A758 68,670 annually—the service ts attracting in- ferlor replacements. Thie means poorer service, Poet office workers' pay is fixed by law, and an increase is possible only through legisla- tion. Several bills for an increase have been introduced in Congress, but no action has been taken on them. To get action postal workers have decided to stage a post-card campaign in which you will be asked to write to your Congressman and urge him to support pay-increase legis- lation. This cause strikes us as being a worthy one, deserving of the cooperation of all. Address of Hon. James M. Mead EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. WILLIAM T. BYRNE OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 14, 1951 Mr. BYRNE of New York. Mr. Speak- er, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following re- marks by Hon. James M. Mead, Chair- man, Federal Trade Commission, at the annual Notions Sales Conference, Stat- os Hotel, New York City, February 6, 1; The Federal Trade Commission and the vast retail business of the country, of which you are representatives, have much in com- mon. We are both concerned with the prac- tices and methods which adversely affect the business of selling and distributing merchan- dise to the buying public. We are both in- terested in maintaining the free functioning of industry and trade on a sound and con- structive basis. In that manner the public @s well as business itself is shielded from the harmful effects of unfair competitive methods and monopolistic controls. The present emergency emphasizes the impor- tance of this common objective for good business, In the commercial and industrial aspects of the present world struggle the contest is essentially between a system of free competi- tive enterprise, on tho one hand, and a regi- mented totalitarianism on the other. The preservation of our Mberties, the survival of our democratic way of Ufe, depend in no little measure upon our ability to operate our economic system in such a way as to out- strip all others tn production and distribu- tion of materials and products for defense and for civilian requirements. To accomplish this we must harness to the task our productive capacity to its full- est potential. We must see to it that private business, which serves us all, is not pushed, or allowed to drift, into the clutches of pri- vate monopoly. Trade must be carried on under principles of acrupulous practices. Methods which injure competition by de- ceiving or exploiting the consumer or under- Mining the confidence of the people in the integrity of business must be prevented. These tasks call for greater vigilance on the part of the law-enforcement agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission. President Truman has been mindful of the need for special alertness in these matters. In a directive of September 28, 1950, the President referred to the fact that during the last war the long standing tendency to- ward economic concentration was acceler- ated. He explained that mobilization, in the absence of protective measures, may again expose our economy to this threat and there- by imperil the very system we are seeking to protect, He further pointed out the fact that in various provisions of the Defense Production Act of 1950, Congress Iikewise indicated its concern over this danger to free competitive enterprise. The President inetructed the defense agencies to consult with the At- torney General and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission for the eof determining and eliminating, without tm- pairment of the defense effort, “factors which may tend to suppress competition unduiy, create or strengthen monopolies, injure smal) business, or otherwise promote undue con- centration of economic power.” Restraints of trade and other monopolistic conditions stemming from industrial combi- nations, and the use of deceptive practices and unfair methods of competition, ere problems with which the Federal Trade Com- mission must deal. Because their harmful effects upon our economy are more deeply felt in times of emergency than in normal competitive periods, the Commission's task is more urgent than in normal times. It ts not erased by the fact that we are muDiliging for defense, In periods of emergenvy some rights and privileges of peacetime must be temporarily abridged or restricted in the in- teresta of national survival. However, that need not, and should not, ental] the sur- render or crippling of our competitive tree enterprise system. Last week I directed the Commission's staff to be on the watch for “opportunists in the business world,” who may seek to exploit con. sumers and the Government during tue na- tional defense emergency. Based upon our experience of World Wars I and 1, it is an- ticipated that unfair acts, practices, and methods in connection with obtaining de- fense contracts will be employed more ex- tensively as the letting of such contracts expands. Experience has demonstrated that when the Government begins to take wn In- creasing proportion of the output of indus- trial concerns, efforts are often shifted by some to securing a preferred position on Government work. By others a preferred po- sition is sought with respect to scarce ma- terials or products needed in the civilian economy. Then there are some who plan for @ preferred position in reapect to business op- erations after the emergency is over, in short, some special unwarranted advantage to the detriment of one’s competitors. During the last war, small and independ- ent business found tt necessary to organize, to seek the assistance of the Federal Trade Commission and committees of Congress in order to remain in business. The Commis- sion was called upon to expend considerable time and effort on cases involving collusive bidding and fraudulent efforts to deprive the Government of a fair price on its defense purchases. The impact of the present mobilization effort is already being felt in our economy. It 1s placing a strain upon our free enter- prise system and increasing the threat of private monopolistic controls and unfair trade methods, If the accelerated growth of the concentration of economic power experi- enced in World Wars I and II is to be pre- vented in the present emergency, and small and independent business afforded oppor- tunity to survive and offer real competition, intensive vigilance ia required. DECEPTIVE PRACTICES When considering matters of tmportance to the protection of the competitive enter- prise system under which our country has produced the highest standard of living in the world, we mUst not overlook the need for guarding against the types of acts or methods in selling merchandise which col- lectively fall under the heading ‘deceptive practices.” In times of war or, as in the present emer- gency, in all-out preparedness for adequate national defense, the functions of the Com- mission in this fleld Mkewise occupy a posi- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD tion of much importance. When there are shortages in essential materials, and substi- tutes must be used, the necessity for truth in advertising becomes greater than when such matertals are in full eupply. Particu- larly is this trttle of such things as food, clothing, household furnishings, and medicl- nal preparations. As more and more physicians are called into the military service, self-medication in- evitably increases. The civilian then must rely to an increasing extent upon the Federal Trade Commission to check promptly false and deceptive claims made for dangerous drugs, ineffective remedtes, or fake nostrums. The citizen who must to a large extent treat himself 1s entitled to all the protection and safeguards that this Commission can throw around the advertisements of foods, druge, and medicol devices. Not only is this true with respect to the preservation of the pub- lic health, tt 1s also true with respect to pro- tection of the consumer's pocketbook. In times when taxes must be sufficiently high to support the military burden, it is im- portant that the public should recelve real value for its money. Purchase of ineffective remedies is not only a waste of the public's money, but it is also a hazard to health. The use of and the reliance upon such reme- dies postpone or prevent recourse to proper treatment. It 18 also highiy important to give such protection as can be given promptly to the public in its purchase of other necessary household supplies and requirements. Ex- perience in World War II showed that as goon “#8 some materials become scarce, the opportufiist of light conscience will use sub- atitutes, ‘or materials’ of infertor value, and materials which may even be harmful. Use of substitutes may not in itself be objac- tionable, but we must prevent false adver- tising of such substitutes and stop the use of false claims which will be detrimental to the purchasing public and unfair to the honest competitor. High woo! prices, shortages of raw wool, and conditions arising from emergency con- trols will undoubtedly increase the use of shoddy and wool substitutes in the manufac- ture of consumer fabrics, Ohanges in fiber content, stresses which arise from shortages and attendant conditions, together with pressure to matntain accustomed price ranges in apparel merchandise, make it more urgent than ever that there be thorough enforcement of our Wool Products Labeling Act. I am happy to note that inforinative labeling generally has in recent years become an integral part of the merchandising prac- tices of progressive manufacturers and mer- chants. Scrupulous manufacturers and mer- chants must be protected against dishonest competitors who would pass off their prod- ucts as wool, when in reality they contained substitute fibera, or those who would falsely label their fabrica as new wool when they were made of shoddy, or who might otherwise conceal the true fiber content. Proper wool labeling must be enforced as a necessary medium of protecting the civilian population, During the emergency period there will be many changes in quality and standards, Aotive enforcement is highly im- portant to bring an adequate measure of protection to our fiber-producing industries; to our manufacturers and merchants against the evils of deception, confusion, and unlair competition, Our field investigation staff is located in strategic industrial centers to expose false or unfair sales practices—practices in the form of advertisements, labels, and other forms, Our continuing surveys of radio and periodi- cal ativertising, as well as our unfair com- petition and antimonopoly work form part of the Government's effort to protect the public in the mobilisation effort and to maintain our private-enterprise system. Constant vigilance is required not only by the Government but also on the part of Jusl-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ness itself. Government alone cannot do the job adequately. Much depends on the ac- tive and moral support of the vast group of scrupulous and patriotic men and women in business who constantly keep their sights on that which is honest and fair in Industry and trade. With business and Government working together in unity under the inspir- ing motive of doing what is best for our country, we can be assured of the ultimate triumph of our ideals of freedom and justice for all. The Righteous Sword EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THURMOND CHATHAM OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 14, 1951 Mr. CHATHAM. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the REc- orD, I include the following sermon by Rev. Frederick Brown Harris, minister, Foundry Methodist Church, and Chap- lain of the United States Senate: Tue RicHTEous SworpD (By Frederick Brown Harris, minister, Foun- dry Methodist Church; Chaplain, U. 5. Senate) There is nothing inherently good or bad about a sword. The quality of sharpened steel may depend on whether it is in the hands of a surgeon or a bandit. Earth's greatest Teacher admonished, “Put up your sword; for he that takes it shall perish by it.” That sword was drawn in anger and ven- geance. It was a bad sword. But Jesus also said, “I am not come to bring peace, but a sword.” That sword unsheathed against evil was a good sword. AJl depends upon the pur- pose for which the blade is to be used. In ancient days, the walls of ruined Jeru- salem were rebuilt by toiler-soldiers with trowels in one hand and swords in the other. And,as late as last summer, gardeners were seen with hoes in one hand and cans of poigon spray in the other for the peste which attacked their growing plants. Without swords, coerced men are com- pelled to cry peace when there is no peace and to surrender the most heavenly things to the most hellish forces. There is a sword bathed in heaven. If swords are in the hands only of those who cannot be trusted with them, then the only peace possible between the lion and the lamb, which, it is prophesied, shall some day Ne down together, is for the lamb to lite down inside the lion. There are present-day appeasers of evil who would label that arrangement peace. But a peace dic- tated by unethical force is the peace of slaves. When a prime minister took an umbrella to Munich and no righteous sword, @ glorious little democracy in the midst of Europe was thrown to the wolves in appeasement, a per- fidy committed for peace in our time. A show of weakness will never bring in any day of peace. A nation must be strong to make its work for peace effective. A peace gained by con- stant retreat because of the threatening blackmail! of superior force is not peace, but war, It will be a day of mourning for all the free world if ever our Nation, whose poten- tial force is the greatest, refuses to back to the hilt its belief in universal brotherhood with its terrible swift sword against aggres- sors ready to pounce on new victims. There always is enough bad in the world to shatter any dream of an ethical peace, unless that 41] will has a restraining fear of the power of organized good will. Whenever a nation with a completely unethical purpose to conquer the world reaches the stage of aggressive hoatility a part of its technique always is to develop disarmament propaganda in the nation against whose life it is plotting. To weaken the national striking power is to vote to make it inevitable that the democracies shall be forced to do the bidding of moral perverts who have been allowed to fashion @ preponderance of swords. Of course, force never is the last word, At best, it but clears the way for the construc- tive agencies of friendship, good will, and cooperation to do their healing work, so that at last swords can be turned into plowshares. But when you face men who have put the state on the throne, instead of God, you cannot conquer them by kindly example or a friendly smile. No gentle charms can stay the fangs of the cobra when it is ready to strike. That callous deviltry is to be al- lowed at will to trample righteousness into the mire whenever it is powerful enough, while the forces of good stand impotently by, is a tragic travesty of justice and judgment. In England, before World War II, a group of influential clergymen, ignoring Germany’s rearmament, led a movement utterly to re- nounce the sword of defensze. Declaring they were willing to risk all on meeting Hitler's threat with understanding and good will, they secured hundreds of thousands of signed pledges of a virtual re- fusal to take up arms. That futile policy, sincerely followed, helped to bomb the churches of which these preachers were the ministers and to fill the land with lamenta- tions for the mangled and the dead. That crusade was a definite factor in Britain's unpreparedness when the foe struck. Time tragically proved it was no hour to exchange a clean sword for an olive branch. In America, a man stood up in a free pulpit to preach. He quoted detached sentences from the Christ whose hand held the lash when His Father’s House was made a den of thieves, and whose eyes were often Aas a flame of fire. The preacher declared that evil, no matter how diabolical, was never to be resisted with any physical weapons. hetorically, he asked, “What has a sword ver accomplished worth while?” In a pew was a worshiper in whose heart was ar aching void and in whose home was a Purplc Heart, speaking of the valor of a young cru- sader who marched forth with a rightecu sword and came not back, At the churc! door, following the service, that worshiper said to the clergyman: “I can tell you one thing that the righteous sword has done.” “What?” asked the minister. Replied the Mstener with deep feeling, “The sword in the hand of those who have resisted militant evil has given you the right to stand here today and to proclaim your convictions without fear of being liquidated.” The one who had publicly said that rampant evil was never to be resisted by force paused for a moment and then acknowledged, “I am afraid I can- not refute that.” There is no refutation in God’s world and man's for the flash of the righteous sword. A Prayer for the President and Congress EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. GARDNER R. WITHROW OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 14, 1951 Mr. WITHROW. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent to extend my re- marks in the Recorp, I include therein a prayer which I received from Sister Mary Samuel, of St. Clara Convent, Sinsinawa, Wis. This very kind lady A759 informed me that this beautiful prayer is being recited every day by 1,500 pro- fessed sisters, residents in different parts of the United States. Sister Samuel stated in her letter to me, “I wish it could be framed and put on the two walls of Congress,” and I most heartily agree with that sentiment. A PRAYER FOR THE PRESIDENT AND CONGRYSS We pray Thee, O God of might, wisdom, and justice, through whom authority is rightly administered, laws are enacted, and Judgment decreed, assist with Thy Holy Bpirit of counsel and fortitude the President of these United States, that his administra- tion may be conducted in righteousness and be eminently useful to Thy people over whom he presides, by encouraging due respect for virtue and religion, by a faithful execution of the laws in justice and mercy, and by restraining vice and immorality. Let the light of Thy divine wisdom direct the de- liberations of the Congress and shine forth in all the proceedings and laws framed for our rule and government, so that they may tend to the preservation of peace, the pro- motion of national happiness, the increase of industry, sobriety, and useful knowledge, and may perpetuate to us the blessings of equal liberty. Food for India EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDMUND P. RADWAN OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 14, 19f° Mr. RADWAN. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend ny remarks in the Rec- orp, I include the following letter, reso- lution, and editorial: CouNcIL oF CHURCHES OF BUFFALO AND Exlz County, Buffalo, N. Y., February 6, 1951. The Honorable EpMmunp P. Rapwan, The House of Representativea, Washington, D.C. Dear Sir: The annual meeting of the Council of Churches of Buffalo and Erle County, assembled in session February 2, 1951, unanimously endorsed the resolution of the general board of the National Council of Churches supporting, the provision for making available 2,000,000 tons of food grain to relieve the acute food shortage in India. I write, therefore, to express the hope that the proper legislation will be drafted, intro- duced, and passed. There are those inclined to punish Nehru for his position on Korea by letting the people of India starve. The Christian conscience rejects this attitude as morally intolerable. Further, starving peo- ple are ripe for the spread of communism. Very truly yours, HARLAN M. Frost, Executive Secretary. Foop ror INDIA Whereas the Government of the United States has been officially requested by the Government of India to make available 2,000,000 tons of food grain to relieve the acute food shortage in that country; and Whereas such action on the part of our Government would he justified not only on humanitarian grounds but also for reason that it would strengthen bonds of friendship between the American and Indian peoples: be it Resolved, That the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of
A760 America recommend that the Congress and the executive branch of the Government of the United States take such steps as may be required to assist in meeting the present urgent needs of the Indian le for emer- gency food ald and that this food be made available on such terms as may be mutually acceptable to the two Governments. Adopted by the General Board of the Na- tional Council of Churches, January 17, 1951, No Trme vor Grupax PoLrrics Unless the Congress of the United States appropriates the price of 2,000,000 tons of grain for famished India, millions of humans may starve to death. It isn’t in the Amert- can tradition to stand idly by so long as we have the wherewithal to avert such a catas- trophe. We have it, and to spare. Prime Minister Pandit Nehru alined him- self with Soviet Russia in voting against the United States resolution in the United Na- tions identifying Red China as an aggressor in Korea, an attitude which soured Congress on India. But this is no time for a punitive gesture. Our grain elevators are bulging with what it takea to prevent a famine in India and common humanity demands that we spare some of it to save lives. Besides, think of the psychological effect such a gift would have in Asia—India stubbornly re- fuses to support us in the UN, but we send food to the starving millions anyway. The administration delayed asking Con- gress to come to India’s assistance largely because UN Delegate Warren Austin did not want to be wide open to Communist charges of blackmail if India retreated from appease- ment and voted with the United States in condemning Communist China. In addi- tion, a suspicious Nehru might have become convinced we were trying to buy his vote. If the grant was made before the vote, Con- egress might have considered it rank ingrati- tude if he didn’t support the resolution of censure. At the White House Friday, President Tru- man appealed to ranking Members of both parties for speedy congressional action to approve the gift. Some of the Congressmen demurred at dipping into our food grain reserves in a time of crisis. Others want to hold public hearings. However, the Presi- dent received some unexpected support when Senator Rosgar A. Tarr declared himself in favor of the Indlan-aid program. Prime Minister Nehru has not asked for the grain as a handout. He pocketed his pride when he asked for it in the first place and salved it by proposing that India pay for it on a long-term credit basis. The Con- grees will cancel out the gesture of good will 4f it demands payment for the grain. Piling more debt on the burdened shoulders of the Indian people will spoil the effect. That is the common-sense attitude of Herbert Hoover, who was called to the White House this week to advise on the problem. “Let it be free. The United States has never in its history failed to be helpful to a famine- stricken people.” That’s the way it should Evacuation of Boston by the British, March 17, 1776 een EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. JOHN W. McCORMACK OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 14, 1951 Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, the @pproaching one hundred and seventy- fifth anniversary of the fortification of Dorchester Heights by Gen, George Washington in 1716 calls attention to one of the most significant military actions of the American Revolution. The now populous region known as South Boston constituted then the area known as Dorchester, Dorchester Neck, Dorchester Heights, and Dorchester Point. It forms a peninsula projecting eastward toward the Atlantic. Dor- chester had been founded as early as 1630, and its scanty inhabitants had made very considerable contributions to the development of the colony. Its his- torians are particularly proud of the tact that here was established, in 1639, what is almost certainly the first free school supported by public taxation on this continent. It is believed also that a decision taken in 1633 to have the men of the colony meet every Monday “to set- tie and set down such orders as may tend to the general good” was the beginning of the “town meeting” system of local government, which became characteris- tic of New England and has had lasting effect on the development of democratic government in America. Dorchester citizens were active in the early measures of resistance to British tyranny, out of which emerged in time the War of Inde- pendence. The Battle of Bunker Hill—which should be called the Battle of Breed's Hill, where it was really fought—took place on June 17, 1775. Tactically it was a defeat for the Colonials, for the British remained in possession of the area, Their losses were staggering, how- ever, and left them greatty weakened as well as bewildered. On the American side there were almost the effects of a victory, so far as morale was concerned. Colonial militia had stood up successfully against British Regulars. The lost—a neck of land containing Bunker Hill and Breed's Hill—was not very im- portant. The gathering American forces were able to surround the whole larger area, For the ensuing 9 months the British were more and more tightly con- tained in Boston itself. Their forces were strong and they had command of the sea approaches, but displayed singu- lar inactivity. In part this was due to their distance from England; it took messages 5 or 6 weeks to cross the ocean from the home government. Be this as it may, in the period follow- ing Bunker Hill the British were fairly tightly confined in Boston itself. There is evidence that they did not intend to stay there indefinitely, and plarmed to make some other central! position such as New York or Philadelphia the base of their effort to subjugate the Colonies, They were in no hurry, however, to leave Boston, and when they did so it was not as they had planned but a very hasty evacuation under duress. The Americans began building up their forces. Washington was appointed to the supreme command; he accepted June 15. Before him was a great task, to take the shifting Colonial volunteers and militia, little more than a motley aggregation of untrained men, and turn them into an army. He had all sorts of difficulty with discipline and enlist- ments and discord and supplies. In the last-named categoty the primary prob- Jem was gunpowder, There was never APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD enough of it, then or throughout the war, and the quality was poor. The patriot James Warren wrote in July: The armies continue to look at each other and fortify themselves. No action or pros- Peck of one. It is a barren time, t— Adds a historian— not barren for Washington. He needed this breathing space for the organizing of iis Army and the training of his men, for study- ing his enemy and learning as well to know his friends. This was his first experience in command of New Englanders, and if at times he admired the Yankee temperament, at others it disappointed him. Weak as coms, pared with his well-fortified enemy, at pres= ent Washington could not strike a blow. He began now to study that lesson of waiting and of preparation which he put to such good use in the years of the long war, (French, p. 810.) There were some small operations. ‘Washington made two raids on Charles-' town, held by the British. Later Howe made his own attempt on Dorchester, caused by information that Americans were gathering fascines and gabions, preparing to fortify the place. In the early morning of February 14, 1776, he sent detachments from Boston and Cas- tle William—in Boston Harbor—to the empty peninsula. They found no mili- tary materials, but burned some vacant houses and returned with captured sen- tinels. Content with this evidence that the Americans were doing nothing, Howe relaxed his attention, The battle for powder described above had begun to be successful and Wash- ington succeeded in building up a fairly substantial reserve; but there was also the battle for cannon. The only store- houses where any large cannons were available to the Colonials were at Ti- conderoga and Crown Point. Winter made possible the portage of these great weights by sledge. Washington sent.Col, Henry Knox after them. Knox reached Ticonderoga on December 5. He got 43 cannons and 16 mortars. Three of the latter were of 13-inch caliber, each weighing over a ton. Knox got these pieces to Lake George by sledge, took them on boats and scows to the end of the lake, then by road again to Albany, crossing the Hudson four times on the way. The boats sank several times. At Albany one of the largest cannons fell through the ice ata ferry. After a difi«' cult time, this “drowned” cannon was reo’ covered, and nicknamed “The Albany.*' From Claverack on the Hudson the pieces were sledged over the Berkshire hills, where the snow was now depend- able. Thence to Springfield and then to Framingham, by the 25th of January, Washington was at last ready to take up the long-chertshed idea of fortifying Dorchester Heights. The difficulty now was the weather. If the work was to escape British interference it must he done in a single night, but experience of similar operations attempted when the was frozen indicated that it might take weeks. The dilemma was solved by a decision to build the breast- works of fascines, which were bundles of sticks held in place by wooden frames calied chandeliers; these were prepared in large quantities.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The local militia were called in for the night of March 4, a date chosen as the anniversary of the massacre, when Mas- sachusetts men might be expected to be at their fighting best. Teamsters with their carts and horses, entrenching tools, quantities of marsh hay, were all quietly assembled. On the third a blind was thrown up along the causeway between Roxbury and Dorchester. Two hundred and fifty axmen were set to fell the trees for the abattis. In addition to these and the large number who were to set the fascines and chandeliers in position, there were 750 men posted on the lower hills near. the water, with sentries be- tween, who would cover the workers, Barrels were prepared, filled with earth, to roll down from the higher hills if there was an attack. Another preparation was the misdirection of the enemy’s attention by cannonading Boston from the land side for two nights. Not much damage was done to Boston, but the great brass mortar named the Nancy and three more exploded and split. The British replied with a noisy fire of their own. The night of the fourth proved perfect for the entemprise. It was mild, with a bright moon:@n the hills, but near the water level a haze which cut off Dor- chester fromsight, both from the town and from the ‘ships. “The wii was of such a direction as to cany soypds away from the town, the ps, end Castle William. The march began about 7 p.m. Cer- tain low hills were immediately manned as cover for an attack by the enemy, which Washington expected. Following the covering party came the working party, 1,200 men under Thomas, and after them 360 ox teams. The hay, in great bundles, was laid as a screen along the short neck, where the carts were to go back and forth. All went in silence; orders had been given in advance, and each detachment knew its business. On the two hills selected for fortification, the two summits of which tow- ered above the anchorage of the British Fleet, the chandeliers were laid out on the plans already marked, the fascines were put in place; and with pick and shovel men fell to work on the frosty earth to make a ditch and raise and thicken the breastworks. The ax- men were felling the orchards and making the abattis; and men were filling the gabions and the barrels for rolling down on the enemy. The carts, having been emptied, re- turned for more chandeliers and fascines; some of them before morning made three or four trips. The work was pushed with such tremendous energy that by 10 o'clock they had two forts, one on each hill, strong enough to be capable of defense against small arms and grapeshot. (French, p. 659.) By 3 o’clock in the morning 3,000 fresh men came on, in part as relief and in part to man the works. There arrived also five companies of riflemen. By dawn, with the cannons brought up, the dig- ging and heaving and ramming and firm- ing completed, the work was done. The British may have had intimation that something was going on during the night. If so they did nothing about it. By morning the work was discovered, and the British began shelling the fortifica- tions, but found their shots falling short. Their position was now untenable. The admiral is reported to have notified Lord Howe that his ships could not re- main in their anchorage. The plunging fire from the forts commanded not only the anchorage, but Castle William, and the ship channels and the town itself. The new fort was so high and so far away that the British guns could not be ele- vated sufficiently to reach them. There was only one possible recourse for Howe, an attempt to drive the Yankees from the new position by the use of troops. It would have been a spectacular bat- tle, along the lines of Bunker Hill, but with much greater advantages on the Colonial side. Howe sent Brigadier Gen- ral Jones with 2,200 men to undertake the task. Seven regiments were sent to the castle by boat intended to embark from thence in flatboats. An assault was to be made on the Dorchester Peninsula at a point nearest the island where the castle stood. The attack was to be made on the first fort while that fort itself shielded the attackers from the second fort. Main dependence was to be on the bayonet. Meanwhile other troops were prepared to attack Roxbury. Washing- ton had made careful plans for receiving the attack. Why did this assault on the new forti- fications never come off? All that day, the 5th of March, it was expected, in vain, by the Americans. It seems the British were waiting for the coming of nightfall, and a favorable tide. But that night there arose what one writer de- scribes as “a Hurrycane, or terrible sud- den storm.” Some of the transports were driven ashore, and boats could not live in the surf on Dorchester Beach. The tempest prevented the battle. Such was the official British explana- tion. Historians, however have evidence to indicate that the real reason for call- ing off the battle was a realization that an attempt to force the new American position would be not only bloody but futile. A council of war decided that the attack must be abandoned and Boston evacuated. By the second day, the necessity for such an action was more obvious. The American parapets had risen higher and thicker, and more can- nons had been mounted. The situation was hopeless for the British. To the dis- may of the loyalists in Boston, prepara- tions for evacuation began on the 6th. The British had plenty of shipping, but all was haste and confusion, Many valuable stores were abandoned. Some 2,000 loyalists went along, most of them perhaps with the complete loss of their possessions and property. Stories were told of fine mahogany furniture found floating in the docks or driven on dis- tant beaches. There was some plun- dering by British soldiers—against Howe’s orders, however. It is probable that Washington could have attacked at this time and de- stroyed the British Army. There were reasons against this. The town would have been destroyed, and probably many noncombatant Americans killed. He himself was running out of powder again, as a result of the bombarding. To “hold his hand,” says the historian French, “was both human and wise.” There were some negotiations, which fell through, but seem to have resulted in a kind of gentleman's agreement that if Howe would leave the town intact, Wash- ington would not interfere with the evac- uation. Washington was watchful for some last enemy attack, while the Brit- A761 ish ships were held up by bad weather, but no attempt was made, Washington expected the British move to be toward New York and immedi- ately began dispatching forces thither. To the surprise of all, however, by a decision, the reasons for which are not even now clear, Howe sailed for Halifax. The fortification of Dorchester and the consequent forced evacuation of Boston by the British constitute the first signal victory of American forces in the Revolution. It was long ere there was another. So far as Washington's per- sona] command was concerned, the only one that could be compared with it was the surrender of Cornwallis at York- town at the end of the war. For Massachusetts this was the end of an era. When the fleet sailed away Boston at last stood free from its long struggle with Britain, and was not again the focus of action. For the Colonies as a whole, new hope existed. What seemed the long stalemate in New Eng- land was over, but had ended with an American triumph. There was new spirit in the Colonies now, which did much to sustain them in the hard years which were to follow. For Washington himself, his influence was consolidated, his skill acknowledged, and his own tal- ents developed. Says the historian French: At Boston were shown Washington's great characteristics: His power to wait, to con- front a stronger enemy without yielding, to bear without disheartenment weakness and disaffection in his own army, to build up strength by whatever means he could, and at the right moment to strike suddenly and effectually. Sources: Allen French, the First Year of the American Revolution, Houghton Mifflin Co., 1934; William Dana Orcutt, Good Old Dorchester, Cambridge, 1893; Benson J. Lossing, the Pictorial Field- Book of the Revolution, New York, 1850; Tercentenary Committee, Dorchester Old and New, Chapple Publishing Co., Dorchester, Mass., 1930; Sydney George Fisher, the Struggle for American Inde- pendence, 1908, volume 1. Federal Job Holders EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. OREN HARRIS OF ARKANSAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 14, 1951 Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, there is much being said about nonessential ex- penditures in Government during these crucial times. We are all concerned about our budget, expenditures, high and increased taxes. There is much talk about economy on those matters not related to our national defense and future security. The peo- ple of the country are not only interested in talk and agitation but action. I be- eve by far the majority Members of this Congress feel the same way. We are continually faced with the difficulty of requests for increased expenditures and the alarming trend of increased
A762 Federal payrolls, much of which is un- der the guise of national defense. Our people are willing to make all nec~ essary sacrifices for our own protection and security to prevent aggression and to try to bring about peace and peaceful relationship among nations. We do not believe it is necessary to accede to the request of huge outlays and continuous large increases of Federal employees for many of these programs that have little or no relationship to the national de- fense. An editorial on this important subject in the Washington Post today points to this problem in a most effective manner, The Appropriations Committees are meeting now, holding hearings for the next fiscal year. I desire to call to the attention of not only the members of that committee but every Member of Congress this appropriate discussion in the editorial and therefore under unani- mous consent, I include it in this exten- sfon of remarks: Feprrat Jos Houpers The congressional Committee on Reduc- tion of Nonessential Expenditures headed by Senator Brap reports that since the out- break of the Korean War, new civilian work- ers have been added to the Federal payroll at an average rate of about a thousand per day. By June payrolls will be above the World War II peak figure and will still be rising. California leads the District in the number of civilian Federal employees, with New York and Pennsylvania not far behind in second and third place, respectively. New York City alone barbors 114,000 civilians working for Uncle Sam; Chicago has 52,000; Philadelphia, 47,000, and St. Louis, 23,000. To arrest this alarming trend, which not only Increases the cost of running the Gov- ernment, but aggravates industrial labor shortages, the Byrd committee has recom~ mended that the National Security Resources Board be authorized to control proposed in- creases in civilian employment by Govern- ment agencies, and that the Appropriations Committees of the House and the Senate require an NSRB survey of personnel require- ments to be made before approving appro- priations for incressed employment in any Federal sgency. The defense program has added to the work burdens of some Government agen- cies, and, of course, the new defense agen- cles are compelled to build up their staffs. However, many old-line departments and agencies are undoubtedly overstaffed. It is the will to save money through more eco- nomical use of manpower that is conspicu- ously lacking in such cases. Under pressure trom an outside agency, such as the NSRB, they could make substantial cuts in expendi- tures, reduce the drain on our manpower reserves and lighten the burdens borne by taxpayers. The Debate Goes On EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWARD H. REES OF KANBAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 14, 1951 Mr. REES of Kansas, Mr. Speaker, under permission granted me by the House, I gm placing in the Recomp a very timely statement by the distin- guished columnist, Walter Lippmann, I believe the Members of the House and readers of the Recorn will be interested in Mr. Lippmann’s analysis. It follows: Tux Denatz Gors On (By Walter Lippmann) It coats much sweat, and even a few tears, to work out who agrees and who differs with whom in the great debate. Subject to core rection later when the hearings, which are to start this week, have produced their re« sulte, it is fair to say, I think, that there are no irreconcilable differences in the views of Taft, Dulles, and Zisenhower. The more one studies their remarke, the more it appears that thelr differences are matters of em-+ phasis rather than of substance. In the meantime I have found it helpful to realize that the whole business is difficult to follow because there are two debates going on simultaneously, esch dealing with a great subject. The first has to do with the rights and powers of the President. The second has to do with the strategical question of how—not whether—Western Europe is to be made secure against invasion. The extraordinary thing about this debate is that, thus far, the two men who ought to be leading it—the President and his Secre- tary of State—have refrained from giving the country an informative and reasoned de- scription and explanation of the project. No one contradicted Senator Tarr last Thurs- day when he said in the Senate that Con- gress had been unable to obtain definite knowledge about whethe~ or not we had made a commitment at Brussels, or about the size of the American Army that the administra- tion was proposing to send to Europe, or about the status of General Eisenhower himself in relation to the other Atlantic governments, But tf all that is unclear and indefinite, Congress does have before it a clear and definite proposal to conscript 18-year-old men for 27 months. The contrast between the heavy concrete sacrifices which Congress has to vote and the generalities and abstrac- tions in which the President and his Becre- tary of State communicate their purposes 1s striking. The iasue of the President's powers has arisen, and will surely not easily be brushed aside in this Congress, because the administration has in effect taken the posi- tion that Congress must provide the men and the treasure, but that the President then has full power to decide where to deploy them. This is not a tenable position. If the President were 4 wiser man than he is, he never would have dreamed of questioning the right of the Congress to participate in the unprecedented project of placing an American standing ermy tn Europe and of merging ft in an international army. He would not only have sought the advice of Congress but he vould have insisted from eet thet Congress share bis responsi- y. Because the President failed to do that, he laid himself open to and invited the kind of attack which Senator Tarr delivered at the Lincoln Day dinner in Ohicago. It ts that Harry 8. Truman ts too impulsive and not o@reful enough in his judgments to hear alone the responsibilities cf life and death, On Sunday, Governor Dewey came out strongly tor the President's position. “TI do not believe,” he said, “that the deployment of our troops is a matter for congressional action. I believe the deployment is a matter for the experts and on that I will trust Gen- eral Marshall, General Risenhower, and the Chiefs of Staff rather than anyone ¢lse.” wonder whether this ie Governor Dewsy's oonsidered view. Can Governor Dewey argue seriously that the project of an American atanding Army in Hurope, involving perhaps three-quarters of APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD @ miilion men, can be called a mere deploys. ment like sending troops to Hawaii, Alaska, or even by putting ground crews at some air political decision of the greatest magnitude? & treaty in order to believe that the admin- istration ought to handle it with the same Kind of respect and deference for Congresa which it would show if it needed to obtain that these decisions will not be made by Mr. Truman but that they will be made by the “experts” and “on that I will trust General Marshall, General Eisenhower, and the Chiefs of Stal/, rather than anyone else.” I myself do not think it is fair to the generals to expect them to take over the very highest reaponsibility of the Government. And we would certainly have fallen into an ignoble state of affairs if the elected Government were in these great matters to evade its responsibilities and to seek refuge and pro- tection behind the general. 4s a matter of fact, if Governor Deway will recall the eventg of the past year, he will find little in the record to warrant his con- idence that the military “experts” will de- cide military questions and that the civilian “experts” will decide political questions, One of the striking charecteristica of the Truman administration has: heen the confu- sion which weakness and hapbasardness have brought isto the relations between the civil- fan and the military authorities. Many that we now regret, many things we May perhaps live to regret, arise from that oonfusion, Address of Gov. Adlai E. Stevenson EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. SIDNEY R, YATES OF ILLINOW IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 6, 1951 Mr. YATES. Mr. Speaker, on Jan- uary 28, 1951, Northwestern University, which is located in Evanston, IL, cele- brated its one hundredth anniversary, Gov. Adlai E. Stevenson, the distin- guished Governor of the State of Ili- nois, delivered the principal address at the convocation ceremonies, an address which is truly thought-provoking at this time when the great debate 1s golng on. Not only has Governor Stevenson made an enviable reputation and record in his high post in the State of Illinois as one of the Nation’s most capable State executives, but his background and ex- perience qualify him extraordinarily to speak on foreign affairs. In 1943 he was appointed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt to head the mission in Italy which was established as a part of the newly created Foreign Economic Admin- istration, His report on his mission contained recommendations for a plan of economic aid for the European na- tions which may very well have been the foundation for the Marshall plan. In 1945 Governor Stevenson became a special assistant to Secretary of Btate James Byrnes. is ability in this posi- tion won him much acclaim. including
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD editorial approval of, the New York Times. When the United Nations Conference was organized in San Francisco, Gover- nor Stevenson was press spokesman for the United States delegation. Succes- sive appointments as minister and rep- resentative to the Preparatory Commis- sion for the United Nations qualified him for his later role as senior adviser to the American delegation. Throughout 1946 and 1947, as an alternate delegate, he was appointed to various important committees of the United Nations. Governor Stevenson’s address follows: Some 5 years ago this university, for rea- sons best known to its trustees, conferred an honorary degree on me. Having thus honored me I suppose the least the Governor of Illinois could do in appreciation was to decline President Miller’s and Mr. Burgess’ invitation to speak at this hundredth anni- versary convocation. Instead, I accepted, after the manner of insensitive and egotisti- cal politicians. I apologize. Because there are others who can speak with authority about the founding of North- western University, I am, with, I am sure, your enthusiastic approval, going to resist the temptation to tell you of the faith and convictions of the founders who stood here 100 years ago and dreamed of a university of the highest order of excellence. All that we see about us testifies that they founded well and that their successors have wrought well upon those foundations. In the 100 years the dream by the lake here in Dr. Evans’ town has become one of the world’s large and honored communities of scholars. Early Illinois was notoriously inhospitable to higher education and I recall the remark of a lusty legislator who said in opposition to a bill to charter the first three Illinois schools that he was “born in a briar thicket, rocked in a hog trough, and never had his gontus cramped by the pestilential air of a col- lege.” Northwestern, too, was born upon a scene on which the light of higher education shone but fitfully. But in our time one never sees a considered catalog of the assets of Iili- nois that does not always proudly list its universities at the top. I once heard it said that Massachusetts Institute of Technology “humanized the scientist” while Harvard ‘“‘simonized the hu- manist.” Just what Northwestern does I don't know; perhaps both. But at all events its contributions to the sciences and the humanities and also to the wholesome good- ness and gaiety we associate with American student life have brought to this campus im- perishable distinction and affection. Thanks to Northwestern, its neighbor, the University of Chicago, the great State unl- versity, and many distinguished lesser insti- tutions, Illinois, and particularly this sec- tion of the State, is now one of the treasure houses, one of the major repositories, of the Western World's culture. It is proper, therefore, that we pause to note the one hundredth birthday of this proud university; that we pause a moment in our feverish defense preparations to re- call what we are defending. Certainly one of the things we are defending is the future security and health of privately supported universities such as Northwestern. In turn ‘we confidently expect them to defend for generations to come the spirit of free In- quiry and fearless scholarship which ts a basic condition of free men, For that pro- tection and for the contribution of the unt- versities to “a large resolute breed of men” which Walt Whitman called the only bar against tyranny, we will have to trust to the future; we will have to trust that the guar- diang here and elsewhere of the riches of our learning will never forget what the treasure they guard js, what it is composed of. We will have to trust that the guardians of western thought will never permit its vi- tality and beauty to be smothered by strong, arrogant men who burn books and bend thought to their Iiking, nor obscured by timid men trembling tn the darkness of anxiety. The continuity of our heritage of scholar- ship, both bold and free, which is the pe- cullar and priceless possession of the uni- versity, must, then, be entrusted to the fu- ture, But what of the present which has such a bearing on the health and strength and continuity of the custodians of our cul- ture? Are the universities to be stripped of stu- dents in order to defend our cultural her- itage? The young of college age are the seed corn of a society and a nation. To survive must we eat our seed corn? And if we do, can we survive? We must and we will, I think, find at least a partial answer to that disturbing question. And we will find it in calm deliberation, not in frantic fright. Then, like you, after some experience, I have made the disturbing observation that absence of thought in war seems to be man- datory. And, of course, total abstinence from thought is very agreeable for most of us, and a uniformly popular condition among adolescents. But is it necessary in mobiliza- tion, in half war, if you please? Perhaps we have something to think about here as we enter the new and unexplored era of the garrison state, Again, I must ask with a shudder {f it will bo largely women who enjoy the bene- fits of more advanced education in the new era? Is the ancient tradition of masculine primacy in jeopardy? Heaven forbid. And I should think a little reflection on this ap- palling possibility by the male leaders in all countries could do more to insure peace than @ balance of power in the world. It ts high time, it seems to me, that we males begin to think of survival in terms of gender as well as nationality and ideology. There is another problem of which you are all soberly mindful. How are the pri- vately endowed universities to survive finan- cially; how can inflexible income meet flex- ible costs—costs that flex in only one direc- tion? What will be the further ravages of inflation, of ever higher income taxes and sharply diminished student population and student fees? How will President Miller bal- ance his budget? Actually I really don’t feel very sorry for him because he can always tell the trustees to ralse more money. But if I can't balance the budget of Tilinois you'll tell me to find another job. But there must be survival for the pri- vately endowed institutions. By virtue of their very independence, they are indispen- sable to the kind of survival we are all talking about. We have long since accepted as right and just publicly supported primary and secondary education for all. But ts that the destiny of higher education too? I hope not. It will be an ominous day indeed when all higher education is government subsl- dized, Yet simple economics point that way and already most of the great private uni- versities must rely more and more on Gov- ernment subventions, whetuer it be GI tut- tion or scentific research projects. And in this connection we could well afford to examine critically the relative growth of the tax dollar and the private dollar con- tributed to higher education, There are masses of statistics, but let me just refer to the immediate situation in our Tilinois. As taxpayers you support six State universities and colleges. For this 2-year period the legislature appropriated $128,- 000,000 for them. In all of them tuition its but a fraction of the feea charged by private inatitutions. Three separate boards of truse tees, elected or appointed, now divide con- trol over these institutions, There is little coordination. Confusion and rivalry compli- A763 cate just and wise decisions on appropria-. tions and other legislation. With the hope of improving this situation, I asked the United States Office of Education to survey the situation in Illinois. This week I published its interesting and in- formative study which does not attempt to say what plan of coordination Illinois should adopt, but offers several alternative plans to improve the present disorderly system. With what emphasis I can command, I say that a public service so expensive and com- peting with privately supported colleges should be considered as a single program and coordinated on a State-wide basis. The budget requests of the several institutions should be equitably appraised on the basis of relative needs. There should be some competent over-all determination of the curriculum, the degrees offered, and the re- search programs at each institution. There should be a continuing evaluation of the op- erations at each, and a continuing study of the State’s needs for tax-supported higher education. If these controls are not exercised how can we assure the taxpayer his money's worth out of this costly service? And how can the legislature or the executive deal fairly, pru- dently and intelligently with such intricate problems at the six institutions. I believe the time has come and gone when Illinois should attack disorder and Gisintegration in a major and expensive State service boldly and decisively, and with a considerate view to the plight of those private institutions of which the State is so proud. Northwestern was born here in a quiet vil- lage on Lake Michigan by a burgeoning city @ hundred years ago. That, too, was a time of revolution abroad and of transition here. In 1851 Illinois was filling up with im- migrants from the South and East. A steel plow to cut the tough prairie sod had been invented. The reaper had come to our prairies, On plank roads, Illinois was rising out of the mud. A rallroadeawas pushing westward. Europe was in political and eco- nomic ferment. The Irish and the Germans were coming in search of something better and more hopeful for the average man. With not 30,000 souls, Chicago was strug- giing out of the swamps. Illinois was pass- ing from the log-cabin-frontier era and shouldering its way into the new Industrial Gay that was breaking upon the Union. A hundred years have passed, a hundred years which have seen the culmination of a great historic expansive movement of peo- ples from Europe to the west, and the con- quest, development, and integration into the world community of the two great Ameri- can continents, severed by revolutions but tied by cultural inheritance to their Western Buropean roots. At the same time, there came another great expansion—from west to east. The Slavic peoples and culture pushed through the Ural Mountains, across the vastness of Siberia to the Pacific, and on across the Bering Sea to Alaska and our own weat coast, The Russtan tide collided with the Japanese, just emerging from the hermits’ hut, with vaulting ambitions, too. There it stopped—for a time—but the land mass over which the Russian expansion surged has for the most part remained firmly in Russian hands, while the European overseas etpan- sion created a new and independent center of power here on our continent. Twice in 25 years our new center of power, stretching from the tropics to the Arctic and facing both the Pacific and the Atlantic, has been compelled to intervene to redress the balance of power in the world, And now with Britain and France enfeebled by these wars, with the German and Japanese power crushed, the United States and Russia, which have risen from the mists of these short hun- dred years, even as this university, etand
A764 face to face, with the other nations polar- ized around them, drawn by the gravita- tional pulls of proximity, coercion, self- interest, and kinship. Believing as we do in a community of free nations and free peoples acting peacefully and responsibly through governments freely chosen, we conclude at last that we cannot live in comfortable security with a great im- perial power which has seen the barriers to its expansion collapse and is on the move again, taking here, probing there, and press- fag relentlessly against the uncommitted, Giscontented millions. Capitalizing the ancient racial zenophobia and the messianic geal to missionize the world of the Russian people, the leaders of the new Russia, armed with force and the old weapon of fomented revolution, use the seductive new weapon of coramunism to soften their victims. But whatever the trappings, the methods, the weapons, the objective is domination—im- pertaiiem. I often think it would be both more accurate and more effective if we talked less of communism with all its appeal for ignorant, miserable peoples and more of im- perialism which threatens the freedom and independence of everyone and has no ap- peal. Communism can be a fighting faith, but tmperialiam is subtle slavery. 89, as Northwestern University enters its second century, America, rich, peaceful, and undisciplined, finds itself face to face across both the seas with an inccrutable, ruthless conquerer, strong, cunning, and armed with an egalitarian idea that has great appeal for the miserable masses of humanity. No longer is there anyone to protect us. No longer can we sow when and where we are certain to reap. There is no safe invest- ment, no certain harvest any longer. We cannot even measure the price of saving our- selves, Indeed, we seem to be in some doubt as to whether we should save ourselves at ali; whether we are worth the cost. The quiet past in which this great uni- versity grew to manhood is no more. Our bright land is troubled and sorely tried. Things are badly out of balance when we spend $280,000,000 for one aircraft carrier, four times the endowment of this university. Ite future ts in doubt. Our future is in doubt, Some say fight now. Some say dGespotiam is the wave of the future. Some way abandon Asia. Some say abandon Burope. And worst of all, everybody says something—including me. In our time peace has become as abnormal as war used to be because this is the revolu- tion. And revolution is extremely irritating, vexatious, and bewildering to a prosperous, peaceful, contented people that wants noth- ing exeept to be left alone. How have we reacted to this condition of perpetual danger? It seems to me that for 5 years we have suffered from the confusion and distraction of alternate moments of il- lustion and despair, Hoping alwaya for a cheap and painless escape from the realities of a distasteful destiny, aided and abetted by politicians who will say anything to be popular and by editors either myopic or worse, public opinion has moved in violent swings between optimism and pes- simiam, between the mountains of com- Placency and the marshes of despair. Tm fatuous haste to be shut of war, worry, and expense, we obliterate our power and leave it to the United Nations to keep a that never existed. When things go right we gush paeans of praise for the United Na- tions; when they go wrong we damn it and even propose to forsake the good because it 1s not the perfect. In fear we overestimate the danger; imperil our liberties, exaggerate the toe’s cumning and strength; even demand & show-down as ugh the certainty of doom were preferable to the unoertainty. Again, perpetual danger invites the com- Placeucy of status and we underestimate the peril by overconfidence in our virtue and power, as though that were enough in a moral contest. But the self hypnosis of loud and repeated talk about our righteousness and freedom will rally no elites nor blow the Kremlin walls down. And now as things get tough and we find we can't buy, threaten, or preach our way to peace, we are menaced by amateur strate~ gists. Even the tsolationists have reap- peared, flexing their muscles, or rather their tongues, and proclaiming “Let the whole world go. We should worry. We can defend ourselves with a strong Navy and Atr Force.” Haven't they heard about Pearl Harbor or the atom bomb? Was the last war all in vain? Haven't they heard that we are not self-sufficient? ‘Won't a garrison state be- come a police state? And do they forget that nothing succeeds like success? If they do, conquerors don't. I suppose any mo- ment even America First may emerge full blown again, except that I hope this time it is more entitled “America Last’”— last on the Kremlin's list. The reemergence of the straight tolation- ist doctrine-—the same people saying the same things we heard before the whirlwind a decade ago—is to me the great regurgita- tion. They remind me of Charles Lamb's remark, “I cannot make present things pres- ent to me.” But fortunately the great debate about foreign policy, which was mostly a debate about military strategy and not foreign pol- icy, appears to be about over. And, none too soon, it appears that we have about made up our mind to stop fighting each other, gather all the like-minded allies we can find, and settle down seriously to the very serious busl- ness of getting stronger than the brigands that are preying on the world. Perhaps an occasional national debate like this one js a healthy thing. It clears the air, releases tensions, focuses torpid attention on great issues, and melts divisionist contro- versy into a mold of common conviction. Maybe we have about reached 8 common conviction that peace through power 1s our salvation. Maybe we have decided that only by once again redressing the balance of power in the world and confronting Russia with a preponderance of force can we thwart an imperialism more sinister than the world has cver seen. But we should profit from an expertence like this, because tt won't be the last time we get rattled; it won't be the last time we doubt our beliefs and believe our doubts. I suppose, for example, we will have to as- sume that the isolationist argument will Nave at least nine lives, for the very human reason that it pleases the average man be- cause it spares him any immediate incon- venience or sacrifice, and it fiatters his sense of power to feel that America can live alone and like it. And have we learned that while the whole Nation may debate the broad policy of whether to defend or not to defend, whether to defend alone or with allies, the details of the where, when, and how we will defend are sometimes questions of military, political, and diplomatic strategy which cannot be set- tled safely or wisely by public debate? Nor can they be wisely settled by men who be- have, to borrow a line from King Lear, “as if they were God’s spies,” but who are neither military strategists nor geopoliticians., Have we learned that what 160,000,000 Americans know about our plana the enemy knows too? Have we learned that hunting scapegoats is not a foreign policy? Have we learned that our mission fs the prevention, not just the survival of a major war? Have we discovered that there are no Gibraltars, no fortresses, impregnable to death or ideas anymore? While the debate talks incessantly in terms of our national crisis and our national sur- vival, it is not just our crisis, it is the crisis of the whole free world. Have we learned APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD that making domestic political capital out of world crisis is not the way to win friends and influence people? Do we realine that the Russians have already gained a portion of their objectives by using our indecision and moral confusion to weaken our Jeadership in the free world? The Russians know the value of even reluctant allies in thie final struggle for power. Do we? Or are we going to risk the slow tion that comes from whittling away the friendty world? If we have not learned that having the most to lose we have the most to save, then I say, let us pray. But if we have, ff the immensity of the responsibility and the stakes has dawned upon us, then the great debate has been a great blessing and we are on the way to thwart this latest greatest threat to *!! this university symbolizes. ‘Why .hould we be poor in epirit? The task is great, the price ts high, but the prize Js better than life. With Europe and its great industrial concentration and forward bases shored up and steadfast, with access to the tin and rubber of south Asia, middie eastern oil, African manganese and urantum, the scales are still weighted to the west, and the waves of the future are still free. Aggres-~- sion must be called aggression in the United Nations. But in insisting on no equivocation about the legal and moral position, we dare not forget that the allegiance of India, un- committed to east or west, is the ultimate objective of both east and west in the Orient. And we dare not fall into the trap, the oubliette, Russia hae prepared us in China. War there will drain our resources and at the same time make China completely de- pendent nillitarily on Russia. With every Rugsian jet at least six Russians go along. A weakened China means a stronger Russia pressing from behind against Hong Kong, Indochina, south Asis, and finally India. Hounded by peopie of small vision and great emotion it will not be easy to stand the pressure to help solve Russia’s problems with China. And with us mired in the morass of the China mainland the Soviet could turn next summer to some unfinished business with Tito in Jugoslavia. Pray heaven we can remember amid the discord and chagrin of defeat that military force alone cannot win the day for us in Asia. Our moral authority there is low because we are white and Asia is colored. Desperately poor, struggling to shake off the shackles of white colonialism, Asia is Just now passing through the era of revolution, independence, and self-determination that swept the west- ern world long ago. It will take great pa- tience, great insight, great restraint for us who see the whole world in our own image and likeness to win confidence and faith in the great uncommitted areas of Asia. It can’t be done with the white man's sword. But it can be done; they can be convinced that Communist imperialiem is not liberation but & more deadly enemy of normal aspirations rl freedom and social justice than colonial- Are we, I wonder, moving as a nation from our Greek period to our Roman period; from @ period in which the validity of our ideas was the {mportant consideration to one in which thelr effectiveness ia crucial? Good intentions and reliance on the rightness of our cause will avail us little against an enemy that cares nothing about validity and ts concerned only with effectiveness. The Greeks were right, but they died. A Ganger greater, it seems to me, than Ger- many or Japan in the last war, or Commu- nist imperialism now is moral fatigue, disin- tegration, half loyalty, timid faith—the “weakening of the central convictions to which Western man hitherto has pledged allegiance.” When freedom didn't exist it too was a fighting faith that men would die for. But now that it ls old, it looks a little pale and
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD gentle and lacks the appeal to the militant, irrational sentiments once mobilized by con~ quering religions and now by imperial com- munism. But communism resolves no anxieties. It multiplies them. It organizes terror. It is without spiritual content or comfort. It provides no basic security. In the long run it cannot cure the disease of this anxious age. But its short-term methods are grimly effective. We can't sit still and wait for the fever to run its course. Without combative faith in our spiritual heritage, we won’t long hold out against the subtleties of selfishness and fear, If western civilization is to save its body, it must save its soul too. It must awake again the emotionalism, the conti- dence, the defiant faith of a resolute breed of men to whom liberty and justice mean something positive every day—not just when war has reduced us to the stark issue of self-preservation. It's easy to care mightily then; it’s hard now. It’s easier to fight for principles than to live up to them, But now is the time that a passionate belief counts if we are to avoid another war, and if we are to avoid the greater menace of cowardly surrender to our own doubts and fears, Don't the universities have a large, indeed the leading, role to play in articulating the purpose and the combative faith of a great people in this era of convulsive transition and this hour of discord and doubt? Don’t they know best what we stand to lose? We have proclaimed our military weakness, our vacillation, our hesitation, our fear, Enough of that, The test of a nation is de- feat. The time has come to proclaim our faith in all its might and majesty. History will go on and "The Forfeiture of Freedom” would be a sorry title to this chapter; rather the historian must write that in arousing America to redefine and defend its ideals the ugliest despotism dug its grave in the twentieth century. It was in 1776 that Tom Paine wrote: “The heart that feels not now is dead; the blood of his children will curse his cowardice, who shrinks back at & time when little might have saved the whole.” An Asian Replies to Asians EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN W. McCORMACK OF MASSACHUSETTS “t IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 14, 1951 Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, re- cently the United Nations took the his- toric action of declaring Communist China an aggressor. Many years from today historians will be writing about it and the debate that preceded the decision will be studied and analyzed. One of the most significant phases of that debate was the detailed analysis of the negotia- tions with the Peiping regime as made by Gen. Carlos P. Romulo, Foreign Secretary of Philippines (who served with distinction in this body), in which it is clearly shown that the Chinese Com- munists spurned all the peace-making attempts of the United Nations. In his analysis, General Romulo makes a@ measured reply to India, Egypt, and the other members of the Asian Arab bloc, all of which took a stand against that of the United States on the question. Be- cause it will help enlighten the American people on a matter that is vital to our freedom and national security, I include in the Recorp General Romulo’s state. ment, as follows: VERBATIM. RECORD OF IMPROMPTU INTERVENTION OF PHILIPPINE FOREIGN SECRETARY CaRLOs P, Romvuto Durine DepaTe ON CEASE-FIRE IN Korea BErone THE UNITED NATIONS POLITI- or AND SECURITY COMMITIEE JANUARY 22, 61 General Romuto. Mr. Chairman, on a point of order. The adjournment of the debate has been moved by the delegate of Egypt to give our Governments time to consider the new com- munication from Peiping which has been read by Sir Benegal Rau. There is, however, a question of procedure that must first be settled. The message read by Sir Benegal was re- ceived by the Ambassador of India in Peiping, ostensibly in answer to a request for eluci- dation by the Government of Indla. I believe that it would be an essential first requirement for a proper consideration of the message from Peiping to have the text of the note sent by the Ambassador of India re- questing clarification of certain points tn Peiping’s message of January 17. It would then be necessary to make sure that the subsequent clarification from Pei- ping is clearly intended for the use und fn- formation of the first committee, and that therefore the Indian delegation be requested to convey the desire of the committee that this clarification be addressed directly to this body. (After the interventions of Turkey, Greece, Ecuador, Honduras, and Chile, General Rom- ulo again asked for the floor.) General Romvto, Mr. Chairman, I asked a few minutes ago for certain clarifications of procedure in order that the adjournment of debate suggested by the delegation of India and moved by the delegate of Egypt may be put to useful purpose. Let me restate the two ruggestions I made: First, I requested that the full text of the notes exchanged by the governments of Indla and the Peoples Republic of China be given to the committee in order that we can understand the full scope and meaning of the new message from Peiping. Specifically, what questions about the cease-fire, its timing, and its relationship to the negotiations on other issues, did the Government of India ask? Secondly, some means must be found of conveying to the Petping government the need of communicating any new proposals directly and formally to the United Nations, in order that our governments may deal with them in an appropriate manner. The third point, which I now wish to add to my previous observations, is this: If this latest message to the Government of Indla dis merely a clarification or elucidation, then ‘we must assume that the original message from Peiping of January 17 remains un- changed, and that this subsequent explana- tion does not alter the previous position adopted by Peiping. If this is so, then the statement that “a cease-fire for a limited time-period can be agreed upon in the first meeting of the seven-nation conference and put into effect so that the negotiations may proceed further, This apparently hopeful statement must be interpreted in the light of the Peiping message of January 17 which stated: “It must be pointed out, however, that the principle of a cease fire frst und negotiations afterward * * * could never lead to genuine peace. Therefore, the Central Peoples Government of the Peoples Republic of China cannot agree to this prin- ciple.” In other words, Mr. Chairman, this last message cannot alter the earlier point of the Peiping regime. Is it possible to interpret this latest mes- sage not as elucidation but, in @ sense, a8 & substitute proposal? A765 Mr, Chairman, we want to be enlightened. I therefore yield the floor to the delegate of India, (The delegate of India tntervened.) General Romuzo, Mr. Chairman, with much regret I must say that the answer of the delegate of India was neither an answer nor was it enlightening. In my previous statement on January 18, I made an analyais of the reply of the Peiping government to find out if there was any basis for believing that it embodies any “counter- proposals" worthy of the name. I pointed out that the proposals contained in Peiping’s cablegram of January 17 indicated no willing. ness whatsoever to make a new approach to the problem or to consider new terms for a peaceful settlement thereof. An effort has since been made to present the reply of Peiping as embodying a set of s0-called ‘counterproposals.” This is an opinion that must be examined with the greatest care. One feels that it arises from the attempt to consider the first commit- tee's five principles which were communi- cated to Peiping on January 13 and Peiping's reply thereto of January 17, in isolation from all that has gone before, as if this exchange of messages was the beginning rather than the culmination of the prolonged negotia- tions to bring about cessation of hostilities in Korea, But Petping's reply is the third communi- cation we have received in answer to the third approach we have made to that gov~ ernment. On December 16 the Committee of Three sent a message to Peiping stating, among other things, that “the purpose of the cease-fire in Korea will be to prevent the conflict from spreading to other areas, to put an end to the fighting in Korea, and to pro- vide an opportunity for considering what further steps should be taken for a peaceful settlement of existing issues, in accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations.” The message then ex- pressed the desire of the Committee of Three to meet with representatives of the Pelping regime with the least possible delay. Five days later, on December 21, the Pel- ping government replied to the effect that it could not instruct its representatives to remain in Lake Success for negotiations with the “illegal three-man committee” which had been set up by what it described as an “legal and null and void" resolution of the General Assembly. On December 19, the group of three sent a further message to Peitping spelling out in some detafl the plans cf the cease-fie group in relation to the proposal of the 12 Asian Governments to appoint a com- mittee which would meet as soon as pos- sible to make recommendations for the peaceful settlement of existing issues in the Far East. It was intended by this mes- sage to reassure Pelping that once a cease- fire arrangement had been achieved, the ne- gotiations visualized in the second resolution should be proceeded with at once, and that the Government of the People’s Republic of China would be included in the negotiating committee referred to in the latter resolu- tion. It should be noted that in this second message, the group of three already made a considerable advance from the vague gen- eralzations about a cease-fire which were contained in its message of December 16. Indeed, the cease-fire group, even without an explicit authorization by the first com- mittee, went so far as to give the assurance that negotiations for the peaceful settle- ment of existing issues in the Far East would immediately follow the cease-fire and that the Pelping regime would be included in the negotiating committee. No one can deny that the group of three, by its second message of December 19, leaned over back- wards to make a gesture of conciliation to the Peiping government,
AT66 Four days later, om December 23, the Peiping Government expressed doubt that the negotiating body to discuss existing is- sues in the Far East would ever be set up, and set forth its position as follows: First, that the idea of cease fire first and negotiations afterward was totally unac- ceptable; Second, that the only basis for negotiating a peaceful settlement of the Korean problem js the withdrawal of all foreign troops from Korea and the settlement of Korea’s do- mestic affairs by the Korean people them- selves; Third, that the United States forces must be withdrawn from China; and Fourth, that the People's Republic of China must be seated in the United Nations. On January 13, the first committee ap- proved the five principles and transmitted them to Peiping. Again, it must be noted that the first committee went out of its way to meet the objections and to resolve the doubts of the Peiping government. In establishing the sequence of cease fire be- fore negotiations, the first committee made two notable advances toward conciliation; first, by declaring that the cease-fire arrange- ment would contain adequate safeguards for ensuring that it will not be used as a screen for mounting a new offensive, and secondly, by explicitly stating that the negotiating body would attempt to settle peacefully all existing issues in the Far East, including those of Formosa and the representation of China in the United Nations. In contrast to the eager desire shown by the first committee to approximate the post- tion of the Peiping government, to set its doubts and misgivings at rest, and to give & formal pledge that the two questions in which it {8 most deeply interested would be considered by the negotiating body as soon as agreement has been reached on a cease fire, the Petping government has shown no inclination whatever to move from ite pre- viously established position. Its reply of January 17, except for the addition of two detalls, repeats almost word for word its demands of December 23. In the light of this review of the whole course of our negotiations with the Pelping regime, we are constrained to reject the notion which regards the last message from Petping as embodying any sort of counter- proposals, The picture that emerges from this analysis is that of the United Nations making three separate gestures of concilia- tion, taking three long steps to reduce the distance that divides the parties, while the Pelping government continues to stand firm and unmoving on its original demands and its price for peace. The Philippine Government is not insenai- tive to the argument that peace is so im- portant that we must continue our search Tor it by exerting further efforts to reach an understanding with the Peiping government, The countries of Asia are understandably concerned that this quest be pursued, and none among them more deeply than my own, But the question that must now he resolved 4a whether we have a better chance of pre- serving peace if the United Nations con- tinues to bend the knee to the aggressor than if it undertook finally to stand firmly on the principles that gave it birth. We believe that history rather than wishful thinking should be our guide in this dilemma, and history teaches us that the surrender of prin- ciple and the appeasement of the aggressor have never led to peace but only to further and larger aggressions. But other events of recent history have been invoked to support the thesis of further appeasement. Mention has been made of the United Nations effort to settle the prob- Jem of Indonesia, It is true that the United Mations persevered in {ts effort to settle that dispute. But the Republic of Indonesia, with the support of the Government of India, the Philippines, and others, never at any time abandoned the principle that a breach of the peace and an act of aggression, within the terms of the Charter, had been com- mitted there. A position of moral principle was taken without vacillation by the 15 countries of Asia and Africa that attended the Conference on Indonesia in January 1949 in New Delbi, which was held on the invita- tion of the Government of India. The cone ference included the following countries: Afghanistan, Australia, Burma, Kgypt, Bthi- opia, India, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, the Philippines, Baudi Arabia, Syria, and Yemen. On January 22, exactly 2 years ago today, the Conference adopted a resolution, later trans- mitted to the Security Council, which de- clared, among other things, that the Confer- ence was “of the opinion that the Dutch military action launched on the 18th of De- cember 1948 constitutes a flagrant breach at the Charter of the United Nations and defl- ance of the efforts of the Security Council and its Good Offices Committees to bring about a peaceful settlement,” and that it was firmly convinced that the Security Coun- cil was properly seized of the Indonesian question “as a breach of the peace and an act of aggression, under article 30 of the United Nations Charter.” The resolution further recommended that if the parties to the dispute did not comply with the recome mendations of the Security Council, the 8e- curity Council “shall take effective action under the wide powers conferred upon it by the Charter to enforce said recommenda- tions.” This was an obvious reference to economic sanctions, which the Governments of Indie, the Philippines, and others bad already adopted in some degree even withe out the authorization of the Council. This was 2 years ago, and the dispute was between two states, not between one state and the United Nations. If I cite this admirable instance of the solidarity of the Asian and Arab States tn & matter of prin- ciple which was of direct concern to them, it is because I feel that the reference that has been made to the Indonesian question argues not in favor of vaciliation and sur- render of principle but rather the contrary. It argues in favor of a stanch affirmation of the principles of the Charter and resolute Opposition to aggression by whomever tt may be committed. I daresay that tt ts greatly owing to the unshakable moral position then taken by Astan and Arab states that the Republic of Indonesia now sits with us around this table. In New Dethi we also spoke of further measures that might be taken, without ask- ing ourselves whether those measures would have any practical effect tn halting the mill- tary action against the Republic of Indonesia. Today, on the other hand, we are being asked what further action we intend to take follow- ing the adoption of the draft resolution pre- sented by the United States. We are being detained by the argument that to brand the Peiping regime as an aggressor may serve no useful purpose. We didn't ask ourselves such questions 2 years ago. I think the feeling among the states gathered in New Delhi way that fidelity to principle and reli- ance upon the moral power of the United Nations were things of great value in them- selves, apart from the question of whether or not, in a particular case, thetr resfirma- tion would serve a useful purpose. In accordance with the views I have re- peatedly expressed and in the light of the historic precedent I have just cited, my government gives its wholehearted support to the resolution submitted by the United States. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD You Can Change the World EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ALBERT P. MORANO OF COMNECTICUT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 14, 1951 Mr. MORANO. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- ord, I inelude the following book con- densation from the Reader's Digest of April 1949: You Can CHANGE THE WorLD (A condensation from the book by James Keller, founder, in 1045, of the Christo- phers) * “Better to light one candle than to ourse the darkness”—s0 goes an old Chinese proverb, In a small California town a young Negro, studying to be a teacher, took a part-time job at a filling station to help support him- self and his wife until he got hie degree. But some customers objected; they wanted to buy gasoline only from white men. The owner was about to fire the boy when a woman neighbor asked: “How many customers will you lose if you stand by this fellow?” “About 18; maybe 20.” “If I get you 30 new customers, you will Keep him’ on?” ‘ : “You bet I will.” te Not onty did this aroused woman bring 20 new customers but 5 more for good meas- ure. She was a Christopher—one of a grow- ing band of men and women united in the purpose to help change the world into a better place. What is a Christopher? He is one who belleves in individual responsibility for the common good of all and sets himself a spe- cific Job to do; an average man or woman ready to work and make personal sacrifices. It ia literally astounding to learn the results that are being achieved single-handed by Nttle people of faith and zeal, Although under Catholic auspices, the movement embraces all faiths among its fol- lowers. The movement has no chapters, no committees, no meetings; there are no mem- bership lists and no dues. From a central office in New York occasional bulletins are mailed out to more than 100,000 interested persons; that is the sole unifying contact. Each believes that alone and unaided he has & post of his own in the war between good and evil, and he must believe in the power of himself, as an individual,“to change the world, How single-handed efforts multiply tnto Power was symbolized at a patriotic meeting of 100,000 citizens jammed into the Los An- geles Colleeum one starless night. Suddenly the chairman startled the throng: “Don't be afraid now. All the lights are out.” In complete darkness he struck a match. “All who can see this little light say ‘Yes.’” A deafening roar came from the audience. “So shines a good deed in a naughty werld. ene now every one of us here strikes al ” Faster than it takes to tell, nearly 100,000 pinpricks of flame ficoded the arena with lght—the result of 100,000 individuals, each doing his own part. That is how the Chris- topher movement works. No matter who you are, or what you are, or where you may be, you can do something to change the world for the better. You, as &n individual, are important. You count.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Remember the gigantic letter-writing cam- paign which helped to smash the radical forces in the stallan elections recently. Lit- erally millions of letters went out from people of Italian descent in the United States en- couraging relatives in the old country to vote against totalitarianism. One of the men who fostered that dazzling campaign was a barber in Southampton, Long Islnd. Irritated by Old World criticisms and les about our American ways, he was also exas- perated that people who resented such at- tacks did nothing to countcract them. He decided to do something about it porsonally. First he wrote to relatives in St. Catherine, Sicily, describing his happy life here. Next he wrote his wife’s relatives. Then he per- suaded his son, a doctor, and his daughter, a@ dietitian, to write. Meanwhile he appealed to newspaper editors and even to President, Truman to help enlist the Nation. All agreed it was a good idea but too unwieldy. Various organizations wished him well, but that was all. But the barber, enraptured with his cause, refused to quit. He kept on asking for help. Slowly the idea burned with its own fire, Businessmen, young GI brides from overseas, housewives, veterans’ groups, civic societies, and religious leaders joired in. A steady trickle of letters to Italy swelled to a torrent; the Democratic victory heartened all Europe. One man helped start this, because he lifted himself out of his own narrow, selfish sphere and into the larger world with all its breath-taking potentialities. Not spectacularly, but in countless ways, tens of thousands of Christophers are busy and never before in history were such efforts needed so desperately, For today the worid is ill of the disease of the soul called mate- rialism, If the trend toward paganism cun- tinues, it is only a matter of time before our Nation will collapse from within, That is what happened in Germany. Millions of decent Americans have long forgotten the basic truth that every human being gets his fundamental rights from God—not from the State. That, in fact, the chief purpose of the State—as the founding fathers repeatedly affirmed in the Declara- tion of Independence—is to protect those God-given rights. To believe that these rights are safe today is to embrace illusion. The stockbroker who, forsaking Wall Street, lowered his entire family’s living standards to take a Government job and fight for good principles is a Christopher. So is the Baptist lawyer down in Texas who spends all his leisure time making speeches on the brotherhood of man. And so is a girl epileptic, bed-bound in a small California hospital, who started writing a column that would concentrate on the good in life around us, instead of just the opposite. A little newspaper printed her words; fan letters poured in—and, believe it or not, this girl is now almost completely recovered from epi- lepsy Her doctors understand why; she got out of herself and out of her own nurrow world, gave herself a purpose in life and s0 did away with mental and emotional frus- tration. It ts estimated that subversives who are trying to undermine the United States com- pose less than 1 percent of the people of our country, Christophers believe that 1 per- cent of the normal, decent citizens of Amer- ica can be found ready and willing to work Just as hard to restore divine truth and hu- man integrity to American life. The story of one American wife shows the inestimable power of a woman, working be- hind the scenes in her own home. yr hus- band told her the Reds were taking over his union. “Keep out of that,” she advised him. “It'll only mean trouble.” But a Christopher explained how getting decent people to stay away from union meet- ings was just what the Reds wanted. From then on, she urged her husband to attend every meeting, she induced him to urge others, finally she egged him on to run for president of the union. In substance, that is the history of how a large union was taken avay from an organized leftist minority. One woman with a Christopher purpose was all that was needed to start the fire. In the home, in all our personal relation- ships, we must practice love and we must pass on the message of the good life. As you grow in love for others, you will find your Own power increasing. You will learn how to disagree without being disagreeable. You will become more approachable. You will better understand why all peop’s want to be truly loved and not just tolerated. You will emphasize more and more the good side of even the worst people. You will develop an inner warmth, an abiding sense of humor; naturally you will make mistakes, but you will always be able to laugh at yourself, Your never-say-die spirit will give courage to everyone you meet, Life itself will take on a new and exhila- rating meaning, because you will b3 fulfilling the purpose for which you were created: To love God above all things and your neighbor as yourself. “We hate Christianity and Christians,” proclaimed Anatole Lunacharsky, Soviet Commissar of Education. “Even the best of them must be considered our worst enemies They preach love of one’s neighbor and mercy, which is contrary to our prin- ciples. What we want is hate. * * ®& Only then will we conquer the universe.” (Quoted in Izvestia ) The one thing that terrifies the godless the world over is the fear that some day all those who believe in Christ will wake up— and start acting their beliefs. Once that happens, must of the great prob- lems which plague mankind will disappear overnight, War—Russian Style EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. CARL HINSHAW OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 14, 1951 Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Speaker, Maj, Gen. Hugh J. Knerr, United States Air Force, retired, the author of this article, has had a long and brilliant military career, which began in 1908 when he graduated from the United States Naval Academy. In 1912 he transferred to the Army seeking an aviator's rating and received flight training in 1917 as an of- ficer of the Signal Corps. Later, when the Air Corps was established, he, of course, was transferred to the Air Corps, After a brief retirement because of physical disability, he was returned to duty in 1942 and served as Commanding General of the Air Technical Service Command in Europe, and was Deputy Commanding General] for Administration United States Strategic Air Forces in Europe throughout the war. In 1948 he was appointed Inspector General of the United States Air Force. Just prior to General Knerr's appoint- ment as Inspector General, United States Air Force, he served as alternate to Gen. H. 4H. (‘Hap’) Arnold, in the latter's ca- pacity as Adviser to the Congressional A767 Aviation Policy Board, of which I had the honor to be Vice Chairman. His keen and penetrating understanding ‘of the military problems of our country, not to mention its international political problems, was of immense value to the Congressional Aviation Policy Board. Mr. Speaker, Maj. Gen. Hugh Knerr, as stated, graduated from the Naval Academy, served in the Army, and be- came Inspector General of the Air Force. His long and varied military career, covering 42 years of our country’s most recent history, entitled him to speak with the authority he exhibits in his article which follows: War—Ruvasian STr.e (By Maj. Gen. Hugh J. Knerr, USAF, retired) We are losing a war without firing a shot, We are losing it because we do not secm to understand that the character of inter- National conflict has completely changed since the close of World War II. . Psychological warfare is now the most potent weapon in the arsenal of the totali- tarians. Although Hitler gave us a first- class course in how this weapon can be used, we have chosen to ignore it. That we should not choose to use it is understandable. That we do not recognize it in the hands of Russia is inexcusable. Military arms are essential to this kind of warfare, not necessarily for use but to brandish under the noses of statesmen and politicians fearful of their own position or the safety of their country. That these arms may be inferior or lacking in substance does not appear to be important so long as they are there in great numbers, Russia has retained a huge army primarily for psychological purposes and the control of her own and subjugated peoples. Reliable estimates indicate she can muster a ground force of 3,760,000 men. The Atlantic Pact nations will do well to raise 2,000,000. So what? Would it not be perfectly stupid to enter @ tiger's cage relying upon your teeth and fingernails simply because the tiger has only teeth and claws? Yet that appears to be exactly the attitude we and other nations are assuming. We have become so hypnotized by the colossal manpower available to the Russians and their Asiatic cousins we think we must match them man for man and weapon for weapon in a conflict of their own choosing: A psychological victory for Russia of the first magnitude. In a contest between ground forces western civilization is certain to take a licking again, It 1s impossible for us to stoop to the im- morality inherent in total disregard for hu- man life and dignity. Eastern materialism is no more inhibited in this regard than the tiger. On the other hand, we are just as certain to control the situation if we but follow the example of experts in tiger handling and take a chair, pistol, and whip into the cage with us. As with the tiger, the mere attitude of a willingness to fight with weapons he does not understand and that will hurt him when he steps out of line would be most effective in countering the Russian confidence in, and our fear of, superior ground forces. Fear of this obviously superior force and all the unknown forces that may be back of the iron curtain is the secret of Russian psycho- logical success. RUSSIAN TACTICS EXPOSE WEAKNESS Fear of the unknown 1s a universal weak- ness of mankind, The oriental has played upon it for thousands of years. Cunning, indirection, cynicism are favored as naturally as the occidental prefers an immediate, di- rect settlement of differences,
A768 The orlentai employs his approach as a form of mental and psythological torture to wear down his opponent to the point where, 4n exasperation, he gives up-.or makes a mis- take that may be seized upon to advantage. In this process the batt of apparent succees 4a occasionally thrown out to the occidental who, in his desire to believe in the integrity of his fellow man, grabs it as proof that his opponent has been misunderstood. In spite of the rude awakening that inevitably fol- lows, the same thing happens over and over again, Think back 10 years, or read tomot- Trow's newspaper. This process of leading from weakness 1s as simple and effective as at cards. The same necessity exists for concealing what you do not have. The iron curtain is as necessary to Russia as the vest and sleeves are to the card sharp. It is my conviction that we find ourselves in these unhappy circumstances as a conse- quence of honest people trying to beat an in- ternational sharper at his own game instead of letting him have it in good old western style when he is caught cheating. It is strange how this myth of an all- powerful Russia has grown up in the mind of the average American, who normally is not too gullible. Orisit? This business of Rus- sia overrunning Europe in 3 weeks and then putting it to work producing weapons for our defeat is a neat bit of psychological propaganda not entirely of Rusaian origin. That sort of stupidity is the product of con- siderable intelligence, Certainly Russia can get to the Channel in 90 days. Napoleon made the Volga in less time than that. Russia is not going to make the same mistake in reverse, knowing full well that her real objective lies 3,000 miles beyond. To win Russia Knows she must devise means for canceling the ability of the Atlan- tic bloc to produce five times more steel, three times more coal, seven times more elec- tric power, and 10 times more oil than she can. The key to the riddle facing Russia ts the United States. Why expose her front to war and her back to millions of desperate saboteurs e@mong her own and subjugated populations? Why not drive wedges in the western wall and allow the frost of suspicion to work for her? Why not create a rift between England and France over the industrial resources of the Ruhr? Why not founder the United States and England on the shoals of socialism? Why not frighten us into dissipating our power among nations too cynical or decadent to fight for an ideal? Just stop and think over what Russia and her agents have already accomplished along these lines. Could a war have netted Russia as much in so short a apace of time? VISIBLY STRONG, WE CRINGE IN FEAR Russia knows that if she cannot knock the United States out quickly she is doomed to eventual defeat. Confronted by the in- dustrial might of this country, twice proven within a generation, Russia senses the folly of attempting to match her shortages in food, rubber, oil, transport, and skilled workers against our obvious plenty, for of such is war compounded, Her home-made propaganda sours in the knowledge that # hundred of her cities are marked for destruction if she oversteps the bounds of our credulity and restraint. Burned by the lash of a few recent contacts with our air and naval power, she draws her curtain tighter and roars—in frustration.. That we misinterpret the roar is not to our credit. Now, what of our side of the story? Over the past century we have established s moral force tn the world so far beyond any Russian concept as to be incomprehensible to her. We have created an industrial capacity that is at once the envy and despair of Russia, We have produced an army that had little difficulty in destroying the evil forces of nagzism and fascism—then disbanded it. We have built a Navy capable of controlling the seven seas—then moth balled it. We have brought into being the incon- testable thesia that alr power is peace power—but have not supported it, We have extended the hand of friendship to fallen enemies and bankrupt creditors without expectation of advantage. A prodigal, lusty glant in the family of nations, it's time we snapped out of it. Time that we assumed sober leadership of man- kind and stopped cringing at the taunt of imperialism. Let us boldly proolaim that we are an im- Pperialistic power intent upon establishing peace and justice throughout the world, Rus- alan-style democracy notwithstanding. Let us make it clear there is a limit to fruitless debate, a limit to the money and material we will give away, a limit to the manpower we will drain from industry. And let us inform the United Nations that ‘we will lead in this crusade of 1951 but make it clear there can be no neutrals in this conflict with evil. Zach must be for us or against us. Each must contribute a like proportionate share of national resource. Let us lay down in no uncertain terms our intention to make maximum use of our industrial power, our air power, and our naval power. But by the same token we will not have our Army used as a pawn in an international chess game with the cham- pion. And finally, let us make it crystal clear we are through with the role of a genie in a bottle to be called forth or hustled back again at the whim of a beggar. All of these we can do. The Congress of the United States has the power and au- thority to do them. The voter and the tax- payer have the final responsibility to see that they are done. This responsibility must be accepted sooner or later. Why wait? Southern California Demands Recognition EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. GORDON L. McDONOUGH OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 14, 1951 Mr. McDONOUGH. Mr. Speaker, it would appear from the decisions of some of the heads of administrative agencies establishing regional headquarters for the southwest section of the United States at San Francisco that a special study of the map of the southwest sec- tion of the United States and a perusal of the latest comparative census figures for Los Angeles and San Francisco would be in order for these gentlemen. The establishment of regional offices in San Francisco has created an unnec- essary hardship for hundreds’ of resil- dents of southern California who must journey north wasting many valuable days annually seeking the Government assistance and cooperation that should be available to them in southern Cali- fornia, Recent census figures show that the population of the city of Los Angeles is now 1,957,602, while the population of San Francisco is only 760,381, Los An- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD geles also has 46 percent of all the fac- tories on the Pacific coast with 44 per- cent of all the factory employees on the coast. Certainly the people of southern Cali- fornia and the Southwest section of the United States are entitled to the facili- ties and services of a regional office of major administrative agencies in the southern part of California. The logical location for such offices is in the Los Angeles area, The following is an editorial on this subject which appeared in a recent edi- tion of the Los Angeles Daily News which clearly states the facts and the needs of the citizens of Los Angeles and southern California : Facts Asout Los ANGELES FOR WASHINGTON Broaes What some of our civilian brass in Wash- ington, including possibly the President him- self, seems to need ts a lesson in geography. This lesson should be equipped with adequate illustrations, diagrams, graphs, and & report on the latest census figures. These esteemed public servants do not seem to know, for example, that Los Angeles is a large city in southern California, 347 airline miles away from San Francisco, of which many of them think we are a suburb. Pending assembly of the necessary maps and other exhibits for our higher echelon Officials, here are certain outstanding facts for their immediate information and edifica- tion. The latest census figures, prepared by one of their own departments, shows the population of Los Angeles to be 1,057,692, The population of San Francisco is 760,381, These figures apply only to the city limits in both cases. The metropolitan area of Los Angeles is the third largest in America, being exceeded only by Nev York and Chicago, This city also is the logical and strategic metropolis of the southwest and central to that area, to northwestern Mexico and to the broad Pacific. Now, why is it that this geography lesson needs to be brought home to the men of the White House and sundry capital agencies? Why is it that it fa deemed such a vital lesson by the southern California delegation to Congress that it has organized to march on the White House as a body to impresa upon the officials there the facts to which we have adverted? It is because Washington bureaucracy con- tinues to make San Francisco regional head- quarters for all Federal agencies and is in process of meking it regional headquarters for more. The latest case in point is the establishment in San Francisco of regional headquarters of the Economic Stabilization agency which will have jurisdiction over California, Arizona and Nevada. Some time ago the regional office of the Department of Commerce was established here. Later !t was reduced to a district office and the regional office was moved to San Francisco. Edwin Bates, manager for the district of the Department of Commerce, says that his functions have not been reduced in actual status and that he will be able to render the same service as formerly to the businessmen of this area, This is fortunate and not the case with many other agencies, Chamber of commerce officials, including Oscar Trippett, president, and Harold Wright, general manager, who went to Washington to protest against the continued treatment of Los Angeles as a hick town or a suburb, say that husidreds of reaidents of this olty are forced to go to San Francisco, hat and brief- case in hand, and waste many valuable days annually in seeking what they need from the Government when, they should be able to get it here, They point out, very appropriately,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD that Los Angeles has not only more than twice San Francisco's population, but 46 percent of all the factories on the Pacific coast, with 44 percent of all the factory em- ployees on the coast. How ts this absurd attitude in Washington accounted for? It is due largely to habits of mind, Since the Mother Lode and Barbary Coast days the east has thought of San Francisco aa the big city on the Pacific const. To this day people for miles in every direction say they are going “to the city” when they go to San Franoisco. San Francisco 1s a de- lightful place and we gladly concede it. But Washington should be reminded that some- thing has happened since Jack London made the place famous and Nob Hill was the center of the social universe. Population and the stream of economic life in the West have moved south and south- west, and people have moved with it. Let’s put it in terme which Washington under- stands best: In the 1948 presidential election California’s voters cast 1,913,134 for President Truman, Out of that total Los Angeles County contributed 812,690, and San Fran- cisco contributed 167,726. Let’s put it an- other way: The State has 6,244,837 regis- tered voters. Of these, 2,198,878 live in Los Angeles County and 429,886 live in San Fran- clsco. See what we mean? —L. E. C. Labor Fights for Freedom EXTENSION OF REMAnsns or HON. ABRAHAM J. MULTER OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 7, 1951 Mr. MULTER. Mr. Speaker, a very fine analysis of the role of free labor in the present struggle against commu- nism and specifically in the current in- _ternational situation is presented in an article by George P. Delaney, the inter- national representative of the American Federation of Labor. Mr. Delaney’s ar- ticle entitled “Labor Battles Reds Round the World” was published in the Wash- ington Post, January 28, 1951. I com-~ mend it to the attention of my colleagues. It follows: Lasor Barrugs Reps ROUND THE WoRLD (By George P. Delaney, international rep- resentative, American Federation of La- bor) One of the most important contributions of American labor to the preservation of freedom and the extension of the democratic way of life is its consistent fight againat the spread of Communist ideology throughout the world. While from all directions there is much ef- feotive opposition to Communist ideology, no group has done so much to supply aggressive resistance as free trade-union members and their representatives in the nations of the free world. Everywhere the proponents of communism are attempting to persuade the working peo- ple that the Marxian ideology is the panacea for all ills, though the millions of slave ja- borers in Russia are a living contradiction of such false propaganda. ‘According to Communist theory, the work- ing people are the segment of the popula- tion in each country thet will spearhead a Buccsseful revolution. To stage & success~ ful internal revolution, & hard core of Oom- munists must capture the labor movement of anation. It ahould be borne in mind that XCVII~App.——49 there is no greater achievement for a Com- munist than to convert or capture an im- portant labor leader, Theoretically, upon exposure to the pseudo truths of Stalinism, the worker will react by taking his place in the ranks of the Communists. In the free nations the oppo- site reaction has occurred, and the union members of the free nations, except in a few scattered instances, have forcefully opposed the party line, Totalitarianism in any form hreeds and grows strong in poverty and disease, in social reaction, and economic injustice. Workers who live in a free country, who enjoy a de- cent standard of life, who can join free unions, and who can bargain oollectively will always reject communism. In recent years when & small-scale struggle was on in the labor movement of the United States between revolutionary communism and a trade-unionism that would function within a democratic society, communism lost decisively. In Western Europe, when workers have been given a choice they have always chosen a democratic society over a Communist state. The elected repre- sentatives of free trade-unions have been the first victims of any form of totalitarian dictatorship. This was true in Italy and Germany in the twenties and thirties; in Argentina, Czechoslovakia, Poland, and Hun- gary in the forties, In the total diplomacy of today labor's role in world affairs is of paramount im- portance. People to people, worker to worker communication of the message of vigorous dedication to the principles of democracy can be a decisive factor in the struggle be- tween the freo world and the slave world. Such an exchange of views is being effected through many organizations and channels. Among these are the International Con- federation of Free Trade Unions, the Inter- national Labor Organization, the A. F. of L. Free Trade Union Committee, the Inter- American Confederation of Workers, which is working to prevent the spread of Com- munist ideology particularly in Central and South American nations, and the Inter- natlonal Secretartats. The Free Trade Union Committee has been active in Rurope and Asia, rendering mate- rial ald to the restoration of a free trade- union movement In those areas. The com- mittee also assist free trade-union move- ments In exile and trade-unionists in dis- tress. Economic Cooperation Administration labor advisers in the Marsball plan countries and labor attachés in many United States embassies have made significant contribu- tions, The Office of International Labor Af- fairs of the Labor Department {s doing an excellent job. The A. F. of L, the CIO, and the independent unions maintain standing committees on international relations and have worked with great success in dissemi- nating the concepts of freedom to foreign workers in both the free world and the slave world. In the United Nations, in the Eco- nomic and Social Council, and the Educa- tional, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, free labor has been very active and articulate. In November 1949 the trade-union centers of the free world sent delegates to London to establish the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions. The machinations of labor representatives from the fron curtain countries in the World Federation of Trade Unions had revealed that they were govern- ment puppets and not free trade-union repre- sentatives. Every twist and turn of the party line wes followed rigorously. Consequently, the bons fide trade unions withdrew from the WFTU and formed a common front against the slave world, the International Confedera- tion of Free Trade Unions. Thus, for the rst time, the American Fed- eration of Labor and the Congress of Indus- trial Organizations jofned forces in an inter- national labor confederation. The IOFTU has made a highly auspicious beginning. Its publications go to the far corners of the earth. An ICFTV delegation toured Asia, conferring with labor leadera on techniques of organization and foreign policy. The ICFTU is represented at the United Nations and maintains a branch office in New York. From its headquarters at Brussels are issued policy statements on foreign affairs formulat’a by affiliates of the ICFTU. On January 4, 1961, a conference of representa- tive Western Hemisphere unions was held at Mexico City under the auspices of the ICFIU. The International Labor Organization le an inter-governmental body composed of 62 member nations. Each country is represent- - ed at the annual ILO conferences by two delegates from government and one delegate each from the most representative voluntary organizations of workers and employers. Today one of the specialized agencies of the United Nations, the ILO was for many years an autonomous part of the League of Nations. This agency seeks to raise tho working conditions of workers in all nations through the adoption of labor etandards adopted by the conferences, and ratified by the member countries. The ILO does important research work on international aspects of unemployment, in- dustrial safety, minimum wages, social secu. rity, etc. It also sends teams of experts into the fleid to assist nations in formulating la- bor legislation, to assist groups of nations in such programs as planning for migration, and it is now playing an importent part in the United Nations technical assistance pro- gram. In the industrialized states of the free world, the standard of living is relatively high. Free trade unions have organized a large proportion of the labor force. Collec- tive bargaining is at a fairly mature stage. Moscow propaganda falls on deaf ears among such workers. In the underdeveloped nations of the world, the problem is much more complex and does not lend itself easily to generaliza- tions. Some nations are trying to throw off forms of colonialism, while other peoples are attempting to form unions as instru- mentalities for social and economic reform. Communists have frequently capitalized on such conditions and have taken over the leadership of the forces of revolution. If communism is not to be allowed to spread to the underdeveloped nations, the standard of life of their people must be ele- vated substantially. Anyone who believes that we can remain an oasis of plenty in a world of hungry people and still build and maintain the friendship of those people, is blind to the facts. The action of the economic survey mission to the Philippines in requiring certain inter- na} reforms, Including a minimum wage law, 85 @ prerequisite to economic ald, plonears a pattern that should be developed. No amount of economic ald is going to win the friendship of the working people of the free world if only the upper c'asses benefit. In many underdeveloped nations, free trade unions are prohibited. Union leaders are persecuted, imprisoned, and shot. If workers are given an opportunity to secure jobs at a fair wage, under decent working conditions, to join a free union and to bar- gain collectively for wages and conditions of employment, they will not become come munista, In considering the whole situation, the above statement should be recognized ss a truism. The idea of democracy is much more compelling than the idea of Commu- nism, if each presupposes a decent standard of living.
A770 Letter From Korean War . EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. PATRICK J. HILLINGS OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 14, 1951 Mr, HILLINGS. Mr. Speaker, our people have been inspired by the leader- ship and ability of so many of our young men who are now carrying the fight to the Communist enemy in Korea. I am including at this point a letter from one of these young men, Maj. Volney F. Morin, of Los Angeles, because this let- ter indicates the high ideals and the fine courageous type of American manhood safeguarding our Nation during these critical days. This letter was addressed to the dean of students at the University of Michigan. Before being recalled to active duty with the Four Hundred and Fifty-second Bombardment Wing (L) of the United States Air Force in Japan a few months ago, Major Morin was practicing law in Los Angeles and serving his community in many worth-while civic activities. He is an outstanding young man, and in his letter he helps to answer the question, “Why are we fighting in Korea?” I urge all of the ‘Members of the Congress to read his letter: "{EADQUARTERS, Four HUNDRED AND Firty-sEcOND BomM- BARDMENT WING (L), APO 75, Unrr 1, Cart oF POSTMASTER, San Francisco, Caltj., January 15, 1951. Ericu A. WALTER, Dean of Students, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich. Dear DeaN Water: Thank you for your good etter of January 4. You admonished me to preac’: a bit longer. While I am not an authority on interna- tional relations, I am obliged to admit there is a viewpoint of detached austerity asso- clated with an APO number on the other side “f the world. At an APO you are re- moved from the day to day argument, dis- cussion, and passion of events in the United States. But—to preach a bit: As a lawyer, it seems to ine a person's ability to walk a dark alley alone is depend- ent upon the law and order of the society in which he lives. A bully lurking in the dark alley takes note of that law and order. If you lived in a lawless society, you would have to take certain steps in order to walk that dark alley without fear of the bully— First, you would have to be strong enough to beat him up. Second, you would have to convince him that you could do it. Third, you would have to let him know what act of his would cause you to fight. It seems to me, the United States is now walking the dark alley of international trouble, At least one bully (and possibly more) lurks in that dark alley. The United States must take the same steps to protect itself that you would take. In short, it must be strong; others must know it is strong; it must announce what it will fight for (spe- cifically: It cannot disclaim interest in Ko- rea and then be surprised if the bully moves in). Moreover, it would seem prudent for the United States to gather whatever allies 1t can find to help it on it’s travels. In walk- ing an alley of peril the United States would be better off with an old ally (e. g. Chiang) — than without. When I was in achoo!l in Ann Arbor (1937- 41) it was fashionable to chew on the in- tellectual bone of socialism. Looking back on those days, we never cracked the bone to the marrow. But then, neither did anyone else. Stuart Chase had written glowingly in his Economy of Abundance of the benefits of a planned economy. As an aside, it is interesting to note he would have planned for a lessened food production in 1951 be- cause experts had predicted a population decline by this time. In 1932 in the preface to his On the Meaning of Life, Will Durant lamented his loss of belief in the Socialist Utopia because, as he put it, of the avarice of men. No wonder we failed to reach the marrow of the planned economy. It wasn't avarice; it was a tougher problem. It wasn’t until 1945 that an English Soctal- ist, Barbara Wooten, in her *ook, Freedom Under Planning, gave e. somewhat accurate definition of a planned economy. She said it was: “A conscious and deliberate choice of economic priorities by some public author- ity" This was a forward step. For Marx and Engels never said how they would run the Socialist utopia. Moreover, they would not allow the disciples to discuss the ques- tion. They were right. Kill the enemy be- fore you discuss the division of spoils. Perhaps it is not surprising that it was almost 100 years from publication of the Communist manifesto in 1848 until Miss Wooten came close to defining a planned economy. But it seems to me Miss Wooten still did not reach the issue. Simply stated, the mar- row is: “How did you do it?” For example: How does a nation determine it will produce steel? Is it done by comparison with a capitalist economy? If not, how does it know it should produce steel rather than molybdenum or tungsten? Assuming a determination to make steel; then how much? Clearly, it is not sufficient to have one Englishman making steel; nor ig it feasible to have every Englishman mak- ing steel. As Mason said to Dixon: ‘We've got to draw the line someplace.” The ques- tion is: Where? An English Socialist told me just before my departure from the United States that the determination of how much steel to make was based upon the capital goods requirements. But this only removes by a step the final question of how much. Assuming ability to determine how much steel to make, the planner of the economy must then determine what to do with it, Does he make automobiles? If so, what kind. Does he make locomotives? Washing machines? Refrigerators? Or what? In short, the planner of the economy is obliged to make goods for maximum human happiness, But he has no way of finding out what goods he should make. Human taste varies. To my Knowledge, all nations (and it is not too late to remember the word “Nazi” meant National Socialist Workers Party) that have tried the planned economy have stumbled on these questions. The only an- swer seems to be: A war machine. The mil- itary knows what it wants. The military answers the question of: What to produce? How much? What to make? What is left over is plecemealed to the civilians. If they don't like it, they can be shot or im- prigoned in the name of patriotism. Had we chewed harder on our intellec- tual bones when we were collegians we might have seen it was inevitable that socialism leads to war machines; and the war ma- chine has never been bullt that has not been used. The conclusion is inescapable— we must fight to survive in the dark alleys of the world. A planned economy creates a bully. Tam glad to be able to relate to you that in a Umited way America ts ready to fight. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD In June of 1948 the United States Air Force organized five tactical air support wings. One of these was located in south- ern California. This was the Four Hundred and Fifty-second Bombardment Wing (L), commanded by Brig. Gen. Luther W. Sweet- zer, Jr. With a maximum of 10 days’ notice (and in many cases individuals reported on the same day they received their notices) the Four Hundred and Fifty-second was or- dered to active duty in the middle of the Mojave Desert. Approximately 3,000 civilians gathered in that desert. They lacked the seventy-five-thousand-odd pieces of equip- ment they were soon to acquire; they lacked clothing; inoculations; dog tags; identifica- tion cards; and all the fiddle-faddle that is required for American combat troops. It is interesting to recall that on that first morn- ing there were only nine cooks. Most of the barracks were nailed shut. Beds were stacked in neat piles. General Sweetzer had only a desk and chair; and could not offer his staff a place to confer, Suffice to say that within 60 days the Four Hundred Fifty-second Bombardment Wing had 92 percent of its seventy-five- thousand-odd pieces of equipment. Every man had a full issue of clothing, including three khaki uniforms, one blue uniform, one OP uniform, together with heavy shoes, overcoat, gloves, and all of his fleld equip- ment which in turn included two blankets and a sleeping bag. A movement order was recelved The wing then moved by bus, plane, truck, train, and ship a distance of 7,000 miles without loss of a single piece of equipment or injury toa man. Seventy- seven duys after the Four Hundred Fifty- second was called to active duty it hit the enemy for the first time. At this writing the Four Hundred Fifty- second has flown over 7,0CO0 combat hours. It has hit the enemy with over 1,400 sorties. It has bombed, machine-gunned, rocketed, and napalmed the enemy with observed sat- isfaction. Perhaps, in a small measure, the Four Hundred Fifty-second (led by an officer corps which is 97 percent Reserve and manned by enlisted personnel who sre 70 percent re- servists) 1s indicative of the potential of the United States. This potential is further exemplified by the continued support the Four Hundred Fifty-second receives. For each combat mission of 40 planes there is required a freight train of 24 10-ton railroad cars. The cars supply only gasoline and ordnance, Further, daily trainloads of food, equipment, supplies and clothing are required. It is interesting to note the combat record has been achieved in spite of a confused and conflicting policy at home. Individ- ually, the men of the Four Hundred Fifty- second are not enthused about fighting and dying on the Asiatic mainland. They re- ceive daily letters inquiring why they came and what they are doing. Due probably to home-front pressure, those having four de- pendents have been permitted to go home (without replacement). No more airmen will be called who do not volunteer for duty. In short, the men of the Four Hundred Fifty-second are fighting what is to them an all-out war (for no matter how small the theater of shooting—it’s all-out) with con- fusion, doubt, and uncertainty at honie. If the Nation must continue to walk the dark alleys of the world, let's hope we shall be able to produce an unlimited number of these reserve wings. With warm personal regards to you and yours, I am, Cordially, Vouner F, Morin, Major, USAF, Judge Advocate. Approved for publication: D. J. BRACKENBURY, First Heutenant, USAF, P. J. O. Officer.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Air Power Was Decisive in Halting Chinese—Gill Robb Wilson EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LEO E. ALLEN OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 14, 1951 Mr. ALLEN of MDlinois, Mr. Speaker, I noted in the Appendix to the Recorp of Wednesday last that the Honorable Dewey Srort, ranking Republican mem- ber of the House Armed Services Com- mittee and, incidentally, one of the most realistic and best-informed authorities on militarv tactics ever to sit in Congress, quoted a recent article entitled “Man Power or Air Power.” The article, writ- ten by our mutual good friend and for- mer colleague, Bruce Barton, stated, in part; Generals and admirals are brave men who have sworn to give their lives, if need be, for their country. They are entitled to our re- spect and gratitude. But before we give them universal military training, let them tell us whether they plan to win the next war with man power or with air power. Mr. Speaker, every unbiased military authority in the world recognizes the proven fact that American air power is truly American peace power. I person- ally for years have contended that in any future contest in an all-out global war victory will perch on the standards of that nation which enjoys and is able to maintain supremacy in the air. Few men in the world speak on both civil as well as military aeronautics with greater authority and clarity and with less service prejudice than Gill Robb Wilson, nationally known and accredited aviation editor of the New York Herald Tribune. In an article published last week head- ed “Air power was decisive in halting the Chinese” this intrepid World War I fighter pilot declared: No theater of air operation ever has wit- nessed more ingenuity in the employment of tactical force than Korea. However, it must never be forgotten that air power in Korea, even at its best, has fought a war with one hand tied behind its back. The genius of military atr power lies in its ability to smash sources of supply and man- ufacture rather than merely to ald ground forces. Mr, Speaker, that type of warfare— known as strategic—is but one of the es- tablished roles and missions of the United States Air Force. Noting the fact that our Air Force was not permitted, under rules established by the United Nations, to cross the Korean boundary, either to make observation of Russian strength or strategic attack, Mr, Wilson went on to say: When Maj. Gen, Emmett O'Donnell, com- mander of the Far East bomber command, returned from Korea he made clear in his statement that Korea was a frustrating field for alr power because for political reasons it could only be utilized in an auxiliary capacity, Mr. Speaker, in these days, while we in Congress are weighing the necessity of drafting our 18-year-old boys, trying to understand the lessons that have been taught by the bloody struggle now going on in Korea, and evaluating the terrific impact of a $71,000,000,000 budget upon our national economy, to insure our peace and security, it behooves every Member of this body to read Gill Robb Wilson's article entitled “Air Power Was Decisive in Halting the Chinese.” For that reason I ask the unanimous consent of my colleagues to extend my remarks and include in the Recoxp re- port of the splendid achievement of our Air Force in the Korean War. The article is as follows: Am Powrr Decisive IN HALTING CHINESE (By Gill Robb Wilson) While the Chinese armies were sweeping over the vastly outnumbered United Nations forces and both the Tenth Corps and the Eighth Army appeured in jeopardy of capture or annihilation, the writer made the state- ment that an army with control of the air is almost indestructible. In the face of the situation at the time, the statement appeared to be contrary to the evidence. However, subsequent develop< ment in Korea supported the writer’s thesis, Communist advances by night were stale- mated when C-47 transports, each loaded with 150 illuminating flares, patrolled the Communist supply lines and enabled B-26 tactical bombers to strafe convoys and troops on the roads. This was the first time in avia- tion combat history that such an operation had been attempted but it proved extremely effective and brought the advancing Red armies under round-the-clock air attack, Where United Nations troops were out- flanked and surrounded time after time, C-119 combat transports parachuted am- munition and food to the beleaguered furces, which were thus enabled to maintain them- selves against overwhelming numbers. As a result of the alr attacks, the veteran combat-tested Chinese divisions, despite their fanatical disregard for losses, were gradually brought to a stalemate and the Offensive again was gained by our Ground Forces. Aw Force estimates of casualties inflicted on the Communists during the Korean cam- paign total almost 100,000, half of which oc- curred from November 21 tu the end of the year and practically all of which were against front-line troops. There has been much conjecture as to why Chinese armies ceased to follow the retiring United Nations armies, Some theorists at- tributed it to political reasons. Others called the Red retirement a trap. And now it is being asked tf 1t could be possible that United States air power was decisive in stop- ping the Red Chinese armies. It seems well to let the facts speak for themselves, What army in history was able to advance with tts supply lines constantly shredded and its first-line troops suffering casualties of such proportions? Air power alone did not stop the over- whelming Chinese armies, but air power im- posed a large proportion of casualties on those created by heroic Army and Navy forces, winter weather and disease, and it supported the resistance capabilities of the surface forces. The total adds up to the thesis that an army with control of the air 4s almost indestructible. Interrogation of enemy prisoners in Korea ie a little surprising. The consensus of pris- oner testimony is that aircraft machine-gun fire, napalm, and fragmentation bombs are feared in that order. While it is true that a fighter plane carries 1,600 rounds of .60-caliber ammunition fir- ing from aix guns, it is news that casualties AT71 by mac! n strafing exceed those of the terrible fre bombs and fregmentation pro- jectiles. Naturally machine-gun fire can be aimed more accurately but the napalm and fragmentation bombs, covering a wider area, were generally supposed to inflict greater damage. No theater of alr operation ever has wit- nesaed more ingenuity in the employment of tactical force than Korea. However, it must never be forgotten that air power in Korea, even at its best, has fought a war with one hand tied behind its back. The genius of military atr power is tts ability to smash sources of supply and man- ufacture, rather than merely to aid ground forces, When Maj. Gen. Emmett O’Donnell, commander of the Far East Bomber Com- mand, returned from Korea, he made clear in his statement that Korea was 4 frustrating field for air power because, for political reas- ons, it could only be utilized in an auxiliary capacity. A Pledge to America EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ABRAHAM J. MULTER OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPHESENTATIVES Wednesday, January 24, 1951 Mr. MULTER. Mr. Speaker, the fol- lowing appeared tn the New York Herald Tribune of February 11, 1951. Comment is unnecessary. Each of us should take the pledge. A Pieper To AMERICA (By Russel] Davenport ) A fow ycars ago, in a poem called My Country, 1 wrote these lines: “America is not a land of ease, not a land of rest.” Today these words are being tested. Our country faces the threat of war. We feel the challenge to help her get ready for what- ever happens. In the final count America’s strength will be the sum total of us all, If we love our country now, there are ways to prove ft. We cannot all do big things, but everybody can do small, specific things. Judging by what our elected leaders have told us this far, here is a pledge that we can make today—to ourselves and to our country; T will— Recognize the need for higher taxes and willingly pay them. Keep only a reasonable supply of the neces- sities of life. I will not hoard, Be willing to work longer hours. Make no undue profit out of the prepara- tion for war, But I will also keep my bust- ness or farm , rosperous and strong because my country may need its services. Obey price and wage controls without ask. ing for special favors. Hold living costs to a minimum by giving up luxuries, and practice at home a pay-as- you-go policy. I will advocate the same policy for my community. Urge my community to set up an adequate prvi defense program and do my full share in it. Remember that the way to get things done in @ democracy is through a poaitive atti- tude, not criticism that is purcly destructive or despair that can lead to panic. I will strive through positive thoughts, sympa- thetic understanding, and courageous deci- sions to build a better and stronger America, The needs of America are moving us on- ward together. And what each one of us does today, by deed or word, will help decide the destiny of our country,
ATi2 Why Not Pull Out of Korea? EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CLARE E. HOFFMAN OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 8, 1951 Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, sincere, conscientious, patriotic citizens throughout the United States, believing that our own interests and those of the world could best be served by our participation in a world organi- zation, have become disillusioned by the events of the months since the beginning of the present Korean conflict. The present thinking of a majority of our people is expressed in the following editorial from the Three Rivers Com- mercial of February 9, 1951, published by Mr, William H. Shumaker, at Three Rivers, Mich.: Wy Nor Put Our or Korza? Now for the fourth time UN (mostly American) forces are locked in desperate battle near the latitude of Seoul. The ground was lost in June when the North Korean invasion swept southward, It was won back as we fought northward. It was lost as the Chinese Reds pushed southward. It now appears almost won again as we climb northward into what sometimes seems to be a military vacuur.. The Korean campaign begins to take on the horrible aspect of perpetual motion, We have a nightmarish, uncanny sense of having been through it all already as our forces ad- vance and retire (censorship forbids the word “retreat’) through cycle after cycle. But the cycles aren't precisely identical. New ‘nen die in each advance and rebuff. New equipment is expended, new blood is shed, new cripples are created. The cost in blood and treasu‘e mounts—and mounts— and mounts. It ts difficult to see what we can gain in Korea. It is difficult not to believe that Korea is a diabolical snare set for us—suc- ceasfully-~by the Kremlin. The Russian boycott of the UN was simul- taneous with the invasion of Scuth Korea, The UN police action directive was not blocked by any Soviet veto, as the USSR did not vote. A step of this nature by the UN must, under the UN charter, article 27, have concurring votes from every permanent member of the Security Council, which in- cludes Russia, but the Russians when they returned made no effort to revoke the inter- vention resolution, Russia hus not and need not lose one man in Korea. Chinese pawns do the dying for them, The Chinese reservoir is bottomless. We could continue to slaughter till the crack of doom, and the Chinese birth rate would replenish with more millions. Yet the drain on America is sickening. Chinese superiority in numbers can Keep us in Korea, never quite winning, never quite losing, wasting our strength ad infinitum, weakening our entire defense structure. The nature of the Korean fighting lures ‘us to overemphasize on land fighting in our defense preparations, whereas, as Tarr, Hoover, and others have reiterated, air and sea power are our surest weapons. If allowed to win in Korea, we would hold & peninsula considered by ‘military experts to be indefensible. Our overextended position would make us vulnerable to another disas- trous experience whenever it best suited the Kremlin to push the button, 80 why not get out of Korea? Why let Russia call the tune? Why not choose our own ground, if fight we must? It is argued that to leave would cause us loss of face in Asia. But if Red-informed Asians would see our departure as imperialism defeated, they must see the present war as imperialism em- battled, and would see our victory as im- perialisin triumphant. Is any of these three worse than another? No, the lost face should we abandon Ko- rea would be in Washington, among those blunderers responsible for our Asian fiasco. Is the saving of face for a few politicians worth the terrible price we are paying in not pulling out of Korea as fast as possible? What could possibly suit the Politburo better than to have the Truman-Acheson war in Korea continue undetermined for months or years even if in the end the United States should win the war? Are We Deserting Our Boys in Korea? EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. GORDON L. McDONOUGH OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF F.EPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 14, 1951 Mr. McDONOUGH. Mr. _ Speaker, what is the situation in Korea? What are the true conditions under which our troops are fighting? Rumors are con- tradictory and the reports from our fighting men are not rosy. The com- plaints about inadequate clothing and lack of equipment which come from the GI in battle are brushed aside by denials from the Pentagon. But while American men are dying in Korea and the United Nations debating society affords no help to them, it is time we learned the truth, The following letter from a constitu- ent of mine includes the words written by an American soldier in Korea to his mother: Ferruary 6, 1951. DEAR CONGRESSMAN MCDoNovuGH: I have a nephew in Korea. His outfit has been in some of the worst fighting of the war. His company won a citation last November. A few days ago his mother received a letter from him, which read in part: “There are only a few members of my cecmpany left. Unless we get more equip- ment to fight with, or are pulled out of here soon, we will all be dead. We haven't @ chance.” Over the radio, day after day, we hear that the morale of our troops is high and that everything is rosy over there. Then, from the boys themselves, we get the real story of the true situation. While wishy-washy Uttle men squabble at the UN, our boys are left to die on foreign battlefields, with the bitter knowledge in their hearts that we have let them down. Won't you please do whatever you can to see that needed equipment reaches these boys on time and in sufficient quantities to enable them to defend themselves? If this cannot be done, they should be brought home. In Heaven's name let's do something. I know you will do all you can. Respectfully, Mrs. Myrrie SHay. The lack of equipment this boy writes about is vital to him. It is his life or death. If the administration which sent him and thousands of others from their homes to do battle in Korea, with- out the consent of Congress, is not sup- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD plying them with the necessary equip- ment to defend themselves, an investi~ gation is in order and is, in fact, over- due. It is the duty of Congress to get the facts. Address of Ex-President Herbert Hoover; Saving America for Americans REMARKS or HON. JOHN E. RANKIN OF MISSISSIPPI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 13, 1951 Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Speaker, there has been so much misinformation concern- ing, so much distortion of, and so many false attacks made on the great speech delivered by ex-President Herbert Hoov- er on Jast Friday night that I am taking the privilege of inserting that splendid address in the REcorp, I am well acquainted with ex-Presi- dent Hoover. I knew him during his services as Secretary of Commerce and as President of the United States. While I have not always agreed with him on those fundamental issues that divide the two great parties in this country, I can safely say that I never found any reason for questioning his integrity or his patriotism. He puts the welfare of his country first. He is now approaching the sunset of life, and his warning to the American people has that same ring of sincerity as when expressed by Thomas Jefferson in his first inaugural] address, or by George Washington in his farewell mes- sage to the American people. In 1941, Mr. Hoover delivered a great speech in which he warned us of the dan- gers of a world war. I inserted that ad- dress in the ConGRESSIONAL RecorpD, and I want to quote a short portion of it at this point. He said: Finally we must not forget the price we shall have to pay if we join in this war. It means the sacrifice of our most precious lives and the hopes of millions of mothers and wives. It means the sacrifice also of our own liberty to a dictatorship of our own, in- evitable in total war. If we go into war, we must pass through postwar bankruptcy. The savings of the people will be lost. The endowments of our ‘universities, colleges, hospitals will be de- stroyed. * “* * When we go to the peace table hate will again, as before, sit at that table endeavoring to destroy the hope of any real peace among men. Liberty will not re- cover on this continent for a generation. How prophetic those words were. ‘We have now gone through World War TI, What have we got out of it? Death, taxes, a pension roll, and hatred. Our boys won the fight in the field, on the ocean, and in the air, but the victory was turned over to the greatest enemy civilization has ever known. As I said, ex-President Hoover’s speech on last Friday night was a solemn warn- ing to the American people and to the American Congress. If we continue to follow the program advocated by the wild-eyed internationalists, who are al-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ways demanding that we go to war in some foreign country, it will do just what Lenin gloatingly predicted in 1920. It will drag this country down to physical and financial exhaustion. We had better change our course now, before it is too late, and follow the pro- gram laid down by Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and other great statesmen of the past, and now reem- phasized by ex-President Hoover in his address of last Friday night which I am inserting in the Recorp at this point. The speech referred to follows: Fellow Americans, I have been urged by many thousands of you to again discuss with you our foreign policies. A responsibility rests upon me to speak out from 60 years of personal experience with most of the peoples of the free world and with Russia and Chins. I have been en= trusted during 85 years with high responsi- bilities by my countrymen. I should like to address you through the rose-colored spectacles of idealism and the need of free nations to defend freemen. But I would be doing my country a dis- service if I did not take into account the realities in this endangered world. There is nothing sacrosanct about foreign policies as witness the tombstones which have boen erected over many of them in the last 10 years. They bear the inscriptions “Undeclared war,” “The alliance with Stalin, Tehran, Yalta, Potsdam,” “Dismantling of German peacetime industry,” “The promot- ing of Mao Tse-tung.” Many men, including myself, have de- manded the revision of these policies at each wrong turning. The rightness of our many proposals has been proved by time. I shall recall only two of them for your test, Seventeen years ago, as President, I re- fused recognition of the Soviet Government. I knew from ample experience, and their own documents, that this bloody conspiracy against mankind would flood our country through this open door with fifth columns and spies; that they would sabotage our na- tional life and Government. Every Ameri- can knows they have done fust that. About 10 years ago on June 29, 1941, ina great crisis I urged the revision of our poli- cles to meet the greatest danger that had come to the American people. Mr. Roosevelt had proposed a tacit alliance of the United States with Stalin and his Communist Russia. Britain was then safe because of the diversion of Hitler's armies to an attack on Russia. A few sentences from that address were: “Now we find ourselves promising ald to Stalin and his militant Communist con- apiracy against the whole democratic ideals of the world. * * *¢ “It makes the whole argument of our join- ing the war to bring the four freedoms to mankind a gargantuan jest. * * * “If we go further and join the war and we win, then we have won for Stalin the grip of communism on Ruesia and more oppor- tunity for it to extend in the world.” IT said these two dictators—Stalin and Hit- ler— were locked tn deadly combat, that statesmanshbip required the United States to stand aside in watchful waiting, armed to the teeth; that the day would come when these nations “will be sufficiently exhausted to Usten to the military, economic and moral powers of the United States and at that moment and that moment only can the United States promote a just and lasting peace.” Remomber this was in June 1941, almost 10 years ago. Need I remind you that the grip of communism in this decade has spread slavery fram 200,000,000 to 800,000,000 peo- ple? And we have no peace, IT could recall a dowen more instances, some within the past 12 monthe, OUR PROBLEMS NOW In order to reach any conclusions as to the wise course for America to pursue in the critical issues which confront us we must again and again appraise the constantly- shifting forces moving in the world. The problems which we face are of far larger dimensions than the current discus- sion on sending contingents of American boys to Europe. Their appraisal must also include: 1. Land war strengths. 2. The defense of the American people and the Western Hemisphere. 8. Our economic capacity over a long period. 4, The United Nations. 5, Our policies in the Far East. 6. The North Atlantic military alliance. Policies in these six categories cannot be separated from each other—they are all inter- locked. We must appraise the somber facts around these points before we can map a national direction. We must not shrink from clear- minded appraisal of our strengths, our weak- nesses and the attainment of the purposes to which the Congress has committed us, LAND WAR STRENGTHS We may again appraise as best we can the present milltary strength for Jand war in the world. I am fully aware of the shortcomings of the term "divisions" os a measuring device for comparative military strength, but it is the nearest to a common descriptive unit that we have. The Kremlin-directed horde has under arms and in reserves probably 800 combat divisions, with 30,000 tanks. I am now told they have over 20,000 mostly tactical planes and they have with their satellites 50,000,000 men available for cannon fodder. In World War I, when Russia was with- out the satellites, the Germans failed with 240 well equipped divisions to overcome her. With her allies of general manpower, general espace, general winter and general scorched earth, she had stopped the Germans even before lend-lease had reached her. The nations of Europe in the Atlantic Pact have at the present moment less than 20 equipped and trained combat divisions avail- able for European action. There is here a stark reality upon which our foreign policies must be based. With any seeable land forces from non-Communist na- tions, even including the United States, a land offensive against the Communists could bring no military victory, no political conclu- sion. But that does not mean that there are no other methods of stopping the Kremlin's ambitions. THE DEFENSE OF OUR GIBRALTAR OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION The second stark realism upon which our foreign policies must be based is the defense of the Western Hemisphere. Its defense is not only in our interests but in the interests of free men everywhere. Much criticism is offered, even to a discus- sion of this question. An atmosphere of hurry, rush, anxiety is being developed, the effect of which is to make it difficult, if not impossibie, for the American people to judge their own situation. I may say at once that with proper eco-~ nomic action this hemisphere can be made self-contained in critical raw materials, years as Secretary of Commerce dealing with such questions, I might qualify in this field. Further, unless we so dissipate our strength as to become a beaten end crushed people, fe still surrounded with a great moat. To AT¥3 transport such invading armies either, 3,000 miles across the Atlantic or 6,000 miles across the Pacific would require transport ships and naval protection which the Russians do not and could not build or seize, no mat- ter what further countries they occupy. If we have @ proper naval and air strength, we could sink them in midocean. With some- what more attention paid to our defense, this would apply to invasion via the Bering Straits, Hitler could not even cross the Eng- lsh Channel. Atomic bombs do not trans- port troops over the ocean. Communist armies can no more get to Washington than any Allied armies can get to Moscow. No responsible military man denies these two conclusions. The American people should not be fright- ened into rash action by fear that we cannot survive. Iam not advocating isolationism. But if other nations should fail, we may be isolated by circumstances and against our will, We might go into a period hard to endure, but this Nation can stick it out. OUR AMERICAN ECONOMIC CAPACITY The third stark realism upon which our policies must be bullt is our economic ca- pacity. The bleak outlook of the world may well last more than a decade—pousibly two of them. The new budget calls for Federal spending of over $71,600,000,000. This $71,000,000,000 alone, plus State and local expenditures, is about 87 percent of our national income. That is beyond the long endurance of any Nation and fatal to the preservation of a system of free men. The President has asked for a large in- crease of taxes. We will need also to in- crease State and local government taxes. This burden is going to fall on people with smaller incomes. The proof of this {s easy, If all personal incomes above the level of a United States Senator were confiscated it would yleld only about @2,600,000,000 of ad- ditional revenues. But confiscation would stop most people earning the €2,000,000,000. We must aleo remember the excise and cor- poration taxes in most part are ultimately ‘passed on to the consumer or these milch cows would die. Grim austerity must enter the doors of every American home. Even before these burdens are actually imposed there are stark signs of economic strain. The purchasing power of the dollar has fallen 20 percent in 6 months. The stock boom indicates that many people are seeking flight from inflation. Our already gigantic Government debts permit little expansion without inflation of credit. Two ware prove economic controls cannot wholly stop ine flation. The surest road away from inflation is to accept the President's wise proposal to pay 88 you go. But we simply cannot carry this expendi- ture or such tax load for long. The economic destruction of the United States is one of the means by which Stalin hopes to overcome us. THE UNITED NATIONS The fourth focal point of our thinking must be the United Nations, Our stark reality here is the lack of co- hesion and unity in the free nations. Even some of our European allies are anxious to appease the Chinese branch of the Kremlin on policies of the United Nationa. Despite this, we must not forget that the sepiration of mankind for over a century has been to find peace by collective action against aggressors. The United Nations was built on this same central idea as the concert of Europe and the League of Nations. Halt- ing and faulty as it may be, we cannot abandon this jiea and this hope. But it must Ve clear that the UN for the present will not be a substantial protection | from Communist aggression.
AZ74 OUR POLICIEG IN THE FaR EAST Our men are holding heroically to the mis- sion assigned us by the United Nations in Korea. We are suffering great losses. Gen- eral Marshall says we must send 15,000 men & month. We cannot yet see the end. But were we to drive all the enemy out of Korea, how much of our armies must remain there to protect it? Japan, Formosa, and the Philippines are vital links in our national security. This must not be minimized by nations anxious to direct our energies to Europe. We will need retain much military strength in the Pacific to protect those areas. Certainly there is little stark reality in talking about American ground divisions in Europe in view of our involvement in Asia. THE NORTH ATLANTIC PACT The sixth consideration in our decisions revolves around the North Atlantic Pact and the proposals to start another American ex- peditionary land army to Europe. Current statistics stretch this pact far be- yond its text. The pact provides that the nations shall aid each other in case of at- tack. There has been no attack. Moreover, at the time of ratification of that alliance the administration, through the Secretary of State and the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, gave positive assurances that under the pact no expedi- tions of American ground troops would be sent to Europe. That certainly meant no forces to Europe prior to attack. Our par- ticipation, prior to an attack, was to be limited to munitions. The pact being the will of the American people through the Congress, and in the faith of the text and those assurances, I supported the alliance. But last fall {t became evident that the administration was contemplating sending ground troops to Europe. It was also evi- dent that after years of gigantic American subsidies, the European Atlantic Pact na- tions had done nothing of consequence to- ward their own defense. Former Prime Min- ister Churchill had repeatedly and forth- rightly stated this fact—the last occasion being only a few weeks ago. I made two addrbésses In protest. Judging by the scolding of the European press, I may have helped to start them thinking. Then General Eisenhower was appointed to organize their military strength. And the General has become the potent symbol of the policy of at once sending American ground troops to Europe. The American people are indebted to Gen- eral Eisenhower for many great services. He has magnificient fitness both for the com- mand and the stimulation of spirit and ac- tion among the Allies in Europe. But his appointment does not commit the American people as to policy. The stark reality in Western Continental Europe are their large Communist parties and the disunities which gnaw at their vitals. Their prejudices prevent taking Spain into the alliance with 20 divisions and the most defensible area in Europe. For some reason Turkey and Greece are excluded from the alliance. Equally vital is the fact that there ts little hope of adequate land defense of Europe without West German participatation. Two months ago detailed plans and great prog- ress were announced. Now it is decided that West German military participation 1s out or can wait. From press reports based on information trom Buropeen officials and from General Eisenhower's statements, it would appear that his army, including the 2 American divisions now in Germany, will start with 9 or 10 divisions; by the end of 2 years, in- cluding American divisions, it would seem to be 86 or 40 divisions, The stark reality is that such an army is mall compared to the strength of the enemy, America is at present the major deterrent to the Kremlin's ambitions of world con- quest. There is nothing that Stalin would like more than to get the United States into his clutches by fighting us on the ground in Europe. There lies his overwhelming atrength. Disaster could thus come to the American Hemisphere with no salvation to Europe. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE NEED ANSWERS TO SOME QUESTIONS The American people should have more in- formation before they risk trying a third ex- pedition of ground troops to Europe. Any defense line in Europe must be over 400 miles long. Will our responsible leaders make a public statement that the forces so far proposed can defend this line against odds of 8 or 4 to 1? We have tried this in Korea. Will our responsible leaders tell us whether they contemplate the proposed American contingent as only an installment? Does not this contribution and our huge increase in the Army budget imply many more Ameri- can divisions? Do the American people know all the facts? ALTERNATIVE POLICIES Despite all these stark realities and these problems, I have believed there is a way to at least an uneasy peace for the world. In my address of 6 weeks ago I stated that we should not land men or send money to Europe until large European forces were in sight. I was well aware of the obligation assumed by Congress to give aid in case of attack. It was my view that we should hold to that provision of the pact, and I urged “arming our Air and Navy to the teeth.” I suggest that air power and the Navy is the alternative to sending American land divisions to Europe. With our gigantic pro- ductive capacity and within our economic strength we can build and sustain over- whelming air and sea forces held on our home ground ready in case of attack. Stalin well knows we could carry on that kind of war for his destruction for indefinite ars. The air threat has been during 4 years the most powerful deterrent to any attack on Western Europe. It is far more powerful than pouring American divisions into the reach of this Asiatic horde. I am suggesting no attack. I am suggesting the very pro- tection for Western Europe and our own de- fense which the Senate contemplated when it ratified the Atlantic Pact. There are other reasons for such a policy— both military and economic. Manifestly if attack on Europe came the free world would be inferior in ground forces. Such a ground war would at best be a war of defense. In the air we would have the of- fensive. An Air Force hns range, speed, flexibility, and striking power which can come nearer gaining a decision than allied ground armies. Especially is this true, for tn an air war the Communist horde would be without a large part of its ground allles— General Manpower, General Space, General Winter, and General Scorched Earth. The whole Korean tragedy is developing proof that the way to punish aggressors is from the air and sea, and not by land armies. It would be infinitely less costly in dead and disaster, The unbearable strain on our economic sys- tem will come from trying to do five things at the same time. That is, to maintain armies in the Pacific; to build up an Air Force; a naval force; to furnish munitions to nations who are determined to defend themselves and to send land armies to Eu- rope. Our economy cannot carry this load for long. I can give you an indication of the lesser economic strain to attain the same or more power by air than ground forces. To train, equip, place in Europe, and maintain for APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD 1 year, 10 of the usual combinations of American divisions would cost, about @4,- 500,000,000. This same sum would, for ex- ample, purchase and man 390 B-36 long- range bombers compared to 60 of them at present. If neither went into battle, the annual cost of the 10 divisions would be about $3,000,000,000 and that of such a sege ment of the Air Force leas than $1,000,000,000. POINTS OF REVISION OF OUR FOREIGN POLICIES I can most clearly state the points of for- eign policies in which many of us believe at this time by summarizing a program. No program can be perfect—none without risk. For the present I suggest: 1. We should devote our overwhelming productive power to air and naval strength and supply of munitions, 2. If the Europeans are attacked, we should be prepared and use such overwhelming air and naval power to the limit and keep it up until they have had enough. The Krem- lin knows that we are committed by the Congress to do so. I believe that reserve, if large enough, is Europe's real protection. 8. We should supply munitions to nations doing their utmost to defend themselves. 4. From the stark realistic, economic, po- litical, and military reasons which I have given you, my personal conviction is that we should not create land armies for expedi- tions into the quicksands of either Europe or China I do not want to even start on the road to another Korea. 5. There are those who think we should send more divisions to Europe for their en- couragement even before there is an attack. To them, I urge watchful waiting until much more military strength has been developed by Europe itself and there 1s more evidence they have resolved their disunities, 6. We must reduce our national expendi- tures to a level we can carry over a long term of years, and at the same time avoid economic disaster which can destroy freedom in America. Senator Byrp estimates that 88,600,000,000 of proposed nondefense expenditures tn the budget could be reduced or postponed. We should spend all we can afford on air, navy, and munitions rather than large armies. 7. We can and must defend Formosa, the Philippines, and Japan. We can do it by naval and air forces. As to Korea, we should demand of the United Nations that they call for a stop of supplies to Communist China by the non- Communist nations. Since Red China is making war on our American armies, we should free Chiang Kai-shek to do what he wishes in China and furnish him munitions. 8. I proposed 3 years ago that we should give full independence to Japan and West- ern Germany under representative govern- ments. During 100 years these nations were the great dams against these Russian-con- trolled hordes, In the last war we may have been engaged in a great crusade for freedom of mankind, but we certainly destroyed these two dams. The sooner they are given their independence the sooner, for thelr own secu- rity, they will resume their ancient role. 9. Recently I proposed that if the nations of Europe failed we should, as a prudent Nation, have in mind a second line of air and naval defense based upon the foreign shores of the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, both North and South, and I may add the Mediterranean and Indian Ocean. 10. Congress shauld recover its constitu- tional authority over starting wars, It could certainly do so through its power over the purse. IN CONCLUSION I have proposed no retreat, no withdrawal. I have proposed no repudiation of treaties or obligations. Rather I have proposed that the pledges to the Congress and the Amer- joan people be kept. I have proposed that
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD we stop, look, and listen before we start on @ road of land war that risks the loss of all civilization. I propose no good to Btalin, His greatest hope is to get us into a land war. Before we go off the deep end of steps toward another land war in Europe, let us remember that we fought two such wars hoping to bring peace and we have no peace. We should be prepared to make heavy sac- Tifices to help. But we should do it with common sense, within our strength, with the long view of history in mind. The essence of the program I have pro- posed is to effectively restrain our enemies from attack upon our allies or themselves. It is the best chance of peace—even if it is an uneasy peace. If we pursue the lines of our own genius and resources, we can meet this—the great- est menace of a century. And being in the right the Almighty is on our side. Charles Gilmer, Sulligent, Lamar County, Is Named Alabama Future Farmer of the Year EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CARL ELLIOTT OF ALABAMA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 13, 1951 Mr. ELLIOTT. Mr. Speaker, Charles Gilmer, 17-year-old farm boy of Lamar County, has been chosen as Alabama’s future farmer of the year. Thus he brings distinction to himself and reflects honor upon his fellow farm boys of the great Seventh Congressional District of Alabama. Young Gilmer's record is so outstand- ing that I desire to include as a part of my remarks a news story about it, written by Thomas F. Hill, and carried in the Sunday, February 11, 1951, edition of the Birmingham News. The article follows: CHARLes GILMER IS NAMED FUTURE FARMER OF Yar (By Thomas F. Hill) Suuiicenr, ALa,, February 10.—Charies Gilmer, who this year has been honored as Alabama's Future Farmer of the Year, has found the secret of turning base materials into gold. But his Midas touch has nothing to do with black magic. The secret is simple. It is hard work, It is steady work. And it is @ genuine love for that work. This year, the 17-year-old member of the Sulligent FFA chapter has been selected from 12,000 active FFA members as having the most outstanding farming and FFA pro- gram during the past year. This came as @ surprise only to Charies, All his friends and associates knew the rec- ognition Juat had to come. NO STRANGER The smiling youngster is no stranger to livestock circles, and for the past 4 years the slogan among young beef showmen in Lamar County has been “Beat Gilmer.” And for the past 4 years, the slogan has been to no avail. In 1947, 1946, 1049, and 1960. ‘Young Gilmer showed the county champion at the fat stock shows. And each year he was awarded money for a steer by the Birmingham News-WGSN. The “Beat Gilmer” slogan is working again this year, but again it may not work. 8, 8. Gibbs, Gilmer’s vocational teacher, says it looks like Gilmer’s fourth News calf might win again this year. LOVE OF WORK Gilmer’s love of work was clearly shown one afternoon recently when Mr. Gibbs de- eided to drive out for a visit. It was Satur- day, and Gilmer'’s parents and sister were in town, as were most of the youngsters of the county. When Gibbs drove by he saw Charles in the feld driving a tractor-drawn plow. Through several years of hard work and good management Charles has built his farming program up to an asset value of $34,112.50. His investments have been pri- marily in land, farm equipment, livestock, and pasture improvement. In announcing its choice of Charles Gil- mer, th? Alabama FFA executive committee issued the following statement: “To select Alabama’s ‘Future Farmer of the Year’ is no easy task for the reason that many members of the Future Farmers of America have done and are doing out- standing jobs. Charles has, in the past 4 years, done an outstanding job in assum- ing @ great responsibility in the operation and management of his farm home. He has accomplished much in his vocational aericulture and FFA work. The committee truly believes that Charles exemplifies the important part FFA members today are play- ing in Alabama’s agricultural world.” HIS RECORD Charles has a very oustanding record in leadership and other FFA activities during the past 4 years. His first year FFA activities were as fol- lows: Assistant finance director of FFA chapter; assistant FFA store operator; represented chapter itn calf scramble in Birmingham; ‘won county fat-stock show; member of FFA string band: elected secretary of chapter for following year. FFA activities for 1948-49: Elected vice president of county FFA; delegate to State convention at Auburn; awarded State farmer degree; member of chapter judging team; won county fat-stock show; won seventh piace tn class in Birmingham show; gave response for FFA at Birmingham Newe bar- becue; entered second-place sow in county hog show; member of FFA quartet; operated FFA store with over $300 profit; member of chapter nursery committee; set 700 shrubs; 100-bushe) club entry; elected chap- ter treasurer for next year. 1949-50: Main speaker on banquet pro- gram, nursery-committee chairman, setting 850 shrubs; member of FFA quartet, 100- bushel club entry, supervised FFA store, chairman arrangement committee of father- son banquet, won county fat stock show, placed third in Birmingham show with prime wteer, member of beef-judging team, gave response for FFA at Birmingham News bar- becue, showed grand champion dairy cow in county show and second place beef bull. 1050-61: Showed grand champion dairy cow, first. and second-place beef steers and second-place beef bull at county achieve- ment-day festival; member of beef-Sudging team, member of FFA quartet, entered home- improvement contest, No. 1 member to be called upon by his chapter. MORE PRAISE His FFA Adviser, Mr. Gibbs, praised Charles’ work highly. ‘Charles is a splendid work- er,” Mr, Gibbs said. “He can always be de- pended upon for a jam-up job as Jeader or chairman of any committee. He has a good personality and is liked by everyone. He is neat in appearance and wears nice clothes. “ ——with chief interest in live~ stock—ts first and foremos* with him. Pleas- ure and social life comes second. He is a most outstanding young man and has a very bright future ahead of him.” A775 Charles developed an interest in livestock early in his high-school course. His herd now consists of two registered Jerseys, four registered Hereford cows, three grade cows, two steers for the spring fat stock show, two Hereford heifers, 2 registered bull which he to use as his beef-herd bull, a registered OIC sow, and a litter of pigs. Working in partnership with his parents and sister, Claire Joan, Charles strives to im- prove the farm home each day. He also does tractor farming for neighbors in his spare time. MORE FARMING Being in the sawmill business, Charles’ father, Stanton Gilmer, turned the farming over to Charles 3 years ago. Each year Charles has averaged 150 acres in cotton, corn, and hay. As a juntor III student, he started his pasture program, sowing 6 acres of dallas, lespedeza sericea, and fescue. Each year he has increased his pasture acreage, and this year he seeded 33 additional acres. Rapidly he has turned rolling, eroded hillsides into valuable green acres to furnish grazing for his livestock. He has his own crusher, with which he grinds and mixes his home-grown feeds. His 1'%,-acre fish pond ts stocked and well fertilized. Probably his proudest moment came last spring when his best calf graded Prime in the Birmingham stock show. It was placed third in the middleweight Hereford division, but the Federal grader put the Prime sticker on it after sticking Choice labels to the first- and second-place winners. Charles’ steer also sold higher than the other two winners. THREE PRIZES Recently at the county Achievement Day festival in Vernon, Charlies’ dairy cow was declared grand champion; his two fat stock- show entries copped both first and second prizes, As a result of his successes and capabili- ties, Charles was a natural selection in 1949 and again in 1950 to give the response at the Birmingham News barbecue, held in Birmingham, at which checks for News calves were awarded stock-show winners who par- ticipated at the Birmingham stock show. Charles told his Alabama State fairgrounds audience of his interest in livestock farm- ing and how the stock shows and FFA had inspired him to work with untiring interests toward a challenging goal. He ig a versatile high-school senior. He also is song leader for Sunday school and church services at his church and teaches the young people's Sunday school class. He is president of the Beta Club and plays trombone in the high-school band. GRADUATES Charles graduates from high school this spring. He plans to attend Alabama Poly- technic Institute, Auburn, next year. He will study animal husbandry. His 4 years’ FFA work have netted him over $1,000 in prizes alone. He could cover & wall of his room with blue ribbons he has won at shows, His farm home shows the results of his vision and desire to attain the ultimate in convenience and beauty. He did an excellent remodeling job on his home esrly this year, with electric lights and running water in his house and barn, bath- room, laundry unit, a freezer chest, radio, and electric fans. THE KITCHEN Labor has been cut to a minimum in Mrs. Gilmer's all-electric kitchen. It consists of a hot-water heater, stove, refrigerator and xitchen sink with attractive bullt-in cabi- nots. Cement walks have been bullt around the house, and shrubbery from his FFA nursery makes the Gilmer home the equal of any to be found anywhere in appearance and neat~ ness.
A776 Charies’ healthful living habits and love for hard work have kept him in excellent physical condition. This has led fellow students at the high schoo) to “high pres- sure” him to adding an extra activity to his accomplishments—football. Gilmer always turned them away and finally made 1t final'by summarizing his at- titude toward life and the farm. “Y've watched these players train,” he sald. “I'll stick to farming. I just can’t see my- self working that hard without any money coming in.” Need for Limited Wire Tapping EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KENNETH B. KEATING OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 13, 1951 Mr. KEATING. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I include an editorial from the Milwaukee Journal, The editorial follows: Neep ror LIMITED WIRE TAPPING Among the unpleasant tasks that beset the new Congress is the apparent necessity of legalizing, within limits, and without further delay, a most unsavory procedure. Nobody with moral sense claims that wire tapping is a nice thing to do, but catching and prosecuting criminals is not a nice busi- ness. Governor Dewey has experienced the dilemma; he has had to denounce wire tap- ping by the wrong people, although he freely used it himself when he was a whirlwind young prosecutor. The Federal Communications Act of 1934 contains a blanket ban on intercepting any communication and divulging the informa- tion to any person unless authorized by the sender. Hence, even when enforcement offi- cers resort to wire tapping, the evidence gained by it is not admissible. This has sertously embarrassed the prosecution of traitors. The Judith Coplon spy case dramatized this fact. The appeal court was obliged to hold the evidence illegal and order a new trial, while conceding that her guilt was plain. But the court, headed by one of our great jurists, went on with what lawyers call obiter dictum, It suggested to Congress that legali. zation of limited official wire tapping would obviate such paradoxes in future cases of the kind. Despite the ban, the FBI continued to tap wires when necessary. It acted under orders of the Attorney General and, during World War II, with the approval of President Roose- velt. The FBI has cited in its defense the “set a crook to catch a crook” theory and the tenuous legal argument that the offense is not in intercepting alone but in also divulging. The FBI also has cited the paramount demands of national security. So Congress would be merely recognizin: and legitimatizing a method that the TBI already feels compelled to use and is using. Beyond that, however, it would specifically require the admission into court of evidence obtained by wire tapping or by following up wire-tap clews. That is where the FBI has been stymied. The bill is H. R. 479, by Kenner B. Kear- Inc (Republican, New York). It would let only the FBI and military intelligence tap wires and use wire-tap evidence, and then @hly in cases of suspected treason, spying, sabotage, and others involving disloyalty to the United States. It would allow the tap- ping only if a Federal judge approved it in each instance, and only under rules of the Attorney General. These would seem to be adequate safe-~ guards and restrictions against abuse. As Keatine told Congress, the inhibition under which the Government now labors to pro- tect itself against treason “is certainly carry- ing the right of privacy to an absurd and ridiculous length. “No nation can survive which does not meet problems threatening its very existence with more realism than this.” If Lincoln Were Alive Today EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ABRAHAM J. MULTER or NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 7, 1951 Mr. MULTER. Mr. Speaker, this week we are paying tribute to the memory of one of the greatest Americans and one of the greatest human beings of all times—Abraham Lincoln. What would Lincoln do if he were alive today and had to cope with the problems with which we are confronted? What would the Great Emancipator think or say about our present-day events if he were among the living? A most interesting speculation on this subject is contained in a column by Walter Winchell, the noted columnist, which appeared several days ago. It is entitled ‘Abraham Lincoln in the Twen- tieth Century.” I urge all Members of Congress to read this brief column, [From the Washington Post of February 9, 1951] WALTER WINCHELL IN New York ABRAHAM LINCOLN IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY Wisdom is as enduring as time itself. Re- curring storms sweep across history’s hori- zon—but the sagacity of great men has the constancy of the sun and is as illuminat- ing. The immortality achieved by prophets and sages does not stem solely from their past accomplishments. The sources of their everlasting glory are words and deeds that Mght up the future. The homage paid Lin- coln has been inspired by the nobility of his tenets. He embodted mankind's bright- est aspirations—and he fought with deep courage to make them a reality. The politi- cal and moral issues Lincoln faced differ in detail with current conflicts, but the prin- olples involved have not changed. The Lin- colnian concepts of the nineteenth century are applicable to twentieth century problems. He was blessed with the moral strength that is so desperately needed in Washington today. Lincoln was one of the rare poli- ticlans who combined practical ability with moral ideals transcending political ex- pediency. He could have compromised on the slavery issue and allowed the festering spiritual infection to afflict the Nation. But he refused to appease indecency, No man had a deeper devotion to peace. Yet he took drastic action when he discovered the con- flict could not be reconciled amicably. Sometimes a leg must be amputated to save &@ Hfe. Lincoln said this Nation could not exist half slave and half free, and that in- exorable logic obviously applies to the world of 1961. Men of little faith and less courage are always with us. They measure each chal- lenge by the extent of their fears. They would surrender to the foes of peace in the name of peace, Lincoln knew amity could APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD not be purchased by blackmail. When his opponents threatened that his election would lead to the destruction of the Union, he shot back: “You say you will destroy the Union and the great crime will be upon me? That reminds me of a thief who holds a pistol to your head and mutters: ‘Stand and deliver, or I shall kill you--and then you will be the murdered.’” One of the most disgraceful current ep!- sodes is the attempt of Communists here to use Lincoln's name for their own nefarious purposes. Just as a gangster disguises him- self with an alias, so the Communists are using Lincoln’s name for camouflage. Only the demented mentality essential to Com- munist fanaticism could believe democratic Lincoln would be an ally of despotic Stalin. You might as well expect an angel to shake the hand of the Devil. Since atheism is a salient feature of com- munism, it is well to remember Lincoln's classic observation: “I never behold the stars that I do not feel that I am looking at the face of God. I can see how it might be possible for a man to look upon the earth and be an atheist, but I cannot conceive how he could look up into the heavens and say there is no God.” On the question of dealing with sub- versives, Lincoln made his position crystal- clear during the early days of the war. He did not believe freedom extended to treach- ery or that liberty included the right to de- stroy it. He boldly declared: “Under cover of liberty of speech and press the Copper- heads hoped to keep on foot amongst us a most efficient corps of spies, informers, sup- pliers, and aiders and abettors of their cause in a thousand ways. Must I shoot a simple- minded soldier boy who deserts, while I Must not touch a hair of the wily agitator who induces him to desert? I think that in such a case, to silence the agitator and save the boy is not only constitutional, but withal a great mercy.” Lincoln also speaks in the debate now raging about whether a President can assume war powers during national emergencies without the consent of Congress. A8 many Chief Executives did before him—and after him—he dispensed with constitutional nice- ties when the survival of the Nation was at stake. Lincoln assumed war powers directly after the guns of Gen. Pierre Beauregard fired upon Fort Sumter, It was 3 months later that Congress declared a state of war existed. Front pages disclose political differences are rocking the Nation. But similar strug- gles were more savage during Lincoln's era. Although he attained the Presidency with @ decisive majority in the electoral college, he had a minority of the popular vote. The Nation was split wide open on every major issue. As a result, the most shame- ful vituperation was leveled at President Lin- coln by the press and politicians. Yet his faith in the people never wavered. His re- action to the political turmoil illustrated Lincoln’s genius for stating the truth with humorous simplicity: “The people will de- cide. If they turn their backs to the fire and get scorched in the rear—they’ll find they have to sit on a blister.” The words he delivered before a regiment in 1864 would be just as propitious if ad- dressed to our troops in Korea: “I happen, temporarily, to occupy the White House. I am. a living witness that any one of your children may look to come here as my father’s child has, It is in order that each of you may have, through this free Govern- ment which we have enjoyed, an open fleld and a fair chance for your industry, enter- prise and intelligence; that you may all have equal privileges in the race of life, with all its desirable human aspirations. It ts for this that the struggle should be maintained, that we may not lose our birthrights. This Nation is worth fighting for to secure such an inestimable jewel.”