A1362 friend of every Member of the Congress that meets on both ends of the Capitol. It is a simple story, telling of but four of the hundreds of industries and other business projects that Frank BoYKIN has brought to the First District of Alabama, and which have resulted in the employ- ment of thousands of men and women. The industries referred to in Bob Al- bright's story, and now employing more than 2,000 men and women, are those of the Vanity Fair Mills—located at Mon- roeville, Demopolis, Jackson, and At- more, Ala. Mr. Speaker, at this very hour, there is still another huge industry in the making on the Tombigbee River and on the Southern Railroad, at McIntosh, in Washington County, Ala.—brourht there, wholly and solely, through the efforts of Congressman Frank W. Boy- KIN. It is a new chemical plant, which will avail itself of the great deposits of salt unearthed at McIntosh by the Con- gressman. The plant is to be constructed by the Mathieson Alabama Chemical Co., and will involve an initial expenditure of an excess of $10,000,000. Mr. Speaker, again, Frank Boykin creates still more opportunities for hun- dreds of his constituents and their fami- hes to enjoy higher and better standards of living, education, and life. All hail to Congressman BoyKIn. May his shadow never grow less. Recognizing, in common with all in this body, his integrity and unblemished honesty, in private dealings as well as in public service, I ask the unanimous con- sent of my colleagues of this House to extend my remarks, and insert into the Recorp of our proceedings, the story taken from the Washington Post of Sun- day, March 11, and as reported by Robert C. Albright. The article reads, as follows: GALLERY GLIMPSES (By Robert C. Albright) Alabama's FraNK W. Boyxin (Democrat) for years has risen bef@gp dawn, gone to his office around 4:30 a. and done his day’s aictating into a machine, At least once, the “early bird’ routine paid off in a big way. Here's the unbelievable story: Leaving his office for coffee about 8:30 a.m. a few years back, Borxin saw a big, heavy-set fellow pacing up and down in front of an office acroas the hall. “When will this Pennsylvania Congress- man get in?” the stranger asked Boykin. “I dunno,” replied Boykin, “but come on out and have a cup of coffee with me.” The stranger introduced himself us How- ard Smader, head of the Vanity Fair Mills, of Reading, Pa., specializing in women's smart clothes, Over coffee, BoyKIN dwelt on the unde- veloped glories of his Alabama district, the undiscovered mill sites, the dreamboat op- portunities awaiting employer and labor alike Smader never went back to cee the Penn- syivania Congressman. Instead, he sent scouts to BOYKIN’s Tombigbee River. With- in 2 years, he moved his first mill there from Pennsylvania. Over the years he moved more of them, until today the thriving business operates almost entirely within Borxr’s district, with plants at Monroeville, Demopolis, Jack- son, and Atmore, Ala. Who was the Pennsylvania Congressman? “I'd rather not say,” evades Bovarn, “But it pays to get up early in the morning.” “The Nation That Controls the Air Will Control the Continents of the World” EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FRANK W. BOYKIN OF ALABAMA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 13, 1951 Mr. BOYKIN. Mr. Speaker, I remem- ber some prominent German Air Force general, noted for his skill and ability in aerinl warfare, being quoted as saying: “The nation that controls the air will contro! the sea lanes of the world, will control the continents of the world; the nation that controls the air will control this world and dominate this world for the next hundred years.” Personally, I am disposed to feel as did that Germany military leader, and it is because of that fact that I was par- ticularly interested in an article in the Washington Post of March 2, 1951, tell- ing of a new type of jet plane which Secretary Thomas K. Finletter said “will even surpass our B-36.” Mr. Speaker, the more critical that world conditions become, the more I be- come convinced that not alone are American defenses primarily dependent upon the strength of our air power, sup- ported, let us say, by land power, rather than by lani power afforded so-called tactical air support. My good friend, the Honorable JoHn Bett Wiii1ams, of Mississippi, gave voice to a truism when he stated, in the cloakrcom, but a few days ago: “If we are to survive as a nation, we must recognize the fact that our military strength rests in an invinci- ble Air Force.” It is only, in part, because of these things that I was pleased to note Secre- tary Finletter’s statement that the Air Force is now going into the production of a new heavy bomber—a Boeing jet- engined B~52, as well as a radically dif- ferent jet version of the B26, In the news account of the interview, Mr. Finletter went on to tell about the development of an even newer plane that is likewise going into immediate produc- tion. This plane, it is reported, will have a combat altitude in excess of 10 miles—and the first production models will be delivered in the current calendar year. It is now universally agreed that were it not for our Air Force our ground troops would have been thrown out of Korea months ago. There remains no doubt whatever of the wonderful tactical sup- port which our Air Force gave to the air-ground operations in Korea. In this support, the United States Air Force alone contributed, under the most ad- verse conditions, almost 100,000 fights or sorties. Mr. Speaker, I repeat what I have often said on the floor of this House, “Air power 1s truly peace power,” and, cer- tainly, the most economical way of de- fending our shores. The world is now convinced that the only thing which has contained the Russians, and thus far prevented world-wide global warfare, is the power of the United States Air Force and its ability to deliver the atom bomb, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Stalin, Vishinski, Malik know, as well as does every other competent military and civilian head in Russia, that the United States Air Force has a hundred Russian cities marked for absolute anni- hilation if Russia ever so much as looses a single blast at the homeland of the U.S.A. Mr. Speaker, it is because of its time- liness, and of the deep and continuing interest of the American people in the planning by our Air Force for the eco- nomic defense of this country, that I ask unanimous consent of this House to extend my remarks and include in the REecorp a news account of Secretary Finletter’s statement entitled “Boeing's B-52 Global Bomber Ordered Built.” That article reads as follows: Borinc’s B-52 GLopsL BOMBER ORDERED Burnt—FInvetter ALso Tatts oF PLANS FoR New Jer TyPs oF B-36 (By John G. Norris) The Air Force is going into production with a new heavy bomber—Boeing’s jet- enrined B-52—and will build a radically different jet version of the B-86. One or the other—or both—eventually will replace the present Convair B-36 as the backbone of the Nation’s Strategic Air Com- mand, relied upon to carry A-bombs from American homeland bases to any point on the globe, United States Air Force Secretary Thomas K. Finletter said. At the same time, Finletter announced that there no longer 1s any question about the ability of the United States to build an atomic-powered airplane. This determina- tion, he pointed out, ts a “development of the greatest importance.” Such craft, it is clear, would revolutionize a'r power, making it possible for aircraft to travel indefinitely without refueling. Finletter cautioned, however, that the con- clusion that an atomic aircraft engine is feasible does not mean we'll have one flying acon, The Atomic Energy Commission revealed last week that this project had entered a new phase, and it is expected that the air- craft-engine division of General Electric and Convair Aircraft will join in developing such a plane. Finletter also announced that the Air Force pretty well decided to adopt the Brit- ish Canberra jet bomber as its new light bomber and bdulld it at the Glenn L. Martin plant in Baltimore. Martin's three-engined jet B-51—rival of the Canberra in the light-bomber competi- tion—will not be completely shelved, Fin- letter said. Development work will continue on it, for possible future production, he added. Deciston of the Air Force to piace produc- tion orders now for the B-52 ts a sound calculated risk, even though the craft has no‘ yet flown, Finletter told reporters at a Pentagon briefing session. Two prato- types of the big B-h2 are now bullding but are not expected to fly before fall. The pro- duction model B-52's will be constructed at Boeing's Seattle plant, the company an- nounced, He said the risk of financial loss through failure is well worth taking because the B-52 is really a considerably bigger B-47. The Intter is the Air Force's new medium bomber, a high-speed comparatively short- range craft, considered the best in the world. It has been thoroughly tested and mass production ts under way. Both planes have swept-back wings and cigar-like fuseinges. The B-52 fs expected to have a speed well over 500 miles per hour, & combat altitude in excees of 55,009 feet, and a range somewhat shart of the B-36's 10,000 miles. Thet will be the first version of the craft, which is expected to be equipped
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD with 8, a8 yet unannounced, Pratt & Whit- ney jet engines—-the J-57, which it is hoped will develop about 10,000 pounds thrust. Later, the Air Force plans to put turbo- prop engines in both the B-52 and the new B-36. Such engines—which harness jet power to profellers--give much greater rango than present jets. The new B-36 will be jet-powered and have swept-back wings. New versions of the present B--36's have six piston engines and four jet engines. The latter, however, ure fo. take-off and emergency bursts of speed only. First production models of the B-52 and the two prototypes of the all-jet B-36 will be delivered late this year, Finletter said. ‘They'll be in competition and quantity or- ders of one or both will follow exhaustive tests. No short cut, such as is being taken with the B-52—ordering production before experimental versions are tested—is possible with the new B-36, he suid, The latter is entirely a new airplane, though probably it will be called a RB--36, Finletter declared There'll be no cut-back on production of the present B 36, he ex- plained, Oil Depletion EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. THOMAS H. WERDEL OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 13, 1951 Mr. WERDEI. Mr. Speaker, I have asked for time to address the membcr- ship of this House and convey to them the strenuous opposition of my con- stituency to the recommendations of the Secretary -~f the Treasury to reduce the percentage depletion allowance granted to the oil industry, in computing Fed- eral income taxes where such income is derived from the production of oil and Bas, My constituents are generally very much opposed to having any change made in the present system of tuxing the oil industry. ‘his is because most of them are either directly employed in the oil industry or they prosper by hav- ing this industry in their midst. As a result, I am sure I speak for my entire district when I say that we do not want Congress to do anything which will slow up the operations of the oil industry, particularly with respect to exploration activities which are so important to the future welfare of the industry. In order to illustrate the importance of the oil industry in my district, I would like to call attention to the fact that in 1949 our crude oil production aggregated 102,000,000 barrels, or approximately 30 percent of the total production of the State of California. That production has substantially increased as of this time. In the Tenth Congressional Dis- trict of California we have approxi- mate'y 10,000 011 and gas wells. They are owned by over 450 different oii com- panies and operators. Many thousand people are participating owners in such companies. Several thousan’ persons are directly employed in the industry and many thousands more owe part or all of their support to oil operations. Iam sure that this Congress is already in possession of a vast amount of infor- mation on the subject of percentage de- pletion and that it would be presump- tuous of me to go into technical details. On the other hand, I wish to speak gen- erally with regard to the matter and to indicate to you why I am registering this protest in behalf of my district and the ou] industry as a whole. Mr. Speaker, as the result of my long acquaintance with oilmen, I find that incentive is an essential element in their operations. They will risk their capital, and insofar as they can borrow money, they will risk it too to finance their ex- ploration activities. Four out of five wildcat wells drilled, as you know, turn out to be dry, but in spite of this chance of losing, oilmen consider the ultimate reward worth the risk. On the other hand, if they are to take all the risk and only receive a limited portion of the reward, their incentive is correspond- ingly reduced. Financing oil operations is always a problem with most operators The un- certainty of finding oil is so great that financial institutions are reluctant to lend money on such ventures. Asa re- sult, the initial investment in a wildcat operation 1s usually the venture capital of an individual or a group of individu- als. Without some reasonable assur- ance that this investment may be re- turned out of production, they are in- clined to go slow. Thus, percentage de- pletion serves to add to the income of those who are successful in drilling a productive well and this provides capi- tal for further exploration activity. I am confident that the industry as a whole spends much more for exploration and development of oil than the benefit it derives from the depletion allowance. When I appeared before the Ways and Means Committee last year, I said, in part: It is with considerable interest that I note that the principal argument for reduciug excise taxes is to encourage greater consumer interest in buying the product so taxed. It fs curious that the administration would recommend an action which would discour- age the production of oi] in order to stimu- late the consumption of the products of the other industries This amounts to robbing Peter to pay Paul, when the better way would be to give more serious consideration to reducing Federal expenditures. Mr, Speaker, I have recently rcturned from a rather extensive tour of our Pa- cific coast and Western States. I find that the American workingman and his wife, both in and out of organized labor, are becoming aware of the realities of high Government taxation and political support through hand-outs of power and tax money to pressure groups. The ac- cumulated evidence is now irrefutable and establishes past uriconscionable po- litical tactics against the interests of the average American working person em- ployed in those industries where labor Gemogoguery and a controlled labor press are supposed to be able to turn over the vote. Commencing during the last war, this administration aided and tolerated cer- tain labor organizations to bargain across whole industries. That political tactic now operates in such industries as coal, steel], autos, household appliances, elec- trical appliances, clothing, and many A1363 others. Such increased labor costs when forced upon a whole industry are not paid by the employer, but, rather, are paid by the consumers, 90 percent of whom are other workingmen. The em- ployers in such industries act as tribute collectors for such special treatment in organized labor, just as they act as tax collectors from workingmen to raise our national budget. In these special industries working- men now have a shorter workday, a shorter workweek, most of the so-called “fringe” benefits, and receive over three times as much as an hourly ware as is the minimum wage to employees in in- terstate commerce. On January 25 this administration then froze those conditions. It is now estimated that such freeze may last for at least 10 years. These special indus- tries are supposed to be those where a handful of labor leaders can turn over the vote. Two days aftcr wages were frozen John L. Lewis put over an increase of about $1.70 per day in the coal fields. We are now advised that the Price Sta- bilizer is going to allow escalator clauses to increase wages for about 800,000 auto workers. I know you gentlemen realize that there is no justification for a $16 per day minimum wage in the coal fields, plus about $150 per day in the retirement fund, when those wages are paid by other workingmen who buy automobiles, baby bottles, tricycles, and other necessities made through the consumption of coal. The Ways and Means Committee is re- considering this subject at the request of this administration, after having solved the same subject in favor of the gencral welfare of our country last year. To me, it is inconceivable that a nation living under antitrust laws for over 50 years should have tolerated the political tactics employed in special] industries for the past 8 or 10 years, It is certainly impossible for me to believe that this Congress will now destroy the ability of the oil industry to both employ its pres- ent personnel, or do more for them, so that those employees, as consumers, can pay special tribute to employees of an- other industry. It is understandable that human beings heading labor movements should be joined together and act in col- lusion with politicians if they gain addi- tional power by such action. However, why labor leaders of men working in util- ities, whose wages cannot be raised with- out the consent of rate payers, are able to join in such tactics is beyond my un- derstanding. Probably the answer is that the workingmen they represent have no effective secret ballot through which to put such leaders out of office. I submit, however, that this Congress might better consider authorizing such secret ballot to workingmen rather than spend time considering a proposition that is designed to destroy existing jobs for men in in- dustry necessary for our defense. I know this subject is now important to this Congress because coal min-rs who get a minimum salary of $17 per day are tax collectors from railroad brakemen who only receive $11 per day, even though they must spend $125 per month hving away from their home. The coal miner is in a higher tax bracket and, as J have
A1364 pointed out, his wage differential is to be found in Ford automobiles and washing machines. The request of the Secretary is in effect a statement by this administration that it is welching on the expressed intent of the Congress last year. O11 companies in the past have expended moncys bor- rowed on their future production in pres- ently producing wells to drill dry holes. They relied on expressed congressional intention. Favorable action on the Sec- retary’s request means deliberate fraud and deception. A change in the existing law so that marginal producing oil com- panies cannot do more for their employ- ees when those employees are forced to pay the bill for this administration’s po- litical briberies in other industries is also a fraud against such employces. This is the same subject which has been considered by this administration's advisers and who then very wisely said that it is the little man who will pay additional taxes. The httle man will have to carry the major share ot any tax increases, just as he will have to pay for the past industry-wide bargaining. This fact is brought out clearly by the testimony of Secretary Snyder before the Senate Finance Committee on Au- gust 2, 1950. It shows that the great bulk of income available for additional taxation hes in the low-income groups. He did not have the courage to say that we are going to collect taxes from the large corporations for pure dema- foguery. He would not say that those people were to be made the tax-collec- tion agent for Government und collect those taxes from the consumer. The January report of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers—Keyser- ling and company—speaking of the mat- ter for higher taxes, said: By far the largest part of additional reve- nue must come from the middle and low tax brackets. These are the brackets in which the great bulk of income is located, Of the total net income shown on all taxa- ble rates, 86 percent of the amount re- maining after Federal income taxes is esti- mated to be received by taxpayers with net incomes of less than 610,000. Gentlemen, this House will shortly be called upon to consider a budget involv. ing about $2,800 for each family in America. As Lenin prophesied, we are spending ourselves into bankruptcy. If you will add to that figure about $700 for each family for State government, $500 for county government, and $300 for city government, I believe you will agree with me that the Members of both parties of this Congress must insist that the “gimme” domestic program costing a total of $30,000,000,000 per year must stop. This administration, whose Sec- retary of the Treasury proposed the de- struction of the oil industry last year, has returned in an effort to obtain more money and demands that the Congress destroy that industry this year. Under such circumstances, we need no enemies abroad, the very ticking of the clock in marking off the hours will ruin us. Mr. Speaker, if our Nation is to keep strong, both internally and with respect to defending ourselves against a possible enemy from without, we should not take any action which will deprive ourselves of an adequate oil supply in the years to come. In order to obtain $200,000,000 in additional Federal revenue from oil operators, are we not jeopardizing a multibillion-dollar investment in na- tional defense? It is my belief that we cannot afford to take this chance and that is why I urge the membership of this House to re- frain from making any change in the percentage depletion allowance granted to the oi] and gas industry, which is so important to my district and to the Nation. I have heard it said that in the pres- ent budgct the President has $1,000,- 000,000 that he can use in the netional interest whenever he finds that private industry is no longer able in “know how” America to mect the needs of our domes- tic consumption. I am also advised that present arrangements are being made whereby in the long run the American taxpayer will stand the bill for the ex- pansion of United States Steel to the ex- tent of over $450,000,000 in new plants and comparable expenditures by other members of our steel industry. Mr. Speakcr, we in the West want to develop our own resources, through pri- vate industry and private enterprise. We believe that great oil ficlds of the West are still to be uncovered in eastern Washington and Oregon and other areas. We know from experience that as oil de- pletion allowance in the amount of that presently existing is needed to induce exploration to depths now exceeding 16,000 feet. We have many modern devices, but it is still the core bit 3 miles deep that tells us whether or not oil exists in a particular area. That knowledge is in the national interest and is vital to the war effort. The right to develop such resources, pay good wages, and build good schools is the birthright of the people of the West and other areas of the United States where such ex- plorations might rcasonably be made. There is no need of repeating the words of our Supreme Court that the power to tax is the power to destroy. I know it must have been repeated many times in this House. In closing, I merely want to point out to the membership of this House that you are not just considering increasing the amount of tax levied on an industry, as you have done year after year in this body to support unnecessary Govern- ment waste and spending. You are ac- tually considering at this moment the destruction of private enterprise in a particular industry—oil. Pulaski Day Address EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. PHILIP J. PHILBIN OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 13, 1951 Mr. PHILBIN. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks in the Racorp, I include therein the following speech I delivered APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD on Pulaski Day at Ware, Mass, under the auspices of the Massachusetts Polish Congress: Mr. Chairman, Reverend Father, distin- guished guests, members of the various Po- lish-American organizations, and fellow citi- zens and friends of the radio audience, it is a high privilege, indeed, for me as your Rep- resentative in the Congress of the United States to join you in this most impressive celebration of Pulaski Day. It 1s fitting that we should join together here this afternoon in such large numbers to pay our heartfelt tribute of respect and af- fection to such a great Polish patriot and such a4 great friend of our own country and also by our presence and deciarations rededi- cate ourselves with high courage and un- yielding resolution to the exalted principles and the lofty purposes by which he lived and died. Let me heartily congratulate all those who are responsible for these noteworthy exer- cites There has never been a time tn the history of our country when the need for stalwart Americanism, high ideals, and dauntless spirit was greater than it is today. Everywhere liberty is under challenge by ruthless dictators. Everywhere treedom is being assailed and attacked by power-crazed tyrants. Everywhere conspiracies are being carried out against democracy and justice and unless we move quickly in defense of our priceless free institutions, everything will be lost. How inspiring it has been to me to observe the reactions of our Polish-American friends to the dangers of the present. On every hand through the Pollsh-American Congress, through many organizations of persons of Polish blood, through countless leaders, you have taken up the battle against totalitarian dictatorship and in defense of the principles of America. I cannot find words adequately to compli- ment you upon the sterling patriotism and tireless unselfish devotion which you have displayed in fighting against the great menace of human alavery which is presently overshadowing the world. lt has been a high privilege for me to have taken part in this campnign to preserve the American way of life and to redeem the cause of freedom throughout the world Not long ago on the eleventh anniversary of the iniquitous attack upon Poland, I spoke in the House of Representatives to remind the American people of the tragic events which led up to the betrayal of Poland and to serve notice upon the Soviet Union that true Americans would not cease to agitate the sacred cause of Poland until Poland had again taken its place as a self-respecting member of the world community of nations. We cannot possibly measure the unspeak- able infamy by which the noble Polish people have become enslaved, the first in the then free world to feel the bitter sting of the tyrant’s lash in World War II. At the time Poland was a brave, free nation embracing a peace-seeking, liberty-loving, devoted Chris- tian people with the rich tradition of loyalty to human freedom. It was brutally assaulted by international brigands and racketeers who disregarded all the laws of God and man and broke all the express terms of existing and valid nonaggression treaties in order to encompass the liquidation of a democratic Poland and ruthlessly confine its people be- hind the tron curtain. There was no color of legality to this shameful act. Poland at the time was a member in good standing of the League of Nations and a faithful ally of France and Great Britain. Her people had struggled long and sacrificed bitterly to establish their free government. Yet without provocation and without warning Hitler's bestial hordes attacked defenseless Poland on September 1, 1930, just as the Soviet-led, Moscow-directed
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD forces of North Korea attacked the helpless democratic minded people of South Korea about 3 months ago. As I said in my speech on the floor of the House, the duplicity and treachery behind this savage attack on Poland constitutes one of the blackest pages in world history. As a result Poland was put on the carving block and cut up between Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. Instead of protesting and nullifying this unconscionable act as all decent-minded nations should have done, it was ratified and approved virtually in its entirety at the Yalta conference. Thus our own country became a party at least s0 far as the Russian Government and the rest of the world was concerned to the dismember- ment of Poland and the enslavement of her people by the Soviets. But I have taken the position, and I will continue Inflexibly to take the position that this action which is deprecated by all real freedom-loving Americans never had the of- ficial sanction of this Government. It was @ mere Executive agreement never ratified by the United States Senate As such it is tllegal, unconstitutional, and not binding upon the United States No American offi- cial was authorized to agree to the shameful abandonment to a cruel enslavement by the Soviets of our warm friends, faithful allies, and noble people of Poland We must never cease our activities until we have canceled and annulled the provisions of that incred- ible and unconscionable document. You are fully aware of the current world situation One great aggressor agiinst free- dom has been despatched by force of arms and in that glorious victory boys of Polish blood rendered a magnificent service second to none But has that fact stopped aggres- sion in the world? It has not. Hitler is gone but a new and more widely spread and subtly organized aggressor lifts his ugly head and casts a cloud upon freedom-loving peo- ples throughout the world. Hitler has been liquidated but Stalin has taken his place preaching the gospel of hate against his fellowman and carrying the torch of rebel- lion, insurrection, and conspiracy to the far corners of the earth. It is the everlasting credit and glory of the Polish people that they have never will- ingly surrendered their rights, they have never forfeited their freedom, they have never bowed to enslavement, they have never ceused their resistance to tyranny. To tho contrary, this brave courageous people 1s stil asserting the sovereignty of their nation, still working for liberation from Russian bondage, still ready to sacrifice to recover the Hberties which were stolen away from them by a shameless perfidy and ruthless armed might. The united nation of Poland stands today before the whole world proclaiming its in- dependence to all, reiterating its determina- tion to strive and fight until its freedom has been regained. We welcomed our Polish allies during the war, we are proud of their loyal unswerving allegiance to the ideals of democracy and freedom which we ourselves profess. We ale grateful for their loyal support of our cause and for the association which we have had with them in fighting against the common enemies of freedom. So today, in the name of that freedom, in the name of our American democracy, in the name of the justice of the living God whom we revere, In the name of our Nation, and in the name of every decent principle of civilized man, let us reiterate our loyalty to Poland and her sacred cause of liberty. Let us express our determination that she will soon be liberated from the oppressor and be restored to her place among free nations. Let us renounce and reject once and for ever the unconscionable agreements by which she was consigned to Sovtet domination. On this great anniversary of one of her immortal heroes, let all true Americans rally to her side, encouraging her leaders and her sous and daughters who are still fighting to re- capture their liberty, pledging our assistance to them in their struggle for independence, offering our friendship, our support, our help to them in this hour of their great trial. And s0, my friends, let us accept this mighty challenge that has been flung from the Kremlin aguinst the very existence of the democratic way of life Let us maintain an armed strength here in our Nation that will keep our country secure and that will en- able us through union with other freedom- loving nations in the United Nations and elsewhere to move speedily to the protection of democracy and freedom and justice and human liberty. And may the day soon come, pray God, when peace may dawn upon this sorry world. When the evils of totalitarianism shall be removed forever. When Poland is freed trom the chains of slavery and restored to her rightful status as a free and independent nation. With courage in our hearts let us be re- dedicated today to the great and noble pur- poses of Pulaski and go forward fearlessly to establish a genuine lasting peace on this earth Keep the Commandments EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. WILLIAM A. BARRETT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 13, 1951 Mr, BARRETT. Mr. Speaker, under Jeave to extend my remarks in the Con- GRESSIONAL ReEcorD, I include the follow- ing sermon entitled “Keep the Com- mandments,” which was delivered by The Reverend Vito C. Mazzone, pastor, St. Mary Magdalen DePazzi Church, Philadelphia, Pa., at the fifty-third an- nual communion high mass of DeSoto Council, No. 315, of the Knights of Co- lumbus on Passion Sunday, March 11, 1951. The entire sermon, which was broadcast over radio station WJMJ, follows: Today we are assembled in this church to render a public manifestation of faith and loyalty to God in return for the many bene- fits granted to us. With this attestation of faith we proclaim that we are the children of God and that we owe to Him homage and fillal devotion, Man is » rational, social, and political per- son. There are in human beings gifts, rights, und values which transcend political soclety and which exist neither by virtue of the state nor tor the state, and which are outside the state. The taproot of human personality is not society, but God, the ultimate end of man is not society, but God, the center where the person makes more and more perfect its very life 1s on the plans of eternal things. The philosophy of Charles Murx, Hegels, Lenin—on which Russian communism is based, is materialistic, and therefore atheistic. It denies man’s personality, man’s rights. According to Communist doctrine man is pure matter, a mere cog in the ma- chinery of the state. There is no differonce between body and soul: no survival of the soul after death; no future life. The state is God and religion 1s called the opium of the people. We are living today in an age in which the genius of evil is seeking to spread re- bellion and hatred against God, His church, and His disciples. We are living in a world A1365 in which man considers himself a superman, forgetting that he is not his own creator, forgetting that he is not the result of evolu- tion, forgetting that he ts only the master- piece of God's creation. We are living in an era of deicide and homicide, for man has denied both God and the most essential part of his own being, his soul. While in godless Russia and her satellites, churches and Catholic buildings are con- fiscated or used for profane purposes—-while bishops, priests, nuns, and Christians are murdered, exiled, or imprisoned—we must be thankful that we live in this great and blessed country. This country in which we live is destined by Divine Providence to save the whole world from the menace of commu- nism, to bring to all men the blessing of freedom and independence. It is true that in all Russia there is one Catholic priest, the Reverend Father Adomo- vich who js an American and resides in Mos- cow, through an agreement between the late President Roosevelt and the diabolical Joseph Stalin But when you consider that this Catholic priest is not free to exercise his priestly of- fice— he is always surrounded and watched by sples—he is not allowed to extend his apostolate publicly and to other people, but only to the personnel attached to foreign embassies, then you will understand that this ts not freedom of religion and worship. Yes, the Kremlin government recognizes the Orthodox Church. Do you know, my dear Catholic men, that this church is used for political purpose to spread its propaganda abroad and is the servant of the state and the head of this puppet church is a layman— George Karpov who is an atheist? You, my dear people, are truly fortunate to possess the faith of our fathers. Falth in God, in Three Divine Persons, and in that church bequeathed to us by Christ, watered by the blood of the Divine Martyr, faith in that church which alone has the marks of unity, holiness, catholicity, and apostolicity. Be extremely proud, because the falth which is yours comes from Rome, the cradle of justice and civilization, the mother of heroes, martyrs, and saints, In their wishtul thinking the enemies of our religion imagine that the days of the church are numbered. Throughout the cen- turies, the Catholic Church has been calum- niated and persecuted. However, she has emerged from each attack rejuvenated, more vigorous, and vitalizing than ever. Man’s life is fleeting, empires and king- doms have passed, but the Catholic Church will not pass. My dear friends, we are facing today the greatest foe of our time This is the fight between light and darkness, right and wrong; between Christ and the anti-Christ; between the true followers of Christ and the disciples of His eternal enemy, Satan. You are called upon to do your share in this bitter struggle. The children of this world are wiser in thelr generation than the children of light. You know who our foe is. He disguises himself as the benefactor of munkind; he teaches equality und man’s welfare; he teaches that his philosophy can solve ail social-economic problems. He is well trained, and while his tactics are changenble according to world conditions, his basic purposes are achieved by deceit and double-dealing, force, and vio- lence, the enslavement of all people. The Communists are bold and skillful Mars. The Kremlin-trained Communists are the pro- fessed enemy of God, nations, and the peo- ple, They are the enemies of God becuuse they seek to destroy what js in the nature of every human being, the inalienable right of belief in God They arc the enemies of nations because they endeavor to install a totalitarian government which would exer- cise ruthless control, They are the enemies of the people because they are trying to eliminate the family, man's rights, and even man’s personality.
A1366 This is why you Catholic men today have ® great mission to accomplish. The Com- munists constitute a minority, and yet we cannot help but admire them for what they gre accomplishing. If even a minority of Christians, and particularly Catholic men, were ag enthusiastic and fervent in spread- ing the doctrine of Christ as these Commu. nists are in spreading the doctrine of Satan, the world would soon be living the teachings of Christ. Catholics and non-Catholics should be united not in the doctrinal but in the social fleld to combat and unmask the Communists who are today the greatest en- emy of mankind. We must live the doctrine of Christ. In the shop, in the home, on the street, in the Government, 1n our recreation, we must be Christophers, Christ-bearers, bringing by our way of life, Christ into the lives of others, ‘This will be accomplished by teaching and spreading, by our good ex- ample, the unchangeable and everlasting truths of our Divine Master. It ta up to us, my dear friends. Only the Ten Commandments, which are the un- changeable and eternal law of God can solve the problems of the world. While rulers, legisiators, and diplomats are wasting time and money to find the way of solving these most important problems, the Ten Com- mandments are the only valid tenets, the only true road. Millions of laws have been made, and yet there is no peace in the world, In conclusion, I would like to leave with you one thought: You will remember that when Christ was asked by the young man: “What shall I do to save my soul?” He gave a very brief answer. The answer which the Saviour gave contains in its entirety the information sought in the question, “How shall we find world peace?” That answer is, “Keep the Commandments.” Hint Kaiser-Frazer To Avoid RFC Quiz EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THOMAS B. CURTIS OF MIssouRI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 13, 1951 Mr. CURTIS of Missouri. Mr. Speak- er, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following arti- cle by James M. Haswell, from the Chi- cago Daily News of March 9, 1951: Hint Kaisrr-Frazer To Avom RFC Quiz DEFENSE WorK CHANGES PICTURE (By James M. Haswell) WasHINGTON --The RFO loans to the Kaiser-.‘razor Corp., which started the Sen- ate investigation of the Goverument’s lend- ing policy, probably are not going to be aired before the hearings conclude. Senator Fu.sricut, Democrat, of Arkansas, chairman of the subcommittee in charge of the inquiry, says such hearings would be “like beating a dead horse.” Times have changed, says FutsricHT. The loans that looked risky tin 1949 now look safe in view of defense work coming up. The auto industry expects to sell all the autos it can make in 1951, since dollars sre cheap, metals are short, and the Government may put a quota on car production later tn the year. FULBRIGHT says the Kaisers are not in- volved in the influence aspects of the RFO investigation, If hearings were held they would not show the Kaisers brought improper pressure on RFC directors, or invoked White House aid to gain favors from money-lending agencies, Despite its determination to close the rec- ord without a public airing of the Kaiser- Frazer loans, the Senate committee is under great pressure to change !ts decision. A group of former Katser-Frazer dealers is urging the Fulbright committee to open its book and show the public what it has learned in a year’s investigation. Late last summer a Kalser-Frager hearing was scheduled by the Fulbright committee. The committee staff had explored the details of the multimillion-dollar transactions, and was all set to make a record of the affair. Before it could be held, however, Presi- dent Truman sent to the Senate nomina- tions of three new and two current RFC directors. Acting under orders, the staff pushed aside other plans and launched into its influence inquiry. And that’s the odd story. The Fulbright committe has no present intention of mak- ing a public answer to the question it started out to investigate: Why did the RFC lend Kaiser-Frazer s0 much money? Should the Steam Shovels Start Digging the St. Lawrence Seaway, There Will Be American Tax Dollars in Every Bucketful of Earth EXTENSION OF REMARKS Fr HON. JAMES E. VAN ZANDT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 13, 1951 Mr. VAN ZANDT. Mr. Speaker, it was my privilege to be invited by Georgetown University to participate in a forum dis- cussion on the St. Lawrence seaway and power project, over the Liberty Network, radio station WARL, Washington, D. C., Sunday, March 11, 1951, at 1 p. m. In opposing the construction of the St. Lawrence project I made the following statement: Mr. Chairman, I am deeply grateful for the oppoitunity to participate in this forum dis- cussion on the St. Lawrence seaway project because Iam opposed to its construction, My opposition to the construction of this economic monstrosity which has been before the Americun people since 1895 stems from the fact that it is as unsound today as in the past. This subject hus been before the Congress of the United States time and time again, and not once have its advocates been able to jus- tify the investment necessary. There is nothing new to the arguments of the proponents except that we are now told the seaway is needed to provide a submarine- safe passage for iron ore from Labrador to the Great Lakes. The catch tn this reasoning is that this Nation will have won or lost its security tong before this project could be completed because it is the opinion of expert engineors that it will require from 6 to 7 years to complete its construction. Meanwhile, money, material, and manpower urgently needed for mobilization would be diverted to a scheme that will ultimately benefit Canada more than the United States where only 15 percent of our population would receive any benefits. There is nothing new about the hysteria each year for the St. Lawrence seaway except that something new is being continually added to the propaganda for ite construction. As previously stated, the seaway project has been before Congrees time and time again and each time it has been decisively rejected, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD If one reads the hearings containing the arguments for and againet the project, one will find that congressional rejection was based on the following reasons: 1. The St. Lawrence seaway'’s value as & traneportation artery has been vastly over~ rated, mostly because tt would be closed to navigation for at least 5 months or more each year when the St. Lawrence route is blocked by ice. 2. The proposed 27-foot channel would be too shallow for 91 percent of our own mer- chant vessels, while, on the other hand, for- eign-flag ships which are smaller in size would enjoy a fleld day in dumping cheaply manu- factured foreign products on the American market at the expense of the American wage earner 3. The Nation would lose by spending huge sums of money to establish a costly form of transportation on which could exist only because the burdened taxpayers would pro- vide and support it, but which would never- theless cisrupt long-established and satis- factory commercial arrangements, would in- tensify transportation problems, would add to unemployment, and would cost the Amer- joan taxpayers many more dollars than it would save them. These are only a few of the reasons why Congress has rejected the flimsy arguments for the proposed St. Lawrence seaway and power project. During this critical period in world affairs with our country on the brink of world war III and with the American taxpayer paying about 35 cents out of every dollar earned for tax purposes, the advocates of the St. Law- rence project now come forth with the pro- posal that its construction is necessary to provide a secure route for steamships to bring in only 10,000,000 tons annually of iron ore from the Labrador-Quebec area as compared with our annual need of 100, 000,000 tons. The need for Labrador ores ts based on the argument that such ores are indispensable to our own national security and defense because of an impending shortage of do- mestic high-grade ore principally from the Mesabi Range in Minnesota. While there have been conflicting state- ments regarding the remaining deposits of ore in the Mesab! Range, the facts reveal that from 1917 to 1948 for every 12 tons of ore shipped, 7 tons of ore were added to the ore reserves of the Nation. In the postwar period 1946-49, for every seven tons of high-grade ore mined, six tons were added to the reserves. In addition to this high-grade ore, huge deposits of taco- nite—a lower-grade ore—have been located in Minnesota. According to my colleague, Congressman Biatnix, he stated on February 22, 1951, be- fore a congressional committee that “‘Taco- nite concentrate will compete favorably with direct-shipment open-pit ore” In addition to the high- and low-grade ore reserves of the Mesabi Range, there exists on the north shore of Lake Superior at a site known as Steep Rock Lake, in Ontario, a source of high-grade ore that, sccording to the United States Bureau of Mines, may amount to no less than 1,000,000,000 tons. Transportation for this ore deposit is al- ready available by utilising existing railroad facilities from Steep Rock Lake to Port Ar- thur, where iron-ore vessels now plying the Great Lakes can carry it to its destination, In addition to lron-ore deposits in Minne- sota, both high and low grade, and the de- posits in Ontario, we cannot ignore the huge deposite of ore in Venezuela and Chile that have started to arrive in this country this week. Today we have four principal sources of iron ore, all of them developed in the spirit of free enterprise with adequate trans- portation facilities available to transport the ore to the mille, Back of the argument thet the St. Law- rence senway ts necessary to transport ore
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD from the Labrador-Quebec area is the fact that a half dozen Midwest steel companies are promoting the Labrador-Quebec project and they see in the St. Lawrence seaway the opportunity to subsidize the transportation costs of bringing the ore to market Such a subsidy would affect the price of Labrador- Quebec ore and put it in competition with ore from other sources. In other words, six Midwest stce] companies have invested in the Labrador-Quebec project and they are asking the American people, now burdened with high taxes, to finance the St Lawrence sea- way so that they can get cheaper transpor- tation rates While these Midwest steel compantes are feathering their own nests by asking for a subsidy from the American ta‘ payers, very ttle is being said of the over-all cost of the St. Lawrence seuway and power project We are being told that it is only going to cost the American taxpayers & half billion dollars, but let me leave this thought with you: Should the steam shovels start digging the St Lawrence seaway, there will be American tax dollars in every bucketful of eurth, for this project, plus the necessary deepening of lake harbors and defending it, is expected to cost better than a billion dollars, with two- thirds of it to be sweated out of American taxpayers. Worse still, a billion dollars is only the esti- mate of what the project will cost Bonne- ville Dam cost nearly twice as much as esti- mated, the Suez Canal cost 2), times, and the Chicago drainage canal 3!, times as much as the engineer estimated. The origi- nal estimate of the Panama Canal was $160,000,000 dollars, but the total cost amounted to $375,000,000, Finally the St. Lawrence seaway would cost annually millions more of tax dollars to op- erate and maintain it. So let’s add it: up— thousands of Americans would lose their jobs and the rest of us would face Hfelong taxes that would reduce our already dwindling pur- chasing power due to high living costs The average American citizen, in my opin- jon, is tired of being fooled with subsidy schemes and with high taxes. He will cer- tainly be fooled if the St Lawrence seaway and power project should ever become a reality. Our Best Air Security EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FRANK W. BOYKIN OF ALABAMA IN THE HOUSF OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 13, 1951 Mr. BOYKIN. Mr. Speaker, Thursday evening's Washington Star carried an editorial which said, in part:. It is reassuring to hear from Air Force Sec- retary Thomas K Finletter that the radar screen being built around the continental United States will be completed this year and that an effective Alaskan network will be operating in 1952 Mr. Speaker, the Air Force is to be congratulated on the rapidity with which they are completing the radar network and fence around the country, and particularly in getting the men trained and fitted to run its complex operation. When one speaks of a radar outfit, it brings to mind some sort of hght struc- tural steel or other metal, mobile, radio- like tower surmounted by a scanning de- vice. That description, however, does not apply to the radar system used now to discover planes traveling in the strat- osphere and at supersonic speeds. The fact is that one single type of radar oper- ating in the air defenses of this country now employs 1,300 different types and sizes of electronic tubes, weighs nearly 250 tons, and requires actual adjust- ments of its working parts down to one- thousandth of a microsccond, or, to ex- press it another way, it is built to meas- ure time and opevate within a trillionth part of one second. Mr. Speaker, I know of nothing that could more clearly exhibit the degree of technical training and _ scientific abilities necessary to the operation of our Air Force than does this one-tril- lionth part of a second which enters into mathematical calculations that must be made in order to bring down enemy-operated airplanes through the use of a modern system of radar detec- tion and range-finding. The man in the Air Force uniform today must cervainly have a basic edu- cation in many fields of science, and, in addition thereto, is being sent through highly specialized training schools in order to fight the costly, modern, scien- tific type of warfare that has evolved in these last two decades. The Evening Star’s editorial writer aptly observed: Our best security against atomic attack from the sky 1s the development of retalia- tory power formidable enough to make the Kremlin realize that it cannot hit at us without instantaneously exposing Russia to far more terrible counteraction. We ure capable of that right now. Mr. Speaker, it is because of that capability that the advocates of air power make so much sense; because the Russians know full well that air power is the only thing within our bag of tricks that can bring destruction to the heart of their Russian homeland, if ever she should give cause for genetu! all-out global warfare. It is the timeliness of this article, when we are concerned with the drafting of our youth, that causes me to direct this article to the attention of my colleagues. In order that all may read the same, I ask the unanimous consent of my col- leagues to extend my remarks and in- clude in the Recorp this editorial clipped from the Evening Star of last Thursday, March 8. This reads as follows: Our Best Ain Security It is renssurigg to hear from Atr Force Secretary Thomas K. Finletter that the radar screen being built around the continental United States will be completed this year and that an effective Alaskan network will be Operating in 1952. This means that the Nation will be in a much better position than it has been to cope with possible atomic bombing. But there is no reason for com- placency. The simple but grim fact its that our country, if war comes, will almost cer- tainly suffer from such attacks regardless of the elaborateness of our defenses. Thus, although of vital importance, our radar screen can do no more than give an advance warning—a matter of minutes, not hours—-of the approach of enemy bombers. Aftor that, interceptor planes, antiaircraft artillery, and supersonic ground-to-air guided missiles (still in the process of de- velopment) would have to be depended upon to head off and destroy the attackers. Given A1367 enough such planes, artillery, and missiles, a heavy toll could be exacted of the enemy, but the chances are that many of the attack. ing craft would still reach their targets. In- deed, in the judgment of General Vanden- berg—our Air Force Chief of Staff—we must base our calculations on the assumption that as much as 75 percent would be able to get through to our cittes despite the best kind of radar screen and over-all defensive system that we can set up in the years immediately ahead. But the same holds true for the Soviet Union. If its bombers struck at us, it would be at least equally vulnerable In the last analysis, therefore, our best security against atomic attack from the sky is the develop- ment of retallatory power formidable enough to make the Kremlin realize that tt cannot hit at us without tnstantaneously exposing Russia to far more terrible counteraction. We are capable of that right now In fact, as Dr. Vannevar Bush has just asserted, there is no question, as matters stand today, that we could literally destroy that country with our strategic Air Force. That is one of the key reusons why we can still hope to prevent another world war—a hope that will grow steadily stronger, as Dr Bush has said, if our acrial mi; ht is supplemented with good de- fensive ground forces in Western Europe. Statement of Brig. Gen. E. A. Evans, Ex- ecutive Director of the Reserve Officers’ Association, Before the House Armed Services Committee, February 28, 1951, Regarding H. R. 2811, Providing for Universal Military Service and Train- ing EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. JAMES E. VAN ZANDT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 13, 1951 Mr. VAN ZANDT. Mr. Speaker, un- der leave to extend my remarks, I sub- mit herewith the following statement by Brig. Gen. E. A. Evans, executive direc- tor of the Reserve Officers’ Association, before the House Armed Services Com- mittee, February 28, 1951, regarding H. R. 2811, providing for universal mili- tary service and training: Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the com- mittee, the Reserve Officers’ Association Geeply appreciates the opportunity of ap- pearing before your committee in connec- tion with the proposed legislation affecting the utilization of manpower. The Reserve Officers’ Association has con- sistently, year after year, maintained its be- Nef in @ system of universal military train- ing. We have alsu consistently held to the type of military organization for this Na- tion which was enunciated by Gen. George C. Marshall in a circular published under his name on August 25, 1944, at which time he was Chief of Staff of the Army In this circular, General Marshall directed that the plans for a postwar peace establishment be “based upon the conception of a profes- sional peace establishment (no larger than necessary to meet normal peacetime require- ments) to be reinforced in time of emer- gency by organized units drawn from a citl- zen army reserve, effectively organized for this purpose in time of peace; with full op- portunity for competent citizen soldiers to
A1368 acquire practical experience through tempo- rary active service and to rise by successive steps to any rank for which they can defi- nitely quality" General Marshall stated in this circular that this was the type of military institu- tion which President Washington proposed to the First Congress as one of the essential foundations of the new American Republic. In order to effectively create this type of mihbtary tnstitution, and in order that a proper level of security may be matutained under present world conditions, it is essen- tial that there be a system evolved whereby young men of the Nation are given a thor- Ough basic training and then assigned to the yeserve components uf the several services, Such a plan ts provided in the bill now un- der consideration by this committee. In reference to the bill now before you, namely, H. R. 2811, and with specific refer- ence to the National Security Training Com- mission, we note that a change hag been made trom the concept of the commission tn previous UMT bills in that the commission ig placed on a per diem basis rather than on a full-time basis. Inasmuch as it is felt that the importance of this commission is such that it will require tho full-time serv- ices of its members, we suggest that the per diem plan be deleted and that members be selected on a full-time basis We note sevelal deletions in the paragraph referring to the power given to the Nutional Selective Training Commission, and strongly suggest that the wording of the Senate bill be used. H. R. 2811, for instance, slates that “The National Security Training Com- mission is subject to the direction of the President and will establish policies with re- spect to the conduct of initial military train- ing of members of the National Security Training Corps’ We suggest the wording of the Senate bill which directs the Nattonal Security Training Commission to establish such policies and standards, etc, etc, The Senate version has these additional words which we strongly recommend be placed in H R. 2811: “Establish such poltcics and standards * * * fs nie necessary to carry out the purposes of this act, and shall, subject to the direction of the President, designate the Federal departments and agencies to carry out such training in ac- cordance with the policies and standards of the Commission.” We are somewhat concerned in connection with the follow-through of an individual's service in the Reserve components after he has completed training, or has completed training and active duty service. The Re- serve components are supposed to receive en- listed men today who have completed a 1-year enlistment, but these men are cer- tainly not in evidence, and I have no doubt but that the reason they are not available to us is because there is no method of fol- lowing them up to see that they carry out their obligation. This suggestion has been made—and we think It worthy of considera- tion—and that is that once an individual has completed his training, or training and serv- ice, and has become available for assignment to the Reserve components, that he be re- ported to his local board upon release from the service, and that the local board be charged with the keeping of records that would indicate whether the individual is or 4s not carrying out his obligations under the jaw. We are also concerned in reference to the possible penalty clause which would make the individual subject to the penalty as set forth in the present Selective Service Act in the event he fatla to cerry out his obligation to serve his total number of years in the Reserve components. If the present penalty clause does not cover this portion of his obligation, then we strongly recom- mend that the wording be changed to make at apply. We have no particular quarrel in reference to the age when young men will be drafted, or with the period of time required for pres- ent-day service. We feel that this ts a policy matter that can best be determined by the Congress of the United States based upon the over-all manpower needs of the Nation. You can readily see from my previous re=- marks that we are fn agreement with the basic concept of the proposed bill. We are concerned, however, with the fact that it appears to be necessary to maintain an active duty force of approximately 3,500,000. We huve no means of determining, and we must therefore accept the fact that an active duty strength of approximately 3,500,- QOU ig required under present world condi- tions. But we do become alarmed when we listen to statements made by members of the Defense Department that this strength may have to be maintained for many years to come. This country cannot possibly stand the tremendous continued cost of maintaining large active duty forces year after year after year. We can think of nothing that Soviet Russia would Nke better than to have us wreck ourselves econom- jeally. If it is necessary to maintain a se- curity level as represented by the 3,500,000 active duty force, we contend that it is pos- sible to accomplish this security level by building up the effectiveness of the Reserve components to a point that would soon allow a substantial reduction of the active duty forces The cost of maintaining an active duty force ts probably 10 times greater than that of maintuining a similar force in the Reserve components, and obviously any shift- ing of the security load from the active duty forces to the Reserve components would bring about substantial savings to the tax- payers of this Nation. The terms of the proposed bill, taken to- gether with the statement of Pentagon wit- nesses appearing before the Congress, ind@i- cate that it ts the intention of eventually bultlding up the effectiveness of the Reserve components. But this cannot start until in- dividuals who are drafted will have com- pleted their service and will have been trans- ferred into the Reserve components. This means then, in general terms, that it will be approximately 2 years before any sub- stantial amount of strength is added to the Reserve components. Why is it necessary to wait these 2 years in order to start building up the effectiveness of the Reserve components? If we wait for 2 years to start, 1t will certainly be a year or more beyond that time before we can begin thinking in terms of reducing the active- duty forces and still maintain the required security level to meet world conditions. Every year that we wait in starting to build up the effectiveness of the Reserve compo- nents costs this country $35,000,000,000. We would Itke to see the atart made now—not 2 years hence. It ts true that there is a pro- viston in the bill which would allow individ- uals to be released from service in order to accept enlistments in the Reserve compo- nents, but nowhere do we find this enun- ciated as a policy which would be put into effect without delay It meay well be that this is a contemplated, but I again repeat thet there appears to be too much emphasts upon maintaining and supporting this tre- mendous peacetime establishment over many years to come, rather than a maximum effort to work out a plan of maintaining a security level by the utilization of effective Reserve components now tn order that this country and the people of this Nation will not be burdened with overpowering taxes. We in the Reserve Officers Association much prefer to accept into the Reserves only those men who had received a basic training. This ig the only way tn which the Reserves can be made truly effective. We had hoped that it might be possible to create a plan whereby a certain percentage of the individ- uals who were drafted and who had been given their basic training could be released to the Keserve component units, thereby eliminating the 2-year wait. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Under present conditions, with a substan- tial proportion of the Reserve components on active duty and making up a falr share of the 3,500,000 active-duty force, we find our- selves in the position for the next year and o half to 2 years of having substantially de- pleted our Reserve forces. We feel rather strongly that during this perfod of time, when the Reserve forces are being utilized in building up the active-duty force, that when units are ordered to active duty they should be replaced in number, consistent, of course, with over-all mobilization requirements. Officers exist in the Volunteer Reserve that could be utilized for this purpose, and if some plan could be worked out that would start assigning men to Reserve components immediately aftor basic training was com- pleted, such a plan would be possible. It 1s realized that this would require the draft- ing of additional men in this first 2-year period, but if the situation is serious enough to call Lor the maiutenance of this size active- duty force, then it certainly must be sericus enough to make us consider without delay the raising of the present effectiveness of our Reserve components, be they National Guard or the Reserves of the several services. We are not taken into the confidence of the Department of Defeuse or the Depart- ments of Army, Navy, and Alr, in connection with the over-all considerations that would prompt the creating of a large active duty force for an indeterminate bumber of years. We are therefore unable to dispute the wis- dom of such a move. We cannot then in good conscience advise against the passage of the bill under consideration, as it is a basic bill and does provide the means whereby those things which we feel should be done could be done. What we are concerned about, and what we feel sure must be in the minds of Many of you, as well as people throughout this Nation, is the fact that there appears to be no direct evidence that the military are bending every possible effort to develop ways and means whereby a@ security level may be maintained by immediately building up the present effectiveness of the Reserve components, thereby making it possible to consider reducing the large contemplated active-duty force. For years the Reserve Officers’ Association has been very much concerned with the lack of proper implementation of Reserve pro- “rams of the several services, because these programs, with few exceptions, have not created cffective Reserve component forces. New plans will soon be forthcoming from the Department of Defense which should present a more effectual picture than has existed im the past. These plans, however, must stiJi be properly implemented, and we feel certain that you gentlemen of the House Armed Services Committee feel as keenly as we do about the necessity of such a proper implementation and will therefore take such steps as may be within your power to see that it ts done. On behalf of the Reserve officers of the Army, Navy,Air, Marines, and Coast Guard, vena you for allowing us to present our ews. “Why Our Country Is Great” and “The Challenge That Confrents Us”—By A. M. Piper EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. BEN F. JENSEN oF IOWA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 13, 1951 Mr. JENSEN. Mr. Speaker, Mr. A. M, Piper, editor of the Council Bluffs Non- pareil, Council Bluffs, Iowa, has been
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD known far and wide over a period of many years for his down to earth, clear concept of our God-given Anrerican way of life, what has made America great, and what needs be done to keep it blessed in greatness, goodness, and freedom. The Freedom Foundation of Valley Forge on March 4 awarded a well. deserved certificate of merit to Mr. Piper on two of his editorials which ap- peared in the Council Bluffs Nonpareil on August 6 and October 9, 1950, and which I here insert, along with my sin- cere congratulations to my good friend, Mr. A.M. Piper, for his good works, [From the Council Bluffs Nonpareil of August 6, 1950] THE CHALLENGE THAT Conrronts Us “It is a great time to be alive,” Harry Emerson Fosdick declared in a sermon during the First World War A majority of Americans agreed with him, They were confronted with a challenge which called for the best that was in them, and they met it in a spirit of sacrifice There were exceptions, of course, but most people were ready and willing to consecrate their all to God and country Few grumbled or complained Nearly everybody was en- thuriastic, confident, ready to voluntecr for service. In times of crisis pecple are driven to prayer, the power line that connects with the wisdom and powers of the Infinite It was su during both of our world wars, and it will be so again if we are dragged into @ third But the American people no longer have the enthusiasm and confidence with which they were imbued in 1917 and 1918. There ts a feeling that we have been be- trayed, that we have lost our way in the quest for peace. More and more people ure won- dering why God peimits such terrible things to happen tn His world When we stop to think we are constrained to admit that God is not to blame, that as free moral agents, we are responsible for the evil as well as the good in human telations But this realization does not solve our problems Instead, {it leaves most people more confused than ever 80 many great plans have been formulated to mnke the world better and so many have fulled that discouragement is widespread We xre ine elined to throw up our hands and say, “What's the use?” Such an attitude gives the cnemies of Christianity their great opportunity. A Communist is reported to have said. “Yes, you have vour Christ but we shall win in the end because we are putting in all we hive and are willing to sacrifice You who call yourselves Christians are no longer willing to do so” Our Nation became great because so many Americans had faith in God and were willing to back up thelr faith with sacrifices. In war and in peace they put their coun- try ahead of everything except their God. We have lost some of the religion and some of the patriotism that inspired our lorefath- ers to build the Nation tn which we live. But it is not too late to correct our mis- vakes and overcome our shortcomings, If we put God and country ahead of our own selfiuh interests, the opportunities that have been ours will be available to those who come after us {From the Council Bluffs Nonparell of October 9, 1950] Wuy Ovr Country Is GREAT If the United States is to maintain lead- ership in the battle to preserve a tree world, we must regain our belief in our immortal destiny, the Right Reverend Austin Pardue, bishop of Pittsburgh, said recently. The materialism of our generation, he de- clared, is bringing about the destruction of our most powerful motive force. The best re- miining forces in America today are those inspired by the fulth of our fathers. There is a popular notion that the United States has become rich solely because with the great national resources available, we couldn't help it If that were true, many other countrieca rich in natural resources, would be further along than we are, America is great because sumething dif- ferent took place iu our country. The founders of our Republic, as a peo- ple, were convinced that they cume to this country becuuse God led them here. They put their faith in the Christian idea that min, under God, should be his own master, They maintatned that he is endowed by his Creator with certain inalienable rights. The securing of these rights is what they meant by freedom The church and the social order were not set against cach other in the United States To the contrary, the social order was fashioned to express the belief, preached by the church, of man’s importance and his unlimited capacities. Our ftoretatheis had the one quality most necessary for the upbuilding and preserva- tion of a nation -a belief that they were part of God's plan and that nothing could overcome their destiny. They prayed with an utter simplicity of faith and never doubted that God would see them through their apparently uncon- querable difficulties Hed'd A Constitution was adopted which gave us the best Government in the world. Then came prosperity unparslleled in the history of the world. The economic promise of our resources has been realized because free men, in our tree system, have develuped them. Our eco- nomic prosperity is not merely a vindication of our system. I1 is a@ vindication of Chris- tlanity. The trouble with us today is that trust in education and in material prosperity is taking the place of trust in God. That is why we aie bewildered and confused as we move from one crisis to another. If we are to maintain our leadership jn the world, if our Nation is to endure, Bishop Purdue asierted. three basic beliefs must be preached and practiced: “That God Himself destined this Nation to provide a way of life that would give the greatest good to the greatest number. That the Bible is the revealed woid of God and that his supernatural power is with us. That each of us is immortal and that we must face a day of judgment when we shall be required to make adjustments of the suffering we have caused or idly stood by and permitted.” Our foretathers held these beliefs and practiced them We must follow their ex- ample if we expect to preserve the way c: life we enjoy, and pass it on to our chil- dren. Total Air Power EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. JOHN W. McCORMACK OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE CF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 13, 1951 Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, in the current issue of United States News and World Report there is an article that deserves the widest possible circula- tion. The article is entitled “The Grow- A1369 ing United States Air Force” and is an interview with Hon. Thomas K, Fin- letter, Secretary of the Air Force. The article impressed me because I find Mr. Finletter’s point of view to be quite simi- lar to my own. What Secretary Fin- letter believes in primarily is air power— and 1n his own words “this includes the carrier air and the Marine air as well as the Air Force.” Secretary Finletter's answers to the questions put to him by the representa- tive of United States News and World Repory are as revealing of the Secretary as of the state of the Air Force. Secre- tary Finletter is no narrow-minded par- tisan of one service or one kind of air power. In answer to a query about car- rier air and the Navy, Secretary Fin- letter made it crystal clear that in his opinion carrier air must remain in the Navy. “I think,” he said to his ques- tioner, “that what you are intimating is a one-service, one-uniform setup, and I should personally regret that, because I think the specialization function and the morale factor and all that is absolutely essential, to say nothing of the effective- ness of effort. It looks awfully nice on paper, one service, but I’m not for it.” It is equally apparent that Secretary Finletter believes in total air power, though he places emphasis on strategic air power because it is through strategic air power that the atom bomb can be used to strike at the enemy's heart. Sec- retary Finletter’s remarks about stra- tegic air represent the core of his inter- view, and furnish the truest measure of the man. Of this violent and destruc- tive weapon he says: Politically, strategic air is the thing which has the real possibility * * * of mak- ing an enemy think before he hits us, and thereby of giving us a breathing spell by which we muy be able to work out some way of not destroying ourselves in a third world war That's the political side of the thing, and I want to emphasize that very strongly. Its a peculiar business, gentlemen, to be spending your time working with such a horribly destructive operation, and I can't tell you how destructive 1t can be both ways. But the only thing that makes it bearable is the fact that it may be the one thing which will take this terribly serlous inter- national situation that we have, and pio- vide the stimulus which may make men really get together and use their brains and not destroy each other, Mr. Speaker, I think Secretary Fin- letter appreciates, as do other responsi- ble leaders, that air power must grow apace with the Army and Navy and in partnership with the Army and Navy. It is most encouraging to find the evi- dence provided by this article of the leadership Secretary Finletter is bring- ing to the solution of the problems of the Air Force. Under unanimous consent, I include in the ConGRESSIONAL REcorp the article, the Growing Air Force, by Hon. Thomas K. Finletter, from the March 2, 1951, issue of United States News and World Report. The article is as follows: Tur Growina UNITED STaTEs AIR Force (An interview with Thomas K. Finletter, Secretary of the Air Force) Question. What kind of Job, Mr. Secretary, has the Air Force done in Korea? Answer. I would much prefer to answer in terms of air powet, and to talk about what
A1379 the Navy and the Marine cir did as well as what the Air Force did. But I will answer it strictly on the Air Force, since that’s the way the question was put. What did we have in the Korean area when the North Koreans attacked? We had a lot of planes whose purpoie was to defend the island of Japan against attack, and specifi- cally against airborne attuck. They were therefore interceptor planes, calculated for nir defense The same tulng, by the way, wis true of the Army troops. These ground troops were troops of oeccupation—they weren't intended fo’ a campaign in Korea. The airplanes of the Alr Force were the F-80’s, which ts an interceptor, and World War IT F-51's, which are very good piston- engine fighters. The result had to be an improvisation. So that's the first point which was difficult. Now the second point vas favorable, and that was chance-—that there wasn't any ef- fective alr enemy opposition so we didn't have to worry too inuch about air supert- oity-—there wasn’t any major problem The severity of the ground attack against us in the early days was such that almost the entire Air Force effort went into close support of the Ground Forces. Army leaders have had the highest praise for what was done in this connection. After a visit to Korea in September, General Collins (Army Chicf of Staff) said: “Like the Army, the Alr Force had to switch from pence to wartime opera- tion overnight Gen. Walton Walker testi- fies that, but for what the fliers did those first few days, we would have lost Korea.” Question. Was the job of interdiction rea- sonably well done? Answer. We sent out a commission to Ko- rea under President Stearns of the Univer- sity of Denver and asked him to look into the thing, and all I can tell you is that the answer that we got back from him seemed to indicate that on the whole there was a geod job done. 1 may tell you that his re- purt said more than that. His report said there was an extremoly good job done. But I would limit myself for the present to the proposition that the Job was well done. The question arises: Why then didn’t the alr stop the North Koreans com, letely and the Chinese completely? To which the an- swer is, gentlemen, that probably not even a 100-percent perfect job of interdiction can do that, immediately—-the efforts are cumula- tive. You can't expect the air to prevent absolutely everything from getting to the front lines. Question through? Answer. Comparatively Httle. When you stop to think of it, if you meet someone who claims that the air can prohibit everything trom getting through, then you're talking to the uninformed, because it ie just about im- possible. How can you possibly expect to stop people infiltrating at night down through rice-paddy country? Question. You might stop their = rail- roads——- Answer. Well, we did knock the dickens out of the railronds—but, even with that, you can't stop every single piece of line. They would run the track up to a certain point, we'd Knock out the bridge and then they would carry the things on coolies across the place—you can’t knock all that out. All T can tell you ts that anybody who expects the air—and I’m going now to shift from the Air Force to air power—anybody who expects air power—and this includes the carrier air and Marine air as well as the Air Force—to be able to stop everything from getting to the front line is simply posing an impossible problem. Nobody ever supposed any such thing could be done, and the question ls unanswerable because it isn’t within the framework of common sense. Now, as far as the close-support job goes, it's a highly technical question. I can tell you that a good job was done on close sup- But an awful lot did = get port under the circumstances, and with the number of planes available. Question, But isn’t it said that the Army and the Air Force haven't been working together? Answer. I don’t agree with that <t all, Perhaps, initially, there was something to be asked. After all, how could you expect the Army and Air Force, trained for defensive work against invasion of Japan, to have trained toyether for a job that they never were expected to do? Today, however, sup- port of Ground Forces by the Air Force has been—in General Vandenberg’s (Air Force Chief of Staff) words—‘magnificent.” Question But weren't the Marines pretty well trained? Answer. Well, of ccurse the Marines wcre trained because they were trained for that Kind of job. Question. Why couldn't the Army have been trained? Answer. Because this was a force which was out there for primarily a different purpose Question Fut isn't it betng assumed that they should have been out practicing—that they shouldn't have been idle-—— Answer, General MacArthur had them there ag occupational troops and they were performing occupational cuties. However, there was some joint training. Question It sounds like the official answer, doesn't it? Answer. I'm not giving the official answer— I'm just talking about this thing sensibly, Iam perfectly willing to examine any pos- sible complaint. And maybe these troops and air which were intended to be inter- ceptors should have been trained more as close-support fighters—I don't know. CHINESE AS RETTER TARGCTS Question. But doesn’t it look now as If they are working out well? In the last few weeks haven't they been devastating the enemy, apparently——— Answer. I think that’s for another reason. I thi 1k what’s happened is that the Chinese lines of communication have gotten extend- ed—interdiction is really rhowing its effect— and they weren't as adept—the Chinese weren't—ut fighting in the hills as the North Koreans were, and they've been better targets. Question. But there has been improve- ment? Answer. Yes, they have improved, but— of course they’ve improved in the course of battle. But I don't want to give the im- pression that this problem is anywhere near solved as a general matter—it isn’t. Question. The Air Force and the Army are working closely together? Answer. Yes. Question. They are two different services and yet they are integrated in that fleld? Answer. Well, they are certainly doing their best to work together. Question. And is there no feeling between the services that would keep them from working together? Answer. No, on the contrary—I really think it’s just the opposite. I can only re- port on what I've scen. EMPHASIS ON TACTICAL AIR Question. Could you tell us how the tacti- cal air would work as it's being revised? Answer. Well, the tactical air command is one f three Air Force commands out in front. Question. On the ground, how would it tend to improve the efficiency? Answer. Well, it would—you mean how would it operate in.the training? Question. How would it change the present system by setting up a separate command— what would the practical results be? Answer. Oh, the only effect is to place more emphasis on tactical air by making it a major command, which we did last December, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Question. Operations in the field are not affected, then? Answer, Not in the slightest. Question, Would it be a good idea to put the Marine tactical air force under this com- mand—just have one tactical air force? Answer. I don't think so. It seems to me that the Marines are a separate unit with a separate function, which is a rather spe- cialized one, and the thing has worked ex- tremely well when you look at the history and record of the Marines. I don’t see why, when something has worked as well as that, that you don't leave it alone. Now the Marine operation is one which is to a large extent amphibious in its nature, and it’s a unitary operation, It assumes that the air superiority is there, presumably from the carriers And the Marines are a specialized Operation which has demonstrated its suc- cess with a magnificent record. Question. Why wouldn't it be a good idea for the Army to have its tactical air right along with groun troops in the Army rather than the Atr Force? Answer. That is the situation which exist- ed up to the time of the Kasserine Pass, if you will remember. And it’s a conceivable way of operating, but it has this one diffi- culty, and that is that it doesn’t provide for a unified control over the fighter planes available so that they can get the command of the air. Because if you, say, have allocated one group for a division, and you have, let's say, 10 divisions at any one puint—that would be very good for the close-support function. But it wouldn’t work for the interdiction function, because the interdiction targets might no’ be right in front and nicely dis- tributed along the line. And it would be ex- tremely bad for the air-superiority function, because all the enemy would have to do would be to come in and Knock one of our groups off at one end and then switch all its power over and knock one off on the other end. And that is a theory which I don't think anybody seriously advocates any more, be- cause that would almost insure air supe- riority to the enemy, and of course, as you know, that is the situation which was such a failure at the Kagserine Pass and was changed by General Eisenhower thereafter. I have never heard anybody suggest it since. JET FIGHTER-BOMBER IN KOREA Question Docs the Air Force now have fighter-bombers or other tactical units in Korea? Answer. Yes; we have the F-84, which is a fighter-bomber, and it’s got good range and good attacking power, and it has been doing quite well out there. Question And that is a jet? Answer. That's a jet. Question The British keep tnsisting that our jets aren't as good as the Russians’. Is there any basis for that? Answer. Do the British say that? Question. Didn’t some British magazine say that? Answer. The facts are, I think, that you are speaking of the MIG-15, which is the only Red jet plane which has been used in Korea, and it is superior in speed to our F 80, our oldest operational jet. But it Js not superior to our F-86, and, of course, it’s a different kind of plane from our F-84. The MIG-15 ts an interceptor, and our F-84 is a fighter- bomber, and they are different kinds of planes. I am not too worried about rumors that their jets are superior. I do think, however, it is worth while pointing out that the MIG- 15 is an extremely gocd plane, and I think it ought to be a lesson to us to stop this theory that nobody else can do these things except us. Question. Is that Red jet a madel of a British plane? Answer. Oh, no.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Question Do the MIG-15's all have Chi- nese pilots? Answer. That we don’t know, Question. How good are the MIG pilots, would you say? Answer. From the people I've asked, the general answer is that they are extremely good filers, and the news we've hud from Korea, in general, has been that they were excelient filers—-fly well in formation, get off the ground well, scramble well and in general there is a respect on the part of our people for their performance. Question. Do you foresee a time when we will need two sets of fighters, one for in+ terception and one for ground support? Answer. That might very well be if re- sources were unlimited. That's what you do have, in a sense, in one part of our air power. The Navy's carrier air is the air which does get control of the air, presumably, and the close support, Marine air is the one which does the close support To a certain extent there you do have that spe- cialization of function. And a very good thing it is for that operation Question Does the Air Forco now accept the need for carriers? Answer. They have never contested tt. Question. Wasn’t there some argument about it? Answer No. Question. The Air Force never did raisc that? Answer No; not that I know of. I think what you are referring to 1s the question as to who should carry on the strategic air— the B-36 investigation some time ago. But our position on that is quite simple—and that is that matters of interservice rivalry (which, incidentally, 1s a very good thing— it keeps everybody on their toes) must not be allowed to interfere with what is the best for the over-all effort. And our attitude is that in the strategic air we have the main responsibility pinned on us, but, to the extent that the carrier alr can participate in that, obviously, we are all for it, because we want the maximum cffort—quick and effective. Question. So if carriers could carry planes that would dcliver the atom bomb, there would be a place for them? Answer. That’s right Question Should it be under the over-all direction of some higher command? Answer I hadn't thought about the com- mand question, but I don’t see any reason why the two services can’t operate side by side. NEED FOR CARRIERS Question Should carrier air remain under the Navy or is there any feeling that it should be—that all of our air should be— under one command? Answer. I don’t think so. It would seem to me that you've got to have the carrier air in the Navy. I think that what you are intimating is & one-service, one-uniform set-up, and I should personally regret that, because I think the specialization function and the morale factor and all that is absolutely essential, to say nothing of the effectiveness of effort. It looks awfully nice on paper, one service, but I'm not for it Question There is no question that the Navy can carry the atom vomb? Answer. I'm sure they can Question You told us, Mr. Secretary, about the planes for interception Can you tell us what the principal fighter types will be this time for escort of the »ombers? Answer. Well, for any escort operation we would obviously want a long-range, fast plane. And the F-84 is that. Question. And can you tell us anything about the range of the F-84? In other words, what kind of escort operations can we pro- vide? This was one of the great problems in the Second World War. Have we gotten longer legs for our fighter planes since the war? Answer, Yes; the fighters are getting longer legged all the time, and ulso there are re- fueling techniques which will add to their range, and other methods are being studied which will increase the range of the escorts. Question, Maybe the techniques won't be the same in another war. Answer That's right. JETS’ RANGE EXTENDED Question Can we escort our bombers to Russia from the bases that we have? Answer. All I can say on that is that the escort problem is one that is being studied, and that the ranges involved now create difficulties which were not existent in World War II, and that requires new techniques, and we are working on those new techniques, and the only thing I cun say so far about them is that the range of the modern jet fighter has already been extended by fuel- conservation techniques and other improve- ments In this connection, I want to repeat the obvious fact that the jet engine is in a sharp evolution, unlike the airplane, which is a slow development. The curve of im- provement in jet engines is drastic—where we were talking in terms of 2,000 pounds we are now talking in terms of several times that. Question Can the F-84 be used as escort for, say, B-36's, which must be considerably slower? Answer Oh, the speed factor can be taken care of. All these jets can slow up Question. Who is going to make the jet engine? Is there a tendency to concentrate in the air industry itself, or are you attempt- ing to go out und create new sources? Answer. As you know, the major piston manufacturers were so busy in World War IT that as the jet was being developed they couldn't get in on the business, so it went to Westinghouse and General Electric and Gen- eral Motors. Now, however, the jet engine is made generally in the engine tndustry. Question. Are you going to depend upon the established producers? Answer. In part, yes. In general, both for engines and for airplanes, we want to spread the mobilization base. The theory we are following is to broad: ao the base of production to: First, have an aircraft-production capa- bility for doubling production should full mobilization come Second, get multiple sources of supply geographically separated and, Third, to take up civilian slack to reduce ubemployment and labor dislocation Question. Are you bringing new producers into the engine fleld? Answer Yes, Packard, Studebaker, Chev- rolet, Buick, Ford, and others, Question Isn't the aircraft industry itself somewhat concerned? Don't they feel that outsiders are getting into 4 business that is their business? Answer. I would like to make one point about that, as a matter of policy, and that is this. If we do, for example, take some item made by company A, and we ask them to license company B to make the item, we intend to see to it that product remains an A_ product—in other words, that the original developer of the airplane gets the full credit for it, that {t remains his machine and that everything is done to preserve his prestige tn having created this accepted article. Of course, an argument is made against that sometimes on the theory that the Amer- ican taxpayer pays for the development of this by A and therefore A has no pro- prietary right in it, and therefore that there is %o reason why the Government shouldn't pass that right out to B and C. The Air Force doesn't agree with that. The Air Force thinks that although it is true that A1371 the cost of development has been borne by the Government, we want to see to it that the fellow that really develops the machine gets the credit, Question. Wouldn't he rather expand and fill the whole order than see someone else licensed? Answer. That’s right. And that's where we run counter to him because his interests run counter to ours. We don't want to create a condition where we can’t expand rapidly, and we, therefore, want, as I said before, to have a base which 1s not jammed up with three shifts a day and hasn't ab- sorbed all of tts machine tools, Question Will it be decentralized pretty much—it won't be concentrated? Answer. No. It will not be concentrated in any one place. Question. Are you planning to remove any plants from what might become a dangerous aren? Answer. We have no plans on that; no, NO LABOR-MATERIAL DELAY Question. Mr. Secretary, aro any of your projects held up now for lack of labor and materials? Answer. I know of none Question. Are you expanding your pro- duction quite rapidly? Answer. Oh, yes Question. Will the 560,000-plane goal be reacher ° Answer. That figure was not a figure of production; it was a figure of capacity. And, in general, the capacity to produce at that rate in all oi the services ig a feasibility, but only tf we do what I am saying now. There is no present plan to produce 60,000 planes. Question, Are you planning on any new factories? : y Answer Under present plans, there will be no new factories built by the Air Force be- cause we have two sources which we can tap. The first is the existing factories doing other kinds of business which are not fully occupied, and, secondly, other factories on which we have a recapture clause or which are owned by us and are not being ufd. Question Is your program going to force the automobile industry to make fewer cars in order to go into the airplane business? Answer No; our business won't do that— the natural course of events may, or other economic factors. And if they do, we will take advantage of that unused capacity in all probability. Question. Do you expect any difficulty in manning a 95-wing air force? Answer. No. We do not. We expect an organic difficulty by reason of the very rapid growth of the force. The force is now being built up to 971,000, and the target date is the middle of this calendar year, which is, roughly speaking, 1 year ahead of the ate tainment of the matériel aspects of the 95- wing program. And that’s a tremendously rapid build-up, and therefore produces dif- ficulties, hardships, and #0 on. Question Do you think that ts going to be @ permanent strain? Answer. The only thing I am sure of is that international conditions are not going to re- main static. I think that they are going to get worse or get better. Of course if they get worse that figure is going to increase substantially if we have to go substantially above that. But I think that even If con- ditions get better, it is not, I regret to say, to be anticipated that they will get so much better that we can afford to diminish the air power and the military power which we now have. I am inclined to think that that figure will be compressed a ttle hy effi- ctencies, but I think that the demands will probably make it increase. Question. Is there a pilot shortage? Answer, No; not at the moment. In gen- eral, we are able to keep our p*reonnel sit- uation up with our matériel situation, There
A1372 tg no problem of getting airplanes that can't be flown or can’t be maintained. And what we are doing is: We are aiming our person- hel build-up toward mid-1951, and our ma- tériel build-up toward mid-1952. RAPID GROWTH AHEAD Question. Is the Air Force on the verge of n repid growth? Are we really set to go? Answer Yes; we are on the verge of a rapid growth. We started cut the fiscal year with about 48 “wings” fgroups| with @ budget of around 64,000,000,000. Now we've got a budget of around fourteen billion. That docsn’t mean to say we're going to have three and one-half times as many “wings” within a year. And the reason is that it takes time to bulld planes and to form “wings.” Question What is our goal? Answer As soon as possible—which will run well into the latter part of 1952, and that’s optimistic—we are alming to have 96 “wings ’ Question. How many “wings” did we have in World War II? Answer It was slightly more than 240. Question, Were they comparable in size? Answer. Yes, they are comparahle in size, but as far as the fire power goes there 1s all the difference in the world You take the striking power of a group of B-36's or B-47’s as compared with B-17's, which was the big- gest plane we used in bombardment in Eu- rope, and the increase 1s just terrific. And the present-day horsepower 18 up, too. For example, you take a B-47 with six jet en- gines—you've got a real increase. At high speeds, the added power is something un- believable—to say nothing of the weapons they carry. Question. The weapons are bigger? Auswer The weapons are geometrically more powerful, Question. What was the horsepower in the last. war? Answer. The horsepower of a B-17 in World War IT was 4,800. COMPARISON WITH WORLD WAR IT Quistion. With those 95 ‘wings’? we now plan, would we be anywhere near World War TI, so far as striking power is concerned? Answer. You can’t make ao comparison be- cause the element of atomic power is present. Let's put it this way: You've got three main fighting commands in the Air Force—you've got atr defense, you've got tactical alr, and you've got strategic air. Now everything feeds up to them. That's your end product, as it were. The production back of that and, of course, the transport, the training, proving grounds, research—everything elso feeds up to those three things out in front. Now therefore, if you want to figure out how you stand in terms of power on those, you've got to look at how each of those is going to be developed. You take air defense, for example. It’s entirely new, not comparable to what it was before, because it is air defense of this coun- try against possible atomic attack. Question. How good is our air defense? Answer. Well, it’s fairly good. We are aim- ing to oreate the best conventional air-de- fense system we can—that's our present ob- jective—and to then go on and see how we can improve on it in unconventional terms. Now by “conventional” I mean that air de- fense is simply the old Job of radar, inter- ceptor planes, and antiaircraft guns—the same kind of thing that you had in World War II It's nothing new, but there ts con- siderable improvement in the radar, and in the antiaircraft and, of course, in the inter- ceptors, but it's still the name old thing, and the same rules apply to it, and you're going to knock down only part of the enemy bombers. And the difference In the rules of the game now is that this time they may be bombers carrying atomic bombs. In World War II if you coud knock down 5 percent of an attacking force you could put the ene- my’s air out of business pretty quickly. They couldn’t take it. For example, in the Battle of Britain the rate was 8 percent, and that was something that the “Luftwaffe couldn’t take and they lost the Battle of Britain on 8 percent. But how good is 8 percent when 92 percent of atomic bombs come through? Obviously that’s a very bad situation, and, good as the conventional air-defense system is going to be, it’s never going to be enough to protect the United States against atomic attack, Question. What do you mean by “uncon- ventional’? Answer. What I mean by that is that science may develop new types of ways of knocking down enemy bombers. The ob- vious one is the guided missile, And, a8 you know, some people place great reliance on the guided missile, and we do know that we are going to have ground-to-air guided missiles at some time which will be capa- ble of vastly increasing the power of defense. But I think that those who rely on the increase of defensive power ure leaving out of consideration one general fact, and that is that the offensive power of the guided mls- ile will grow with ite defensive capabilities, and the problems of this are, in the main, two—first of all, the question of power, and secondly the question of guidance, for when you get the guidance and power to make a good defensive missile, you get the guidance and power to increase the power of the offen- sive missile. Question, Mr. Secretary, can yOu say anything about the production effort on guided missiles? Is there anything to indi- cate the scale of that effort? Answer. I think in general you can say that that is a rapidly developing field which has not yet gotten very seriously into the production aspects and will not get there for a short period. Question. Do you think the guided missile will take the place of the piloted plane very s00n? Answer. Not very soon, no. And I would think that even though one may assume that some day !t will, I think you’re going to pass through a long preparatory period where both exist and both have a function. NEW TYPES OF PLANE Question. Is the Air Force concentrating on one type of plane, or is it broadening its field? Answer. For air defense we have the F-80, F-94, and the F-86 as interceptors. The F-89 is also a newcomer in this field. The F-80, as you know, is the interceptor plane which was used in Korea. It gets up in the air fast, is maneuverable, but has short range. That's what an interceptor is. The F-80 has been in Korea and that's the oldest jet plane that we have, and it ts getting older. Now the F-86, which we sent out there is the newest of our interceptors, but present operational models are day interceptors. That is to say, tt is not all Alled up with radar to enable it to operate at night; and it's a one-seater plane. We have a so-called all-weather inter- ceptor which is called the F-94 which is in ‘use, and that ts full of radur, has great climb- ing capnbility, and can function at night. Our objective is to get the whole interceptor fleet all-weather, and none of the planes limited to operate only by daytime. Parenthetically, we're doing the same thing with radar in this air defense—we're get- ting modern radar in just o8 fast as we can and we're expanding the radar coverage. Question Is radar effective in any event? Answer. Radar is simply a method of try- ing to see things—our present radar is a dl. rect line of sight and can’t curve around the earth or go through it, so therefore it's gov- erned by the curvature of the earth. Rough- ly speaking, 126 to 160 miles is about all you APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD can see, and you can figure what that is with the speed of modern planes. For ex- ample, if a plane is going only 375 miles an hour—that’s only 20 minutes. THE RADAR SCREEN Question. About a month ago there was gome discussion of this so-called radar screen—that a lot of civillans would be brought in as spotters, and that sort of thing. Will there be less emphasis now on that? Answer. No; there is going to be more em- phasis. Up to the fiscal 1950 budget we didn’t have enough money to build a sys- tem of radar which covered the entire area of the United States from the west coast to the east const. While we have got that money, we are building that whole set of radar, which for convenience you may call a screen. We also have made arrangements for the development of radar in Alaska and elsewhere, for the obvious reason that we want to know and be able to track these planes as they come in. There are two jobs that radar does. One is that it acts just to locate incoming planes and shows where they are, and the second job is what is known as GCI—ground-con- trol intercept—which guides our own inter- ceptor up, and shows him where the enemy plane is. There is increased concentration now on radar. Question Did you say everything is cov- ered, or everything will be covered? Answer Will be fairly well covered when it 1s complete, and construction will be rea- sonably complete within the continental United States sometime this year. Question. What would be the chance, roughly, of spotting an enemy plane after the screen is built? Would you be quite sure of spotting it, or fairly sure? Answer. You would be fairly sure of spot- ting it. But the answer of whether you would spot it in time ts another question. Of course, this is a game of the offensive versus the detensive, and this is a defen- sive Job, and the other side, of course, is planning methods of mixing up our radar and putting it out of commission not only by physical attack but by various electronic measures. And in that battle I should say that we are reasonably sure of seeing enemy Planes coming over. Your questions reveal to me that you are placing a degrce of rellance on the radar and the antiaircraft and the interceptors which I think is unjustified. I think you expect that defense system to be able really to stop everything. Question. That's what the American peo- ple believe, isn’t it? Answer. The point that I want to make en- tirely clear is they can’t do it. If you asked Me what percentage of enemy bombers are going to be knocked down I would have to say it depends on the warning, not from the radar but from the other circumstances. If, for example, the political stuation were such that we knew an enemy was about to attack and everybody was out there sitting on pins and needles with their eyes glued to the scope and all that sort of thing, that’s one state of affairs, and the other state of affairs is where an attack would creep in unexpectedly, and that makes an awful lot of difference. But even if you take the first condition—a condition of complete alertness, with every- body waiting, you cannot completely stop an enemy bomber attack—a certain percent- age is going to get through and that certain percentage could be very large. WARNING PLUS SPOT DEFENSE Question. Is our system of defense s fence round the country, or a group of islands around the cities? Answer. Both—what you call the “fence,” which is for the purpose of getting warning at the earliest availablo moment that enemy
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD planes attack us, and also a series of spot defenses at strategic points. Question. Thay're more likely to come from the north across the Atlantic? Answer. They wouldn't come across the Atlantic. Question. Will the Alaskan radar be com- pleted this year? Answer. No, it will not. follow along next year. Question. You mentioned, Mr. Secretary, the “unconventional” methods of air de- fense, and guided missiles as one item—can you say anything about other possibilities? Answer. This condition of affairs that I’ve just described, about the lack of ability of the conventional air-defense systems to stop something, obviously makes your mind jump to another conclusion, which is: Well, we've got to do something really drastic here, And all I can tell you is that that is very firmly in our minds and we are trying to do something about it. Question. If we can't stop an enemy at- tack, by the same token they couldn't stop one of ours, could they? Answer. That’s right. Question. Are we better able to attack them than they are to attack us? Answer. Yes Remember, I said there were three things—air defense, strategic alr and tactical air. Now we move into the realm of strategic air. And I would like to get off a couple of basic facts about this strategic air, before we get down into tech- nical details. Air defense is indispensable—we've got to do the best we can. But I don't think the amount of losses that we could cause is going to stop anybody from starting a war, Now when we get to tactical air, you’ll see that that is part of the ground job and that isn’t a complete deterrent because usually the aggressor figures he can lick the other fellow on the ground. But this strategic air really could be a very serious defense for us, because strategic air is, of course, the air that takes the atom bomb and strikes at the enemy's heart, and the violence and destructiveness of that thing are really catast:ophic. After all, look at what happened at Hiro- shima and Nagasaki and think that that was two bombs And think what can be done with a greater number, a very much greater number of these weapons, and you have something which really raises the ques- tion as to whether any civilization cun take it and survive. And our potential enemies know that And obviously they are going to, I think, think several times before they move against that sort of thing. So that, politically, strategic air is the thing which has the real possibility in my opinion of making an enemy think before he hits us, and thereby giving us a breathing spell by which we may be able to work out some way of not destroying ourselves in a third world war. That's the political side of the thing, and 1 want to emphasize vhat very atrongly. It's | peculiar business, gentlemen, to be spending your time working with such & horribly destructive operation, and I can’t tell you how destructive it can be, both ways. But the only thing that makes 1t bearable is the fact that it may be the one thing which will take this terribly serious international situation that we have, and provide the stimulus which may make men really get together and use their brains and not de- stroy each other. And that is the cardinal political point, In my opinion. B-36 CAN GET THROUGH Question. If we do have to attack in self- defense, can the B-36 get through? Answer. Yes; I think it can. Now, to get to the technique of the stra- tegic air, we have two types of planes in the main—the intercontinental bomber, the B-36, and the medium bombers, which are The Alaskan will now the B-29 and the B-50. The B-50, as you know, is the development of the B-29, We are trying to improve our medium bomb- er fleet, because all three of those planes I've just mentioned have piston engines and, therefore, are relatively slow, in modern terms. We want to speed them up. And the B- 36's have already had four Jets added to them in the new models. Question. They are for a certain short range, aren't they? Answer. No; it’s not one of these jet as- sists; this is a real jet engine which can be used for extra speed or power whenever needed And then we're doing the same thing with a medium bomber. We're con- centrating on the B-47, which is a swept- back-wing plane. The present model has six jets in it and is very much faster than any other bomber. Question Dves it have range? Answer. Yes. Question Is it faster than anything else we have, or faster than anything else any- body else has? Answer. It’s the fastest bomber we know of in the world. Question Does it compare with the B-50? Answer, It’s a medium bomber like the B-50. Question. It can carry the atom bomb? Answer. Yes. The strategic air fleet must be able to. BASES ABROAD NFEDED Question. You would need bases in other places besides the United States? Answer. Yes; we would, because the me- dium bombers are not intercontinental, on the same terms as the B-36. And we are also working, but at a much earler stage of development, on the B-52, which is a much bigger B-47 and would be intercontinental, and we're buying two prototypes of that. It’s a superb new plane. I scrambled around one che other day at ‘he factory. Question. Can you tell us how soon we could deliver bombs after we were attacked? Answer. You want to know the amount of time it would take to mount the offensive? Question. Yes. Answer, I assure you nothing is receiving more careful attention than the readiness of the strategic air offensive and of our defense, Question. So. we hrven't wasted our money and time on the B-36? Answer. We certainly have not. Bt, on the other hand, don’t think the B-36 is the strategic bomber to end all strategic bomb- ers It isn't. Already we've got the B-29 and the B-50 working with it, and already we're trying to mae all of those planes just as fast as we possibly can. Question. But at this time has the B-36 turned out a wise investment? Answer Absolutely. I think that to have relied exclusively on the medium bombers both as a deterrent and a force for victory would have been a most improvident thing. Question With respect to Korea there has been a feeling in various quarters that the Air Force has fallen down somewhat; is that justitied? . Answer. Now we're moving into the third phase, tactical air. Question. But that isn’t quite tactical— wasn't there a strategic problem there? Answer. No, there wasn't any real strate- gic problem in its true sense in Korea. We were bound by two ground rules there; one is—oh, by all sorts of ground rules—one was that you couldn’t go beyond a certain terri- tory, the Yalu River; secondly, that you couldn’t use your heavy weapons, and, third, that you weren't really in all-out war, The atrategic air force is such a serious bsi- ness that you don’t bring it into play un- less you are in all-out war, And this thing in Korea is not all-out war. Question. So you really didn’t bring strate. gic air into 1t? A1373 Answer. Not in the way we would in all- out war. Our policy has been to kcep the bulk of strategic air here. But we did have some medium bombers out there which did some strategic bombing and assisted in a job that tactical airplanes could have done, Korea was essentially a tactical job. Tactical air is, of course, the job that you do with the Army. And it has three main purposes: First of all, it is necessary to get air superiority. It must achieve the condition that we had on D-day and afterward in Normandy, where our planes were the planes that dominated the air, and which was just the reverse of the situation in 1940, say, when the German Stukas were climbing down everybody's neck. That's the first thing, to get air superiority. The second thing ts the job of interdic- tion, which ts to try to knock out the stuff coming up along the roads-~-knock out the locomotives, the bridges, and all thut sort of thing and try to interfere with the sup- ples that are coming from the main con- centration point. Back of that, the strate- gic air is trying to knock out the sources of all of these things. But the tactical atr is trying to interdict their coming up to the battlefront—to isolate the battle- fields. And then the third function of tactical air is close support of the ground forces— right in front of them—knock out. pillboxes, knock out artillery and all that sort of thing, knock out anything that is shooting at the ground forces. HELPING THE ARTILLERY Question It’s doing an artillery job, really? Answer, Well, doing a superartillery job, if you will, I don’t think it is fair to say that the artillery alone should do that, be- cause the air ought to be able to help the artillery. Let me repeat—there are three things: Get uir superiority, one; do the interdiction or isolation job, two; and the close support, three. There has been a lot of talk about this tactical-alr thing since Korea, that either the thing has been done terribly badly, or terribly well, and so forth. And sometimes the charge was that the Alr Force has neg- Jected it in favor of strategic air. I think I have said what I think of the cardinal importance of strategic air. And this is not to say that we don't need tactical air, too. But it must grow apace with the Army and 1t must grow in partnership with the Army, And wo are working in partnership with the Army. Secretury Pace (of the Army) and myself, General Collins and General Van- denberg are working jointly and coopera- tively on this question of tactical air, and we are working out our plans for the future, The Dispersal Bill EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. J. HARRY McGREGOR OF OHIO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 13, 1951 Mr. McGREGOR. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following radio ad- dress made by me over the NBC network, Friday, March 9, 1951: I am glad to have the opportunity to dis- cuss with you the dispersal bill before the Public Works Committee of the House of Representatives authorizing a program pro- viding for construction of Federal buildings
A1374 outside of but in the vicinity of and acces- sible to tho District of Columbta. This bill authorizes the Administrator of Ceeneral Services to acquire sites located out- side ot the District of Columbia and to con- struct eight buildings to house Federal em- picyees at an expenditure of €100,000,000, ‘the Public Buildings and Grounds Subcom- mittee amended this bill to authorize only $145,000,000, cost of constructing of six butidings, including utilities, roads, high- ways, et cetera, and made an unfavorable re- port to the full committee. Yam worried over the continually increas- ing taxes and ever-mounting number of ci- viltan employees of the Federal Government, and Y am definitely opposed to any unneces- sary expenditures. Our Petention was called to the fact that the civilian employment in the executive branch of the Federal Government increased by 60,594 during the month of January, bringing the total employment to 2,245,275. ‘This increase, averaging approximately 2,000 n day, nearly doubled the daily average in- crease of approximately 1,000 a day during the last quarter tn the calendar year 1950. The Military Establishment increased civilian employment during January by 58,- 388. This was a ratio of $ civilians for every 4 men called in the 80,000 January draft quota. Civilian employment in the Military Establishment totaled 1,046,820, passing the 1,000,000 mark for the first time since December 1946. The civilian employ- ment by the executive branch, outside the Military Establishment, totaled 1,198,446 tn January, an increase of 2,206 over December, These figures are summarized from reports from 67 agencies as submitted to the joint committee on the reduction of nonessen- tlal Federal expenditures. Payroll costs necessarily lag a month be- hind employment figures, so I will give you these for December instead of January. Ct- villan employment in the executive branch totaled 2,184,681; the payroll was running at an annual rate of $7,950,000,000 which, with pay-rate increases to be taken into account, may be compared with the annual rate of $2,300,000,000 at the peak of World War IT. I fully realize many Federal employees are needed and many are doing a good job, giving dollar service for the dollar received. However, I belleve that we have many on th Federal payrcl! who are not essential and who are not rendering the service for which they are paid. With this thought !n mind, I feel we should call a halt to increasing Federal pay- rous with employees not absolutely essential to our war effort, and removing from the payroll those not giving the service required. We have requests every day from the herds of the various departments of our Govern- ment for more personnel. We, as Congresa- men, do not have the office help nor the time to investigate all of these requests, with the result, our Federal employment is increasing ab T have shown in actual figures given nbove. If dispersal is necessary to protect our Gove ernment and to prevent it from being de- stroyed, the removal of fringe agencies and commissions connected with the Govern- ment will scarcely be adequate, because the main departments of Government will be left in the same concentrated situation, in the same spot, in the District of Columbia. The Department of the Intetlor could be moved from the District of Columbia and set up to tunction in the interior part of the country. The Department of Labour does not necessarily have to be located in Wash- ington. The Department of Agriculture could be placed in a different location and sttll function as it does today. Of course, the heads of these Departments could have thetr offices in Washington to be available to the President and the Congress, but the entire department does not have to be o- cated here It would be difficult to move the Department of State and the Department of the Treasury away from Washington but the Departments already mentioned, in addi- tion to others, might well be situated in other parts of the country. This is an idea which has nut been discussed but it might well be developed into a 10-year plan for the general benefit of everyone concerned. By separating these great Departments of Government, a measure of security to our main Government organization would be brought about and it would be more difficult for an enemy to destroy it. Now the question arises just what we are going to do about it I do not criticiae the General Services Administration as 1 feel Commissioner Reynolds of the Public Bulld- ings Service under this agency is most sin- cere in his endeavors to hold down expenses, but it is his duty to furnish office space de- manded to house additional personnel brought into our Federal Government. How- ever, we are faced with the facts, wand with taxes as they are, with programs dealing directly with the war effort, and with our Indebtedness In excess of $260,000,000,000 it is time we carefully analyze any additional expenditures. The dispersa] bill, in my opinion, should not be passed until a careful study is com- pleted and a determination made on what agencies can be moved out from the area of Washington where rental costs and construc- tion costs are so high. The buildings that are requested in this legislation are supposed to house approxi- mately 45,000 workers. I feel that we should know the number of Federal employees that can be moved to other sections of the coun- try and determine what office space might be available by suth dispersal or decentralt- zation before we are called upon to furnish additional buildings. Washington ts congested and this conges- tion is due to the many agencies of the Government recently created and the plain fact 1s that this dispersal program ts put forward in order to make room for more Government employees The dispersal subject is not new to us who have served in Congress a number of years as it has been presented to us on many ocea- sions, but now it is submitted by stressing the possibility of an atomic attack. I per- sonally feel that these reasons are simply & camoufiage for the construction of new office building space The removal of these fringe agencies to centers 10 to 20 miles from the District of Columbia will only tend to add to the ex- pansion of the area now occupied by the Nation's Capital. The city of Washington, made possible by the generosity of the States of Virginia and Maryland, occupies 8 10- mile-square area and if the agencies of Gov- ernment are moved out only 10 to 20 miles away, it means that a greater area will be occupied by Federal Government agencies and the States of Maryland and Virginia will be contributing 1n a larger measure to that expansion. In many instances no reve- nue is received from Government-owned lands and bulldings and the same problems wit! be developed in these proposed areas which now exist in the Distriot of Columbta which requires 3 substantial cash contribu- tion from the Federal Government tn order to meet the expenses of maintaining the ex- pected facilities, TJ the event of an attack no one knows where the bomh would fall. The target might be 20 miles as well as 2 miles from the Capitol, and I ratse the question if we are to protect the 45,000 workers that would be in the new buildings requested, what would be done with the other Federal employees that are not so protected. None of these buildings are to be occupied by military units, legislative units, judicial units, or executives in high places in this adminis- tration. If the workers of six or eight agen- Ctes are to be protected, the question arises as to the protection of their families, If APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD a bomb dropped in a residential section, fathers and mothers would immediately do everything in their power to get home to learn what effect it had on the lives of their children and their property. Should we attempt to protect the workers in the six or eight new buildings, what are we to do about the workers in other departments in the District. of Columbia and in depart- ments possibly more essential to our Govern- ment which are scattered throughout this Nation, in Chicago, Detroit, or in other ch os. I feel those people \ ould have a right to ask for the same protection because & person working in Washington is not en- titled to preierential treatment over those working in other areas for the same Federal Government, The transportation problem must, also be given sertous consideration. If the bridges or arterial highways leading to these proj- ects were destroyed by bambs, access to them would be practically impossible. These are but a few examples of changes that would be made without hindering the efficiency of our Government’s operation, Therefore, I believe that the cry that these buildings are needed because of the threat of an attack carries very little weight. So, the question arises arc we going to construct buildings costing $190,000,000, con- tinue putting civilians on the payroll, forc- ing an increase in Government expenditures, which would result in either increased taxes and/or increased national debt. May I call to your attention a statement made by Lenin, the Russian dictator who said: “Some day we will force the United States to spend itself into destruction.” I am wondering if this terrible prophecy is coming true. Seaway “Economy” Blasted EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. DANIEL J. FLOOD OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 13, 1951 Mr. PLOOD. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- ORD, I include the following editorial that appeared in the Times-Leader, the Eve- ning News, of Wilkes-Barre, Pa., on Tuesday, February 13, 1951: Sraway “Economy” BLASTED At this writing there are known to be 914,600,000 tons of ore tn Minnesota. The owners are paying taxes on thts quantity, There are 146,000,000 tons in Michigan and 6,000,000 tons in Wisconsin—ea grand total of 1,066,000,000 tons. If we use this at the wartime (1941-45) average of 84,000,000 tons, there is only an apparent 12% years’ supply. In the spring of 1920 the apparent reserves of Lake Superior ore were 1,647,000,000 tons. Since that time 1,686,000,000 tons were shipped, and there are still a proven 1,066,- 060,009 tons In the ground. Thus, while we shipped 1,686,000,000 tons, the depletion of apparent reserves was only 481,000,000 tons. To put it another way, for every ton shipped only 0 28 of a ton disappeared from the re- serves. This is the story from 1920 to 1959. Looking at only the postwar years, Mny 1, 1945, to May 1, 1949, the apparent reserves dropped from 1,186,053,378 to 1,116,069,0538 tons, or 69,904,320 tons but in those 4 years 301,700,000 tons were shipped, or 0.23 tun joss of reserves per ton consumed. There sre two excellent reasons for what seems to be a statistical paradex. The first is that there are thousands of acres of land
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD that in every probability contain ore but which has not been proven by drilling be- cause any deposits thus proven would be- come taxable. Tax-forfeited and other State lands contain substantial deposits paying no taxes and, consequently, are not enumerated as part of the reserves. Secondly, there are unknown ore beds beneath higher proven deposits. They come to light only after the upper material has been mined Because of these two situations there are millions of tons of ore added, every year, to the list of reserves. Not listed in the U. S A. reserves are the Steep Rock deposits 40 miles north of the Canadian border where drillings and the most conservative of estimates indicute a minimum of 300,000,000 tons of very good ore. There are at least 100,000,000 tons in the Michipicoter area at the east end of Lake Superior. Added up, these apparent reserves total 1,466,000,000 tons. We may conservatively assume the discovery of one- halt ton of new ore for every ton shipped in- stead of the three-fourths of a ton found in the past On this basis we have 2,199,- 000,000 tons of ore reserves which will last 23 years with shipments as high as 96,600,000 tons per year, or 15 percent above the World War II average. Along with all of this direct loading ore there is, at or near the ground surface, many billions of tons of taconite A plant is now reducing this basic ore to a product con- taining 64 percent iron and possessing highly advantageous properties In blast and open hearth furnace operations, The plant cost is 815 per ton of capacity, The only ulti- mate limit in producing ore by this process is the amount of investment funds and the eapacity of luke boats to move the product, The use of processed taconite will substan- tially increase the output of pig tron blast turnace-hour, which would make possible much added steel output without building a single new blast furnace If the St. Lawrence seaway 1s built, this country and Canada will have to spend a billion dollars for a facility that will have annually only eight or ten millon tons of Labrador ore to handle, which is an invest- ment of $100 to $125 per ton of ore. It would be far less expensive in terms ol capt- tal, labor, and critical materials to expand our ore output by building taconite proc- essing plants—United States facilities for United States ore. instead of a Canadian waterway for Labrador ore—and obtain a product of much greater value in the blast furnace. Faith in the Principles for Which Men Fight—Address by the President of the United States EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. CLYDE DOYLE OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, March 7, 1951 Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I am hon- ored to call the attention of all the Mem- bers of this great legislative body to the address by the President of the United States, delivered at the dedication of the Chapel of the Four Chaplains at Phila- delphia, Pa., on February 3, 1951. Granting, Mr. Speaker, that many Members of this Congress have prob- ably heretofore read much of this ad- dress by the President, I am, neverthe- less, hopeful that my calling the full text to the attention of all the Members will make it so easily available that the read- ing of it will be of great value to all. Certainly the opinions of fhe President of the United States on this important subject are always of value to those who vigorously, vigilantly place the welfare of the Nation ahead of petty partisan- ship or petty political advantage or disadvantage. Accompanying the President’s speech are two other documents which I feel are of great value to all the Members of Congress and to all American citizens, to wit: First, The Strategy of Freedom, an address by Secretary of State Ache- son, which was broadcast from Wash- ington to the National Council of Churches of Christ in the United States at its annual meeting at Cleveland, Ohio, on November 29, 1950. This will be fea- tured in another extension of my re- marks of this date. Second, Assurance of World Security Through American Leadership, remarks, by Gen Dwight D. Eisenhower, Supreme Allied Com- mander, Europe, in a broadcast from Washington on February 2, 1951. This speech by this distinguished American will also be found in my remarks of this date These speeches by these three Ameri- can leaders, taken together and read to- gether, should be of inestimable value to conscientious, patriotic American citizens The speech by the President of the United States follows: Fairu In THE PRINCIPLES FoR WHICH MEN FIGHT—ADDRESS BY THE PRESIDENT? This chapel commemorates something more than an act of bravery or courage It commemorates a great act o1 faith in God. The four chaplains in whose memory this shrine was bullt were not required to give their lives as they did. They gave their lives without being asked When their ship was sinking they handed out all the life preservers that were available and then took off their own and gave them away in order that four other men might be saved. Those four chuplains actually carried out the moral code which we are all supposed to live by They obeyed the divine command-~ ment that men should love one another. They really lived up to the moral standard that declares: “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man Jay down his life for his friends.” They were not afraid of death because they knew that the word of God 1s stronger than death. Their belief, their taith, in His word enabled them to conquer death. This is an old faith in our country. It is shared by all our churches and all our de-~ nominations. These four men represented the Protestant, the Catholic, and the Jewish beliefs, Euch of these bellets teaches that obedience to God and love tor one's fellow man are the greatest and strongest things in the world. We must never forget that this country was founded by men who came to these shores to worship God as they pleased. Cath- olics, Jews, and Protestants—-all came here for this great purpose They did not come here to do as they pleased—but to worship God as they pleased, and that is an important distinction. The unity of our country comes from this fact. The unity of our country ts a unity 4 Delivered at the dedication of the Chapel of the Four Chaplains at Philadelphia, Pa., on February 3 and released to the press by the White House on the same date. A1375 under God. It is a unity in freedom, for the service of God is the perfect freedom If we remember our faith in God, !f we live by it as our forefathers did, we need have no fear for the future. Today, many people have become fearful. If we reaffirm our common faith we can overcome these fears This does not mean that we can always be sure what the future will bring. We cannot always know what the outcome of events will be. As President Lincoln once said: “The Almighty has His own purposes ” But we need not be afraid of the out- come if we go on trying to do the right thing as God gives us to see the right RULE OF LAW IN WORLD TODAY That is what we are trying to do tn the world today. We are trying to establish world peace, so that all men can ve to- gether in brotherhood and in freedom. And to do that, we are working with other na- tions to create the rule of law in the world. What does this rule of law mean? Let me give you an example. In the eurly duys of our western frontier, law and order were not yet established. Disputes were settled in favor of the man who was quickest on the draw. Outlaws terrorized whole com- munities. Men who wanted to see Jaw and order pre- vail had to combine against the outlaws. They had to arm themselves. At times, they had to fight. After they had put down law- Jess violence, the courts took over and jus- tice was established And, then, it was pose sible for all citizens to get on with the important work of building up their own communities, paving the streets and hulld- ing new schools, and giving all people a chance at the right kind of life This is just what woe are trying to do to- day in the International fleld. If we can put a stop to international aggression, order can be established and the people of the world can go nhead full speed with the construce tive tasks of peace. We are not trying to do this job by our- selves. We could not do it by ourselves if we tried. We ure acting as one member of a whole community of nations dedicated to the concept of the rule of law in the world. As in all other communities, the members of this community of nations have many dif- ferent tdeas and interests and do not all speak with one voice. Some are cautious and some are impatient We cannot always have our own way in this community. But we have a tremendous responsibility to lead and not to hang back. Fate has made this country a leader in the world. We shirked our responsibility tn the 1920's. We cannot shirk it now. We must assume that responsibility now, and it will take everything we have—all the brains and all the resources that we can mobilize. Leadership carries with it heavy responsi- bilities. Good leaders do not threaten to quit if things go wrong. They expect co- operation, of course, and they expect every- one to do his share, but they do not stop to measure sacrifices with a teaspoon while the fight is on. . We cannot lead the forces of freedom from behind. RESTRAINING AGGRESSION The job we fnce is a hard one, Perhaps, it will be harder in the few years immediately ahead than it will be in the years thereafter. If we can get over the present crisis success~- fully—if we can restrain aggression before it bursts out into another world war, then things will be easter in the future. And I think we can do this. We can't be sure, of course, but there is good reason to hope for Buccess. In recent months, the United Nations has been faced by a serious challenge. But it is meeting that challenge courageously, and it
A1376 is stiJl man’s best hope of establishing the rule of law in the world. General Eisenhower has brought home the report that the people of Europe, in spite of their diMculties and their many problems, want to preserve their freedom. He has told us of the effort they are making. They ure working very hard, and, if we all work to- gether, we cun be succcasful. When things lovuk hard, there are always @ lot of people who want to quit. We had people like that in the Revolutionary War, and we have them in every war and every crisis of our history. Thomas Paine called them the summer soldiers and sunshine patriots. If we had Mstened to them, we would never have been a free and independ- ent nation. We would never have had a strong and prosperous country. We would not be strong enough now to stand up against Communist aggression and tyranny. The sacrifices that are being made today by the men and women of this country are not being made in vain, Our men are in Ko-. rea because we ore trying to prevent a world- wide war. The men who have died in Korea, have died to save us from the terrible slaughter and destruction which another world war would surely bring. Their sacrifices ure being made in the spirit of the four chaplains, to whose memory this chapel is dedicated. They are being made in defense of the great religious faiths which make this chapel @ place of worship. These sacrifices are being made for the great- est things in this life, and for the things beyond this life. I have falth that the great principle for which our men are fighting will prevail. The Strategy of Freedom—An Address by Secretary of State Acheson EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. CLYDE DOYLE OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, March 7, 1951 Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, this day I have inserted in the CONGRESSIONAL Record an address by the President of the United States entitled “Faith in the Principles for Which Men Fight,” which was delivered at the dedication of the Chapel of the Four Chaplains at Phila- delphia, Pa., on February 3, 1951. The President’s speech appears on another page of this daily ConargssionaL REcorD, and I respectively call the attention of yourself and of my colleagues thereto, for I feel it and the address by Secretary of State Acheson, which follows, should be read together: Tre STRATEGY OF FREEOOM—ADDRESS BY SECRETARY ACHESON ' T regret that T have not been able to come out to Cleveland to meet with the National Council of Churches, as I had hoped to do, and that it has boen necessary for me to talk to you instead from my office at the State Department in Washington. The events of the past few days, as I know you well under~ stand, raise innumerable questions which ree ‘Broadcast from Washington to the Na« tional Council of Churches of Christ in the United States, which was meeting at Cleve- land, on November 29 and released to the press on the same date Also available as De- partment of State Publication 4084. quire almost hourly study, consultation, and decision. This coming together of many grent sources of spirisual strength in our American community is an event of historic impor- tance, If ever a time imposed a test, not alone of strength, but of character, upon our people, this 1s such a time. All the re- sources at our command, of wisdom, of con- science, of character; the finest traditions of our people; our deepest wells of faith, must guide us in fulfilling the responsibility which history has placed upon our country. The great increase in the power and the ef- fectiveness of the Christian communions which are now uniting to form the National Council of Churches will encourage millions Of people throughout the world. The remarks that I had planned to make this evening were prepared several days ago. I had planned to discuss with you some of the basic problems, some of the underlying issues which concern us in our relation- ship with the world. I know, from the long record of intelligent and responsibie participation which your separate organiza- tions have had in foreign policy matters, that you have given much serlous thought to these issues. I had not planned to dis- cuss current day-to-day developments on this occasion, But now a serious situation has arisen, one which holds grave danger for the peace of the world. AN ACT OF BRAZEN AGGRESSION I would like to talk to you about the mean- ing of this situation which has been created in Korea, before going on to discuss some of the broader questions I had in mind to raise with you this evening. An act of brazen aggression has taken place in Korea, the second such act in 6 months. The harsh significance of this act, and its complete disregard of any kind of moral standard, can best be understood when it is looked at against a background of what the United Nations has been trying to do in Korea. First of all, the United Nations itself rep- resents a commitment on the part of the nations of the world that they will stand together in support of an international order based on justice and dedicated to the peace- ful settlement of disputes. The first article of the first chapter of the Charter of the United Nations says that one of the pri- mary purposes of the Organization is to sup- press acts of aggression. That is why, when the armed forces of North Korea, without any pretense of legality attacked the Re- public of Korea on June 25, the overwhelm- ing majority of the members of the United Nations supported immediate and effective action by force to put down this act of ag- Gression. For the first time in history, a world organization has rallied to put down by force of arms a crime committed against the international community. The only exception to the unity of this action in support of the Charter was the Soviet Union and its satellites. In defiance of the 58 member nations who upheld the authority of the United Nations, the Soviet Union sought to impede the action in Korea, to give aid and comfort to the aggressors, to give matériel support to the act of ag- gression, and to break up by obstructive acts the work of the United Nations. Despite this defiant behavior, this tremendous ex- periment, tn behalf of international law and morality, went forward. Across vast seas and from distant lands, men of many nattons came together under the flag of the United Nations to push back the invaders. They came to fight for a principle. Many of them have given their lives that men someday may be free of this scourge of war. After many discouraging weeks, the United Nations forces, under the command of Gen- eral MacArthur, made their way up the pen- insula, driving the aggressors before them. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD They were approaching the successful con- clusion of their mission, which was to en- able the United Nations to carry out what has been its purpose from the very begin- ning—to help the people of Korea establish their own free and independent government, Plans were moving forward in the General Assembly for the reconstruction of the coun- try, and the nations which had contributed forces to this heroic effort were looking for- ward to the return of their troops to their home countries upon completion of their mission. Then came this second shocking act of aggression. This is not merely another phase of the Korean campaign. This is a fresh and unpiovoked aggressive act, even more immoral than the first. CHINESE COMMUNIST INTERVENTION IN NORTH KOREA Even before the attack in June, the Com- munist authorities in China had aided in butlding up the forces of the North Koreans, This was done by turning over Korean soldiers in their own armies and by munt- tions and supplies. The Chinese also moved some of their own armies from South China to Manchuria. After the North Korean at- tack started, more matériel and fresh soldiers came across the Manchurian border in greater and greater numbers. After the North Korean defeat the cloak of pretense became thinner. Chinese military forma- tions were moved into Korea under the guise of volunteers. Now, no possible shred of doubt could have existed in the minds of the Chinese Communist authorities about the intentions of the forces of the United Nations. Re- peatedly, and from the very beginning of the action, it had been made clear that the sole mission of the United Nations forces was to repel the aggressors and restore to the people of Korea their independence. In behalf of the TInited States, President Truman declared that it is the intention of this country to localize the confiict and to withdraw {ts forces from Korea as s00n 48 possible. In the Security Council, this Gov- ernment wag one of the sponsors of a pro- posed resolution which affirmed that the policy of the United Nations was to hold the Chinese frontier with Korea inviolate, and that legitimate Chinese and Korean inter- ests In the frontier gone would be fully protected, The peaceful nations of the world made it unmistakably clear that if the Chinese Com- munist intervention had a limited motiva- tion, if it sprang from an uncertainty ree garding the intentions of the United Nations forces, the matter could be settled without enlarging the conflict. But, at the very moment when representa- tives of these Chinese Communist authori- ties appeared at the headquarters of the United Nations, claiming the right to speak before this world organization in the name of the Chinese people, the cloak of pretense had been thrown off. In great force, the armies of the Chinese Communists have streamed across the Manchurian border, en- gaging the forces of the United Nations tn a new encounter. Against these new, fresh, and numerous forces, our United Nations troops are fighting bravely. But the condi- tions are difficult; terrain and weather, long lines of supply, and the wear of an arduous campaign have been met with heroic forti- tude. UNITED NATIONS NOT INTIMIDATED BY NEW CRISIS We have had dark days before In Korea, When the first wave of aggression, with the advantage of initiative which the aggressors always have, had driven us back to the bridgehead of Pusan, and the outlook was not bright, the UN forces showed no weakness of spirit or of determination because they were fighting for a principle. And I am confident, too, that the United Nations will not be
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD found lacking in firmness of spirit or deter- mination in responding to this new aggres- sion. The United Nations has a special relation- ship with the people of Korea. It has re- solved to help the people of Korea establish a free and independent government of their own choosing. It has helped them to set up an independent republic which, had it not been for the veto of the Soviet Union, would today be @ sovereign member of this world organization. The United Nations cannot be intimidated by this new challenge to its au- thority Into shaking off its responsibilities to the people of Korea. Now this new act of aggression has created @ new crisis, a situation of unparalleled danger. For if the Chinese Communist authorities continue to impose upon their people this warring against the United Nations, they will vastly increase the danger to the whole fabric of world peace. And among the tragedies of this reckless course would be that it would spring from no in- terest of China or the Chinese people. If these Chinese Communist authorities have any real concern for the well-being of their people or for the regard of other nations, they now have the opportunity to show It, This is their hour of decision. The authori- ties of Communist China stand before the bar of the judgment of mankind. The world will watch their actions In Korea and at Lake Success. Will they represent their own interests, or will they 1:t themselves be the dupes of others? If they defy the United Nations and mock the Charter, then no lies, no bluster, and no veto will conceal from the people of the world the evil of their action. These are questions that affect all the members of the United Nations. The United States has no special intcrests or interests different from those of the majority. From the very beginning of the Korean crisis, the United States has sought complete solidar- ity with the majority of members. ‘WORLD ENDANGERED BY COMMUNIST DESIGN The questions raised by these acts of ag- gression in Korea go tar beyond the contours of this small and remote peninsula. They have to be viewed as part of a world picture. ™o be fully understood, they must be seen as part of the world-wide operations of the international Communist movement The increasing boldness of the international Communist movement, tts willingness to use overt aggression, and to accept the deliber- ate risk uf war make it increasingly urgent for all American citizens to face squarely the danger that confronts us and to give vigor- ous and united support to the measures we must take to meet this danger. Those who control the Soviet Union and the Interna- tional Communist movement have made clear their fundamental design. It 1s to hold and solidify thelr power over the people and territories within their reach, however ruthless the means required. The danger to the rest of the world created by this design arises out of the belief made amply clear in Bolshevist political writings that the holding of power by the rulers of the Soviet Union requires the complete subversion or forcible destruction of the countries now free of their control. They are encouraged to act on this belief by the illusion that, in go doing, they are helping along the inevi- table course of history. According to the Bolshevist interpretation, history points to the collapse of non-Soviet states and their replacement by Soviet-style and Soviet-con- trolled states. Conflict is anticipated in Bolshevist theory as an inevitable part of the process. The hostility of Soviet intentions, if taken alone, would not produce 80 grave a threat. But the combination of these intentions and Soviet military power creates very grave dan- ger to the survival of free nations and free XCVII—Arp.—— 87 institutions, a dunger which must not be underestimated. All governments which are now free and all responsible citizens of free societies must face, with a sense of urgency, the capabilities for conquest and destruction in the hands of the rulers of the Soviet Union. The problem we have been called upon to solve, therefore, is: What course of action will enable us to maintain our freedom and bring about a peaceful resolution of this world crisis, or if despite our best efforts, aggression does take place, will provide a basis for defeating it? Our essential purpose fs, as it has always been in our history, to preserve our free in- stitutions, so that freedom and justice may survive and continue to flourish. We wish to do this peacefully, because peace fs the climate in which our free institutions flour- ish best. But we have shown in our his- tory that we hold these values so dear that if we must fight, we will fight for them. The course of action we have chosen 1s to join with our allies in building the strength of the free world as a bulwark against Soviet aggression, The purpose of this strength is not aggression. It is the very opposite. It is to deter such aggression. This involves bullding military rtrength, but it requires no less the buttressing of all the other forms of power—economic, political, social, and moral—and the utmost resolution and unity among the free nations of the world, Over the period of time the rulers of the Soviet Union, confronted by a strong and confident free world, may be obliged to aban- don thelr expansionist alms. To build the strength of the free worid is a Nard course, It involves great effort and much saciifice both by our own people and by all the peuple of the free world. It offers no promise of relief from these burdens in the near future. It makes no guaranty of peace. But it is rooted in the principles by which we live, and It offers us the best realistic approach to the problem of peace and the preservation of our freedom. ELEMENTS IN STRATEGY OF FREEDOM The main elements of the strategy by which we are seeking to carry out this course of action—the strategy of freedom—are now well established as national policy. They have emerged as practical responses to the problems we have encountered, and they have found general support in the Nation. I want to try to bring these elements to- gether and develop their interrelationships because it is essential that the whole pat- tern and single purpose of our actions be clear to us, There are six main elements in the strat- egy of freedom. INTERNATIONAL ORDER FOR PRESERVATION OF PEACE AND FREEDOM First 1s the development of an interna- tional order for the preservation of peace and freedom under the United Nations The Charter of the United Nations expresses the universal aspirations of mankind, and the organization itself is a symbol! of these as- Pirations. But the United Nations is also more than a symbol. It is a means through which we can take practical, day-by-day steps toward the building of a stable in- ternational community. As an organization in which most nations participate, the United Nations can also help to bring about the accommodations of interest and the ad- justments of differences which are essential to peace in a world of change. Our action in Korea, as we have seen, is in- tended to support the authority of the United Nations against aggression. In the current session of the General Assembly, we have initiated a number of measures de- signed to increase the effectiveness of the United Nations action against aggression. We intend to do our full part in helping the United Nations to grow in strength. A1377 REGIONAL GROUPINGS FOR COLLECTIVE SFCURITY The second element tn the strategy of freedom is the development of regional groupings, within the framework of the United Nations. To insure thetr collective security, free nations are engaged in coop. erative defense measures, not possible on a universal basis at the present time. The keystone of the defense system of the free world is being built in the North Atlantic community, and among the states of the Western Hemisphere, A whole network of cooperative institu- tions has been developing among the free nations of the North Atlantic and Western European area, each a practical response to a felt need. The problems they face are extremely complex, but progress has been made toward overcoming ancient national hostilities, and In developing a common will and a sense of confidence in the potentiall- tics of the North Atlantic community, work- ing together as a community. In this hemisphere, the accomplishments of the Organization of American States in promoting unity of action have been re- markable. Support of this organization is fundamental to our policy. The essential ingredient in these regional developments has been a sense of community interest among neighbor nations. The de- velopment of further regional organizations depends in the first instance upon the exist- ence of this community sense among the people of other areas. RAPID BUILDING OF MILITARY STRENGTH The third element in our strategy of free- dom is the rapid butiding up of military strength at home and among our allies. I stress the word “rapid” because the period of greatest danger is directly before us. Our defense must not only be strong enough, it must come soon cnough. There is only one test of whether our de- fense preparations are adequate: That is io mensure them against a sober calculation of the danger which faces us. So mensured, the defense efforts of the United States and other free nations are inadequate A greatly increased scale and tempo of effort is required on the part of all free nations to enable them to over- come this inadequacy at the earlicst pos- sible moment. ECONOMIC COOPERATION The fourth element is economic coopera- tion. This has a dual chaiacter, It con- tiibutes powerfully to the building of our defenses against external attack. It also is an instrument for helping to build healthy societies in which the vitality and the prom. ise of freedom find practical expression—in comparison with which the decadence and despair of Communist tyranny is starkly ex- posed. Although the amount of resources availahie for economic assistance is limited by the de- Jense requirements imposed upon us by Soviet action, even under the burden or rearmament, free societies can more effec- tively provide for human well-being and ad- vancement than tyrannical regimes. The productive power of free men, who are awnre of the dangers that face them and who are determined to meet the challenge to their freedom, cannot be matched by authorita- rian societies. With our technical assistance, the resolve of the free peoples of Latin America, Asia, Africa, and the Middle East to better the conditions of their lives can become a pow- erful drive against the age-old banes of pov- erty and disease and the political instability which often accompanies them. Men every- where have awakened to the opportunities for progress which modern science and tech- nology have opened. We can help them to help themselves, and it ts in our Interest to do so.
A1378 Our technical assistance 1s not philan- thropy, for here our principles and our self- interest coincide. As the people of under- developed areas rise from poverty, not only will our own economy benefit, but also and even more important the real promise of freedom will expose the false promises of Bolshevik imperialism, and the peoples of these countries will grow in their recogni- tion of the common interest and purpose of the free nations, Bo far as possible, economic cooperation, like defense cooperation and collective secu~ rity programs, is being carried on through the United Nations and regional organiza~ tions in order to strengthen international institutions devoted to peace and security. READINESS TO NEGOTIATE SETTLEMENTS The fifth element in the strategy of free dom is a readiness at all times to negotiate just settlements of international disputes and to find just accommodations of conflict- ing interests Our experience has demon- strated that the Soviet rulers cannot be ex- pected to accept falr and equal negotiation so long as they feel capable of Imposing their own terms or exacting their own price. Their concept of negotiation 41s that it should re- cord the tacts of power rather than the re- quirements of justice, We shall not seek to ‘use our power in this way, but as the free world develops strength, the Soviet rulers may find it advantageous to adjust differ- ences equitably rather than to seek to im- pose their demands. The free nations must always be prepared to enter into genuine negotiations, and even to take the initiative in efforts to bring about honest negotiation. If the issues are clear, free men will not be prey to unrealistic expectations, nor to propaganda abuse of the negotiating process. It is in the long perspective that results may be expected, not in the fits and starts of shifting tactics. Because our earnest desire 18 peace we shall remain constantly receptive to genuine negotiation With the confidence that comes of strength and the humility that comes from our devotion to Christian prin- ciples, we shall be endlessly patient in works ing for peace. And we shall at the same time be endlessly alert to defend the bases of our nutional life. FIRM ADHERENCE TO MORAL VALUES The sixth element in the strategy of free- dom ts a firm adherence in all our actions, at home and abroad, to the moral values which give meaning to our lives, We are a young country, an enthusiastic people, and despite our great Interest in ma- terial progress, we are an idealistic nation, The principles to which our common life is dedicated are powerful forces for good in the world. The affirmative values of our society have been deeply inspiring to those who have seen and felt their great creative force. We do not always present our best side to the world. In our enthusiasm and drive we often do not take care to make ourselves understood, and expect others to recognize us for what we are. We have launched a greatly expanded information program to bring knowledge of ourselves to other peoples, a program which the Presi- dent has called the campaign of truth. It is our purpose to carry to all parts of the world the facts about what is happen- ing in America and in the world, because it is a fundamental part of our democratic taith that peoplo, if informed of the truth, will make sound judgments What Is even more important than what we say to the world is how we conduct ourselves at home and abroad. The force of example and ac- tion is the factor which finally determines what our influence is to be. If we are to be worthy of the leadership that derives from our power, we must be sure that we are true to the values and prin- ciples upon which our society is founded. It is the example of democracy at work, vigorous, healthy, respectful of its first principles, growing in freedom and justice and opportunity, that can inspire ourselves and others to meet the tasks ahead with hope and confidence. Without this, which depends on every one of us, on the everyday conduct of each citizen, the strategy of fredom would “be- come as sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal.” ALL AMERICANS RESPONSIBLE FOR PEACE These are the elements of our national foreign policy of the strategy of freedom. This is the course by which we seek to avoid war and to secure peace. No one can guar- antee that war will not come. The present crisis is extremely serious Whether reason will prevail is only partly for us to decide. We must hope and strive for the best while we prepare for the worst This is a responsibility, not just of a few public officials, not just of the Congress, but of the whole American people The qualities we must demonstrate—steadiness, moderation, restraint, constancy of purpose, and flexibility in action, imagination, wis- dom, maturity—these qualities are possible for us as a Nation only if the American people participate as individuals in striving to make our society worthy of the hopes that free men everywhere have placed in it A deep understanding of the forces we are dealing with, and the role we must play, must be acquired by each of us’ Every sin- gle individual has a share of this respon- sibility. The six elements of the Strategy of Free- dom, support of the United Nations, develop- ment of regional organizations, the rapid building up of our strength in partnership with our allies, economic cooperation, readi- ness to negotiate, and a firm adherence to the fundamental purposes and principles of our society, constitute a national policy, not a party policy. They have emerged from a long process of discussion and consideration as the practical requirements of a policy ade- quate to the problems which confront us. They are rooted in our traditions, They find general support in both parties It is right and proper that there should be differences of opinion among us about the execution of this policy, and about questions of emphasis, priorities, application and ad- ministration No one has a monopoly of wisdom and the vigor and vitality of a demo- cratic society derive from free discussion and debate and the consent which flows from un- Gerstanding However, vigorous our debates may be, it should be made clear to all that our country ts united in its determination to hew to the strategy of freedom which is our national policy. The Nation's peril is our challenge. The united will of the people must be our answer, Assurance of World Security Through American Leadership—Remarks by Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, Supreme Allied Commander, Europe EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. CLYDE DOYLE OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, March 7, 1951 Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I have this day inserted in the CoNGRESSIONAL Recorp an address by the President of APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the United States entitled “Faith in the Principals for Which Men Fight,” and also an address by Secretary of State Dean Acheson entitled “The Strategy of Freedom.” I am now privileged to call to the attention of all my colleagues in this Congress the radio remarks made by Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, Supreme Allied Commander of Europe, from Washington, D. C., on February %, 1951. These three important documents by these three Americans so recently made and on closely related subjects will surely add to the information and in- spiration of all who read them. The remarks by General Eisenhower follow: Assurance or Wortp Securiry THROUGH AMERICAN LEADERSHIP---REMARKS BY GEN. DwiaHt D EISENHOWER, SUPREME ALLIED COMMANDER, Eurore! As a soldier, I have been given an Allied assignment that directly concerns the secu- rity of the free world, with special reference to the countries bordering upon the North Atlantic Ocean I have approached the task, aiming at the good of the United States of America, conscious that a strong, solvent America is the indispensable foundation for a free world. While I have reached certain conclusions, the subj:ct of the free world’s security is 50 vast and complex that no man could hope to master its elements to the last critical item or, in a quarter hour, to answer all questions in his fellow citizens’ minds Consequently, though I speak to you out of deep conviction, I do so in all humility, trusting to your sympathetic consideration. Our hope remains the achievement of peace based on understanding and forebear- ance, the only sure foundation for peace We must never lose faith that such a peace can be ultimately established We seek such A peace, and no one can honestly interpret our current modest preparations otherwise. But we should examine the current situa- tion fearlessly and clearly, neither shutting our eyes to obvious dangers nor permitting fenr to warp our judgment. America's rec- ord and America’s strength certainly should prevent hysterical apprehension of the future Today we are faced by an aggressive impe- rlalism that has more than once announced its implacable hostility to free government. Therefore, we strive to erect a wall of secu- rity for the tree world behind which free institutions can live That wall must be maintained until Communist imperialism dies of its own inherent evils. NECESSITY FOR EFFECTIVE COOPERATION One of the great questions befure us 1s the will and capacity of Europe to cuoperate effectively in this aim Unless there exists in Europe a will to defend itself, no amount of outside help can possibly make it secure. A nation’s defense must spring from its own soul, and the soul cannot be imported For years, we have heard that Western Eu- rope is plagued, confused, and divided far more seriously than we are; we have heard that in their homes, in factories, on the street, millions of honest workmen are daily subjected to Communist bullying, that their days and nights are haunted by the specter of invading hordes whom they cannot hope to equal in numbers or physical strength. Furthermore, the discouragement, destruc. tion, and confusion visited upon the peoples of Europe by two world wars sapped their productive capacity and, in some instances, reduced them to levels af near starvation. More than this—their spirit was smothered in war weariness. ) Broadcast from Washington on February 2 and released to the press by the Depart- ment of Defense on the same date.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD That ts a story often told. If it were the whole story, then all I could honestly do would be to recommend that we abandon the NATO Treaty and—by ourselves—at. tempt, however, futilely, to build a sepa- rate fortrees against threatening aggression. Two striking facts make such a recommene dation, for me, impossible. PARTICIPATION IN EUROPEAN DEFENSE The first fact ts that the utter hopcless- ness of the alternative requires our partici- pation in European dcfense. We can all understand that America must be strong in air and sea power. These elements are vitally essential to the defense of the free world and it is through them that we pro- tect the approaches to our homeland and the routes of commerce necessary to our exetence. Bit this alone ts not enough. Our ships will not long sail the ecas, nor ou: planes fly the world airways, if we stand aside in fancied security while an aggressive im- perlalism sweeps over areas of the earth with which our own future ts inseparably linked Western Europe is the cradle of our civili- gation; fiom her originally we drew our strength, genius, and culture But our con- cern in Europe is far more than sentimental, Our own security {s directly involved. Europe is a highly developed tndustrial com- plex with the largest and most varled pool of skilled labor on earth. This huge poten- tial would be a rich prize for a totalitarian invasion. Its direct tmportance to us Is the stark fact that its possession by Com- munist forces would give them opportunity to develop a preponderance of power Even this disaster would not tell the whvle story If Western Furope should be overrun by communism, many economically dependent areas in Africa and the Middle East would be affected by the debacle Southeastern Asia would probably soon be lost Thus, we would be cut off from the raw materials of all these regions--materials that we need for existence World destiny would then be dictated by imperialistic powers whose avowed purpose is the destruction of free- dom, POWER OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY The second fact bearing upon our particl- pation in European defense 1s that the peo- ple of Europe ale not spiritually bankrupt, derpite the validity of many pessimistic re- ports. Great sections of its population have for years labored on and fought the creeping paralysis of conimunism, Now, the North Atlantic Treaty has brought new fuel to the flames of hope in Europe. It has notice- ably lifted morale, the fundamental element in this whole situation—the force which powers all human progress. In every capital, there is growing a desire to cooperate in this mutual security effort. All the governments that I have recently visited agreed that thelr defense programs must be stepped up despite economic and other difficulties—in spite of preoccupations that constitute abnormal drains upon par- ticular nations. For example, France now wages a relentless and costly war against communism in Indochina. Britain, still existing on an austerity level, shoulders heivy burdens in Malaya. However much those nations may differ from us in their diplomatic thinking with respect to Asiatic states, there is no question concerning thelr solidarity in opposing Communist aggression. They, and others on the continent, are taking measures to effect substantial in- creases in their defense establishments. Within the past few days, Britain has stepped up drastically its rate of preparation. The new military service program in France bars all exemptions of every kind whatsoever. The Norwegians impressed me with their unshakable determination that never again will they be victims of occupation. To, them, a fighting resistance, even to their own destruction, is preferable. And in Italy, there are unmistakeable signs of a stiffening courage and determination. The same if true of Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Portugal, Luxemburg, and Iceland. In every country, I saw heartening evi- dence of a regeneration in Europe's spirit. Its morale, its will to fight, will grow with every accretion to physical strength. The arrival in Europe of new American Jand and air units, though modest in protective in- fluence by themselves, will certainly pro- duce added confidence nnd accelerate the preduction of military force throughout the member nations. The European nations must, of course, preduce and maintain the great bulk of the Jand fcurces necessary to their defense. TIE STOREHOUSE OF RESISTANCE For this purpose, the most immediate need of Eurepe is munitions and equipment Everyone of the continental nations I visited can rapidly and markedly increase its re- sistance power tf it cen be promptly fur- ntshed additional supplies of this kind To fill this need, our loyal neighbor, Canada, with Britain and others, i shouldering part of the lord. In military potential, the free nations have everything they need, natural resources, in- dustrial genius, productive capacity, and great recervolrs of le:dership ability. Given the ingredient of morale, the determination to comidine for mutual protection, the mili- tary strength necessary will be produced at a Fpeedy race, With every increase in strength, there will be an upward thrust in morale, resulting In an ever-mounting spiral of con- Naence and recurity. With respect to time, no man can know at what hour, if ever, our defensive organiza- tion may be put to the ultimate test Ee- cause our purpose is entirely defensive, we must le ready at the euarlicst possible mo- ment. Only an aggressor could name the day and hour of attack. Our current mo- bilization, properly adjusted to our peaceful eecurity needs, should be es rapid as any required by the emergency of war To you, the people of America, I repeat, as I have to the Congress and to the President, that I believe, First, the preservation of free America 1¢- quires our participation in the defense of Western Europe. Second, success ig attainable Given unity In spirit and action, the job can be done Third, while the transfer to Europe of American military units 1s essential, our major and special contribution should be tn the field of munitions and equipment. By no means, do I believe that we Amert- cans can support the world militarily or economically. In our own interest, we must insist upon a working partnership with every nation making the common security its task of first priority. Every one of the member nations must realize that the success of this combined effort to preserve the peace rests as directly upon America’s productive, eco- nomic, and political strength as it does on any amount of military force we can de- velop. Only cooperative effort by all of us can preserve for the free world a position of security, relative peace, and economic stability. Attainment of this result is largely a mat- ter of morale and the human spirit. The free world now must prove itself worthy of its own past. If Frenchmen can rise to the heights their fathers achieved at Verdun in 1916; if Italans can recapture the fervor of Vittorio Veneto; if the British can relive the days of 1940 when they stood alone against Hitler; if our other allies can react to today's threat in the mode of their own revered patriots; if we, here in America, can match the cour- age and self-sacrifice of the ragged, freezing A1379 members of Washington's army at Valley Forge; indeed, if each of us now proves him- self worthy of his countrymen fighting and dying in Korea, then success is sure—a glo- rious success that will bring us security, con- fidence, tranquillity. Each of us must do his part. We cannot delay, nationally or individually, while we suspiciously scrutinize the sacrifices made by our neighbor, and, through a weasling logic, seek someway to avoid our own duties. ACCOMPLISHMENT BY AMERICAN LEADERSHIP If we Americans seize the lead, we will pre- serve and be worthy of our own past. Our children will dwell in peace. They will dwell in freedom. They will read the history of this decade with tingling pride and, from their kinship with this generation, they will inherit more than can be expressed in nill- ions, In acres, or in world acclaim. It 1s not my place, as a soldier, to dwell upon the politics, the diplomacy, the par- ticular treaty arrangement that must ac- company and go forward with such an effort But 1 do concelve it my duty to report irom time to time, both to this Government and to all others in the coalition, as to progress achieved. Thus, our own and all other peo- ples may constantly review their decisions and plans—and, if necessary, revise them. Thir evening, I come back to you only eas one with some experience in war and peace, of some a’quaintanceship with our friends of Western Europe, to bring you what ts in my hear. and mind I shall go about my own turk in this undertaking with the unshakable confi ience that America will respond fully when the basic issues are understood We know that 150,000,000 untted Americans con- stitute the greatest temporal force that Nas ever existed on God's earth. If we join ina common understanding of our country s role today und wholeheartedly devote ourselves to its discharge, the year 195] may be record- ed in our history in letters as bright es is v stten the year 1776. Tite Man Who Transformed the World EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. PETER W. RODINO, JR. OF NEW JERSEY !N THE HOUSE OF REPRE. .ENTATIVES Tuesday, March 13, 1951 Mr. RODINO. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the REc- ord, I wish to include a prologue to the religious drama entitied “The Man Who Transformed the World.” This play will be presented on March 16 and 17, at the National Guard Armory in Washington under the sponsorship of the Gold Star Wives of America, Inc. Part of the proceeds from this presenta- tion will be turned over to the fund for medical attention for the children of the men who died in the service of our country. Mrs. Edward H. Jordan, of Washington, is the chairman of the board. The part of Jesus Christ will be portrayed by Mr. Jean Gabriell, of New Jersey, and a cast consisting of the Pas- sion Players of America, who have given this performance for a number of years. The Christian Voice, New York City, jn commenting on this play said: Religious leaders and organizations: The Story of the Man Who Transformed the World will do more for your community than all other attractions together.
A1380 In these critical days when foreign and godless ideologies menace our lives and the lives of future generations, it would be well for us to be more conversant with the Greatest Story Ever Told. The prologue follows: THE MAN WHO TRANSFORMED THE WORLD Two thousand years ago, from within a defeated and embittered nation, held in bondage by a tyrannical emplre, there arose a Man, a Leader, who inspired the people of that nation, healed them, and gave them new courage to live He conceived a formula for curing the Ils of humanity by striking at the root of evil. He established a pattern for mankind to follow, based upon the imi- tution of God. This Man in 3 short years revolutionized the entire pattern of thought and philosophy of life. They call Him, “Master,” “Messiah,” and “Son of God” Mercy, love, and universal forgiveness of injuries, He preached, yet 19 centuries later, we still haven't learned to abolish force, abolish hate, abolish revenge. How long does it take man to realize the meaning of His words? The Man's profound wisdom, superior in- tellect, and inspirational ideals were 50 ad- vanced as to be Inconcetvable to the minds of His time His enemies, iu) alarm and fear, sought to stop Him and still His voice They succeeded in destroying His body, but they could not still His voice, His name has be- come such a cornerstone of humanity, that to tear it out from this world would be to shake its very foundations, A Soldier in Korea Asks Some Unanswerable Questions EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. JOHN B. BENNETT OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 13, 1951 Mr. BENNETT of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my own remarks, I include herewith a letter from a soldier in my district who is now fighting in Korea. His letter was written to the Marquette Mining Jour- nal. It presents some unanswerable questions which those in charge of our foreign policy program might profitably read: Dear Sir‘ Myself and a few thousand other GI's would like to know the answers tu sev- eral questions The biggest question at the present is, Just why are we over here? The Army has tried to answer that for some time now, but I've yet to hear anyone sry he’s convinced we ought to be fighting The Korean people certainly aren't glad to have us. I’ve seen that with my own eyes. You'll notice I said the people, and not the politicians, After all, it is the people of this world whom we are trying to satisfy, even though the scales show otherwise. WHERE WILL IT END? Another good question is, Where will it all end, and to what advantage? Also, do the people back home realize how disgusted the reservists are at the quick shuffle they’ve gotten? I’ve never seen the morale of troops 80 low before. It just about all bolls down to this: How is a man going to fight or give his all when he can’t see anything worth while behind it? No one has satistied us yet, so think twice before you try, QUESTION OF RESERVISTS Another question which all reservists would like answered: When we signed up after the last war we wee led to believe we wouldn't be called until a national emer- gency existed Most of us were called belore the emergency was declared To us It was kind of a low blow dealt from what we once called a democratic Nation It’s rough to be lied to, by our own Government, at that This may sound harsh, but it’s not half as harsh as all of us feel. Why is it that our PX (post exchange) shelves are bare when the black market thrives to such an extent that the streets are lined with shops selling American ciga- rettes, candy, toilet articles, stationery, and every item of GI clothing—not used, hut brand new? BRITISH IN AMERICAN GARB Why is it that our enginecr battalions have 1o diive trucks and equipment made in Japan, when the Koreans use United States equipment and tear it up within a month? Why was it that the reservists, the major- ity of whom were more than qualified, weren't held in the States to train dra{tees instead of being sent overseas? Why is it that Britash soldiers, from the nation which claims to have the best tailors in the world, are scen weatin: GI field coats and carrying M-1 rifles as they stroll) through the PX buying up our scarce items? Why, too, are Korean police, civiliins, and soldiers wearing our GI untform? How 1s an Ameri- can soldier supposed to respect his uniform when {t’s being worn by everyone in the world? IMPOSING EDIFICES Why Is it that the British, Dutch, and other European legations are housed in im- posing edifices when the Nation that foots the bill tor the whole show is in a dump by comparison? You try to answer these questions the expendable GI's, can't Criarurs C CowrLanp, We, Tuirty-third Anniversary of the Indcpend- ence of Lithuania EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. DANIEL J. FLOOD OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 13, 1951 Mr. FLOOD Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- orb, I include the following letter and resolution just received by me from Mr. Joseph Maceina, chairman of the Joint Committee of the American-Lithuania Council, Inc., Pittston Chapter, and Lithuanian Relief, Chapter 44, Pittston, Pa: PrTtston, Pa, February 18, 1951. Dear Sir* At a mass sally of Americans of Lithuantan ancestry in the city of Pittston, Luzerne County, Pa, on Sunday evening, February 18, 1951, to commemorate the thir- ty-third anniversary of the proclamation of the independence of the country of their forefathers, the enclosed resolution was adopted by the unanimous vote of the par- ticipants. Tribute was paid to the Government of the United States for their courageous stand in defense of liberty of people everywhere, being particularly concerned with the des- tiny of Lithuania, whose people desire noth- ing that ts not rightfully theirs. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD This meeting requests the Government of the United States of America to initiate appropriate measures (1) to induce the So- viet Union to withdraw its army of occu- pation and administrative forces from the territory of Lithuania, and allow the Lith- uanian people to exercise their sovereign rights of an independer t nation in conlorm- ity with the international treaties and the principles of the international charters sub- scribed to by the Soviet Union, and (2) to induce the Soviet Union to stop its geno- cide practices in Lithuania ind to repatriate those many thousands of Lithuanians who were deported to Siberia during thelr occu- paiion of Lithuantan territory. We feel confident that the Government of the United States of America will spare no efforts in bringing about conditions which would enable the Iuthuanian people, as well as other nations behind the iron curtain, to regain their lost freedom and to resume their rightful place as independent nations. Sincerely, JosePH MACFINA, Chairman of Joint Committee of Amer- wan-Lithtanian Council, Inc. Pritts- ton Chapter, and Lithuanian Relief, Chupter 44, Pittston, Pa. At a mags rally of Americans of Lithuanian ancestry in Casino Hall, 91 North Main Street, Pittston, Pa, on Sunday evening, February 18, 1951, to commemorate the thirty-third anniversary of the proclamation of the independence of Lithuania, the fol- lowing resolution was unanimously adopted: “Wherens for 21 years (from 1918 to 1939) the Republic of Lithuania was a free and in- dependent nation, and during that period proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that she is fully capable of self-government. They were released from the yoke of subjugation by decree of the League of Nations, and “Whereas historlans tell us that Lithua- nians settled on the shores of the Baltic Sca as early as the eleventh century, and spoke a language very similar to the ancient San- skrit, and “Whereus Lithuania, as a neutral country, was the victim of ruthless warfare and pil- laging during World War II, is presently oc- cupied by Soviet Union armies and adminis- trative forces, and “Whereas the principle of political {nde- pendence enunciated in the declaration of the United Nations, and in the Atlantic Charter, is a hollow mockery in the light of the situation in Lithuania as it exists today, particulurly the genocide practices which constitute a flagrant violation of the law ol nations in general and of the United Nations Charter in particular’ Now, therefore, be it “Resolved, That request be made on the Government of the United States of America to initiate appropriate measures (1) to in- duce the Soviet Unicn to withdraw its army of occupation and administrative forces from the territory of Lithuania, and allow the Lithuanian people to exercise their sovereign rights of an independent nation in conform- ity with the international treaties and the principles of the international charters sub- scribed to by the Soviet Union, and (2) to induce the Soviet Union to stop its genocide practices in Lithuania and to repatriate those many thousands of Lithuanians who were deported to Siberia during their occupation of Lithuanian territory; and be it further “Resolved, That coptes of this resolution be forwarded to the President of the United States of America; to the Secretary of State; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs; to the United States Senators from Pennsylvania; and to the Congressman from Luzerne Coun- ty, Pa.” JOSEPH MACEINA, Chairman of Joint Committee of Amen- can-Lithuanian Counel, Inc., Pittston Chapter, and Lithuania Relie/, Chapter 44, Pittston, Pa.