A8774 The Wounded Don’t Cry EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. PAUL B. DAGUE OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 18, 1950 Mr. DAGUE. Mr. Speaker, in the furor that has been raised by the order inactivating Valley Forge General Hos-~ pital, which is located in my district, I have attempted to point out the eco- nomic fallacy in the closing of this fine institution and the evidence of political maneuvering in the simultaneous erec- tion of another multimilion dollar facil- ity in Philadelphia, Jess than 20 miles away. In this connection I cannot praise too highly the outstanding work done by our colleagues the Honorable L. MENDEL Rivers and the Honorable Lron H, Gavin, chairman and member, respec~ tively, of the Armed Services Subcom- mittee, who have presented to this House such telling arguments for keeping Val- ley Forge open, The one aspect of this closing order which has been generally overlooked has to do with the complete breakdown of the morale of our disabled servicemen who now face the bleak prospects of be= ing shunted to remote hospitals, where they will be confronted with new and strange doctors and nurses, who, nat= urally, will not be acquainted with their cases. It is asad commentary on a Gov- ernment which seems to be ready to spend billions on the citizens of other nations but at the same time secks to effect savings at the expense of those who continue to suffer from the wounds incurred in defending that same Gov-~ ernment from those who would destroy it, in the helping of whom we are now s0 lavishly spending our substance. The most factual, and certainly the most poignant, picture of the plight of these displaced patients has been given us by Mr. Ivan H. Peterman in the Philadel- phia Inquirer for May 15. I commend it to your attention as a recital of just how thoughtless bureaucrats can be in the prosecution of their ill-advised plan- ning: Vers Grr DP TREATMENT IN VALLEY Forea OvusTER (By Ivan H. Peterman) “The wounded don’t ery,” they say, and after 5, 6 or 7 years groping through war’s aftermath, they don’t talk much, either. If they did, some could recite 2 story of this great United States Government, which Javishes billions on others who never heard @ shot fired, while shoving these, the most deserving, from hospital to hospital, with callous indifference. For that is the story of Valley Forge Gen~ eral Hospital’s new DP’s—the legless, the armless, the incapacitated, and even the blind. Over the combined protests of rela- tives, friends, Gold Star mothers, welfare workers who in the postwar years have adopted many so that their life has become more bearable, over the American Legion’s demurrer, and the efforts of Phoenixville’s civic associations who now regard the “boys on the hill” as part of the town, the Defense Department is closing Valley Forge at the end of June. Many familiar figures have gone. There are no blind boys fishing this spring in Dr, Gotwals’ pond. They loved that. About the only sport a blind serviceman could enjoy. At the Army’s center for the blind in Chicago, there is no fish pond. No country atmos- phere. No familiar paths and walks which only time can restore to a man whose sight went with the blast of a shell. But Secretary Louis Johnson, whose hurry- up economy order didn’t pause to consult with medical officers of either Army or Navy, decided Valley Forge must close. When you call Washington to find out why someone didn’t investigate first, or why some arrange- ment hasn’t been made to keep these help- less near their friends and famulies, there’s a@ lot of evasion, but few adequate answers. Nobhody’s very proud of this move. Army and Navy have long been silenced by top administration order. Explanations, when given, don’t face the issues. Office of Defense decided one military hospital— Walter Reed—was enough this side of the Mississippi. A few post hospitals like Fort Belvoir, and the residue—like those luckless Jads found in burning Belle Vista sanitarium. recently—-shunted to private institutions. Some have been quartered at the State Hos- pital for the Insane in Norristown. In the meantime, a new veterans’ hospital 4s about to rise in Philadelphia. More effi- cient, requires less personnel, is the reason. But not long ago the Veterans’ Administra- tion was willing and ready to take over Valley Forge. Last October, the Army said it would remain. In February, Secretary Johnson changed his mind. On May 3 came the de- cision to clear out, if possible, by June 15. The soldiers’ wishes? The dilemma of dozens of veterans’ families who, thinking Valley Forge was permanent, had bought homes and moved to Phoenixville to be near wounded husbands and sons? The whole problem of sudden, unexpected dislocation, breaking of companionships among the pa-~ tients? There was no thought of this, And under the Fair Deal’s growing gestapo fear, nobody had the courage to speak out. But nobody likes it. Some were shipped to Chicago. Some to San Antonio and California. The Veter- ans’ Administration, which at most had com- paratively few patients in Valley Forge, on April 18 had only 54 patients there, all but 8 of whom were general medical cases. The public is widely mistaken on Valley Forge. Tt is not a Veterans’ hospital at all, and most of the blind, orthopedic cases you’ve been seeing at Franklin Field, at the ball parks, the tracks and Arena, and Stadium, are tech- nically not veterans, but still active service men, at service pay and subject to Army orders. The Veterans’ Administration is wholly blameless in this matter. The order traces directly to the Secretary of Defense, and the wishes of President Truman. It was the President, remember, who last week on his quarter million dollar, tax-paid junket, proclaimed that while he hoped some day to balance the budget, there would be no sparing of dollars at the expense of the people’s welfare. That sounds mighty fine to uninformed lsteners at a whistle stop. But it must bring bitter smiles to Valley Forge’s 1,500 wounded of the Second World War, displaced by his own economy order. But it’s a long cry from a wounded vet's dull day to the high-pressure office of na- tional defense. Louis Johnson, for all his qualities, never crouched in a wadi after bomb shock and watched the light fade at sunlit noon. I have, and I know the grati- tude when you can see again, and the under- standing you must always have for those who weren’t so lucky. If there’s anything but politics left in Washington, those responsible for the Valley Forge situation will listen to public appeal, and rectify this hasty move. The State of APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Pennsylvania wants to take over the hospi- tal; arguments that it is inefficient, a fire hazard, etc., are strictly phony. It’s a splen~ did place for these patients. If Army medics can farm out such boys, they can also ar- range to return or keep them at Valley Forge, pay their way in cooperation with the State, and avert one of the harshest deals yet banded those who all but died for the country. Do I hear any objections? Justice for Ireland EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HAROLD D. DONOHUE OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 18, 1950 Mr. DONOHUE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I should like to include the address I delivered to the members of the Clan-Na-Gael at their annual banquet in Worcester, Mass., on the evening of May 14, 1950. This meeting was held in commemora~- tion of the Irish martyrs who gave their lives to perpetuate a great ideal, during the Easter Week uprising of 1916. The address follows: Again we meet to pay reverent tribute to those Irish martyrs who gave their lives in the Easter week uprising of 1916 in carrying forward a great ideal. Men who passionately loved Ireland and human free- dom; men who unselfishly dedicated their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor in order that the bitter, bloody struggle of over 750 years should one day be crowned with the brilliant achievement of deliver- ance from bondage, and the glories and triumphs of self-government and inde- pendence. These men sought no selfish gain nor personal aggrandizement; they sought no territorial conquest save what was their own. They sought what the human soul has sought since the dawn of history—the right to be free; the right to be delivered from cruel and tyrannical rulers; the right to speak their own minds, to worship the God of their choice; to set up the govern- ment of their own selection; in a word, to find self-expression, self-realization and self-development through the medium of free institutions. Great events are often moved by a few. The people, as a whole, are often inspired by a small group. The number of these heroes of the Irish volunteers and citizens’ army was not large, put the spirit of free- dom, sacrifice, and gallantry which they displayed animated and infused their fellow citizens with an insuperable courage to go forward, never to give up the fight for free- dom until it had been won, never to cease resistance until their liberties had been se- cured, never, never to know the meaning of the word “defeat.” From those dark days of 1916 there has been 2 steady march forward in the affairs of the Irish Government, Led by a succession of brilliant, far-sighted statesmen, endowed with great talents, zeal and courage, Ire- land has steadily developed its free insti- tutions, its resources, its native capacity for self-government, and today stands as a free and independent nation among the govern- ments of the world. Although Ireland is now enjoying a new birth of freedom, there is one essential char- acteristic of democracy that is still lacking,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD and that is its God-given geographic unity. That right has been willfully and deliberately denied to Ireland in contravention of every principle of democracy, every canon of seif~ determination and every tenet of justice as they are known between men and nations. Ireland was deliberately divided and parti- tioned by the designing and arbitrary action of a superior and powerful imperialistic force in 1920, when the British gave a separate government to the six counties in the north, An imaginary geographic line was drawn across the nation in such a manner and with such a purpose as to include the max-~ imum territory that could be included with- out endangering political control, and al- though the so-called great democracies of the world are decrying communism and fas~ cism, this northern government has been operating on the Fascist model for over 27 years, and the British Government which set up and which supports it has not lifted a finger to do anything about 1t. When I read of Ireland’s reluctance to be- come a member of the Atlantic Pact, I could readily understand the reason. When we find signatories to that pact maintaining such monstrosities as the so-called government existing in the north of Ireland, originated as a result of crass gerrymandering, where the majority is being controlled by a minor- ity, the explanation of the Irish attitude, on that score, 1s clear, It is my considered opinion that the ob- jectives of this organization have not been, and will not be, attained until we can per- suade every lover of true democracy and free- dom to do all in their power to bring about the eliminatian of the partition which now keeps the Irish people from being one nation, indivisible, with lberty and justice for all. Biggest Story EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KATHARINE ST. GEORGE OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 18, 1950 Mrs. ST. GEORGE. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the Appendix of the REcorp, TI include the twenty-third article by Mr. Frank C. Waldrop on the infiltration of communism in our country: Brecusr Story (By Frank C. Waldrop) The record of American gullibility and self-deception concerning Soviet Russia is so remarkable that it would be incredible, ex- cept for the hard facts of public record. No wonder Stalin was so confident of his power when he sat down at Tehran and Yalta with President Roosevelt. He knew that he had before him the su- preme example of that sort of American who had for 30 years been hugging illusions in the place of fact, concerning the Soviet system. Consider here these known and public facts. The first Soviet Government took control of Russia by force of arms on Janu- ary 18, 1918, after having lost the elections the year before. It set about at once the suppression of all political activity in the Russian empire and instead, undertook to make a private organ- ization, the Communist party, superior to the official government. To understand the importance of this, you must keep in mind the actual structure of the Government itself. This, as organized by the Communists, was set up as a system of soviets, Meaning councils, These soviets were set up first in the vil- lages and neighborhoods, with higher and higher ones made up of delegates from below. The supreme Soviet, at the seat of the na- tional government, combined within itself all three functions, legislative, executive, and judicial. But were elections to any of these rising circles and councils free? Could anybody run for office? Could competing politicians organize in parties and contest for office with regular platforms, campaigns, and free speech to criticize and expose the acts of one another? Could voters have secret ballots and pri- vate choice of their representatives? The Communists, who had lost every elec- tion up to the day they were able to buy enough men and guns actually to seize the government offices and kick out the legally elected members of Parliament, made sure that could not happen. One of the very first things they did was to declare all opposition a major crime. They made their own rules from the top down as to who could qualify for member- ship in the Communist organization, itself. You couldn’t just announce that you had decided to be.a Communist, then roll around to the nearest party office, register, declare your allegiance, and ride the gravy train. Oh, no. Joining the Communists was joining the aristocracy in power, and they took in members on a rule stricter than that of any private club. Yet, through their use of the guns and the power seized by revolution, they made sure their private club actually had superior au- thority over the system of soviets supposedly the legal government of the nation. Thus, in every soviet, it was not the actual membership in office that made policy, but the Communist fraction. Remember the word for it was in time to be a plague to American labor unions and all other organi- zations Communists would seek to dominate, The Communist faction gave the decisions and all the rest Just rubber stamped. Such was the government set up in Rus- sia by Lenin, Trotsky, and the others who seized control in 1917-18. It was a government in which the tax~ payers not only were deprived of property and the privilege of free elections, but also had to pay through their taxes for the single political party that ran the Government from the top down, and elected its own member- ship into both Government and party, also from the top down. All this was visible from the start. It was no secret. Indeed, Lenin declared that the Communists would by such means not only govern Russia but the whole world. Could Americans fall for that after having been brought up in the tradition of govern- ment operated by checks and balances be-~ tween independent branches of legislative, executive and judicial officials? Could Americans abandon the proved value of keeping political parties in competi- tion with one another and never allowing any one set of politicians to settle into power secure against exposure and dismissal by the voters? Well, the Soviet system was hardly de- clared in Russia and the international Com- munist movement organized in Moscow hbe- fore the uproar began here for our Govern- ment to recognize the Soviet system and make the Communist work for our destruc- tion easier. Now begins the story of the real Russian invasion. And in typical fashion it began by indirection. On May 6, 1919, there ar- rived in New York City one Ludwig <A. Martens, presenting credentials as the diplomatic representative of the Soviet Union, A3775 Biggest Story EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KATHARINE ST. GEORGE OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 18, 1950 Mrs. ST. GEORGE. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the Appendix of the Recorp, I include the twenty-fourth article by Mr. Frank C. Waldrop on the infiltration of communism in our country: Brecest STORY (By Frank C. Waldrop) Now in this strange, eventful history comes a chapter of events as ludicrous as they are bitter. It is the story of the American busi- nessman taken for a sucker by the Com- munists seeking diplomatic status for their Soviet regime in Russia. Well do I remember, in early 1948, the Honorable Averell Harriman reading a riot act to a number of us whose hearts remained hardened against his friend in the Kremlin. Mr. Harriman at that time was the golden Ambassador of lend-lease in Moscow and his heart was full of simple faith. Five years later he testified to a congressional com-= mittee: “Stalin is a greater menace than Hitler ever was.” But in 1943, Mr. Harriman’s mission from Moscow was to make the ignorant in and around Washington realize that the Russians only needed a little loving kindness shown to become partners after the war. They had known he was coming and had baked a cake. Indeed, if you will trouble to look in the old World Almanac for 1928, you will see just how far back they had seen him coming, For the almanac of that year has the notes on a little venture organized in New York City by Mr, Harriman and friends, a corpora- tion to explore for and mine gold in Siberia for good old Joe. It was a great adventure, and fortunately the parties to it had plenty of shirt to lose. But it 1s something to think about, that so astute and experienced a banker as Averell Harriman could forget the events of 1926-27— 28, in the fun of 1943. All this fantasy of doing business with the Communists began in the spring of 1919 when one Ludwig C. A. K. Martens produced credentials as the first Ambassador from the first Soviet government in the world.: Marten’s who had been here since 1916 as a Russian engineer, presented his creden« tials to the State Department on March 19, 1919, and was politely told to take himself off. How did Martens get in here in the first place? This is one of the many little side mysteries of those Gays even yet not solved in full. Make of it what you will, but one Leonid Krassin, another engineer, was one of the Communists’ most famous secret prerevolu- tionary agents in Russia. Krassin, like Alger Hiss, was outwardly the very model of respectability. Yet under« cover he organized bomb throwers and il- legal agents of all kinds, , He even turned in about $1,000 a month of funds to the Bolsheviks, furnished by his employer, himself one of Russia's idle rich in love with revolution. As soon as the State Department declined Martens the status of diplomat he opened propaganda offices in New York. He began a magazine, Soviet Russia, the ancestor of Soviet Russia Today that re- mains a chief apologist for Stalin to this
A3776 very day. And then he let slip the word that the Soviets intended to pick up where the Czars had left off, at granting foreign development companies access tu S.bez1a. TJuicier than that, he invited manufac- turers of everything from pig iron to 1odine to come in and make him bids for sales contracts. Before anybody could say ‘“Dzughasvih,” he had issued some 830,000,000 worth of these. Unfortunately, all these contracts had a clause explaining they were at the moment purely tentative, and indicative, not hard- rock. The reason, of course, was that the United States and the Soviet government had no lawful basis for exchanging their separate kinds of money. Diplomatic status, he indi- cated, would cure everything. But the United States of America, as a large creditor of the czar and the government that followed him, had on its mind some- thing near to a couple of hundred million dollars’ worth of private and public debts due from Russia. Would the Soviet government honor these? It said it would rot. Yet the businessmen who thought the Communists would soon come around, were jumping for contracts. Finally, the State department issued cate- gorical warnings that any American extend- ing credit or accepting any obligation to pay, by the Soviets, would do so at his own risk. A New York State committee raided Mar- tens’ office. He was called down here before a couple of congressional committees, served with deportation warrants and generally made highly visible so that his agitation and propaganda work suffered. Soon January 22, 1921, he gave up and went home. His place was taken by another curious character, Boris Skvirsky, of whom much more, later. Nearly 15 years later, Martens was back in the news. In Britain as in the United States of America, business and industry had been sucked into development work for Soviet Siberia. Somewhere around 1930, Stalin figured it was time to break off. So then we hear of Mr. Ludwig C. A. K. Martens as a member of a people’s court before which six British citizens, engineers for the famous Vickers company, were drag- ged on charges of espionage. New Pattern for Democracy EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ROBERT F. RICH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 18, 1950 Mr. RICH. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following editorial from the Altoona Tribune of May 15, 1950: New PaTTERN FoR Democracy Government's refusal in recent years to follow the accepted American precepts of standing aside, protecting only the freedom of the American people to live, work, and do business lawfully, and their right to go about such business unhampered has ret sulted in a vicious circle, an apparently end- less race by the American people to keep up to the cost of living. Coupled with this is the Government’s concern for foreign relations, which has been taken to the extreme length by the President of the fantastic point 4 by which Mr. Truman would have us pay to develop the underdeveloped portions of the globe. Americans have been paying out billions in recent years to sustain European govern- ments and economic systems, both of which are rotten in thelr underpinnings, and ac- tually can be strengthened only by the unity of their own respective peoples. From these two modern aspects of Ameri- can Government has evolved an un-Ameri- can governmental principle which appears to be a confused version of equalitarianism. We find 1t emanating largely from Gov~ ernment officials and bureaus. While both spout democracy, they present it in the form of socialism, sharing-the-wealth Govern- ment-will-take-care-of-you programs, all overlaid with vague hintings against the prosperous or the wealthy, which is given point by the soak-the-rich theory. In other words, the ultimate objective seems to be to reduce America, through this new democracy of equality to the place where every man earns the $4,000 a year suggested by Mr. Truman the other day, and probably, only the top upper crust of governmental bureaucracy may be entitled to attain to more than that, in ether power or money. We are presenting this as bluntly as we can, because we see the picture this way. The Government is not quite so frank. It talks about democracy, or demiocracy in ac- tion, while what it proposes is a paternalistic welfare state. The British, for example, don’t quibble about it. They acknowledge they are trying a welfare state. We are told, for example, by the State Department and the President, that we must make every concession we can make for world trade. Of course, trade is vital. But, if it costs us more than it repays, it cer- tainly is not good for America. Mr. C. W. Gustkey, of the executive com~ mittee, National Labor-Management Couns cil of Foreign Trade, told a House subcom- mittee the other day that imported glass- ware last year cost American workmen $4,- 000,000 in wages. Wage losses this year, he said, may total $12,000,000. Employment in that industry, he said, has been cut in half by imports from Europe. He testified, in fact, that such imports threaten the very existence of the handmade glassware indus~ try in this country. From New York comes the report that threats of new competition from abroad are harassing the textile industry. It is esti- mated that at least 50,000 jobs in the textile industry are directly at stake through rising imports of cotton goods, and cuts in our own exports as a result of increased foreign pro- duction built up by United States dollars. Coal industry estimates have suggested that some 50,000 miners will lose their jobs because of the importation of cheap foreign oil into this country. From Czechoslovakia is coming a flood of felt hats, an increase of 300 percent last year. That hits American industry. And, while famine haunts China, from some strange reason, our Government is importing dried eggs from that stricken land—some 2,000,000 pounds, the equivalent of 12,000,000 dozens, in 8 months. And the Government is loaded with surplus dried eggs it has bought from our own people and can’t sell or give away. Government warehouses are filled with sur= plus wheat, barley, and rye, but we are re- ported importing them, also. What about a program for future world trade that 1s reducing American jobs now? What about a State Department theory of foreign trade that ruins American industry now with an influx of cheaper imports? Will the net result of this Government pol- icy, in all truth, be to reduce the American standard of living, to “equalize” the Ameri- can people to the point where they have no APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD opportunity, nothing beyond the caleulated limit of earnings which the Government may allow them? Is that the kind of democracy we are to have? If so, a vast and terrible change will be taking place in our great free Republic, McGregor Will Hold Conferences in District EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF EON. J. HARRY McGREGOR OF OHIO IN TSE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 18, 1950 Mr. McGREGOR. Mr. Speaker, since I have been in Congress I have always attempted to keep in close contact with the people of the Seventeenth Ohio Dis- trict, whom I represent. I have used many methods of obtain- ing their opinions on various matters, including the questionnaire, letters, and personal contact. Each year I arrange meetings in the courthouses of the six counties in my district, publish the dates of those conferences, and urge everyone to meet with me and talk over any sub- ject they choose. This year I will again follow this pro- cedure during the period of our official congressional recess. I have made ar- rangements to be in the courtrooms of the six county courthouses from 9 a. m, to5p.m. each weekday. Saturday con«- ferences will last only until noon when the courthouses close, and no sessions will be held on Sunday. I have established the following schedule: Monday and Tuesday, August 21 and 22, Ashland, Ashland County. Wednesday and Thursday, August 23 and 24, Mansfield, Richland County. Friday and Saturday, August 25 and 26, Mount Vernon, Knox County. Monday and Tuesday, August 28 and 29, Delaware, Delaware County. Wednesday and Thursday, August 30 and 31, Newark, Licking County. Friday and Saturday, September 1 and 2, Coshocton, Coshocton County. Many constituents have shown inter- est in these courthouse visits in the past, and I have been very pleased with the results. It is surprising how much can be accomplished when a citizen and his Congressman can sit down and talk over national and personal problems. No appointments are necessary for these conferences, and I hope to see a large number of people. All of us have problems we would like to discuss, and this discussion will be of mutual benefit. I urge any or all of my constituents to meet with me on the date most con- venient to them. With the knowledge thus obtained, I know I will be better able to truly represent them in the Con- gress of the United States.
APPENDIX TO TIT CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The Late Hon. Bainbridge Colby EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WINGATE H. LUCAS OF TEXAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 18, 1950 Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Speaker, Bainbridge Colby, the last Secretary of State in the late Woodrow Vilson’s administration, died on April 11, 1950. In his long life- time covering some fourscore years, Mr. Colby accomplished many things equal to the greatness of his capacity. But one of the most important faculties he pos- sessed was his foresight and understand- ing of human emotions and desires. Perhaps, if we had remembered in the thirties the warning that he issued in 1920, we would not have the trouble with Russia that we are having today. At that time, he issued a masterly summa- tion of the reasons why we could not do business with Russia either economical- ly or politically. His statement was a correct evaluation of Russia and Soviet psychology. Irefer to the statement that Mr. Colby, as Secretary of State, made in a note to Baron Cammillo Romano Avezzana, the Italian Ambassador to Washington. At the time that he is- sued the note, negotiations were under way for settlement of the Polish-Russian conflict that followed the end of World War I on the eastern front. Poland had set itself up as an independent republic, and under the great Polish leader, Pil- sudski, had attacked the Ukraine. The Bolshevik Government retaliated. It al- most crushed Poland, and its armies reached the outskirts of Warsaw, the Polish capital. The Polish Government offered peace, and assistance from Amer- ica staved off complete defeat for Poland at that time. Italy, through its Ambassador here, inquired of our position in the matter. In substance, Mr. Colby replied that we favored maintenance of the territorial integrity of both Poland and Russia. Greatest friendship for the Russian people, as such, was expressed by our Government in the note which also stressed our friendly relations with them inthe past. But Mr. Colby, speaking for our Government, said that entirely apart from the political views of the minority (Soviet group) which had seized power in Russia, we could not deal with them on the ground that they openly renounced adherence to the moral code which goy- erns comity between nations. I will not produce the entire text of the statement here, but just the pertinent excerpts. ‘These excerpts show the wis- ‘dom of Bainbridge Colby as well as the Jack of wisdom displayed by this Govern- ment when it recognized the Soviet re- gime in the early thirties. I commend to you the reading of these excerpts as fol- lows: It is not possible for the Government of the United States to recognize the present rulers of Russia as a government with which the relations common to friendly governments can be maintained. This conviction has nothing to do with any particular political er sccinl structure which the Russian people th.m.sives may cee iit to ombrace. It rests upon a wholly difzront set of facts. These facts, which none disputes, have convinced the Government of the United States, against its wll, that the ex.sting regime in Russia is based upon the negation cf every principle of honcr and good faith, and every usage and convention underlying the whole structure of international lav; the negation, in short, of every principle upon which it is possible to base harmonious and trustful relations, whether of nations or of individuais. The responsible leaders of the regime have frequently and cpenly boasted that they are willing to sign agreements and undertakings with foreign powers while not having the slightest inteniion of observing such un- dertakings or carrying out such agreements. This attitude of disregard of obligations vol-. untarily entered into, they base upon the theory that no compact or agreement made with a non-Bolshevist government can have any moral force for them. They have not only avowed this as a doctrine, but have exemplified 1t in practice. Indeed, upon numerous occasions the re- sponsible spokesmen of this power, and its official agencies, have declared that it is their understanding that the very existence of bolshevism in Russia, the maintenance of their own rule, depends, and must continue to depend, upon the occurrence cf revolu- tions in all other great civilized nations, in- cluding the United States, which will over- throw and destroy their governments and set up Bolshevist rule in their stead. They have made it quite plain that they intend to us? every means, including, of course, diplomatic agencies, to promote such revo- lutionary movements in other countries. * * * * * Inevitably, therefore, the diplomatic serv- ice of the Bolshevik Government would be- come a channel for intrigues and the propa-~ ganda of revolt against the institutions and laws of countries with which it was at peace, which would be an abuse of friendship to which enlightened governments cannot sub- ject themselves. In the view of this Government, there can- not be any common ground upon which it can stand with a power whose conceptions of international relations are so entirely alien to its own, so utterly repugnant to its moral sense. There can be no mutual con- fidence or trust, no respect even, if pledges are to be given and agreements made with a cynical repudiation of their obligations already in the mind of one of the parties, We cannot recognize, hold official relations with, or give friendly reception to the agents of a government which is determined and bound to conspire against our institutions; whose diplomats will be the agitators of dan- gerous revolt; whose spokesmen say that they sign agreements with no intention of Keeping them. A Very Bad Idea EXTENSION OF REMARKS F HON. JAY LeFEVRE OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 18, 1950 Mr, LEFEVRE. Mr, Speaker, under unanimous consent to extend my re- marks in the Rrecorp, I include an ar- ticle taken from today’s New York Her- ald Tribune. Mr. Speaker, I realize that the House Committee on Ways and Means is put- A3777 ing in many weary hours trying to im- prove on our present tax laws. They have a terrific problem and in their effort to satisfy Mr. Truman to make up the loss in excise taxes, I fear the provision recently zdopted to collect 10 percent from corporations to catch a possible $150,000,000 in dividends not reported will be expensive economy. A large portion of those dividends are going to institutions presently exempt. Without a doubt, many small stock- holders depend on the dividends for day to day expenses. This move will only add confusion to an already chaotic situation and I hope the members of the Committee on Ways and Means will recognize this error before it is too late. The article referred to follows: A Very Bap Ipra The House Ways and Means Committee, seeking additional revenue to offset a billion-dollar cut in excise taxes, has hit upon a plan for withholding a 10-percent tax on dividends. The 10 percent would be collected directly from the corporations; they would mail a receipt to each stock~ holder with every curtailed dividend pay- ment; the stockholder must save the re- ceipts throughout the year, mail them with his March 15 income tax. If he owed no taxes on his dividends, the Income Tax Bu-~ reau would in due time mail a refund. Here is new complication, new forms for the companies, new trouble for the taxpayers, more bookkeeping for the Treasury. Here, too, is hardship for the man of small income whose dividends will be cut whether or not he owes taxes upon them and whether or not he depends upon them for day-to-day needs. What will be gained from this added trouble? Its sponsors say $150,000,000. They point to $1,400,000,000 paid out in cor- poration dividends which fail to show up on income-tax statements. A substantial amount estimated at close to half, of the “Jost” revenue can be accounted for in the tax-exempt dividends paid to charitable, educational, and religious institutions, and there must be many small stockholders, among the retired, for instance, who have insufficient income to require a tax. Ac~ tually the device seems to be aimed at small stockholders, since corporations report all dividends of more than $100 for check against individual tax statements. One wonders, therefore, whether the Representa~ tives have not overestimated that $150,- 000,000. The House move is destined to make sorer one of the sorest spots in the whole tax field—the double levy on dividends. As every stockholder knows, the corporation itself pays up to 38 percent on the income from which dividends are paid, and they pay again on their income-tax returns, Withholding is, moreover, at best a device- ‘of expediency. We see no justification for its extension to a new field, or for further bedevilment of the taxpaying citizens, Omnibus Appropriation Bill EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. CHET HOLIFIELD OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 18, 1950 Mr. HOLIFIELD. Myr. Speaker, the drastic effect of the Taber-Thomas and
A3778 Jensen amendments to the omnibus ap- propriation bill is becoming apparent. An article in today’s Washington Post by the able columnist, Jerry Klutz, analyzes some of the drastic effects. The House and Senate conferees will, {I hope, eliminate the provisions con- tained in these amendments. The article referred to follows: Tre Feperat Diary—PosvaL, VA SERVICES Facing Drastic Cuts (By Jerry Kluttz) The Senate Appropriations Committee yes- terday was warned that the House-approved Taber-Thomas amendment by itself would: Drastically reduce postal services; force the firing of about 57,000 postal workers, and cut the Department’s budget more than 200 million dollars under present operations. The committee also was told that the Jen- sen turn-over amendment, also approved by the House, by itself, would: Force the Veterans’ Administration to abolish more than 23,000 jobs during the 1951 fiscal year; 15,000 administrative, and 8,000 in its medical department, and cripple opera- tions to the extent that service couldn’t be given veterans as required by law. And those cuts would be merely the be- ginning. Both VA and Post Office would have to make additional job cuts under a combination of the Taber-Thomas and Jensen riders, as would most other Federal agencies. “The effect of the two amendments, taken together,” Budget Director Frederick Law= ton told the committee, “cannot be estimated and unfortunately will require additional personnel to assure compliance with the limitations. “The effect,” he added, “might well be even more serious than anyone presently suspects.” That’s the tip-off that the riders would knock off far more than the estimated 200,- 000 Federal jobs in the next year. In a 83-hour session with the full Senate Appropriations Committee, Lawton and his staff dealt mainly with the many confusing, bewildering, and conflicting problems raised by the two House economy amendments. He asked the committee for clarification on scores of points. EFFECTS SUMMARIZED The Jensen amendment, Lawton said, would have this effect on these few selected agencies: VA: A total reduction of personnel in all programs of slightly more than 23,000. The amendment excludes doctors, nurses, and other medical personnel, but not service em~ ployees in the hospitals. “It is obvious,” Lawton said, “that these reductions to the programs for handling vet- erans’ claims, insurance matters, applications for education and training, for loans, etc., -will cripple the Administration to the extent that service could not be rendered to vet~" erans as required and as is due them under laws enacted by the Congress. “The reductions in the medical program,” Lawton pointed out, “will make it absolutely impossible to activate new hospitals which will be available for operation during the 1951 fiscal year, will further curtail out- patient medical care to veterans with service- connected disabilities, and will tremendously increase the backlogs of veterans awaiting hospitalization or out-patient care.” HURT MILITARY POWER Defense agencies: The Budget Director told the committee that they would be forced to fire civilians and to replace them with mili- tary people, thereby reducing military strik- ing power. ‘‘This,” he said, “would be in conflict with the existing policy against fill- ing civilian billets with military personnel.” Lawton added that custodial help in ord- nance plants and navy yards had a high turn-over which would result in maintenance problems. Aliso, that turn-over among skilled workers averaged about 30 percent annually. To cut this staff, he said, would have an adverse effect on the production, rehabilita- tion, and repair of weapons. General Services: This agency, Lawton brought out, has a turn-over in custodial jobs up to 200 percent a year. As a result, he added, “it is expected that by the end of th fiscal year 1951 the level of mainte- nance and security operations in Govern- ment office buildings would be reduced to an extremely low level.” He also said it would be impossible to maintain some operations on a 24-hour basis as they are now. MUST FILL SOME VACANCIES * Post Office: The Budget Chief said that many of its 42,000 offices have less than 10 employees. “Inability to fill vacancies,” he said “would present a major problem since the transfer of personnel between such offices would be difficult and expensive.” He also said that rural mail routes were a one-man operation and unless vacancies in them could be filled that routes would have to be con- solidated to an impracticable point. It was clear that Lawton and his staff had far more misgivings about the Taber-Thomas amendment than the Jensen rider. He told the committee that he didn’t know how it could operate in many circumstances. The committee, incidentally, has invited both Chairman Cannon, of the House Appropria- tions Committee, and Representative TaBER (Republican, New York), to explain what the House had in mind when it approved the amendment. Selecting a few agencies, Lawton told the committee the Taber-Thomas rider would have these effects: Federal security: That St. Elizabeths and Freedman’s Hospitals here would have to cut service to patients, and that Public Health hospitals would have to reduce food, drugs, clothing, etc., for its staff and patients. ~ PHS doctors, nurses, etc., are exempt. A re- duction would have to be made in the ad- ministrative staff of the old-age and sur- vivors insurance despite the fact that their salaries are paid from a trust fund. This would result, Lawton said, in reduced service to beneficiaries who have contributed to the trust fund and who are entitled to prompt payments. Defense agencies: Civilians serving in Army and Navy hospitals aren’t exempt as are strictly medical employees in VA and PHS hospitals. The defense agencies also would have to put in an additional system of ac- counting to keep tab on the amendment. FUNDS FOR RENT CUT General services: The amendment cuts funds to pay rent. Lawton points out that 90 percent of the leases are on from 2 to 4- year terms, and that the leases can’t be can~ celed without added cost to Uncle Sam. Post office: A cut of $200,000,000 and 57,000 employees as noted above. Postal transpor- tation costs couldn’t be cut as required by the amendment as they are determined by volume of mail and rates fixed by regulatory agencies. Leases.on already inadequate pos- tal facilities would have to be canceled. The procurement of both stamps and money orders would have to be curtailed. VA: Its budget would be cut about $53,000,- 000 and $35,000,000 of it would apply to per- sonnel. So, an additional cut of 12,100 would have to be made; 7,600 in administration, and 4,500 nonmedical people in the Department of Medicine and Surgery. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FUNDS DISCUSSED Lawton asked the committee if reductions under Taber-Thomas would be made in ap- propriations for the legislative and judicial branches and the District of Columbia gov- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ernment, and by whom, if it is determined they are to be covered. He points out that the Library of Congress, Government Printing Office and other such agencies appear to be covered by Taber- Thomas. On the other hand, the Jensen rider clearly exempts any agency in the leg- islative or judicial branches, or the District government. “With respect to the District of Columbia,” Lawton testified, ‘‘it is considered that the intended action shoulc be clearly spelled out.” He referred to the Taber-Thomas amendment, The Jensen turn-over amendment exempts scientific and technical jobs in the Atomic Energy Commission and the armed services which Lawton said “indicates a desire not to jeopardize employment of such personnel in the interests of national defense.” But the Budget Chief explained that the Bureau of Standards, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics and the Research and Development Board does work for these agencies, and their personnel would be cov- ered by the rider. A copy of Lawton’s statement on the House-approved budget was given to each member of the Senate committee. A com- mittee member allowed this reporter to study his copy. Living in a Glass House and Throwing Stones EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. DANIEL A. REED OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, April 26, 1950 Mr. REED of New York. Mr. Speaker, itis about time that the mask be stripped from our political and mud-slinging President. I am inserting an editorial from the Washington Times-Herald which at least has made a beginning in this important service to the American people: Dr. DREAMBOAT AND Mr. PENDERGAST Mr. Truman's speech at the Chicago sta- dium represented a tremendous effort to make people forget that he is the Pender- gast gang’s President, that he was a key fig- ure in the Pearl Harbor conspiracy, that at Potsdam he was the architect of the brutal peace, and that his State Department is under the domination of the Communists, and the English. It was an effort to make people forget the vast corruption and the vastly corrupting influence of his Adminis- tration. TRUMAN ASKED FOR OPPOSITION He shoulda be promptly challenged by the Republican opposition on all of these charges and compelled to answer them-—if he can. After all, Mr. Truman repeatedly asserted that he was talking facts and that he and his party “believe in giving the facts to the people.” The facts about Mr. Truman arp the facts he never mentioned. Tt is all the easier for the Republicans to challenge Mr. Truman for he departed from his text to write the challenge. He ex~ pressed, as “‘a personal wish,” the hope that the “opposition would come out for some~ thing and be a real opposition.” Citing the death of parties in the past which failed to satisfy the people’s needs, Mr. Truman sald! “we need a strong two-party system in this Republic of ours, and I sincerely hops the Republican party will profit by the examples I have cited.”
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD That is a sufficient invitation for the Re- publican Party to start acting like an op- position, to forget the echoing “me too” of Willkie and Dewey, to throw overboard the Truman snare that it is high minded and patriotic to swallow the follies of the New Deal foreign policy by being bipartisan, and to challenge Truman on every one of the countless issues on which he is vulnerable. Mr. Truman was not willing to discuss his lifetime association with the gunmen and vote thieves of the Kansas City mob. The Republicans should discuss it for him. Mr. Truman was not willing to try to justify the monstrous deceit by which his predecessor and his party brought down the Pearl Harbor holocaust on America and threw this Nation into a war which has left the world immeasurably worse then it was before. It will be remembered that, in 1945, when he finally released the secret reports of the Army board and Navy court which reported on the responsibility for Pearl Harbor, Mr. Truman said that the blame did not belong to his party and its leaders, but to the American people themselves. ‘T think the country is as much to blame as any individual in this final situation that developed at Pearl Harbor,” Mr. Truman said. “I came to the conclusion that the whole thing is the result of the policy which the country itself pursued.” REPUBLICANS MUST SPEAK Mr. Truman in Chicago was unwilling to develop this thesis of the war guilt of the American people. It is the duty of the Re- publicans to counter this shameful libel. Mr. Truman did not speak of his ratifica- tion at Potsdam of the Roosevelt deals at Tehran and Yalta which have sold half a billion of the world’s inhabitants into the hands of the Soviet slavemasters—the very result which he is now using in justification of the outlay of more than $20,000,000,000 a@ year to prosecute the cold war. If he won’t talk, the Republicans must. Mr. Truman wended his way through the whole State of Wisconsin without ever once mentioning Senator McCartHy or the Wis- consin’s Senator’s charge that Communists have infiltrated his State Department and are determining policy there. It is up to the Republican opposition to bring out the facts. Mr. Truman says he likes facts. Mr. Truman crossed the whole country without ever referring to the English par- entage of his Secretary of State and of a policy pursued by that Secretary which pre- eminently and at all times is in the interest of England and is dictated by England when it is not being dictated by Communists. These are facts for Republican challenge. Mr. Truman never discussed the enormous corruption which characterizes his adminis- tration, from petty smuggling and 5 percent rakeofis by White House pets, through tol- erated gambling which feeds the Democratic coffers in every big city and almost every State, down to the bribery of every segment of the body politic implicit in the operation of the Marshall plan. He did not once talk honestly of the de- basement of the currency through inflation- ary spending which robs every man, woman, and child of a little more of his savings each year this corrupt regime lasts. If Mr. Truman won’t speak, Republicans must. Mr. Truman was willing only to talk about dream castles and to pledge himself to help everybody’s dreams come true. Never could a stranger “genie of the lamp” be conjured up than this busted haberdasher who all his life has consorted with the scum of the Kan- sas City gang. The New Deal, in fact, is less a political philosophy than a blight. It will Kill the country if the country doesn’t vote it out of power, Blow to Kings Peint EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HENRY J. LATHAM OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 18, 1950 Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I wish to set forth in the Rrecorp the following edi- torial which appeared in the May 14 is- sue of the Long Island Daily Press: BLow To KINGS PoInT The end of monthly allowances for cadets at the Kings Point Merchant Marine Acad- emy is a serious blow tc that important in- stitution in Great Neck. In voting down an appropriation bill, Con- gress may have sounded the knell of training for merchant marine officers comparable to that given Army officers at West Point and Navy officers at Annapolis. In any event the Academy cannot now ful- fill commitments which induced many of the cadets to enroll there. At the same time, the end of the allowances may result in a sharply reduced enrollment in future classes. In voting down the maritime training bill, Congress cut off the $65-a-month allowance to the cadets. It is that allowance which makes it possible for a large portion of the Academy’s student body to attend classes there. Without it, many of them may be unable to go on with the specialized educa- tion the Academy offers. Boys who must have financial help if they are to enter the Academy no longer will be able to enroll. The allowance ends July 1. If it is to sur- vive, Kings Point will now have to seek ap- plicants for admission whose family financial status makes it possible for them to attend college without the governmental allowance. Defeat of the maritime training bill was a serious mistake. Martin Gorski MEMORIAL ADDRESS HON. CHAUNCEY W. REED OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 17, 1950 On the life, character, and public service of Hon. Marrin Gorsxl, late a Representative from the State of Illinois Mr. REED of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, the sudden and unexpected death of our esteemed colleague, MarTIn GorskI, filled my heart with sadness. Born in Poland, he came to Chicago at the tender age of three. Without the advantage of wealthy parents, he determined never- theless to secure for himself a good edu- cation. After graduation from high school he attended first, a business col- lege and then the Chicago Law School from which he received his bachelor of Jaws degree in 1917, These were evening schools and he was thus enabled to earn his way by working during the daytime. As a member of the Chicago Bar, his progress was rapid. He became succes- sively an assistant State’s attorney and master in chancery of the superior A3779 court of Cook County, which latter office he held for 14 years. In 1942 the people of his congressional district chose him as their representa- tive and he came to Washington as a Member of the Seventy-eighth Congress. He was re-elected to the Seventy-ninth, Hightieth, and Eighty-first Congresses. During the 7 years that he served he and I were drawn closely together. Al- though of different political faiths, we had a number of things in common. We were both from Illinois; we were both lawyers, and the congressional districts we represented, although not adjoining, were but a few miles apart. I had been a member of the Committee on the Judi- ciary for several years and was delighted when, during his first term, Martin GorSKI was elected to membership in that great committee. Then, again, he was immediately appointed by chairman Hatton W. Sumners, as a member of the same subcommittee to which I had been assigned. We served together on that subcommittee during the entire re- mainder of his congressional career and I came to know him well, He was mod- est, unassuming, conscientious, and gen- tlemanly. It did not take long for the members of our committee to appraise his real worth. That he was an able lawyer, there could be no doubt. Often he accepted assignments for special studies of proposed legislation and the opinions which he renderec on the legal questions involved, won for him the re~ spect of every member of our committee. We have missed him since his demise and shall never forget his outstanding serv- ice. It was my sad duty to be one of the official party from this Congress to at- tend his funeral. The outpouring of people in all walks of life who assembled to pay their respects to his memory was ample evidence of the veneration in which he was held by those who knew him so well. Some time, some day, our eyes shall see The faces kept in memory; Some day their hands shall clasp our hands Just over in the morning land. President Tells Western Farmers How He Would Run Their Fanns EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWARD H. JENISON OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 18, 1950 Mr. JENISON. Mr. Speaker, there have been some revealing results in the wake of President Truman’s so-called nonpolitical trek across the country. One significant and encouraging result has been the increasing tendency of the people themselves to weigh more care- fully the campaign oratory pouring from the rear platform of the cross- country train being financed by tax- payer dollars. There is increasing evidence of deter- mination to think through many of the pleasant-sounding proposals skillfully
A3780 compounded to attract votes in the Pres- ident’s expressed program to drive from the Congress those obstructionists who do not believe in squandering the re- sources of the present and the future to maintain temporary political power. In the great middle-western agricul- tural belt the President had much to say about his newest bid for farm sup- port, the Brannan plan. An interesting commentary on this is to be found in an editorial from the Danville (Ill.) Com- mercial-News, one of the Gannett group of newspapers, and the largest newspa- per in the congressional district I have the honor to represent. Conscientiously devoted to the interests of the rich agri- cultural area it serves, the Commercial- News offers a revealing editorial com- ment on the administration’s program deserving of consideration by all Mem- bers of the Congress. For that reason I am including it in the CoNGRESSsIONAL Recorp under permission granted to me in the House. The editorial follows: PRESIDENT TELLS WESTERN FarRMers How Hz Wovutp Run THER FarRMs The President, whose administration is spending in this one year more than the value of all the farms in this Nation, went out to Lincoln, Nebr., to tell the farmers how he’d run their business if they'll let him. He acclaimed Federal farm ‘policies as an unparalleled success, but admitted they have to be changed. There is a great clamor, he said; produc- tion patterns have not been readjusted to peacetime needs—as, indeed, they could not under Federal price supports; stockpiles of wasted food threaten to become “too high” and farmer income has declined 20 percent in spite of $4,750,000,000 spent in taking food off the market and an additional $2,000,- 000,000 declared necessary for this year. So without naming it, he again proposed the Brannan plan, which, he said, would check tke decline in farmer income and at the same time make food cheap enough so that all the food products that cannot be put in caves will be used. The Brannan plan is one that would con- tinue price supports on basic crops—the President declined to specify which are basic—~at a higher level than at present, and let perishables find their own level on a free market, the taxpayer paying to farmers the difference between the market price and a “fair return.” | The President admitted that this scheme would require the Government to assume some measure of control over how a farmer could use his acres. But it would be nothing like, he said, those horrid labels that farmers themselves have attached to it—regimenta- tion or socialization, British farmers could dispel any doubts about that. They have been operating under a Brannan plan for some years and have no control over thei: plazi.n:+ The President aid ibis pian would swing more acres into production of livestock and animal products—a goal much to be desired. But he did not explain the first question that will occur to any Illinois farmer, name~ ly, how to prop feed prices sky high and at the same time increase livestock production, , The Democratic Eighty-first Congress al- ready has turned down the Brannan plan, even for a trial run. The major farm or- ganizations oppose it. The citizens can only conclude that it is being urged by the Presi- dent only because it is a politician’s dream, @ promise of high prices to the farmer and low prices to the city consumer. Mr. Speaker, all of us are familiar with the wisdom of the familiar traffic warn- ing—stop, look, and listen. In the pres- ent situation confronting the Nation, it is equally prudent to add one more word. We must stop, look, listen, and think. Our economic survival depends on it. Explanation of a Proposed Bill To Estab- lish a More Effective Secondary Market for Home Loans Insured or Guaranteed by the Veterans’ Administration EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CHET HOLIFIELD OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 18, 1950 Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Speaker, the purpose of the proposed bill is to provide a permanent and more effective second- ary market for veterans’ home loans. A section-by-section analysis follows: Section 1 of the bill cites the contem- plated act as the “Veterans’ Secondary Market Act of 1950.” Section 2 of the bill amends section 801 (a) (1) of the National Housing Act so as to limit the purchases by the Fed- eral National Mortgage Association to loans insured or guaranteed by the Vet- erans’ Administration. The Congress would thus recognize that the 4 percent interest rate on the VA loan, having a less attractive yield than other Govern- ment insured mortgages, necessitates the support of a Government secondary market in order to maintain a reasonable flow of private capital into the veterans’ housing program. This section also declares that it is the intent of the Congress that the Federal National Mortgage Association so con- duct its purchase and sales program as to more effectively operate a revolving fund for the purchase of GI mortgages. Section 3 of the bill amends section 801 (c) of the National Housing Act by substituting the Chairman of the Board of the Reconstruction Finance Corpora- tion for the Federal Housing Commis- sioner as the one in whom would repose the authority to dissolve the Federal Na- tional Mortgage Association. This is deemec advisable because for several months almost 97 percent of the associa- tion’s purchasing activity has been in VA loans, and the bill would contemplate limiting the Association’s activity en- tirely to VA loans. Section 4 of the bill amends section 302 of the National Housing Act by increas- ing the authorization of the Federal Na- tional Mortgage Association to $3,500,- 000,000 from the present $2,'750,000,000 and would require that the Association make available for purchase by the pub- lic, the notes, bonds, debentures, or other such obligations which it may from time to time issue. This would eliminate the necessity of reflecting the Association’s increased authorization in the Federal budget. Section 5 of the bill amends section 306 of the National Housing Act by clarify- ing the authority of the Chairman of the APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Board of the Reconstruction Finance Corporation with respect to the Asso- ciation, by prohibiting liquidation or winding up of its affairs so long as sec- tions 501 and 502 of the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act are still in effect. Let Congress Decide EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDITH NOURSE ROGERS OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 18, 1950 Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts, Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my re- marks in the CONGRESSIONAL ReEcorp, I wish to call the attention of my col- leagues to an editorial that appeared in this week’s issue of the Disabled Ameri- can Veterans’ Semimonthly entitled “Let Congress Decide.” There has been criticism directed at the proponents of the 16,000-bed hos- pital bill passed by the House recently. In my opinion, it has heen unwarranted criticism and is due to a lack of knowl- edge of the facts as they exist. There is not a Member of Congress who does not have hundreds of veterans’ claims pending in his office—cases that at this moment are non-service-con- nected but after careful handling and proper presentation stand an excellent chance of being adjudged to be of serv- ice origin. A great many of these vet- erans are in poor physical and mental condition and need immediate hospitali- zation, It was to these sick veterans that I called the attention of the House when I supported the bill in question on the day it was before us. I stated then that the Veterans’ Administration had a waiting list of 25,707 applicants for hospitalization, most of them potential service-connected cases. As vehement- ly as I could I called attention to the added burden that will be placed upon the VA hospitals through the closing of certain large service hospitals. I know that Congress does not intend that physically and mentally ill veterans should walk the streets without the care and treatment they deserve because of their war service. The editorial follows: Ler Conorress Drcws A ray of sunshine brightened the critical VA hospital situation last month as the House passed a measure authorizing the restoration of 16,000 hospital beds eliminated by President Truman last year. Although the bill faces an uphill fight in the Senate, substantial progress was made in replacing these vitally needed facilities. The bill had hardly cleared the House, however, when it was viciously attacked by the very man who should most want its pro- visions carried into law—that is, if he believes in performing the duties of his office. The person referred to is Dr. Paul B. Magnuson, medical director of the Veterans’ Adminis- tration, upon whose shoulders rests the re- sponsibility of providing adequate hospitall- zation and medical care for this Nation’s dis- abled veterans. His immediate superior,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD General Gray, also voiced opposition to the measure. Unless someone is doing the thinking for these officials, their line of reasoning just doesn’t make sense. With full knowledge of over 25,000 sick and neglected veterans walk- ing the streets, dying with tuberculosis, and suffering from seriously agsrave*ed mental conditions, these officials blard:y state that additional facilities should not be approved by Congress. These sick men who are presently walking the streets are the same men who sacrificed their health in defense of this country. It is a well-known but little-publicized fact that thousands of these so-called non-serv- ice-connected veterans have service-connect- ed disabilities which are not yet adjudicated. Cthers have at least one service-connected disability but are denied hospitalization be- cause the tuberculosis or mental condition they are afflicted with is adjudged non- service-connected. The DAV claims service is constantly being flooded with letters, wires, and phone calis relating such tragic cases. Many are prac- tically on their death beds before service- connection is granted. Many more are per- manently removed from productive, useful lives because their disease is allowed to be- come chronic. They are granted non-serv- ice-connected pensions far more costly to the Government than prompt hospitalization. Certainly this is not the kind of treatment expected or deserved by some 15,000,000 de- fenders when they were called into uniform to win World War IT. General Gray and Dr. Magnuson wail that it is impossible to staff the proposed 16,000 beds. Yet, with almost the same breath, they fire nearly 5,000 medical personnel. Al- though the layoffs have heen postponed, the ax still hangs heavy over the heads of. vital VA medical workers. We wonder if these officials think tactics of this sort will solve their problems in acquiring needed doctors, psychiatrists, and nurses. The final decision must be made by Con- gress. If the 16,000 beds are to be restored and disabled veterans given a decent break, the DAV must offer these legislators conclu~ sive proof that the situation warrants addi- tional hospital beds. Our national com- mander and members of his staff have the proof and will present it to Congress. President Truman’s Address at Madison, Wis. EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ANDREW J. BIEMILLER OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, May 19, 1950 Mr. BIEMILLER. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- orD, I include the following address of the President at Madison, Wis., on Sun- day, May 14, 1950, on the occasion of the dedication of Filene House, of the Credit Union National Association: It is a pleasure for me to be here in Wis- consin, one of the great progressive States of the Union. And I am glad to be in Madi- son, a State capital and a university center in which so much has been done for the progress of our country. I am happy to participate in dedicating Filene House, the international headquarters of the Credit Union National Association. Credit unions offer people who have few resources a way of getting funds when they need them. I am told that last year, in the United States alone, credit unions had about 4,000,000 members and made loans totaling close to a billon dollars. This is a splendid record. It is a tribute to the values of thrift and self-help and mutual assistance. This building will serve credit unions in the United States and Canada, and other areas in the Western Hemisphere. It will be a truly international headquarters—and, as such, it symbolizes the international char- acter of cooperative activities. In whatever country they may be found these activities speak a common language and have a com~= mon goal. Their common language may be found in the principles of self-help, mutual assistance, and democratic control. Their common goal is to solve, by joint action, problems which cannot be solved by acting alone. The effectiveness of cooperative action has been demonstrated in many ways. In our country, farm cooperatives and cooperative stores have been successful. Use of the co- Operative principle has brought electricity to rural areas. Use of the same principle offers new ways to solve the housing problem. In a broader sense, moreover, cooperative action is the method we are using to solve problems we share with other nations. Today, the United States is engaged with other free nations in a great cooperative en- deavor to preserve freedom and achieve peace in the world. This is the greatest problem we face. We cannot solve it unless we work together. No one nation alone can bring about peace. Together, nations can build a strong defense against aggression, and combine the energy of free men everywhere in building a better future for all of us. That is the way to achieve peace. That is why it is in the interest of each of the free nations to help one another. The United States is a part of a world made up of many nations and many peoples. This world is constantly being drawn close to us by improved communications and improved transportation. Itis also being drawn close— dreadfully close—by weapons of destruction which become ever more terrible. We could not, even if we wanted to, go our own way and let the rest of the world go its own way. You remember the situation when our own country was formed. There were 13 separate colonies scattered along the Atlantic coast. Each of them could have tried to get along as an independent nation. But they were wise enough to realize the folly of such a course. They decided to band themselves together in a common cause. And out of that decision has grown the greatest nation the world has even seen. In many respects, the whole world is now in the same position in which those Colonies found themselves in 1776. Remember, you can now go from Madison to Moscow much quicker than a man could go from Phila- delphia to New York in those days. We must recognize that the march of events - has joined the peoples of the world together in a common destiny whether we like it or not. And yet the nations of the world are not ready, as the 13 Colonies were ready, to join together in one single government. Indeed, one nation today is doing every- thing it can, short of war, to prevent com- mon international action among nations. For the Communist philosophy feeds upon suspicion and hate and disunity. And the Communists are doing their best to break down the strength of the free nations of the world in an effort to bring more people under the domination of their godless creed. This makes it more than ever necessary for us to work together with the other free nations, to preserve our freedom and to in- crease our common welfare. If we are to achieve these ends, the free nations of the world must demonstrate that “ success. A3781 freedom leads to greater strength and a better life for the people. One of the most important tasks that we must accomplish together is to create a sound economic system in the world. And to do that, we need to work together for more production in the free countries and more trade among them. Our own country has grown strong and great by increasing production in all parts of the country and by expanding our in- ternal volume of trade. The same kind of growth can occur in the world. All coun- tries will benefit from a growing volume of international trade. But that trace has to be on a basis of fair competition and mutual benefit among nations that stand on their own feet. That is what we have been working for ever since the war ended. Our first step was to aid the recovery of nations whose economic systems were shat- tered by the war. We have given substan- tial assistance in the restoration of devas- tated areas and in the rehabilitation of in- dustry and agriculture. The greatest ex- ample of this type of activity is, of course, the Marshall plan. That program has been an extraordinary Three years ago, many of the Marshall-plan countries were on the verge of collapse and absorption by communism. Today, with our help, every one of them is stronger and better able to resist commu- nism than at any time since the war, The success of the Marshall plan demon- strates the value of international coopera- tion. It demonstrates that helping people to help themselves is one of the best ways to maintain and strengthen freedom. In the rest of the world, just as in Europe, joint action to increase production is the key to trade, progress, and security. One reason why there is so much unrest and insecurity in vast areas of the world, 1s their low produc- tivity and their inability to trade profitably with us and with other countries. The problem in most of the rest of the world is different from that in Europe. The primary problem in Europe is to reestablish and expand a modern industrial and agri- cultural economy. In the underdeveloped areas of the world, the primary problem is to build such an economy in the first place. And that requires a very different kind of action on our part. The greatest needs of the underdeveloped areas are modern scientific and technical knowledge to increase their skills, and the investment of funds to increase their produc- tive capacity. Today, more than half the people in the world are undernourished. Millions of farm- ers in Asia and Africa and Latin America still turn the ground with crude wooden plows. They Know little about improved seed. Their livestock is underfed and dis- eased.- Many of them have never even heard of soil conservation. As these people become better educated and healthier, as they get more roads and factories and power plants, as they increase their output of agricultural and industrial products, they will slowly but surely play a larger part in the community of nations. In that way, they can attain progressively better living conditions and renewed faith in the promise of the democratic way of life. In that way, too, the United States and other free countries can acquire new sources of the things we need and new markets for the things we produce. I am very glad that both Houses of Con-~ gress have authorized the Government to increase our rrogram for aiding the under. developed areas to progress toward modern standards of health, education, transporta- tion, and production. I am determined that this work shall go forward energetically. I regard it as one of the most important factors in promoting
A3782 trade and one of the main hopes for world peace. These cooperative programs to build a world economy which will bring increasing welfare to all free people, are vital to world peace. So also is the work we are doing to strengthen the common defense of free coun- tries against aggression. And so is the effort we are making to create an effective world political order through the United Nations. All these steps are essential to freedom and peace. They are all ways of putting into practice, in our relations with other nations, the basic cooperative principles of self-help, mutual assistance, and democratic control. The measures we are taking to bring peace to the world are necessarily imperfect. We are working to solve a problem larger and more difficult than any other we have ever faced. We shall inevitably experience set- backs, as well as successes. But we must continue to move forward, strongly and steadfastly, in cooperation with other free countries. We have no other choice. Isolationism is no alternative. Isolation- ism is a counsel of despair. Isolationism would bring on another war, and it would be a war in which we might stand alone against the rest of the world. In our own self-interest, therefore, we must cooperate with other free nations. We must join with them in a common defense against aggression and in providing greater oppor- tunities for human advancement, But there is another reason why we must work together with the other free nations. We have a moral duty to protect the ex- ercise of freedom here and in other lands. As a Nation we are committed to the prin- ciple of freedom because we believe that men are created equal. Freedom is a rela- tionship between equals. We believe that men are equal because we believe that they are all created by God. The religious traditions which have flowed together to make the foundations of this Nation all emphasize that every individual is an expression of the spirit of God, and should be respected on that account. Because of that relation between God and man, we believe that each man in himself has dignity and individual worth. Because of that relation, we believe that all men are brothers, who must strive to live together in freedom and peace. We would be unworthy of our traditions— we would violate our fundamental bellefs— if we failed to acknowledge and to live by the principles of brotherhood which bind men and nations together. ‘We must continue to exert our energy and our will, in cooperation. with those who share our beliefs, that together we may create on this earth a community of free men, living at peace with one another and working together for the common good. We must not falter or turn back. ‘We must go forward, in the faith that we are following the commandments of God, who is the Father of us all. Mothers Are Our Natural Peacemakers EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. HAROLD C. HAGEN OF MINNESOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, May 19, 1950 Mr. HAGEN. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rzc- oRD, I include the following excerpt from Drew Pearson’s last Sunday’s broadcast over the American Broadcasting Co. net- work. I was impressed by Mr. Pearson’s trib- ute to mothers the world over, and for that reason I ask for and secured his permission to insert this timely Mother’s Day statement in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. It follows: Sometimes as we look at the problems I’ve just described, I can’t help but think that the world’s diplomats, especially behind the iron curtain, could take a little advice from those we honor today—our mothers. For mothers are our natural peacemakers, Because they bring forth life, they set the highest standard on life. They are diplomats in family disputes, chief of staff in the kitchen, wizards of finance; they can mend anything from broken toys to broken hearts. Yet they never get a Congressional Medal or a Silver Star for just being a mother. They accept criticism or complaint, thoughtless- ness or selfishness, and just go on being taken for granted. Mothers are pretty much the same the world over, because they have a common bond—the desire to raise their children in peace. And if we could apply their phi- losophy to the rest of the world—a little wis~ dom, a little patience, a lot of common sense and much goodwill toward men—that would be the greatest guaranty that peace and democracy would not perish from this earth. The President’s Message to 1950 Confer- ence of Mayors EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HUBERT H. HUMPHREY OF MINNESOTA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, May 19 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the REcorp the mes- sage sent by President Harry S. Truman to the 1950 annual conference of the United States Conference of Mayors which was held May 11 to 13, in New York City. This statement discusses problems of mutual concern to the cities and the Federal Government, There being no objection, the state- ment was ordered to be printed in the REcorD, as follows: STATEMENT TO THE ANNUAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES CONFERENCE OF MAYorS, BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES Last year when the United States Confer- ence of Mayors met in Washington I had the opportunity of addressing your meeting in person. I regret that I cannot be with you this year again. I understand that, as was true last year, you have with you distinguished municipal Ieaders from cities in other countries. To these I extend the cordial welcome of the United States Government. Strong cities are essential to a strong na- tion: and a well-ordered world. Our cities are vital centers of a peaceful society, where our democratic rights and opportunities are expressed and practiced. They are the heart of our commercial and industrial life. They are strategic cores of our national defense and our internal security. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD We have passed the time when we can think of the various elements of our political economy as unrelated or conflicting. Hach is an organic part of our national life, fed by @ common bloodstream. Urban insecu- rity makes all of us insecure. Our cities, on the other hand, are dependent for sur- vival on the preservation and use of our land and natural resources and on a sound national economy. The national concern for the well-being of our cities was illustrated last July when I signed the Housing Act of 1949. That act enables cities to begin clearing their slums and to provide decent housing for more low-income families. That legislation is now being carried into action as you in your home towns determine and develop your own plans for your com-~ munities. Last year you looked to Washing- ton to get you the help you needed. Now you have the opportunity for action on your own part. I am pleased to learn that you are meet- ing this responsibility. Nearly 600 commu~ nities have already officially applied for Fed- eral aid to provide public housing for low- income families. Although the slum clear- ance and urban redevelopment program is new and complex, some 875 localities have expressed interest in undertaking local proj~ ects, and about 80, exclusive of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, have already acted officially to obtain Federal funds for their initial projects. This year, through the Housing Act of 1950, we have added to and expanded other types of housing assistance, particularly for lower cost and lower rental housing. That act has also set up practical machinery for further use and disposal of war and veterans’ housing in your communities. One proposal that I recommended this year did not pass the Congress—a proposal for Government help to housing for families in the lower middle-income range, particularly to cooperative housing. Iam afraid the lack of such assistance may prove a real handi-~ cap not only to many families who need housing, but also to many of your cities in the relocation of families from slum areas you seek to clear. I am going to continue to seek more help for these families, but it is also partly your task to let the Congress know of the seriousness of this middle- income housing problem in your cities. We must not delay, however, in putting into effect the important housing measures we now have, One of the major goals of our housing pro- gram is to increase the supply of rental hous~ ing and permit the orderly decontrol of rents without excessive hardship to tenants. As you know, I have recommended to the Con- gress the extension of rent control until June 80, 1951, as a protection to the tenant in a short housing market, and as a stabiliza- tion measure for the national economy. Along with the extension of controls we must continue our present policy of granting justi- flable increases in rent to the landlord. Any rent-control policy must be fair to the land- lord and to the tenant alike. Although it is, and will continue to be, our policy to de- control rentals as the supply of housing in any community comes into reasonable pal- ance with demand, it is estimated that as of June 30, 1950, 8,000,000 rental units in 40 States, 63 cities, and thousands of smaller communities will still require protection against the hazards of an acute housing shortage with all that portends for inflated rentals. Under your vigorous leadership, I am con- fident that we are on our way to decent hous- ing and better cities for our people. Last year I discussed some of our joint financial problems. I am happy to report that progress is being made in developing proposals to alleviate tax losses that occur when: the Federal Government acquires real
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. estate and reduces the property-tax base from which local governments derive their revenues. It is hoped that a legislative pro- posal may he ready for submission to the Congress at its present session. Many of you are seriously concerned with prospective water deficiencies and are mak- ing great efforts to overcome them. The Federal Government is aware of the prob- lems you face and has a very real interest in the availability of water for the peacetime needs of 1t8 citizens and for national secu- rity. Accordingly, you may be sure that the Public Health Service, the Water Resources Division of the Geological Survey, and other Federal agencies concerned with water, will be glad to assist you any way they can in solving your water-supply problems. In ad-~ dition, I have appointed a temporary Water Resources Policy Commission to advise me on national policies in this field. I am sure that that Commission and all other Federal agencies will welcome suggestions from your group for ways to solve our water-supply problems better and faster. I would like to call the attention of this conference to the national interest in peace- time v'anvirg for civil defense. Civ dcforse is a mutual task in which the Federal, State, and local governments must share responsibility to the people. .Since last October the Federal Government has trans- mitted a substantial.amount of guidance material on the subject to the gavernors of the States for subsequent transmittal to their local governments. Moreover, the Federal Government plans to release later this year a suggested plan for civil-defense organization which will serve as a guide to the States and munic-~ ipalities. In the meantime, I urge that you, as mu- nicipal leaders who will have primary re- sponsibility for implementing civil-defense plans in the event of need, proceed with your local civil-defense planning in cooperation with State authorities and the Federal Gov- ernment. May I suggest, too, that in your city plan- ning and building activities you pay par- ticular attention to the municipal problems of strategic dispersion, Unless absolutely necessary, it is unwise to continue the build- ing of vital municipal facilities in the center of cities already congested. The present trend toward municipal dispersion should be continued for civil-defense reasons. The national interest 1s an inescapable part of your local responsibilities, just as the welfare of the community as a part of the responsibility of the Chief Executive. Your assistance to me, individually and through the United States Conference of Mayors, has been invaluable, and I am sure you know that my primary concern has al- ways been the interest of the people to whom you and I alike are accountable, Letter From Hon. William Benton, of Connecticut, Favoring FEPC Bill EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FRANCIS J. MYERS OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, May 19 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. MYERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the RrcorD a letter writ- ten by our colleague the junior Senator from Connecticut [Mr. Benton] favor- ing the FEPC bill, which was printed in the New York Times of yesterday. There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the Rrecorp, as follows: FEPC BILL FAVORED—SENATOR BENTON URGES ENACTMENT OF LEGISLATION ON CIVIL Rriczts To the Eprror oF THE NEW YorK TIMES: Arthur Krock’s interesting column of May ll, criticizmg my speech on the FEFC bill, should be contrasted by your readers with your editorial of May 10 on the FEPC. Rea- sonable and honest men may disagree on this issue, and Mr. Krock clearly seems to disagree with your editorial, at least in part. Your editorial says: “Common sense, as well as experience in State and local legislation of this sort, indi- cates that the enforcement agency should be able to fall back on legal sanctions if its ef- forts at persuasion fail. There is no tyran~ nical power here, unless Congress and the Federal courts be viewed as instruments of tyranny.” The editorial further argues that an FEPO would “show the world outside our borders that we really mean it when we say that we believe in equality of opportunity.” My Sen- ate speech on May 9 documented the inter- national implications of the legislation. Let me now answer those who object to the FEPCO bill, as interpreted by Mr. Krock. EXEMPTION OF EMPLOYERS Is the exemption of employers with fewer than 50 employees unconstitutional® The Supreme Court upheld the Federal Unem- ployment Insurance Act, which exempts em- ployers with fewer than 8 employees as well as all farmers and domestics. It upheld the Wagner Act, which applied only to em-= ployers, the Petrillo Act, which applied only to broadcasting employees; the Guffey Act, which applied only to the bituminous coal industry; the Sugar Act, which established quotas for offshore refiners but not for those on the mainiand. We are all familiar with the many precedents upholding chain-store regulation and taxation according to size. Chief Justice Hughes said: “Congress may consider and weigh relative situations and needs. Congress is not restricted by any technical requirement but may make lim- ited applications and resort to tests so that it may have the benefit of experience in deciding upon the continuance or extension of a policy which, under the Constitution, it is free to adopt. As to such choices, the question is one of wisdom and not of power.” Is the exemption of employers with fewer than 50 employees a “bad domestic policy”; is it either “a sham” or ‘an outrider for an- other bill which will affect all employers”? The opponents who are q™:oted by Mr. Krock have missed my point here. Although ex- empting the smaller-type employer, in store or factory or farm, the bill applies to around half of American nonfarm employees and this half is employed by a relatively small number of corporate units. APPLICABLE TO LARGE GROUPS By exempting employers of 50 or more, the bill brings the administrative problem within fe&sible bounds. But the exemption of smaller firms is based on policy more vital than mere administrative convenience. The pill is designed to apply only to the larger corporations and the labor unions, where the owners and bosses don’t Know and can- not know their employees. It is difficult for a small employer to fire ah efficient worker because of racial prejudice, as it is difficult for him to desert loyal employees in ill health or old age. He Knows his men and he has a feeling of responsibility and often of affection which vanishes in the person~ nel and employment Offices of the big cor- porations, where employment policy tends to be discriminatory as well as soulless. Are my conclusions sound as to the inter- national impact of discriminatory practices at home? Here I can only refer him to the A3783 evidence exhaustively collected in my speech, including testimony by Dean Acheson, John Foster Dulles, and others responsible for our foreign policy. My position was not that we conduct our foreign policy merely in terms of its effect on Communist propaganda. Senator RussgELL’s query as to whether we should repeal our Constitution was of course @ gibe rather than an argument. We can never hope to win Communist approval, no matter how spotless our record; but we can= not afford to give a whip with which to flay us to our enemies who would destroy us. Our failure to pass the FEPC Act will hurt us abroad among the very peoples whose alli- ance we most want and need in the cold war. We can no longer afford to give reasonable men anywhere the ground for reasonable suspicion or justified criticism in this vital area of civil rights. ORIGIN OF BILL Where in fact did the FEPC bill originate? Mr. Krock says that according to available records the modern drive for this legislative concept seems to have had its inception in the Communist Party platform of 1928 and in the Daily Worker of the same year. Walter White, president of the National Association for the Advancement of the Colored People, repHes to Mr. Krock on this point in the Times of May 16 by tracing the movement back to 1909, and even before. I prefer to believe that the FEPC idea really began in the Book of Genesis itself, where it is written that God created man in his own image. FEPC is reflected in the Sermon on the Mount and in all true Christian teaching ever since. And FEPC was first translated into political terms by a document some-= what antedating the Daily Worker, a docu- ment which declared as a self-evident truth that all men are created equal. Our unfinished business is all too obvious. The FEPC bill and the rest of President Tru- man’s civil-rights program should be enacted into law. Entirely apart from the fact that justice demands it—that we betray our democratic ideals if we refuse it—our na- tional security is involved to a far greater extent than has been publicly recognized, There is no time to lose. . WiLtIAM BENTON. WasHINcTon, May 13, 1950. ' What’s Good in Labor-Management , Relations EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. AUGUSTINE B. KELLEY OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, May 19, 1950 Mr. KELLEY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, when we hear of strikes, we sometimes forget that most employers and most workers have peaceful indus-. trial relations. We also tend to forget that it is collective bargaining in good faith between management and labor that avoids labor disputes and that settles strikes when they do occur. On April 14, my friend, Millard Cass, addressed a church group here on “What Is Good in Labor-Management Rela- tions.” Referring to his speech, the Labor Leader, published by the Asso- ciation of Catholic Trade Unionists, said: Millard Cass, Assistant to the Under Sec« retary of Labor, gave an effective and com- mon seise answer to the proponents of the
‘A3784 theory of continuing class-warfare In a talk 2 weeks ago. I believe the Members of the Congress will find Mr. Cass’ speech interesting and enlightening. Under permission to extend my remarks in the Rrecorp, I am including Mr, Cass’ address as follows: Tt is still dark most days when America’s farmers rise for their chores. And 1t 1s not too much brighter when their fellow-workers start out to make our great industrial ma- chine run. Hours later, when the sun has sunk below the rim of San Francisco Bay, the farmers and industrial workers who are the backbone of our country wearily seek the rest earned by honest labor. Farmers and workers plant crops and run machines, harvest grain and assemble prod~ ucts, run tractors and build houses. From Bangor to Seattle, from Miami to Los Ange- les, from Chicago to New Orleans, the heart- beat of our country is strong and warm and rhythmical. Ours is a land of myriad differences and astounding similarities—but through it all runs a common thread. From the Atlantic to the Pacific, from the Great Lakes to the Gulf, we are a single, united people. We come from many lands, many strains, and many races, and we worship God in different ways. We speak the same language, but we speak it with a variety of accents. Nevertheless, in 48 States and the District of Columbia, the words “democracy” and “freedom” have the same spine-tingling effect. This is “the land of the free’—~ this is a people with a common goal and a great destiny. Our greatness is not merely a matter of Federal and State constitutions and natural resources. It is primarily a matter of folks— farmers and workers and businessmen—mil. lions of fine, independent Americans. They have a common interest in a better way of life for all our people. Those who have made our country great have a real community of interest—whether they be farmers, industrial workers, or businessmen. They grow the food, produce the goods, and consume the products of America’s great agricultural and industrial machine. They constitute the consumer demand that makes us prosper. Sometimes we forget these good things about our country and our way of life. All too often we take our great achievements for granted and merely criticize our imperfec- tions and weaknesses. To be sure, a critical review of our society, our economy, and our democracy is always in order. Good as it is, our way of life is not perfect. Growth and development are a mark of the democratic system. We must be constantly vigilant to improve, expand, and strengthen our de- mocracy. Nevertheless we need not be unduly modest about our accomplishments. We would be unrealistic, unpatriotic and ungrateful if we did not feel proud of our democracy and our economy. In spite of its imperfections, ours is the greatest and best country in the world. Make no mistake about that. We have been lucky. That we must admit, We are endowed with great natural resources, large and diversified areas and a wide and healthful range of climate. We did not suffer devastation from the two World Wars. Nev- ertheless, these factors do not even begin to explain or account for our greatness. Many other countries have all of these assets, but have failed to achieve our political or eco« nomic strength or our democratic freedoms. ‘We have been lucky, but we have also been industrious, courageous, and ingenious. We have worked and fought and sacrificed for what we got. We have developed the highest standard of living the world has ever known and the greatest productive machine extant. ‘We have retained and protected individual freedom and kept our faith in God. And we are dedicating a significant share of our bounty to help other nations preserve their democratic freedoms and strengthen their economies. This is at the same time both an act of generosity and an investment in our own. well-being. With all this we sometimes tend to forget the good things about our country. This 1s as true in the field of industrial relations as in any other. We read about strikes and lock- outs and hear about industrial disputes, but we seldom know when a contract is signed peacefully. We hear a great deal about dis- agreements between employers and workers, but we seldom are informed about labor~ management cooperation. As a result, some people conclude that employers and workers are opposing classes having antagonistic n- teresis. This was the false premise adopted by Marx and Engels over 100 years ago. It is even more wrong today than it was then. There is in the United States a large and relatively unpublicized amount of labor- management cooperation. It is this indus- trial harmony that I want to discuss today. It is this good side of labor-management relations that has helped make us great. We could not have achieved our great produc~ tion or distributed our largesse as widely among our people if we had not enjoyed a high degree of industrial peace and a large amount of joint endeavor by management and labor. Labor-mangement cooperation is not dramatic. It seldom has news value, but that does not mean it is unimportant. Sometimes, our emphasis on news value warps our sense of lasting value. By devot- ing our attention to the sensational, we lose some of our sense of perspective. We have carefully documented labor- management disputes, tried them in the newspapers, dramatized them with headlines, and compiled statistics with respect to their extent, duration, and cost in man-days of idleness. Only recently, however, has there been a widespread attempt to present the positive side of labor-management relations. It was the extensive and continuing drama- tization of industrial disputes that led the National Planning Association, on the sug- gestion of Mr. Clinton Golden, to start a series of inquiries into the extent and causes of industrial peace. Some schools and col- Jeges and some individuals from manage- ment, labor, and the Government have also decided to publicize the peaceful develop- ments in the field of labor-management re- lations, Under the leadership of Secretary Tobin, the Department of Labor is taking an. active interest in promoting and publiciz- ing industrial peace. It is good to see that groups like your own are also interested in this positive side of industrial relations. At the outset, it should be noted that union-management cooperation connotes an active policy of collaboration for the purpose of promoting the common interest of both management and the workers in a plant or industry. It is reflected by honest and sin- cere collective bargaining resulting in con-~ tractual relationships between the parties. It involves such things as participation by labor and management through joint com- mittees in the elimination of wasteful methods of operation and plant inefficiency, in the introduction of new machinery or processes, and in the formulation of sales- promotion programs. It has even involved the lending of union funds to the company, the services of union specialists in produc- tion problems, and joint support of legisla~ tion in the interests of the industry. Every year many thousands of collective- bargaining agreements between management and labor are peacefully negotiated. The number of such contracts has been variously estimated as from more than 100,000 to half ® million. Tens of thousands of disputes and grievances are settled annually without a strike or lock-out. Hundreds of joint labor~ APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD management committees are still operating effectively. There are, under the auspices of the United States Department of Labor, 6,500 local joint apprenticeship committees. The 38,000 members of these committees, repre- senting management and labor, work toe gether to promote apprenticeship. Hundreds of persons from the ranks of management and labor are working together to promote industrial safety through the President’s Conference on Industrial Safety. This is a continuing program sponsored by Secretary Tobin at the request of President Truman. In all of these fields workers and employers are working together to develop good human relations. Shakespeare has said that: “The evil that men do lives after them. The good is oft interred with their bones.” This, unfortunately, seems to he the case in industrial relations. For example, how many of you know that the Crown Zellerbach Corp. and the Pacific coast pulp and paper industry have not had a single day’s inter- ruption of work for 14 years caused by a dis= pute between a paper mill and its employees? During this period only two grievances have been submitted to arbitration. No unfair Jabor practice charge has been filed under the National Labor Relations Act, and during World War II only one dispute was presented to the War Labor Board. All of this occurred in an industry which has region-wide collec- tive bargaining. It occurred in a highly unionized industry where over 98 percent of the eligible workers belong to the Interna~ tional Brotherhood of Pulp, Sulphite, and Paper Mill Workers or the International Brotherhood of Paper Makers, which jointly possess the exclusive bargaining rights. Sim~ ilar industrial peace has been achieved be« tween the Hickey-Freeman Co. and the Amal- gamated Clothing Workers of America, who have enjoyed a 29-year strike-free period of labor relations; the Nashua Gummed and Coated Paper Co. and seven AFL unions, which have had a 15-year-old collective-bar- gaining relationship with no strikes or lock- outs; the Sharon Steel Corp. and the United Steelworkers of America, which have had only two strikes or work stoppages—-both indus- try-wide steel strikes—during thelr 12 years of collective-bargaining relationship; the Lockheed Aircraft Corp. and the Interna- tional Association of Machinists, which have settled 30,000 grievances over a 12-year period without a strike or lock-out; and the Dewey & Almy Chemical Co. and the International Chemical Workers Union, which have had a 9-year record of peaceful collective bargain- ing. These are a few examples of industrial peace taken from the studies by the National Planning Association on this subject. The association has noted a number of factors normally existing in cases where there is a healthy labor-management rela- tion. These are: “Management—from top to bottom—gen- uinely accepts the process of collective bar- gaining, and the union as an institution. “The union fully accepts private owner- ship and operation of the industry. “The union is strong, responsible, and democratic. “Mutual trust and confidence exist be- tween the management and the union. “Neither party has adopted a legalistic ap- proach to the problems of collective bar- gaining. “There have been no serious ideological in- compatibilities between the company and the union leaders, nor within the union itself. “Negotiations are ‘problem centered’—the management and the union spend more time on solving concrete problems than they do on defining abstract principles. “Grievances are settled promptly within a flexible procedure—many which could be processed through the grievance procedure clear to the top are handled quickly and informally.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD “There are effective two-way communica- tion channels between the management and the union. “Management consults the union and en- courages its participation in the making of important decisions. “The line management organization, down through the foremen, fully accepts responsi- bility for industrial relations.” While emphasizing the absence of indus- trial disputes between the companies and unions which it is studying, the National Planning Association has noted that the lack of strikes 1s not the only criterion of healthy industrial relations. It has also noted that occasional strikes do not prove conclusively that labor relations are unhealthy. Labor and management have a real com- munity of interest, but their interests are not identical. As a result, there is bound to be some conflict in the course of day-to-day as- sociation in an industrial democracy. The important thing is whether the relationship which exists remains healthy, 1n spite of oc- casional conflict, or whether it deterorates to warfare despite a common interest in industrial peace, In this connection, it is worth noting that strikes today are very different from strikes afew years ago. As recently as the 1930’s, strikes were frequently marked by violence and bloodshei. Teday, on the other hand, peaceful labor disputes are the rule. For- merly the basic distrust and misunderstand- ing of the parties and the opposition of em- ployers to collective bargaining by their workers made labor disputes virtually civil wars. Today, with each side recognizing the other, strikes are normally merely a test of economic power to achieve desired results and do not involve ancillary physical force. The result of this has been that strikes no longer breed the mistrust and hatred they formerly engendered, They no longer upset collective-bargaining relationships and dis- rupt them as they once did. The aftermath of strikes in continued grievances and con- tinued suspicion has therefore, to a large extent, been eliminated. In spite of the attention and publicity given strikes, they involve only a small per- centage of the total work force and of the estimated total working time. In 1946 strike activity was at a peak. Even in that year, however, the percent of estimated work- ing time lost by strikes was only 1.43. In 1949, when major stoppages accounted for over three-fifths of all man-days of idle- ness, only 0.59 percent of estimated working time was lost as a result of labor disputes. These work-stoppage statistics are an in- direct method of demonstrating the high de- gree of labor-management cooperation dur- ing the year. By simple arithmetic, it is ap- parent that 99.41 percent of estimated working time was utilized productively, without work stoppages. That means that in 1949 labor relations were almost as pure as Ivory soap. This labor peace reflects the desire of man- agement and labor generally for industrial harmony. Both sides are well aware of the cost of strikes and lock-outs. They know that while the public suffers from labor dis- putes, it is the parties themselves who suf- fer first and most. Workers do not treat lightly the stopping of their income, with all its attendant con- sequences. It is not easy to take a step that will cut off the funds necessary for food, rent, and clothing, and that may jeopardize the equity in a home or car, a radio or a refrigerator. Workers turn to the strike Weapon only as a last and desperate resort. Strikes are not born full bloom. They grow from disputes, inequities, or injustices. They are a gamble on economic force to which workers sometimes turn when all else has failed to resolve a dispute. Employers also have much to lose from industrial warfare. During strikes or lock- outs, they find themselves without income but with continuing responsibilities and ex- penses. Owners demand profits, and stock- holders require dividends. Competitive po- sition can be impaired and markets for prod~ ucts can be lost during a prolonged cessa~ tion of operations. It is clear that economic necessity requires labor and management ta seek industrial peace. Richard Steele wrote in the Spectator in 1744 that “The noblest motive is the public good” This concept has keen responsible for much industrialharmony. A trade-union statesman recently said: “In a free society, workers have the right to strike and employ- ers the right to suspend an operation. But neither possesses the right to injure severely or irreparably innocent fellow men. Both owe a prior obligation to society.” Recog- nition of this obligation has induced the parties in many instances to agree to vol- untary arbitration, fact-finding boards, or postponements of strike action or shut- downs. Both sides have frequently demon- strated real statesmanship in this regard. One caveat should be noted, however, It is unfair and unwise to count upon workers or employers to shoulder the full cost of promoting and protecting the public interest. For example, 1f workers believe they need and deserre > ~->:> imerease, it is fine to say that they :"..-c*¢ strike to get it because the public interest requires continued opera- tion of that industry. From the employees’ standpoint, however, it will appear that the public is demanding of these workers greater sacrifices for the public good than it is de- manding of other segments of the popula- tion. The public should have as great an interest in right and fairness as it has in continuity of operations. Mutual understanding is a prerequisite to labor-management cooperation. An indus- trialist recently stated that: “When man- agement and employees uncerstand one an- other, have mutual respect and mutual con- fidence in one another, and when both man- agement and employees feel that they are getting a fair deal from the other side, « * we have made one important step toward achieving labor peace.” That need for understanding and confidence is a fer-~ tile ground for all who are really interested in industrial peace. There is still much to be done to bring the story of labor to man- agement and the story of management to labor. Development of mutual understanding is not achieved in one day. It comes from long and honorable association and is found- ed upon goo faith. There can be no under- standing where management is antiunion or labor is not sympathetic to the need for profit in a free enterprise economy. There can also be no continuing understanding where the rules of the game inspire dis- trust. Legislation that inspires animosity, distrust, and fear is, therefore, an impedi- ment to industrial peace. It is for that rea- son, among others, that the Taft~Hartley Act has not promoted labor-management cooper- ation. Mutual understanding must be based upon knowledge as opposed to ignorance—facts as opposed to fiction. It is up to employers and workers to supply each other with the in- formation necessary to an understanding of their respective problems and needs. I do not look at the world through rose- colored glasses. I did not arise this morning singing a song from Pippa Passes, and con- cluding that “All’s right with the world.” Nevertheless, I do believe that there is much that is good in labor-management relations. Emphasizing healthy industrial relations will not only help us see ourselves in truer pro~ spective but will assist us in our quest for sound and enduring industrial peace. A8785 The Statehood Bills EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. E. L. BARTLETT DELEGATE FROM ALASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, May 19, 1950 Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I include the following editorial from the Wash- ington Daily News of May 16, 1950: Timx’s RUNNING Out Several Members were absent when the United States Senate’s Committee on In~ terior and Insular Affairs held its weekly meeting yesterday. So the committee did not take up the bills, already passed by the House, to grant state- hood to Alaska and Hawaii. Senator O’MaHoney, of Wyoming, the com- mittee’s chairman, said he hopes the state- hood bills will be considered next Monday, Surely they should be—and not merely considered but approved and made ready for an early vote 1n the Senate. Time 1s running out. A few more weeks, and Congress will be itching to adjourn so its many Members who are seeking reelection can go home and start campaigning. It will be a sad thing if the statehood measures get lost in the shuffle. Sad for the people of Alaska and Hawaii, who are hoping that Congress at last will keep the promises of both major political parties and give them statehood. Sad for the people of the United States, who need these two great Territories in the Union now as bastions of national defense and as evidence that America means what it says when it professes devotion to the principle of self-government. Revision of Administrative Procedure of Customs Bureau EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. IRVING M. IVES OF NEW YORE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, May 19 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. IVES. Mr, President, I ask unan- imous consent to have inserted in the body of the Recorp, following this brief statement, the context of a resolution of the board of directors of the Greater Endicott Chamber of Commerce, of Endicott, N. Y., in opposition to a bill to revise administrative procedure in the Bureau of Customs. Mr. CONNALLY. Reserving the right to object, is the matter which the Sena- tor submits to ke printed in the Appendix? Mr. IVES. It is a resolution, Mr. President, from a chamber of commerce, and it is addressed to the Congress, Mr. CONNALLY. Did the Senator re- quest that it be printed in the Appendix? .Mr. IVES. I requested that it be printed in the body of the Recorp. Mr. CONNALLY. I object.
A3786 Mr. IVES. Mr. President, so long as there is an objection, Iam perfectly will- ing that the resolution be printed in the Appendix. There being no objection, the resolu~ tion was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: RESOLUTION OF THE BoarD OF DIRECTORS OF yur GREATER ENDICOTT CHAMBER OF CoM-= MERCE At a regular meeting of the board of di- rectors of the Greater Endicott Chamber of Commerce held at the Hotel Frederick on the 12th day of April 1950, the following resolution was duly offered, seconded, and unanimously carried, to wit: “whereas it has become known that a bill to revise administrative procedures of the Bureau of Customs is now being prepared in Washington; and “whereas such bill provides, araong other things, for the elimination of the American selling price principles as heretofore estab- lished and a reduction of the protective tariffs with regard to rubber and rubber soled canvas footwear; and “Whereas such proposed legislation is con- trary to the long-established tariff policy of the Federal Government; and “whereas such legislation if adopted, would directly affect the manufacturers of rubber and rubber soled canvas footwear in this community, and would eliminate the jobs of an estimated 1,500 employees: Now, there- fore, be it “Resolved, That the Greater Endicott Chamber of Commerce go on record as being opposed to the proposed changes above men- tioned and that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to our Representatives in Con- gress and other interested executives of the Federal Government.” I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted by the board of directors of the Greater Endi- cott Chamber of Commerce, at a regular meeting thereof held on the 12th day of April 1950. Frank J. BALL, Secretary, Greater Endicott Cham- ber of Commerce. Remarks of President Truman at Breckenridge, Minn. EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HUBERT H. HUMPHREY OF MINNESOTA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, May 19 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the ConcrEssIonaL ReEcorp the remarks of our President, Harry S. Truman, which were made on May 13, 1950, on his visit to Brecken- ridge, Minn. There being no objection, the Presi- dent’s remarks were ordered to be printed in the Rrcorp, as follows: I am glad to be back here in Minnesota once more. I had a grand time here about 2 years ago, when I was running for office. During the past week I have traveled across the great plains and the Rocky Moun- tains nearly to the Pacific Coast, and back again through Montana and North Dakota. I have been reporting on’ what the Govern- ment is doing and how it is working with your State and local governments to build @ better America, In the last few days I have been talking particularly about recla- mation and flood control. What has been happening this last month in northern Minnesota, in North Dakota, and in Canada, proves the necessity of our going ahead with fiood control projects on a national basis. North of here, along the Red River a great many cities and towns have been overrun by devastating floods. The Army, the Na- tional Guard, State governments, the Red Cross and other agencies are all working together to relieve the distress. I have al- located $150,000 from the President’s emer- gency fund to help restore some of the dam~- age done by these floods in Minnesota. I have a very small emergency fund, and I have given you all I can. But relief after floods have come does not help much more than locking the barn door after the horse has been stolen. These tragic floods bring home to all of us how important it is to prevent costly floods in the future. I have been glad to see your own Senator Humpnurey taking the lead in working for flood-control projects. And he happens to be on the train with me tonight. Unfortunately, there are always some peo- ple who are afraid to plan for the future. Every time the Federal Government looks very far ahead, some of our opponents will yell it costs too much, we have got to cut the budget. And they have been trying to cut my budgets ever since I have been Pres- ident. They always come up with a little more than I ask them to give me on a& sub- ject that I am not interested in, but they try to cut- the things that help the country. I happen to know that some people have tried to say that to Senator HuMPHREY, but I am glad to know that he doesn’t pay any attention to these cries of false economy. I am proud to say that he knows that a few dollars spent on flood control today will save a great many dollars in the future—not to mention homes, farms, industries, and even lives. The same thing goes for all of our do- mestic and international programs. Some 1 ple cry that we should cut down on edu- cation, housing, and health. I say that this is the worst form of false economy. A few dollars spent here will pay rich investments in the future in building a higher standard of living, and a stronger Nation. The economizers—they are not really economizers, they are anti-Trumanites—also cry that we must stop spending money on our national defenses and stop sending money abroad. This, too, is another form of false economy. It is going to be difficult and expensive—make no mistake about it—to get the world back on the road to peace. But the expense is nothing at all compared with the catastrophe of a third world war. We have got to make sure that for every dollar we spend we get a doliar’s worth of value. We have to have true economy by making sure we don’t spend money on any- thing we don’t actually have to have. But we can’t stand false economy if we are going to succeed in building a stronger United States and a peaceful world. Now, I have been spending my time since Japan folded up in September 1945, trying to get a peaceful world. Ihave done everything I possibly can, and those who have been with me in the Cabinet have done everything possible, to obtain peace in the world. Now, to obtain peace in the world, the United States must remain strong itself. In order to remain strong, we must have a na-~ tional defense establishment which is strong enough to meet the aggressors. We must have an economic set-up that is strong APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD enough to keep the country prosperous. That’s all in the world I am working for. I took this trip around the country just to explain to the people exactly what I am trying to do and what the Government is trying to do to obtain peace, and to main- tain that strong economy. You know the Constitution provides that the President of the United States once a year goes down and speaks to the Congress on the state of the Union. Well, now, what I have done since I left Washington, a week ago—it will be a week tomorrow—I have been facing the people and giving the people a message on the state of the Union, and what I think will be best for the welfare of this country and what I think will contribute to peace in the world. IT am here for that purpose, and I want you to see what I look like, and I want you to understand that Iam not running for office. I ran for office in 1948 and had right good luck. I am merely reporting to you as the head of the Government and as your servant. The President and the Vice President are the only men in the United States who are elected at large by the whole people of the United States, and I think it is right and proper that a report should be made to you every so often, personally, by the man who is responsible for carrying on the executive branch of the Government. I can’t tell you how very much I appreciate this wonderful and cordial reception into Minnesota. This sort of reception has met me everywhere—at Galesburg, Ill; in Ot- tumwa, Iowa; in Lincoln, Nebr.; in Casper, Wyo.; in Pendleton, Oreg.; and Grand Coulee Dam, in Washington—Butte and Grand Falls, in Montana; at Minot, in North Dakota. And at Fargo, N. Dak., just a while ago, they told me that they had the biggest crowd that Fargo had ever had in its history. And it looked to me like all the people in North Dakota were there. Now, here I have come into Minnesota, al- most at midnight, and it looks to me as if everybody in this great State of Minnesota is here. They tell me there arc more people up ahead of the train than there are behind it. ITappreciate that more than I can tell you, and I am more than happy to have your Senator Humpsrey with me on the train to- night. Thank you very much. I am sorry that I can’t present to you Mrs. Truman and Margaret. They have had a most terrific day, and they had to go to bed. Diamond Jubilee, Sons of the American Revolution EXTENSION OF REMARKS fo} HON. JOSEPH R. McCARTHY OF WISCONSIN IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, May 19 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an address delivered by me before the Diamond Ju- bilee Convention of the Sons of the American Revolution, May 15, 1950, at the Claridge Hotel in Atlantic City, N. J. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Gentlemen, I want you to know that I feel deeply privileged by the invitation to address the diamond jubilee of the Sons of the American Revolution, an organization
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD which has always stood for America—Amer- ican first, last, and always. It is truly an honor to meet with you, the descendants of men who successfully fought against almost insurmountable odds to establish a free nation dedicated to the dignity of man and the freedom to worship God—ycu, whose forefathers established a free mation in a world of despotism, a na- tion which was destined to grow to be the most powerful on earth. Your organization was born of a revolu- tion—a revolution which gave birth to free- dom and independence. Today the world is torn by another revolution, one which threatens to destroy what was won by your ancestors whom we today honor. Before discussing this modern revolution of destruction and the impetus given it by some high officials in our Government, I would like to take a few moments to clarify two things which I am asked about most often. . The first has to do with the skeleton files which the President has given to the Tydings committee, which was created to investigate my charges of communism in our Govern- ment. Rather than take your time on the subject of files, or express my personal opin- ion thereon, I have made photostats of the reports made by the chief investigator of the House Appropriations Committee which investigated those files, This report is based partly on an FBI investigation of those files made shortly before that time. This FBI report, you understand, was made before the present fight about files. I have made sufficient photostats so that as many of you as care to may take them along with you. But for the benefit of the listening audience who cannot see those photostats, I might say that they set forth in some detail that the files were inadequate, in that many of them had been completely rifled, that prac- tically everyone in the division had com- plete, free access to take material from the files whenever he cared to, and, in effect, that there is no way of knowing whether or not any file was complete. And, gentlemen, those are the files which the President is giving the committee. That is one of the reasons why I repeated- ly warned the committee that in order to arrive at the truth, they must get not only the skeleton State Department loyalty files, but the civil service and the FBI files. So much for that. Another question often asked is in regard to the methods employed. A number of my friends say, “While we agree you are getting the job done, McCartay—a job that is 16 years overdue—we wonder if it couldn’t be accomplished by some other method.” Gentlemen, this is the roughest fight I have ever been in—and it has only started. As we cut nearer to the quick and more seriously threaten the plans of those traitors to America, the squealing will become louder and the fight will become tougher. Gentlemen, when I was a small boy on the farm, mother raised chickens. The eggs and meat furnished groceries and much of the clothing for our family of nine. We lived fairly close to the woods, and weasels, snakes, and skunks would steal the baby chicks from beneath the mother hen and kill them. One of the jobs which my three brothers and I had was to dig out and destroy those killers. It was not a pleasant job—and some- times we did not smell too well when the job was finished. But the skunks were dead and the chickens alive. A much more dangerous and smellier breed of skunk is now being dug out in Wash- ington. And to those of you who say that you do not like the rough tactics—any farm boy can tell you that there is no dainty way of club- bing the fangs off a rattler or killing a skunk, Tintend to continue with this job. It can- not be done with kid gloves. It has been a bare-knuckle job. It will continue as such. I have also been flooded with questions as to my reaction to the paranoic attack by Senator Cuavzz last Friday on Louis Budenz, who testified that the State Department’s high policy adviser, Owen Lattimore, was a member of a Communist cell. CHAVEZ Was supported on the Senate floor in his attack on Louis Budenz by the ad- ministration leader, Senator Lucas, and the chairman of the investigating committee, Senator TypINGs. Obviously, in this rugged fight, the Kremlin is reaching into high places for dupes to spew its malignant smear. On May 25 when I am to speak before an editors’ convention, I intend to answer in de- tail this vicious assault made on a witness upon whom the Department of Justice and the FBI have placed great reliance in the prosecution of dangerous enemies of the country, like the 11 top Communist leaders found guilty before Judge Medina. Had it not been for the hundreds of hours of help given by Louis Budeng to the FBI and the Department of Justice, many of the Communist conspirators now in jail would still be free to do their dirty work of under- mining the United States. I would like to discuss with you gentlemen today the details of a most dangerous hoax— a@ most vicious fraud which is being perpe- trated on the American people by men of little minds who have been honored with important jobs in our Government. It is a conspiracy conceived in the dark, hidden corridors of communistic treachery—a con- spiracy which, if not destroyed, will condemn to death millions of American young men, But the sands in the hourglass of time are fast running out. If this conspiracy is to be destroyed, the job must be done now; not years from now; not months from now, but within a matter of weeks, days, or even hours, Before spelling out the details of that con- spiracy, let me first give you some of the background setting in which it was con- ceived. Six years ago, at the time of the first con- ference to map out the peace (Dumbarton Oaks), there was within the Soviet orbit, 180,- 000,000 people. Lined up on the anticommu- nistic side there were in the world at that time, roughly 1,625,000,000 people. Today, only 6 years later, 800,000,000 people are under the absolute domination of Soviet Russia—an increase of over 400 percent. This indicates the swiftness of the tempo of Communist victories and American defeats in world war III. While this is a long step forward in the Godless communization of the world—the avowed aim of the Communist Party—it can- not, of course, be successful until the United States is conquered. Twenty years ago the Communists officially decided that a neces- sary step prior to the destruction of the United States was the conquest of China— the remaking of it into a Red China, which could be controlled from the Kremlin—and then the transformation of the Pacific into a Red lake. Communist determination to conquer America is not new. The determination to rip from the heart of America the rights for which freemen now stand is as old as com- munism, but yet as new as the latest edict from the Kremlin to its puppet traitors in our Government today. A Red China and a Red Pacific are so nec- essary to the success of the Communist plans for world domination that Premier Stalin has always personally taken the responsibil~ ity for controlling the China and Pacific policy for the Comintern. In 1981, he insti- tuted a most concentrated campaign to make the Pacific a “Red lake.” In 1931 he moved the Pan-Pacific Secretariat from A3787 Shanghai to San Francisco. This meant that all the infiltration activities in the Astatic colonial war, plus that into Japan and Australia, and the new infiltration into China was to be operated from the United States. This called for development- of the Com- munist organization in the Northwest region of the United States, on the coast and in the Hawaiian Islands—all synchronized as closely as possible with the communization of China and the Islands of the Pacific. But the key to success was China and as Stalin realized without a Red China, his plans for a Red Pacific and world wide communism would fail. Stalin’s plan to create a Red China and to make of the Pacific a Red lake, as a prelude to taking over America, is no more secret than Hitler’s aims were secret in Mein Kampf. No man who claims to be even remotely worthy of a job in the Far Eastern Division of our State Department can claim to be ig- norant of that fact. It can be read in the official Communist program, which is avail- able to anyone in the Department. In this connection it is interesting to note that Senator StryLes Brincss, approximately 3 years ago, when questioning the fitness of John Carter Vincent, who at that time was head of the Far Eastern Division, pointed out in a letter to Dean Acheson that Vincent had been following the officially published Communist program for the conquest of Asia down to the last comma. The Secretary of State’s answer was, and let me quote it: “Mr. John Carter Vincent (Mr. Acheson’s top advisor on Chinese affairs) advises me that he has never even read the two Com- munist documents under reference. I have never read them myself.” This coming from men who are supposed to be leading 152,000,000 people in a fight against Communist aggression—this com- ing from men in charge of the spending of billions of dollars to fight communism— certainly does not require comment, Let me repeat Acheson’s words: “Mr, John Carter Vincent advises me that he has never even read the two Communist documents under reference. I have never read them myself.” To those in the State Department who say that Soviet Russia’s alms have changed in the last few years and that she no longer wants to enslave America, let me quote what Stalin said, not 20 years ago, not 10 years ago, not during World War II, but less than 8 years ago: “To think that the Communist revolution can be carried out peacefully, within the framework of a Christian democracy, means one has either gone out of one’s mind and lost all normal understanding, or has grossly and openly repudiated the Communist revo-~ lution.” Gentlemen, can there be anyone here to- day who is so blind as to fail to see that the war ison? Unless we blind our eyes and close our ears, we must realize that the Commu- nist world has said that the time is now— that this is the era of the Armageddon— that final all-out battle between light and darkness foretold in the Bible. This is not of cur choosing, but face the fact we must. Gentlemen, the chips are down; they are truly down. Unless we do face the facts as they are, not as we would wish them to be, we shall pay the price that is paid by those who wait too long. Now, the Russians have one important task yet before the Communist waters of a red lake begin to wash our shore with their athe- istic corrosion, That task is the destruc- tion of the remnants of Chiang’s anti-Com-~ munist armies—500,000 strong—the largest force which stands between the Soviet Union and total success in the entire Far East. The Communists have officially declared that the total destruction—the mopping up of those anti-Communist forces on the island
A3788 of Formosa—is the No. 1 plank in their plat- form; and, incidentally, as you know, this is the No. 1 plank in the written platform of the State Department adviser, its architect of our far eastern policy, Owen Lattimore. How near the Communists are to having complete victory within their grasp is pain- fully clear. The extent of the aid which the Communists are getting from those who shaped our foreign policy for the Far Hast is equally clear. As you know, we have been engaged in the difficult task—before a hostile commit- tee and with all the power of the Govern- ment against us—to prove that some of these men were traitors and others were fools. Today, however, I intend to discuss the results of their actions rather than their motives—for the results are the same regard~ less of whether they are the acts of traitors or dupes. The only thing the big gangster in the Kremlin is interested in is results. He cares not how sanctimonious or how depraved are the men who get him those results—results which he certainly has gotten from dupes and traitors within our Government. I said earlier that I wanted to discuss with you a vicious hoax and fraud that is being perpetrated upon the American people. Now let us take a look at the mas~ ter plan for that hoax. It is the Lattimore- Acheson plan for the Pacific. It is a clever, evil thing to behold. It is gigantic in its fraud and complete in its deceit. It camou- fiages ruin. It will wreck nations and en- slave millions. It deceives and betrays America and promotes communism. It is the strategy of the Lattimore-Acheson axis of hitting Communists at the front door with a silk handkerchief while they beat the brains out of your friends at the back door. Mr. Lattimore master-minded it. He ad- mits it. He not only has confessed, but he proclaims it as the child of his brain. Now hear this; this is Lattimore talking: ‘The thing to do, therefore, is to let South Korea fall, but not to let it look as though we pushed it.” Did you hear what Lattimore is saying? Does the hideous impact of that utterance hit you where it hurts? It should, for here in a sentence we have laid bare the whole scheme of ideological barbarism that would betray us. This is what he means: Spend American dollars and American lives to hold South Korea, but Just enough to make it look like we are trying. “With my left hand,” says Lattimore, “I will push Korea toward its doom into the hands of the Communist masters in the Kremlin, but with my right hand I will ex- tend enough aid to camouflage the sell-out— to make it look good enough to fool the suckers paying for it—good enough to fool, if you please, those who shall die because of it.” This, gentlemen, is the plan conceived by Mr. Acheson’s architect, Mr. Lattimore, con- ceived and publicly advocated by him for part of the Pacific area. Mr. Acheson has bought it and applied it to the entire Far Now let us discuss this viciously deceptive plan of the Acheson-Lattimore axis, The plan which stated in its plainest terms is to deliver vast areas and millions of people into Communist slavery without, in the words of Lattimore, having it appear that we pushed them. That was the plan for China. That is Lattimore’s plan for South Korea. That is now the plan of the Lattimore-Acheson axis for the entire Far East. Now let us examine the details of the Pa- cific plan of the Lattimore-Acheson axis. More than a year ago the American Con- gress voted $75,000,000 to fight Communists in the Pacific, As of today, not a cent has been, spent. Not a nickel has gone to the troops on Formosa, not an ounce of powder. In this connection I would like to briefly quote from a story of January 6, which ap- peared in the Washington News, which set forth in detail the fact that the Defense Department strongly urged the necessity of this and other help to Formosa. General Bradley, usually only a fair speak- er, was reported to have made an impas- sioned plea for this aid at the National Security Council meeting at the White House. Therefore, we find both the Democrats and Republicans of both the Senate and the House almost unanimously saying “give all the necessary aid to the anti-Communist fighting forces in the east.” We find the Chiefs of Staff of our Military Establish- ment approving. All evidence points to the fact that General MacArthur considers For- mosa in friendly hands vital to the defense of the Pacific. However, Mr. Acheson said, “No, not one ounce of gunpowder must be given to those troops who are fighting the Communists’—for, after all, doesn’t Mr. Lattimore, his architect of our Far Hastern policy, say in his secret instructions to the State Department that those troops must be destroyed. The Lattimore-Acheson axis then wrote Truraan’s declaration of January 5, which vetoed the intent of the House and the Sen- ate—Democrats and Republicans alike—the declaration which vetoed the demand of the American people that we assist our allies in such a manner as to stop the forward march of communism—the declaration which ve- toed our great war leaders who should: cer- tainly know better than the Lattimore- Acheson axis what is needed on the firing line. Recently, however, public opinion has forced Mr. Acheson to make an about-face on the position he had followed during the sell-out to China, and to appear to be at- tempting to stem the flow of communism across the Pacific. And this is the point at which the Lattimore plan of “Let them fall but don’t Ict the American people know we pushed them” suddenly developed full plown as the Lattimore-Acheson plan for the Pacific. But how to put it into effect so that it would not be too difficult? Mr, Acheson suddenly discovered there was a@ place called Indochina, an area in which there is no fighting force to even remotely compare to the troops on the island of For- mosa, but a good vehicle for the new plan of murder, but make it look like suicide. Therefore, here is where he will dissipate American dollars and materials for de- fense—materials necded so urgently by the fighting forces on Formosa. But not a farth- ing, mot one shot, not one ounce of pow-~ der will be sent to help the anti-Communist forces on Formosa. However, enough will be given down in Viet Nam to disguise the real motives and convince the American suckers that we did not push the vast Pacific into the Kremlin arms. . The plan of betrayal is the same as that used in China, but it is to be dressed up with a little more effective deception this time. Now this, gentlemen, is the plan. Do we like it? Do we want more of it? Does the spectacle of men who screamingly proclaim their Jove of the flag which they are hauling down while they push free lands into the Kremlin net convince you that the time has come for action? By their actions those men have outlawed any right which they had to public confidence. They have outlawed their right to speak for America. They should be silenced, gentlemen. They should be silenced now. To show the “Dutch Twins” type of think~ ing of the Lattimore-Acheson axis, let me quote briefly from the public utterances of these two men. First from Lattimore: In referring to the Communist victory in China, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD he says, “Throughout Asia there prevails to< day an atmosphere of hope not despair, What they (the people of Asia) see opening out before them is a limitless horizon of nope; a hope of peaceful, constructive ac- tivities in a free country, and peaceful co- operation among free peoples.” And now to the other half of the axis, Mr. Acheson: he says (on January 12 of this year before the National Press Club) “a new day has dawned in Asia. It is a day in which the Asian peoples are on their own and know it, and intend to continue on their own.” Gentlemen, those are their own words pub- licly spoken. Lattimore refers to the 400,- 000,000 people sold into communistic slavery as ‘free peoples”; Acheson says they are “on their own and know it.” Acheson speaks of communism in China with bated breath as the “dawning of a new day”; to Lattimore it is a “limitless horizon of hope”— and unless the Lattimore-Acheson Pacific plan of “allowing our allies to fall to com- munism but not having it appear that we shoved them’”—unless that plan is stopped in its tracks—unless it is stopped now, then as certain as you sit here today, gentlemen, Acheson’s “great new day” and Lattimore’s “limitless horizon of hope” shall dawn in the Philippines, India, and thence across the Pacific to our shores. To give you an even clearer picture of the architect of this new Lattimore-Achcson Pacific plan and how he vicws communism, let me quote from a broadcast prepared under his supervision while he was head of the Pacific division of OWI, and beamed to the Asiatic people on July 23, 1944—and listen to this if you will—“The Chinese Communists have established four colleges. Education is compulsory behind Communist lines. The schools are free. Once this was a poverty stricken region. Today everyone works or fights. There is no opium traffic. There is little vice. There are no laggards, for only those who believe in the cause of Chinese liberation are here. This is the Chinese Communist Government. The Communists have worked out the problems of all the people, living, working, and fight- ing together. * * ™“ If we are to succeed, we must organize the workers politically. The Chinese Communists want political rights for themselves and all the people. They want a thorough-going Democracy.” Gentlemen, this tops the pinnacle of all the foul products of fouler corruption. I have on numerous occasions discussed In detail a third member of the Lattimore- Acheson axis. I would like to very briefly deal with some of the facts concerning this man. He is Phillip Jessup, another of the great experts on the Far East—the Presi- dent’s roving ambassador. I have presented to the committee checks totaling $38,500, which represented Com-~- munist money paid to his organization, the Institute of Pacific Relations, whose publi- cation was being supervised by Mr. Jessup. This money was paid prior to and during the time that this publication was being used to spearhead the smear against the anti- Communist forces in China and to sell to the State Department and the American peo- ple the idea that we must cast our lot with the Communists in China because they were not Communists at all. Testimony has been presented to the com- mittee that some 17 Communist writ- ers were used by this publication to sell the Communist Party line. Since I appeared be- fore the committee I have gotten photostats of additional checks which now total $6,500 of Communist money paid his organization. The checks are signed by Frederick Vander- bilt Field, who has proclaimed himself as the Nation’s leading Communist and who has been named by Louis Budenz as a Soviet espionage agent. When the original checks totaling $6,500 were called to the President’s attention, by way of answer he immediately
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD gave Mr. Jessup top-secret clearance to all A- and H-bomb information—dangerously mischievous playing with the security of 152,000,000 people. I have here with me several hundred photo- stats of those checks if any of you care to take them along with you. Mr. Truman, the time has come to stop your whistle-stop campaigning and come home. But before you come, Mr. Truman, look into the faces of the mothers standing by your train tonight. Are they to weep again for their sons who must fight and die for the failures of dishonest or incompetent men? Are their sons next when the Red hordes trample over the bodies of 500,000 Chinese dead who perished for lack of arms? Come on home, Mr. Truman, you have a lot to do. Tell Mr. Jessup, for instance, that this Government no longer has a place for men whose organization takes money from Communists. You can tell him you have the photostats of checks from Communists paid to the publication he served—the publication that peddled the Communist cause. I am sending them to vou, Mr. Truman. Come home, Mr. Truman, and halt Mr. Acheson’s veto of everything America stands for. Come home, Mr. Truman, and tell the Lat- timore-Acheson axis to give effective aid to the anti-Communists in Asia. Order them to supply the rear guard on Formosa with the sinews those fighting men need. Come home, Mr. Truman, and fire the Pied Pipers of the Politburo. Fire the headmaster who betrays us in Asia. Fire the collectors of corruption, those prancing mimics of the Moscow party line in the State Department. Policies and Procedure in Income-Tax Fraud Cases EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. PAT SUTTON OF TENNESSEE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 18, 1950 Mr.SUTTON. Mr. Speaker, the Mem- bers of Congress and numerous taxpayers over the Nation will be interested to know the policies and procedure in connection with income tax fraud cases. The Honorable Turner L. Smith, Chief of the Criminal Tax Section of the Department of Justice, is recognized as an authority on tax problems. Because of his vast experienee as a lawyer and as Chief of the section which he heads in the Depart- ment of Justice, he is probably more qualified to speak on the subject of pro- cedure and policies concerning income tax fraud cases than any other man in public life. On May 6, Mr. Smith delivered an ad- dress before the Second Annual Legal Institute sponsored by the College of Law, University of Notre Dame, in con- junction with the Indiana State Bar Association. Since Mr. Smith discusses his subject in great detail, I am placing his remarks in the Recorp, and congratulate him upon his fine work. His address follows: , Gentlemen, I am delighted and honored to have your invitation and be present on this occasion to take part in the Second. Annual Legal Institute as sponsored by the XCVI—App.——289 College of Law of the University of Notre Dame and the Indiana State Bar Association, When your kind invitation came through the dean of Notre Dame, I gathered from his communication that it was the plan of those arranging the program to focus attention this year primarily upon the side of the actual general practice of law, as dis- tinguished from addresses on highly tech- nical or specialized subjects. With this thought in mind, I have at- tempted to prepare for this occasion a paper which might be helpful to you practicing lawyers when you are employed by a tax- payer to represent his interest and defense at the time a criminal-tax case is under consideration for prosecution by the Depart- ment of Justice. Until very recent years there were com- paratively few Federal prosecutions for in- come-tax evasion. It 1s unlikely, therefore, that all of you here today have had occa- sion in the past to represent a client who was on the verge of a tax-fraud prcsecution. Since this crime now seems tc be on the increase, the probabilities of your being so employed are considerably strengthened. It would thus seem appropriate for me to anticipate some of the questions arising in your mind as you undertake to prepare administratively to defend the client before the Government agency making the deci- sion for or against prosecution. Undoubted- ly, some of the questions you would ask yourself in the first instance of employment would run along these lines: Can I go to Washington and by offering to pay to the Bureau of Internal Revenue or Department of Justice any and all tax deficiencies, penalties, and interest, save my client from indictment and prosecution? Will any Government attorney listen to any defense I may have to offer? If so, to whom should I write or communicate with to as- sure a hearing before an indictment has been sought? Should I seek to get character let- ters and otherwise document the good name and reputation of my client in preparation for a hearing at the Department of Jus- tice, or would my time and energy be more profitably spent in studying taxpayer’s books and records to determine if there is defense in merit to the Government’s claim that my client intentionally and with delibera- tion understated his income? Should I pre- pare for oral presentation alone or should I take along a brief with affidavits and ex- hibits setting forth in writing the taxpayer’s position? Is it of any advantage to me if I learn that my client is suffering with a severe heart ail- ment or other serious illness; and if so, what should I do about it? Under what circumstances and conditions will the Department of Justice accept an offer in compromise in @ criminal tax case? Before which Government agency should I urge the defense of voluntary disclosure? To what extent will the Government re- veal its case at the conference in Washing- ton? After studying client’s tax affairs and upon concluding that no reasonable defense can be offered, will I be permitted to waive indictment and enter plea to an informa- tion; and if so, will the Government accept a nolo contendere plea, and in what type of cases? Some or all of these questions which have been selected and set down at random will arise in every criminal tax case in which you become engaged. I am not addressing here, of course, the courtroom conduct of your defense. These remarks apply entirely to what is commonly referred to as administra. tive tax practice. So it is with these general and essentially practical problems in mind that I discuss briefly in this paper what happens when the Department of Justice is working on a tax-~ fraud case. And what you can do about it. - From the moment of receipt from the Bue reau of Internal Revenue of a tax-fraud ac- A3789 cusation by the Tax Division of the Depart- ment of Justice, its handling is vitally af- fected by a number of administrative poli- cies. These policies have developed or have been adopted in an effort to make the en- forcement of the criminal laws for the pro- tection of the revenue both fair and effective, If, however, these ends are to be attained, the policies and procedures of the Tax Di- vision must not remain hidden in the files of the Department; they must be known by the members of the legal and the accounting professions who represent taxpayers accused of criminal fraud. ORIGIN OF CASES It is perhaps needless to relate for the benefit of tax practitioners that tax-fraud cases are not initiated in the Department of Justice, that is to say, Justice has no in- vestigative force with general authority to unearth, investigate, and report on alleged evaders. These audit and investigative func- tions are vested respectively 1n the revenue agents and the special agents of the Bureau of Internal Revenue within the Treasury De- partment. Bureau agents alone initiate and conduct audits and fraud investigations. Every practitioner should know such investi- gations are thorough; that they are summed up in carefully prepared reports, and backed up by a file of evidence. It is only after the reports and exhibits have been reviewed in the Penal Division of the Bureau and for- mally transmitted by a letter from the Com- missioner of Internal Revenue recommend- ing prosecutive action that the Tax Division of the Department of Justice takes complete jurisdiction of a case. The number of income-tax evasion cases received from the Commissioner of Internal Revenue has increased significantly during the past 8 years, as demonstrated in the following table: Calendar year: 1942 Number of cases This very substantial increase in the num~ ber of cases referred for prosecution is vari- ously attributable to the increase in tax rates, the excess-profits tax on corporate income, and the prevalence of black-market operations which participants sought to con- ceal during the period of the OPA. Not to be overlooked also is the very large addition of agents in recent years to the Bureau's enforcement staff. Taxpayers, it seems, wished to hang onto a larger proportion of war-boom receipts. At the same time, the wartime and post- war need of the Government for increased revenue became greatly enlarged. As a re- sult, the processing of the tax-crimes case load has now become a major activity of the Tax Division. Each case transmitted by the Bureau of Internal Revenue to the Department of Justice is assigned to an attorney in the Criminal Section of the Tax Division. It then is his responsibility to review complete- ly the reports of the special agent and of the revenue agent and to determine from those reports and the supporting exhibits whether, in the light of the law involved, a case can be made out which can reasonably be ex- pected to result in a successful prosecution, CONFERENCES In the usual ease, the attorney assigned is materially assisted in reaching a sound conclusion by a conference with counsel and accountants representing the taxpayer. De- fense evidence which may have been over- looked by the investigating agents is often 60 convincingly presented that the Division
A3790 attorney recommends that prosecution be declined. On the other hand, he may ke able to dispel a supposed defense by an ex- planation to defense counsel or by a supple- mental investigation. This may result in the taxpayer ultimately entering a plea of guilty, thus obviating the mutual expense of a trial which would most likely result in a conviction. It was formerly the practice in the Tax Division to afford conferences to taxpayers’ representatives only if requeseted. Then, as now, alert attorneys sought to press their defense in conferences at every stage, in the agents’ offices, In the regional offices of the Bureau's decentralized Penal Division, and in the headquarters of the Penal Division in Washington. In such cases, the Tax Divi- sion has generally received a written re- quest for a conference by the time the file is referred to it by the Commissioner, and oftentimes a year or so in advance of re- ferral, But it was found that many times tax- payers without counsel first learned that they were subject to a Federal tax-evasion indictment when the United States marshal hauled them unceremoniously before a com- mitting magistrate. The present head of the Tax Division, Assistant Attorney General Theron lL, Caudle, felt that a disparity of treatment necessarily resulted when some taxpayers had counsel and conferences in the division and others had neither—much less notice that they were in trouble. In this connection, it should be borne in mind that tax investigations usually involve re- turns dating back 1 to 5 years; that a year or more can and does pass before the re- sults of investigations reach the stage of consideration for prosecution in the Justice Department; and that, unlike the celebrated prosecution of Al Capone, the usual tax evader is not an underworld character or criminal in the visual sense. The temptation to cheat on taxes, it ap- pears, preys on respectable citizens, the bus- iness man, the professional man, yes, even lawyers, doctors, accountants, and judges. Mr. Caudle, therefore, established the policy that, when it did not appear from the file that the taxpayer had had the benefit of counsel, the Criminal Section attorney as- signed to such case must notify the tax- payer that prosecution was being considered. This notice includes an offer of an oppor- tunity for a conference in the Department if one is desired. Should distance, or the rela- tive lack of means of the taxpayer (the file reflects this occasionally), or the necessity for speedy handling to avoid the bar of the statute of limitations make an offer of a conference in Washington impracticable, then the United States attorney is asked to afford the necessary preprosecution confer- ence opportunity. While this policy puts an added burden on the Tax Division staff, it has been generally recognized as a contri- bution to the fair administration of crimi- nal justice in the tax fleld. Hence, the first action taken in the department is to find out whether the taxpayer has an attorney and whether a conference request is pend- ing. NUMBER OF CONFERENCES It is also the policy that conferences should, as far as possible, be limited to one. Only where the necessity for the presentation of substantial additional evidence becomes apparent at the first conference is a second one properly granted. Memoranda record- ing conferences are written by the staff at- torney, and these are available to the sec- tion chief, the first assistant, and the As- sistant Attorney General when the staff at- torney’s analyses and recommendations are forwarded for review and for ultimate ap-= proval or disapproval by the Assistant At- torney General. There is, therefore, little purpose to be served by successive confer~ ences over the same material with the re- viewing officials. There is even less utility in successive platoons of counsel asking a hearing on identical contentions. DEFENSE CONTENTIONS This suggests that a comment is here in order concerning what is expected of tax- payer’s representatives when they appear for conferences. As already noted, the tax divi- sion has before it a considered recommenda- tion of the Commissioner of Internal Rev- enue, based on reports that almost uni- versally show arduous, careful investigative work, The supporting exhibits give tangible proof of something seriously wrong, taxwise. This is what the taxpayers’ counsel must be prepared to explain away, preferably by equaily tangible proof. If a legal argument is to be made, it is expected that it should be sound enough to bear submission in writ- ing. The attorneys in the criminal section are well experienced and disposed to con- sider reasoned documented contentions. But practitioners are apt to find something less than an interested reception if they present only a dissertion on what a good churchgoer the taxpayer is, how well respected he 1s, or that he is not the type to have an intent to evade. That taxpayers are likely to lose a business or a license to practice, or that a jail sentence will disgrace their families or work a great hardship on minor children are considerations which are properly for a court at the time of sentencing and could have weight on a decision to prosecute only when the merits of the substantive case for prose- cution are in doubt. WEALTH CONSIDERATIONS If a case is made out in the reports and exhibits which cannot be explained away, policy requires that a prosecution be under- taken, unless it appears that the individual taxpayer’s life will be endangered by crim- inal prosecution because of some serious mental or physical condition. The prose- cutors in the tax division and the several United States attorneys do not want to be responsible for the death of a taxpayer. The Bureau of Internal Revenue has a like policy. The revenue does not need such protection. Hence, a documented contention by defense counsel that a taxpayer is dangerously ill and that he could not survive a trial will be scrupulously examined and given thorough and serious consideration. A Public Health Service medical examination will be con- ducted, and sometimes because of distance or other factors arrangements are made for the United States attorney in the taxpayer’s district to select an outstanding medical spe- cialist to conduct the necessary examination at the taxpayer’s expense. When all other defense positions advanced by taxpayer's counsel appear to leave a deci- sion by the Department to prosecute un- changed, it has been a growing practice on the part of the tax bar to urge the bad health of the taxpayer as @ last resort. Permit me, therefore, to spell out this health policy by saying: one, that this defense to prosecu- tion will not be considered unless a private doctor has in the first instance certified in writing to the fact of a serious illness in- volving a probable ultimate loss of life; and two, prosecution will not be declined until this private medical report has been verified by a thorough examination of the taxpayer by some doctor, likely a specialist in his fleld, selected and appointed by the Government to conduct the examination, and make a report. Thus, it may be stated in summation, that the decision by the Department to prosecute or not to prosecute rests entirely and square- ly upon the merits and evidence available in a Particular case, excepting only in cir- cumstances where a competent doctor con- ducting the examination at the Depart- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ment’s request certifies that prosecution and trial would constitute a clear and present danger to the prospective defendant’s life. This one exception to prosecution noted here does not embrace, of course, the volun- tary-disclosure policy which has been enun~ ciated by the Treasury Departmuent and which has no application to the case once it has been transmitted to the Justice Depart- ment. oa VOLUNTARY DISCLOSURE Another bar to an otherwise apparent fraud case is the so-called voluntary-disclosure policy of the Treasury Department. The contention is frequently raised during the consideration of an income-tax evasion case in the Tax Division of the Justice Depart- ment that the taxpayer had made a voluntary disclosure. It goes without saying that in tax-practice parlance this means the policy of the Treasury Department to grant im- munity from prosecution to tax evaders who within the pericd and under the conditions prescribed by that Department make a clean breast of their misdeeds. Former Secretary of the Treasury Vinson, in a press conference on May 28, 1945, crystallized this practice into definite policy. But, observe that this immunity to timely repentant tax evaders is strictly the policy of the Treasur Depart- ment. It is absolution implemented solely by this agency, and the means of implemen-~ tation is simply not to send voluntarily dis- closed tax-fraud cases to the Justice Depart= ment for prosecution. There is, therefore, a reciprocating policy in the Tax Division in Justice to accept the decision of the Bureau of Internal Revenue as to whether a volun~ tary disclosure has or has not been accom- plished. If the record coming from the Bu~< reau. does not disclose a decision on this point, the fact of referral of a case is con~ sidered to evidence such decision. Only the possibility that the agents may have elicited the necessary incriminating evidence by an express or implied promise of immunity can be properly considered by tlic Tax Division. As a matter of policy, again, the Department of Justice will be reluctant to prosecute if there Is persuasive evidence that such a promise of immunity was given, OFFERS IN COMPROMISE Still another administrative defense ap- proach to the Department is by way of an offer in compromise of the criminal case, to- gether with the civil Mability. In criminal cases the policy of the Department Has re- ceived some airing among the practitioners and in legal periodicals. Despite this, the attorneys in the Criminal Section of the Tax Division are constantly asked whether “we can’t compromise this case by paying the tax and penalties.” They must answer this by saying that the policy of the Attorney Gen- eral and Assistant Attorney General Caudle is not even to consider compromising 4 criminal tax case except when the defendant couples his offer to pay the tax or such por. tion of it as he has ability to pay at the time with an unconditional offer to enter a plea of guilty to a major count of the indictment. In short, compromise of a criminal case must result in a conviction. But whether that portion of such an offer as concerns the tax liability will be accepted is, as a matter of policy, usually dependent on whether it is acceptable to the Bureau of Internal Rev< enue, That agency is primarily responsible for the collection of the tax and the civil penalties. Its recommendation is always sought on offers in compromise and is fol- lowed save in the rarest of exceptions. SUBMISSION FOR PROSECUTION After a criminal section attorney has re- viewed a case in the light of all the defense contentions raised, he submits a recom< mendation through channels to the Assist- ant Attorney General. If he finds that the evidence discloses a violation of the evasion
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD statute (26 U.S. ©. 145 (b)), or the faiture- to-file statute (26 U. S. C. 145 (a)), or the false-execution statute (26 U.S. ©. 3809 (a)), or the aiding-and-assisting-in-the-false- preparation-and-presentation statute (26 U.S. C, 8793 (b) (1)), as the case may be, and that there is a reasonable probability of a successful prosecution, then he will recom-~ mend submitting the case to the appropriate United States Attorney to institute criminal action. This recommendation is reviewed by the Chief of the Criminal Section and by the First Assistant in the Tax Division, and a final decision is then made by the Assistant Attorney General, on whose approval the case is transmitted to the United States Attorney concerned and counsel are notified. In the usual case, the United States At- torney proceeds in due course in his district to obtain an indictment, and then to trial if no guilty plea is entered. At this stage, after transmittal of the file to the District At- torney, the Tax Division is frequently impor- tuned to grant a further conference and to recall the file. There is a policy on this, too: it is that the file will not be recalled from the United States Attorney. If weighty reasons are given for a conference, the United States Attorney may be asked to defer action, put the delays involved in recalling the file and in again resubmitting it are scarcely ever incurred. Generally, the taxpayer’s repre- sentatives will be told that further confer- ences in the Department would be fruitless and that any further conferences should be with the United States Attorney. CONCLUSION This discussion of policy should not end on the preceding stony-hearted note. It can be stated by way of conclusion that, in consider- ing cases with defense counsel, there is a gen. eral policy to discuss rather more freely the merits of the proposed tax case for prosecu~ tion than the usual criminal case. This statement should not be construed as a com~= mitment to reveal fully the Government’s hand. An honest effort is made, however, to outline the Government’s contentions, so that conferences are not sterile and in order that the possible existence of bona fide de- fenses may be explored. Common sense dic- tates the limitations on the disclosures made to counsel, but in this, as well as in the formulation of the other policies and pro- cedures mentioned, the objective is the fair and efficient conduct of the prosecutor’s duties. Such Is a Union’s Power EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FORREST C. DONNELL OF MISSOURI IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, May 19 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. DONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there be in- serted in the Appendix of the Rrecorp an editorial appearing in the Kansas City Star of May 13, 1950, entitled “Such Is a Union’s Power.” There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Rrcorp, as follows: Sucu Is a UNION’s POWER Slowly the wheels of industry are dragging toward a stop along the lines of four major railroads. At this early stage 200,000 persons are out of work. Unless the latest move for @ quick settlement succeeds this is only the beginning. The railroads are the lifeline of our na~ tional economy. Without the cars to move coal the mines shut down. Without the flow of their materials factories must close. Along the Santa Fe lines farmers are worried about the movement of the wheat crop. The inconvenience to railroad passengers is @ small thing compared with the silence in the freight yards. The firemen’s brotherhood has cut the lifeline provided by four roads. There is talk of moving on to other roads to make the paralysis complete. But this far the brotherhood has already gone to put a third man in every multiple unit Diesel locomo- tive. It has nothing to support its argument except force. This is no complicated, highly technical argument involved with a lot of ‘ifs’ and “buts.” It comes down to a sim-~ ple proposition of what a third man could do. And the answer is “nothing.” Two presidential fact-finding boards have heard the brotherhood’s argument of addi- tional safety and found nothing to support it. The union leadership is prepared to spread this devastation to have its way without an argument, without logic or a moral principle to support it. Such power in the hands of one organiza- tion is an omnious thing to this land of the free. What it can do on four roads it can do on all roads. This is a demonstration of power for the American people to swallow. As of today there is no greater power on the side of the people—definitely not the Government of the United States. Presi- dent Truman has said he lacks the power to take action and, as far as we have heard, he hasn’t asked for more power. Publicly he has shown no concern. Congress can do nothing except write new legislation, and there ap- pears to be some real interest in Senator DONNELL’s compulsory arbitration bill. But for today there is no way to meet force with the force of public interest. The hope for the national economy along four major railroads rests entirely with the talks around the table. Regardless of the outcome of this strike the demonstration should have been driven home to the American public. Over its vital economic lifelines no little group of men can be permitted absolute power. Amendment of Social Security Act EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HERBERT H. LEHMAN OF NEW YORK IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, May 19 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. LEHMAN. Mr. President, yester- day I issued a statement announcing that I would introduce a bill to amend the Social Security Act extending the public- assistance provisions to the people of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. This would be in accordance with the action already taken by the House. Iask unani- mous consent to have printed in the Ap- pendix of the Recorp my statement, which also includes some comments on the social-security -bill reported by the Senate Finance Committee, A379I There being no objection, the state. ment was ordered to be printed in the RecorpD, as follows: STraTemMEnt oF SeNaTorR HerBerT H. LEHMAN on Socian SecuRITY AMENDMENTS To H. R. 6000 aS REPORTED BY THE SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE A number of aspects of the amendments to the Social Security Act reported out by the Senate Finance Committee are very disap- pointing to me, although the action by the committee in working out this difficult and complex piece of legislation was, on the whole, very constructive and salutary. I expect to introduce a number of amend- ments from the floor and to join with other Members of the Senate in urging increased benefits and expanded coverage. One point on which I have already ex- pressed myself very strongly and on which I propose to insist as vigorously as I know how is the extension of the provision for public assistance to the people of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. If there are any groups of American citizens who are particularly in need of the aid extended by this provision, it is the people of these islands who, through no fault of their own, are confronted with economic conditions with which the local government can deal only in part. The local governments in Puerto Rico and in the Virgin Islands have made outstand- ing progress toward the solution of basic economic problems. The extension of the public-assistance provisions to the Social Se~ curity Act to these people would be a notable and constructive contribution and would, at modest cost to the Federal Government, pro- vide essential support to the efforts which the local governments are making to bring to the underprivileged groups on these is- jJands the basic needs of livelihood. Approval of this extension of coverage, as already agreed to by the House, would signify to all the people of Puerto Rico and the Vir- gin Islands the fundamental desire of the Federal Government to grant equality of treatment to all its citizens and special con- sideration for those citizens who are in par- ticular need through no fault of their own. Iam not urging the Senate to approve this on the basis of charity or beneficence, but rather on the basis of right. I think these American citizens have a right to the same treatment by the Federal Government as the American citizens on the mainland. I hope the Senate will amend the action by the Finance Committee and restore coverage to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Boys’ Clubs of America EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HARRY DARBY OF KANSAS IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, May 19 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. DARBY. Mr. President, Hon. Herbert Hoover, former President of the United States, and Director J. Edgar Hoover, of the FBI, are among the most distinguished Americans who have ren- dered valuable service to their country in assisting our youth to become better citi- zens. ‘The former President has served as chairman of the Boys’ Clubs of Amer- ica for 14 years, and last night awarded to the Director of the Federal Bureau of
A392 Investigation the coveted Golden Key-~ stone Award for his splendid contribu~ tion to the Boys’ Clubs of America. ‘The Honorable Herbert Hoover and Mr, J. Edgar Hoover boih made fine and ap- propriate addresses on the occasion of the final meeting of the annual conven~ tion of the Boys’ Clubs of America in Washington on May 18, and I ask unani- mous consent to have these addresses in- serted in the Appendix of the Recorp. There being no objection, the ad- dresses were ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Appress BY Hersert Hoover PAVEMENT EOYS—WHAT WE ARE DOING I am proud that this is my fourteenth year as chairman of the Boys’ Clubs of America, We have doubled in potency in this period. But the real record is that of your president, William E. Hall, He entered that office 34 years ago and has nursed this effort up from its swaddling clothes. But Mr. Hall and your directors and I are unani- mously agreed that the greatest punch and spirit of this national organization comes from your director, David Armstrong, and his able staff. The Boys’ Clubs of America are a great school. They might even be called the uni- versity of the pavements, for our purpose is mostly directed to the pavement boys in our congested areas. Here are linked together over 325 institu- tions with $00,000 to 350,000 boys, with an equipment that $60,000,000 could not replace and with an annual budget of $7,000,000. There were 24 building projects nearly come pleted in 1949 and 18 more are under way, costing a total of about $5,000,000. All these great sums are made possible by geti- erous people who love boys. If you need some more statistics, I may tell you that there are 35,000 adults giving generously of their time to the Boys’ Clubs as boards of directors or auxiliary organiza- tions. The clubs are guided by over 6,000 trained adult leaders who are the “faculty.” This education includes self-organization and their own discipline in the conduct of their clubs. It includes testing out their natural bents in shops, crafts, music, and the professions. It includes medical inspec- tion and training in health. It involves every known indoor and outdoor game and sport, except horse racing and golf. It even in- cludes the flying trapeze. There is no discrimination as to religion orrace. Theirs is that equality which is the foundation of free men. The greatest moral training, except for religious faith, comes from training these boys in teamwork and sportsmanship. We do not claim that the boys’ clubs sub- stitute for either mother or the public schools. We are concerned with the kid from the hour when school is out until he goes to ped or when he gets a holiday. When a boy is inside our doors, mother has no worry. The police have no worry from. some of his primitive instincts. ‘We have a right to brag a little. We have produced some major league ball players and some great editors and artists. In the last war craft the total number of rejects among our graduates was less than 6 percent as against the national average of over 30 per~ cent. I could tell you of districts where we have reduced delinquency by 75 percent. Over the years we have brought joy into the lives of millions of boys. You will anticipate my next remark. We need More Money and lots of it, for there are 2,000,000 of these pavement boys whom we have not taken care of, HIS RIGHTS, CHARACTERISTICS, ENVIRONMENT, AND HOPES The work of the boys’ clubs is geared to certain ideas. First. When the founding fathers an- nounced the unalienable rights, they laid proper emphasis on the pursuit of happiness. I have no doubt any lawyer would construe that as especially intended to include boys. However, we are not so worried at the mo- ment with his unalienable rights to the pur~ suit of happiness as we are with his processes in the pursuit. Second. In pursuit of happiness, the boy has two jobs. One is being a boy and the other is training to be a man. When the boys’ clubs contemplate his jobs, we take into account certain characteristics of the animal and his environment. Some years ago I made some observations on these essentials. I have combined them with some further observations to bring ou up to date in this important matter. Together with his sister, the boy is our most precious possession. But he presents not only joys and hopes, but also paradoxes. He strains our nerves, yet he is a complex of cells teeming with affection. He is a periodic nuisance, yet he is a joy forever. He is a part-time incarnation of destruction, yet he radiates sunlight to all the world. He at times gives evidence of being the child of in- iquity, yet his idealism can make a great na- tion. He is filled with curiosity as to every mortal thing. He is an illuminated interro- gation point, yet he is the most entertaining animal that is. The whole world is new to him. He must discover it all over again. All its corners and things must be explored or taken apart, Therefore his should be a@ life of discovery, of adventure, of great undertakings. He must spend much time in the land of make- believe, if he is to expand his soul. One of the sad things in the world is that he must grow up into the land of taxpayers. He is endowed with a dynamic energy and an impelling desire to take exercise on all occasions. He is a complete self-starter, and therefore wisdom in dealing with him con- sists mostly in what to do with him next. His primary instinct is to hunt in a pack and that multiplies his devices. He and his pack can go on the hunt either for good or evil. Our first problem is to find him constructive joy, instead of destructive glee, To complicate this problem, this civiliza- tion has gone and built up great cities. We have increased the number of boys per acre. We have paved all this part of the land with cement and cobblestones. Of these human organisms, perhaps two and a half million must find their outdoor life on these pave- ments and confined by brick walls. Much of their life is concerned with stairs, light switches, alleys, fire escapes, bells, and cob- pblestones, and a chance to get run over by a truck. Thus these boys are today sepa- rated from mother earth and all her works, except the weather, In the days before our civilization became so perfectly paved with cement, he matched his wits with the birds, the bees, and the fish. But the outlet of his energies in exploring the streams and the fields is closed to him. The mysteries of the birds and bees and fish are mostly denied to him. The normal boy is a primitive animal and takes to competition and battle. If he doesn’t have much of a chance to contend with nature, and unless he is given some- thing else to do, he is likely to take on con- tention with a policeman. I dislike to refer to these boys as under- privileged. That is only a part truth, He as better facilities for education and better protection of health than boys in any other country in the world. He suffers less from APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD mumps and measles than his grandfather did; more quickly do we heal his broken pones. He will live longer, and if his start is blighted, the Nation will have to board him longer in jail. He has other gains. The electric light has banished the former curse of all boys, of cleaning lamps and everlastingly carrying them about. The hght switch has driven away the goblins that lived in dark corners and under the bed. It clothes drab streets with gaiety and cheer by night. And it is the attraction of these bright lights that in- creases our problem. But we are concerned with the privileges which all these bricks and cement have taken away from him. The particular ones with which we are concerned bear on his character and moral stature. This brick and cement foundation of life is a hard soil for his growths. Somebody will say morals are the job of parents. But the best of parents cannot keep him indoors all the time. And the world in the streets is a distorted and dangerous world which the parents cannot make or unmake. So it be- comes a job of public relations. But there is more than that. The fine qualities of loyalty to the pack are not so good on the pavements. For here the pack turns to the gang, where his superabundant vitality leads him to depredation. And here we make gangsters and feed jails. The way to stop crime is to stop the manufac- ture of criminals. This is only a marginal problem to the total boys in the United States. If we can start this marginal group right on the road to character, we will have done more to cure our national ills than either subsidies or so-called security. And there is more to this than even exer- cise and morals. There is the job of stretch- ing his vision of life. The right to glimpse into constructive joy, the right to discover an occupation fitted to his inclinations and talents, and the right to develop his person- ality. The priceless treasure of boyhood is his endless enthusiasm, his high store of jdealism, his affections, and his hopes. When we preserve these with character, we have made men. We have made citizens and we have made Americans. AvppRESS BY J. Epcar Hoover, Director, FEDERAL BuREav oF INVESTIGATION The Golden Keystone Award is indeed a cherished honor. As its recipient I know that this great honor would never have been accorded me had it not been for the tireless and unselfish assistance and devotion to duty of my associates in the FBI. For them, as well as for myself, I accept this honor with pardonable pride and gratitude. The fact that the award is presented by Hon. Herbert Hoover, chairman of the board of directors of the Boys’ Clubs of America, gives it even greater significance to me. It has been my distinct privilege and pleasure to have served under Mr. Herbert Hoover for many years in my official career and later to be associated with him in the boys’ clubs work. His life symbolizes the precepts of this great Nation. Inspired by our finest traditions of liberty and freedom and justice for all, he stands foursquare against every disrupting force. His contributions to our Nation's welfare have been outstanding; his great heart and soul are attuned to the needs of humanity which he has served so nobly over the years. May God grant him many years to counsel our country through these troubled times, There is a parallel between the alms of the Boys’ Clubs of America and the FBI. We work on different fronts, but toward a com- mon, objective—a more secure America. One of the great tragedies of our generation has
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD been our lack of vision. As a people we have prospered materially, We have harnessed our vast industrial potential; we have pene- trated the mysteries of science. We have achieved a standard of living which is un~ equaled the world over. The defects of our social order are gradually being overcome. We have more leisure time and opportunities for recreation than people in any civilized land in the world. But we are sadly neglect~ ing our most precious asset—the citizen of tomorrow. We are witnessing, too often, a gradual dis~ solution of the traditional American home. The American home too frequently has be- come merely a place to eat and sleep instead of a place of moral development and spiritual growth. Adult America in too many in- stances has failed miserably in its responsi- bility to youth. The tendency to coddle youth or treat their problems with indifference manifests itself in too many communities. Instead of giving young people leadership through example and discipline, too frequently we permit them to run rampant in the uninhibited expres- sion of their impulses—a practice which has led to disastrous consequences. The awesome spectacle a few weeks ago in one of our cities, of scores of young people swept by a mob spirit flaunting the forces of law and order by rioting in the streets, and equally startling and frightening spectacles in other cities, are sufficient to make us pause and take stock. The unlawful activities of too many of our young people are a national disgrace. We who are engaged in law en~- forcement see the results daily in the un- governed activities of teen-age boys and girls who are responsible for a percentage of crimes out of all proportion to their age group. This is indeed a serious indictment of parenthood. In fact, some 50 percent of all crimes against property are committed hy young people under 25 years of age. In 117,562 cases last year involving young people under 21 years of age, law enforcement agencies re- garded the offenses sufficiently serious to take the fingerprints of the offenders for in- clusion in the fingerprint files of the FBI. These represent some 15 percent of all per- sons arrested. Yet, as a group, persons under 21 years of age accounted for 43.8 percent of all persons arrested for auto theft; 38.2 per- cent of all persons arrested for burglary; 80.4 percent of all persons arrested for rape; 26.7 percent of all persons arrested for rob- bery; and 11.9 percent of all persons arrested for felonious homicide. This sad spectacle of misdirected energy is an unwholesome blemish on the American scene. Perhaps the disappearance of the woodshed of my generation has had its effect. I have hearc too many sorrowful confessions of parents who “spared the rod and spoiled the child” not to be convinced that a firm- ness and a determination to enforce disci- pline and order have their merits. There is no satisfactory substitute for discipline in developing character. Hard work, even if it is considered old-fashioned in some quarters, is a stepping stone to achievement. The breakdown in some of the homes and the lack of facilities in the schools to fully administer to the fundamental needs of youth have made necessary such a youth~ serving agency as the Boys’ Clubs of America, . In the brief span of their existence, the boys’ clubs of the Nation have left an in~ delible imprint for good upon the 325 com- munities where they exist. The 330,000 members of the boys’ clubs are being given opportunities which they would not other- wise have. Make no mistake—each of these boys will become a better citizen because some adults have had vision and have been willing to devote their time and energies to providing these young men with opportuni- ties which are their inherent right. The program of the boys’ clubs has con- clusively proven its worth by satisfying the basic desires of youth in offering opportuni- ties for new experience, recognition, response, and security which come from group activi- ties. In making this possible, I want to commend the 6,088 professional and volun- teer workers who have carried forward this program in 37 States. Back of these men who give of their time and energies is another group, totaling some 35,000 members of boards of directors and auxiliary organiza- tions in the various communities where boys’ clubs flourish, These men, many of whom are here to- night, by their daily deeds are living up to the responsibilities of good citizenship. Their contribution toward the building of a better America sets an example for others. The achievements of the boys’ clubs invite the scrutiny of every community in the land. The annual expenditure of some seven mil- lion dollars—the cost of maintaining the boys’ clubs—is returned manyfold in the results of its constructive work. The ex- perience of one neighborhood where the number of juvenile delinquents dropped from 222 to 28, an 87 percent decrease, after a boys’ club moved into the community, I am sure, is the rule rather than the exception. The operation of the Boys’ Clubs of Amer« ica is basically American. They embody some of our finest traditions by working in the locals where they can render the great- est service. Our Nation has flourished be~ cause of that principle—the serving of local needs. In the final analysis, America is the aggregate of all of our people; it is the ag- gregate of all of our towns, cities, counties, and States. America is only as strong as all of our people and our communities work- ing together in unity toward a common goal. Good citizenship, like charity, begins at home. That is why, for example, I have always opposed the concept of a national police force. The best type of law enforce- ment is the home-town police. Any other system would be alien to our American way of life. Each community not only deserves exactly what it receives in terms of law and order, but also has within its power the abil- ity to have law observance and good law enforcement if it so desires. There is not a city, town, or hamlet in the Nation which could not strike a telling blow against the forces of lawlessness within 48 hours if its people had the will and de- termination to eradicate the breeding places of crime. The law-enforcement agencies in the land, with few exceptions, are thoroughly competent and capable. They are willing to do their job if they are unshackled and sup- ported as they should be by an aroused citizenry which will brook no interference and tolerate no alliance between the upper world of officialdom and the underworld of corruption. Similarly, the youth problem in crime would disappear quickly if each parent and adult recognized his responsibility and made an honest effort to do his duty. I look for- ward to the day when the number of Boys’ Clubs will double, triple, and quadruple. A crying need exists for an extension of this most worth-while endeavor. ‘You, the lead~ ers of this movement, have done your job well put you have scarcely scratched the sur- face. There is still much unfinished busi- ness. Now is the time for action. The need for giving American youth what is justly his— guidance, training, discipline, proper sur- roundings, incentive, moral and spiritual de- velopment—is more important than ever be- fore in the history of our Nation. The strength, the security, and the future of America depend upon the character and the quality of our youth. In the face of attacks from subversive forces which would destroy our American way of life, we must strengthen and expand those organizations A3793 which aid in molding our youth into good citizens. The Boys’ Clubs of America must go for= ward if other boys are to be given the oppor~ tunities of democracy in action—the type of democracy which fiourishes in the atmos- ° phere of liberty and freedom in the United States. Protection of Wisconsin Dairy Farmers EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KENNETH S. WHERRY OF NEBRASKA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, May 19 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. WHERRY. Mr. President, I was glad to note in the May 15, 1950, issue of the newspaper Herald-Telegram, pub- lished in Chippewa Falls, Wis., a very fine and deserved editorial entitled “Waging Courageous Fight,” recounting the splendid work of our colleague the senior Senator from America’s dairyland, the State of Wisconsin [Mr. Witzey]. I ask unanimous consent that the editorial be printed in the Appendix of the RECORD. . There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Rrcorp, as follows: Wacine Covracrous FicHt Senator ALEXANDER WILEY’S courageous fight in the United States Senate to aid Wisconsin dairy farmers was called to the attention of the local Kiwanis Club and their farmer guests Wednesday night at Eagle Point. Milo Swanton, executive secretary of the Wisconsin Council of Agricultural Coopera- tives, praised Wisconsin’s senior Senator for what he termed his yeoman service in the farmers’ battle against the manufacturers of dairy substitutes. Swanton’s remarks drew spontaneous ap- plause from the more than 100 men present at Wednesday night’s meeting, indicating that the farmers were appreciative of WILEY’s fight for the dairy industry. Now, a communication from Washington reveals that the Badger Senator is waging a terrific fight on the floor of the Senate on behalf of boot and shoe manufacturers in his home State. This should be of particular interest to Chippewa Falls businessmen, since huge numbers of some of the finest boots and shoes in the United States are manufactured right here in our own community. Senator Witzy is genuinely alarmed at what he terms the indiscriminate lowering of trade barriers, which allow cheap for- eign-made boots and shoes to flood Ameri- can markets, The Senator read into the CoNGRESSIONAL Record a letter received from the Boot and Shoe Workers Union, Local 705, South Mil- waukee, Wis., in which the workers com- plained of the steady flow of foreign shoes into the country at prices far below the domestic retail price. Wnuer, in presenting this problem to the United States Senate, has this to say, and there is no question but what his remarks are well worth repeating for readers of the Herald-Telegram: “Our basic obligation is to afford reason« able and legitimate protection for American jobs and American producers, as against un- fair competition from floods of cheap for- eign imports.