “brain trust” for American foreign policy. Davies was given the job of calling the American signals about China—and at the top-policy level. He was then sent to our Embassy in Russia along with Horace H. Smith, whom Hurley also threw out. Arthur Ringwalt, also sent back by Hurley on suspicion of procommunism, was made XCVI—App. 255 Acting Chief of the China Division in Wash- ington. Who were appointed assistant chiefs? Iwo more of the very same 11 men Hurley threw out in the same bunch, Edward E. Rice and Fulton Freeman. You have seen what has happened to us in China since then—as well as in Moscow .2@nd throughout the world. Yet we talk now about “total diplomacy” in the hands of the same leaders. Stalin must be laughing at us. “Total diplomacy”? Whose diplomacy is it we have—his or ours? Now we come to John S. Service. Here are the facts. Please listen carefully, if you fear America’s position in a next war. First, Ambassador Hurley told me that John Service had already been relieved of his duties once in China, and sent home, by supreme commander Lt. Gen. Albert CG. Wedemeyer, another fine American. Never- theless, State Department officials in Wash- ington sent John Service back to China, through another channel, to the Communist area of Yunnan—bypassing Wedemeyer, and without the knowledge or consent of Ambassador Hurley. THE WHITE HOUSE INTERVENES Ambassador Hurley told me that, when he discovered this, he went to the White House and protested to President Roosevelt. Re- member, all this is news. He produced let- ters John Service and others had written, re- flecting their views. May I say that the Senate and the American people should read those letters and reports now, while the bleeding is on. President Roosevelt authorized Hurley to send such characters home. So Service was sent home for a second time. When Service reached America, he was arrested by the FBI. He wasn’t just ques- tioned by the FBI. He was arrested by the FBI, as Mr. J. Edgar Hoover would verify to you. For J. Edgar Hoover is not afraid of anybody. That’s what makes him a great American. , THE WHITEWASH TREATMENT Service was brought before a grand jury, but he was let off—although the claim is made that his FBI record was never fully presented to the grand jury by Government attorneys. A State Department whitewash quickly followed. , Then what happened? Was Service detached from policy deci- sions? Well, hardly. After all this, Service was assigned to Japan to tell General Mac- Arthur, of all people, how to negotiate with Russia. General MacArthur reportedly re- jected Service. But Service showed up in Japan anyway, on some kind of authority from the State Department. Then, after Mr. Acheson be- came Secretary of State, Service was actually boosted even higher. ; Today we have John S. Service on the way to high official duties in India, a critical place in our problem of communism, WHO IS HOLDING THE UMBRELLA The question arises: What mysterious power has protected his record? After five long years since the charges of 1945, and after 13 months of latest so-called study, the loyalty review board of the Civil Service Commission now states that it does not feel ‘it can give John S. Service “loyalty clear ance.” He is asked to come home for the purpose of giving personal answers—no more than that at this stage. But why have the FBI record on John §S. Service, and the China and . Moscow background, and his FBI arrest been treated by protectors as if they didn’t exist? Certainly something has gone frightfully, tragically, terribly wrong with our security measures, even if our own Officials will not admit it. For it has already been shown in ‘A4945 court that we do have traitors working in our Government. Blindness to the Communist strategy has already cost us Asia. It can cost us the world. It can cost us the United States. It can be a question of life and death to our Nation in the event of a surprise war—unless we wake up and insist that America’s safety is more important than anybody’s refusal to let the chips fall where they may—and there is no time to lose. Salvage: New Hope for the Insene EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. LISTER HILL OF ALABAMA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, May 26 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. HILL. Mr. President, I have be- fore me an article entitled “Salvage: New Hope for the Insane,” by Harry Henderson, appearing in the May 20 is- sue of Collier’s magazine. I have sub- mitted this article to the Public Printer, and I am informed that the cost of printing it in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD will be $184.50, inasmuch as it is esti- mated that the article will require 2144 pages. Despite that, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the article may be printed in the Rrconrp. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Satvace: New Hors For THe Insane (By Harry Henderson) She is a pretty, clean-cut girl who laughs easily, loves tweed skirts, works hard anv likes a boy who works for the gas company in her suburban New York home town. Yet only a few months ago, classified as a schizo- phrenic, she was alternately moping in the wardroom of a mental hospital or screaming invitations to her funeral. And her ex~ perience, a horror tale until recently, points to significant and hopeful psychiatric ad- vances: the development of physiological treatments for severe mental disorders. Her recovery, for instance, was brought about the use of histamine, which until now has been considered of little therapeutic value. The development of histamine ther- apy and other recent experiments have stirred the hope that insanity can be prevented, perhaps cured by drugs and chemicals. What makes her story particularly signifi- cant is that she suffered from schizophrenia, the most dreaded and most baffling of all mental illness. Schizophrenia’s victims, who eccupy more than one half of the bed8 in our mental institutions, in most cases pro~ gressively become worse, living more and -more in the unreal fantasies of their dis~ turbed minds and less and less in the real world. This process of psychotic deteriora- tion is one which medical science has been virtually unable to arrest. Aside from sur- gery, only two forms of therapy—electric convulsive shock and insulin subcoma shock—are widely used in checking this dis- turbance of the brain function. They have, however, proved effective only part of the time. Moreover, many cases are unsuited for shock treatment so other measures must be sought. . “ Therefore a world-wide effort is being made to discover the physical causes of men= tal disease and to find new, helpful drugs. One of the greatest fields of study centers