A42388 Labor Sees the Danger EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. GEORGE A. DONDERO OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, June 6, 1950 Mr. DONDERO. Mr. Speaker, under leave granted by the House to extend my remarks in the ConGRESSIONAL REcorRD, I include therein a statement or release by the International Brotherhood of Elec- trical Workers on the question of public power. This organization realizes that if Gov- ernment takes the place of private in~ dustry and private investment that their interests will be jeopardized. This or- ganization of workers has taken the same position that I have maintained through the years and since my service in Congress in regard to public power. Government controls the rivers and their potential power. For this reason, it is proper that the Federal Govern- ment should build the power dams or any other dam by which electric energy is generated as a byproduct. My opposition has been and is now to the transmission and disposition of such power in direct competition with private investment and private enterprise, in many instances already serving the areas affected. If the philosophy of public ownership is so desirable and is carried to other activities, we shall soon have a Govern- ment patterned after the Russian idea. I am bitterly opposed to it and every loyal American should be opposed to such a principle. The statement included herewith should be read hy every Member of Con- gress. It reflects sound American prin- ciples, Tue INTERNATIONAL EXECUTIVE COUNCIL OF THE INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WorkKERS ENDORSES THE ACTION AND PoLicy OF INTERNATIONAL PRESIDENT D. W. Tracy IN OPPOSING PUBLIC OWNERSHIP TREND IN THE ELECTRIC LIGHT AND Powmr INDUSTRY In the interests of the commonweal there is no more pressing need than provision for flood control, irrigation, navigation, and the prevention of soil erosion. By reason of geography and the topography of the land such provision and prevention is necessarily and inescapably within the realm of Federal obligation. In the fulfillment of such obligation our Federal Government properly conceived the idea of utilizing hydro power for the purpose of generating electricity as a byproduct of soil conservation and irrigation. The Inter- national Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL, heartily endorsed and diligently sup- ported the idea. However, in the interval since the inaugu- ration of this program there have been de- veloped and institited procedures engen- dered by a false concept of the fundamentals of Americanism. The Rural Electrification Administration was brought into being for the purpose of facilitating the transmission of electricity into rural sections. Under the Government power program, however, the facilitating in- tent has been substituted for by a plan in- volving what could well be and assumes all the aspects of the first step in the evolution of governmental ownership of the genera- tion, transmission, and sale of electricity to the individual consumers. Under this pro- gram the operations of the Rural Electrifi- cation Administration combined with the functioning of the Bureau of Reclamation, Department of the Interior, and the Army engineers, have extended the scope of the program to a point that threatens peril to legitimate free enterprise. The scope of the program now embraces the generation of electricity by power other than that procured through irrigation and flood control, steam as an instance; the dis- tribution of electric power and the sale of electric power in direct competition with pri- vately owned electric utility companies. The Rural Electrification Administration, through its financing of cooperatives, has proceeded to the extent of using public moneys supplied by the taxpayers for the puilding of electric transmission lines paral- lel to existing privately owned distribution systems, The progress of this procedure is such as to clearly indicate complete dupli- cation of transmission facilities in competi- tion that can only lead to extermination of private utility companies. Such complete extermination has been accomplished in the State of Tennessee and is rapidly approaching completion in the State of South Carolina and is making rapid progress in the State of Nebraska. In pursuing the above policy the Rural Electrification Administration has lowered the quality of work standards and ignored the rights of electrical workers to bargain collectively. The resulting situation is anomalous in- deed. In the first instance while the funda- mental policies of the Federal Government champion the rights of labor to organize and bargain collectively, the Administration of the Rural Electrification completely ignores these rights of labor. In the second instance one branch of Government is engaged in the prosecution of trusts and combines on the premise that the operation of such trusts is inimical to the common weal. At the same time a department of the Government is nurturing a governmental monopoly of the generation, distribution, and sale of the greatest power man has mastered for in- dustrial production, home necessities, and public convenience. The International Brotherhood of Elec- trical Workers does not raise its voice on the subject of public power in behalf of private companies or their management. We have met the abuses of power by these com- panies in the past and have achieved sub- stantial correction. Today 90 percent of the workers in the privately owned electric light and power industry are covered by union contracts and the IBEW itself represents more than 75 percent of the organized em- ployees in this industry. The International Brotherhood of Elec~ trical Workers raises its volce on the subject of public power at this time in the interest of organized labor in the electric light and power industry. The subtle transformation of the Government program from the proper purposes of providing power as a byproduct of the initial program and of furnishing a “yardstick” for private utilities has reached the stage where it threatens free enterprise in this industry. We support free enter- prise not only in our capacity as citizens of the United States but also in our capacity as representatives of organized labor. The in- crease in the area of Government and quasi- Government ownership operation in utilities necessarily carries with it a decrease in the area of freedom for labor as well as other groups. Labor cherishes its right to bargain collec- tively for wages, hours, and working condi- tions. It fights the abrogation of such rights whether in the form of antilabor laws or in the more complicated form of transferring APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD their status to employees of the Government without any rights to bargain collectively or otherwise exercise their economic strength. The International Brotherhood of Electri- cal Workers has had drastic experience with the effect on its interests resulting from the transfer of utilities from private to public or quasi-public ownership. In a recent case where the ownership of a utility was transferred to a municipality the IBEW was deprived of collective bargain- ing rights by an order of the court even though the majority of voters of the munic- ipality had enacted an ordinance requiring their officials to bargain with the union. Labor does not choose to have its welfare determined by the administrative orders of Government officials no matter how Well-in-~ tentioned they may purport to be. Under fascism, nazism, and communism the people work for the State. Under the policies inaugurated by the Rural Electrifica- tion Administration those employed on elec- trical properties work for the Government under the guise of cooperatives. It is a dis- tinction without a difference. That the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers has been cognizant of these developments for some time was indi- cated by its expressed concern in 1948, when its mnternational president, D. W. Tracy, in an address before the members of the Edison Electric Institute, in the course of his re- marks said: “I would not be talking heart to heart in a manner consistent with my expressed de-~ sire in my earlier remarks if I did not say: we need and must have more democracy in Government and more democracy in busi- ness with less Government interference in business and in labor. In an effort to pre- vent possible misunderstanding of my state- ment I emphasize the fact that the Inter- national Brotherhood of Electrical Workers endorses, advocates, :nd defends the profit system. Call it capitalism if you will but the fact remains the system 1s an element of Americanism because it is the economic system of our land and has contributed to the higher standard of living in this country which at once becomes the envy and the hope of common people in foreign lands.” The international executive council of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers today endorsed the action of Inter- national President Tracy and unanimously subscribed to this public release in defense of freedom of labor, in defense of freedom of legitimate enterprise, and in defense of freedom of cooperation between both to the benefit of the commonweal through safe- guarding the elements of Americanism, against assault, by authoritarian or State power on the liberties that have identified America as the country where labor has an effective voice in the establishment of con- ditions of its employment. Jefferson Davis EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. J. HARDIN PETERSON OF FLORIDA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, June 6, 1950 Mr. PETERSON. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- oRD, I include the following address de- livered before United Daughters of the Confederacy by Congressman ARTHUR Winstead, United States Capitol, Stat- uary Hall, Saturday, June 3, 1950: Madame Chairman, members of the United Daughters of the Confederacy, ladies and
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD gentlemen, our meeting here today is prompted by our desire to pay tribute to a great American, a citizen of Mississippi and the South and a leading figure of all time in this great Republic. Jefferson Davis, the first, last, and only president of the Con- federacy, was no doubt misunderstood and criticized more by those who did not know the facts, or who cared nothing for the facts, than probably any other American. There were those who held Jefferson Davis responsible for the secession of the Southern States and also for the War Between the States, but the record does not so reveal. The record shows that he fought for the right of the States to secede under the Con~ stitution, but never advocated that they do so. The record also shows that after the Southern States did secede he remained loyal to them because of his belief that they were acting according to their constitutional rights. In an address delivered by Bishop A. Gallo~ way at the University of Mississippi, June 3, 1908, he had this to say: “Mr. Davis had his limitations, and was not without his measure of human faults and frailties; but he also had extraordinary gifts and radiant virtues and a brilliant genius that rank him among the mightiest men of the centuries. He made mistakes, because he was mortal, and he excited antagonisms because his convic- tions were stronger than his tactful graces; but no one who knew him, and no dispas- sionate student of his history, ever doubted the sincerity of his great soul or the absolute integrity of his imperial purpose. Let us, on his anniversary day, learn some patriotic les- sons from the life history of this greatest Mississippian. Jefferson Davis began his life well. He had a clean boyhood, with no tendency to vice or immorality. That was the universal testimony of neighbors, teach- ers, and fellow students. He grew up a stranger to deceit and a lover of the truth. He formed no evil habits that he had to correct, and forged upon himself no chains that he had to break. His nature was as transparent as the light that shone about him; his heart as open as the soft skies that pent in benediction over his country home; and his temper as sweet and cheery as the limpid stream that made music in its flow through the neighboring fields and forests.” Jefferson Davis had an accomplished’ war record in the defense of the United States. He served in many and varied capacities. As a Member of the Senate, in the opinion of many, he served at a time when no doubt the Senate was composed of more outstand- ing and able Senators than at any other time. With such men as John C. Calhoun, Danicl Webster, Henry Clay, Stephen A. Douglas, and many others, he was deseribed at that time as “eloquent among the most eloquent in debate,” and worthy to be ‘the premier at any council table of American statesmen. The historian Prescott pro- nounced him “the most accomplished” Mem- per of the body. Senator Henry Wilson of Massachusetts afterward spoke of him as “the clear-headed, practical, dominating Davis,” Jefferson Davis was sincerely and unfalter- ingly devoted to the doctrine of State sover- eignty and all the practical questions which grew out of this doctrine. He held stead- fastly to the fundamental fact that the Union was composed of separate, independent, sov- ereign States, and that all Federal power was delegated, specifically limited, and clear- ly defined. He never lost sight of the fact that the Articles of Confederation declared that “each State retain its sovereignty, free- dom and independence, and every power, jurisdiction and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States in Congress assembled,” and that this principle was transferred intact to the Constitution itself. Jefferson Davis stood on the doctrine that one function of sover- eignty was the right to withdraw from a compact, if occasion demanded. Quoting again from Bishop Galloway: “Jefferson Davis’ farewell to the United States Senate, in which he had so long towered as a com- manding figure, and where he had rendered his country such distinguished service, was one of the most dramatic and memorable scenes in the life of that historic Chamber. Mississippi, by solemn ordinance, and in the exercise of her sovereign right, had severed her relation with the Union, and he, as her representative, must make official announce- ment of the fact, surrender his high com~ mission, and return home to await the fur- ther orders of his devoted people. It was a supreme—a fateful hour—in our country’s history. The hush of death fell upon the Chamber when Jefferson Davis arose. The trusted leader, and authoritative voice of the South, was about to speak, and an anx- ious Nation was eager to hear. Every Sena- tor was in his seat, Members of the House stood in every available place, and the gal- leries were thronged with those whose faces expressed the alternating hopes and fears of their patriotic hearts. The fate of a Nation seemed to hang upon that awful hour. “Pale, sad of countenance, weak in body from patriotic grief and loss of sleep, evi- dently under the strain of sacred, sup- pressed emotion, and yet with the calmness of fixed determination and settled convic- tion, the majestic Senator of Mississippi stood hesitant for a moment in painful si- lence. The natural melancholy in his face had a deeper tinge as if the shadow of his country’s sorrow had been cast upon it. His good wife, who witnessed the fateful scene and felt the oppressive burden that almost crushed the brave heart of her great hus- band, said that had he been bending over his bleeding father, needlessly slain by his countrymen, he could not have been more pathetic and inconsolable. At first there was a slight tremor in his speech, but as he proceeded his voice recovered its full, flute- like tones and rang through the Chamber with its oldtime clearness and confident strength. But there was no note of defi- ance, and he spoke no word of bitterness or reproach. He was listened to in profound silence. Hearts were too sad for words and hands too heavy for applause. Many eyes, unused to weeping, were dimmed with tears. And when he closed with these solemn words, there was a sense of unutterable sor- row in the entire assembly. ‘Mr. President and Senators, having made the announce- ment which the occasion seemed to me to require, it only remains for me to bid you a final adieu.’ ” Jefferson Davis returned to his Lome in Mississippi. He did not seek nor desire the leadership of the Confederacy, which was thrust upon him by unanimous vote, and from which the people who knew of his great and outstanding abilities and who trusted his leadership, refused to release him. He, therefore, felt constrained to ac- cept the Presidency and the responsibilities of the office. The South felt that peace with two governments was better than a union of discordant States. Horace Greeley himself said: “If the cotton States shall decide that they can do better out’of the Union than in it, we insist on letting them go in peace.” Aware of the possibility for war, the South- ern States seceded without the least prep- aration for it, There were no guns, no establishments for their manufacture or re- pair, no soldiers or vessels had been pro~ vided in preparation for war, either offensive or“defensive, The South’s desire was to live in peace and friendship with their late con- federates, and did all they possibly could to accomplish this end. We all know now that many sincere and outstanding leaders in our Nation, from both the North and South, earnestly sought some method by which their differences might be recognized and settled without conflict. Yet, because of agitators, A4239 radicals, and propaganda by unscrupulous persons, the dreadful conflict resulted. It was only when the Federal Fleet set out for Fort Sumter that the realization came to the South that war was upon them. We can all see now that had the truth been known and understood as to the intent and purpose of such leaders as Jefferson Davis, and other southern leaders, as well as some of the northern leaders who sought a peaceful so- lution, this tragic war would never have occurred. Thus today every true American, from both North and South, should appreciate this great United States of ours and our form of Government, which we must retain. The southern boys have volunteered for service in the two wars of this generation as freely, if not more so, than have the boys in any section of the country. They have bravely fought in defense of the flag of the United States of America and for the protection of peace-loving people everywhere. Today, with the cold war raging, with communism spreading in every area of the world, with some in our own midst, it behooves each of us to be tolerant and understanding of each other’s problems and to keep a united Amer- ica. With atomic bombs, the possibility of H-bombs, and other modern methods of war- fare, it is absolutely essential that we keep ourselves united and strong. It is sad in- deed that in these crucial times we have some people who would stir up racial strife and prejudice and hatreds and divide our people jn order to perpetuate themselves politically and for other selfish purposes. Many of us today believe in State sovereignty, in the constitutional processes of government, and that States can better regulate their own problems, in many cases, than can the Fed- eral Government. We believe it essential that these principles be retaine? if our Na- tion is to stand. We have understanding, appreciation, and cooperation in the Southern States today. We recognize our differences and our prob« lems and we believe in solving such differ ences and problems in a peaceful and honor- able way. We find agitators today as we found them in previous years, who would divide and conquer, who would stir up strife and turmoil. There are those who advocate the so-called civil rights program, including FEPC, with the might of the Federal Gov- ernment to be used to enforce social change. Surely we oppose the efforts of these agita- tors who are trying to stir up trouble in our section of the country where we have lived peacefully as two races for these many years. There is not much difference in the opinions of honest people in the North and South who want to promote the welfare of all our people, work toward a better understanding and improve the economic conditions of the Negro in both sections. However, there are those of us who believe firmly that these problems can better be solved by local peo- ple, rather than by Federal legislation—much of which we of the Southern States believe to be unconstitutional. It is indeed strange that the great mass of those who advocate such legislation as FEPC, and other measures directed toward the South, come from sections of the coun~- try where there is more discrimination than is practiced in the South. Sections, other than the South, have more subversive groups, more Communists, more agitators, more ra~ cial prejudice and discrimination than there is anywhere in the South. The South was one of the most poverty-stricken areas, after the War Between the States, that could be found anywhere, yet there has never been any place of communism in the South. We had no Marshall plan, we had no ECA, we had no financial support from the Federal Government, but in many cases we had Federal interference. Our forefathers had a will to do and a willingness to work and so built a great segment of this Nation. With brave hearts they worked. Men and
A4240 women, with common understanding and mutual agreement, labored together for the betterment of all the people. We feel that they worked well in spite of few tools with which to work, with little or no capital. These fine people of our beloved Southland have through the years developed a splendid area, an area of industrial progress and agricultural advancement. In the last- 20 years we have made more progress than any section of the Nation. Today, at a time when much of the Na- tion’s energies and efforts are being used to hold back communism abroad and to weed communism out of Government at home, we do not have to worry about communism in the South. Today, as in the days of Jefferson Davis, we are faced with problems caused by those who would destroy constitutional processes. We would not have armed conflict, but by every peaceful and constitutional means at hend, those of us in Congress, those in every walk of life must band ourselves together to oppose those who would destroy local self-government, those who would create an all-powerful national state, which, through the use of Federal force, would control the individual, destroy his initiative. Though such movements are offered in the name of liberty, it is the same thing that has led to the dictatorships abroad and would even- tually destroy our great Nation at home. Many of us are making the fight against such programs. We are striving in every way to protect local self-government. We believe that if the American people can be made aware of these dangers, these problems can be solved and free people will continue to run their own affairs. Today, as we honor the great American, Jefferson Davis, and the many others who had a part in giving us in the South so great a heritage, may we re- affrm.our faith in our beloved Southland and pledge anew allegiance to the principles upon which this, the greatest Nation on earth, was founded. As Jefferson Davis said in the only book he ever wrote of that tragic period of our history: “It is needful that the truth, the whole truth, should be known so that crim- ination and recrimination may forever cease, and then on a basis of fraternity and faith- ful regard for the rights of the States there may be written on the arch of the Union ‘Esto perpetua.’” Anthracite Research Laboratory REMARKS OF HON. DANIEL J. FLOOD OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, June 6, 1950 Mr. FLOOD. Mr. Speaker, as part of my program in the interest of the great anthracite coal industry and the vital area in which it is located, as well as in the interest of the general national wel- fare and security, I have, this day, intro- duced a bill to provide for the establish- ment and operation of an anthracite re- search laboratory at Wilkes-Barre, Pa. This is the third in a series of bills I think necessary for the immediate aid, and for a long-range plan, to render as- sistance to a major segment of the Na- tion’s economic life. The first of these bills was for the construction of an office building, garage and storage center at Wilkes-Barre, Pa., for the field head- . quarters, in the anthracite area, of the - Bureau of Mines of the Department of the Interior. The second bill in the pro- gram was introduced by me last week, and that was for the Government pur- chase and stockpiling of anthracite coal to guarantee production and employ- ment. And now I present to the House this bill, which looks to the future and calls for a full-scale, all-out, effort on the part of the Government, science and the industry itself, to preserve and de- velop further, this great mineral gift which Almighty God, in his bounty to America, placed in the hills and valleys of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I have insisted from the floor of this House, time and time again, that the Federal Government has a great burden of responsibility to the anthracite industry. Two weeks ago, in support of my plan for stockpiling, I said: To a great extent the major part of the economy of the Northeastern United States is dependent upon the mining of anthracite in the anthracite coal fields of Pennsylvania. The problems of this vast mining in- dustry are not alone those of the day-to- day production and marketing, but must include those of preservation, readjust~ ments, improvements, new uses for an~ thracite—and we find that these factors call for legislative assistance. It will be suggested that there is a newly built anthracite laboratory soon to be opened in the lower coal fields of Pennsylvania. For this gesture from the Government we are grateful. But make no mistake about it, this so-called labora- tory is a mere gesture in the face of the magnitude of the economic problem which faces the Nation in this urgent drive to succor this basic fuel industry. In a small and limited way and within the narrow scope of its purpose, the re- cently built laboratory will render a dis- tinct and welcome service. But keeping in mind the vast potential to the national welfare inherent in the hard coal economy—mineral, manpower, financial, and defense—the present lab- oratory isa teakettle. The full brilliance, imagination, and skill of American science; the unlimited storehouse of American know-how must have the co- operation, encouragement, and substan- tial financial aid of the Government it- self. The combination of these elements properly housed will, as always, do their full share in contributing to this phase of the over-all plan to revive and develop and enlarge the scope of anthracite in America’s future abundance. This is a major problem and calls for major action. We must profit by the now well-known adage “Too little and too late.” The site designated in the bill is Wilkes-Barre, Pa., in the very heart of the anthracite-coal fields. Twice as many hard-coal miners—35,000—work in this locality as in any other part of the hard-coal fields—nearly half the total of the men still employed in anthracite-coa] mining. The Anthracite Coal Institute is located in Wilkes-Barre. This body represents over 80 percent of the anthra- cite producers in the country. The main offices of the Glen Alden Coal Co. is in Wilkes-Barre. This company is the big- gest single producer of anthracite in the APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD world. The producers are eager to ex- tend full cooperation of their skills, ex- perience, mines, and so forth. Labor is anxious that this laboratory be built; that this work be under way at once. The 1,000,000 people who depend on the in- dustry in this limited area, where the hard coal is found, look hopefully for this kind of practical help. We do not want a dole. We do not want the United States Treasury to put a@ permanent prop under the anthracite. But we are in trouble, we do need emer- gency, temporary help and we ask for this great laboratory as assurance that we can work our way out of this problem into a brave new future for our area and our country as well as our families, our businesses, our self-respect, and our peace of mind and heart. We abhor communism. You will find none of this evil in the hard-coal country—did you ever stop to think of that? We do not want Government censorship or dicta- torship—we do not want socialism—but we do want Uncle Sam to help us out of a tight spot and to help us see the right road for us to follow into the years ahead. Research in anthracite—the develop- ment of assistance in matters pertaining to new and more effective methods of us- ing anthracite, new fuel uses, nonfuel uses of anthracite—all of these things call for a complete and unreserved ef- fort. This will not permit, not now, any halfway measures, a gesture here, a meeting there, a suggestion, an idea, good, bad, indifferent. No longer can we meet this issue halfheartedly. Mr. Speaker, this is a desperate cause. This is no boys’ game. We need a labo- ratory, not a coffee pot. The facilities of Wilkes College and King’s College, both institutions of high learning and repute, will be at hand with all the other advantages so necessary and peculiar in need to the purposes I en- visage in the operation of this wonder- ful scientific giant. Think what added courage this will give to the strong hearts of the hard coal peoples. We are being assailed on all sides by competitive fuels. We do not protest mere competition, but when our competi. tors receive preferment we seek equal righis. Even now, with the limited ef- fort the economic status of the industry will permit, a new world is opening for the use of anthracite. In addition to sponsoring research work on improved equipment for utilizing anthracite as a heating fuel, research will bring to the public a long list of nonfuel uses of an- thracite. Some of the present new fuel uses of anthracite are graphically shown as acid-resisting vats, and so forth; ac- tivated carbon; battery plates; black concrete roads; carbon brushes; carbon electrodes; carbon refractories; carbon structural forms; carburizer; cement kilns; desludging agent in oil refining; diaphragm plates; electric furnace re- sisters; filter medium; flashlight bat- teries; foundry cupolas; foundry facing; heat transfer tubes; manufacture of briquets; manufacture of chemicals; manufacture of coke; manufacture of graphite; manufacture of producer gas; paper mill digester blocks; paint pig-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ment; reduction of ores; sintering of ores; telephone granular carbon. Figures are not available at the pres- ent time which would give in detail the size of the total anthracite nonfuel market. However, listed below are au- thoritative figures on the approximate annual tonnage involved in the major applications: Cupola fuel... 100, 000 Filtering 1-2-2 7, 000 Foundry facing-~---_------. 3, 000 Manufacture of briquettes__....__ 926, 000 Manufacture of chemicals...tii.. 1, 000 Gas producers_..------..-------~ 645, 000 Manufacture of coke_._-...------ 256, 000 Manufacture of electrodes__..._.. 17, 000 Ore sintering..--.------....--... 257, 000 Special uses__..----.---~-~-~.--- 121, 000 A 0) 12) 2, 333, 000 The building of this great laboratory and the execution of this program em- braces the whole broad vision of econom- ics and technology. These things have been talked about for years. The vari- ous Government agencies have lamented the need for a plan, a program of action. Well, Mr. Speaker, here it is. I want to sce all of these well-wishing Govern- ment departments get behind it. The use of an abundant supply of energy-resource material has made the United States of America the great world power that itis today. I have, as I have mentioned, legislation now in the House dealing with the immediate fuel-produc- tion problems and the guaranty of the continued fuel supply if national defense measures ever curtail the use of oil and gas for such purposes, especially domestic heating. A major readjustment in the fuel- energy economy of the country has been taking place during the past several decades. This proposed laboratory will devote a phase of its work to this impor- tant fleld. New markets beyond the realm of the traditional fuel use must be discovered for anthracite. The potential has no bound- ary. We cannot afford to neglect to explore this territory further when such little experiment, as now accomplished, promises such rich opportunities. Improved metallurgical processes and scarcities of Important mineral resources all demand this great and dramatic effort. Do not forget that anthracite coal was the original fuel in the open hearth furnaces in the production of steel. The return of anthracite to this vital use alone would justify this proposed labora- tory and operating fund of $10,000,000. The fantastic discoveries of iron ore in South America will place this raw ma- terial for steel, when it arrives on our Atlantic seaboard, just a few miles from the anthracite coal fields of Pennsyl- vania. Imagine this boon to our econ- omy, the harnessing of hard coal open hearth steel production units to the un- limited Venezuelan jron ore deposits in the coal fields of Pennsylvania! Such a venture in itself would justify a sum ten times $10,000,000—if only for the experiment—and yet we know it is a practical and economic and desirable fact, including the fact of geography. Liquid fuel from hard coal; gaseous uses from hard coal; here are other avenues down which experimentation must go— and at once. No panacea for anthracite industrial ills exists or can be concocted. At once voices will rise against this proposal. “It’s too late’ some will say. Other “Gloomy Gus” cries will be heard. “Not worth the money” and “Coal is finished.” We have no time for these “Sad Sacks.” We are going places and we are in a hurry! Mr. Speaker, anthracite being a fuel and a source of important basic materi- als entering into the industrial pattern of the country should be a relatively sim- ple product to link successfully into the present and future national economy. Experience and research, but of neces- sity on the large scale required by this bill, should join to define and later en- large the areas of opportunity for the industry. There remains two further pieces of legislation in my program of short- and long-range aid to the anthracite indus- try and northeastern Pennsylvania. These bills will include provision for the benefit of areas suffering from chronic unemployment and a plan to develop the many phases of the general economy of the area and surrounding and adjacent areas. These steps will come in due course—as for now—the $10,000,000 an- thracite laboratory program. Mr. Speaker, to prevent the loss to the national economy of this vital natural resource and economic disaster to mil- lions of our citizens and to promote the general welfare, I have introduced this bill. Point 4 Program EXTENSION OF REMARKS F HON. JAY LeFEVRE OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, June 6, 1950 Mr. LEFEVRE. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include an editorial taken from today’s New York Times. Mr. Speaker, the President signed the bill yesterday for over $3,000,000,000 to con- tinue the ECA program. I voted for this bill when it was before the House believ- ing that we should finish the job we started in helping the European coun- tries to become self-sufficient again. Having seen the damages brought on by the war in 1945, in many parts of Europe, I felt that we really had a moral obliga- tion to give assistance to these countries. I did not believe that the point 4 program should have been attached to the ECA bill. In approving of this fea- ture, we are embarking on a new venture which it seemed to me deserved much further study. No one can deny that the objective of the point 4 program is a@ very worthy one. We all would like to see every nation in the world further developed and given a higher standard A4241 of living. My fear is that we are reach- ing out a little too far at a time when a good many countries are depending upon the solvency and strength of the United States. We know that $35,000,000, the amount in the ECA bill to carry out the point 4 program, is only a drop in the bucket. This is the first step. The Committee on Ways und Means have worked long and hard in an effort to bring out a new tax bill. From all corners of our country we have been urged to reduce the emergency excise taxes. The committee has approved of some reductions but in an effort to sat- isfy the President to increase other taxes in order to offset the reduction in excise taxes, the committee has run into many snags. To my way of thinking, some of the suggestions have been very unfair. How could they approve of an increase in the taxing of surpluses of savings banks and building and loan associations and at the same time refuse to tax other mutual associations who are in competi- tion with private enterprise. Yesterday @& member of the committee brought to our attention a bill before the committee asking the American taxpayers to appro- priate $85,000,000 to build reads in four countries or provinces which I doubt whether any of us had even heard of. Mr. Speaker, this is going too far. We must have unity among our own people and we certainly cannot get that by fur- ther burdening our taxpayers. We must give some real consideration to the wel- fare of our own industries so they in turn can give full employment to our own large segment of labor which needs pro- tection in many lines at this time. Poinr 4 Brecins In signing the act authorizing the ex- penditure of $3,120,550,000 for foreign eco- nomic assistance during the coming fiscal year, President Truman emphasized yester- day that the major new step forward in it is represented by one of its smallest items—the $35,000,000 for the point 4 program. This is the bold new program for the development of underdeveloped areas proposed by Mr. Truman in his inaugural address more than 16 months ago, to provide a start for a great international cooperative enterprise for the achievement of a world of peace, plenty, and freedom. Because of the political circum- stances under which it was launched it has only recently been approved by Congress over stubborn opposition. But now it is incor- porated into law; Capus M. Waynick, Am-~ bassador to Nicaragua, has been named as preliminary director of it, and assuming that the authorization will be followed by actual appropriation of the funds, the program is at last on its way. Other programs in the economic aid act carry far larger authorizations. But these programs are temporary, cesigned to over- come the immediate ravages and dislocations of the war. The point 4 program is a long- range program designed not only to main~ tain the gains achieved by the other pro- grams but also to provide an instrument for expanding world economy on the basis cf private initiative and free enterprise as the best means of promoting democracy and free- dom. In that sense it may he regarded, like the equally long-range North Atlantic Pact, as another potentially tremendous contribu- tion to the defense of the free world against Russo-Communist imperia‘:sm. The first steps contemplated under this program call for technical assistance to underdeveloped areas on an organized and
AA242 sustained basis in cooperation with the United Nations, individual governments, and private organizations already engaged in this work. But, as Mr. Truman again emphasizes, and as the United Nations subcommission on economic development agrees, the main support of the program will have to come from private capital invested on a business basis which will relieve governments of the burdens of the present recovery programs. This demands a new approach to the prob- lem of foreign investment. On the one hand, as the United Nations subcommission urges, underdeveloped coun- tries, proiected from colonial exploitation, will have to create an atmosphere congenial to such investments in order to attract pri- vate capital. On the other hand, private capital will have to forego excessive profits previously justified by political instability in the investment areas. The proposed par- tial Government guaranties for private cap- ital against confiscation or freezing of profits, and specific treaties protecting such investments, are among the ways to achieve these ends. But in the long run the success of the program will depend on good faith and energy on both sides. Censorship in Radio EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. STEPHEN iM. YOUNG OF OHIO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, June 6, 1950 Mr. YOUNG, Mr. Speaker, the atten- tion of the Members of this House has previously been drawn to the proceed- ings of the Federal Communications Commission against radio stations KMPC, of Los Angeles; WGAR, of Cleve- land; and WJR, of Detroit. Quite re- cently my distinguished colleague from New York, Congressman TavRIELLo, in an address on this floor, challenged the propriety of the Federal Communica- tions Commission’s using—as one of its star witnesses—a man by the name of Clete Roberts who, while on the witness stand, had the effrontery to classify all southern Italians as “not being worth a tinker’s damn.” At this point I want to wholeheartedly agree with my colleague in challenging the credibility of such a witness as Roberts, and I also want to compliment him for his staunch support of all individuals in this country of southern Italian extraction. No one can look into the faces of little Italian chil- dren and meet daily with Italians for more than 2 years without forming a high opinion of and strong affection for Italian people. - I served in a humble capacity with the Fifth Army in Italy throughout the bitter war years. I was in every part of Italy from Salerno to the Swiss border and in the great offensives of the Fifth Army and on the Anzio-Nettuno beach- head. I was in constant contact with the Italian people. I repudiate from my very soul as slanderous and untruthful the statement of this witness, Roberts. Over and above the fact that when Congress created the Federal Communi- cations Commission and gave it certain authority over radio and other methods of communication and wrote into the act a definite ban against any form of censorship—over and above this all-im- portant fact—I am interested in this matter because there seems to be a defi- nite plan on the part of certain Repub- lican leaders to make this case a partisan issue. I have before me speeches which have been made on the ficor of the Sen- ate by such Republican leaders as the Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. Bripces], and the junior Senator from Michigan (Mr. Ferguson]. These speeches clearly indicate to me that they are using this particular case aS means of building up material for the coming No- vember elections. I have every reason to believe that other Republican Sena- tors will be speaking out in connection with this particular case. The purpose of my remarks today, therefore, is to serve notice that I am opposed to any form of censorship with regard to any phase of our communica- tions systems. I do not believe that the Republicans can succeed in taking credit for the preservation of this basic factor in our democracy, and I suggest that the Democratic Party could well take cog- nizance of what I believe is a well~ad- vanced plan on the part of the Republi- cans to use the present case as political propaganda. I have made it a point to look into this case and unhesitatingly state that if it is the plan of the Federal Communications Commission to penalize the owner of these stations because of his personal views, then the Federal Communications Commission is going far beyond any au- thority vested in it by Congress. Freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of the air waves are basic privileges which have made this democracy of ours the great Nation it is. I can hope that the Federal Communi- cations Comniission will keep this in mind. It might be well, Mr. Speaker, if this particular case were looked into by Republicans and Democrats alike. I have here an editorial of the Washing- ton Post under date of April 11 in con- nection with this matter and I add this editorial to my remarks as it deals with some very vital questions which have arisen as a result of this case against these three radio stations: SHapow or THE Crnsor A hearing of great importance to the radio industry and the public has recessed in California. It involves charges of bias and news-slanting against George A. Richards, the owner of KMPC in Los Angeles and two other powerful radio stations. Three for- mer employees of Mr. Richards charge that he ordered them to distort and color the news s0 as to discredit some individuals and groups and to reflect credit upon others. Since the Federal Communications Commission has no powers of censorship, the issue boils down to whether or not the licensee is a fit person to operate radio facilities subject to regula- tion in the public interest. Of course, no broadcaster is free to operate his station, using public facilities, solely as he may see fit. In the broad sense of the ‘word he must serve the public interest or give way to someone else who can, But the pub- lic interest thus to be served necessarily has a very broad meaning. The FCC is not at liberty to put a broadcaster off the air be- cause it may disagree with his viewpoint or because he may fall short of perfection in the management of his broadcasts. The his- tory of broadcasting in this country shows relatively few abuses of the freedom that APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Congress has granted to the licensees in shap- ing their own programs. That record is not such as to warrant the disciplining of broad- casters by the back-door method of finding them unfit persons to operate a radio station, unless their activities fall hopelessly below the minimum standards of public service. If the Silver Shirts, the Communist Party, the Ku Klux Klan, or a gang of outlaws were operating a broadcasting station to further their own interests, there would be no ques- tion about the necessity of withdrawing their license. But these are extreme cases. It would be a very different matter for the FCC to undertake to discipline a broadcaster be- cause of the manner in which he “played” the news. If Mr. Richards should be put off the air for trying to slant the news against the persons and groups that are anathema to him, where would such a policy end? To be consistent the Commission would then have to withdraw the licenses of stations slanting the news against other political figures and organizations. We do not be- lieve that the Commission has any standards that would be a safe guide in such a venture, and if it did the enforcement of such a policy would go seriously against the grain of our traditions. Every decision as to what shall go on the air and how it shall be “played” is likely to be influenced by the broadcaster’s or the newscaster’s prejudices. The best radio sta- tions and the best newspapers hold these prejudices in check struggling for fair and unbiased presentation of the facts. But it is common knowledge that slanted newspapers flourish, presumably because the people wish to read them. Would it be feasible for the Commission to put off the air a broadcaster catering to prejudices that were common with big metropolitan dailies in the same city? To be sure, the number of broadcast- ing channels is limited, but so are the oppor- tunities for publication of a dally newspaper, We doubt that the FOC can apply stricter policies In the regulation of broadcasting than the press generally applies without tak- ing upon itself an unmanageable problem of censorship, The public interest démands a wide range of freedom on the alr as well as in the press. The danger of the FCC em- barking on a policy of censorship seems to us much greater than the occasional abuse of freedom by HMcensees whose prejudices color their judgment. Arming of the Arab States EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. HUGH J. ADDONIZIO Or NEW JERSEY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, June 6, 1950 Mr. ADDONIZIO. Mr. Speaker, one of the most important problems con- fronting world peace today is the situa- tion in the Near East with respect to the sale of arms to the Arab states by Great Britain. The news last week that the free pow- ers have accepted a joint responsibility for the maintenance of peace in the Near East is truly welcome. Their detcrmina- tion to put a stop to the arms race en- gendered by British shipments of heavy arms to certain of the Arab states will depend upon the determination with which these assurances are administered. Certainly the large number of Mem- bers of the Congress who urged upon Secretary Acheson the three-power dis-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD cussion which has apparently resulted in this agreement will continue their in- terest and deep concern with the result of this development and will cooperate in seeing thal it brings the assurance of peace. This illustrates once again, I think, the lesson we have learned since World War II—winning and maintaining the peace is a daily job—it must be worked at just as hard, if not harder, than winning a war. Under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I herewith include an ad- dress made on this important subject on May 24, by my colleague, the Honorable AntTHONY F. TaurreLto, Member of Con- gress from New York: Appress or Hon. ANTHONY F. TAvuRIgLLO, MEMBER OF CONGRESS, BEFORE Mass MEET- Inc To PROTEST ARMING OF THE ARAB STATES By GREAT BRITAIN, MapIson SQUARE PaRK, New York Ciry, WEDNESDAY, MAy 24, 1950 Iam happy to be here this afternoon to discuss with you a matter which has been troubling me for some time. I have long taken an interest in the struggle for the establishment of the Jewish state and I have followed with keen interest the growth and development of Israel in tho last 2 years. To me, the situation today in the Near East is very disturbing. The fact that Eng- land is rearming the Arab states on an un- precedented scale, particularly Egypt, whom she Is supplying with jet planes, cannons, tanks, and other heavy military equipment is, in itself, a very grave situation. It is even more disturbing when we realize that our own State Department is giving its ap- proval to this British action and is thereby encouraging future trouble in the Middle East. It is for these reasons that I took the lead- ership in approaching my colleagues in Con- gress to organize concerted and bipartisan action to bring to the attention of Secretary of State Acheson the dangerous policy which he is following in the collaboration with Mr. Bevin. On March 28, a group of 32 Congressmen, headed by me, met with Mr. Acheson in his office and we spoke to him very frankly and bluntly about this situation, When the time approached for Mr. Ache- son’s departure for Europe to attend the Foreign Ministers Conference, we submitted to him a stutement signed by 51 Members of Congress in which we again indicated to him our views and objections. Yes, my friends, he sent us a reply just before he left Washington, but I don’t mind telling you that to me Mr. Acheson’s reply was painfully disappointing. It is simply a repetition of the allegations of the State Department during the last 83 months. There Js no need for me to go into a detailed analysis here. Mr. Acheson says, and I quote: “There has been no indication that the United Kingdom is diverting any undue proportion of its resources into military pro- duction.” I say to you, my friends, that this statement, to put it mildly, is misleading. The amount of arms and the kind of arms which England is diverting to the Arabs may not represent an undue proportion of Eng- Jand’s resources, but it certainly is out of proportion to the needs of the Arab states for their internal defense. Egypt and the other Arab states do not need jet planes and cannons for internal defense against their own people; these arms are intended for a purpose, and for one purpose only, for ag- gressive action against Israel in a war of revenge. Mr. Acheson prefers to close his eyes to the fact that there is an inconsistency between his words and his deeds. The right hand does not know what the left hand is doing. He fails to realize that there is a conflict be- tween the declared policy of the United States regarding peace in the Near East and the policy of our State Department which ap- proves the shipment of offensive arms by England to the Arab states. I said that in my public statements, I am saying it here today, and I shall keep repeating that the State Department’s approval of Britain’s arming of the Arabs is contrary to the estab- lished American policy and is an incitement to a renewal of war against Israel. All our efforts to bring to the realization of the State Department the serious situation and the dangerous path upon which it is treading have been answered with pious and meaningless words by Mr. Acheson. These words are being nullified every day as every delivery of arms reaches the Near East. These words are a mockery of our policy of professed friendship toward Israel. In fact, they are cruel toward the infant State of Israel because its very life is being threaten- ed by this overwhelming supply of arms to the Arab states by England, with the bless- ings of our State Department. I believe it is high time for us, as Americans, to insist that Mr. Acheson bring his action in line with the true American policy toward Israel—a policy of peace and not of war. The United States, which was the first country to extend recognition to Israel, owes @ moral duty to the inhabitants of the Jew- ish state and certainly to the 400,000 DP’s and other homeless Jews who came there in the last 2 years with the encouragement and financial support from this country. I say to you today that it is our moral obli- gation not to expose these people once again to slaughter; they have suffered enough al- ready. We are told that the rearmament of the Arabs is also dictated by the concept of security of the Middle East against a pos- sible attack by a third power. If that be so, then I ask: Why should not Israel be included in that program? Why is not Is- racl entitled to the opportunity of military preparedness against a possible assault by the Arab countries in view of their constant threat? To me, the policy of arming the Arabs and at the same time refusing to supply arms to Israel, is a policy of discrim- ination against Israel and favoritism toward the Arab states. The fair-minded people of this country will never acquiesce to such a policy of discrimination and they will never condone Mr. Bevin’s anti-Israel policies by placing the people of Israel at the mercy of fanatical Arab leaders. The rearming of the Arabs and at the same time the denial of arms to Israel is not the way to peace— it is the way to chaos and war. Israel is an outpost of democracy in the Middle East which is shaped in the image of our own American democracy. It is guided by American ideals of freedom, equal- ity, Justice, and liberty for all, regardless of race or creed or national origin. The United State needs Israel as an outpost of democ- racy as much as Israel needs us. It was all this that prompted me to take an interest in this problem and to try to persuade our State Department to avert a renewal of the war in the Near East before it is too late. Let Mr. Acheson beware of Mr. Bevin’s anti- Israel psychosis and not encourage the efforts of the Arab leaders who are eager for new bloodshed. I promise you here today that I shall con- tinue these efforts; I shall continue my en-- deavors to make the State Department realize that it is following a dangerous policy. I shall continue to do everything in my power until a permanent and lasting peace is estab- _ lished between Israel and the Arab states. A final word: Thank God we live in a de- mocracy—the American democracy. Through the force of enlightened American public opinion we shall compel the Department of State to listen and to act. The right hand A4243 shall know what the left hand is doing. Let this message go forth from this magnificent gathering: America will never desert Israel, as Israel never deserted America. Israel did not fail us. We shall not fail Israel. Pertinent Comment EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. J. CALEB BOGGS OF DELAWARE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, June 6, 1950 Mr. BOGGS of Delaware. Mr. Speaker, there is published each week in Wilmington, Del., one of the finest, if in fact, not the best, labor newspapers in this country. The newspaper to which I refer is the Labor Herald. In solid substantiation of my state- ments about this outstanding newspaper is the fact that the Labor Herald received national recognition in November 1949 when it was selected for one of the top awards of the Freedoms Foundation. The editor of the Labor Herald is Mr. Frank Saylor, who writes for each issue a column entitled ‘‘Pertinent Comment.” In this column Editor Saylor expresses his views on national as well as local af- fairs. Mr. Saylor expresses his views with thoroughgoing honesty, independ- ence and patriotism. Consequently, his incisive appraisals of matters of public interest are thought-provoked and merit the earnest attention and consideration of all of us. Mr. Speaker, I am fully confident that you and the other Members of this body will be in full accord with my previous statements when you read Mr. Saylor’s latest column which appeared in the La- bor Herald of June 3, 1950, which I am including below as a part of my remarks. _ Mr. Saylor’s column follows: PERTINENT COMMENT ON MATTERS or LocaL AND NaTIONAL INTEREST (By Frank Saylor) Attention is directed to the news article in columns six and seven which expresses the apprehensions of the executive council of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers of the trend toward the socialization of the electrical industry. Apparently there is a growing realization, here and abroad, that a joker accompanies many a package of so-called social gains. The electricians have found that they can’t deal with the Govern- ment as an employer as they did with pri- vately owned utilities; in fact, it’s possible that collective bargaining can be completely eliminated and working conditions arrived at on a take-it-or-leave-it basis. It’s only been 3 years ago that President Truman who for purely political purposes gags at the Taft- Hartley law proposed to draft the railroad labor force into the Army to break a strike. There are still some old-line unionists who didn’t fall for the idea of the Government leaning over backward to favor labor in what was essentially a vote-getting gesture rather than a manifestation of sympathy for men who work for wages. Incidents such as the threat of forced railway labor and refusal of the REA to bargain with the IBEW show how the wind’s blowing. Few Americans can con- ceive the possibility of a society made de- pendent upon Government, tasting in the
AA244 end involuntary servitude. For that matter neither could the people of England. When the Socialists took over mm England they an- nounced that they would, for the first time, demonstrate a planned society without forced labor. It took less than 2 years before they had to resort to forced labor, euphemistically calling the order a control- of-engagement order. It was to be tempo- rary, for the emergency only, and was limited to 14 months. Before its life expired, the time limit was extended for an additional year. Last year 1t was extended again, and 1s still in force. It is true that the order hasn't been widely resorted to, but there it is, a power in the hands of the government against that government’s pledge to recon- cile planning with freedom. First to awaken to the dangers of a society dependent upon Government was business, pig and small. However, for some strange reason, the objections of business and asso- ciations of Tusinessmen to economic pan- aceas was presumed to be prima facie evi- dence that fat cats were being gored and labor and so-called liberals continued their support of the planners. That the opposi- tion of business to economic experimentation which persistently came a cropper should operate to inspire a counterreaction attests the extent of the infiltration of Marxist thought and its concept of class antagonism. It has only been lately that labor has be-= come aware of the insidiousness of the Gov- ernment invasion into the field of labor leg~ islation. When labor asked for and got enforced collective bargaining, first in the Wagner Act and later in the Taft-Hartley law, it yielded its own freedom as the railroaders, the coal miners, and the electricians have come to realize. Right now there is a movement afoot for Government to come to the aid of small business. If this aid realistically went about aiding small business by reducing taxes, much could be sald for it, But no, the pro- posal is to extend Government credit and if that credit is accepted, those who accept 16 surrender control of their business. Another movement proposes legislation granting Federal aid for the public-school systems of the States. Some years ago it was believed that Federal aid would come to the rescue of the so-called poorer States by providing assistance when the need is greater than the State can bear. Since then there has been stich growing centralization of power in the Federal Government, and disre- . gard of the rights of the States and local authorities by the national administration that thinking educators have arrived at the conviction that Federal aid cannot be ac- cepted for public schools without ultimately losing control of them to the Federal Gov- ernment. Gov. J. Strom Thurmond, of South Caro- lina, is apprehensive of Federal aid to schools and decided that South Carolina can best take care of its own education. Says he: “We are already improving our school pro- gram, and the control of that program should pe retained in our communities and in the State, where our taxes can be made to yield their maximum returns. Will we gain by sending our educational dollars to Washing- ton, to be put through the Federal shrink- » ing machine? “The vital issue confronting us is whether we can maintain a locally supported and lo- cally controlled public-school system. This Nation has grown great because of our free public schools. They are the bulwark of our liberty and the backbone of our democ~- racy.” The point to it all is that there is a per- sistent drive toward bureaucratic dictator~ ship with men enslaving themselves by bar- gaining with government for favors at the expense of their freedom. There are heart- ening indications of a growing awareness of the trend. Best of all the awareness is not political. The trend cuts across party lines and is no longer the exclusive property of the Democratic Party which traded so suc~ cessfully upon it for a score of years. Labor, business, and educators ere beginning to sense that once there are Federal conces- sions, there 1s a yielding of freedom, a sur- render of control, and, in the recognition of racial groups in law, a possibility of being discriminated against by law. First ve had Secretary Acheson declaring that he would not turn his back on Alger Hiss, twice-convicted perjurer, and now it’s Judy Coplon, radiant in her wedding gown and awaiting sentence as a spy. Years ago guilt in such instances would have been the end of the road for Americans, and their names would have gone down 1n history for infamy. So far gone are our sense of values today that convictions for perjury and csp1o- nege, rather than being marks of infamy, might well be considered the prelude to a happier life, Patriotism? Why, patriotism is the refuge of scoundrels. Nationalism ? In it is the poison that causes war. Accord- ing to such lghts, to transmit confidential information to another nation is but ignor- ing narrow, arbitrary nationalistic barriers and as for being a yankee doodle dandy, that’s passé. Who knows but what in some future day, the way things are going, Hiss and Coplon will be put down in history as the prototypes of advanced world citizenry which is unhampered by outdated copybook morality? Aliceville, Ala., Seeking New Industries, Has Many Advantages To Offer EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CARL ELLIOTT OF ALABAMA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, June 1, 1950 Mr. ELLIOTT. Mr. Speaker, the town of Aliceville, in Pickens County, Ala., in the district which I have the honor to represent here, is a growing, public-spir- ited, neighborly and progressive town. Though situated in one of the best agricultural sections of Alabama, it real- izes the desirability of industrial growth and expansion, which together with its fine agricultural and cattle potential, will give it an economic balance that will raise the incomes of all its people. I said Aliceville was a growing town. Its population has doubled since 1940. I said Aliceville was a public-spirited town. This has been demonstrated a hundred times within the past few years in the manner in which its townspeople get together to put over a particular pro- gram or civic objective. The town is well kept, and its new buildings—and there are many of them—reflect the pride which their owners have in their town. Aliceville is a neighborly town, Its people get along well together. Both races of its people live in harmony and understanding. Its people and civic or- ganizations work together to promote its growth. Aliceville is progressive. Its new build- ings, its new businesses and industries all radiate a pride in its future. Soon it will have a new hospital toward the building of which the Federal Government will contribute two-thirds the cost, under the provisions of the Hill-Burton Hospital APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Construction Act of 1949. It has a hous- ing project, a swimming pool, a recrea-~ tion building. Under construction is a $25,000 cattle sales barn, a $100,000 fer- tilizer plant, a new modern picture show building. Alicevulle has a wonderful transporta- tion system, two railroads, several paved highways, and is located near the Tom- bigbee River which in the interest of national defense must be developed at an early date. The proposed connection of the Tombigbee and Tennessee Rivers will give Aliceville water, rail, and highway transportation. It has many natural advantages, fine people, good climate, high annual rain- fall, is surrounded by good farming and cattle lands, and an abundance of pine timber. Its transportation system gives it a superior connection with the grow-~ ing markets of the Southeast. It has an adequate supply of both white and colored labor for several new industrial enterprises. As a part of my remarks I include an article from the Aliceville Informer, pub- lished at Aliceville, Ala., in its May 24, 1950, issue styled ‘‘Aliceville as an indus- trial site,” written by Mr. G. N. Downer and his daughter, Miss Betty Downer: ALICEVILLE AS AN INDUSTRIAL SITE In connection with the coming Alabama Industry Days, G, N. Downer, with the help of his daughter Betty, has prepared the fol- lowing historical factual statement on our town: LOCATION Aliceville is located in the southwestern part of Pickens County, which is in the western part of Alabama, about 8 miles east of the Mississippi State line and about 100 miles west of Birmingham, 165 miles north- west of Montgomery, 35 miles southeast of Columbus, Miss., 86 miles north of Meridian, Miss. CLIMATE Aliceville has a temperate climate. The summers are long and warm, but the tem- perature seldom rises above 100° F. The winter temperatures rarely fall below freez- ing and then only for a day or two at the time. The average temperature for the win- ter months is about 47°, for the spring 64°, for the summer 79°. Rainfall is about 50 inches, well distributed. The average grow- ing season is about 230 days. POPULATION The population of Aliceville in 1910 was 640; in 1920 was 940; in 1930 was 1,066; in 1940 was 1,476. The census for 1950 has just been taken and we understand that it will run approximately 3,200 to 3,500 people. Most of the original settlers came from South Carolina, but many were from Ten- nessee, Georgia, North Carolina, and Vir- ginia. For the most part, the present popu- lation is descended from these, hut a few people from the North and Hast have come during recent years in connection with lum- ber and other industries. OCCUPATIONS The main occupations of the people of the community are, in importance: Agriculture, cattle, forestry, building industry, saw and planing mills, cotton mills, railroads, whole- sale and retail trade, professional service, and domestic and personal service, There is an abundance of labor available in this territory, some of which is skilled. The Alabama Mills has a plant in Alice- ville employing about 450 people, There are several large lumber companies and a large stave mill. Three cotton gins, seven large warehouses, a Coca-Cola bottling plant, sand
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. and gravel business, a machine shop, cold storage and we have under construction a $25,000 cattle sales barn and a $100,000 fer- tilizer plant. We have also, several first- class garages and repair shops. We have a very modern funeral home locally owned. We are especially proud of the fact that in the business district of Aliceville, we haven’tl a wooden building, all of them being masonry constructed. There is under con- struction now a modern picture-show bulld- ing equal to any in west Alabama. INDUSTRIAL SITES AND BUILDINGS The town secured from the Federal Gov- ernment the old prisoner-of-war camp, to- gether with the waterworks and sewage sys~ tem. This site has 132 acres of land with streets, sidewalks, railroad sidings, electrical installations and is adjacent to highway and railroad. This property is available to any industry wishing to locate here. Lo- cated on this property at the present time is @ $25,000 recreational building and a $25,- 000 swimming pool which is city owned and operated. COMMERCIAL Aliceville has one bank, the Aliceville Bank and Trust Co., with total resources of about $2,500,000. Business failures are unknown in our town and there are many high class merchandise establishments. MUNICIPAL The government of Aliceville is conducted by a mayor and five councilmen. The city has about 10 miles of paving and about 6 miles of sewage. The water supply of Aliceville comes from a system of deep wells, electric pumps and elevated standpipe with 563,000-gallon capac- ity. Gravity pressure 1s 68 pounds. Acequate fire protection is provided for a small town with a modern fire truck manned by a paid flre department. The city is ade- quately policed by a chief of police day and night. The city maintains a splendid school sys- tem presided over by a superintendent and 21 teachers. The junior and senior high have a@ registration of about 275 students wilh 10 teachers, and elementary school has an en- rollment of 339 students with 11 teachers, Aliceville schools are fully accredited and zealously maintain this high scholastic standing. It has all modern equipment in- cluding a gymnasium, lunchroom, lighted athletic field, vocational department and a good band and music department. The religious life of Aliceville 1s cared for by seven congregations. Most of these are modern brick buildings. We have a Rotary Club and chamber of commerce. Pickens County maintains a full time standard health unit. We think one of the best in the State. TELEPHONES The telephone system is owned by the Ala- bama Telephone Co., which is in close con- nection with the Southern Bell Telephone System. TAXES Pickens County has a reasonable tax rate— total State, county, and city being $3.10 per hundred, and assessments are reasonable and fair. The indebtedness of Pickens County is very small, due to efficient management of its county officials. After February 1951, Pickens County will be clear of debt, as we now have Federal bonds to liquidate all out- standing bonds on that date. POWER Light and power are furnished by Alabama Power Co. They have in the last few years built a high-powered line, replacing the old line. They maintain an office and mainte- mance crew in Aliceville and give excellent service. TRANSPORTATION Aliceville is well situated in regard to trans- portation. There are two railroads through Aliceville. The S. L. & 8S. F., which connects Pensacola to the great Middle West via Mem-~ phis, Tenn., and the A. T. & N., which was recently purchased by the S. L. & S. F. and was reconditioned at a cost of $3,000,000, connects the G. M. & O. at Reform and ter~ minates at the Alabama State docks in Mo- bile, giving us two deep-water ports. In addition to the railroad facilities, we have several motor freight lines. We have a network of paved highways. There are few towns with facilities as great as Aliceville’s transportation. LABOR Aliceville has never had any labor trouble whatsoever, and is not threatened by any. Our local labor is of a higher type than much imported labor which is found in Many other places. This 1s one of the big- gest factors in the industrial development of our town. SUMMARY ‘We need several small industries and our town is well situated for their development. We have good native-born American people, good church and school facilities, and an unusually strong bank for a small town. Health conditions are above the average. We have an abundance of good drinking water and a modern sewerage system. Our local industries at the present time represent approximately a million-dollar capital investment employing 600 people with an anual payroll of $2,685,000. Biggest Story EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KATHARINE ST. GEORGE OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, June 6, 1950 Mrs. ST. GEORGE. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the Appendix of the Recorp, I include the forty-third article by Mr. Frank C. Waldrop on the infiltration of communism in our country: Biacest Srory (By Frank C. Waldrop) For 5 cents you can get the official story entitled “Establishment of Diplomatic Re~ lations With the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.” Just apply to the Superinten- dent of Documents, Washington, D. C. This is absolutely indispensable material for anybody who wants to see what a fool Stalin made of Roosevelt from the very start of their many dealings. And since it is official, unqualified, and consists of the actual state papers exchanged petween Messrs. Roosevelt, Hull and other high dignitaries with their opposites in Rus- sia, nobody can argue very strongly that the facts are otherwise. These state papers will be reviewed here in summary. But first, some evidence on the climate of public sentiment and the propa- ganda of the hour, as the issue of recognition was coming to its climax in 1933. The big talk of the day was that recogni- tion would open up “vast” business opera- tions between the United States swamped in a surplus of goods, and famine-haggard Russia. As soon as Mr. Roosevelt was in office the talk got more positive than ever. Speaker of the House Rainey gave off a statement that is a fair sample. A4245 He declared the United States was losing at “least $500,000,000 a year’? in trade with Russia by delaying recognition. He said that he could vouch for that per- sonally, after having been to Russia on an inspection trip with the House Ways and Means Committee. He said that he found the Russian people “happy and contented and hard working.” Not long after that, Jesse Jones announced that the Reconstruction Finance Corpora- tion would grant a loan for the Soviet to buy cotton. Several “inside” columnists began to ex- pound the advantages of putting $1,000,000,- 000—that is one billion dollars—in credit at the disposal of the Soviet, who were declared most reliable credit risks. “They always pay their bills,’ was the slo. gan. And Mr. Raymond Moley, the white knight of the hour, was reported as having the specific Presidential assignment to talk over recognition in close detail when he should arrive in London for the famous economic conference that was supposed to rebuild world trade. Little attention was paid to the facts. In Russia, the people that Speaker Rainey de- scribed so falsely as “happy and contented” were actually suffering the ravages of famine. This was the period in which Stalin was at the worst of his attack on the farmers. The small landholders, familiar to the world as kulaks, were being kicked off their property and sent to Siberia. Russia was teetering on the edge of collapse and full revolt. At Geneva, preceding the London economic conference, there was a disarmament con- ference. And there, too, the drumfire of propaganda was that the United States of America would find in Russia an enormous hew market for our surplus goods. The American business community was bewitched with this fascinating prospect. But what were the facts? In fact, what little dealing foreign busi- ness had conducted with Stalin was already crashing, right and left. I have recounted earlier how Mr. Averell Harriman and some friends had their shirts ripped up the back in undertaking a gold exploration and min- ing concession in Siberia. That was in 1927-28, But allowing for the shortness of memory and the eternal gullibility of Wall Street bankers who cannot believe it when a man says he means to destroy them hoth in their work and personally in their lives—so vain can they become—consider a more current case. In 1933, to smash the last vestige of for- eigners’ standing with the Russians, Stalin ordered the arrest and trial of six British engineers working under a contract the Soviets had with the Vickers Co., a sort of combination General Electric and United States Steel. At the very moment Mr. Roosevelt was rushing headlong into Stalin’s trap, the British were in the midst of a terrific, open quarrel. The British diplomats had always been impressed with the firm intentions of Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin & Co., to cause a world revolution as they had said publicly and repeatedly. But pressure for trade, after 1918, had evolved from a mere commercial agreement to an exchange of ambassadors. Now, in 1933, the British started with- drawing. Their first act was to cancel all trade relations, using the attack on the Vickers engineers as a basis. The road was then open from there to a complete end ta diplomatic relations. They overlooked Roosevelt,
A4246 Fuel Oil in New England EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CHRISTIAN A. HERTER OF MASSACHUSETTS . IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, June 6, 1950 Mr. HERTER. Mr. Speaker, the fol- lowing testimony given by Mr. Eugene Holman, president of the Standard Oil Co.—New Jersey—before the Oil Imports Subcommittee of the Select Committee on Small Business of the House of Rep- resentatives is of particular interest to the New England area, where the con- tinued importation of certain types of oils is of great importance to industry, to the householder, and to the merchant fleet: FACTS ON THE IMPORTATION OF Or INTO THE Untrep STATES AND THE Pontcy or STANDARD Or Co, (NEw Jersry) on Or Imports ABUNDANT SUPPLIES OF FUEL ENERGY MEAN HIGH LIVING STANDARDS Modern production and transportation rest largely on a foundation of fuel. The burning of fuel in machines to augment the energy obtained from manpower and animal power can increase enormously the output of goods and their availability to consumers. The per capita consumption of fuel is an index of a nation’s standard of living. The United States uses energy at an annual rate of 284,000,000 British thermal units per capita. (As used here, the term refers to energy obtained from coal, petroleum, nat- ural gas, and hydroelectric power.) Al- though this country has but 6 percent of the world’s population, it accounts for 45 percent of world use of energy. All other nations combined consume, on the average, only one-tenth as much per capita. The only nation that even approaches our country in use of energy is Canada, whose per capita consumption is about 85 percent of ours. The European recovery plan nations use about 25 percent as much as we do on a per capita basis; Russia, 18 percent; Asia, 2 percent. By employing 10 times as much energy per person as the average for the rest of the world, the United States produces 2 to 4 times as much goods per labor-hour as even the most highly industrialized nations of Europe. In the United States the use of energy has increased about a hundredfold during the past century, and national income has been multiplied by almost the same amount over the same period. DIFFERENT FUELS MAKE VARYING CONTRIBUTIONS TO ENERGY SUPPLY The principal sources of fuel energy in the United States are coal, oil, and natural gas. The production, processing, and distribution of these fuels are carried on by thousands of business firms. These firms compete for pusiness in the particular industry in which they are engaged—that is, in the coal in- dustry, in oil, or in gas. But, In addition to such competition, there is competition be- tween fuels in the over-all energy market. Over the years the proportion of total energy supplied by the three fuels has varied, refiecling changing conditions of availability, competitive vigor, convenience, new uses and efficiencies developed through research, price differentials, and other factors. A century ago, for example, the entire fuel supply of the United States consisted of coal and wood. Then, in 1859, the first oil well was drilled in Pennsylvania, and petroleum began adding to the Nation’s fuel supply. In the early period of the oil industry, petroleum was chiefly useful as a source of kerosene for lighting, displacing whale oil almost entirely for use in lamps. Kerosene lightmge was, in turn, largely displaced by electric lighting, and the oil industry had to find new markets. With the coming of the automobile, a major shift developed in the oul industry. Oilmen, who had earlier made as much kero- sene as possible from their crude and had re- garded gasoline as a bothersome byproduct, now tried to reduce yields of kerosene and to increase the yields of gasoline. Automotive fuel became the principal product of the oil industry, and methods were sought and found to obtain more gasoline from crude oul than is naturally in it. Thus, although a profound change had occurred 1n the pattern of the Nation’s fuel needs, adaptability and research enabled the oil industry to keep on growing. More recently, further evolution of the fuel market has seen petroleum become out- standingly useful as a source of fuel for heating, for driving locomotives and ships, and for generating industrial power. And such evolution has not stopped. Today, natural gas is becoming increasingly im~- portant as an addition to total fuel supplies. In the future, atomic power, and heat from the earth and from the sun, may well make their contributions. It is clear, then, that the business of supplying energy is not a static one, and, as there have been shifts in it in the past, there are shifts taking place now and there will undoubtedly be more in the future. By bringing greater conveni- ences to consumers and by increasing the total of energy available to the Nation, such shifts have spelled progress for America. OIL PROVIDES A GREAT ADDITION TO THE NATION’S FUEL ENERGY In the gasoline business companies within the oil industry compete with one another. ' There is little or no competition for gasoline from nonpetroleum fuels because there is no substitute for liquid fuel in most kinds of small- and medium-sized mobile equipment. However, in the fields of space heating, marine and railroad transportation, genera- tion of electricity, and factory power, sup- pliers of petroleum fuels compete not only among themselves but also with suppliers of other fuels. In these flelds petroleum has been able to win and hold high con- sumer acceptance. Among factors that have puilt acceptance are oil’s efficiency, clean- liness, and convenience, as represented by high heat content in relation to bulk, ab- sence of ash, automatic feeding into com- bustion chambers, and ease of controlling the fuel flow in consuming equipment. The great importance of petroleum to the Nation’s supply of energy is indicated by the fact that use of oil in the United States has gone up 60 percent since 1940. This does not mean that oil has displaced an equiva- lent amount of other fuels over that period. On the contrary, the increase in the use of oil has represented an addition to the total amount of energy available to the Nation. In 1940 the energy used in the United States amounted to  24,200,000,000,000 B. t. u’s. It was obtained from 487,000,000 tons of coal, 1,300,000,000 barrels of oil, 2,600,000,000,000 cubic feet of natural gas, and 54,000,000,000 kilowatt-hours of hydro- electric power. In 1949 energy used in the United States had risen to 32,100,000,000,000 B, &. u.’s, ob- tained from 468,000,000 toms of coal, 2,100,- 000,000 barrels of oil, 5,500,000,000,000 cubic feet of natural gas, and 96,500,000,000 kilo- watt-hours of hydroelectric power. Thus it can be seen that, while coal made approximately the same contribution to the Nation’s energy supplies in 1949 as in 1940, the total energy available to the Nation was materially higher in 1949 because of addi- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD tions from other sources On the basis of heating value, oil supplied almost half of the mcrement. The amounts of energy used in the United States from 1940 to 1949 are shown, by sources, in chart 1. oln IS A MAJOR AMERICAN INDUSTRY The production of oil from domestic re- sources, its conversion into useful products, and the distribution of the products to mil- lions of consumers constitute one of the larg- est and most important of all American in- dustries. The great development of pe- troleum resources in this Nation has been a fundamental factor in the remarkable growth of our country and in its security. The strength and welfare of the Nation will continue to depend importantly on a suc- cessful and strong domestic oil industry. The industry makes its contribution to the energy supply of the United States princi- pally from oll deposits it has discovered and developed within this country. In addition to the oil it produces from domestic fields, however, the industry provides energy for the Nation through imports. Oil has been brought into our country 1n varying amounts for a long time; 35 years ago the United States was importing some 18,000,000 barrels a year. The oil industry also exports, and has done so for many years. In fact, American oil exports began within 2 years after the drill- ing of the Drake well at Titusville in 1859. Oil, for a number of reasons, is brought into the country at the same time that other oil is being shipped out. For example, im- ports are useful in providing types and quantities of oil that are not readily avail- able from domestic sources when needed. And oil is exported because many foreign nations that require substantial volumes of it have little or no petroleum production or refining facilities of their own and turn to the United States to buy special-purpose emides or, more importantly, finished prod- ucts. AMERICANS HAVE LARGE OIL INVESTMENTS ABROAD In the early years of the industry, Amer-~ ican oil was usually sold to consumers in foreign countries through third parties. In the 1880’s American oil companies began setting up facilities for carrying on direct marketing operations of thelr own. Amer- ican refining activity abroad began about this same time but remained relatively unim- portant until after World War I. Foreign crude oil production by Americans began around the turn of the present cen~ tury—first in Mexico and, a little later, in Rumania. By the time of our country's en~ trance into World War I there was American production also in Peru and, on a very small scale, in the Netherlands East Indies. Par- ticipation in foreign production increased markedly during and immediately after the First World War, and direct investments by American citizens in petroleum properties abroad had passed the $1,000,000,000 figure by 1930. Very large additions to such in- vestments have been made recently, and the total stands today at more than $3,000,000,~- 000. Americans have oil-producing proper- ties in 20 countries in both hemispheres, and almost half the proved oil reserves outside the United States are owned by American companies. Investments by Americans in petroleum properties abroad have been and are of great value both to the United States and to the world. In many countries operations of American oil companies have been a power~ ful factor in raising living standards. Em- ployment, vocational training, general edu- cation, modern housing, and health facilities have been provided for the nationals, who have been able to earn the means for pur- chasing material comforts they never knew before. Opportunities have been created for
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the establishment of many new businesses, and the whole economy has been quickened. Revenues flowing to the governments in the form of royalties and taxes have provided means for building roads, harbors, homes, hospitals, and schools. OVERSEAS OIL OPERATIONS BENEFIT OUR NATION IN WAR AND PEACE Oil deposits outside the United States, de- veloped by Americans, have been highly im- portant to the defense of the free world in two wars. In World War I the widespread use of oil-burning ships created a tremen- dous demand for heavy fuel oil. Mexican crudes were particularly suited to the pro- duction of this grade of fuel, and large quantities were imported into the United States. It may be noted here parenthetically that, when the fighting ended in 1918, world use of oil continued to rise, and Mexico be- came the leading oil-exporting nation. A large part of Mexican production was brought into the United States to offset deficiencies in domestic supplies, and in the 3 years 1920-— 22, for the first time in its history, the United States imported more oil than it exported. In World War II our domestic supplies of oil for industry and for the Allied armed forces were supplemented to an important extent by oil from Venezuela, and, in the later stages of the conflict, oil from the Mid- dle East was of great importance in fueling operations in the Pacific. Without Carib- bean and Middle East oil sources to draw on, the military requirements of the United States and its allies for oil could not have been met in the amounts and at the times demanded. American oil activities abroad have bene- fited our country no less in times of peace, Profits to American companies from overseas operations create tax revenue for the United States Treasury and produce dividend in- come for hundreds of thousands of American families. The purchase in this country of drilling machinery, casing, line pipe, and other equipment for the development of for~ eign properties brings millions of dollars of business to Americai firms and provides em- ployment here. As previously undeveloped countries achieve higher productivity and better living standards, they become better markets for American goods, better custom~ ers of the American exporter, manufacturer, workman, and farmer. And the money that foreign countries earn from development of their oil resources furnishes them with means to pay for American goods without relying on loans or grants of funds from American taxpayers. Foreign trade is often thought of solely in terms of selling American-produced goods abroad or of buying forelgn-produced goods here. However, a major part of the foreign trade of American oil companies does not fol- low that pattern. Most often it consists of producing oil in one country abroad, perhaps refining it in another, and selling it in still a third. Thus, the oil involved in such com- merce never touches our shores. It does, however, contribute to the economic well- being of foreign countries and of our own country. THE ROLE OF OIL IMPORTS IN UNITED STATES FUEL SUPPLY Although most of the oll produced by American companies abroad is also used abroad, some of it is imported into the United States to supplement our own sup- plies, And the effect of the importation of oil on the domestic oil industry has long been a subject of discussion and debate. It js a question which can properly be con~ sidered only against a background of the industry’s nature. The oil business is one in which volumes have followed a generally rising trend. Con- sumer use of its products has risen year after year with few exceptions. To keep pace, the production of crude oil has also increased. As is inevitable in a natural resource in- dustry, however, the growth of oil demand and the growth of crude oil supply do not follow exactly parallel courses. Discovery of new oil to replace that which is used occurs at an irregular rate. At times, the constant search for oil will lead to a major discovery, as in east Texas in 1930. Such an event may be followed by a number of years when, although exploration is continued energetically, no important new discovery is made. Then, sooner or later, the unre- mitting search is rewarded by some new major find, such as occurred in Scurry County, Tex., in 1948. Meanwhile, fluctuations of consumption— influenced by weather, industrial activity, military needs, or other factors—may not co- incide with the times of peak additions to reserves. As a result of these circumstances, there have been periods in the United States when rising demand for oil has pressed hard upon domestic supplies. When this does happen, as it did in the winter of 1947~48, the availability of oil from American properties abroad has been of the greatest importance to the Nation. On the other hand, there have been periods when productive capacity has been expanded at a somewhat more rapid rate than demand has risen, It is at such times that appre- hension is expressed about imports and that proposals are made for restricting the vol- umes of oil brought into the United States from overseas. Such a situation exists at present. Today, some domestic oil producers feel that their business is being hurt by imports, and they strongly assert this position publicly. Simi- lar assertions come from coal interests, which contend that oil imports are injuring the coal industry by taking part of the over-all fuel market it would otherwise supply. These arguments: have been carried to agencies of Government, with pleas that ad- ministrative action be taken to restrict oil imports, and to the Congress, where various legislative proposals have been introduced that would restrict such imports either by imposition of quotas or by raising tariff rates to a level that would amount to virtual em- bargo. Because proposals of this kind bear directly on the vital subject of the Nation’s energy supply, they merit the most serious study and most careful examination of the premises on which they rest. DOMESTIC OIL PRODUCTION HAS FOLLOWED A LONG-TERM UPWARD TREND Domestic production of oil decreased in 1949 from the level of the preceding year. However, this decrease followed a period in which the industry had set new highs of production for six consecutive years, At a level of 5,042,000 barrels per day, domestic oil production in 1949 was higher than in any other year of the industry’s entire 91-year history, except for 1947 and 1948. It was 918,000 barrels per day, or 22 percent, higher than the average for the 6- year war period, 1940-45. It was 1,836,000 barrels per day, or 57 percent, higher than the average for the 5-year prewar period, 1935-39. Production of coal declined in 1948 from the all-time peak reached the year before, and slipped again in 1949 to the lowest level since 1939, Meanwhile, imports of oll, taking crude and products together, have increased yearly since 1942, The decreases in domestic oil and coal pro- duction have been attributed by some almost entirely to larger of] imports. The facts do not support this view, Other factors are ob- viously involved. Oll imports have been rising for the past 7 years. But domestic oil production also A4247 rose during six of those years and reached an all-time record in 1948. The relation of the two movements is shown in chart 2. Over other periods, too, domestic production has grown at the same time that imports were increasing. To cite specific figures, imports were higher by 413,000 barrels per day in 1949 than in 1940, yet domestic production was higher by 1,345,000 barrels per day in the later year than in the earlier one. Or, taking the post- war period, imports were 265,000 barrels per day higher in 1949 than in 1946, yet domestic production was up 291,000 barrels per day. One indication of the vigor and pros- perity of the producing end of the oil in- dustry is the number of new wells drilled. Chart 3 shows the number of wells drilled by oilmen in the United States since 1940. It will be seen that, on the basis of this cri- terion, the domestic industry’s vigor was not diminished in 1949. In the first quarter of 1950, 9,126 new wells were drilled as com= pared with 8,346 in the first quarter of 1949. Further, proved reserves of crude oil and natural gas liquids in the United States are at the highest level they have ever reached, having been increased by over 1,500,000 bar-~ rels during 1949 alone. Numbers of drilling permits issued, exploration activity as mea- sured by numbers of seismographic and geo- physical crews in the field, and many other evidences all point to a high level of strength and health for the domestic oil industry. DRAFTS ON INVENTORIES AND LOWER EXPORT DEMAND AFFECTED 1949 OUTPUT There are several reasons for the decrease in domestic oil production in 1949 as com~ pared with 1948. One is that, in 1948, oil in storage was being added to at a rate of 293,000 barrels per day, whereas, in 1949, stocks were being drawn down at a rate of 8,000 barrels per day. During 1948 the oil industry was exerting itself to correct a condition of tight supply that had existed in the early part of that year and in 1947. It will be recalled that in the winter of 1947-48 the American public and the Government were seriously con= cerned about the Nation's oil supply. Almost daily, newspaper headlines proclaimed their anxiety. Some persons even thought the country was facing a permanent dearth of petroleum and would have to start im- mediately to make synthetic liquid fuel on a large scale. Faced with this sudden demand upon it, the oil industry made a tremendous effort to find new oil fields, drill more wells, and ex-~ pand the great complex of equipment re- quired to refine oil and get it to people. The industry succeeded well in this task. Once again it showed that alarmist predictions about it were ill-founded. It expanded its productive capacity to heights never reached before and began to rebuild inventories of crude and products which had been heavily drawn down to meet the public’s need. With Inventories replenished to overflow- ing, some cut-back below maximum produc- tive capacity was inevitable in 1949. It would have occurred whether oil was imported or not. The decrease in 1949 from 1948’s all-time peak in domestic oil production is further accounted for by a decline in oil exports. Quantities of crude oil and products shipped out of the United States have gone down from 568,000 barrels per day in 1944, the peak export year, to 328,000 barrels per day in 1949. Loss in export demand from 1948 to 1949 amounted to 40,000 barrels per day. This decline has been due to the fact that parts of the world which used to depend heavily on the United States for crude oil and oil products now have other sources of supply. In the reconstruction of European countries, and in the increasing industriali- zation of others, refinery installations have been newly erected or have been expanded,
AA4248 so that these countries are now able them~ selves to fill more of their needs for finished oil products. More importantly, the discovery and de- velopment of vast oil deposits in other parts of the world—notably the Middle East— have made it practical for many nations to look to those areas for petroleum supplies rather than to the United States. Chart 4 shows graphically how areas such as western Europe, which obtained large amounts of oil from the United States before the war, are now drawing much of their supplies from the Middle East. HEAVY FUEL OIL ACCOUNTS FOR A LARGE PART or IMPORT TOTAL A substantial part of oil imports into this country is of heavy residual fuel. The rela- tion of such imports to the domestic oil in- dustry is entirely different from the relation of other types of oil imports to the domestic industry. Imports of heavy residual oil provide a means for economically supplying a desired fuel to consumers in certain parts of the country. If these imports were reduced or cut off, output of domestic crude oil would not increase by an equivalent amount be- cause of the economics of production of heavy fuel oil, the uses to which it is put, and the places where it is used. Heavy fuel oil is the residue left over after lighter products such as gasoline and kero- sene are distilled from crude petroleum. Since the lighter products normally have higher market value, the domestic refiner his- torically has sought to maximize their pro- duction and to minimize the residue of heavy fuel oil. He does not seek to make heavy fuel ol] but obtains it as a byproduct of his operations. Heavy fuel oil is used principally to power ships and to burn under boilers in factories and in central generating stations. In the eastern seaboard States, with their great ports and highly industrialized sections, there is far greater demand for this oil than can be supplied as byproduct from domes~ tic refineries normally serving the area. It is to meet the eastern seaboard demand that residual imports are brought into this coun- try. Geographical distribution of demand for residual fuel in 1949, and the part sup- plied by residual imports, is shown by chart 6. It will be seen from the chart that the great bulk of all the residual fuel consumed in this country comes from domestic sources. This has been the case for many years. Even in the areas of heavy consumption along the eastern seaboard and Gulf coast, domestic refineries supplied an average of 80 percent of all the residual fuel used in the years 1946-49. The balance of the demand for heavy fuel ol] (some 15 to 20 percent of the total in recent years) has long been met by import- ing fuel oil or heavy-fuel-oil crudes. The total demand cannot be met from domestic sources today simply because heavy fuel oil cannot be made economically from domestic crude except on a byproduct basis. If more crude Oil were run through domestic refin- erjles to meet the total demand for heavy fuel oil on a byproduct basis, the production of lighter products would greatly exceed de- mand for them, And enlarging output of domestic residual fuel oil other than as byproduct would mean the deliberate down-~grading of crude oil into fuel oil, the value of which is usually well below that of crude oil bxcause its market price gravitates to a point where it will com- pete with coal. Since there is no economical way of meet- ing, from domestic sources, the full demand of American consumers for heavy fuel oil, the importation of heavy fuel oil has furnished the means for taking care of the marginal 15 to 20 percent of fuel oil demand. The use of residual fuel oil has followed a rising trend over the past two decades, although it has declined slightly in the past 2 years, Meanwhile, yields of residual fuel at domestic refineries have tended to shrink pecause improvements in refining technique have made it possible to obtain larger pro- portions of more valuable products from the crude oil processed. These circumstances further underline the necessity of imports if the full demand for residual fuel is to be satisfied. If such imports were cut off or severely reduced, the total demand for fuel oil could not be met except by the highly uneco~ nomical means just explained. Under such circumstances there seems little doubt that the cost of fuel oil to consumers would in- crease sharply and that the total fuel-oil market demand would shrink materially. DECLINE IN COAL OUTPUT DUE TO MANY CAUSES Beginning with the outbreak of war in Europe in 1939, the pituminous coal indus-- try reached successively higher levels of pro- duction in every year through 1944. (Bitu- minous coal accounts for over SO percent of the coal produced in the United States and for virtually all the coal consumed by Amer- ican industry.) There were declines in 1945 and 1946, although production was still well above the prewar level. Then in 1947 the industry reached an all-time high figure of 630,000,000 tons. The following year output was 599,000,000 tons (still well over prewar production), but in 1949 a severe decline took place—to 434,000,000 tons, a drop of 27 percent. This decrease coincided with dras- tically reduced activities in the mines due to strikes and to a 3-day week over a consider- able period. In 1949 an estimated 28,000,000 fewer man-days were worked in the bitumi- nous coal mines than in the year before. Coal output is shown in chart 6. Some people believe that the decrease in use of coal has been caused by imports of oil. Statistics, however, do not show this to be the case. They show, on the contrary, that, while coal has lost some business to oil, a very small fraction has been due to oil imports. For example, petroleum in the form of gasoline for automobiles and planes, fuel for jet planes, diesel fuel for buses and tractors, jubricating oil, and many other products does not compete with coal at all. As Diesel fuel for locomotives and marine use and as home-heating oil, petroleum has partly displaced coal because of oil’s greater efficiency and convenience for these uses. It should be noted, however, that virtually all the Diesel fuel and home-heating oil used in this country come not from imports but from domestic crude. In the form of heavy residual fuel, petro- leum also competes with coal, largely on a cost basis, as a source of factory power and for generation of electricity. It is pertinent to examine figures for coal consumption both in the categories where it competes with middle distillate fuels (Diesel and home heating oils) and where it com- petes with heavy residual fuel. In 1948, 101,000,000 tons of coal were burned in American locomotives as against 68,000,000 tons in 1949. This represented a decline of 33 percent, the largest percentage loss for the coal industry in any category. At the same time, use of residual fuel burned under boilers of steam locomotives also showed a decline—in the order of 30 per- cent. The figures thus indicate that both coal and residual fuel oil are being replaced for locomotives by increasing dieselization of railroads. Dieselization is a development of technical progress being carried forward by the railroads of the Nation. The fact that only about 480 steam locomotives have been built since the war while more than 8,000. Diesel units have been built is due to the APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD efficiency of Diesel propulsion as compared with steam propulsion and to the operating economies which Diesels permit. In the home heating field, although oil and gas are taking care of most of the addi- tions to the total number of houses in the Nation, coal use has remained fairly stable. The greatest volume loss by the coal in- dustry in 1949 as compared with 1948 was for industrial uses other than electric power utilities and railroads. The decline here was from 247,000,000 to 191,000,000 tons. For the same period, use of residual fuel in indus- try outside of electric power utilities and railroads increased from 200,000,000 barrels to a little more than 206,000,000. The in- creased quantity of heavy fuel oil so used was equivalent in heating value to 1,500,600 tons of coal, as against coal’s loss of business in this category of 58,000,000 tons. The dif- ference was undoubtedly due to lower man- ufacturing activity in the Nation (perhaps as much a result as a cause of reduced coal production), and to some replacement of coal by natural gas. Use of natural gas, it may be pointed out, bas been growing at a rapid rate. Reserves of this energy source have been greatly in- creased in recent years. Under circum- stances favorable for its development and for its transmission to consumers, use of gas can be expected to grow. It will thus offer sharper competition for both coal and oil. In the public-utility field use of coal for power generation declined from 96,000,000 tons in 1948 to 81,000,000 in 1949. At the same time use of residual fuel by utilities rose from 37,000,000 barrels to 60,000,000. The increase of 23,000,000 barrels of fuel oil was equivalent in heating value to some- what less than half the outlet that coal lost jin this field. The fact that public utilities turned to oil in 1949 to supply a larger part of their fuel requirements was due, beyond any doubt, to their inability to get coal be- cause of strikes or to thelr anxiety that they would be jeopardizing service 1o thelr cus- tomers if they could not have an assured fuel supply. Although coal lost about 18 percent of its outlet in the field of marine fuel in 1949, this was not large in volume. Coal has lost outlet for this use over a considerable period, concentrated chiefly in the years 1910-20. Because of the greater efficiency of oil for ships, it is highly improbable coal could regain this market even if imports of heavy fuel oil were entirely eliminated. It is almost inconceivable, for example, that our Navy would ever go back to using coal. The same is true of the merchant marine. Coal lost 18,000,000 tons of export outlet in 1949, reflecting rehabilitation abroad and expanding output of forelgn mines. The re- duction in coal consumption in 1949 against 1948, by classes of use, is illustrated in chart 7. In 1949, the year in which coal experl- enced its severe loss of business, the Increase in imports of residual fuel over the year be- fore was equivalent in heating value to about 5,000,000 tons of coal, or slightly over 1 percent of the production of coal for that year. It seems likely that the problems which the coal industry is experiencing stem not from oil imports but from a changing pat- tern of the over-all energy market as served by coal, oil, and natural gas. These problems can best be understood by looking at the facts squarely; they will not be solved by attributing effects to the wrong causes, FOREIGN PRODUCTION OF STANDARD OIL CO, (NEW JERSEY) DEVELOPED TO MEET NEEDS As @ company which plays a substantial part in providing oil for the American econ- omy, and as one which has oil-producing interests both in the United States and
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD abroad, Standard Oil Co. (New Jersey) gives constant study to the volume and type of oil imports and to their relation to the do- mestic industry. Jersey Standard was established as an American o7~~™--~ 17-71 has its roots in this country. O " . 0 9 stockholders, some 209,000 are American citizens. The company has been an important ele- ment in the domestic oil industry for more than 50 years, and its career has covered a large span of the oil industry’s history. It has shared in the dovelonrent ~£ the do- mestic industry—anc *. cul. "isa « to that development. Today its affiliates in the Unitec Sic res produce crude oil in 18 States and market in 27 States and the District of Columbia. Jersey began in its earliest days to extend American business overseas by the export of refined ‘products. ‘The company’s first fixed investments outside the United States were virtually all in marketing properties. Jersey’s first producing interest abroad was in Rumania. In 1914 the company obtained an interest in a Peruvian property and be- gan to expand its output. In Mexico a Jer- sey refinery helped provide heavy fuel oil to power allied navies and United States war industry during the First World War, and in 1918 an interest was acquired in a Mexi- can producing property. World War I made heavy demands on the oil resources of the United States, and fears of a shortage in this country were voiced in the tmmediote reeiwar neriod. The war had also shor co mutucriiv the importance of oll to a rs inu’s ulierr strength. In the years following the war, the United States Government urged American oil com~ panies, as a matter of yatlonal policy, to make intensive effort to develop oil sources abroad. A Jersey affiliate obtained a concession in Colombia in 1920, A year later the company began exploration in Venezuela, and in 1928 and again in 1932 it added to its interests there and developed large-scale production. After long negotiations Jersey and four other American companies in 1928 obtained a min- ority interest in the Iraq Petroleum Co., which had little production at the time but held concessions on what was thought to be promising oil territory in the Middle East. (Later withdrawals left the American inter. est in Irag Petroleum Co. shared by Jersey and one other company.) In 1948 Jersey made a $75,000,000 investment in Arablan American Oll Co., providing additional capi- tal for the development of an area on which two other American oil companies had ob~ tained a concession just before World War IT. The history of crude imports into the United States by Jersey affiliates has been, briefly, this: In 1921 the affiliates were im~ porting an average of 98,000 barrels per day of crude oils, They imported an average of 49,000 barrels per day of crudes during the 20-year period before World War II. In 1947 the average was 87,000 barrels per day. Be- ginning in 1948, imports of crude were stepped up as rapidly as possible to meet a serious, though temporary, oll shortage that confronted most of the country. Then, when it became apparent in De- cember, 1948, that domestic crude oil was again coming into good supply, Jersey Stand- ard’s affiliates began to cut crude oll im- ports as rapidly as possible. They made suc- cessive reductions in crude imports from 160,000 barrels a day in January, 1949, to 75,000 barrels a day in February, 1950. Their crude imports for the first quarter of 1950 averaged about 75,000 barrela a day, com- pared to an average of 127,000 barrels a day for the first quarter of 1949. The average rate of crude imports for the first quarter of 1950 is less than that in any of the years 1947, 1948, or 1949. The company’s crude oil imports have been primarily of crudes to make heavy fuel oil or of types not readily or economically available in the United States and needed to make such products as special lubricating ouls, waxes, and asphalts. JERSEY’ IMPORTS CONSIST PRINCIPALLY OF HEAVY FUEL OIL Jersey’s foreign production was not orig- inally acquired to supply oil primarily for use within the United States. The company’s programing with respect to production of crude oil overseas has always been on the premise that such oil would find its chief outlet through the company’s marketing fa- cilities overseas. Jersey also regards its for- eign oil production, however, as useful to our own Nation in supplementing domestic supplies of fuel. This is no recent or novel position for the company. Its import pro- gram has already attained substantial di- mensions as early as World War I when its Mexican properties were among those called upon to help supply heavy fuel oil for naval and industrial use. Ever since then the principal product im~ ported by Jersey has continued to be heavy fuel oil. The company has many customers for this product in the industrialized east coast area of our country. And only on rare occasions has the company heen able to obtain enough heavy fuel from domestic sources to supply those customers. In order to assure them a regular supply, therefore, it has supplemented the heavy fuel available to it domestically by importing from Carib- bean sources. A breakdown of Jersey’s imports by types, and the proportion of the company’s imports to total oil imports, is shown in chart 8. A HEALTHY DOMESTIC OIL INDUSTRY IS VITAL TO JERSEY Standard Oil Co, (New Jersey) has a very lively motive for not wanting oil imports to impair the domestic oil industry—Jersey is itself a part of the domestic industry. The company has large investments in this coun- try. In 1948, its affiliates had a net crude oil production from domestic fields of 428,- 000 barrels per day and, in 1949, 337,000 bar~ rels per day. Last year the affiliates’ net purchases from others averaged 276,000 bar- rels of domestic crude oil daily. Jersey’s do- mestic affillates had refinery runs of 622,000 barrels per day in 1949, and their product sales amounted to 767,000 barrels daily. It is obvious that with stakes of this size in the domestic oil industry Jersey's own welfare is inseparably linked with the wel- fare of that industry as a whole, Simply as a matter of common sense, the company would not conduct its affairs in such a way as 10 damage the long-term value of its investment and business. VIEWS OF STANDARD OIL CO. (NEW JERSEY) Views of Standard Oil Co. (New Jersey) on, the subjects of American development of oil resources abroad, its own Overseas oil production, and imporis—views which have been arrived at after careful study and after consideration of the facts contained in the foregoing pages—may be summarized as fol- lows: 1. Abundant supplies of fuel are essential to our country’s industrial strength and to high living standards for its people. 2. Since the United States depends on do- mestic sources for the great proportion of its energy needs, it is of major importance to have strong and dynamic companies engaged in all domestic fuel industries. But no action should be taken which would unnecessarily purden American consumers simply to shield one segment of the fuel industry from com- petition or normal economic evolution. 8. Imported oil, which has long supple- mented domestic sources, has an important part to play in the total supplies of energy available to the Nation. The economy of the United States, more than that of any other nation, has been built on abundant AA249 supplies of oil. With 21 percent of the world’s estimated proved reserves located within its own borders, the United States currently produces 56 percent of the world output of oil and natural gas liquids, and accounts for some 60 percent of world use. The United States is in no danger of run-~ rint out of oil; it has large reserves already C:sc crod, and large additional reserves will almost certainly be discovered in the future. Supplementation of these domestic re- sources through imports, however, would ap- pear to be clearly in the interest of the national economy and of conservation. 4, Any attempt to erect an oil-tight dike around the Nation and to bar the American consumer from access to oll from abroad would not serve the interests of consumers nor the country’s economy as a whole. Con- versely, the best interests of the United States would not be served by a “flood” of imported oil, even if such a flood were physi-~ cally and financially possible, since such an occurrence would disrupt domestic energy in- dustries to the long-run disadvantage of the Nation. 5. Jersey Standard subscribes to the state- ment on oil policy, including the sections on imports, adopted by the National Petroleum Council. (The National Petroleum Council is a group, widely representative of the in- dustry, appointed by the Secretary of the Interior to advise the Department of the In- terlor on matters which the Department submits to it for consideration. On July 3, 1948, the Secretary asked the Council for ad~ vice concerning United States petroleum policy, and on January 18, 1949, the Council unanimously approved and transmitted to the Secretary a report titled, “A National Oil Policy for the United States.”) Ac- cordingly, we believe that imports of crude and products into the United States should always be considered in relation to their effect upon the long-range preservation of the national security, the welfare of the American consumer and the domestic in- dustry, and the sound growth of interna-~ tional trade. _ 6. American oil operations in other coun- tries make important contributions to the economies of those countries, helping them to build up their living standards and to earn the means to purchase American goods. The American economy is part of the world econ~ omy. The development of natural resources, as represented by American oil operations abroad, enhances world trade and, therefore, is in the interest of our own Nation. Oil operations constitute an important bond and point of contact between America and na- tions whose friendship is an asset to us. It follows that every effort should be made to avoid acts which would jeopardize the econ- omies of such nations. 7. Sources of foreign ofl would be of vital importance to the armed forces of the United States in the event of war. Avoidance of war is to be wholeheartedly hoped and worked for. Nevertheless, our country would be courting disaster to be unprepared for emergency. In the event of emergency our forces and those of our allies might well be deployed in parts of the world where they could be more readily supplied with fuel from sources outside the United States than from within it. 8. The domestic oil industry now has a margin of efficient capacity over current pro- duction which is somewhat less than the margin that existed when the United States entered World War II. Some margin of pro- ductive capacity is obviously desirable. 9. Legislation or Executive orders which imposed a rigid formula on the rate, or which increased the price at which oil enters this country, would limit flexibility in meeting variations in domestic demand, jeopardize relations with friendly nations, and lessen the incentive for Americans to enlarge for- eign investments. Any such action would be
A4259 a backward step in American aspirations to- ward freer and larger world trade. More- over, any such action would foreshadow still further Government controls and a stulti- fying of the initiative and independence that have made the American oil industry a leader in inventiveness and technical progress. 10. We expect domestic demand for pe- troleum products to rise so that there will pe increased crude requirements. However, we do not expect crude-oil imports by our affiliates during 1950 to increase above the average which has been maintained since early this year. Over the long term we be- lieve that the continuing growth of America and the rise of living standards will call for the use of increasing amounts of fuel energy. We believe that rising fuel requirements will call for an expanding production of domestic oil, and may call for expanding volumes of imports as well. We do not believe these two things are incompatible nor that do- mestic production and oil imports must fol- low opposite trends. On the contrary, we believe the two can follow largely parallcl courses, as they generally have in the past. 11. The factors applying to crude-o1l im-~ ports differ greatly from the factors govern~ ing residual fuel imports. In considering oil import statistics, most people Jump fig- ures on crude oil and fuel oil together. This practice can be misleading, and a distinc- tion should be made between crude oil and products in reporting and considering the statistics and in trying to draw conclusions from them. 12, Standard Oil Co. (New Jersey) acquired its foreign sources of oil primarily for the supply of foreign markets. These sources are also an important contribution to the puilding of world trade and—particularly important today—a means of helping friend- ly nations to achieve better balances in their international commerce without expense 10 the American taxpayer. They are sources of special crude oils the company may not be able to obtain domestically when needed. They are protection to American consumers against shortages in the face of possible sudden short-term peaks in demand result- ing from abnormal weather cr other factors. They are supplementary sources of supply insuring the country against any possible long-term inadequacy of domestic supply. Finally, they are supplies and facilities available to our country in the event of emergency. As a matter of policy, Jersey Standard is following these principles: (a) With domestic crude in good supply, the company’s imports of crude oil are being kept to a minimum consistent with “the maintenance of its foreign sources of oil for the purposes listed immediately above. (b) The company plans to import residual fuel oil to the extent that the domestic supply economically available to it is not sufficient to meet demands of its customers, (c) The company will do its best to main~ tain its properties overseas for the purposes lusted in the paragraph numbered 12 above and as sound investments for its 215,000 stockholders. A Beok Review on Beards EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. JAMES J. HEFFERNAN Or NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, June 6, 1950 Mr. HEFFERNAN. Mr. Speaker, un- der permission to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include therein a book review on beards which appears in the current issue of the Explorers Journal, published by the Explorers Club, New York, and edited by Commander Wen- dell Phillips Dodge, well-known explorer and editor: BEARDS, THEIR Socian STANDING, RELIGIOUS INVOLVEMENT, DECORATIVE POSSIBILITIZS, AND VALUE IN OFFENSE AND DEFENSE THROUGH THE AGES EXPLORING JOWL JUNGLES As most early explorers were adorned with beards of various descriptions which they carried to the then unexplored regions of the earth, to say nothing of present-day explor- ers who are members of the Explorers Club and might be called pogonotropists without limiting themselves to eating hersefiesh, or hippophagists, eaters of horsefiesh who wear beards, the author of Beards makes too much of this play on horsey words in such a book. He might have been closer to nature had he really entered the jowl jungles by going on a beard expedition to the East Indian archi- pelago and the peninsular mainland for the long-armed, closely approaching man Hylo- bates, of the family Simidiae, subfamily Hylobatinae. Of a blackish color, they are marked with white on the face and hands, and their beards resemble that of Horace Greeley, who advised “Go west, young man.” To Reginald Reynolds I would say, “Book passage on a P. & O. ship for the Far East and keep on going to Sumatra, to Assam—and, for the best-known bewhiskered gibbons, to Tenasserim.” L doubt, however, if these hy- Jobates are either pogonotropists or hip- pophagists. But, then, it’s been a long time since I’ve read the Origin of the Species and traced the beginning of men’s beards to gib- bons. | In any event, overlooking the aimless wan- derings of Mr. Reginald Reynolds in and out of the book racks of the British Museum, here is a book written expressly for the more adventurous of our members. Despite his meanderings through a mir« rored maze of thesis sort of research, the au- thor of Beards really has done a painstaking and rather thorough job about this most pro- vocative subject down through the ages. Wearers of beards, and by all means others, will find out more than mects the eye, as one Will Shakespeare had a way of putting it. And so, when the chairman of the club's library committee, our onetime, for a time, be-whiskered “Dan” Streeter asked me if I would review this book, how could I do other than say yes? I suppose, between us, his picking on me had nothing whatever to do with my own baby gibbonish facial fringe. Nevertheless, “Dan” Streeter slyly sent along a lst of club members he could think of off-hand who either wear beards, or have in- dulged in the luxury at one time or another. If he, or I, have missed any member of the Explorers Club who either now wears a beard, or has done so on expeditions, or what have you, we are sorry. So, just write in and tell us about it, won’t you? The chairman of the club’s library com- mittee sent me 4 kind of graph, headed “Full Beards,” “Part Beards,” ‘'Goatee,” and “Mustache.” And woe unto you, “Dan” Strecter, for putting me under the heading, “Goatee.” I protest, for I wear what is known as the “Imperial.” I used to wear a sort of “Vandyke,” only my whiskers were untrue to him—or to me, for except when I let ’em grow wild all over my face, and looked more Russian than the Russians, the best I was able to raise was an “Imperial.” Of course, I do have a “goatee,” as does every wearer of a beard. But, a goatee is no beard, nevertheless, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD To stop digressing, and get back to *Dan” Streeter’s beard graph of Explorers Club members, here’s the way it shows up: Full beards: Gen. A. W. Greeley, Peter Freuchen, A. R. Crawford, Dr. Otto Schmidt, our late wearer of the beard beautiful, Dr. William H. Jackson; Amos Bonsall, Ernest Ingersoll, James A. Ford. Part beards: Burton Holmes, Rudolph Kersting, Prince Albert, of Monaco, Dr. Otto Nordenskjold, Frederick W. Stokes. Goatee: (“Dan” Streeter headed the list with this reviewer’s name, but its libelous) the late late Dr. Franklin P. Lynch, Ernest Ingersoll, Nelson, Ernest Thompson Seton, Daniel D. Streeter (for two short periods in the long, long ago), Sir Hubert Wilkins (again, Sir Hubert has worn a real and beau~ tiful beard, which is far, far more than a mere goatee), Daniel Carter Beard (he also, wore a@ real beard that covered up his goatee, which any self-respecting beard should do); our late good old captain Edwin Willard Dem- ing, Sir Wilfred T. Grenfell, Albert Operti, Henry B Kane, Dr. Antonio Carlos Simoens da, Silva. Mustache: Rear Adm. Robert E. Peary, Dr. Fridtjof Nansen, Gen. David L. Brainard, Dr. William Beebe, Lawrence I. Grinnell, Henry Fairfield Osborn, Sir Harry Johnston, Frederick S. Dellenbaugh, Dr. Frank M. Chapman, Matthew A. Henson, Dr. Sven Hedin. Sir Douglas Mawson, Col. Theodore Roosevelt, ex-President of the United States, Frank D, Millett, the Chief of Clannfhear- ghuis of Strachur, Lowell Thomas, Henry F, Evans, Frederick A. Ober, E. O. Hovey, and others. I would add, too, the name of Capt. Sergius M Riis, who wore a rough-and-ready Volga boatman kind of-beard during his action service in the Red Army of Trotsky during the Red revolution, while he was officially dead in the files of the Navy Department in Washington, D, C. Riis’ beard at that time made our genial Peter Freuchen’s a tame affair, indeed. Then there is Capt. Hassoldt (Bill) Davis, who wouldn’t dream of beat- ing about vhe jungle bush without a cheek- and-chin bush of his own, and always emerges from the deep jungle bearded Ike & king. And now, to get on with the review of this book of Beards. The author, himself, re- verts to beards with an observation of E. B. Shuldham, M. D., in his monograph on Clergyman’s Sore Throat (London, 1878), remarking that “the beard is an accident of sex, nay it is an accident of individual ca- pacity for hair growing, but nature has been generous enough to give all her children a nose.” Proceeding to Lactantius as an au- thority on the virtues of the beard, he held that the beard added to the dignity of the mature body, adding that it contributed to the differentiation of the sexes. He found it also an ornament of virility and strength. Asking “had Adam a Beard?” the author dug up “that the father of the human race had a beard from the first instant of his creation, and that all men before the Deluge also had them,” citing Giuseppe Valeriano de Vanetti’s Barbaliogia “and then some” in the somewhat longish title in 1759 as proof. Reginald Reynolds spared himself no end of delving into the, shall we say, lore of the beard, and came forth with many interest~ ing items, among them that of a certain learned scholar who said that long hair “is symbolic of the multitude of sins, hence clerics are directed to shave their beards; for cutting of the hair of the beard, which is said to be nourished by the superfluous humours of the stomach.” (Guillaume Durantis, Rationale, 1459.) “Shall we join the Ladies?” hardly heard any more with the passing of genteel living and of the o:d-fashioned hut comfortable
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD dining room, where the men would remain to smoke after dinner, the while the ladies retired to powder their noses, when it was about time to proceed to the drawing room, leads one to the author’s question, “Why women have no beards.” Quoting a certain Mr. T. S. Gowing, who wrote a small book on “The Philosophy of Beards,” Mr. Reynolds lets Mr. Gowing state his case: “«  * % “Woman was made a helpmeet for man, and it was designed that man should, in 1eturn, protect her to the utmost of his power from those external circum- stances which it is his duty to encounter.” Always willing to give both sides of the question, the author of the book, Beards, says that a learned French doctor, Jean Rioland the younger, “was dissatisfied with the explanation that beards are given to us for protection precisely for this reason, that women most need such protection and are not provided with it. To him I must ascribe yet another explanation, that nature in- tended the beard as a warning of puberty in order that sexual segregation may take place when lanugo begins to sprout.” Mr. Reynolds sects forth that the painter Liotard is said to have lost the love of his wife when he removed the beard in which he had wooed and won her. Proceeding to ‘“‘ex- amine the earliest chins of which we have any record,” the author states that the first beards were false. He refers to the custom of the early Egyptians tieing false beards, sometimes made of metal, to their chins for ceremonial occasions. Even the Queens of Egypt camo eventually to wear such beards, their’s being of gold, like the beards of the Pharaohs. “But when we turn to Assyria and Baby- jon,” says the author of this highly informa- tive and intensely interesting book called Beards, “there is lyrical matter in the orna- mental variety to be observed, chiseled in sculpture by artists who, with light hand, traced the parallel waves of royal and mili- tary whiskers. Here, indeed, we may find the first bona fide beards; for if those of Egypt were false, those of China, were they never so ancient, could not have been com- pared with such magnificent growths.” How many of you readers of the Explorers Journal have ever seen an American Indian with a beard? Well, the author of the book we are considering tells of the shaving of half the beards—which, by the way, I used to live in almost mortal fear would happen to mine while asleep, shipmates and others often threatening to do the job. It seems, from, the book, that Capt. John Smith told of the Red Indians of Virginia shaving half their beards. It is to be presumed they had their squaws do so, using two sharp- edged sea-shells for a razor. If any of you would like to see a woodcut illustration showing an American Indian with a half beard delve into John Bulwer’s Anthropo- metamorphosis (1653). That little chore accomplished, turn to the frontispiece of Saxton’s Atlas of England and Wales (1579). This should be of decided interest to all explorers, for it shows the allegorical figures of Geography and Astron- omy with vast bushy beards, Another such beard was used by its wearer, Gaspard de Coligny, a Huguenot admiral as a parking- place for his toothpicks when not in use. Our author certainly did a lot of arm-chair exploring of the human beard, having some- thing to say, also, on the “Discovery of the New World and the Old Beard.” But then, as one beard to another, also to a half beard— oh, well, to all who read this, I do solemnly recommend your picking up a copy of Reg- inald Reynolds’ Beards. Then, if you don't like at least 5 percent of what you find in it, you are at liberty to “beard the lion in his den,” this reviewer being a Leo and a beardist. Establishing and Operating the Greenville (S. C.) Farmers’ Wholesale Market EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOSEPH R. BRYSON OF SOUTH CAROLINA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, June 6, 1950 Mr. BRYSON. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Ap- pendix of the Recor», I submit herewith a brochure on the establishment and operations of the Greenville (S. C.) Farmers’ Wholesale Market. This amazing establishment, with its outstanding results in so short a time, has been largely the work of the mar- keting commission assisted by its able secretary, a marketing specialist under the Clemson College extension service. We are justly proud of achievements in this umportant field thus far and feel that the knowledge thus gained will be helpful to other communities. Secre~ tary Martin is now in Washington at the request of Chairman Cooney, of the House Committee on Agriculture, to tes- tify on the problems of marketing. ESTABLISHING AND OPERATING THE GREENVILLE (S. C.) Farmers WHOLESALE MARKET (By Robert H. Martin, secretary, Greenville County Marketing Commission, marketing specialist, Clemson Extension Service) Three years ago public officials felt that a@ modern marketing facility was needed in Greenville. Over 100,000 persons lived with- in a radius of 24% miles. Within a 50-mile radius 700,000 persons made their living in the cities and on the farm. The city area is surrounded by fertile farm land. The Mar- keting Facilities Branch of the United States Department of Agriculture reported in its survey here thai annually the Greenville trade area (a 10-mile radius) was consuming about 27,500 tons or 2,200 equivalent carloads of fresh fruits and vegetables. Eggs con- sumed annually in the trade area is about 200 equivalent carloads and 150 carloads of dressed poultry. In 1944 farmers of the vi- cinity of Greenville harvested for sale about 8,600 acres of vegetables. We are within 30 miles of the largest peach growing county in the world. These facts and the fact that our only marketing place was a wide street where truckers, farmers, and grocers gathered early jn the morning and made many of us feel the need for a facility that would cut han- dling costs from the farm to consumer. We tried to interest our three banks in financing such a facility. They were not interested in the project and did not want to take a chance on its success. The members of the Greenville County legislative delegation became interested in establishing a public wholesale market here. . They bought 27 acres of land, passed an act appropriating $100,000 and authorizing the borrowing of another $100,000 by the Green- ville County Marketing Commission to set up the new market. The act made the loan of $100,000 a full faith and credit of the taxing power of Greenville County, the bankers were anxious to loan the $100,000 at 8-percent interest and all three participated. It appears that we have a perfect example of the need for legislation such as is con- tained in the blll H. R. 8320. Without the insuring of our loan by the county, it would A4251 have been impossible to have expanded our market after only three months of opera- tion. We see the need of other facilities, but all funds are spent. Our loan is for a 10-year period; however, it should be for a 40-year period as is provided in H. R. 8820. Thinking that the committee might be interested in y‘ctures of the modern markKet- ing facilities and what the cost, I have prepared this information on the pages to follow. Also, I felt that the committee would like to know of the income and expenses of oper- ating a marketing facility. This is shown on a chart following the pictures. This shows the market’s first year of operation and with the expansion program completed, the net profit should be greater in the years to follow. Putsch That Failed EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. WALTER H. JUDD OF MINNESOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, June 6, 1950 Mr. JUDD. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the RrEcorp, I include the following editorial from the Minneapolis Morning Tribune of Wednesday, May 31, 1950. The real les- son from the Berlin episode of Sunday, May 28 is that the Communist putsch was not tried when its organizers knew in advance they faced firm resistance. Thus far this has been the unvarying pattern of Soviet behavior, which should give powerful guidance to our conduct in the future wherever Communist ag- gression is threatened: PUTSCH THAT FAILED The world can breathe a little easier now that the Whitsunday demonstration by east German Communists has come and gone. There was no violence, although Communist leaders had openly hinted the affair might develop into a spontaneous bid to drive the western powers out of Berlin. That no putsch was attempted was prob- ably due to the elaborate preparations made by the west to preserve order by force if necessary. These preparations were as well advertised as the demonstration itself and they had the full support of non-Commu- nists in western Germany. Clearly the Soviet master minds behind the demonstration were not ready to provoke an incident that might turn the cold war into a hot one. Still, propaganda forays like this to test the psychological defenses of the West do not make the task of peacemakers any easier. They give the lle to the soothing words of Soviet leaders who, according to Trygve Lie, just back from a 90-minute conference with Stalin himself, say they want nothing but “peace, peace, and peace.” There was no bloodshed in Berlin Sunday. But there were plenty of insults directed against the West. The marching bands, the disciplined young people, who performed like radio-controlled robots, and the ominous ap- pearance of the east German ‘“people’s po- lice” force suggested nothing that might promote understanding between East and West. As we have come to know the tactics and strategy of cold war, the demonstration must be put down as a hostile act against the
A4252 West. Allied occupation officials in Ger- many are certain that others may be ex- pected as long as the divided occupation of Berlin continues. The United Nations secretary-general has talked with President Truman and Secretary of State Acheson about trying to persuade Russia to end its boycott of the United Na- tions. Presumably he discussed Stalin’s re- action to the Lie peace mission and relayed the Soviet dictator’s “terms” for returning to the security council. Peace-loving peo- ples the wer'd wem rrvay that something con- crete mayi2 ' 2o:2'77 ¢ talks that would indicate peace is attainable. Unfortunately, there are more grounds for pessimism than for hope. The schism between Hast and West remains wide and deep. As Dir. Charles Malik of Lebanon said in his classic discussion of “War and Peace” before the UN General As~ sembly last fall, we will have peace only when the non-Communist world feels at ease with Communists. But he added that this can never happen so long as the West “knows that the Communists wait only for the day of its damnation.” Mr. Truman would be naive indeed to com- mit this country to a Stalin-approved peace formula without first insisting that the Soviet Union show by acts and deeds that it is ready to abandon its bid to rule the world. The American people have every right to be suspicious of Soviet promises so long as they must be judged by what hap- pened in Berlin Sunday. The Responsibilities of Organized Indus- try in Our Expanding Economy EXTENSION. OF REMARKS HON. FRANK BUCHANAN OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, June 7, 1950 Mr. BUCHANAN. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- ord, I include a panel presentation be- fore the 1950 spring meeting of the American Trade Associativn Executives in Washington, D. C., by Robert E. Har- per, moderator, managing director, Na- tional Business Publications, Inc.; Hon. Frank Buchanan, chairman, House Se- lect Committee on Lobbying Activities; Hon. James M. Mead, commissioner, Federal Trade Commissicn; H. B. Mc- Coy, director, Office cf Domestic Com- merce, United States Department of Commerce, and Alexander Kirk, assist- ant director, International Trade Pro- motion Division, Economic Cooperation Administration: THe RESPONSIBILITIES OF ORGANIZED INDUSTRY tn Our Expanninc EcoNoMY Mr. Harpgr. Mr. Vice President, ladies and gentlemen, distinguished guests and fellow members, I have already been privileged aplenty in being permilted to perform as your program chairman for this edition of our spring get-together. Now, it is my added high honor to serve as the moderator of this panel of person- alities who are tops as far as talent goes, and who are on top of four of the most sig- nificant responsibilities of our times. We read the headlines today and every day, and we find ample cause to wonder just what are the responsibilities of organ- ized industry in our expanding economy? Headlines that startle our most vivid imagi- nation; that play havoc with our choicest conviction; that quicken our gravest con- cern for the future. Headlines such as these: “Scientists say first atom-fuel motor to be built next year”; “Political punishment of business charged”; “Rise in United States imports forecast during 1951-52”; “John Bull’s dollar-getting experts lend their acu- men to south Asia”; “United States said to be facing chromic unemployment due to Government’s economic policies.” Weadlines about happenings that are part and parcel of our expanding economy * #* * happenings that create issues and cause conflicts regarding our responsibilities. Your moderator, for whatever his opinion may be worth in these deliberations, is in- clined to believe that nothing is going to be settled in the sense in which things were once supposed to be settled, for the simple reason that knowledge will probably con- tinue to increase and will nevitably alter the world witli which we have to make terms. But, it is for the purpose of expert opin- ion that this foursome is brought together with you today * * * so, I am only wasting time, by not letting my panel get at the subject at hand—‘The responsibilities of organized industry in our expanding economy.” We shall follow this procedure. I shall in- troduce each panel member separately and he shall speak on the subject briefly without interruption. Following the presentation by the fourth and last member of the panel, I shall throw the session into an open forum and, as you see, some of the members of this audience have provided me with enough questions to keep us lively the remainder of the day. Now, then, first to address you is a native of McKeesport, Pa., and a graduate of the University of Pittsburgh, plus postgradu- ate work in economics at Columbia. The first and only Democratic mayor of his home town, he was elected No. 1 citizen in 1941 and served until 1946. Prior to 1941, he had been an educator and business con~ sullant. First elected to represent the Thirty-third District of Pennsylvania to fill an unexpired term in May 1946 and reelected in November 1946 to the Hightieth Congress, and again in November 1948 to the Eighty-first Congress—he is a mem- ber of the House Committee on Banking and Currency, the Joint Committee on the Economic Report, and the House District Committee. He is married and is tl.e father of not two but twin daughters. Ladies and gentlemen, I am proud to pre- seit to you the distinguished chairman of the House Select Committee on Lobbying Activities—the Honorable Frank BUCHANAN. Congressman, the floor is yours. Mr. Bucwanan. I appreciate the invitation to discuss the responsibilities or organized industry with the leadership of America’s top trade associations. We all talk so much and think so much about our rights and privileges and immunities under a free form of government and under a free-cn- terprtse system that it is refreshing and stimulating, and important, to discuss once in a while this concept om the other side of that coin, that is, the responsibilities which go with our free political life and our free~enterprise system. , As representatives of the great trade as- sociations, you no doubt have many impor- tant problems before you, of a technical or specialized nature. You are to be congratu- lated then for going out of your way, and inviting Government officials and Members of Congress to come in and point warning fingers at you about your responsibilities to the economy and to the general public. You leaders of America’s trade associa- tions have already exhibited a fine sense of lesponsibllity which is to be commended, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD and whether you get much guidance or not from this panel, you can’t be blamed for not having made the effort. The first piece of meddling advice I'd lire to give today 1s a little impertinent, per- haps, but I’d like to suggest that instead of restricting this discussion to the subject “Responsibilities of an Organized Industry in an Expanding Economy,” we change “in” to “for,” making it the “Responsibilities of Organized Industry for an Expanding Econ- omy” We have gone through the equivalent of a new industrial revolution in America in the past 10 years under the stress of war— hot and cold. During the good part of that period, industry had heavy responsibilities— terrific responsibilities—which were shoul- Gered in the cause of total war. Many of those responsibilities were taken on volun- tarily, others were imposed by Government. In the years since the end of the shooting war, most of the Government-imposed re- sponsibilities have been removed. Industry is getting back to making its own decisions again. We have been beset with fears of inflation. We have had some scares about recession and collapse. There were always plenty of optimists around to tell us every- thing was going to be all right, but most of us as individuals and as citizens had our doubts and fears about who was going 1to get hurt. There is no doubt now that we came through those boom years of 1947~48--49 bet- ter off than most of us had ever dared hope. Petrovnien’i” 1949 was not as big a year as .ucict. fact, to some the drop was sig- nificant enough to appear as a iull-blown recession, and yet 1949 was about the best year we’d ever had in total economic well- being at any time in our history, other than 1948. There was a good amount of business sense and statesmanship demonstrated in 1949, particularly in the early half when prices and profits started down. The fear reaction, the panic reaction, always incipient in a situation like that, did not develop. There were many balancing mechanisms in our economy today which were not present 20 years ago. This stability in our eco: omv hos been the end result of recovery and i¢’orm measures adopted over the past 15 years. But essen~ tially, I think a good part of the credit for bringing us through 1949 in good shape was business responsibility. There were not the wholesale wage slashes and cut-backs and inventory depletions which accompanied previous dips in the economy. We have today a dynamic and expanding economy. Now, when I said earlicr that I thought we should discuss the responsibili- ties of organized industry for an expanding economy and not merely in one, I had in mind the conviction that in the days and years ahead—if we can keep the world from falling apart at the seams, then industry has the greatest responsibility for achieving a continuing full employment economy. Business leadership and business states- manship are needed more today than ever before. Business must lead and lead toward the right goals in America and our world of today or forever after take the consequences. Democracy is a flexible thing, and freedom- loving Americans in a democracy have Icarned to accept change. Extremism from any side does not appeal to our people. Free enterprise, a bit chastened and somewhat re- formed, came through the great depression of 20 years ago still free, and we have come through the greatest war in history with not less freedoms than before but actually with more. In past eras economic and financial may- hem has been committed in the name of free enterprise, but wise business leaders have scen these fallacies and want no more of it. yok
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD And so, antitrust laws that restrict the freedom of businesses; labor laws that re- strain unbridled freedoms of both labor and management must come about. Brakes must be applied to labor management and government when balance end equilibrium are threatened. We have come a long way in recent years toward these goals of industrial progress. Government meddling helped to bring about some of these improvements. Many of the reforms imposed by Government were bitterly fought at the time as too severe, but I beheve, and like to think, that the fair- minded businessmen who worried threugh these years of reform will acknowledge that the reforms were made necessary by the fail- ures of large segments of American industry to shoulder responsibilities which were prop- erly and rightfully theirs, responsibilities for tleating worke s as human beings, for exercising a social consciousness as a neces- sary part of the profit motive in a free nation of free people. It is significant to me that no matter how deep our economic distress ever became in America, there was never—any time—and I evel include the decpest darkest days of the depression of the thirties when any substan- tial, responsible area of the American elec- torate seriously challenged the place of the profit motive in our economic system. There have been times, frequent times, when many Americans were disturbed—and properly so-—over the excesses of profit-taking but no political party which advocated the elimina-~ tion or even the sharp curtailment of the profit motive ever received more than a paltry fraction of extremist votes. And I don’t think the credit for that can properly go to those tew die-hards of an obsolete re- action who screamed “communism” at every moderate reform in our economic structure; it should go, instead, to the inherent fair- mindedness and common sense of the Amer- ican people. If we can assume then, that most Amcri- cans sincerely and genuinely believe in the profit system and a free enterprise system— and ” friakly believ> that is a fair assump-~ V.0 l=) Che responsikiil'y of organized indus- Ley iod.y in-- or fer -an expanding economy rests on a continuous demonstration of faith in America and in the good sense of her people. That faith has been demonstrated and upheld as valid many times in the past decade when our very existence as a nation of free men was at stake. It has been demonstrated frequently in the last few years, too, when there was not the emotional stimulus of war for our very lives to bolster our determination. The war taught us amazing new techniques for vast productive miracles. After the war, industry went ahead confidently to exploit those techniques. Technological progress had zoomed during the war; after the war, business, under the spur of profit expect- ancies, used those techniques vith confi- dence in the stability of America’s absorptive capacity. Plants were expanded dramat- ically. Co'‘ossal investments in new plant and new enterprises were taken. The risks have proven, J] 1 most cases, to be good. Television, an experimental plaything as far as most of us were concerned 10 years ago, crashed on the postwar scene with the impact of an industrial giant. Plastics, electronics, gadgets of all sorts rushed to new markets. The result was a steadily expanding econ- omy, a steadily expanding working force, an unbelievable 60,000,000 jobs and an ac- celerated national income which 10 years ago we would have thought fantastic. We have been concerned in the past about attaining full employment. The goals we set then have been cxeceded and will continue to expand in the future. We are going to keep expanding our econ- omy and our job opportunitles for the good XCVI—App.——-268 and simple and necessary reason that—if we are to continue to maintain dynamic capitalism—we’ve just got to add Job oppor- tunities. We haven't been creating them fast enough. Our labor force has been in- creasing faster than employment opportu- nities. And so we have this specter of in- creasing unemployment at a time when em- ployment shouJd be on the increase. This is critical. It has been said that the way to make more employment 1s to make more employ- ers. Employers are made, of course, by pro- viding incentive, by providing investment funds, and by providing markets and profit possibilities. Despite the anguish over taxes, incentive is very much present in the American ccon~ omy, as expanding productive facilities at- test to. Much of the investment money for this expansion is coming from profits. Funds for new businesses and new enterprises are not available from new investment sources. They must be provided from somewhere. The investment markets have not been made generally attractive to the small investor. Big financial institutions with available capital are often restricted by law in their freedom to invest. Just what is the answer to this dilemma? Elther investment must come from pri- vate sources or increased demands on Gov- ernment will be made by small-business men seeking capital to start new enterprises. We have seen it in housing finance, and the RFC is openly besieged for loans for new businesses. Government has the responsibility—and you of business are just as insistent as any other group that it shoulder that respon- sibility—for keeping us secure in our free- dom, secure from invasion or attack, secure from depression and collapse. Government is not some impersonal thing, it is people. It is you and me. We all want the same things for our country and in war we pull together with unified determination. We group together in common defense against a visible enemy. We curtail our human greeds and our human selfishness. Poacc—even this halfway peace which is armed truce-—doesn’t evoke the same unity. We all want the same safety and security for America but, humanly, we want the biggest slice of the pie we can get. We don’t figure a little extra cut of that pie is going to really hurt anybody, until we find everybody grab- bing off a little bit more than he should—or trying to grab—and the first thing we know, the pie just doesn’t go around. Somebody gets left out. In a nation of full and equal citizens, we can't go letting too many get left out of jobs, orvoriun.tes, housing, education and other vants and uecessities. We best look out for our own interests by looking out for each others’. In a free enterprise economy, in a free political society, our first responsibili- ties are to our fellow citizens and to our communities and to our nation. If we carry out these responsibilities, our Nation and our economy will continue to remain strong. When there are jobs for all of our people, when the door of opportunity continues to remain open, then we need have no fears as to our Nation’s future. To keep our system operating successfully, we must continue to expand. There are a lot of young people coming out of our schools and colleges in the next few months and to tnany of them free enterprise is just an ab- stract phrase. Can we make it a reality? This is our basic responsibility. It is fundamental; it presents a never-end- ing challenge. Mr. Harpzr. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for a masterful job of getting us off on the right foot, down the right road, toward the right goal, A4253 Our next speaker needs no introduction to any Washington audience nor, for that mat- ter, to Americans everywhere. Born at Mount Morris, N. Y., he rose from water boy on a railroad to tender of switch lamps and maintenance of way man. Seeking knowl- edge in the law, he took employment on the Capitol Police Force, so he could study at night, soon followed by his election to his home-town County Board of Supervisors. In 1914, his fellow-workers saw fit to name him president of his local railroad union. From 1915 to 1918, he served as a member of the New York State Assembly. He did his job faithfully and his friends and con- stituents recognized his ability, sending him to the United States House of Representa- tives in 1919, where he served 10 terms. Then he stepped into the shoes of a United States Senator, where I first had the pleasure of knowing him as Chairman of the Senate Committee on Post Office and Post Roads. During the war, he was Chairman of the Sen- ate Special Committee to imvestigate the national defense program, having succeeded to that post when his colleague, Harry S. Truman, resigned to become Vice-President. Senator, Iam happy to have the honor of presenting you to my fellow trade associa- tion executives as the Hon James M. Mead, Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission. Mr. Mrap. It is a pleasure to meet today with you men who are taking such an im- portant part in the development of an econ- omy which is producing living standards un- dreamed of in the previous history of the world. We have but recently come through a world war with its attendant waste of hu- man values and property values. This coun- try has not only withstood the shock of that waste and gone forward to new economic heights but has also shouldered the burdens of a substantial portion of the free peoples of the world. History presents no counter- part of this situation. Never before has a nation, proceeding without thought of con- quest or domination, made such a voluntary contribution toward the preservation of right principles among its fellow nations. The decisions which have brought about this unprecedented atmosphere of cooperation among freedom-loving people were born of great courage, vision, and idealism. It has been possible to make them effective, how- ever, only because our economy at home was sound. It was built upon a sound founda- tion, and it was possible, therefore, to expand it rapidly enough to meet both domestic and foreign needs. You men who are responsi- ble for the efficient operation of trade asso- ciations have contributed your full share to the building of that economy. Since coming with the Federal Trade Com- mission, I have been questioned concerning the attitude of that Commission toward trade associations and also as to whether I personally favored or opposed trade asso- ciation activity. As a matter of fact very recently a sentence was selected from an opinion of mine dismissing a complaint and was construed in a manner to indicate that I entertained some personal opposition to trade associations. I think the opinion in that case shows very clearly that I have no such thought in mind. I was merely point- ing out the absence of media of any kind through which agreements or understand- ings might have been reached or enforced in that particular case. It is undisputed that in the past some trade associations have served in that capacity. Certainly I had no intention then or now of condemning trade associations in general or of detract- ing in any way from the spendid work that the great majority of these associations are performing. Please be assured, therefore, that I hold firmly to the belief that no sug- gestion of wrongdoing arises from joint ac- tion taken in an effort to solve mutual problems or to improve the well-being of any group so long as those who participate do
AA254 not act in such a manner as to injure those who do not participate, including compet- itors, supplies, and customers. This kind of joint effort in my opinion is the proper field for trade associations. I have not been empowered to speak for my colleagues, but I believe that represents their thinking as well as my own. Conversely, however, when a group seeks to improve its lot at the ex- pense of others, then those others need pro= tection. That briefly is the theory underly- ing the laws that prohibit agreements in restraint of trade. When any group through its trade asso- ciations or otherwise looks for easy solutions to its problems by methods that hurt others, such as fixing prices, excluding competitors from the market, restricting production, pre- venting innovations, etc., it is performing @ disservice to its industry and to the econ~ omy as a whole. It not only directly damages the public interest but also diverts attention. from the harder, more inventive, and more useful devices which would benefit the posi- tion of the participating group without hurt- ing others. It is obvious that there are many activ- ities which may be handled through trade associations with regard to which the likeli- hood of resultant unlawful restraints upon competition would be either nonexistent, or most remote. Some that come to mind in this field would be legislative and informa- tional services, research activities, studies dealng with employee relations, overseas markets, etc, Another broad field in this category is the developing of meaningful trade terminology with reference to com- modities and characteristics of commodities for which there are no precise words or con- cerning which the interpretation of language differs substantially. The Federal Trade Commission and trade groups have col- Jaborated in working out the definitions of such terms as “preshrunk,” “gold-filled,” “shock resistant,’ and the like. Such co- operation creates the possibility of making acer ire wourescT+vticne in the place of hazy Ora ‘seta. ine, Ll. enables both indus- try and the Commission to assist in protect~ ing honest businessmen and consumers alike from the effects of misrepresentation. The Commission’s rayon rules present a good example of that kind of work. As contrasted with joint activities of this type, there are the practices which almost inevitably involve unlawful trade restraints. These, of course, would include all forms of price fixing and price manipulation, In- cidentally in that connection, I fear that at times there is a tendency to believe that unless the practice results in the actual fixing of a price, it may not be unlawful., I would like, therefore, to quote briefly from the Supreme Court’s decision in the Socony- Vacuum Oil Co. case in 1940: “Any combination which tampers with price structures is engaged in an unlawful activity. Even though the members of the price-fixing.group were in no position to control the market, to the extent that they raised, lowered, or stabilized prices, they would be directly interfering with the free play of market forces. The act places all such schemes beyond the pale and protects that vital part of our economy against any degree of interference. Congress has not left with us the determination of whether or not particular price-fixing schemes are wise or unwise, healthy or destructive. It has not permitted the age-old cry of ruinous competition and competitive evils to be a defense to price-fixing conspiracies. It has no more allowed genuine or fancied competi- tive abuses as a legal justification for such schemes than it has the good intentions of the members of the combination. If such a shift is to be made, it must be done by the Congress. Certainly Congress has not left us with any such choice.” Between the two extreme types of prac~ tices, those where unlawful results are un- likely to be found and those which cannot be engaged in without producing unlawful re- sults, there is a great variety of practices whose legality must be tested against the results which they produce. For the most part they are capable of being used without harming others. Experience has also shown that they are equally capable of being used in such a way as to harm others. For this reason the Commission can neither unquali- fiedly condemn nor unqualifiedly approve trade-association activities involving such practices. ; In the Temporary National Economic Com- muttes Mencerenh No. 21, and, incidentally, I was? memo 1c¢c..luea Committee, the section on trade associations as a means of monopo- lizing the market has subheadings which deal with cost accounting, statistical activi- ties, price-reporting systems, standardiza- tion, credit bureaus, and patent pools. Un- der these subheadings cases are referred to in which each of these classes of activities was used as a device to restrain trade. Yet any one of these activities may be innocently used by other associations under other cir- cumstances. It is unfair to conclude from this that the law is crpriciows or uncertain or that it exposes esscciatio managers to undue risks. Those who participate in a plan are the only ones who realy know what its purpose is or in what way it is to be carried out. Likewise, they are in the most favorable position to know in considerable detail Just what consequences it has had. If it is actually injuring others, there seldom is doubt in their minds as to this point. More- over, those who develop a program of lawful, constructive activities are in the most fav- orable position to prevent it from becoming combined with illegal activities. The re- sponsibility properly rests on them to avoid the illegal purpose and not upon the Gov- ernment to forbid practices absolutely even though they are sometimes innocent, or to condemn practices absolutely even though they are sometimes the instrument of an unlawful scheme. The law-enforcement agencies constantly encounter cases in which there ts documentary evidence of an intent to violate the law and to cloak the violation with innocent activities, or with a profes- sion of ignorance about the proper interpre- tation of the law and about the consequences of the illegal acts. For this reason these agencies are understandably skeptical of as- sociations that havr able legal counsel, and whose membership consists of enterprises most of which have able legal counsel, who profess to be apprehensive and uncertain about what they may legally do. It seems to me that if trade associations are to serve the needs of industry and at the same time remain within the established legal boundaries, the first requirement is that their managers believe sincerely in the preservation of the competitive free-enter- prise system. Recently there was called to my attention statements contained in speeches delivered several years ago by trade association managers, whom I am advised have achieved considerable prominence in that field. The following is quoted from one of those speeches: ‘Under the system of unrestricted com- petition honestly carried out, prices are al- ways either toohigh or toolow. * * * Asa matter of fact we have never been able to try out the system of unrestricted competition honestly because, notwithstanding the anti- trust laws, men have been forced through motives of self-preservation to work to- gether in various ways to control prices and to avoid the ultimate risks of a system under which they were supposed to operate. * * * ‘If I were in a position to write the ticket for industry in this country, I should give each industry the right to name the prices at which its products should be sold and I should enforce these price determinations through due process of law.” APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD I hope and believe that the philosophy expressed in this quotation is far less preva- lent today than it may have been when the speech was made. For certainly there would be troubled waters ahead for any association whose course was charted by such a com- pass. When I was invited to appear here this afternoon, I naturally sought out some cur- rent literature on the subject of trade asso- ciations with a view to informing myself as to the problems with which you might be most concerned. From this I gained the impression that the problems were of recent origin—or in any event had been greatly ag- gravated by recent activities of the enforce- ment agencies of the Government. It fur- ther appeared that those agencics were tak- ing progressively stricter action against co- operative activities in industry. When [I sought to test the character of current ac- tions against those taken in similar situa- tions a generation ago, however, the facts failed to support the contentions made in this regard in some current trade journals and magazines. So let us check the record. I found, for example, that the Federal Trade Commission in its very first proceeding in-~ volving the activities of a trade association, Docket 17, Bureau of Statistics of the Book Paper Manufacturers (1917), after finding that the association and its members had been engaged in a cooperative plan to en- hance and maintain prices of book paper through the association, ordered the various members to “forever cease and desist from continuing their respective memberships in the said Bureau of Statistics of the Book Paper Manufacturers, or from reorganizing the said bureau, and shall not create or join or become members of any such bureau or similar organization having for its purpose the objects, or any of them, charged in the complaint.” They went further than that for in that same case the secretary of the association was ordered to “‘forever cease and desist from continuing said Bureau of Statistics of the Book Paper Manufacturers, or from reorgan-~ izing such bureau, or from creating, man- aging, conducting, working for or becoming connected in any capacity with any other bureau or similar organization having for its purpose the objects charged in the com- plaint as having been the objects of said Bureau of Statistics, or similar objects, and from being connected with or assisting in any concerted movement to enhance prices of book-print paper, or maintain such en- hanced prices, or to bring about substantial uniformity of such prices, or from aiding and assisting In any capacity in effecting or maintaining such enhancement, or such uniformity of prices through the medium of telephone communications, or by corre- spondence, or by personal meetings, or through other communications or in any other manner whatsoever.” Nearly 30 years later the Commission had occasion to issue another order to cease and desist in the book-paper industry, this time against the various manufacturers and the Book Paper Manufacturers’ Association, cov- ering a somewhat similar cooperative price- fixing effort. In this latter case, however, the Commission merely required the mem~ pers of the association to cease and desist from exchanging through the association or any other agency certain current and future price information. Another case in point on this subject is American Column & Lumber Co, (257 U. 8. 877, decided in 1921). In that case the De- partment of Justice had charged that a trade association and its members had violated section 1 of the Sherman Act through the exchange of price and statistical informa- tion. In upholding the charge the Court stated: “Genuine competitors do not make daily, weekly, and monthly reports of the minutest details of their business to their rivals, as
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the defendants did; * * * and they do not submit the details of their business to the analysis of an expert, jointly employed, and obtain from him a ‘harmonized’ estimate of the market as it is and as, in his specially and confidentially informed judgment, it promises to be” (p. 410). The Federal Trade Commission, in its re- port on “Open-Price Trade Associations” (S. Doc. No. 226, Feb. 11, 1929), stated: “The circulation of price and statistical information in a form to identify the results for individual members is so unnecessary to the general statistical work of associations and so susceptible of abuse that it might explicitly be declared illegal irrespective of inient. The impropriety of the practice of members of an association giving informa- tion as to ‘minutest details of their busi- ness to their rivals’ in what purported to be statistical reports was adverted to by the Supreme Court in the Hardwood case.” The Commission added, however, that: “With the development of rules of trade practice, on the initiative of the associations and with the cooperation of this Commis- sion, it is reasonable to suppose that the marketing of goods will become more and more an open and aboveboard affair and that much of the machinery needed to find out what competitors are doing may be dis~ pensed with. What is needed in its stead is more comprehensive trade statistics.” In the disposition of its legal cases the Commission has not found it necessary to issue orders requiring trade associations to cease all exchange of price and statistical in- formation. It has been careful to limit the provisions of its orders so as to prohibit only those systems and programs of exchanging and disseminating price and statistical in- formation found as © matter of fact to have trade-restraining effects in the particular caso before the Commission for its considera- tion. It is clear that the position of the Federal Trade Commission in condemning activities of trade associations falls far short of the oft-quoted position of Adam Smith. Furthermore, it is clear that in terminating unlawful activities the Commission has not found it necessary in recent cases to employ fully the drastic remedies suggested in the Supreme Court decision from which I have just quoted. I can only conclude from a comparison of the Commission's current actions against trade associations with those taken a gencra- tion ago and with earlier court decisions that the Commission’s current position shows no antagonism on its part against the lawful activilies of trade associations. It has not relaxed its vigilance insofar as unlawful practices are concerned, but obviously it has sought to put out the fires without destroy- ing the structure, It can never be tolerant of illegal activities because the Congress has created it for the purpose of eliminating all practices that fall within that category. I hold firmly to the belief that trade assocla- tions have by no means exhausted the possi- bilities of developing lawful activities of great benefit to their groups and to the whole economy. We shall be pleased to ex~ plore with you the problems in this fleld and to render every possible assistance con~ sistent with the protection of the public interest that has been intrusted to us by the Congress. Mr. Harper. Thank you, Senator, for giving us one of your always exacting interpreta- tions. You have sharpened our thinking and I know that you have stimulated a number of questions for our forum to follow. The third member of our panel was born 1n Richland, Ind., attended Purdue Univer- sity, and was graduated from George Wash- ington University with an A. B. in economics. He entered the Department of Commerce in January 1920 and was assigned to the Bureau of the Census, transferring to the United States Treasury the following December. He returned to Commerce in July 1928 as a mem- ber of the Specialities Division of the Bu- reau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce, becoming Chief of the Division in 1938. In October 1942, with a reorganized Bureau, he was appointed Chief of the Industrial Econ- omy Division. When the Office of Internea- tional Trade was organized in 1945, he was named Chief of the Commodities Branch, re- maining with the OIT until he was appointed Deputy Director of the Office of Domestic Commerce under the late Gen, Albert J. Browning. When General Browning resigned to become a vice president of the Ford Motor Co., our next speaker took over as Acting Director, being appointed Director in August 1946. Fellow member and guests, I give you, at this point, an old friend of trade association executives, but one who always has a new and meaningful message for such represent- atives of business and industry as we. The Director of the Office of Domestic Commerce of the United States Department of Com-~ merce, Mr, H. B. McCoy. Mr. McCoy. Americans have the reputation of being a Nation of joiners. In no other country do its citizens organize for group . effort as much as in the United States. This is a natural consequence of a large popula- tion with a high standard of living and the many diverse activities of business, recrea- tion, and social which are part of our modern life. Business alone spends many millions of dollars annually in activities which are carried on through business organizations, For many years, the Department of Com- merce has compiled various kinds of in- formation on organized industry. In fact, keeping abreast of trade association develop- ments in this country is probably the single oldest activity of the Department of Com- merce during its almost 50 years of existence. According to our latest survey of nonprofit organized business groups, there are now more than 16,000 national and local organ- izations of businessmen. This huge body of organized business activity is probably sev- eral times the number of such groups that were in existence when I began my service with the Department of Commerce 30 years ago. In addition to the 16,000 trade groups, we have a record of more than 10,000 local luncheon clubs of business and professional men, There are now 1,500 trade associations of national scope (manufacturers, retailers, wholesalers, service industries, and the like) and 2,500 regional or State groups, plus 8,000 purely local associations. In general, these organized business groups are dedicated to the welfare of their particular industry or trade and they carry on a large variety of functions and activities to achieve their ob- jectives. Of the 12,000 purely trade associa- tions, 2,000 are of manufacturers, 5,000 are of retailers (or of wholesalers) and another 5,000 are of business service firms (including those in construction, mining, and other miscellaneous activities). The other major type of organized busi- ness Is the chamber of commerce, of which there are about 4,000. Quite obviously, this type of organized business effort is devoted to the general welfare and the problems of a particular city or area, Chambers of com- merce are generally regarded as purely pro- motional organizations, but they do carry on a great many activities that are not of direct promotional character. The large number of organized business groups is probably not excessive by any rea- sonable standard in relation to our total business population. While the growth of organized industry groups has been rapid during the last quarter century, we have also had a large increase in our business population, According to statistics developed by the Department of Commerce, there was an average of 3,900,000 business firms in operation during 1949, which was slightly below the number in 1948, but was 600,000 A4255 more than those in operation 10 years before, in 1989. Parenthetically, this mass of 600,- 000 business establishments is in the main composed of small business firms. This large increase, mostly in the small-business area, does not bear out statements made during the past two or three postwar years that hundreds of thousands of small businesses have disappeared due to absorption by larger firms. We do not, as yet, have complete statistics on the size distribution of businesses for the most recent years for comparison with data collected and tabulated by the Department of Commerce for the year 1939. During that year when the business population was 8,300,000, nearly half of all business enter- prises had no paid employees; 37 percent had only 1 to 8 employees; 14 percent had from 14 to 19 employees; 3 percent had from 20 to 99 employees; and only 1 percent employed 100 or more. There is a considerable vari- ance, however, in the size distribution among the major types of business. Accord- ing to estimates of our Office of Business Ecou.omics, the following size distribution is indicated for manufacturing (approxi- mately 200,000 enterprises): 15 percent had no employees; 82 percent had from 1 to 3 employees; 29 percent had from 4 to 19 em- ployees; 17 percent had from 20 to 99; and about 7 percent had 100 or more. It is thus evident that the preponderant number of smaller business enterprises are found in the distributive and service indus- tries, but, even so, the manufacturing indus-~ tries are largely small businesses. We estimate that the 1,500 trade associa- tions of Nation~wide importance have a gross membership of 1,000,000 business firms. An additional large membership is accounted for in the regional and local trade groups, including, of course, chambers of commerce. Actually, business organizations are active in about 4,000 cities and towns. However, in the discussion this afternoon we are large- ly concerned with organized industry groups which are national in scope and character. If our estimates are reasonably accurate, probably not over one-fourth of our busi- ness establishments belong to an organized industry group of this kind. Even if the roughly 40 percent of all business estab- lishments, which are individual proprietor- ships, are eliminated as having no potential membership possibility, there is still appar- ently a very large number of small busi- nesses which do not have affiliations with the principal organized business groups of na~ tional character. The questions might be asked, does this indicate that the typical organized industry group has no particular attraction for a large number of small busi- nesses, or that the organized groups have made no effort to increase their membership among small-business firms? Personally, I do not know which is the correct answer, al- though I suspect that a highly qualified affirmative answer might be given to both questions. The Department of Commerce has for many years been a supporter of organized pusiness effort when the objectives of such organizations are to promote the general welfare of consumers and the owners and employees of the businesses. Where busi- ness organizations achieve such objectives that are being operated in the general pub- lic interest and are thus entitled to general public approval. It is hardly necessary before this audience to discuss the various and well-established functions and activities of trade associations. Some time ago the Department made an analysis of the extensive range of services that trade associations gave to their em- ployees. Just recently, we made available @ report enumerating 75 of the more com- mon and popular trade association activities which we hope will be useful to all organ- ized business groups which are concerned
AA256 with appraising and improving their services to members, Trade association activities, like every- thing else, are expensive undertakings. Al- though the number of trade associations and the scope of their operations are impressive, the great majority of these groups have small budgets and small staffs. As Jay Judkins points out in his “National Associations of the United States,’ of the 1,500 associations which endeavor to serve the major industries and trades of the Nation, only 210 have a staff of 15 or more; 230 have a staff of 6 to 14 employees; while 970, or about two-thirds of all of them, have an average of only three employees each. Thus, in discussing what trade associations might do to aid small busi- ness, it must be kept in mind the limitations of activities the members put on these groups through financial contributions to their operations. An expanding economy, such as ours, re- quires large business investments, both in new and existing enterprises. We must pro- vide each year employment for over a mil. lion new workers that are added to our labor force. we now have about 600,000 more business firms than we had in 1939 which is a direct corollary to the expansion of our business activity during the past 10 years. Although we have no facts or figures on which to base a judgment, I believe that a very large share of these new enterprises are owned and operated by individuals having limited busi- ness experience. As everyone is well aware, yew businesses are undertaken by people without any business experience; other busi- nesses are established by those who have previously been employed in a certain line of business, have gained some experience in some phase of it and then strike out on their own. Due to the high level of business ac- tivity, particularly the 3 years immediately after the end of the war, small businesses prospered. As competitive conditions re- turned to a more normal situation, the capa- bilities of small-business management is be- ing tested. It is this fact, it seems to me, that offers the greatest opportunity for organized industry to be of real service to the country in assisting small businesses which deserve help and thus help in maintaining our business expansion. . Most of the authoritative studies that have been made of the problems of small business generally emphasize two major factors that are of the greatest importance in the organization and operation of small enterprises. These are the availability of adequate financing and capable manage- ment. Organized industry cannot be of very much assistance in connection with the financing of small business. By and large, most' small businesses must be initially financed by the resources of the owner and with the help from relatives and friends. It is in the field of management that organ- ized industry can be of greatest help to small business. Under the designation of manage- ment, I refer to all types of operations in which business decisions must be made, such as purchasing, production, and marketing. It is not feasible within the time limits this afternoon for me to discuss in detail the widely varied activities of trade associa- tions which are now and may in the future ald small business. Some of the best ex- amples are readily available as public in- formation. One of the best sources is the ATAE awards program, which was inaugu- rated in 1929. We have recently prepared @ summary of the entire series of contests. The summary is being forwarded to the ATAE Advisory Committee for suggestions and comments before it is put into final form. This summarization, entitled “Outstanding Services of Trade Associations, 1930-1949,” is available on the exhibit table in this room. A review of the 124 submittals which have been made since the inauguration of the As I have indicated previously, said program reveals numerous projects and programs of trade associations which have been beneficial to small business. Some of them were designed specifically for this pur- pose, Of the many kinds of things that organ- ized business can do to help small business, I should like to discuss two which I think are of outstanding importance. These relate first to technical research, largely in the manufacturing industries, and second to merchandising and sales promotion which are common problems to practically all small businesses. The most often mentioned dis- advantage of small business is that of tech- nical research. Large companies can afford to maintain research laboratories to im- prove their products, develop new products, and increase productive efficiency. Small business is at @ particular disadvantage in this field. However, there has been definite development in the last few years for trade associations to finance technical research, the benefits of such research is available to all members, large, medium, and small. As a@ matter of fact, the results of such research are frequently made available to nonmem-~ bers. In order that small business may com- pete with one another and with big business, jt must have access to technical informa- tion and guidance at costs which small busi- ness can afford. In some fields of produc- tion and processing technological progress is very rapid. An outstanding example is the chemical industry. New production and new processes developed in the laboratorics find their way quickly into commercial pro- duction. Small business can be at a seri- ous disadvantage unless it has access to these developments as promptly as possible. This is a very fruitful field in which organized groups can provide an outstanding service to small business and to the public generally. Hundreds of thousands of business in- quiries are received each year by the Depart- ment of Commerce both here in Washington and through our 42 fleld offices. For the last year, these inquiries have increased and have been characterized by an increasing proportion being devoted to marketing and sales promotion. It is in this field that the small business necds stimulating ideas, in- formation on markets and market statistics, and advice and guidance on sound and pro- ductive sales promotion methods. This scems to me again to be an extremely useful function for organized industry to assist the smaller business community. Not so long ago, it was common practice among business not to reveal successful merchandis- Ing and sales promotion ideas and methods. About 20 years ago, I became quite familiar with the activities of a trade association in a rather important industry. The trade as- sociation mectings were largely social affairs. It had few members from small businesses and the reason was obvious; the activities of the trade association provided nothing of value to a small busincss and I suspect not a great deal of value to the other members. Today, that trade association has several very important activities which are uscful to all members, including small business. The membership of small business in this association is now very substantial. It at- tracted the smaller members because it has provided statistical services, marketing in~ formation, advice on the selection and train- ing of salesmen and other similar subjects which the smaller businesses could apply directly to their operations. I believe that trade associations are gen- erally aware of their public responsibilities. A number of trade association executives fee] that their organizations are on trial and that they must not only continue to justify their existence to thelr members but also to carry on their work in such a way as to merit public recognition of their value to our society. That trade associations are giving increased attention to the responsibilities APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD they have to aid smaller businesses is, I be- lieve, sound judgment on their part. The emphasis on small business is not merely an attempt to single out one segment of our business life for special or preferential atten- tion. Small business asks for no special preferences or favors; it does ask for fair treatment and an equalization of its funda- mental disabilities as compared with big bus- iness. By serving small business, organized industry groups will serve all business. Mr, Harper. Thank you, Mr. McCoy, and you likewise have stirred our thoughts about such basic elements as small business and I know that there’ll be questions in the hopper for you. The final participant in this panel presen- tation was born in Chicago, holds a bachelor of arts degree from Harvard and spent a short time in the Army in the First World War. From 1921 to 1942, he was in the in- vestment banking business in Chicago and, in 1942, he joined the war effort as a civilian at Wright Field in Dayton, Ohio, in the re- negotiation of war contracts and subcon- tracts, continuing in that work, both in and out of uniform, until February 1949. Dur- ing the last 2 years of his renegotiation en- deavor, he was a member of the Army Price Adjustment Board which had charge of all renegotiation activities for the Army and the Air Force, In March 1949, he came to the Economic Cooperation Administration and was attached to the office of his old friend and fellow townsman, Wayne C. Taylor. With the formation of that agency’s Inter- national Trade Promotion Division, our next speaker became its Assistant Director. Ladies and gentlemen, here is & man with & message of merit ahout a responsibility that must be reckoned with, regardless of the pros and cons, and the man’s name is Alexander Kirk. Mr. Kirx. I understand the topic under discussion here today is the Responsibilities of Organized Industry in Our Expanding Economy. This is a very large fleld to at- tempt to cover. I would therefore like to take the liberty of expressing my views and those of ECA on one highly important aspect of this general topic, one which we feel is probably the most important economic problem confronting the free nations of the world today. This is the responsibility of organized industry in bringing about a bal- ance of payments between the United States and the nations of western Europe at a high level of international trade for the over-all good of our domestic economy, for the sake of keeping our allies out of the hands of communism and for the prevention of a third world war. This will mean, of course, that if American industry chooses to assume this responsibility, it will not only accept without protest @ greater flow of imports from western Europe, but it will do every~ thing it can to encourage and help the dis- tribution of imported merchandise in this country. Now, even if we were all as dumb in ECA as our critics would like to have you believe, none of us is so dumb that we do not recor- nize that this is a highly controversial sub- ject. There are very many sincere and in-~ telligent people, in addition to those who have special axes to grind, who believe that all this talk about increasing imports and balancing payments is a lot of bureaucratic nonsense. They foresee that this policy, instead of being of bencfit to our national economy, will result in the ruin of many of our domestic producers and the throwing out of work of millions of Americans. Now I grant that if the United States Government should suddenly remove all barriers to the importation of foreign goods and at the same time the nations of western Europe should achieve the miracle of persuading their man- ufacturers to concentrate all their efforts on exporting goods to this country, our domestic producers in some lines might be in for a very bad time. Even under these impossible cir-