APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD were taken and no resolutions were ado . The Institute of Pacific Relations is privately supported by the great educational founda- tions, by individuals, and by business con- cerns, As an organization the institute takes no policy position on the problems with which its members are concerned. Free of protocol and the Hmitations that often com. pel reserve by government spokesmen, there was a full and healthy exchange of views. Ray Lyman Wilbur was the first president of the institute (began in 1925). It was Dr. Wilbur's view that, in unofficial conferences of representatives from all the Pacific coun- tries, there would be a frank facing up to the truth disagreeable though it may be. I hope that my report of my recent expe- rience will give you an idea of the way in which some of the people of the Far East look at you and at me, at America, today— disagreeable though it may be. My remarks are directed in large measure to relations between India and the United States because the discussions in which I participated were concerned with these rela- tions. Moreover, following the conference, the dean of the law school at Lucknow, aware that during the meetings I had seen only the relatively comfortable surroundings of a westernized hotel, a leading Indian univer- sity, and one of India's more fortunate urban communities, insisted that I join him on a visit to some of the villages that, in his phrase, “Are India.” This we did in the vi- cinity of Benares, the shrine city on the Ganges. I have seen poverty and disease the worst of it in parts of central and South Africa, but the worst in those areas was relatively well-being compared with the existence of the peasants, the physically ill villagers and the millions of the great cities of India. We went into tiny mud huts completely without sanitation facilities, where three or four families live huddled in the most sickening conditions. We went, as well, into the flelds where the oxen, the wooden plow, a primi- tive system of irrigation, and workers at a wage of 4 cents plus 1 pound of grain per day, farm as their people have done for hun- dreds of years. After my trip to the villages had been followed by days in the worst of Benares and Calcutta, much of what had been said by Indian colleagues during the 2 weeks at Lucknow became meaningful. In my limited time today, I shall discuss Indian-American relations by stating first the essence of the Indian position as my colleagues and I understood it at Lucknow, proceeding from there to an analysis of that position and finally to the recommendations I would make, if I were called upon to sug- gost the lines of a policy for the United Btates today. One statement must precede my summary of Indian position. There is no doubt as to the depth of the distrust and suspicion of the western intention, the western purpose in the Far East. Today this means suspicion and doubt concerning the purpose and objec- tive of the United States. Moreover—and this I would have you remember even though you forget everything else that I say—the important fact is not that the Indians and their neighbors may be wrong about us, The important fact for us is that they hold these views. We will miscalculate seriously if, because we believe they are wrong, we ignore their doubts and the strength of their convictions concerning us, For the next few minutea, in the role of a spokesman for the Far East, I would like to speak to you Americans in the manner in which some of my Indian friends spoke to us during the Conference. This will be an ef- fort to give you the essentials of the Indian challenge—the Indian question-—to us, “In both official and private statements by your western leaders there is frequent recognition of the movement for independ~- ence and of the spirit of revolution that have swept the Far East. But we of the west question seriously whether in the calcula- tions and judgments of your western peo- ples and governments this recognition is given substantial practical effect. We feel that your judgments and your attitudes toward us are not significantly affected by the knowledge which you claim to have con- cerning our struggle for independence. “This may be due to your failure to appre- clate the scope and the depth of our revolu- tion against the west. This revolution has been more than a struggle for political inde- pendence, whether in China, in its fight against western intervention by special treaties and concessions, or in Indonesia, or in India, in Pakistan, or Indochina. It has been a revolution against foreign political control. But it has been more than that. It is, as well, a social and economic revolu- tion by people with a deep sense of their poverty and misery. Moreover, as one of your own scholars has expressed it, our struggle has been a ‘racial revolt, a revolt of the east against the west, a determination that the destinies of Asia shall be decided by Asians, that the new nations of the east will be ends in themselves, not means to western ends.’ It is this determination that affects our judgment and reaction to every deed, every proposal, of the west. We fear and will resist every action which, in using us to promote western ends, operates to restore the power and domination from which we have so recently been liberated, “If you understand this, you will also begin to understand our determination not to be used as means or tools for the west in its struggle against the Soviet Union. We sus- pect that your interest in us springs not from a desire to help us and our people, but from your need to gain allies in your struggle against your enemy. It is in this context that we judge your apparently permanent occupation of Japan, your string of bases along the Asiatic periphery, your opposition to the Chinese Revolution, your defense of Formosa, your support for the French and Bao Dat. These actions are part of the struggle of the west against the Soviet Union; they are not actions that have been undertaken out of regard for the Asian view of the best intorests of Asia. “You, of course, claim that you are de- fending us against a common enemy, but this overlooks that Western Europe, with which you are now allied, has long been the enemy, and that each step which you claim to take in our defense now appears also to be one more step toward the restoration of western control, this time under the leader- ship of the most powerful Nation in the world, “To declare that we refuse to be pawns in the western plan is not to say that we are about to cast our lot with the Soviet Union, In India, Pakistan and elsewhere we have moved vigorously against Communist leaders who, there is little doubt, have received and acted upon directives from Moscow. As Asia becomes more important in the Soviet Unton’s world strategy, that natlon may be tempted increasingly to interfere in our af- fairs. But as the Communists or any other group in India or elsewhere in the east sub- ordinate national independence or the eco- nomic welfare of their own country to the interest of the Soviet Union their prestige and power among us will be weakened. “The net effect of our resistance to out- side domination from any source whatever, whether from the west or from the Soviet Union is the neutrality which you deplore. “To say that we are neutral does not mean that we will not meet our commitments under the United Nations Charter to join in putting down aggression. It does mean that we distinguish between collective action by A601 the United Nations under the charter and the day-in-and-day-out struggles of the cold w ar. “We are not prepared to join in the cold war. Moreover, because we belleve you un- derestimate the determination of Asiatic peo- ples to resist threats to their independence, we may, in the councils of the United Na- tions, urge a greater measure of restraint than will be acceptable to you, It was this that induced our reservations with regard to the decision of the United Nations to press on to the Manchurian border. The Korean peninsula has served as the clagsica] corridor both for the extension of Russian and Chinese power into the Sea of Japan, and for the extension of Japanese power into Manchuria and China. The advance of the forces of MacArthur toward the Manchurian frontier, coming at a time when Japanese power is being revived under the American occupa- tion, would, we of India believed, not only arouse China's fears but also increase her reliance on Soviet Russia. Our reservations may have been wrong. We considered that your calculations should include a careful weighing of such @ consequence, “With regard to communism as a form of government—distinguishing now between the imperialism of Moscow and communiam as a method of dealing with social and eco- nomic problerne—there are also important reasons why our attitude differs from yours. We would prefer a system of government which not only achieves a decent standard of living but does so by democratic means. The danger is that the exercise of this preference, this choice, may not be open to us. We fear that countries as poor as ours may not be able to afford what seem to be the high economic costs of western democratic methods. “Certain it is that in our part of the world no doctrine can hold its own with commu- nism unless it also gives first place to the needs of ordinary people. The Communist emphasis on economic security has a strong appeal to those who live close to the bread or the rice line. People in the rice line have less concern with political and spiritual values than do those who have economic se~ curity. Our sick, underfed, and iiliterate people, and we their leaders, believe that the Soviet internal program and the experiment which {s now under way in China may hold at least a part of the answer for countries as r as ours. “We are told that we have been misled by a myth of Soviet accomplishment in the past 80 years. If this is the case, we must point out that the information which brought the myth into being came largely from English and American writers during the years be- tween the wars, and to an even greater extent from Anglo-American propaganda which, during World War II, unqualifiedly praised and described the accomplishments of their great ally, the Union of Boviet Soctalist Republics. “Of one thing we are certain. Our miser- able lot today ts not the product of commu- nism. We can hardly be blamed, therefore, if we take more than a passing interest in a system which appears to have done so much in so short a time for great numbers of a backward people. “We are aware that the west, and particu- larly the United States, is possessed of finan- clal and engineering know-how, of equip- ment and capital, which could be of the greatest assistance to countries such as ours. But on numerous occasions since the end of World War II both your President and your Secretaries of State have declared that the major initiative in developing the backward areas of the world must be taken by private capital, The difficulty here is not only that your business people demand privileges and guaranties which we venture to believe they no longer enjoy in their own country but
A602 they require what they call a climate for in- vestment which would compel us to aban- don programs to which our governments are firmly committed. As to government aid rather than private aid from the west, al- though there bas been much publicity con- cerning the bold new point 4 program, the action of the Amertcan Congress does not encourage us to believe that there will be a follow through that will make !t a truly bold program. Moreover, we have been made to understand, by the Marshall plan example in Europe, that any direct assistance from the United States would be conditioned upon our abandonment of neutrality. “We assure you that in the resulting im- passe we realize that there may be danger to both of our Interests.” . Much more could be sald to spell out the details of the Indian position. I have given you ita essentials, In giving a composite pic« ture, I have necessarily left out statements of members of the Indian and other delega- tions who departed from the position of the majority. At one extreme, was the member of the Pakistan delegation who declared that he could best demonstrate the extent of Asian distrust of the west, by reporting his own conviction, and that of many of his peo- ple, that the United States would never have Gropped the atomic bomb on a white people. At the other extreme, one very able Indian Tepresentative took issue throughout the conference with the views of his colleagues. He was outspoken in his criticism of the fail- ure to appreciate the real character of the Soviet threat he deplored acceptance of what he described as the myth of Communist ac- complishment, and he favored unqualified adherence to the position which western leadership has taken in the United Nations. But his was almost the only dissenting east~ ern voice to the position as I have stated it. Of course, the eastern position not only induced rather sharp responses from spokes- men for the west, but made all of us feel, after about a week of patient submission that the time had come to tell our side of the story. It was at the beginning of the second week that one American delegate stated his own reaction in terms of a frustrating dilem- me. He pointed out “that western aid is condemned as imperialism, lack of ald as Jsolationism; keeping troops in Asia as ex- pansionism, keeping troops out of Asia as in- viting aggression, political neutrality as helping reactionaries, support of progressive forces as intervention. We are dammed if we do and damned if we don't.” It is not my intention to argue the rights and wrongs of the positions taken by India, Pakistan, and other eastern representatives, I share the view expressed by one of our leading papers that in today's world the neutral course of India leads to bottomless difficulties and inconsistencies. But I also feel that our impatience with the neutrals of today may be a good illustration of the American habit of looking only forward and regarding both the recent and distant past as dead weight. As Ihave thought about the neutral position of India, I have recalled that it was only a little more than 10 years ago that we were the great leaders of a neutral bloc, neutral as we ultimately came to ac- knowledge between the forces of Nazi evil, the forces that had overrun Austria, Czecho- slovakia, Poland, and France, and the forces of western democracy. Our neutrality had taken the form of a series of neutrality acts by which we legislated ourselves into the rigid position from which we were finally driven only by the attack on Pearl Harbor, Our neutrality had been dictated, at least in part, by the conviction that we could gain nothing by joining with either side. Our neutrality and isolationism went back over many years to a reluctance, among 8 power- ful segment of the American people, to join in an alliance with any part of Europe, and in particular with the British Empire. It is important in negotiating with coun- tries like India that we not forget that a very short period of time has passed since the day when our motivations were comparable to those which induce their neutrality today. We must recall that India and Pakistan achieved independence in 1947 after a long struggle. It should not be surprising that in 1940-60 they are reluctant to join an alliance which includes nations from which eastern independence hag been so recently ‘won. In urging a look-back to our recent and distant past with a view to more tolerant understanding, I do not propose that we abandon efforts to demonstrate that the neu- tral east may be misguided. I do this so that as we advance our own cause, we show & real appreciation of the considerations which influence the judgments of other peoples, And as we take full account of the back- ground of India’s neutrality we should also give serious study to what many consider the real danger in India, both to India and to our interest in the Far East. India has set @ course for herself as a democracy in the western tradition. Her constitution is essentially democratic. The judiciary is independent. The army is sub- ordinate to civil power. The press is pro- tected by constitutional guaranties. Dur- ing the coming year 170,000,000 citizens will go to the polls in one of Asia’s first general and free elections. India is setting out on the road to democracy. The important question is: “Flow far will she be able to travel on that road?” She will probably be able to travel on that road only if she is able to respond to the growing demand of her people for food, clothing, and shelter. Poverty is not new in Asia. What ie new is that the people have learned to attribute their condition to the injustice or inade- quacy of their rulers. The view is shared by many who know India well that she stands a long, long way from an effective beginning on the compre- hensive program required to meet the needs and growing demands of her people. There ig a steady increase in population, approxi- mately 14 percent or more than 4,000,000 per year; from 819,000,000 in 1941 to 342,- 000,000 at the end of 1946. The already low standard of living has been going down since 1942 and in some areas, for much longer than that. To meet the resulting need for increased agricultural and industrial pro- duction, the government is doing its best—- some irrigation, some hydroelectric projects, but its best is not good enough. Conse- quently millions of people who had been led to believe that independence would bring the millennium, who believed that poverty would disappear after British rule ended, may become disillusioned. The independ- ence movement, although of a dynamic revo- lutionary character, was essentially negative. That movement did not require and did not develop leaders to cope with the type of problem that has come after independence, Consequently, while there has been nruch talk in India of agrarian reform, industrial and commercial development, while speeches ere made and some laws, such as that for the division of the large estates, have been put on the books, action has been, and prom. ises to be, slow in coming. There is too much stress upon the defects and evils of the old, too Httle by way of concrete design for the new. As unrest grows, a preventive deten- tion act is being used not only to lock up the Communists, but also Socialists and other troublemakers, There is concern that APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the one party system, the system of the pow- erful Congress Party, may feel increasingly compelled to limit basic freedoms of speech and press. Pailure to improve living conditions over 8 pertod of time would not necessarily mean communism in India. It might mean 4 move to the extreme right, The chaos that could conceivably precede or accompany a move either to the right or to the left would ald only the Soviet Union, not India, not the west. What can the United States do to meet inls and closely related problems in the Far it? 1. Almost every hour brings additional proof that the first and major task of the Nation today is military preparedness. Every hour brings additional evidence that our commitments for the maintenance of peace, our undertakings on the political level, are beyond our power to act. We are over- extended. We must bring our forces up to our commitments. We must be prepared to meet force with force whenever and where- ever there is a violation of the United Na- tions Charter. This is the first front. If the battle on this front is lost, everything is lost. 2. Calmiy and with cold calculation we should reassess our strength and our weak- nesses in the Far East. Such a calculation would give greater weight than we have given heretofore to the eastern attitudes about which I have been speaking today. Such a calculation would also consider how many of our Western Allies in the United Nations would join us in the kind of mili- tary operation on the Asiatic mainland which for a long time now has been the logical ultimate of the views expressed by flag- waving and speech-making Senators as they travel about the Far East. 8. I have said that overwhelming strength and military preparedness is imperative, but in the kind of struggie in which we are en- gaged, victory on the first front, military vic- tory, does not necessarily mean ultimate victory. Whether we like it o~ not, we must continue to fight the battle on the second front, the battle on the front which has been so well fought under the Marshall plan in Europe. I refer to the front that my Indian colleague had in mind when he said that “in our part of the world no doctrine can hold its own with communism unless it also gives first place to the needs of ordinary people.” This is what I mean by the second front in Asia. Greater wisdom than I shall ever possess is necessary to understand the motives and anticipate the strategy of the men in the Kremlin. Of one thing, however, I am reasonably certain, This is, that high on the lst of their ob- jectives is the determination to induce—to lead—to compel the United States and its allies not only to neglect, but to abandon the second front. It ig a second front—« standard of living— problem which is attaining serious propor- tions in countries like India, And because of the present neutral position of such coun- tries our task is infinitely more difficult than it has been in Western Europe. It is more dificult because of Indian reluctance to abandon neutrality as a condition of ald. It is more difficult because, at a time when the demands on our resources seem over- whelming, our Congress and our people un- derstandably draw back from proposals for aid to those who refuse to join our side. Can the impasse, the dilemma, be resolved? This leads to my fourth point. 4. India and her neighbors have recently met in London under the auspices of the British Commonwealth of Nations and have agreed upon a program of economic cevelop- ment. Funds in the amount of over $6,000,- 000,000 are to be committed to the program.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The expressed objective is to resist the. spread of communism in the Far Bast. A news dispatch from London yesterday stated that it was the hope of the Commonwealth nations that the United States would oo- operate by tying in its efforts under point 4, Here then is an opportunity for United States collaboration on a multilateral basta which would avoid the delicate political problems presented by India’s neutrality. We should seize this opportunity, Nelson Rockefeller has been appointed Chairman of a United States Committee on the point 4 program. Rockefeller has had 15 years of experience on this Kind of job in Latin America. During 10 of those years he was operating on development programs as head of his own private corporation. Dur- ing five of those years he was at the same job in a Government capacity. He knows how to deal with foreign governments and with foreign business interests. He has learned that programs in aid of the econo- mies of other countries must be safeguarded not only to prevent waste but also to insure that the development is in aid of those who need it most. Above all, in connection with the Standard Oil interests in Venezuela, with his own development company in Bragil and the Caribbean and with the Government, he has learned the importance of compre- hensive programs to train the workers of underdeveloped countries to use the agricul- tural and industrial tools without which the standard of living cannot be raised. As my point four then, I would urge that Rockefeller and his associates meet at the earliest possible time with representatives of India and the other Commonwealth coun- tries of Asia so that there may soon be pre- sented to the Congress a statement of what America should do on condition that these countries continue to help themselves. 5, And last on my list for today, I would tell the Indians and others of the east who ere in the same neutral position that we know that the objectives of their neutrality— peace and security—are the same as the abe jectives which we pursue through collective action under the United Nations Charter. We should tell them further that we hope they will come to see, as we have 80 recently come to see that the establishment of a powerful collective force through and as @ part of the United Nations is the more ef- fective way to achieve their objectives and ours; peace and security, It may be that developments like those in Tibet and in North Korea will do to and for the Indian position what 1t took Greece, the Berlin blockade, and the fall of Czechoslovakia to do to and for the American attitude toward the Soviet Union. In a word, I would not pressure India to be on our side every time there is a vote in the United Nations. 1 venture the view that the mistakes of both the Soviet Union and Communist China will do more for our cause in India in this par- ticular than any amount of pressure from us, Whether you agree with any of my recom- mendations is not important. I shall have fatied rather badly, however, if I have not given you some idea of the way in which Indians from many walks of life—wealthy business men, journalists, doctors, lawyers— look at the west, look at you and me today. I referred at the beginning of my remarks to Dr. Wilbur's association over the years with the work of the Institute of Pacific Re- lations. In a commencement address in 1927, Dr, Wilbur had occasion to describe the pure pose of the conferences of the Institute. One of his sentences sharply states the reason why I shall always consider my experience at Lucknow a great one. It is an effective statement of my major purpose in speaking here today. “To see yourself as others see you, to view your own country through the questioning eyes of foreign neighbors, is a chastening and wholesome experience and one that millions must undergo if we are to deal successfully acroas the great ocean.” Bring the Boys Home EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CHARLES E. POTTER OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. POTTER. Mr. Speaker, under permission to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I wish to insert results of a poll conducted by the Detroit Free Press, De- troit, Mich.: “Brine THE Boys Homs”—PusLio OPINION Voters TuRN THUMBS Down ON Korean War; Sex Stirr ConTROLS; Ask FoR BLASH In SPENDING An additional week of voting did not change results in the Free Press survey of public opinion, Seven in 10 still favor with- drawal from Korea as quickly as possible. Those who returned public opinion ballots largely continued other trends indicated in the first week. There had been predictions that an addi- tional week of balloting would upset results presented last week. It was argued that those who viewed unfavorably the published results would flood the mail with contrary views. There was a flood of mail last week in the closing hours of the mail survey. But, as noted, it did not change results. Most decisive vote was on price and wage controls—85 in 100 wanted stiff ones—and on the proposal to have foreign nations sup- ply the bulk of UN forces. Again, 85 per- cent favorable. Almost as decisive was the vote in favor of cutting nondefense spend- ing: 80 in 100 favorable. Readers also indicated they are against dropping the A-bomb now, although they want it kept as a United States weapon. They oppose, 2 to 1, sending American troops to Europe; oppose by narrower margins draft- ing 18-year-olds and sending substantial aid to foreign countries, Many of the one-quarter who favor ad- mitting China to the United Nations ex- plained their vote: They belleve in facing facts and, as they see it, the Reds are the present rulers of China. The plan to defend outlying bases but keep our armies at home, largely as pro- posed by ex-President Herbert Hoover, won favorable votes from about two-thirds of those who returned ballots. One happening that seemed unusual to tabulators was the number who voted on only a few issues. For example, in one case, 43 votes were cast. But of these nine did not choose to register an opinion on whether or not to stay in Korea. For this reason the votes shown in the result table do not add up. To get a total of 4,000 votes on any one question, it was necessary to count well over 4,000 ballots, The idea for the public opinion survey was suggested to the Free Press by Edward W. Bowers, editor of the Daily News in Rolla, Mo., after he used 8 similar ballot in Rolla to find out “what the public thinks,” Korea GI's are so busy they even receive their citations in fox holes. “Get the troops out of there” is the advice of tha majority A603 who voted in the public opinion survey. Exact resulta are shown in the table below: Final ballot figures Actual vote Bhould we withdraw from area ss quickly as pos- es Bhould we stay until we can give Korea a government chosen by its people? Should we drop the A-bom now and take chances on reprisal? Should we reject use of the A-bomb as a weapon of war?, Should we continue to send substantial ald to foreign countries? Should wo draft 18-year-olds?. Should we send American troops to Europe? mitted to the United Na- tions? Should we expect foreign na- tions to su; ply the bulk of UN armed forces? Should we simply defend our outlying bases with sirand fea power and koep our ormies at home?.. ........ Should we havo stiff price and wage controls? Two Russian Fronts EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CHARLES A. HALLECK OF INDIANA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. HALLECK. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- orp, I include the following address en- titled “Two Russian Fronts,” by Hugh Baillie, president, United Press Associa- tion, delivered before the annual con- ference of the Newspaper Advertising Executives Association, Inc., at Chicago, Tll., on January 22, 1951: Ladies and gentlemen of the Newapaper Advertising Executives Association, having traveled from Korea to Europe and back to Washington, I am prepared to give you my reporter's observations of what I saw on those trips. I won't make any predictions or indulge tn any editorial comment. What I am going to tell you is what was told me by other people. By the people who are running the show. First, let me sketch Nghtly over whore I went and who and what I saw. In Korea I saw General MacArthur. And I will say right at the outset that few military com- manders in history ever did so much with so little, as General MacArthur has accom- plished in Korea. How little won't be known ‘until it’s all over. General MacArthur risked his reputation in this Korean War at the command of the United Nations. He told me that he was very much surprised when he was called to the telecom at 4 o’clock in the morning and saw there a directive for him to get in and Gght in Korea. We all remember the enthusiasm and the cheers which greeted the United Nations in- tervention in Korea. The enthusiasm of the United Nations evaporated under adversity. And now, some of our most powerful friends
AGM are looking for the exits. Macarthur has suffered reverses, most of which are attributable to not having enough troops, the popular thing ts to second-guess him The thing for us to do in Korea is to get in or get out. You can't fight a half-war. You can't pull your punches. Yet that is exactly what we are doing In Asia. We ere pulling our punches. We are pulling our punches because the United Nations is get- ting shaky on the issue, and because those back here who are running the show feel that we cannot risk a two-front war at this time. We now have about 32,500,000 men under arms. The last time we fought a two- front war, we had 12,864,000 mon under arms. And corresponding munitions, shipe, and supplies of ali sorte, But as to the question of whether there is going to be a war, why, the war's on now. The question is how fast it will spread. The cost of liberty is going up and up, as we all can see. Like everything else. The price {fs rising. But, we ain't seen nothing yet. This war is young. Well, as I said, General MacArthur told me that he was surprised at being ordered into Korea. If there was anybody more surprised than General MacArthur, it was the Russians themselves. They did not expect the United States to show up. They had heard offictal pronouncements to the effect that we had written off Korea. When the Americans ap- peared on the field of battle, and in the afr, and on the sea, Iam eure the Russians felt they had been mousetrapped. They had been hoaxed. People have asked me why the Chinese did not get into the war earlier, and come down into Korea and keep us from advancing so far. The answer to that is that the Chinese were not ready to enter the war earlier. It had never been supposed by the Russians they would need the Chinese in this par- ticular campaign. They thought the North Koreans could handle it alone. It took sev- eral months for the Chinese army to move up into Manchuria and along the border and get ready to intervene, By that time, under clearance from the United Nations, MacArthur bad advanced so far that the Chinese obviously decided to lay back and let him come all the way up to the frontier. The Asiatic style of warfare, 80 IT was told in Korea, is predicated on the annihilation of the enemy. The deeper we advanced the eaaler the Chinese t it would be to annihilate us later. That's what they have been trying to do ever since last November. General MacArthur echfeved a military miracle in Korea by holding a line around the old Pusan perimeter. He was fabulously outnumbered at all times. When I was over there the artillery ammunition was ra- tioned, 20 rounds to a etin per day. Then through the maneuver of the Inchon landing, and the constant atr attacks which had weakened the Korean Communists to such an extent that they were ready to collapse, the tide was turned and the enemy army Was virtually destroyed. When I accompanied MacArthur to Seoul, at the time he turned the government over to Byngman Rhee, the president of Bouth Koree, MacArthur thought the war was over, and said so. During the oeremony MacArthur led in the Lord's Pray- er, and thanked God for the victory. If was there in the sesombly hall of the Korean capital building, and remember the broken glass that came tumbling down around our ears at intervals from the shattered dome, as MacArthur spoke and prayed. The Korean Red armies have ceased to exist as formidable antagonists, as was demonstrated by the rapidity with which we advanced into North Korea. But the Chinese were lying tu watt. body believed the Chinese then, any more than we believe the Russians now, when they say they will not etand idly by and see us organize a Western European army, particu- larly with a backbone of German troops. The Russians are making those threats at frequent intervals, ‘They are discounted in this country. I¢ is common that the Moscow correspondents are able to file through censorahip only that news which the Russians want to get out. It is noticeable that during the last several days and weeks, our correspondent in Moscow, the United Press correspondent, has been able to fle many stories, the news that the Rus- sians will not stand for the organization of the army, which hes been undertaken by General Eleenhower. This is coming out because the Russians want it to get out. It ig the first move, or one af the first moves, in thelr campaign to frustrate the organiza- tion of Eisenhower's army, They may be ex- pected to try many other things. First, they will try to scare the Germans out of joining General Eisenhower's army. They will also start an agitation tn this coun- try against arming the Nezis. They may be expected to create an incident, like the Ber- lin blockade, whitch will take our minds off the business of building this North Atlantic treaty army. Of coutse, the Russians don’t want wer, #0 to speak, if they can get what they want without war. Or at least, without getting into the war themselves, personally. They prefer wars like the one In Korea. As on distingutshed British statesmen sald to me, “The Russians are very generous with other people's lives.” Those who are on the ground and run- ning the show in Germany believe that if the Russians get the idea that the Western European army is actuality going to come into being, and emerge from the blueprint stage (and they aren’t convinced yet that ft will), they will do something drastic. Mean- while they won't. They are not afraid of a blueprint army. But I was told in Germany thet if they decide to move, they will endeavor to create inside Germany, Korea No. 2, And this is the way they would go about it. The Rus- atans bave, in the eastern zone of Germany, an army which is called the alert police. I have heard {ts figures given as high as 100,000 men. This ts a fully equipped army, with tanks and airplanes, read to roll. Now the Yast Germans are endesvorins to start ne- gotiations with West German Chancellor Adenauer, looking toward « untfication of Germany. It so happens that I was actu- ally talking to Adenater at his office located in a ville et Bonn, on the Rhine last month when the original note from President Grote. woh! of East Germany was handed to him. I remember that Adenauer turned to me and sald, “We certainly live in interesting times.” When the time comes that the Russians want to create this Korea No. 2 the formula is simple. The East Germans announce that Adenauer has been wasting thetr time. They would sey that he, and he alone, was stand- ing in the way of a unified fatherland, If they follow the classic formula, they will de- nounce him as a tool of Wall Street and the American cannibals, and they will call on all loyal Germans who want a unified father- land, and who do not want to be “sold” into Eisenhower's army, to rise and put Adensuer APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD daisy. gaining. If he were in this country, he would probably be a labor tor. Adenauer {a striving to drive a tough bar- gain with the victorious Allies. He wants the oecupation statute converted into a treaty and he wants the High Commissioners to be- come ambassadors, He has no intention of paying Hitler's debts, nor has he any inten- tion of continuing to pay the costes of the Occupation. He wante the German scientists to be let loose to conduct their research for the benefit of Germany instead of for ite conquerors. He wants Germany to have the Tight to build ita own merchant marine and air fleet (no doubt with American money, like everybody else). And instead of fur- nishing combat teams to Eisenhower's army, to be commanded by Frenchmen, Americans, or British, Adenauer wants the Germans to have their own army with thelr own general staff. All this would have seemed fantastic only a few short months ago. It isn't fan- And since we are about to negotiate a peace treaty with Japan, to be followed by the organization of a Japanese army to iend That is, i¢ Russta site we will be playing the Russians’ game. He told me the Russians desire to have us bied white in Koreas so they could occupy without a fight. As he put it when I inter- viewed him for the United Press the Rus- sians would win the game without losing a man Adenauer told me there would be lasting peace onty when the Untted States was able to confront Russia with a militery force which the Soviets would consider dangerous. He said that to build such a forve the United coopers: Germans only when they ao longer feel they are a second-class power under occupation. That's the basia of bis argument,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Adenauer in his desire to have us discon- tinue the war in Asia js in entire agreement with the other European statesmen with whom I talked last month. What they want, of course, is for us to Nquidate the war in Korea and bring our Army over to Europe. You have heard the question asked, if the Russians actually are going to move, why right now—this January. They'll never find Europe any flatter, or less able to resist, than right now this January. Well it could be, of course, they are waiting for the snow to thaw and the ground to harden so us to carry their armor. Churchill believes it’s the atom bomh, This, in his opinion, 1s the great deterrent to the Russians. They know we have more atom bombs than they have, and a better delivery system. Other British authorities told me the Rus- sians first would have to grab the Pe:sian oil fields before they could enter into u full- scale war, The first move in such 2 war, therefore, would be Ruastan occupation of the rich Azerbaijan oil fields in Persia, However, it must be remembered that Rus- sia is less dependent on oil than the west. Their armies don't use s0 much armor as we do. They take the form of another Asi- atic horde, like the Chinese. One of the amazing features of the Korean War has been how the Chinese managed to do it, without air power and without extensive transport. The fact that they use human beings instead of trucks, very largely, gives them a big advantage. You can shoot up the roads and destroy the convoys, but it's harder to interrupt the supplies whe1 they're all brought down on the heads or backs of people. As a matter of fact, in Korea we have a highly modernized European-style army fighting in a primitive country. The enemy knows how to use his legs. He hasn't been riding in automobiles since infancy. He can walk up a mountain like a fly going up the side of a house, and can keep on doing it day and night. He doesn't need a big plant behind his lines. And when he’s wounded nobody worries about carrying him back, they just throw him into the ditch. There are always more where he came from, The American soldier is a precision instru- ment, trained, a technician, with background and education. He is not expendable. Put him against a Chinese coolie of whom there are unlimited quantitics, and give each of them an automatic weapon, and it's a stand- off, Much the same situation would prevail in a war with Russian. Prime Minister Attlee of Great Britain ts very anxious to have us out of Kores. He regurds any war in Asia as a bottomless pit for the white race And this attitude ts heartily echoed by Bevin, the Foreign Sec- retary. In France, I found the same thing. Premier Pleven believes that we can be bled to death in Asia. Foreign Minister Schuman thinks the same thing. But Schuman doesn't believe that Stalin {s going to strike a military blow in the immediate future. He feels that Stalin has become old and prudent, and that he would be too wise to risk every- thing in an open war when he can continue to attain his objectives by subversion. In this respect Schuman agrees with Attlee who also foresees an intensification of Russia’s underground methods in seeking its objec- tives, without war. And two of Russia's prime objectives, of course, are Italy and France where the Communists are a large and powerful political party, General Eisenhower has probably been handed the toughest assignment of all at this particular time. But I think he expects to succeed, or he wouldn’t have undertaken it. To Europeans, of course, the appoint- ment of General Eisenhower meant just one thing. That ts, the Yanks are coming. They don’t think Washington would ever let Ike down. If he cumes back and says we can dis- courage the Russians, and encourage Europe in really rearming and joining up, but that he needls a certain number of American divi- siins as a starter, he'll get them. That's what they believe. Ladies and gentlemen, the position today is that we have called Russia ike Britain called Germany in 1939. You may recall the British told the Germans there would be war if they entered Poland. I remember veing in London at that time and I asked the British what they could do to defend Poland from the Germans. The reply was they could do nothing; however Poland would be the chip that Germany would knock off Britain's shoulder and start the war. Like the British, we have drawn a line. We drew a line against the Russians in Korea. We have drawn a line against the Russians in Europe, I have been on both fronts. On the Korean front where we are at grips with the Communists, and on the European front where we are preparing to come to grips with them if they advance. The war has already started. The question is whether it will spread. and how fast. Russia ts still calling the tune. Never was there such a time when there Was 80 much dissension in high places, so many contrary opinions of what ought to be done, or how to go about doing it. I have been on a long trip and seen a lot of people—people who presumably know the answers—people who are in command-—peo- ple who bear the responsibility. Yet I think I can say, without joking, that this is a case where the more you see and hear, the less you know. The less you know for sure, anyway. Twice before in our generation the lights of freedom have burned low all over the world. Twice before they have been re- kindled by the United States. The question before us now is, whether we will have to re« Kindle them this third time? Draft for “Sick” Railmen an Idea EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. PAUL W. SHAFER OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. SHAFER. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- orp, I include the following article in the Boston Sunday Advertiser of February 4, 1951, written by Austen Lake: Drarr ror “Sick” RAILMEN AN IDEA (By Austen Lake) Tam just old Joe Blunt, American, and pretty confused in the head by what I read in the newspapers. So here we are, the sove ereign United States people, exhorted to stand unitedly behind President Truman in what is called @ national emergency. But how can we stand behind him when he faces in so many directions on the same basic problems like wage-and-price controls? Be- cause, no sooner do we stand behind him on one decision, then he pivots around and we are not behind him any more. Also we are invited to show our loyalty by following our congressional leaders. And so we should. But how can we form a common procession when the leaders traipse off in separate parades and individual counter- A605 marches. Because, no sooner do we fall in line, than we find ourselves trailing a lot of men going nowhere in different ways. Like I say I am just old Joe Blunt, Ameri- can and father of four little Blunts, and I would like to do my democratic share. Eut, if President Truman and Congress don’t know where they are heading on almost everything, how can the great commonality of Americans, like me, render realistic service, JOE WILL DO HIs DUTY Here last week the Nation gets a price- and-wage freeze as of January 25, So I say to old lady Blunt, “Well, costs are pretty stiff, but now we can try to budget the pay check.” But next I read where Congress has changed its mind, and we have a price. and-wage thaw. So there goes my pay budget all to hell again. That ain’t what bothers me most. Here, today, comes a letter to my boy, Joe Biunt, Jr,, which reads “Greetings from the Presi- dent,” and says for him to report for Army induction and physical examination next Thursday without fail. So young Joe says, “T guess that's {t, Dad,” and I say, “Yes, son, that’s your duty as a good American boy.” I got a daddy’s unhappy feeling, of course, because young Joe is just 19 and fresh out of high school and don’t know anything about what causes wars. Still, when Uncle Sam stretches out his long arm and tells my kid, or your kid too, “Come on and no ifs, ands, or buts,” we got to bo good citizens. We haven't any choice like. Then I see in the papers that the rallroad switchmen are out on strike and paralyzing some 33 roads which are hauling essential war materials of our troops in Korea, where my nephew, Bill Blunt, is fighting with the marines. Only this ain’t a regular, legal strike, because last December 14, the United States Department invoked a court tnjunoc- tion which made rail strikes unlawful. So the paper says how the ratlroad switch= men are pretending to get sick all at once while their union bosses said “Tsk-tsk. It’s some kind of epidemic over which we have no control.” Now that, of course, is pure malarky which even a simple guy like old Joe Blunt can recognize, let alone a real smart man like President Truman, Then I think, “It seems strange that a Govern- ment which has the power to draft young boys, to fix prices, and freeze wages, to grab strategic materials and otherwise contro] the freedoms of individual action and the eco- nomic life of the Nation, can be so helpless to stop and punish wildcat strikers. WHAT IF JOE GOT SICK? So I say to old lady Blunt, “What would happen if young Joe decided to get sick and stay sick for the duration of the hostility in Korea and elsewhere?” And old lady Blunt gives me a queer look and says, “That would be rebellion againet the Government, and young Joe would go to jail.” Which, as I know, is the right answer. But then I say, “Here the Justice Depart- ment has a court order, dated back to De- cember 14, against railroad strikes, Yet the switchmen are defying Federal law and strik- ing anyway, even when the Army 1s placed in control of the railroads. Isn't that re- bellion, too, and shouldn’t somebody go to jail?” So, if the President and Congress don't stand firmly behind their own laws, how can old Joe Blunt or the American people be expected to stand behind the President and Congress? That is, unless the people some- how grow two faces and learn to stand fac- ing opposite directions at the same time. Then old lady Blunt, who is pretty cute in some matters said, Well who would you
A606 arrest-—the entire brotherhood of railroad switchmen, numbering some $5,000?” “No. But the Army ts asking for 80,000 soldiers for immediate service and it seems kinda sensible to draft the 36,000 switchmen. It might not be a bad idea if Mr. Truman would mat] them all a letter starting, ‘Greet- ings from the Prestdent of the United States,’ like he did taday with young Joe. Then he could say, ‘Now you are inducted into the Army and my firat direct order, as your Com- mander in Chief, is to get back on the job awitching trains, and no ifs, ands, or buts.’” Old lady Blunt wrinkles up her nose and eniffe, “But that ain't the democratic way and, if nothing else, President Truman is a Democrat first. Not only that but the whole Truman administration is owned, body and soul, by the labor vote, or thinks it is, And Mr. Truman 1s never a man willfully to kick votes tn the face.” SOME OF LIFE’S PUZZLES The only conclusion I can manage from all this is that it constitutes “Government by drift” and Mr. Truman and Congress, as the captain and crew of our ship, are allowing the winds, cross currents and tides to carry the Nation willy-nilly, by guess and by accident. At which point old lady Blunt says, “Have you got a couple of dol- Jars? I want to buy some pork chops to feed young Joe a good, last meal before he joins the Army.” So I fish around and all I can find 1s $1.50, which IT hend over, warn- ing, “That is all we got till next Wednesday payday.” Old lady Blunt sighs and says, “Well I hoped to buy pork chops, but I guess we will have to eat cabbage soup again and maybe some eggs.” 8a I turn to the part of the paper which says how the Government is still paying millions for farm subsidies and stock piling more mountains of eggs, butter and cereals to rot in order to keep prices at top levels. Which puzzles me some more on how the Government can boost Prices up and freeze ‘em down at the same time. I will close by wondering which way Mr. Truman and Congress are facing today, so I can face that way too, and thus stand ‘unitedly behind them, United States Policy Must Be Based on Facts EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. SAMUEL W. YORTY OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. YORTY. Mr. Speaker, we have, in the City of Los Angeles, a compara- tively new metropolitan newspaper which recently demonstrated the kind of Journalistic leadership which we all greatly admire. The paper conducted a poll to ascertain the sentiment of its readers relative to our foreign policy. When the results of the poll showed the thinking of a majority of those writing in to be isolationist and contrary to what the editor deemed best for the safety of the United States, he promptly took an editorial position contrary to the major- ity expression of those answering the poll, and set forth his reasons for believ- ing them to be inerror, I think Mr, Vir- gil Pinkley, the editor and publisher of the Los Angeles Mirror, deserves to be commended, both for his forthrightness and the high quality of his editorial analysis of our situation. The editorial merits widespread dissemination, and I am therefore including {t in our Recorp as follows: Uarrep SraTes Powicy Must Be Basen on Facrs Final results in the Mirror poll on the United Nations-European ald question show that the thinking of a majority of those who participated is ruggedly isolationist. “We respect and understand that viewpoint. But we disagree with it. We have a certain sympathy with those who are annoyed and repelled by recent in- ternational developments. However, now more than ever, we should not let emotion outrun reason. This is a time for mature, reasoned decisions of long-range character. Analysis dictates the conclusion that isola- tdonism is wrong for the United States at this point in history. To us the fallacy of the isolationist posi- tion is clear. The world has shrunk so much in the past 10 years that the United States could not stand aafely alone, even if it wished. That statement becomes truer and truer every time a faster plane and a stronger A-bomb are produced. Since we cannot stand alone we must learn to stand together against tyranny. Standing alone looks deceptively simple. Just build our big wall and hide behind it, they say. Standing together is much harder, because it involves blending our American viewpoint with those of other nations. And though their basic alms may be the same, their ways of reaching the goal are bound to differ. That generates an appearance of con- fusion and uncertainty which makes it easy Jor the faint-hearted to say, “Aw, let's toss the whole United Nations out of the window.” Here are some answers to some of the most frequent isolationist charges: 1. Western Europe is not doing its part in the common defense. Answer. The United States in 1950 had 14 men in uniform per 1,000 population. Britain and France each had 16 men in the armed services per 1,000 population, 2. Air and sea power can beat Ruasia tn Europe; a land army isn't necessary. Answer, That's what many thought about Korea, too. Our sad experience there, and that of World War II, are conclusive evidence that air attacks will not stop ground forces. The man with the rifle wins wars. $8. If the United States sends troops to Europe, Russia will start a war. Answer. Russia respects only strength. She is far more likely to attack a weak foe than a strong one. She will never be offended into a war, 4. Western Europe isn’t so vital; what if we do lose it to the Reds? Answer. Take steel, for example, since it ig a basic material of war power. In 1950, the United States produced 96,500,000 tons of steel. Russia and her satellites produced 84,900,000 tons. A far larger percentage of Soviet steel than American goes into mili- tary production. Western Europe produced 57,000,000 tons, If we desert Western Europe we have hanced the Russians equality in steel output. Most of the uranium for our atom bombs comes from the Belgian Oongo. The air bases we need in event of war with Russia are controlied by our Western European allies, The airfields in Britain, French North Africa, Greece, Turkey, and Italy are the key to power strokes against Russia. If we are denied these bases we lose our No. 1 advan- tage over Russia. On the of these facts alone, we ‘urge those who would have us pull back in- aide a shell to reexamine their views, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The United States is the leader of the free world. The hareh facts of economic reality makes us s0. What leader ever won a fight by putting his head in the sand? Duty to Country—Or to Purse? EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HENDERSON L. LANHAM OF GEORGIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. LANHAM. Mr. Speaker, with leave to extend my own remarks in the Recorp, I am including an editorial which appeared in the Rome (Ga.) News-Tribune on Sunday, February 4, 1951, entitled “Duty to Country—Or to Purse?” The action of the striking railroad workers has aroused the indignation of the people of the country and prop- erly so. As I have stated in previous insertions in the Recorp of other editorials on the same subject during the past few days, the time has come to not only halt the present strike but to strengthen the Railway Labor Act and the Taft-Hartley law so that the President will have ade- quate power to deal with Nation-wide strikes that affect the national health, welfare, or security. The editorial follows: Duty to Counrny—Or To Purse? The current “sick call” by switchmen members of the Brotherhood of Rallroad Trainmen is the latest, most flagrant, and victous abuse of the power the organized labor monopoly has created. In 4 sickeningly transparent ruse to force the American public and its Government to comply with what otherwise might be legiti- mate needs, the switchmen are costing the United States incalculable damage. The news reports tell of walkoute in at least 44 major cities and the consequent tangle of rail traffic. In Chicago, shipments of food and medica) supplies bound for Americans fighting in Korea are halted. Becked-up shipments have forced layoffs in industries manufacturing our defense needs, halting production which we may never re- gain. The strike, and such it is no matter how much the sanctimonious aura of sick leave is spread, is technically against the United States Government, The Army assumed con- trol of all major ratlroads last year in a Fed- €ral move to avert just such dangerous walk- OU.s as we now face, Now this newspaper has opposed the en- croachment of Federal Government into the lives of citizens as much or more than the next one. We feel and always will feel that an individual is entitled to make his living and bargain for a better one without being seduced or coerced by Government in any case. But the fact remains that Government in- tervenes in these cases only when the na- tional security and the welfare of all citinens is threatened by the arbitrary and dicta- torial attitude of the comparative few. And 1¢ ia @ proven fact that our particular ad- ministration, conscious of labor's political power as tt 1s, will intercede only when the need is dire and after the great mass of the American peopie have brought their opinion
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD to bear. That has been established in the coal strikes and rail walkouts of the past few years. Therefore the railroaders on strike today are deliberately flouting the order of a Gov« ernment acting in the interest of all its people. They are sacrificing in no small de- gree the welfare and security of all Americans. This strike is even more indefensible since the switchmen actually claim they are dis- criminated against by thelr own union, Their grievance is against their own leaders, not the GI in the snows of Korea. But it is the GI who suffers. Their claim for a reduc- tion in their workweek may very well be legitimate. But the GI cannot discard his responsibility to his Nation by walking out on 7-day-a-week combat duty just because he thinks his gripe 1s legitimate. Continued refusal by organized labor to recognize and shoulder its responsibilities may prove labor’s downfall yet. Failure by union leadership to put duty to country be- fore duty to purse can't be tolerated much longer. Two New York Newspapers Whooping It Up for Internationalism and Urging That We Spend Ourselves Into Bank- ruptcy EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN T. WOOD OF IDAHO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. WOOD of Idaho. Mr. Speaker, never in the entire history of our coun- try have the American people been more keenly aware of the fact that the power to tax is the power to destroy. There is a growing realization that the danger of war and the atom bomb are being deliberately overemphasized to blind us to the fact that we are being rushed headlong into a situation worse than war—total economic collapse. That would mean revolution and unbridled anarchy throughout the entire world— a throwback to the dark ages, If we would defeat our enemies and save our country, we must see clearly who our enemies are. The struggle that goes on in the world today is not be- tween communism and capitalism, but the age-old struggle between the forces of absolutism and the forces of free- dom. Communism is merely one of the instruments used by the absolutists to set up the power state, and to achieve their objectives the absolutists have en- tered into an unholy alliance with the Communists, Fascists, fellow travelers, phony liberals and one-worlders. The tools with which they work and the ve- hicles on which they are riding to power are supplied by a debauched, manipu- lated, irredeemable paper currency which is so manipulated that we are financing communism in Europe while our sons are dying to stop communism in Asia. Prices are high because they have made our dollars cheap. We must recognize that there is a na- tional and international conspiracy to drain away our wealth, to gain control of our industry and commerce, replace our system of government with the power state, lower our standard of liv- ing to the world level, and reduce the United States to the status of a province in a world government in which we will be outnumbered and outvoted 15 to 1. The leading absolutists of today are the one-worlders of Wall Street and the London counting houses. They are the real architects of our foreign policy, They want the American taxpayers to pay the interest on their foreign bonds; that explains our European policy. In Asia, they want to gain control of such strategic materials as raw rubber, tin, manganese, and tungsten, which are so essential in our economy, and thereby dominate our industry and commerce. Chiang Kai-shek and Nationalist China was in their way; they caused him to be eliminated, and as a consequence our boys are dying in Korea. These international conspirators, through the press and radio which they seek to control, are softening us up for the kill; beating the war drums to jus- tify the regimentation of the American people, the drafting of our sons, the re- armament of Western Europe, and spending ourselves into bankruptcy. While giving lip service to small busi- ness they are pursuing a course that is destroying small business and forcing all business into monopolies which will be easier to take over when der tag comes, The appended article from the Wash- ington Times-Herald of February 6, 1951, tells you how two big New York news- papers are whooping it up for interna- tionalism. These are not isolated exam- ples; the internationalists are buying outright or gaining control of newspa- pers in all sections of America. They have their columnists and commenta- tors—slick, tricky individuals who wave the flag with one hand while chiseling away the foundation of this Republic with the other—bleeding hearts who drool for the forgotten man while advo- cating policies which will place him in perpetual chains, and sell America down the river. These international racketeers must be stopped—and stopped now. Show me an internationalist, and I will show you a potential traitor to the United States. The hour is late. Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. The article from the Washington Times-Herald follows: Two New York Newspapers WHOOPING UP INTERNATIONALISM-~TIMES AND HERALD TRISUNE AGAIN Back UNITEp STATES IN- VOLVEMENT IN EuROPE’s TROUBLES (By William Fulton) New Yoru, February 5.—For the third time in less than two score years, the eastern in- ternationalist press 1s whooping it up for greater involvement in Europe's chronic troubles, wholesale drafting of youth, giving President Truman a blank check for shipping troops overseas, and building vast arma- ments. The only new note is virtual subservience to the United Nations, Constant embrotiment in Europe's wars is salable here because of the large foreign- born population along the eastern seaboard— people not yet assimilated to the American A607 way of life and still militant about issues in the old country. VIOLENTLY PRO-BRITISH Bellwethers for the internationalist Une ere the New York Times and the New York Herald Tribune. Both papers engaged in a saber-rattling campaign prior to Pearl Har- bor. The Times in particular came under fire on the grounds it was violently pro- British and anti-German before this coun- try'’s entry into World War I in 1917, Generally speaking, the foreign inclina- tions of the two papers reflect the prevailing thought among the bankers and the Wall Street financial district. The publications have denied any connection, but the parallel is striking. On the financial front in recent years this Parallel has revealed itself in the news- papers’ espousal of the Marshall plan, Bile lions have been poured into European “ree covery” and many millions have found their way back into big banks here and corporas tions doing business abroad. Thousands of dollars have filtered back to the newspapers and magazines which support the Marshall plan. According to the most recent figures, the Herald Tribune has received subsidies for tte Paris edition amounting to $60,000 from the Economic Cooperation Administration. The Times did not participate in the first sube sidy plan although the Herald Tribune did so. AGREE WITH ALDRICH On the political front, the Times and Herald Tribune see eye to eye with Winthrop Aldrich, board chairman of the Chase Na- tional Bank and undercover financier for Governor Dewey's me-too political cam- paigns. Aldrich was slated for appointment as Treasury Secretary or Ambassador to Britain had Dewey been elected President in 1948. Currently the two newspapers are bally- hooing General Eisenhower and the North Atlantic Pact, While the two papers are separately owned, their editorial pages and play of the news are of “tweedledum and tweedledee” sameness, Julius Ochs Adler, vice president and gen- eral manager of the Times, a member of the Citizens Committee on the Present Danger, is making public speeches these days tn favor of the universal military service bill. The pinko trend on the Herald Tribune is generally laid on the doorstep of Joseph Barnes, formerly foreign editor on the paper, Barnes was a Harvard buddy of Frederick Vanderbilt Field, millionaire supporter of Communist-front causes. Barnes later threw in his lot with Bartley Crum in the ill-fated publication of the New York Star, an outgrowth of the failure of PM, the Marshall Field journalistic flop in this city. The Star twinkled only briefly. BENNETT BORN IN SCOTLAND Before the Herald Tribune fell upon these evil days, it was regarded as the organ of the British Foreign Office, the United States State Department, the Episcopal Church, and Wall Street. James Gordon Bennett and his son, and Horace Greeley and Charles A. Dana built the newspapers that finally merged into the Herald Tribune, The elder Bennett, born in Scotland, established the Herald in 1835. His son obtained social position in England before he could get it in New York, where he was born in 1841. The younger Bennett was horsewhipped by hig filancée’s brother after his engagement was broken off in 1877 and thereafter he lived abroad. He became more European than American. The Herald became a British mouthpiece and was violently prowar in 1914. While the Bennetts were establishing the Herald, Horace Greeley founded the Tribune
A608 In 1841, Greeley, a newspaper genius, was succeeded by Whitelaw Reid, who marrted Elizabeth Mills, an heiress. WA@ UNITED STATES AMBASSADOR Subsequently Reid became the American Ambaasador to Britain and hts paper went completely British, taking ite editorial direc- tion from Whitehall. The Herald was taken over in 1924 from Frank A. Munsey, who had acquired it in 1918, and the consolidated sheet became the present Herald Tribune. Ogden teid, Whitelaw Reid's son, became the publisher. The family acquired in-laws in the British nobility when Jean Reid, Ogden's sister, be- came Lady Ward by marrying John Hubert Ward, equerry-in-ordinary to the King and brother of the Earl of Dudley. Ogden Reid had married Helen Rogers, a secretary in the American Embassy in Lon- don. When he died several years ago, she became president of the company, and a son, Whitelaw, took over as editor. Mrs. Reid is an energetic, international do-gooder whose one-time Republican principles have been diluted and distorted by the globalists. The Times was a limping newspaper prop- erty toward the end of the century when Adolph 8S. Ochs, one-time printer's devil who had made a success of the Chattanooga Times came to New York City to make his mark, He took over the management of the ‘limes in 1896 and made a great success of it. Oohs admired the Times of London and modeled his enterprise after it. One of the rensons why the Times has been criticized for its foreign inclinations is that through the years a number of foreign na- tionals have been employed, particularly in the news service abroad. EDITOR BORN IN ENGLAND 4 case in point is Prederick T. Birchall, one-time acting managing editor, who was born in Warrington, England, in 1871. He came to the New York Times in 1905. During World War I he took a leave of absence to work for the British Government. After Carl van Anda retired in 1926, Bir- chall was named acting managing editor and served in that capacity until 1932. The “acting” was never removed from his title because Birchall always remained a British subject. He went abroad in 1932 to take charge of the European news service and finally retired early in the war. He is now living in Nova Scotia. Upon his death in 1935, Ochs left his con- trolling stock interest for the benefit of his grandchildren, the offspring of his daughter, Iphigene, and her husband, Arthur Hays Sulzberger. It was entrusted to three trus- tees, providing for a life interest for Mrs. Ochs and Mrs. Sulzberger. The three trustees are Mr. and Mrs. Sulz- berger and Adler Sulrberger is the publisher and real boss of the Times. The Rail Strike and a 1948 Manifesto EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HENDERSON L. LANHAM OF GEORGIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. LANHAM. Mr. Speaker, with leave first obtained, I am introducing in the Recorp, with my own remarks, an editorial which appeared in the Atlanta Journal of February 2, 1951, entitled “The Rail Strike and a 1948 Manifesto.” It is every day becoming more appar- ent that the railroad labor law, as well as the Taft-Hartley Act, is too weak in its provisions for dealing with nation- wide strikes that threaten the public health, welfare, and security. Iam in hearty accord with the Atlanta Journal editorial which follows and agree that the time has come, not only for action to halt the present railroad strike masquerading under the pretense of illness, called by some a hit and run strike, but also time for the Congress to take action to strengthen both the Railway Labor Act and the Taft-Hartley law so the President will have adequate power to protect the country from irre- sponsible labor union leaders and those who blindly and to their own hurt follow their lead, The editorial follows: Tre Ram Sreike ann A 1048 MANIFEsTO Five years ago the engineers’ and train- men’s brotherhoods rejected a Presidential fact-finding board’s recommendation for a 16-cent wage increase, and also President Truman’s subsequent proposal of 1814 cents. The unions struck the railroads, the Presi- dent seized them in the name of the Nation, The President threatened to draft the strik- ers, public sentiment condemned the strike, and it was called off after 2 days. The two brotherhoods then accepted the President's wage proposal, although Whitney of the trainmen threatened to destroy Harry 8. ‘Truman. Three years ago the engineers, firemen, and ewitchmen rejected a fact-finding board's award of a 154%4-cent raise and called a Na- tion-wide strike. The President went through the formality of se' ing the rail- roads, the Department of Justice got an in- junction, and there was no strike. The Army went through the motions of running the roads for 2 months until management and the unions agreed on the 15!4-cent Wage increase, plus some rules changes, Last year, some of the brotherhoods adopted a new tactic. They called it the hit-and-run strike. The President again made the gesture of taking over the rall- roads. The Nation still holds them in theo- retical captivity to preserve the health and security of our 150,000,000 people, and court injunctions forbid any strike. So there is no strike. Inetead, a mysteri- ous illness has hit a lot of switchmen in var- ious strategic rail centers. In consequence bia are suffering @ paralysis of transporta- fon, That is, the men report that they are sick. Union leaders profess to be trying to persuade them to return to work. The claim of illness is, of course, untrue. It is a flouting of the Government of the United States and the law of the land. It is a repudiation of the agreement signed at the White House on December 21, 1950, by the president of the Brotherhood of Ratl- road Trainmen, by the president of the Order of Railway Conductors, by the president of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen, and by the grand chief engineer of the Brother- hood of Locomotive Engineers. The union movement in this country won public support because it was predicated on the character and the responsibility of its Jeadership and its membership, They were forthright men who kept their contracts and whose word was good. No greater disservice could be done the union movement than the insolent dishon- esty which characterizes this t rebel- lion against the majesty of the Nation and ita courte. It is union irresponsibility at its worst. On May 25, 1948, a manifesto wos issued by the Railway Labor Executives’ Agsocla- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD tion, This manifesto sald it was speaking for an overwhelming majority of the Nation's rail workers. It demanded that, as a matter of perma- nent policy, the Federal Government take over the ownership and operation of the country's railways. The relationship between the actions of the rail] unions in 1946, 1948, 1950-51, and the manifesto of 1948 should be brought into the open, It is a4 matter of national concern, one of the greater perils of the none-too- remote future. How “Right” Settled a Strike EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CHARLES B. DEANE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. DEANE. Mr. Speaker, the entire country is becoming more and more alarmed over the serious impact of the current strike involving the railroads of this country. The issues involved appear to be serious and complex. It is to be hoped that all parties involved are at- tempting to settle this controversy, that is bringing so much hardship to the American people and the alarming slow- down to our defense program, on the basis of not who is right, but what is right, Mr. Speaker, within recent days the National Assembly on Moral Rearma- ment was held here in Washington at the Shoreham Hotel. In attendance at these conferences were many Senators and Representatives, as well as delegates from many sections of the world. Many of us were greatly impressed with the im- pact for good that this conference brought, not only in the fight against communism, the conflict between man- agement and labor, but the need for us individuals to analyze our own actions on the basis of certain absolute moral standards, involving honesty, purity, un- selfishness, and love, In this connection, Mr. Speaker, I in- elude as a part of my remarks the fol- lowing statement made by Senator H. ALEXANDER SmirH, of New Jersey, in the other body on the occasion of the ap- pearance on Capitol Hill of many of the visiting delegates to this National As- sembly. I invite the attention of the Senate to a group of distinguished visitors who are seated in the gallery today. Among them are mili- tary, political, industrial, and labor leaders from the danger areas of Europe and Asia, They bring evidence of an ideological force for democracy that is seeking to bring an auswer to communism in those areas. Along with our military and economic strategy, America more than ever needs to develop ideological strength 1f we are to win what is primartly a struggie for the minds of men and women. We as a people must live and proclaim the inspired experience of our democracy based on moral stendards in which alone can freedom survive and flourish. ‘These men and women of all races and all creeds, and of widely varying views on life, come together in one common purpose.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD They are making a distinct contribution to the cause to which I refer. They merit our attention and support. Mr. Speaker, several Members of the other body expressed similar statements as did our own esteemed colleague, the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Cox], who had this to say about the need of show- ing the world how to settle problems on jhe baat of what is right rather than who ght: It has been encouraging at a time when we are compelled to appropriate billions of dollars and mobilize millions of men to meet the threat of world communism, that evi- dence should be presented in our midst of @ world force which 1s answering communism in men's minds and hearts, Through the capture of key leadership in critical areas it has actually turned the tide of communism in some of the most vital danger spots in Europe and Asia. I would like only to point out, as one ex- ample of the effectiveness of moral rearma- ment in producing national unity in this time of crisis, that the presidents of two of America’s major airlines brought their top management personnel and the leaders of the pilots’ associations in both companies and announced that serious strikes had been averted on both sides because of the influ- ence in their companies in recent weeks of the program of moral rearmament, It would be an interesting speculation to visualize how many millionse—perhaps even pillions—might be saved this Government in ite present mobilization effort if such a spirit of honesty, teamwork, and unselfish coop- eration and patriotism were to be multiplied throughout the length and breadth of this land. Mr, Speaker, referring again to the serious railroad strike now costing not only American lives but millions of dol- lars, I think it most appropriate to in- clude as a part of my remarks what the idealogy of moral rearmament accom- plished in settling impending strikes in- volving the United Air Lines and the National Airlines as carried in the Jan- uary 24 issue of the Pathfinder: How “Rrowt” Serrump A STRIKE United Air Lines President William A. Pat- terson thought hardboiled Larry Shapiro was kidding. Three months ago Shapiro sug- gested that deep-seated company-untion dif- ferences could be settled ‘‘on the basis of ab- solute honesty, purity, love, and unselfish- ness.” Speaking for the United Air Lines Pilots Association, he soon convinced Patterson he was dead sertous. Contract talks—dead- locked for 16 months over 119 pointe of dis- agreement—were resumed. All but three of the differences have since been cleared up, and a strike which would have cost his com~- pany an estimated $12,000,000 has been averted. Patterson last week told 500 dele- gates to a National Assembly on Moral Re- armament in Washington. The quick set- tlement, Patterson said, came about by ap- plying MRA principles to the dispute. Sharing the platform with his boss, pilot Shapiro said he had been “an expert in damning management”—untll he attended the 5-day Labor Conference of Mora) Rearm- ament last September at Michigan’s pictur- esque Mackinac Island. There, he said, he found in MRA prinoiples a solution “so sim- ple that even today I am amazed.” MIRACLE MEDICING Later in the week delegates were told of another airline strike—this time at Nationel Airlines—aidestepped by negotiation based XOVII—App.—39 on the ideology and spirit of MRA. “Hence-~ forth,” said W. T. Babbitt, vice president of the Airline Pilots Association, “I ahall refer to MRA as a wonder drug that makes real human beings out of people.” MRA’e healing power was startlingly vis- ible at the Washington assembly. Labor and management weren't the only ones to bury the hatchet publicly. Delegates from France trooped to the microphone to apol- ogize to German delegates for “gloating” when Allied bombers rained death on Gere many during World War II. The Germans, in turn, humbly assumed public blame for their country’s three invasions of France. All speakers testified that their change of heart resulted from » pilgrimage to the Eu- ropean center for moral rearmament at Caux, Switzerland. There, during the last 5 sum- mers, 80,000 persons from 104 countries and territories have gathered for training, indoc- trination, and devotion, FOUNDER As he lstened quietly last week to these protestations of brotherhood and goad will, bright-eyed Dr. Frank N. D. Buchman (pro- nounced bookman), 72, wore the look of 4& man pleased but not at all surprised. He and his untold millions of followers (there are no membership lists) think that all prob- lems can be solved by the application of the absolute standards of honesty, purity, un- selfishnoss and love under God’s daily guid- ance. Criticized at one time as an upper-class Salvation Army, MRA today draws its mem- bers from all walks of life. Nonsectarian and nonpartisan, it is supported by volun- tary contributions, has no denominational creed. Meeting places range from London dockers’ houses to the huge Hollywood Bowl, The doctrine 1s spread in round-table dis- cussions, summer training schools in the United States and Switzerland, personal evangeliam, radio broadcasts, extensive pub- lications, and presentations of well-staged, forceful dramatic productions. The Moral Re-Armament movement (also known as the First Century Fellowship, the Oxford Group, or simply Buchmanism) was born in 1921 as Frank Buchman strolled through the quiet college yards at Oxford, England, reflecting on the question, How can one man change the world? DIRECT ORDER Suddenly, he says, God gave him the an- swer, which he hurriedly jotted down: “First one man changed, then two, then four, then eight. A million changed. A whole nation changed.” The Pennsylvania-born Buchman has since devoted his own life to changing the lives of others. Best statement of MRA's aims, ideol- ogy, and methods is in a book of his speeches, called Remaking the World (Robert M. Mc- Bride, New York: 83). A bachelor and a fare mer Lutheran minister, Buchman summar- izes MRA's precepts this way: “Be honest with yourself and with your family and with your neighbor, Be pure and genuine in what you do. You'll find that you're happy, that the people around you will become happy and friendly. Soon this feeling will epread to whole cities and then to nations and to the world. If you'd like to change the world, first try changing yourself.” Mr. Speaker, is it not reasonable to contend that if these great airlines and their employees can come together on the basis of what is right instead of who is right, then the same can be said of the problem involved in this great calamity involving the railroads of this country and the employees thereof? Somebody must make the first move as was thé case with Larry Shapiro. A609 The Late Rear Adm. F. D. Berrien cmnnaaamanad EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. ANTONI N. SADLAK OF CONNECTICUL IN THE BOUGE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. SADLAK. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remark., I include a write-up from the New Haven (Conn.) Register giving notice of the las’, services for Admiral F. D. Berrien, an outstand- ing naval hero, a most distinguished con~ stituent, a remarkable athlete, brilliant poach, a great American, gentleman, and leader: Last Seevices ree ApmiIzaL Berrten—War Hero anv Ex-Coack or Navy Poorsar. Diss After SHOvELING SNow Hree Funeral services were he'd Friday morn- ing, February 2, in Center Church, New Haven, Conn, for Rear Adm. Frank Dunn Berrien, retired, 78, United States Navy hero and coach of one of the most successful of Annapolis football teams. He died ruddenly in his home at 367 Prospect Street while rest- ing after shoveling snow from his sidewalks. During a 85-year active career, Admiral Berrien served all over the world and par- ticipated in several campaigns as well as two World Wars, Coach of the Naval Academy football squads from 1908 through 1910, the goal line cf his last team was never crossed, CAPTURED SUBMARINE Nation-wide fame came to the naval officer during World War I when he commanded the destroyer Nicholson, which, in November, 1017, captured the German submarine U-58 and {ts crew. The Nicholson later rescued the freighter Julta Luckenbach from shelling by another German sub. Burviving are his wife, the former Mary Elizabeth Whittelsey of New Haven; a son, Frank W. Berrien of Miami, Fla; and a daughter, Mrs. Harry Lugg, of Rockville. Funeral services were held tn Center Church at 10 a. m. with the Rev. David N, Beach, pastor, officiating. Interment was in the United States Naval Academy Cemetery, Annapolis. A resident of New Haven since his retire- ment in 1935, Berrein was called back to service—he was the only member of his graduating class to return to active sea duty—during World War II and served as troop convoy commander between San Fran- cisco and Australia. Berrien, then a captain, commanded the United States Submarine Base at Groton from 1921 to 1923 and established the Naval ROTC at Yale University in 1926. He waa commander of the unit here for 2 years. Admiral Berrien was born in Galesburg, Nl), August 17, 1877, son of Leonard Budd and Harriet Mat Smith Berrien. His father was @ manufacturer of agricultural machinery. Graduating in 1000 at the United States Naval Academy, he was commissioned as an ensign in 1902, At Annapolis he was an out- standing athlete. He played four years on the varsity baseball team, three years on the football team, and was a record-breaking hurdler, on the track squad of 1900. He rose to the rank of captain in 1918, and was com- missioned rear admiral and retired June 30, 1936. While a midshipman at the Naval Academy he saw service in the West Indies during the Spanish-American War. From 1900-1904 he was on Asiatic duty, participating in the! Philippine and China Relief campaigns, and |
A610 between 1904 and 1908 served with the At- lantic fiecs on the battleships Kentucky, Missouri, Minnesota, and Connecticut. In 1908 he returned to the Naval Academy as head football coach. From 1910 to 1913 he commanded the de- stroyer Trippe of the Atlantic Fleet, partict- pating in naval operations in the campaign against Mexico in 1918. From 1913 to 1915 he was in command of the naval magazine at Hinsbam, Mass., and then for 11 months was on duty at the Naval War College, Newport, R. 1, whore ho graduated in 1917, CHIEF OF PATROL STAFF When the United States entered World War I he served as chief of staff to the com- mander of the United States Patrol Squadron based at Hampton Roads, Va. In 1917 he was ordered to duty on the staff of Admiral William S Simmsin London, From July 1917 to June 1918 he commanded the destroyers Nicholson and Wilkes, and destroyer division No. 9 at Queenstown, Ireland. Wale in command of two destroyers oper- ating in a convoy protecting merchant ships out of Queenstown, Berrien—aboard the Nicholson—captured officers and crew of the first German submarine taken by United States forces in World War 1. When he returned to the United States in June 1918, Berrien was put in command of the hospital ship Com/ort, in convoy from New York to Brest, France. After the armis- tice he was United States naval port officer at Bordeaux. Later he served as chief of staff to the commander of the destroyer squadron of the Pacific Fleet under Rear Adm. Henry A. Wiley. After duty at the New London submarine base Berrien commanded all United States destroyers in European waters from 1923 to 1925 and thon graduated from an Army War College in 1926. KEPT TACOMA LIGHTED He commanded the aircraft carrier Lex- ington following his service at Yale. In 1930 the “Lez” furnished electric power to the city of Tacoma, Wash., fur a month. The feat was widely publicized and became a Navy legend. Captain Berrien pulled the carrier, then the largest Navy vessel in the world, up to a dock in Tacoma and while using only one-quarter of the electric power of the ship was able to keep Tacoma lighted. Other assignments were as officer in charge of the hydrographic office in Boston and cap- tain of the navy yard at Washington, D. C. Admiral Berrien was a member of many organizations, including the Military Order of the Dragon, Order of the Carabao, Military Order of the World War, American Legion. Also the Faculty Club at Yale and the Grad- uates Club, New Haven. He was awarded many service medals of the world wars, including the United States Dis- tinguished Service Medal. Great Britain made him an honorary member of the Order of St. Michael and St. George and Greece made him a commander of the Order of St. Savior.  eamnnnemeeesmesnssenneemmenn seemed - Church Endorses Food Aid to India EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JACOB K. JAVITS OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 2, 1951 Mr. JAVITS. Mr, Speaker, the ap- pended resolution of the Broadway Tab- ernacle Church, of the Congregational denomination, points up the widespread support among religious groups for ex- tending food aid to the Republic of In- dia to avert impending famine there: Resolution on wheat for India Recognizing the tremendous need of In- dia’s people for food, intensified in recent months by a series of national disasters, and aware of large stores of food grain held by the Government of the United States of Amertca: Be it Resolved, That the members of Broadway Tabernacle Church, Congrogational, 3211 West Fifty-sixth Street, New York, N. Y., a8- sembled at a atated corporate meeting of the church on Wednesday evening, January 24, 1951, declare themselves in favor of the Gov- ernment of the United States making avalil- able to the Government of India 2,000,000 tons of wheat upon mutually agreeable terms, and urge that everything possible be done to complete this transaction speedily. JosrrH E, CHOATE, Clerk. Atsrrt J. PENNER, Mirister, Congressman Doyle Explains How H. R. 2383 Would Stop Use of Power To Arbitrarily Destroy Legitimate Busi- ness—Remarks in Regard to Case of Ewing Versus Mytinger and Casselberry EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. CLYDE DOYLE OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 2, 1951 Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, on yester- day I filed a bill which was given the number of H. R. 2383, the text of which follows: H. R. 2383 A bill to amend section 304, subsections (a) and (b), of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended Be it enacted, etc., That subsection (a) of section 304 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended (21 U. 8. C. 331), is amended by striking the balance of the sentence following the words “dangerous to health” and changing the comma after “health” to a period. And it ts further amended by striking all that portion of the last sentence of such subsection following the words “between the parties” and by inserting in leu thereof the following: “or, if no such stipulation be filed within a reasonable time, the court, on mo- tion for the convenience of parties and wit- nesses, in the interest of Justice, may transfer the case for trial to any other district or aivision thereof.” That subsection (b) of section 804 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended (21 U. S. C. 331), is amended by inserting after the first sentence the follow- ing sentence: “Cases brought hereunder shall be entitled to preference on the trial calendar.” And it is further amended by striking from the third to the last sentence all words fol- lowing “such court”, and inserting in Neu thereof the following: “On motion, for the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, may transfer the consolidated proceedings for trial to any other district or division thereof.” In connection with the titl, I wish to further add that on August 17, 1950, in the Eighty-first Congress, I filed H. R. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD 9466: which bill was referred to the Com- mittee on Interstate and Foreign Com- merce. This bill was not acted upon by this committee and, therefore, never had a@ chance to come to the floor of Con- gress for debate and decision, H. R. 9466, and H. R. 2383, which I intro- duced on February 5, 195:, are identical bills. At the time I filed H. R. 9466 in the Eighty-first Congress, I inserted remarks in the Appendix of the CoNGRESSIONAL Record, volume 96, part 17, on page A5924, and related that I became inter- ested in the situation therein described because of the location in the Eighteenth Congressional District, which I repre- sent, of the important business of Nutri- lite Products, Inc., the continuance of which business was placed in immediate jeopardy by reason of the manner and method applied to make effective section 304, subsections (a) and (b), of the Fed- eral Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Since that date, the matter has been liti- gated through the United States Su- preme Court and finally determined as the case of Ewing against Mytinger and Casselberry, the defendant being the prosperous, important business located as aforesaid, The issues concerned are of such im- portance and of such Nation-wide in- terest that I asked the assistance of the worthy legal counsel of my constituents, Mytinger and Casselberry, in the prepa- ration of these remarks. The purpose in so doing was to have enunciated as fully as practical the issues involved and the practical situation which has devel- oped as c result of the interpretation by the United States Supreme Court. Also it will give the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, to which H. R. 2383 has been referred, the earliest pos- sible opportunity to have the basic argu- fuente in support of this bill to its atten- on, So my effurt in connection with the bill last session and the bill this session jis to be constructively cooperative to the end that the greatest good and the great- est number shall be served. I will make further remarks about this subject tomorrow and I now respectively call you attention to the following: The bill (H. R. 2383) I have just in- troduced is intended to correct a situa- tion growing out of a decision of the Su- preme Court of the United States in the case of Ewing against Mytinger and Cas- Selberry, Inc., decided by a divided court on May 29, 1950, with rehearing denied on October 2, 1950. That Court has held that the Congress intended to confer such unbridled and such unstoppable power upon the Federal Security Agency as to irreparably injure—yes, even to destroy private businesses. And the Court goes so far as to hold that even though Mr, Ewing is acting arbitrarily, capriciously, and oppressively, the Con- gress intended to take from Federal dis- trict courts their traditional equity pow- ers of protection to stop such action, even where the evidence establishes to the satisfaction of the trial court that Mr. Ewing is 100 percent wrong. As I will develop later, the Supreme Court blames this unprecedented grant of
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD power upon the Congress. I do not be- Neve Congress intended to give such power to Mr, Ewing; and if Congress in using broad language did inadvertently grant the power; I propose that we im- mediately take it away. Under our sys- tem of government no man should have power. My interest in this important matter goes back more than 2 years. Evidence was then presented to me showing that @ valued and long-established business located in the Eighteenth District of California, which I represent, was in a life-and-death struggle with the Food and Drug Administration. Mr, Ewing had ordered multiple seizures of the vitamin and mineral product sold by this company throughout the Nation on the ground that certain parts of the com- pany's advertising Uterature was mis- leading, although he and his subordi- nates conceded—as they must—that the product is harmless and in fact benefi- cial, Eleven seizures had been made, all carefully spaced and planned geographi- cally so as to cause the maximum injury to my constitutent’s reputation by the publicity attendant thereupon. The seizures were made as follows: Belleville, N. J., Seattle, Wash., St. Petersburg, Fla,, Chicago, Ill, two seizures; Clarkfield, Minn.; Spokane, Wash.; Buffalo, N. Y.; Hastings, Nebr.; and New York, N. Y. And these seizures were made with the purpose of destroy- ing my constituent’s business before a trial on the merits of Mr. Ewing's claims about the literature could be had. I pause here to say that the last two state- ments are not mine but are taken f-om the unanimous findings of a special three-judge court, which findings I will quote later herein. Naturally no company could thus be universally attacked and disgraced all over the Nation by lawsuits and the at- tendant publicity ‘xy Government offi- cials and hope to continue to exist, Judge David A. Pine of the United States District Court for the District of Colum- bia, when appealed to for an injunction, said he would grant one unless Mr. Ewing agreed to make no more seizures. He said this decision was made “because I feel there has not been a strict and lit- eral compliance with the statute and that there should be when such a drastic and harsh provision of the law permits the acts contemplated.” Mr. Ewing’s counsel agreed Mr. Ewing would make no more seizures pending Mr. Ewing’s compliance with the law. I then wrote to Mr. Ewing on January 27, 1949, as follows: I trust that all of the persons passing upon the problem before it comes to your desk for your own personal finding and signature will make very sure that the finding they ask you to sign is true in fact, and that the finding they ask you to make is consistent with existing law and facts in the preriises. Furtermore, I respectfully request that, inasmuch as my constituents emphatically ‘maintain to me that, under the Food and Drug Act, their product, “Nutrilite,” is not misbranded by their printed matter. And inasmuch as the reported determination of the Department to consecutively libel the interstate shipments of this product could and would norma'ly bust or break the cor- poration producing the same before the mat- ter could get to a final court decision—i¢ would appear reasonable, would it not, Mr. Ewing, that there be no finding by you which would result in forcing the producing com- pany to insolvency until there had been a reasonable hearing opportunity given the producing corporation to the end that there be opportunity to make a showing before yourself as to their contcution that this Nutrilite product is not misbranded. Mr, Ewing did not grant the hearing I requested and his deputy made findings against my constituents without accord- ing them a hearing. Again the matter was brought before Judge Pine, who characterized the actions of the deputy on behalf of Mr. Ewing as unfair, drastic, and harsh, but the judge was forced re- luctantly to conclude as he did at the first hearing: Shocking as it may seem to you and me, Congress has certainly given him the right to do just this without a hearing. My bill, which I now offer, strikes from the law the provision which shocked Judge Pine and which he labeled harsh, drastic, and unfair, for I do not believe Congress intended the interpretation given to that provision by Judge Pine and then later by the Supreme Court in the decision cited above. And Judge Pine is not the only person in a highly responsible position who was shocked by the actions of Mr. Ewing and his subordinates against my constituents. My people then were allowed by Judge Pine to amend the complaint against Mr. Ewing and claim this harsh provision of law is unconstitutional, and a special three-judge court was set up to hear the case, Judge T. Alan Goldsborough, who served with distinction for so many years in this House, Judge Bennett Champ Clark, a very able former Mem- ber of the United States Senate, and Judge Edward A. Tamm were the mem- bers ‘of this special court. After a long- drawn-out trial these three distinguished and able judges unanimously held that Mr. Ewing and his subordinates had act- ed “capriciously, arbitrarily, unreason< ably, oppressively, and unlawfully” and should be and were enjoined from carry- ing out their unlawful scheme to destroy my constituent’s business, The court findings soundly castigated the public officials. The three judges in their findings said in part: 5. Nutrilite contains no substance or Material or combination of substances or materials harmful or deleterious in any man- ner to human users thereof when taken in suggested dosage. No claim has been made by any Federal, State, or other governmental agency that Nutrilite is adulterated or harm- ful in any manner to the health of human users thereof, insofar as the record before the court shows. 6. The label of the package in which Nutri. lite was and is sold complies with ull re- quirements of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938, 7. The objection of the defendants to the sale of Nutrilite, which is the basis of this action, is the use by plaintiff of any adver- tising pamphlet entitled “How to Get Well and Stay Well.” Nutrilite ts sold directly to users thereof and this pamphlet is used tn making about 40 percent of the initial sales of Nutrilite. 8. The product now sold as Nutrilite was ret marketed about 1938; defendants’ rec- ords show they received information about it in 1939 and had correspondence about it A611 in 1040; plainttf? bas been its exclusive nas tional distributor since 1945; defendants re- ceived their first coptes of the then current edition of the pamphlet How To Get Weil and Stay Well, on December 5, 1948, together with names and addresses of certain of plaintiff's distributors outside of California, . » e * » 82, (8) On December 80, 1948, the instant injunction action was filed. At this time it was the intention and plan of the defend. ants to file many more libel seizure actions and seize nutrilite throughout the Nation. The food and drug Inspectors knew of this general policy. * * e iJ e (c) Defendants made no effort to secure an early trial in the libel cases and in order to effect seizures more quickly mimeo- graphed copies of the booklets, How To Get Well and Stay Well were prepared for trans« mission to United States attorneys. * e * * e 34, On January 24, 1049, Judge David A. Pine of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia found that the ac- tions of the defendants in rendering said decisions were unfair, drastic, shooking, and hareh, and held that the dectaions of defend- ants Crawford, Larrick, and Dunber, de« scribed supra, were unlawful because the Administrator of the Federal Security Agency did not have the authority to dele- gate this power to make such decisions to said defendants, { * * * * . , 89. The seizure actions caused plaintiff a sales loss of some $100,000 per month from' the time of the first seizure until the instant: action was filed, and the defendants were’ restrained from making further seizures. The seisures had the effect of frightening Plaintiff's agents and distributors, so that they worked less, and some resigned, with the net result of loas of morale among agents and distributors, loss in sales volume, and loss of ' personnel. Unfavorable opinions and in-‘ Surious information with respect to the labels : ing of plaintiff’s product reached many pri-' vate individuals and organizations, Pub-. licity about the seizure cases initiated by de-, fendants appeared in newspapers and maga- zines in a way which did injuriously damage plaintif! and this led to loss of customers. ! Plaintiff was compelled to hire counsel in the 10 libel cases and put up bonds and costs ‘ in each case. The value of the Nutrilite seized by defendants in the 10 libel actions 4s 96,822.17, and the product so seized will be unsalable if returned to plaintiff, The nature of plaintiff's business makes good will , of the public one of its most valuable assets and the acts of the defendants in the em-. bargoes and seizure actions in widely sepa- rated parts of the United States has caused the plaintiff's injury and damage. Defend- ants admit injury to plaintiff and that there has been @ serious impact on plaintiff's rights by thelr actions, and that thera is no provi~ sion of law requiring or permitting defend.’ ants to reimburse plaintiff for the damages herein found or for the injury or for destrucs tion of its business and good will by the ac- tions of the defendants, in the event of a determination of said libel actions in favor of plaintiff. The injury and damage to plaintif! which has occurred and which is threatened by defendants is therefore sub- stantial and irreparable. 40. The defendants have never advised plaintifY of the particulars of plnintiff’s lit- erature considered to be objectionable by defendants. The defendants have not pro- vided an opportunity to plaintiff! whereby such Hterature could be corrected, revised, and amended in a manner which would con- form to the views of and be acceptable to the defendants. 41. That plaintiff! would have been sub- Jected to many additional sctzures of its
A612 product throughout the United States in ad dition to the existing 11 seizures of its prod- uct if not enjoined from so doing is admitted by defendants. It was a general policy and plan of the defendants to make with all pose sible speed many seizures of plaintiff’s prod- uct, Such additional seizures, and the prod- uct could be seized by defendants in the hands of more than 5,000 of plaintiff's distrib- utors, would have the effect of destroying plaintiff's business prior to any possible ad- judication of the disputed Issues on plain- tiff's labeling in any of the libel actions al- ready filed or threatened. 42. There was and is no emergency involv- ing injury or damage of any Kind to the pub- lic or to any purchaser, consumer, or user of Nutrilite or in connection with Nutrilite and plaintiff's use of the three pamphlets which conatitute defendants’ sole objection to Nu- trilite’s sale. Defendants have not at any time tndicated or contended that there is an emergency or situation of compelling public necessity with respect to the labeling of plaintiff's product and no such emergency or situation did, in fact, exist at or prior to any of the actions of defendants described herein. 43. The evidence herein on the actions, conduct, and course of action of defendants before and after the decisions of Crawford, Larrick, Dunbar, and Kingsley described above reveal, as do their decisions and ac- tions in making said decisions, that the de- fendants in making said decisions acted ca- priciously, arbitrarily, unreasonably, oppres- sively, and unlawfully. The three-judge court also held that the language my bill strikes from the law js so unreasonable as to be unconstitu- tional when used as Mr. Ewing was using it here against a harmless and beneficial product to destroy a business before trial of the merits of Mr. Ewing’s charges. Mr. Ewing appealed to the Supreme Court, and that Court held, as I stated above, that the injunction must be set aside, that Congress intended to confer this unbridled power upon Mr. Ewing and even if he exercises it in an arbi- trary, capricious, and oppressive man- ner, Federal district courts have had their injunction jurisdiction removed by Congress so they are helpless to prevent the resulting irreparable injury. The Supreme Court in a nonunanimous opinion by Mr. Justice Douglas thus reversed the three-judge court's deci- sion. Mr. Justice Jackson, one of the dissenting Justices, said: The Court does not deal at all with what appears to be the ultimate issue decided by the court below. The trial court of three judges wrote no opinion but made 43 detailed findings of fact which would require 20 of these print- ed pages to reproduce and which summarize & 1,500-page record of a long trial. Those findings sre made largely on undisputed evi- dence and on evidence from Government sources. This Court does not criticize or reverse any of them. The substance of these ia to find that the Government instituted a multiplicity of court actions, with seizures in widely sepa- rated parte of the country, with a purpose to harass appellee and its dealers and in- tending that these actions and the attend- ant publicity would injure appellee's busi- ness before any of the issues in such cases could be tried. This, the court held, was Justified by no emergency, the product be- ing, at worst, harmless and having been marketed for years with knowledge of the Department, Assuming as I do that the act on its face is not constitutionally defective, the ques- tion remains whether it has been so mise used by refusal of administrative hearing, together with such irreparable injury in anticipation of judicial hearing, as to deny appellee due process of law or to amount to an abuse of process of the courts. The Government has sought and received from this court protection against a multi- plicity of suits under circumstances where injury was less apparent than in this (Landis v. North American Co, (229 U. 8. 248)). The holding of the court below and the conten- tion of the appellee here that the Govern- ment ts not entitled to so apply the statute as to bring multiple actions designed to de- stroy a business before it can be heard in its own defense is not frivolous, to say the least. I am constrained to withhold assent to a decision that passes in silence what I think presents a serious issue. Mr. Justice Frankfurter in his dis- senting opinion stated that the findings of the three judges were justified by the evidence and the three-judge court should have been held to have jurisdic- tion to grant the relief given. I introduced this bill last August, and it was H. R. 9466 of the Eighty-first Congress. Due to the international sit- uation, and the short time that Congress was in session after the bill was intro- duced, hcarings on my bill were not pos- sible before that session ended. In rein- troducing this bill today, Iam ever mind- ful that today our Government is being held up to the international spotlight as one where democracy under law rather than dictatorial powers exist. I am in favor of carving out of our law every provision which allows bureaucratic abuse, without hearing, to destroy a law- ful and honest business. I think it is our duty as Members of Congress to seek out such provisions—and some may slip by us inadvertently or as here be held to exist by court decision regardless of what Congress intended—and carve those pro- visions out of our law. That is my. pro- posal in my bill. I hope you will all support it to the end that in the future when your constituents come in contact with Mr. Ewing you will not find the courts helpless to stop this arbitrary, capricious, and oppressive action. Address of Frank A. Hecht EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LESLIE C. ARENDS OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. ARENDS. Mr. Speaker, under leave to revise and extend my remarks, I am inserting in the ConcressronaL Record an address of Frank A. Hecht, president of the Navy League of the United States, on December 7, 1950. I believe this speech merits general reading. It follows: Nine years ago today we went to war to resist aggression. Then we did not hesi- tate. There was no thought of appeasement, ‘The odds were against us, But we were not intimidated. We buckled down, tightened our belts, and fought on to victory. Today we are again at war. Whether we like it or not, whether we choose to admit APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD it or not, we are at war with Communist China. They have attacked our forces. They are killing our men. What more, is needed for one nation to make war on an- other? The Chinese Communists have killed many more Americans in Korea than the Japs killed at Pearl Harbor. And yet there are those timid souls who would pull the covers over their head and pretend that nothing has happened, that we were still engaged only in a police action, They will not recognize the fact that we and our allies in Korea have been the victims of an attack just as we were 9 years ago. Once again we find ourselves assembled in annual meeting for the purpose of reviewing the record of the past year and planning for the coming year. The past year has been a busy one for your officers, It has been one of transcendent im- portance, both for our country and the world. Decisions have been made and steps taken which will influence the course of free gov- ernment in the world for good or for evil in our lifetime and in the times of our descend- ants. Immediately following our annual meeting of last year at St. Paul, we found ourselves at variance with those in the Department of Defense who advocated a program of econ- omy, which involved reducing our Armed Forces. We made this stand known in our publications, in our contacts with the Mem- bers of Congress, especially those who serve on the Armed Forces committees of the House and Senate, in speeches by our offi- cers and directors, through press releases, and in other media. The reason for this stand was that we believed then, as we do now, that disarmament, whether it be complete or par- tial, not only renders us physically incapable of dealing with an international emergency but also it actually encourages aggression be- cause of the fact that an aggressor nation will attack when it realizes our military weakness. We said then that Communist Russia was an aggressor nation. We say it now. It will be just as true in the future as it is today. We must always be ready to deal with Communist aggression wherever it breaks out. We differed with the policy of the State De- partment with regard to Communist China. We did not believe that, through default and inaction on our part, we should allow a government which was friendly to be re- placed by one which, of its very nature, we knew to be hostile. We differed with and criticized the action of the former Secretary of Defense in cancele ing construction of the flush-deck carrier. We protested the threatened attrition of Marine Corps ground-support aviation and the reduction of the Marine Corps itself to a parade-outfit status. We publicly went on record, after a vote of our board of directors, as favoring the bill which would make the Commandant of the Marine Corps a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. We have continued our publications, and have encouraged increased activity on the part of local councils. During the year your directors went on record as favoring the re- sumption of the celebration of Navy Day under completely civilian auspices, Accord. ingly, on Navy Day, your president laid a wreath on the tomb of Theodore Roosevelt, the father of the modern American fleet, at Oyster Bay, Long Island. The birthday of this great American had been selected as Navy Day. Celebrations were held in var. fous other parts of the country from the Atlantic to the Pacific coast. Because of the limited time between the determination to resume the celebration of this day and the occurrence of the day, preparations and pro- grams were, of necessity, curtailed. It is hoped that every local council will plan, initiate and carry out an appropriate cele- bration honoring the Navy and the men and women of the Navy on next October 27, It
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD is my sinoere belief that it ts much more bacoming for a civilian organization to pay tribute, to laud, and to honor the Navy and the men and women of the Navy, than it is for the armed services themselves to in- dulge in eulogies of self-adulation, as was done when Armed Forces Day was colebrated under the auspices of the services them- selves, During the past year your president has traveled from coast to coast, visiting with local councils. The interest expressed by the verious members in their local communities was encouraging. As much cannot be said for the organization of all local councils, Because of the inactivity of local officers in many instances the local council has not held meetings reguiarly and has, to a large extent, become merely a paper organization, It is hoped that State presidents will see to it that local councils hold elections. Members of the local councile are urged to elect as their officers men who have a gen~ uine and aincere interest in our work, who are willing to devote time and effort to it and, as a result, can achieve an active local council, It is unfortunate that the local enthusiasm, interest, and desire to partici- pate in behalf of a sound defense program is not better coordinated within the local councils. This situation must be corrected, We rely on you to see to it that it ts done. After every war there 1s always a wave of disinterest in the Armed Forces which sweeps the country. The period following the end of hostilities in World War II was no exception. People assumed the attitude that the size and composition of our Armed Forces was a matter for the experts, and was no proper concern of a busy professional man or industrialist. More time and in- terest was manifested in golf scores or the pennant races than was ever given to the questions of national defense. People, who knew what the current tax reductions were that they were entitled to, knew and cared nothing about the size of the budget for the Navy and the other armed services. How short-sighted they were. Because the Na- tion got, and perhaps wanted, economy, we are faced with a worse situation which will necessitate vast expenditures for our armed services in the years to come. This situation will undoubtedly bring about con- trols, shortages, inconveniences, and other things which will deeply affect the dally life of every one of us. Defense is every- body's business—always. That is true whether we are fighting in Korea or whether we are fighting in Europe or elsewhere. It is true even if we are not fighting anywhere. It will be true as long a8 aggressive commu- nism remains a strong force ‘in the world. We invite you and all who think along simi~- Jar Hnes to join us in the Navy League to gee that we do have an adequate defense, to urge a sound foreign policy and to keep & vigorous eye on our domestic economy. This can be done better through an organization than it can by individuals working sepa- rately. To that end we invite your coqpera- tion. Tonight as we sit here, American men are fighting and dying in Korea. We and the other of our peoples of the world are in retreat there before the forces of Communist aggression. It ls one of the great crises of our national history. The situation calls for bold and courageous action. Temporizing and half-hearted measures will not suffice. Korea has proved once again that there is no easy way to victory. It has disproved the claims of those apostles of push-button war- fare, who say that warfare as we have waged it in the past is obsolete and that we can rely upon the atomic bomb ag our principal means of defense. In the light of Korea, our defense policies must be re-examined. It has proved anew that we need balanced forces—strong ground troops, a strong fieet and tactical alr power as well as a atrategic bombing potential, In Korea we suffer from an inferiority in manpower. We need more ground troops. Those are available on Formosa. There the Obinese Nationalist Government, the duly constituted govern- ment of China, which we have and still do recognize ag such, has available 600,000 troops. These have been offered for use in Korea. We refused to utilize them for fear of provoking attack by Communist China. Regardless of the intricasies of international diplomacy, the fact is that we are now at war with Communist China. If there were ever any reason for not utilizing these Chinese Nationalist troops, that reason has now dis- appeared, Accordingly, I respectfully pro- pose that the following steps be undertaken immediately: 1. That we reaffirm our recognition of the Nationalist Government as the legal govern- ment of China and declare that the Com- munist government is controlled by a non- Chinese government, that tt illegally eeizzd power by force, with the assistance of a for- eign government. 2. That, {f the Nationalist Government is willing, we tnvite them to send a large army to fight with UN troops resisting Communist forces in Korea. 3. That we reaffirm our determination to defend Formosa from invasion and imple- ment this by strengthening the Seventh Pieet. 4, That we announce that we will veto in the Security Council of the United Nations any proposal to hand Formosa over to the Communist forcess. &. That the authorization be immediately given to General of the Army Dou ‘las Mac- Arthur to have our forces bomb logistic sup- ply bases in Communist China, as well as enemy forces in the vicinity of the Korean fighting front. 6. That we request of Congress increased defense appropriations and increased man- power for the Armed Forces. It would be unwise and unprofitable for us to undertake an all-out conquest of the mainiand of Asia. Because of our inferiority in manpower and the vastness of the terrain, such undertaking would probably be doomed to failure. However, we can control the east- ward spread of Communist forces from the mainiand of Asta, if we hold the line which is now anchored on Japan, Okinawa, For- mosa, and the Philippines. Although we are inferior in land forces, we have a definite superiority in seapower. If our island de- fenso line is to be breached, it must he done through a Janding operation. Such an op- eration can be successfully resisted, if we have a strong enough fleet. We know that the Russians possess a well-trained, well- equipped, and efficient submarine force, which is in excess of 270 submarines. The Communists, by utilizing this force, can {n- flict losses on our fleet. Therefore, !t be- hooves us immediately to increase our Far East fleet, and to increase our training for and our potential to cope with enemy sub- marines. If our isiand chain, which I mentioned, were breached in any part, the chain will be materially weakened. It is unthinkable that we would allow any diplomatic mancu- ver to allow the Communist forces to take over Formosa, Remember that Chiang Kai- shek was our faithful ally. In the early part of World War II when we were unable to send a single bullet or a single gun to the Nationalist forces, President Roosevelt re- peatedly wrote Chiang, urging him to con- tinue to fight against Japanese aggression. - ‘This he did. He kept faith. Unfortunately, as much cannot be said for us. Do you think tn view of what has happened that Chiang can consider us a trustworthy and deairable ally? Recently in tha United Nations we have seen the extraordinary spectacle of the A613 representatives of Communist nggreasion, the ambassadors of & government whose troops are now Killing Americans in Korea, coming to appear before the United Nations to accuse us of aggression in Formosa, While they accuse us of aggression, they will not answer any questions about Chinese Communist aggression in Korea. We have wholeheartedly supported the objectives of the United Nations and will continue to do so. However, unless the United Nations is to go the way of the League of Nations, it muat face up to the aggressors and take B positive stand in support of the United Nations forces in Korea. Regardless of the outcome of the Korean eltuation, communism will still remain an agereasive force. It will be a continuing threat to us and to all free nations. Com- muntsm cannot reach its objectives while there are democratic, capitalistic, or free gov- ernments anywhere in the world. Nevor be- fore in the history of the world has one nation subjugated so much territory and so many people as has Communist imperialisin. The price of our survival will be our willing- ness to make sacrifices and our development and retenticn of the power to resist Com~ munist aggression. We are a maritime nation. Our entire economy is dependent upon imports. With-~ out imports our industry will be greatly cur- tailed. Our esonomy would be disrupted and our war potential vastly diminished. In the last war we saw what happens when we cannot get a vital import such as rubber. The reason we could not get rubber was that the enemy was able to take over the island area where it was produced and that we did not retain control over the sea lanes. The same ts true of manganese and many other products. We do not have enough oi] re- sources in our country to supply ourselves and our allies in the event of an all-out shooting war. This means wa must tmport oft from the Near Hast, South America, and from other points around the world. To make sure that this oil gots here, we must retain control of the sea lanes. The way to do that is with a strong ficet. Believe me when I say that people in the service in the Navy count on us to say things which they cannot say. We are perfectly free to express ourselves, to criticize and to present our views to Congress. Those on active duty are not, This is one of the moat important roles of the Navy Leazue. With due modesty and without uny sense of boasting, I think that we can be justly proud of our activities of the past year and the correctness of the stand which we have taken on matters pertaining to the national defense. The year ahead offers tremendous opportunities and presents commensurate challenges. Whether or not we can and will live up to what ts expected of us depends, in large meseure, Upon you, our members, Will you help by taking an active part in your local organization, by increasing our mem- bership, by becoming familiar with the ques« tions and the answers presented by the world situation? We honestly believe that within the Navy League you and your friends can echieve these objectives. Mistakes of the past and mistakes of the future, if they are permitted, are paid for in American blood They can be prevented if the facts are known, the issues are discussed, and if sound decisions with regard to national de- fense are reached. Now more than ever be- fore it is apparent the Nation needs a strong Navy. The Navy needs the Navy League. The Navy League needs you. God grant us today the courage, the intel- Ugence, and the resolution which we had 0 years ago. God grant that once again we shall be victorious over the forces of aggres- gion and then enemies of liberty. God be with us now as then. God be with us always.
A614 Unions in the South EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EUGENE J. McCARTHY OF MINNESOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, the contention that the Taft-Hartley Act has made it practically impossible for labor to exercise its right to organize is sustained by recent reports on the prog- ress, or lack of progress, in legitimate labor organizing in the South. Here is one report, published in the Common- weal of February 2; Unions IN THE SOUTH (By John C. Cort) In 1947 there were about 1,250,000 work- ers employed in textile mills, mostly strung along the eastern seaboard, of whom a little over half worked tn the South. The major subdivision of the textile industry is cotton spinning and weaving. In 1926 about 80 per- Cent of this industry was in New England and 20 percent in the South. Today the figures are exactly reversed, with 80 percent in the South and 20 percent in New England. Many New England mills have closed up and moved bodily to the South to escape the unions and their high wage rates. Others have folded up in the face of southern com- petition. For more reasons than one, there- fore, the Textile Workers have beeh forced to concentrate on the job of organizing the southern mills. They have spent several million dollars on the job and have conduct- ed about 60 strikes 1n the last 5 years. And still only 15 percent, or less than 100,000 of these workers, are now represented by either the CIO or A. F. of L. Consider some of the difficulties. In 1948 there were about 770 milis located in small southern villages which were owned in toto by the mill owners. If the workers went on strike the mill owner would simply evict them from their homes, pointing self- rightcously to his lease, which specifies that the occupant must work in the local mill. If the union fought this outrage in court, there was usually @ local judge who could see only that each tenant “refused to work for the plaintiff, quit his job, and walked off.” No mention of a strike at all. Case dismissed. (See case of Plymouth Manufac- turing Co. strike, McColl, 8. C., 1949.) Often the mill was owned by a large textile corporation which also owned anywhere from 10 to 44 (Burlington Mills) other factories, It could well afford to close one mill for a year or even forever. Many of these cor- Porations are owned by northerners, includ- ing such big outfita as Goodyear, Firestone, U. 8, Rubber, who do not hesitate to inflame every conceivable southern prejudice in order to lick the union and fatten their own money bags. Last March the CIO set out to organize the Orr Mill in Anderson, 8. C. A columnist in the local paper bristled with bigoted indig- nation, saying, “Yet from the so-called ‘melting pote’ of the northern cities, where people of strange races and imbued with alien ideologies are blended together to pro- duce all manner of men, including numerous arrogant mongrels, come emissaries of mis~ information and hate to tell textile workers in thia section of America what they should think, believe, and do.” To this point I have summarized less than half of the textile workers’ case against the South. The second half tells what happens when and if the CIO should overcome all these obstacles and still win a collective- bargaining election. Then the agony really starts. Here is a case which is only some- what more painful than the average. It in- volves the Tower Hosiery Mills, a subsidiary of Burlington Mills, the giant that owns 45 mills and ia the second largest employer of textile labor in the South. Note the time- table: 1943—union wins election, but does not feel strong enough to strike and no agreement results; 1944—union loses elec- tion; 1945—union wins election; 1846—again unable to negotiate a decent agreement, union files charge of failure to bargain in good faith; 1947 (14 monthe later) National Labor Relations Board gets around to hold~ ing a hearing; 1948 (1 year later)—trial ex- aminer makes report; 1949 (11 months later—NLRB agrees with union and orders Tower Hosiery to bargain in good faith; 1960 (18 months later)—United States court of appeals rejects company’s appeal and sus. tains the NLRB. The textile workers’ at~ torney concludes sadly: “Of course, no con- tract has been consummated. Indeed, there is now no local union at this plant.” One is reminded of the old saw, “The op- eration was succeseful, but the patient died.” The National Labor Relations Act, even as amended by Taft-Hartley, is supposed to pro- tect labor's right to organize and bargain in good faith. In the South this protection is a mockery, and, indeed, not only in the South. In the North as well, In my own Jocal union we have just passed through ne- gotiations in which two employers openly and unashamedly committed unfair-labor practices. But knowing that any appeal to the NLRB would take several years to proc- ess, we could do nothing but take it. The southern industrialists no longer need the goon squad in white sheets, the tar and feathers, the free ride out of town on a fence rail that were so popular a few years back. They use them too, occasionally, even now, but today the better class of people doesn’t soil its fingers with such vulgarity. Today they hire a high-priced lawyer and strangle the union to death with legal red tape and delay, to which homicide the Taft- Hartley Act lends itself with glad abandon. They say that ‘Justice delayed is justice denied.” The textile workers filed 165 charges of unfair-labor practices against southern mills with the NLRB between Au- gust 29, 1947, and February 28, 1950. From the tii 2 the charges were filed these were te average periods of time before they could get action from the Labor Board and the courts; about 12 months before the NLRB issued a complaint; about 1 year and 4 months before the NLRB held a hearing be- fore a trial examiner; about 1 year and 6 months before the examiner made his re- port; 2 years and 3 months before the Board handed down an order: 3 years and 8 months before the courts forced compliance in those few cases that the union was able and will- ing to push this far, Total Blunder EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HUGH D. SCOTT, JR. OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1952 Mr. HUGH D. SCOTT, JR. Mr. Speaker, an article by Max Eastman en- titled “Total Blunder,” in the February 1951 issue of Catholic Digest, warrants careful reading and thoughtful consid- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD eration. Although I do not necessarily make all of the thoughts in this article my thoughts also, I agree entirely with the main thesis that “America is without leadership in the most subtle and com- plex and implacable danger she ever con- fronted.” The article follows: TOTAL BLUNDER (By Max Eastman) Everybody agrees that the present plight of the United States is bad, but nobody names the true cause. “Disloyalty in the State Department,” “Stalin doublecrossed us,” “Roosevelt died,” “Truman is small town," “Acheson is stubborn,” “The Repub- licans were ignored,” “We can’t support the whole world.” None of these guesses fully explains what is the matter. The real, sim- Ple. and sole cause of our plight is ignorance. We are up against a complex, mystical, pseudo-scientific religion, a well-armed cru- sade called Marxism-Leninism-Stalinism. It differs from everything else in history, most of all from everything American. It has cre- ated a crisis that may well be the supreme crisis in the life of mankind. And yet, up to the present moment, no one in executive authority in thig country has taken the trouble to study its dogmas, decrees, plans, and strategies, and find out what it is and how it works. On February 11, 1940, Franklin D. Roose- velt said to a bunch of Communist-minded young men and maidens on the White House lawn, “The Soviet Union, as everyone knows who has the courage to face fact, is a dic- tatorship as absolute as any dictatorship in the world.” That was bold, true, and su- premely important. The Soviet Union, after Hitler attacked it, continued to be a dictatorship, as absolute as any dictatorship in the world. But Roose- velt lost the courage, more exactly, the intel- lJectual clarity, to face the fact. He began to deceive himself, and deceive those about him. He became soft-headed; so did they. He became fuzzy-minded; so did they. He didn’t know much about Stulin or Lenin, and nothing at all about Marxism, and in- stead of reading up on it, or calling in some- body who did know, he cultivated his igno- trance, So did they. Aided by the war fever, he reached the point where he could habit- ually speak of the Soviet Union as a de- mocracy, a liberty-loving, peace-loving na- tion. He could say of Stalin, who had then fully shown himself to be one of the blood- jest tyrants in history, “I got along fine with Marshal Stalin. I believe he is truly repre- sentative of the heart and sou! of Russia. I do not think any insoluble differences will arise among Russia, Great Britain, and the United States. We came to the conferences with faith in each other, and now we have supplemented faith with definite knowledge.” But it was definite knowledge of what waa not true, the most fatal of all forms of ignorance. Cultivated ignorance, not knowing because you don’t want to know, extended into every department of our Government, and every phase of our political and military strategy in relation to Russia. Our statesmen didn't know and didn’t want to know what Russia's foreign policy was, what Russia’s internal re- gime was, what Stalin meant by democracy, what the great purge of 1936 to 1988 was about, why and by what means the fabulous confessions were extorted. They didn't know or want to know that the Chinese Communists were hand-and-glove With Stalin in his plan to seize Manchuria, and then all China, and then all Asta, and then the world. They were taken in by the transparent hoax that the Chinese Commu- nists were middle-of-the-road agrarian lib« erals, independent of Moscow. For 5 years
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD our whole Par Eastern policy was based on that Moscbw-manufactured Joa And when the hoax was exploded, did they change their policy? Not for a second. They got out an enormous White Paper, 1,054 pages, trying to Justify their policy. The makers of our foreign policy were more concerned to defend their own past than the future of our country. However, I am not discussing the Demo- cratic administration here. I am not cam- paigning for the Republicans, They have been just ss ignorant. They joined the Democrats in what has been mistakenly Called @ bipartisan foreign policy. It was a nonpartisan no foreign policy, a harmony of ignorance, a clasping of hands on the fact that none of them had the slightest idea what to do. I do not know how much Winston Church- 11 will be able to say in apology for his part in handing half the world to a tyrant; how far he was hoodwinked by Stalin, how far outvoted by the Stalin-Roosevelt com- bination. He has not yet told us about that. But he joined heartily in the conspiracy of se)f-deception. He contributed to Roosevelt's cultivated ignorance of Soviet policy. His guilt ts greater, too, for in him tgnorance requires more cultivation. He does not decide on things by hunch, as Roosevelt did. In Great Contemporaries, published in 1987, he wrote two paragraphs containing the entire body of knowledge for the lack of which the dele- gates at Tehran, Yalta, and Potsdam threw away their opportunity to rebulld the world, He wrote, “Communism is not only & creed. It is a plan of campaign. A Communist ts not only the holder of certain opinions; he is the pledged adept of a well-thought-out means of enforcing them. The method of enforcement is as much a part of the Com- munist faith as the doctrine itself. Pacific propaganda may be made the mask of hatreds never before manifested among men. No faith need be, indeed may be, kept with non- Communists. Every act of good will, of tol- erance, of conciliation, of mercy, of magna- nimity on the part of governments or states- men is to be utilized for their ruin. Then when the time is ripe every form of lethal violence from mob revolt to private assassi- nation must be used without stint or com- punction. The citadel will be stormed under the banners of liberty and democracy; and once the apparatus of power is In the hands of the brotherhood, all opposition and con- trary opinion must be extinguished by death, The absolute rule of a self-chosen priesthood according to the dogmas it has learned by rote is to be imposed upon mankind without mitigation, progressively and forever, “To be forewarned should be to be fore- armed.” How shall we reconcile this penetrating wisdom, & warning to the free world against every mistake its leaders have made in the last 5 years, with the giant part Churchill played in making those mistakes? How shail we reconcile it with his saying to the House of Commons {in November 1944: “TI believe with deep conviction that the warrior states- man at the head of Russia will lead the Rus- sian peoples, all the peoples of Russia, into the sunlight of a broader and happier age for all, and with him in this task will march the British Commonwealth of Nations and the mighty United Btates of America.” He said this of a government which Keeps in slavery 14,000,000 of its people. Churchill has frankly stated that he gave up all other considerations in his determt- nation to beat Hitler. He exclaimed in a broadcast June 22, 1941: “I will unsay no word that I have spoken about communism, But all this fades away before the spectacle which ts now unfolding. We have but one aim and one single, irrevocable purpose. We ere resolved to destroy Hitler and every ves= tige of the Nazi regime.” And more intimately he confided to his secretary: “I have only one purpose, the de- struction of Hitler, and my life is much sim- plified thereby.” His praise of Harry Hopkins, though Uttle short of adulation, could rise no higher than this: “There he sat, alim, frail, il, but absolutely glowing with refined comprehension of the cause. It was to be the defeat, ruin, and slaughter of Hitler to the exclusion of all other purposes, loyalties, or aims. In the history of the United States Tew brighter flames have burned." It {s unquestionable, indeed, whether such an abdication of intelligence in high places is to be found in the previous history of the United States, or such praise of tt in Eng- jand. Whatever may become of the British Empire, these words mark the end of the classic tradition of British diplomacy. Churchill did unsay every word he had spoken about communism. He unknew every item of his knowledge about it. He achieved, by a somewhat strenuous exercise of will, the ignorance that our American leaders were naturally endowed with. But the result was the same—a second world- conquering tyrant is at our gates because a war against the first one was fought blindly. Truman has wisely undertaken to get the truth about America into the minds of the Russians, but there remains the heavy task of getting the truth about Russia into the mind of Truman. Before a man can learn something, he has to know that he is ig- norant of it. Even this preliminary knowl- edge is denied to those transfixed by the Churchill-Roosevelt tradition. Truman got a merited horse laugh last year when he said, “I know Joe Stalin; he's a good fellow, but he’s helpless in the hands of the Politburo.” Yet that was only what his predecessors thought when Stalin failed to live up to his promises at Yalta. It was a notion that Stalin himself had been careful to plant in their minds in advance. Stalin has demonstrated by 5 solid years of treachery his unaltered belief that no faith need be, indeed, may be kept with non-Communists, That is the vory simple truth which those must see who aspire to lead us from here on, President Truman recently said to Arthur Krock, “The real trouble with the Russians is that they are suffering from a complex of fear and inferiority where we are concerned.” If he really means that, America is without leadership in the most subtle and complex and implacable danger she ever confronted, The real trouble with the Communists is that they believe that we are a degenerating society, and that they are the society of the future. They believe that in the long run they are bound to win. They are in a mood of belligerent superiority. They control one- third of the people and nearly half the earth, and threaten our national life as it has never been threatened before. To the Truman-Marshall-Acheson school of diplomacy, last-ditch defenders of the policy of not knowing because you don't want to know, the attack In Korea must re- main an impenetrable mystery. All they can learn from the sacrifice of American lives in that battle was summed up by Dean Ache- son in the brilliant thought (not quoted verbatim) : Because of the unprovoked attack in Korea, we must be all the more careful not to do or say anything that might pro- voke the Chinese Communists, The Chinese Communists are “provoked” by one thing and one only—an exposed point in our de- fenses, another chance to win a battle for the totalitarian world-Communist crusade of which they are @ part. Ignorance in thé Executive, ignorance in the makers of our foreign policy is more Cangerous than treason. A615 Address of John F. Nave EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. R. WALTER RIEHLMAN OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. RIEHLMAN. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- orp, I wish to include hercin the follow- ing speech made by John F. Nave, national commander of the Itallan- American World War Veterans of the United States, Inc., at a dinner given in his honor on January 28, 1951, in Syracuse, N. .: I find tt extremely difficult tonight to speak at length; or on any particular subject. It occurs rarely in a man’s life that he ts singled out to be honored by an affair of this nature. With deep humility and great pride I ac- cept the benevolence, good will, and ¢onfi- dence that this occasion inspires. As National Commander, I realize the faith, trust, and vote of confidence placed in me by my fellow veterans and organizational members throughout our beloved country, It has been stated that over 3,000,000 honorably discharged American War Vet- erans in the United States today have eligi- bifity requirements for my present position, It hos been further stated that only 16 of them have attained this coveted position. This great honor bestowed upon me by my fellow veterans is indeed something to be greatly proud of and forever remembered and cherished. My great hope and ambition fs to keep faith with the great office to which I have been elected for the fiscal year 1950-51; and to pass onto my successor accomplish- ments not in existence at the time of my assumption of office. This, I know, shall be. Since, tonight, you honor the National Commander, it is only fair to reveal a few highlights of the national organization he has been entrusted to command. My organization is nonprofit and non- political. It does not promote the candidacy of any person to public office. Its income does not go to any private individual or concern. The national, State, and local officers serve with- out salary or compensation. Charity and benevolence is the basis of our veterans’ cause, which we so honorably and faithfully serve. It ig composed entirely of persons who were honorably discharged from the Armed Forces of the United States for service rendered in time of war. It 1s & patriotic American veterans’ organ- ization. It is against all Communist, Fascist, totali- tarian, subversive, and un-American groups and organizations. It is faithful and loyal to the Constitution and Government of the United States; and against all its enemies, foreign and domestic. Moreover, it reaffirms the privilege of all vetorans’ organizations to serve and ald vet- er.ns, their wives, widows, and dependent children and parents, regardless of their posi- tion or station in life. In addition, {t fosters and advances the true principles of democracy, freedom, and loyal Americanism. ‘uastly, incorporated as a war veterane’ nonprofit, nonpoliticial membership corpo- ration in the States of Connecticut, Massa- chusetts, New York, New Jersey, California, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Rhode Island, it 1s
A616 also specifically recognized by name as such under 23 different State laws, as well as sponsoring 67 bills tn Congress during the last 4 years, in its individual name. This, in brief, is a short synopsis of the national organization which I am entrusted to command for the ensuing year. To paraphrase the words of the military, I am proud of my command and the assign- ments it entails. Ita foundation consists of the cornerstone of democracy and freedom, One could not find a better cause to scrve. As I stated in my opening remarks, I find it extremely difficult to speak at length or on any particular subject this evening. 1 belleve the reason ts perhaps quite obvious, Your presence here tonight on this gala occasion tn my behalf is both touching and overwhelming. To be so honored is not only rare in a man’s life, but also greatly ine epiring. This day is a memorable and joyful one for me. May the Lord be as gracious and kind to all of you present here tonight who made it possible, If the Small Miners of America Could Have Produced During the Last 5 Years, We Would Not Face Our Present Short- age of Critical and Strategic Minerals and Metals EXTENSION OF REMARKS ~ HON. CLAIR ENGLE OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. ENGLE. Mr. Speaker, the pro- duction of the small mines of this coun- try is necessary if we are to have an adequate supply of the critical and stra- tegic minerals and metals. For 5 years following World War II some of us from the far West urged a program which would continue the production of this large segment of the American mining industry. Our efforts were unsuccess- ful and today our Nation faces a des- perate shortage of these materials. Why that happened is discussed in a speech I made at the annual convention of the American Mining Congress at Salt Lake City on August 25, 1950, which I include as part of the Recorp, as follows: The problems of the small mine operator is a large subject. My association with those problems has been in the legislative field, and my discussion of them will be limited to the legislative problems of the small miner in which I have some first-hand knowledge. The legislative problems of the small mine operator originate in the field, If he didn’t have trouble in his operations in the fleld, he never would have been back in Wash- ington having legislative problems. All I know about that is that the small miner-— and some not so small—have been telling me that they are going broke—that they bave had to close up their mines—that the present price will not support their opera- tions—and that something has to be done about it. Presumably, the amall miner has ex- hausted his remedies in the fleld—whatever could be done in improving his operations by his own resources has been done. No one comes to Washington for help—least of all the little fellow unfamiliar with the laby- rinthian ways of Washington—uniess it is the last resort. So he has come, and the crescendo of his complaints has risen as the reports of more and more mine closures have piled up. Surely he has been in ® sorry plight, and he wonders why something hasn't been done about it. Let me tell you why. The small miner in his effort to get help has been faced by an unusual and formida- ble coalition. He has been opposed in his own Government by the Interlor Depart- ment. He has been opposed in his own Gov- ernment by the State Department. He has been opposed in his own industry by some of the big operators. And he has been op- posed in Congress by interests themselves getting fat on Government protection and subsidy, I will be specific. The Interior Department has vigorously opposed any legislation modeled on the World War II premium price plan. It has supported, but reluctantly, a very Mmited program for additional development and ex- ploration and the salvaging of those min- erals and metals which would be lost in pres- ently closed or closing mines unless imme- Giately taken out of the ground. The record is clear. In the Eightieth Congress the President on the recommendation of the Interior De- partment vetoed the Allen bill to continue temporarily a modified version of the pre- mium price plan. Consistently thereafter, the Interior Department opposed a bill for @ similar purpose authored by Congressman Russell, of Nevada. In this Congress—the Eighty-first—the Interior Department has turned thumbs down on a bill by Senator Morray, of Montana, and me, to ald the small miner which was introduced after ex- hausting conferences with the Interior De- partment and after we had gotten what we believed was their agreement The bill was pared in the Rules Committee with their elp. Subsequently, on two different occasions, Senator O’MAHONEY and I worked up further compromises—bills that gave the Interior Department unlimited power to pick and choose between operators—which they de- manded—the so-called selective contract system for incentive payments for the pro- duction of critical and strategic minerals and metals. These measures were twice de- feated on the floor of the House—after tak- ing them around the Rules Committee on a special rule. Those bills have had the ap- proval of the Interior Department but not what I would call their enthusiastic support. As this war emergency came upon us a new measure was locked up in the Rules Committee along with the others. This was & measure providing for limited help in ex- ploration and development and in addition the salvaging of mineral and metal re- sources which would be forever lost to the Nation unless removed from the ground now—the deep mines in Michigan, which are closed and watering up, as an example. This measure had what I would call the half- hearted support of our Government agencies, Finally, reluctantly—beaten into it by the necessity of war—the leaders in Washington started to talk about the importance of minerals and metals—the deplorable condi. tion of the stockpile—which had been called to their attention all along—and the expen- diture of two or three billion dollars on es- sential materials. Now what has brought this attitude about; what has been the reasoning which has sup- ported this reluctance to aid the small mine operator? Let me answer that question. There are people in our Government who believe that our mineral resources have been grievously depleted by war; that the mineral resources of this Nation have been used up APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD to an astonishing degree; that our minerals and metals have been scattered over the four corners of the earth, in almost every land and at the bottom of almost every sea in the extravagant expenditure of war. That this being true, we should conserve our resources by keeping them in the ground, and should use 80 far as possible, and stockpile so far as possible, the resources of other nations, That that was not only the wise, but the cunning thing to do, and was the policy of true conservation. And that certainly it is sheer folly to use any more of our resources than we had to—much less pay premium or incentive prices to bring them out of the ground and burn them up in industrial use. Now our answer was as ancient as the lore of western mining—and as hard to under- stand without experience, It was the ancient proverb of mining—that ore begets ore. That the only way to develop and conserve our mineral resources is by mining them. And, our legislation provided that the min- eral wealth produced as a direct result of incentives from the Government should go into indestructible stockpiles which would grow in value, and not be lost or used until needed—and that by this method we would not only bring to the surface tn usable form our mineral wealth, but also—in effect— stockpile the manpower and transportation to make the resource available in event of war. Additionally, we would thereby main- tain and keep the finest stockpile our Nation could hope to have—a healthy, going domes- tic mining industry producing and ready to produce more in a national emergency safely beyond the reach of the snorkel submarine. But our arguments were unavailing, and policy was made in high places. Linked in this dangerous and specious rea- soning with the so-called conservationists has been the State Department. It fitted their necessities exactly. The State Department needed to maintain the dollar balances of foreign nations, For that to be done, foreign nations must sell us something for which dollars could be paid. The thinking of the conservationists dove- tailed neatly. Minerals and metals should be bought abroad. The domestic market should be supplied with foreign minerals and metals, Millions should be spent through ECA in developing foreign mineral and metal pro- duction for sale to the United States. And, the scattered and politically impotent domestic small miner was a perfect victim, whose murdered squeals would hardly be heard from the far west on the spot-lit Washington stage. Moreover, even the political hazards were further minimized. The conservationists in the government departments and the dollar- balance policy in the State Department found an unexpected ally in some of the big mining operators. And they—the big mining operators—had some ideas that make sense to them. Here they are: They did not want the Government to get its meddling hand into thelr industry. Their observation proved that Federal regu- lation followed the Federal dollar. Ii made no difference that they were not required to participate unless they wanted to—or that their nonsubsidized mines would not have to compete in the free market with the sub- sidized small mines whose production would be required to go into the stockpile. It was the dread foot of Government through the peacetime door of thir industry. And they wanted none of it. Further, a little mine nursed on a Government subsidy might grow to a big rough competitor who no longer needed a subsidy—or any odds from them in the free market, Others with foreign in- vestments, presently or in prospect, could see no merit in reducing or endangering the home market. From any side it looked lke a horned devil to them—and their emissaries
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD trod the high-ceilinged halls of the Capitol, button-holed Congressmen and whlavered the mining industry is against it. Tt is a fine tribute to the Congressmen from mining States—Republicans and Democrats alike—that in the face of these circumatances a bill ever got to the floor at all. There 1s no partisanship among the supporters of mining in Congress. They fought hard and well—on both sides of the aisle. Especialiy I want to pay tribute to the Representatives from this State, Colo- rado, Montana, Idaho, Arizona, and New Mexico, all of whom, regardless of party, have done everything in their power to repair the desperate situation of the domestic miner. But there were not enough of us. The Senate, where mining {ts relatively stronger because each mining State—no matter how small—has as many Senators as New York, twice passed mining bills. In the House, where the thinly populated mining areas are submerged in representation from the great metropolitan areas, we did not do so well. The Congressmen from the East and South voted us down. Some didn’t like subsidies for the mining industry—Congressmen from New York who shout their heads off for low cost public housing—we got 2 votes out of New Yark’'s 45. Congressmen from the South who will fight to the last breath for parity for cotton, tobacco, and peanuts—we did not get a single vote in Georgia. Congressmon from the Midwest—the land of wheat and corn—who not only want parity but cheap Government financed storage for their grain—and will vote Democratic if they don’t get 1t from a Republican Congress. We got 6 votes out of Ohio’s 23. And some just weren't interested-——and “I have to cast one economy vote this session, don't I?” In summary, then, the problem of the small mine operator is to convince the In- tertor Department that “ore begets ore’— that mining and developing our mineral re- sources is conservation; to convince the State Department that American dollars paid for foreign minerals and metals has @ Sia- mese twin—a dangerous and costly depend- ence upon ocean-borne supplies from foreign lands constituting a serious threat to our national security and our long-range peace time needs; to convince some of the big operators that the national interest ls above any private interest; and to convince the eastern and southern Congressmen that the security of their farms, factories, and homes requires a self-sufficiency of those things without which our industrial machine will collapse, It is a big order. And Iam sure the Ameri- can small mine operator takes no satisfaction from the fact that the Korean crisis has made the hard realities plain: that our domestic mining industr;’ has slowly gone out of exist- ence; that the stockpile is deplorably short and unable to sustain any kind of a war effort; that we are tragically lacking in some of tLe very essentials of a war effort. The damage can be repaired, but it will be costly, and in our present emergency we will suffer from our failure to have a well balanced and long-range domestic mining policy. Government agencies will be given more power than contemplated in any of the measures I have referred to—and it may be a long time before we can limit that authority. Steps will be taken to maintain and increase the domestic production of critical and strategic minerals and metals by providing the assistance required to assure production from small and marginal mines and the undeveloped mineral deposita of the United States. In our haste we will again gouge our rescurces—as we did in the last war—rather than following orderly develop- ment and production. Manpower will be short and costs will be high. But what the Nation, Congress, Government officials——and I believe the industry—have finally been convinced must be done, will be done. The offictals of our Government will be urged to counsel with all phases of the mining and related industries and to avoid if possible some of the pitfalls in our past experience. Out of all this I hope will come a balanced long-range domestic program based on the princtple that it is sound for our economy and necessary for our security to have and to maintain at all times a healthy going domestic mining industry. I have con- Adence in the leadership in the mining in- dustry represented here at this great con- vention, and know of your willingness, your anxiety, to do your part, Cecil Dickson EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN E. LYLE, JR. OF TEXAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. LYLE, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Cecil Dickson has resigned as coordinator of information for the House of Repre- sentatives to assume new duties with the Motion Picture Association of America. ‘We shall miss him very much. Mr. Dickson had character, ability, and in- tegrity. He served this body well, and we sincerely hope for him great success in his new work. Orrice or CoorDINaToR or INFORMATION, House or REprResENTATIVES, February 1, 1952, Hon. 8am RAYBURN, Speaker of the House of Representatives, United States Capitol, Washington, D.C. Drar Mr. Speaker: Serving under you as Coordinator of Information for the United States House of Representatives for the past 2 years has been a supreme privilege and honor, but now I must resign to assume new duties with the Motion Picture Association of America, which we have discussed. The intimate association with you, the second most important official in our Gov- ernment, and the confidence and trust you reposed in me constitute the highest tribute one could receive in 30 years of close per- sonal friendship, I shall cherish the mem- ory for all time. It has been a challenging and interesting pleasure to work for you and the other Mem- bers of our great Congress. I am deeply grateful to you for the opportunity to serve, and I was so happy to be with you when you established a record for both accomplish- ments and tenure as Speaker of the greatest legislative body on earth. May the coming years bring to you more honor, greater happiness, and genuine con- tentment which you go richly deserve. With deep personal affection and high regard, I am, Gratefully yours, Czon, Dickson, me Tae SPraxrr’s ROoMs, Hover or REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D, C., February 2, 1951. Mr. Ceci, Dickson, Pleasant Hill, Paeontan Springs, Va. Dear Ceciz: I have received your letter of February 1, 1951, etating that you must re- sign as Coordinator of Information for the House of Representatives to assume your new duties with the Motion Picture Aasso- citation of America. Let me say that I ace cept your resignation with deepest regret, A617 but I cannot stand in the way of your prog- ress or bettering yourself and your family. When I first met you, you were a corre- spondent with the Dentson Herald at Deni- son, Tex., which is in the district I repre- sent, Since that time I have watched your career with a friendly interest. You made good and reached a high place in the newa- paper fraternity. No one could have made a greater or more satisfying Coordinator of In- formation for the House of Representatives than you have. Your work has been thor- ough and intelligent to the highest degree. Throughout the years I have appreciated your friendship and your loyalty to me per- sonally. You are not only loyal to men, you are loyal to principles, It has been a high privilege to have enjoyed the friendship of and worked with, throughout the years, a man of your steadfast honesty, your high Gegree of loyalty, and your marked ability. You carry with you into your new field my unalloyed friendship and best wishes. Affectionately yours, Gam Raysurn. bate eneneeenmnemeel Extension of Trade Agreements Act EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KATHARINE ST. GEORGE OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mrs. ST. GEORGE. Mr. Speaker, un- der leave to revise and extend my re- marks in the Appendix of the Rrcorp, I include a resolution adopted by the Twenty-fifth Women’s Patriotic Con- ference on National Defense held in Washington, D. C., January 25 to 27, This resolution asks that the recipro- cal Trade Agreements Act of 1934 be not extended and that in its place there be established the principle of flexible im- port fees, Mr. Speaker, the Women’s Patriotic Conference represented 40 organizations and more than 2,000,000 American women. The resolution follows: RESOLUTION OPPosING EXTENSION OF THE TRADE Agreements ACT or 1934, as Exrenpgp, ADOPTED BY THE TWENTY-FIFTH WOMEN’S ParnoTic Conrrrencr on Nationa, Ds- rense, STatter Horst, WasHINGTON, D. C., JANUARY 26-27, 1951 Whereas a healthy national economy is necessary to a strong national defense; and Whereas good wages and full employment form the foundation of a healthy economy; and Whereas the free trade importation of pro- ducts of countries where workers are paid much less than workers producing compa- rable goods in the United States can only re- sult in increasing unemployment here and a weakening of our economy and our potential for national defense; and Whereas the so-called reciprocal trade agreements program has removed protection from our workers and investors against the unfair competition of the low-paid workers of other countries, thereby threatening jobs of workers in industries important to our national defense; and Whereas as a result of the reduction of tariffs and import fees incident to the pas- soge of the Trade Agreements Act of 1984 as extended, grave injury already has been inflicted upon various industries in this
A618 country, important to our national defense program; and Whereas imports into our country should be controlled by the imposition of import fees which would reflect the difference in our workers’ wage standard and standard of live ing to those standards in other countries: Therefore be it Resolved, That the Twenty-fifth Women’s Patriotic Conference on National Defense urge upon Congress that the Trade Agree- ments Act of 1934 as extended which expires in June of this year, be not extended further and that in its place there be established the principle of flexible import fees, to be decided upon by the Congress in keeping with the Constitution of the United States. Forry PaRrrictpaTING OraaNizaTIONS REPRE- @ENTING More THAN 2,000,000 WomeEn American Gold Star Mothers, Inc.; Ameri- can Gold Star Sisters, Inc.; American Gold Star Wives, Inc.; American Legion Auxillary; American War Dads Auxiliary; American War Mothers; American Women's Legion of World Wars; Auxillary to Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War; Blue Star Mothers of America; Catholic War Veterans of the U.S. A. Ladies Auxiliary; Dames of the Loyal Legion of the U. 8. A.; Daughters of Union Veterans of the Civil War (1861-65), Inc.; Daughters of the United States Army; Ladies Auxiliary of the Military Order of the Purple Heart; Ladies Auxiliary of the Veterans of Foreign Wars; Ladies of the Grand Army of the Republic; Marine Corps League Auxillary; National Amvets Auxiliary; National Auxillary, Jewish War Veterans of the United States; National Patriotic Council; National Society for Con- stitutional Security; National Society Daugh- ters of the Revolution; National Society Daughters of the Union (1861-1865), Inc; National Society of New England Women; Na- tional Society Patriotic Women of America, Inc.; National Sootety of Service Star Le- gion, Inc.; National Society Women Descend+ ants of the Anc. and Hon. Art. Co.; National Women's Relief Corps Auxiliary; National Yeomen F; Navy Club U. 8S. A. Auxiliary; Navy Mothers Club of America; New York City Colony, New England Women Soctety Sponsors of United States Navy; the Wheel of Progress; United States Army Mothers; Women of Army and Navy Legion of Valor of United States; Women’s National Defense Committee of Philadelphia; Reserve Officera Association Ladies Clubs of the United States; the National Gold Star Mothers, Inc. The Marble Plaques Adorning the Walls of the Chamber EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. ANTONIO M. FERNANDEZ OF NEW MEXICO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I include the ninth of a series of short sketches being published by the Wash-« ington Post with respect to the men honored by the plaques which adorn the walis of the Chamber: Marmonipes: Great JewisH Law SCHOLAR AND PHILOSOPHER (1135-1204 A. D.) Maimonides (1185-1204 A. D.) was born in Spain and migrated to Egypt, where he became the greatest Jewish scholar of medie- val times, writing works on law, logic, as- tronomy, medicine, and philosophy, His principal philosophical work, The Guide for the Perplexed, sought to harmo- nize Jewish teachings with philosophy, espe- cially that of Aristotle, At the same time The Guide recognized that reason is limited and needs to be supplemented by revela- tion. The work influenced not only Mai- monides’ Jewish successors but also Arabian. and Christian—among the latter St. Thomas Aquinas and Albertus Magnus. In the Mishna Toruh he gave a classified collection of Jewish oral law, which became a reference book for rabbis and judges. His plaque was sculptured by Brenda Put- nam, of New York City. Unsnapping the Bear Trap EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. WILLIAM L, SPRINGER OF ILLINOIS : IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. SPRINGER. Mr. Speaker, other than the gentleman from Minnesota LMr. Jupp] and the gentleman from In- diana [Mr. Bray], there is no man in the present House so well equipped to speak upon the situation in Korea as the gen- tleman from New Jersey [Mr. SIEMEN- SKI]. Only a few weeks ago he was in Korea while the present action was being joined. He has first-hand knowledge of the psychology of the people in Korea and China, Today he is in this House clothed in the modesty of a new Member of this body. He is a pleasing and con- vincing speaker and above all he stands for something, as was so well evidenced by the way in which he beat the Hague machine last November in absentia. This House stands well in need of in- formation from a man so well informed. He should be encouraged to give it with- out further delay. I believe his observa- tions while in Korea will be most helpful to all of us in Congress. I include in the Recorp herewith an article written expressly for Internation- al News Service this month and which was published on January 19 in the Jersey Observer: REPRESENTATIVE SIXMENSKI OFFERS WAR PLAN--JERSEY Orry CONGRESSMAN CALLS “Rep HORDE” of CHINA a MYTH (Evrror’s Note.—A Member of Congress who only a few weeks ago was serving in Korea, herewith presents a five-point pro- gram for unsnapping the bear trap clamped on UN forces by the Chinese. An Army ma- jor and press chief for the Tenth Corps, Representative ALFRED D. SIEMENSKI was evacuated direct from the Hungnam beach- head to take his post in Congress, to which he was elected from New Jersey's Thirteenth District while serving in Korea. He fought in the Italian campaign in the last war and later served with the American Military Gov- ernment in Austria under Gen. Mark Clark.) (By Representative ALFRED D. SrEMENSKI, Democrat, of New Jersey) WASHINGTON, January 19.—The alleged “Red horde” of China, capable of sweeping Western democracy out of all Asia, is a myth, China today is a mass of poverty-stricken people seething beneath the feet of a mi- nority Red bloc. Only the officer corps, for instance, in the Red army are Communists. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD We can save China and the rest of the Orient for the free world by the political, economic, and psychological defeat and sterilization of that minority—and without committing American troops to any Jand campaign in China, “WE MUST HOLD IN KOREA” But we must hold in Korea. That is basic, because Korea, with its Yalu River power dams and its southern “rice bowl” is the key to domination of Manchuria and the frustra- tion of Russian aims of conquest, To unsnap the bear trap that the Chinese Reds have clamped on United Nation troops in Korea and to save the west from a catastrope in the Far East, I propose that: 1. We prevail on Chiang Kai-shek to be- come military adviser to General MacArthur and move Chiang’s government-in-exile to Tokyo, leaving his troops under military, not political, command. 2. The Nationalists declare themselves “volunteers” at the disposal of the United Nations. 3. We employ Nationalist troops in Korea to kidnap the entire Chinese Red Army of Mao Tse-Tung. The Reds would desert to us by the tens of thousands, if given a decent chance. 4. We promote a triple entente compris- ing Free China, the Republic of Korea and Japan. The establishment of Chiang’s exile government in Tokyo would facilitate this step. GFT DOWN TO ORIKNTAL NEEDS 5. We quit wasting our time talking to the Orientals about vague intangibles and get down to their needs. Wars are fought for the right of a people to live as a nation— to give those people the opportunity of get- ting what they need to live. They need food, medical care, and housing. Once they understand that we are fighting to see that they obtain those things, they will be convinced we have the right idea, without all the frills. If this program is put into effect, any large scale landing on the Chinese mainland will not be necessary. But we should en- courage raids and guerrilla warfare to keep Peiping off balance until the remainder of the program achieves success. Perhaps I can wrap up what I’m trying to say here in one lttle incident that I wit- nessed : One of our Chinese Red captives, after be- ing fed and given warm accommodations, an- nounced that he was ready now to fight for the United States. He was a veteran of 60 campaigns and had been impressed first into the Nationalist army, then into the Red army. He was told, “No, your fighting days are over, Why do you wish to fight for the United States?” He replied, “Because I have gotten better food and care from you than I ever had be- fore. If I can't fight, then I'll work for it.” Multiply him by the multitudes of China and the Orient and you see what I'm driving at. But we should never try to appease the real Communists. They are vicious, cruel, and ruthless, We Want What's Ours EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CHARLES E. POTTER OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. POTTER. Mr. Speaker, under permission to extend my remarks in the
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Record, I wish to insert a timely edito- rial from the Detroit Free Press of Jan- uary 27, 1961, by Frank B. Woodford, on the controversy now before the Civil Aeronautics Board between Nationwide Airlines and Wisconsin Central. As the article well points out, the issue at stake is whether the two great peninsulas of Michigan will at long last be united by adequate transportation or whether the Upper Peninsula will still be considered as the lost colony of the State of Michigan. The editorial follows: Wr Want WHAT'’s Ours (By Frank B. Woodford) There’s a battle going on between Michi- gan and Wisconsin and Illinois before the Civil Aeronautics Administration, and Mich- igan had better win it. The fight is over whether the Upper Pen- insula of this State will be served by an air- line operating from points in the Lower Pen- insula, or whether air service will be fur- nished by a line running between Chicago, Milwaukee, and Upper Peninsula points. So far, with the skirmishing just started, it looks like our neighbor States to the west have the edge in this fight. They probably will be able to bring enough political pressure to bear in Washington to emerge the winner, with half of the State of Michigan as the prize, unless Lower Penin- sula folks bestir themselves and take an ac- tive Interest in the contest. The stakes are high. They consist of an area about as big as the entire State of Connecticut, with a fairly heavy population, and a lot of cash business, Most of the latter 1s, by existing circum- stances, now drained off into Milwaukee and Chicago. Detroit and other cities in the lower part of the State get very little of this business. Undoubtedly they could use it. Certainly they are more entitled to it than either Wis- consin or Illinois. Tnfortunately for a great many years that part of the Upper Peninsula west of the straits always has been closer, economically, to Chicago than it has to Detroit or other Michigan localities. Included in this “lost” area are such im- portant towns as Marquette, Escanaba, Foughton, Iron Mountain, Ironwood, Stam- baugh, and many others. In these places the citizens have Michigan license plates on their automobiles; they pay 6 sales tax and other taxes to the State of Michigan; they send a few representatives and a senator or two to Lansing to help make the laws. But beyond that, they are generally as re- mote from that part of Michigan which its “down under” as if they lived tn Iowa or Minnesota. The bulk of the things they buy comes either from Milwaukee or Chicago. They read the newspapers from those places, while it 1s almost impossible to obtain a Detroit paper up there. They listen to Chicago sta- tions on their radios, and when they “go to town,” as the saying has it, it's to Chicago that they buy their tickets. They even root for the Cubs instead of the Tigers, and that’s about the lest straw. This all came about because of the inade- quacy of transportation between Detroit and that part of the State. It’s almost as far by automobile from Detroit to Marquette as it is from Detroit to New York. If you go by train from Detroit to Escan- naba or Iron Mountain, you first have to go to Chicago. It’s a trip requiring 2 days or @ day and a night. But by afr from Detroit it's only 2% or 3 hours to those Upper Peninsula points, and en afrline now covers the distance on regu- lar achedule in that time. Moreover, the air fare 1s about half the first-class train fare. It’s a small ine, Nationwide Airlines, which runs out of Detroit for the north. Ite com- petitor is Wisconsin Central Airlines, “There isn’t enough trafic to support both,” saya the CAA, and the hearings now being held are to determine which line will be certified to serve Upper Peninsula points ex- clusively. If Wisconsin Central gets it—and it has powerful backing—business will continue to filter through Milwaukee and Chicago. If Nationwide is allowed to operate directly be- tween Detroit, Lansing, Grand Rapids, and the Upper Peninsula, the latter will again become part of the State of Michigan, in fact as well as politically. Certainly the results are important enough to the people of all of the State so that they ought to get busy writing to their Congressmen and to the CAA, demanding thet the Upper Peninsula be returned to the ‘old. We want our lost colony back again. Attention, Taft EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WAYNE L. HAYS oF OHIO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. HAYS of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, in view of some of the criticisms that I have heard from the other side of the aisle, and which may be valid, I think it is ap- propriate that the following editorial from the Washington Daily News of Feb- ruary 5, 1951, be included in the Recorp: ATTENTION, TAFT A political check up on top defense offi- clals shows them to be overwhelmingly Re- publican, 12 to 5. This is the way they line up: Republicans: Charles E. Wilson, Director of Defense Mo- bilization. Eric Johnston, Eoonomic Stabilization Ad- ministrator. William H. Harrison, Defense Production Administrator. Manly Fleischmann, National Production Administrator. Cyrus Ching, Chairman, Wage Stabiliza- tion Board. James Knudson, Defense Transportation Administrator. Bruce Brown, Petroleum Administrator for Defense. Charles W. Connor, Solid Fuels Adminis- trator. James Boyd, Defense Minerals Administra- tor. Robert Goodwin, Director of Defense Man- power. John Small, Chairman, Munitions Board. Thomas B. McCabe, Chairman, Federal Re- serve Board, which is in charge of credit re- strictions. Here are the Democrats: Michael DiSalle, Price Stabilization Di- rector. Clifford B. McManus, Defense Power Ad- ministrator. W. EB. Barber, Chairman, Reconstruction Finance Corporation. Raymond Foley, Housing Administrator. Millard Caldwell, Federal Civil Defense Ad- ministrator. A619 Let’s Roll Back Prices EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WILLIAM C. LANTAFF OF FLORIDA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. LANTAFF. Myr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- orp, I am inserting the following radio address by Scott Bishop, program direc- tor for radio station WIOD, Miami, Fla. Mr, Scott Bishop gave this talk on the editor’s report program on January 26, and repeated it on January 28. I want to talk to you today about the price of food. On February 1—next Thursday—the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics will begin ® survey of Miami families of moderate in- come to determine how much they spent on food, clothing, rent, recreation, taxes, and other items during 1950. Well, all this ts very nice, very nice, in- deed. But I think these families of mod- erate income know full wel] how much they spent last year for rent end food and for taxes, I don’t think it will take a survey to tell these people about the present high coat of living. These people the United States Bureau of Labor Statistica ta going to interview don’t have to be surveyed to learn where their money ts going, That's why I want to talk to you today about the price of food. And I want to ask you some questions, too. For instance, one question I want to ask is this: “Why has the cost of food risen 247 per- cent right here in Miami since 1940?” Why has food gone up almost two and one-half times over the cost of 10 years ago? Why does it take 83.47 to buy the same amount of food today—that one dollar would have bought in 1940? Take any grocery bill right here in Miami. If you spend 820 a week for groceries today, you would only have had to spend 88 a week in 1940. Hight dollars a week then—$20 8 week now. Has the average income increased 247 per- cent since 1940? Is the average worker now earning 214 times as much ag he did in 1940? Statistics prove he is not. But statistics also show that the average employer has made every honest attempt to keep pace with the breakneck speed taken by rising prices. The average em- ployer has been utterly unable to increase the wages of his employees 247 percent. Even now, our courts are overflowing with bankruptcy pleas-from the smaller buainees- men who have been completely crushed by the ever-rising tide; by the ever-demanding drain on their budgets and on their financial resources. Even now, businesses which once operated at a fair profit to the benefit of employer and employee alike—are now op- erating at a deficit, writing in their account books with red ink in the optimistic hope that the American economy will soon again find a more stable path to follow. And, in the meantime, what? Let’s look at the facts. Let's look at the record. Let's let the figures speak fur themselves. For instance, let’s go back not 10 years but let’s go back 5 years—to January 1946, ‘We had just ended a 4-year war with Ger~ many and with Japan. During 1942, 1943, 1944, and most of 1945 our war-production output was at the most gigantic peak ever known to the human race. Food in those years was available, but food was not over- plentiful. You could walk into any grocery
A626 store in Miami and find the soap shelves empty. The sugar shelves empty. The gel- Jatine-dessert shelves empty. The table sirup, black pepper, tapioca pudding, canned cherries, canned pineapple, preserves, and jelly shelves empty. The Kleenex and paper towel shelves empty. The coffee shelves empty. Shortening shelves empty. The gum and candy shelves empty. The meat coun- ters sparsely filled, and with not-so-choice cute at that. Then came 1946. The war was over. Foods which had been scarce for more than 8 years began to come back on the market. Shelves began to be stocked again. Sugar was available, shortening was becoming more plentiful, coffee was on the way back. So were the many, many items which had been scarce for so long. But let’s keep the facts still in mind. The American people had either done with- out—or had managed to struggle along for 8 or 4 years with very sparse supplies of all those scarce items which were missing 80 long from the grocers’ shelves. And when these scarcities did come back, what happened to the prices? Let’s examine the record again. Let's look at the facts again. Let's let the prices speak for themselves. After all those years of rationing and of doing without, the American people, hav- ing, in most part, reaped a cons.derable har~ vest of good American dollars, were ready to go back to the good old days when meat and coffee, shortening and sugar were all plentiful. They had the money and they were willing to pay. Prices remained higher than before the war-—yes; that’s true. But equally true is the fact that prices did not skyrocket. The facts being what they were, prices had every logical reason under -he sun to sky- rocket. But they didn't. Today, you can step inside any store in the land and what do you see? Shelves heaped high with every- thing imaginable in the line of foodstuffs. Bars of soap by the thous: nds, packages of soaps by the hundreds, tins of shortening by the dozens, pounds of coffee by the score, A.l you want—buy it and take it away. No Umit. Help yourself. Load up your grocery basket and carry it out. If you can pay the price. If you don't care what it costs you. If you can afiord it. Mrs. Homemaker bought Uberally and in plentiful quantities back in 1946—only 6 years ago. But let's see what her grocery dollar did for her 6 years ago. Let's compare what her grocery dollar did for her 5 years ago with what it will do for her today. Hee are the facts, This is the record. The comparison stands in black and white in the groce~y ads of 1946 ard in the grocery ads of 1951. For example: Coffee: Coffee was 41 cents a pound in 1946, Today, coffee is selling at 90 cents a pound and still going higher. Coffee is 49 cents a pound more right now than it was in 1946. And yet a recent news story on the radio and in the newspapers reported that the crop for 198} appears more promising than that of Why, then, is coffee 220 percent higher now than it was at the close of World War II? Does it cost the grocer, the processor, the wholesaler, and the retailer 220 percent more right along the line to get that coffee onto pur tables? I doubt it. I very much doubt t. Then let’s consider shortening, put up in 8-pound tins. Vegetable shortening of this nature was 64 cents in 1946 for the 3-pound container. Today, that very same product is 91 cents for 8 pounds and still going higher. What has caused vegetable shortening to increase in price more than 140 percent in & years? And just consider the small item of ground black pepper. Back in January of 1946, ground black pepper sold at 10 cents for the 1%4-ounce size. Believe it or not, that same size tin of pepper now costs the Miami housewife 87 cents—27 cents more. But what is there about the growing, processing, wholesaling, and retailing of ground black pepper that has caused it to go up in price 870 percent in 5 years? Then consider today’s meat prices. Plain, ordinary round steak. Up from 42 cents a pound in 1946 to $1.15 8 pound today. That’s an increase of 73 cents a pound in 5 years. That's an increase of 274 percent. And hamburger. Hamburger was 29 cents in 1946. It is 69 cents today. Forty cents more a pound for hamburger. Pork chops were 37 cents. Today, they're 89 cents a pound. That’s 52 cents more a pound. And look at these prices: Chuck roast, 27 cents a pound in 1946; 73 cents today; 46 cents higher. Pork roast, 35 cents a pound in 1946; 89 cents today; 54 cents higher. Veul cutlets, 47 cents a pound in 1946; $1.39 today; 92 cents higher. Cold cuts, 29 cents a pound in 1946; 79 cents today; 50 cents higher. Beef liver, 40 cents a pound in 1946; 89 cents today; 49 cents higher. Margarine, 21 cents a pound in 1946; 37 cents today; 16 cents higher. Powdered soap, 23 cents a package in 1946; 81 cents today; 8 cents higher, Paper towels, 10 cents u roll in 1946; 23 cents today; 13 cents higher. Hand soap, 3 bars, 20 cents, in 1946; 3 bars, 39 cents today; 19 cents higher. Salt, 2 boxes 9 cents in 1946; 2 boxes 16 cents today; 7 cents higher. Crackers, 1-pound box, 18 cents in 1946; 1-pound box 26 cents today; 7 cents higher. Sugar, 5 pounds 29 cents in 1946; 5 pounds 45 cents today; 16 cents higher. Canned milk, 8 cans 25 cents in 1946; 3 cans 39 cents today; 14 cents higher, Flour, 5 pounds 29 cents in 1946; 5 pounds 45 cents today; 16 cents higher. Catsup, 14 cents in 1946; 39 cents today; 25 conts higher. Baby food, 3 jars 19 cents in 1946, 3 Jars 29 cents today; 10 cents higher. And this could go ¢n and on and on, this seemingly never-ending list of items which are so incredibly higher in cost now as com- pared to war’s end in January of 1946, And why? I don't know why, I am unable to deter- mine. I can guess, and I don't think I'd be far from wrong. Someone is cleaning up, someone is turning the homemaker's pennies and dollars into fortunes. But who? And how long will it continue? I am not concerned here with price con- trols. Iam not debating the usefulness or the uselessness of price controls. As an American citizen, I am not in favor of Gov- ernment telling any man what he can or what he cannot ask for the goods he sells. But I am in favor of investigating any con- dition existing in America today which gouges the American housewlfe—the Ameri- can mother. More and more, the high cost of food becomes a situation which should and must be investigated. Any rollback on prices existing at any time in the month of January this year is completely useless— except for the fact that such a rollback does act toward keeping already exorbitant prices from becoming even more outlandish. Re- ports are that an official investigation of high food prices soon is to get underway. All of us sincerely hope that this investigation will turn up facts—not double talk. That it will be carried out in a sincere, honest manner—not merely as an empty political gestur>, Mr. Speaker, as a result of this broad- cast, WIOD received 587 letters and 65 telephone calls, «ll of them complimen- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD tary to the station, and all of them very much concerned about the alarmingly high cost of food. I thought you might be interested in this indication of the feeling of the people in south Florida in regard to the high cost of food, TTT Special Class Teachers EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THOMAS J. LANE OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. LANE. Mr, Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I wish to include the following article which is most en- lightening and interesting from the Law- rence Sunday Sun, Lawrence, Mass., January 28, 1951: Sprovan TRAINING CLASSES BENEFIT EXCEeP- TIONAL CHILDREN HERE—GREATER LAWRENCE SpeciaL Ciass TEACHERS Usr LaTEsT ECIEN- TIrICc KNOWLEDGE OF MENTAL RETARDATION To HELP YOUNGSTERS INCREASE UNDERSTAND~ ING, TRAINING OF PARENTS Is EQUALLY ImM- PORTANT (By Bill Collins, Jr.) The trouble is so few people have the cour- age to voice the hurtful truth, and the truth is so important at a time like this. The little gir] with the golden hair laughed when her mother kissed her cheek, and sent her off toschool. Her long and shiny ringlets danced as she sKipped out of the yard, a green-blue pencil box held proudly in her hand. There was a prideful joy alight within the watching woman’s eyes as she saw the happy gleam of laughter. This, she said within her heart, is all that was really needed—new friends, new interests. I hope it ts, she prayed. The child said nothing within her heart. Her eyes were eager for the adventures of a new, untouched day. A running dog stopped to wag its tail, and she smiled and touched its head, A pretty pasteboard lady waved from a drugstore window, and the child felt warm inside. She had no fears, nor trepida- tions. She had already forgotten yesterday. Yesterday did not return until she sat down at her desk, there in the first-grade class- room, There was the cruel, unthinking giggling of children sitting near her. Then yesterday came back in all its chaos and con- fusion. Her heart raced and hammered against her tiny ribs, and she dug her knuckles into her eyes so no one would see the tears. Yesterday had been the first day, her first day of school. How wonderfully it started. The teacher was a kindly, friendly lady. The blackboards were trimmed with marching, cut-out animals, and the desks were freshly cleaned. First they sang out loud, and then the teacher passed out crayons. That was the beginning. She couldn’t re- member which color each one was. She couldn’t understand what the teacher wanted. As the day progressed, she found more and more confusion in things that seemed to be so easy for the others. She couldn't remember the teacher's name. She couldn't count to five, She couldn't name any of the letters on the cards the teacher held. Then the laughter came, with the innocent cruelty of children, Before the day was done, she was sitting stiffly, silent at her desk, her hands so tightly clenched, her knuckles were bloodless