APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD lies in @ peacetime Air Force capable of achieving immediate mastery of the air should war come. Once we build this air power, the likelihood of war is, indeed, re- mote. Yet our Government is spending more than $14,000,000,000 this year and we are not getting true military security. This is an especially dangerous situation in view of our aggressive foreign policy. Our program in Europe cannot possibly prevent the Red army from overruning France. This fact is well known among top military leaders. We should content our- selves with sufficient equipment for our allies to prevent civil war. We can’t afford the assistance we have promised Europe and we should adjust our present policy so as to save a billion dollars this year. Something like thirty to fifty billion dollars can be saved from our entire European program if we do the sound thing militarily and aban- don it. As things now stand, we are headed for trouble in Europe. Since our Army can’t win against Russia on the ground and our Navy cannot deliver the knock-out blow, we should pare down our appropriations for the Army and Navy and thereby make sufficient money available for the Air Force—and I am a ground officer making this recommendation. True unification cannot be effected until we adopt an over-all strategic concept which will be effective in deterring war and enable us to win should it come. This formula is very simple. It is: The best air force in the world supported by an adequate army and navy. It’s the phrase “supported by” which our leaders refuse to insert into the concept. But until this is done unification cannot be achieved and true national defense will be lacking. I want to repeat that unification is not held up by the GI nor by the officers under whom he serves. Rather it is held up be-~ cause our very top leadership has failed to prescribe the correct strategy for our na- tional security. It is high time this tragic situation is corrected. Until it is corrected the danger of war is very great. Until it is corrected we cannot solve our national econ~ omy. It’s a problem which will not be re- solved until the American people make known their will to our leaders, Senatorial Battles EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HUBERT H. HUMPHREY OF MINNESOTA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, May 25 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Rrcorp an article by Mr. Charles Parmer, well known Washington correspondent. Mr. Par- mer’s comments concerning our distin- guished colleague, the senior Senator from Utah [Mr. Tuomas], represent a well-earned and merited tribute to a great American and an honored states- man. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Parmer From WASHINGION (By Charles Parmer) . The senatorial battles—even more than the House fights—this year show a striking trend both within the parties and between the parties: a trend toward liberalism, Most significant were two primary results within the past fortnight; in States where the Republican Party is powerful, and the reactionary element is supposed to rule, yet liberalism won out over reactionaryism. James Duff was given little chance to win the Republican senatorial nomination over Grundy’s machine candidate in Pennsyl- vania, yet he did it nicely. In Oregon eastern money was poured in “by the ton” to beat the forward-thinking Warne Morse. He defeated his Republican reactionary foe by 3 to 1, for the senatorial nomination. Those two were interparty fights; each man now will face a Democrat in the elec- tions, but the results, in two such widely separated States, show a decided liberal trend. The next big battle looms in Utah. The fight will be to reelect one of the Nation’s outstanding statesmen: Senator Expert D. THoMas—"‘THomas of Utah,” as he’s known here and abroad. (At the moment he has no Democratic opponent in the primary.) Big eastern interests make no bones about it—they wish an ultraconservative reaction- ary, and for 2 years and more those interests have been building up one Wallace Bennett. He is a former president of the National As- sociation of Manufacturers—a group never noted for liberal thought. Mr. Bennett, I understand, is against sin. Senator THomas is against sin, too; like- wise he stands for and fights for legislation which places human rights above massed property. He knows that the strength of a nation is based on the welfare of its multi- tude of individuals. For three terms in the United Statés Sen- ate—from 1982 onward—he has fought with all his great intellectual power to make this Nation a leader—to provide conditions of living and working which will bring forth a strong, healthy, educated citizenry. He is the Nation’s authority on Thomas Jefferson—whose precepts he finds so sound that he would transplant them into today’s needed legislation. During war days he was chairman of the Senate Military Affairs Com~- mittee—he saw to it that this Nation’s mili- tary was the world’s best. After it was all over—when the public began to forget—it was THomas of Utah who battled for the rights of the GI’s—the right to an educa~ tion, the right to his old job, if he wished it, Expert D. THomas made it embarrassing for certain interests that would forget what the men and women in uniform sacrified for the United States of America, understand their opposition? The story can’t be told yet—in full: it is still wrapped in military secrecy—I refer to his personal services in giving of his knowl- edge of Japan to the military (in his younger days he had been a missionary there). Top brass sought him out for advice and counsel. He it was who initiated OWI’s devastating broadcasts to Japan—taking the leadership in the propaganda warfare that was so effec- tive. Senator THomas, in his official capacity, saw that others got the ribbons and the medals—his reward was the satisfaction of serving well his native land. He’s served as Amercan delegate on more foreign missions, I’d say, than any living official * * * abroad he ranks as one of the world’s statesmen, At this critical hour we must Keep at the wheel of Government, individuals with world outlook and practical experience in global affairs—as well as with a realistic grasp of problems on our domestic front. THomaAs of Utah typifies the highest type of public service—free from self-interest, fearless in standing for what he holds is right—here in Washington—where his value is known—the prayer is for Utah to send back to the United States Senate Exserr D, THomas—American statesman, A3989 The Road Back to America EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. MELVIN PRICE OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 25, 1950 Mr. PRICE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following editorial from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch: AN APPEAL RENEWED Under the heading, “The road back to America,” the Washington Post—one of the most vigilant and constructive of American newspapers—has presented its readers with an analysis and proposal concerning the “evil atmosphere” which has descended on this country. “For weeks,” says the Wash- ington newspaper, the National Capital “has been seized and convulsed by a terror.” The Washington Post’s proposal to get the country back on the right road is for the appointment of a “Commission on National Security.” This Commission, which would lift the issues above partisan politics, “would elevate the current debate” and “catalyze the decencies of America.” The Post-Dispatch is glad to call attention to the Washington Post’s editorial. As many of our readers will remember, the Post-Dis- patch proposed the appointment of just such a national commission nearly a year ago. Our editorial, America’s Grave Need, which was accompanied by a cartoon entitled “Reckless Winds,” appeared Sunday, June 26, 1949. Deploring the wild abandon with which epithets such as “Red,” “disloyal,” “spy.” and “traitor” were being thrown around, we said: “The gravest single need in the United States today is for a national evaluation of this tangled problem—a coldly factual evalu- ation without favor and without bias. “To this end, the Post-Dispatch proposes that the President appoint a commission of outstanding, qualified citizens to make an early report to the American people on the confusing elements of Communist activities and the means of combating them. “Such a report by such a commission could perform a brilliant, patriotic service. It might well decide how the United States is to preserve its historic reliance in the great freedoms that have been ours from the Dec- laration of Independence to this day.” Although the commission we proposed was not appointed, extracts of our editorial were reprinted in the Christian Science Monitor and other newspapers at the time. Thus, the idea at least gained currency. But if the pro- posal was sound then, it is even better now, after the damage done by the McCarthy per= formance. . ‘We applaud the Washington Post for its efforts to bring about the appointment of a national commission and herewith renew our own appeal to the President to meet this grave need. . Racial Discrimination in Bowling EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. MATTHEW M. NEELY OF WEST VIRGINIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, May 25 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. NEELY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the
A3090 Record an editorial entitled “Victory for Fair Play in Bowling and Democracy,” which appeared in the Minneapolis Spokesman on Friday, May 19, 1950. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Victory ror Fam Puay IN BowLINne AND DEMOCRACY Decision of the American Bowling Congress last week to eliminate the “whites only” clause from its bylaws was a victory for right and justice. It was also a victory for various groups and organizations which, spear- headed by the United Auto Workers union, aroused public opinion so greatly that the ABC had no other logical course to take, except to end its discriminatory policy. Minnesota may well be proud of the part it played in bringing about the new policy. It furnished courageous, far-sighted Senator Huser H. Humpprey, who as mayor and later Senator, served as cochairman of the Na- tional Committee for Fair Play in Bowling. Jt supplied the Minnesota State NAACP whose adpeal to attorney-general J. A. A. Burnquist brought about a threat to obtain an injunction against the holding of the 1951 tournament in St. Paul. Its two hu- man rights groups, the St. Paul Council on Human Relations and the Minneapolis Mayor’s Council, helped organize two of the first chapters on Fair Play in Bowling, the group which has spearheaded the attack on ABC policy. Minnesota furnished many examples, such as the Minneapolis Jaycees who not only furnished the local leader for the Committee on Fair Play in Charles Hvass, but changed its bylaws so that bowling under ABC aus- pices was impossible. Minnesota contributed also the results of the Minneapolis Star and Tribune’s Minne- scta Poll which gave ctrong evidence that Minnesotans by and large were in favor of abolition of the un-American rule in the AEC. These results along with the threat of the State attorney-general’s office to take court action may have been the straw that broke the ABC camel’s back. Minnesota furnished Pat Whelan, whose union of bowling alley pin setters was loud in denunciation of the ABC “whites only” law. This group would have been a key group to make the ABC see the light in event the offensive bylaw was not erased. It is of course impossible to recount all of the manifestations which brought about ABC capitulation but no comment would be correct unless organized labor as repre- sented by the United Auto Workers was given top credit. The UAW first challenged the ABC policy openly in Buffalo several years ago when Negro members of its bowl- ing teams were barred from participation in the ABC national tournament. A large majority of the white bowlers in Minneapolis and St. Paul who belonged to ABC were in favor of cleaning up the by- laws. The Minneapolis NAACP in coopera= tion with the Minnesota Bowling Associa- tion urged four Negro bowlers to enter the Tribune classic as a test case. The men entered the tournament by mail and when they appeared for play those in charge were flabbergasted but the entrants were allowed to participate. Johnson, the paper’s sports editor, when queried, said something to the effect that if the ABC didn’t like it they could “lump” it. Way out in Spokane, Wash., bowlers in the typographic union, particularly those work- ing on the daily paper back in October, dis~ associated themselves from the ABC because of the objectionable clause. . At the Buffalo tournament the UAW place pickets around the building in which the play was held. This was the first time that a large segment of the daily press and many of the ABC members themselves were aware that the organization was committed to a whites-only program. The first big blow to ABC came when the State of New York through its attorney gen- eral took action to bar the ABC from the Empire State because of its discriminatory rules. The second blow came when Iilinois tate followed suit. Another body blow came when the New York American, Hearst paper, in dramatic fashion, canceled its an- nual bowling tournament with 8,000 entrants because by ABC rules Joe Louis, Jim Thorpe, or Duke Kahanamoku would not be eligible to bowl. Bill Corum, sports editor of the New York daily, made this peint in announcing can- cellation of his paper’s annual tournament: “Any championship not designed to prc- duce the true champion is not, and cannot be, a true championship. For that is the pasic assumption, the keystone, on which all sports are founded. So that when any potential contestant is barred by reason of creed, race, color, or bias, they are not true sports events, either. And, most certainly, they are not truly American. “What American, once he came to think about it, would want to be the champion of any sport where a better man was barred from competition?” Almost immediately after the New York America’s action, its sister Hearst paper in Chicago, the Herald-Ezaminer, canceled its tourney. Action of these two newspap2rs focused the world’s attention on the ABC. Prior to the Hearst papers’ action in late Februery a straw in the wind was the com- ment of Charles Johnson, executive sports editor of the Minneapolis Star and Tribune, who predicted in the February 5 edition of the Sunday Tribune: “Officials of the American Bowling Asso- ciation might as well make up their minds now, that eventually, sooner than they think, they'll lose the argument on discrimination in their entries. “The campaign to eliminate the color line on entrants is coming to a head all over the country. One State after another is en- acting laws that will outlaw practices such as prevail in the ABC. “Already local governing bodies are refuse ing use of municipal buildings for this gigan- tic tournament. “The sooner restrictions are lifted in this sport the faster will be its progress through- out the United States and the world.” An Illinois judge fined the ABC $2,500 for discrimination, suggesting that it could with profit change its racial policies. The only religious group represented, even unofficially, in the fight was the Catholic Church. Rev. Charles T. Carow, of Brooklyn, N. Y., fought the biased ruling for 6 years in the councils of the ABC. No story of the victory over race prejudice in the bowling sport would be complete without mention of Father Carow who was really the pioneer voice crying in the ABC wilderness. This newspaper considers the new ABC ruling a credit to the sense of fairness which dwells in the breasts of most Americans. For it was not overlong after millions of Ameri- cans had the facts in the situation that the ABC went on the defensive and victory was finally achieved. Such evidences of final justice and fair play give strength to democracy, Thus the wave of sentiment for fair play supplemented by direct action as in the case of the court action, helped the ABC make a very wise decision, Things like this more than any words which can be spoken makes America great and will keep her great. In no other coun- try that we know of does public opinion force changes in such dramatic fashion for the protection of minorities. The ABC APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD change is just another indication that Amer- ica is coming of age, and many changes which must come will weld a new unity among all its people and prepare it for any challenge from without. The Knauff Case EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EMANUEL CELLER OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 24, 1950 Mr. CELLER. Mr. Speaker, I have a great respect for Attorney General Mc- Grath and for that reason I am at a loss to understand the attitude of the Department of Justice concerning the case of Ellen Knauff. He has made an exemplary record as head of the Depart- ment of Justice and I am sure upon re- flection he will change the attitude of his Department anent this Knauff case. I do not agree with all the criticism against the Department of Justice as indicated in the editorial hereinafter at- tached. It does, however, despite its severity, reflect public opinion on this case. The House Judiciary Committee unan- imously passed the bill offered by my dis- tinguished colleague Representative Francis Waiter, of Pennsylvania, per- mitting Ellen Knauff to remain in this country. Sheis the wife ofa GI. The House unanimously passed the bill, and it is now being considered by the Senate Judiciary Committee. Despite this action, efforts are being made to exclude Ellen Knauff and to dispatch her summarily to Germany. Only a decision by Justice Jackson of the Supreme Court saved her from en- forced deportation at the eleventh hour. It is hoped that our very able Attor- ney General in his wisdom and human sympathy will force reconsideration of this case by the Department of Justice. The case of Ellen Knauff has created widespread publicity as well as bad pub- lic relations for the Department. Edi- torials like the one I include below from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch are ap- pearing in our newspapers: Who owns the Department of Justice? Does it belong to the officials who staff 1t? Or does it belong to the American people? Whom is the Department of Justice sup- posed to serve? Is it supposed to serve the employees who are hired to conduct its busi- ness? Or is it supposed to serve the em-~= ployers.who pay the bill—some 150,000,000 citizens? These are not idle questions. These ques- tions are gravely pertinent because of the in- credible case of Ellen Knauff. Mrs. Knauff, as readers of the Post-Dispatch know, is the war bride of a combat veteran, who has been barred by the Department of Justice as a so-called “security risk” without ever being told why. Consider only the latest developments in this astonishing case. Late Tuesday afternoon, the United States Attorney in New York, acting for the Im- migration Service, asked authority in the Federal court of appeals for immediate de- portation of Mrs. Knauff. This request was
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD refused by Judge Augustus Hand. Judge Hand said any proceedings could wait on arrival of the court decision in due course— some 15 days. With this, the Immigration Service—a unit of the Department of Justice—decided to set itself above the ruling of Judge Hand. It ordered Mrs. Knauff to Idlewild airport for return to Germany the next morning. The reservation on the plane was marked “no publicity.” If this was not in contempt of court, it was at the very least flagrantly contemptu- ous of Judge Hand. But it was also already flagrantly contemptuous of Congress, A House Judiciary subcommittee had held a hearing to which it had brought Mrs. Knauff from Ellis Island under subpena—the only way it could get to talk with her. After that the Judiciary Committee recommended unanimously the bill to admit her, spon- sored by Representative Watter, of Pennsyl- vania, a Democratic veteran of the House with 18 years of service. Then the House, on May 2, passed Mr. WatrTer’s bill unani- mously. Only Justice Jackson’s last-minute Su- preme Court stay order saved Mrs. Knauff from this second “lynch law” deportation which the Immigration Service tried to ram through. Whatever the security case may be against this little survivor of Hitler’s persecution of the Jews, it cannot possibly justify the star-chamber record of Depart- ment of Justice. It cannot justify vindic- tiveness. It cannot justify stealth. There is no question that vindictiveness was at the bottom of the “no publicity” overnight order to the airport for rush de- portation. The Director of Immigration at New York, Edward J. Shaughnessy, gave it all away. When Justice Jackson’s stay reached him by telephone, Mr. Shaughnessy said, “I was afraid of that.” What was the Department of Justice afraid of? Was it afraid to permit the processes of justice to work? Was it afraid of the reaction of citizens who believe in fair deal- ing for all? Was it afraid that it could not get away with this Fascistlike scheme in the light of duty? We venture to predict that no more tricks of this sort will be tried by the Department of Justice In the Knauff case. After the blistering it got from Justice Jackson—a former Attorney General—the Department of Justice doubtless will pay closer attention to historic rules and procedures for appeals to the Supreme Court. The scene now moves to the Senate, where several Knauff bills are pending. The sub- committee consists of Senators DoNNELL, of Missouri, and McCarran, of Nevada. They can and should help remove this blot from America’s case before the world by a prompt recommendation to the Judiciary Committee. Meantime, Attorney General McGrath ought to ask himself how satisfied he is with the record in the Knauff case. Maintenance of Peace in the Near East EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. ABRAHAM J. MULTER . OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 24, 1950 Mr. MULTER. Mr. Speaker, now that the President’s statement on the ques- tion of maintenance of peace in the Near East has been released for publication, I desire to place in the Recorp a letter written to me by Assistant Secretary of State Jack K. McFall, dated May 24, 1950, together with enclosure mentioned therein: DEPARTMENT oF STATE, Washington, May 24, 1950. The Honorable ApraHam J. MULTER, House of Representatives. My Dear REPRESENTATIVE Mutter: In view of the interest you have expressed in the question of the maintenance of peace in the Near Hast, I know you will be interested to learn that the President will release from the White House on Thursday, May 25, at 11 a. m., the text of a declaration being issued simultaneously by the Governments of the United States, the United Kingdom, and France relating to the near-eastern secu- rity situation. An advance copy of this declaration 1s enclosed for your personal in- formation. It is the belief of the United States Gov- ernment that this declaration will tend to incrcase stability in the Near East. This Government is deeply interested in the estab- lishment and maintenance of peace in the area, and, together with the Governments of France and the United Kingdom, has sought through the attached declaration to make a contribution to this end. Sincerely yours, Jack K. McFaut, Assistant Secretary. DEcLARATION BY THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE Unrren STATES, THE Unitep KINGDOM, AND France, REGARDING SECURITY IN THE NraAR East The Governments of the United Kingdom, France, and the United States, having had occasion during the recent Foreign Muinis- ters’ meeting in London to review certain questions affecting the peace and stability of the Arab states and of Israel, and particu- larly that of the supply of arms and war material to these states, have resolved to make the following statements: 1. The three Governments recognize that the Arab states and Israel all need to main- tain a certain level of armed forces for the purposes of assuring their internal security and their legitimate self-defense and to per- mit them to play their part in the defense of the area as a whole. All applications for arms or war material for these countries will be considered in the light of these principles. In this connection the three Governments wish to recall and reaffirm the terms of the statements made by their representatives on the Security Council on August 4, 1949, in which they declared their opposition to the development of an arms race between the Arab states and Israel. 2. The three Governments declare that as- surances have been received from all the states in question, to which they permit arms to be supplied from their countries, that the purchasing state does not intend to undertake any act of aggression against any other state. Similar assurances will be requested from any other state in the area to which they permit arms to be supplied in the future. 8. The three Governments take this op- portunity of declaring their deep interest in and their desire to promote the establish- ment and maintenance of peace and stabil- ity in the area and their unalterable op- position to the use of force or threat of force between any of the states in that area. The three Governments, should they find that any of these states was preparing to violate frontiers or armistice lines, would, consistently with their obligations as mem-= bers of the United Nations, immediately take action, both within and outside the United Nations, to prevent such violation. A3991 Upper Savannah Soil Conservation District EXTENSION OF REMARES HON. JAMES B. HARE OF SOUTH CAROLINA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 25, 1950 Mr. HARE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following speech recently delivered by me at a meeting of the Up- per Savannah Conservation District, held at Six Mile, S. C., on Tuesday, May 23, 1950: I am indeed honored and extremely grateful for your very thoughtful and con- siderate invitation to be with you today and to take part in this very important occasion. I well remember the fall of 1943 wien I had the pleasure of presenting prizes to the winners in the pasture contest sponsored by the upper Savannah River Soil Conservation District in cooperation with various businessmen and agricultural workers. This pavticuicr event took place on the farm or Mr. Jim Shirley which is a few miles east of the city of Anderson. Upon receiving a copy of today’s prograin, it was with particular interest that I noticed that a number of those who received prizes in 1948 in the pasture contest are today receiving certificates of merit for continued good soil conservation farming. -The annual program of the upper Savan= nah Conservation District in cooperation with th: Bankers Association to award cer= tificates of merit to farmers who have done an outstanding job in conserving their soil and water resources is indeed worthy. It calls the attention of the world to the fact that here are farmers who are not only producing quality food for the dinner tables and fiber for the clothing on our backs, but who are also keeping the machinery of our food and fiber-producing plant in ex- cellent condition for any eventuality—for peace or for the defense of our Nation. By practicing soil conservation, we are safe- guarding the future of our children, our people, and our Nation by working hand in hand with the laws of nature and as long as we have prudent husbandry of our soil and water resources we can always be assured that there will be no agricultural tombstones of a better day having passed because that better day will always be in the future. At this point I wish to commend the Bank-~ ers Association and businessmen for their realization of the necessity of soil-conserva- tion practices by their cooperation in this program. The united and determined efforts of all will build a strong America. Events as the present one which recognize farmer accomplishments in conservation farming must indeed warm the hearts of all con- servation leaders and especially the district supervisors of the Upper Savannah Soil Con- servation District. The supervisors of this district are fellow farmers who have been duly elected by interested farmers in this district. The supervisors have given unself- ishly of their time, energy, and in many cases of their money to help fellow farmers achieve a better living and a better life for them- selves, their families, and the people of our Nation. The Board of Supervisors for the Upper Savannah District is composed of men who are outstanding leaders in the field of farming: Mr. J. B. Douthit of Anderson County, chairman, and who is also presi< dent of the South Carolina District Super- visors Association; and his fellow supervisors are Mr. W. Hugh McGee of Anderson County,
A3$92 Mr. J. R. Nicholson and Mr, R. A. Reeves of Oconee County, and Mr. L. P, Thomas of Pick- ens County. All of them are to be com- mended for their faithful service to commu- nity, State, and Nation. The Upper Savannah Soil Conservation District holds a unique and enviable flace in the Nation’s conservation activities. It was about 13 years ago that the farmers of Pick- ens, Oconee, and Anderson Counties organ- wed the Urper Savannah District. It was the first in the State of South Carolina and the second in the United States. At that time knowledge of effective soil and water con- servation was very limited. Consequently, such an organizational move to encourage fellow farmers to do something about the ex- pensive loss in crop-producing soils and ta locally take charge of a program to control this devastation must have indeed chal- lenged the imagination of not only the lead- ers in that movement but also of those who merely went along out of curiosity. At this point, I am sure that it will be interesting to observe that Mr. J. B. Douthit, now chair- man of the Board of Supervisors, is the old- est of more than 11,000 other supervisors throughout the Nation’s 2,300 soil-conserva~ tion Gistricts who have followed your leader- ship in this program. It is further intercst- ing to ncte that Mr. J. R. Nicholson is the third oldest supervisor in our Nation. I would be remiss in any remarks that I have to make today if I failed to note that there are some who substantially and ener- getically gave of their efforts in the estab- lishment of this district and the promulga- tion of its program but who are unfortunately not with us today. I particularly recall a late friend and leading conservationist, Mr. Frank Merck, who with others foresaw that the real key to successful agriculture is con- servation farming and not ruthless exploita- tion of the soil. It is not difficult to see the beautiful scene or picture of agricultural security that has been painted by the craftsmanlike work of the conservation farmers in the Upper Savannah Soil Conservation District. As I drove here today it was obvious that almost every other acre is now in either small grain, hay, pas- ture, or grass crops. The strip rotations, flanked by many other soil and water con- serving measures stood out as barriers against the loss of food and fiber producing resources. Even the world renowned five acres on the E. M. Duncan farm which held the world’s cotton-production record has now joined ranks with many other acres in producing grass and clover. However, there is still pres- ent the scars of gullies and other erosion which cut cancerous growths in the face of mother earth. This is particularly true because of the two-crop system of cotton and corn which we have adhered to for many generations. But, by careful work and con- servation farming these scars can be erased and agricultural security built in their place. We are not alone in our reverence to soil and water conservation because it is of prime importance to our national life. More and more of our people are awakening to the reali- zation that productive soil is a life-giving and life-sustaining resource—that food doesn’t grow in tin cans on the shelf of the grocery store or behind the counter of a restaurant as many have supposed, People are realizing too that gocd food and food at a reasonable price doesn’t come from fields eroded of productive soil nor does it come from fields riddled with gullies. Many are coming to appreciate that good food comes only from farms whose farmers are taking care of their land, farming efficiently, and who are holding on to their productive soil. In practically all cases, these are farmers who are actively supporting local conserva= tion programs—their soil conservation dis- trict program which uses the technical help of the soil conservation service and the PMA conservation program, They are farmers who are cooperating with the other agencies in the agricultural field which help farmers to achieve more efficient and better prcduction such as the Extension Service, the Farmers Home Administration, Vocational Agricul- tural Program, and other agricultural agen- cies. I know of no better way to form a syn- chronized team of agricultural workers than +o do so under the direction and guidance of local soil conservation district supervisors, PMA committees, and Extension Service spe- cialists. In this way greater emphasis can be placed on the job of conserving soil and water resources. It is time for more and more of cur people to give support and recognize that produc- tive soil and water are our most important resources because without them we could not live. Further, without productive soil our standard of living would be infinitesimal to what it is today. We must remember that it is only by the fact that our farmers are able to produce food for more than them- selves that others of us can devote our labor to manufacturing, distripution, and other services for all of our people. The necessity for more and more support for soil conservation work is well empha- sized by a few statistics which I shall men-~ tion. In fact, the statistics are in them- selves alone sufficient justification for the enlargement of our local, State, and Federal programs for soil conservation. In 1790, just 160 years ago, a very short time in the span of life of the world, the population of these United States was 3,129,000 people Within 70 years the War Between the States occurred and at that time the population was in excess of 31,000,000 people, an increase of eight times the original figure. Forty years later, in the year 1900, the turn of the century, a date prior to which many of you were born, the population had increased to almost 76,- 000,000. In other words, the population of our country had more than doubled within a period of 40 years. The amazing feature is that in the present year of 1950 the popula- tion of our country is estimated to be in excess of 150,000,000 and the census reports indicate that such is true. Consequently, in the lifetime of many of us the population has again doubled. If we can rely on the statistics and history of growth of our population, we may reasonably expect our population to almost double itself within the next 50 years. If that proves to be true, we are going to have to almost dou- ble our production of food for our mouths and fiber for our clothing. Mow can we do it if we permit our soil to be depleted. I am not an alarmist, but scientists and those who have made a study of our soils tell us that the topsoil of our country has been reduced from approximately 9 inches to about 5 inches within the past two or three hundred years. If that is true, and if we permit that to continue, then we may reasonably expect our great Nation to be a land of poverty within the next 100 years unless greater em- phasis is placed on soil conservation and the conservation efforts of all farmers obtained. If there is any doubt regarding the value of productive soil in helping us to create a higher standard of living, which provides a greater income for the farmer, the textile worker, the filling-station operator, and the businessman, we need but look to any of the many research results which show the differ- ence in production between topsoil and subsoil. A few years ago an experiment station in the State of Ohio removed all of the topsoil from a test plot and began using huge appli- cations of fertilizer, manure, lime, plus ex= cellent rotations in an effort to see what could be produced. At the same time the identical treatment was given to an adjoin- ing plot on which the topsoil had been left and another plot on which an extra layer of topsoil had been added. The subsoil, unfor- tunately for the experiment, was of the best APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD 15 percent that we have in this country. After a number of years of heavy application of fertilizer to the subsoil it was possible to puild up a yield of corn to 85 bushels an acre, During the same period the plot on which topsoil had not been removed yielded 125 pushels of corn per acre, and the plot on which an extra layer of topsoil had been added yielded 141 bushels per acre. On a dollar basis the acre of subsoil produced crops worth only $337 as compared with the crops worth $698 per acre on the single-top- sOll-layer plot. It is mere folly to inquire which piece of land you would rather have or which one would give you the best yield, the best profit, or which would allow you to buy more of the better things in life for your family. Besides being profitable for the farmer and the consumer, effective soil and water con< servation holds an additionally important place in our national agricultural affairs. I wonder how many of you have given thought to the fact that if every acre of our crop- jJand was being used for the purpose it is best suited, what changes would take place in the agricultural production picture and what would be the case of our present crop sure plus problems? Suppose we take the 1948 production year as an example and look at the effect just one soil conservation practice would have had— the practice of good rotation. In 1948 if every acre of cropland in this country had been used in a minimum soil-conservation rotation we would have had 48,500,000 less acres of row crops such as cotton and corn, and £8,500,000 less acres of small grain such as wheat and oats. That land would have been in hay and pasture crops, and the forage would have been used to feed more livestock for which there is a great demand, The most important fact is that we would not have had a surplus problem anything like we have teday in corn, cotton, potatoes, and other crops. Consequently, without such sur- plus there would have been no necessity for acreage allotments and marketing quotas. The more we study the effects of a good soil-conservation program the more obvious it becomes that such a program is one of the greatest things that has ever happened in our Nation. Effective soil and water con- servation does much more than Just protect our soil and water resources although that is very worth while and necessary. It en-« courages and makes possible diversified pro- duction which will result in less production of the crops now causing our surplus prob- lems and which will eventually lead to lower farmer income. A survey conducted on 216 South Carolina farms whose farmers are cooperating with the soil-conservation districts show exactly what happens when conservation farming is used. These farms average about 800 acres each. Before conservation farming, these farms had about 10,000 acres planted to corn and about 10,500 acres planted to cotton. After the conservation programs got under- way, the acreage of corn was reduced to 7,000 and the acreage to cotton to about 8,000 acres. A reduction of approximately 18 to 20 percent in each case. With this re- duction the production of the number of bushels and the number of bales remained just about the same. But, the cost of pro- duction of each bushel and each bale was greatly reduced, and consequently, resulted in greater profit to the farmer. At the same time, the acreage planted to hay and pasture crops increased by 72 percent and the num- ber of dairy cows increased 50 percent and that of beef cows 150 percent. That is the type of land use changes taking place in all of the 33 soil conservation districts in South Carolina. Consequently, there is no question why the , Nation looks favorably upon its soil conser- vation districts and the job they are doing as well as all of the other governmental agen- cies interested in soil conservation. That is
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD why in the face of the tremendous national debt of more than $256,000,000,000 that the House of Representatives recognized the great need and importance to appropriate suffi- cient money to help farmers conserve their productive soil and water. Even in view of the necessity to cut governmental expendi- tures the Congress increased the appropria- tion for the Soil Conservation Service and other governmental services engaged in a similar enterprise in order to continue to give technical help to the farmers for the preservation of our greatest natural resource. The Congress recognized the value of the PMA conservation payment program, the Farmers Home Administration, the Exten- sion Service, and other services by retarding many stalwart attempts to drastically reduce their appropriation. This is the case because the Congress realizes that the Nation’s agri- culture is its No. 1 industry and should not become subservient to any other indus- try whatsoever. The Congress is frequently criticized by opponents of a strong agricul- ture and much of the criticism centers around the cost of the present price-support program. These opponenis fail to recognize that during the war the farmers did their part in expanding their facilities and pro- duction to meet wartime needs. To do this, farmers had to invest in additional ma- chinery and make other changes that were costly and just as necessary as many of the alterations and changes that industry had to make for the production of tanks and guns. After the war, while industry could make its shift to peacetime production sched- ule, agriculture was compelled to continue its wartime type of production in order to feed the peoples of the world until their own agricultural plants could be put back in order. Agriculture is now in a period of readjustment from wartime production to peacetime production—some half decade after the war. Congress recognizes that this late shift is not the fault of the farmer who followed his Government’s program in the fight for a democratic way of life. Yet, there are many who criticize the few dollars that the Nation must spend in help- ing farmers in this shift. They forget that when industry made its shift to peacetime production that the Federal Government spent about $7,000,000,000 to aid in the con- version, together with a great reduction in excess-profits taxes for industry. Helping industry to reconvert was a good thing be- cause it helped to maintain high industrial employment and thereby permitting the pur- chase of food and fiber produced by the farm- ers of our country. But helping agriculture in this conversion period is just as necessary and equally as wise. The Nation cannot afford not to help agriculture during this crucial period, a period which finds the in- come of the farmer lowering drastically fast, while the prices for machinery, seed, and fer~ tilizer are not lowering in comparison. There are a great many things the indi- vidual farmer can do for himself to help sta- bilize his income. One of the best is con- servation programs being sponsored by vari- ous governmental agencies which help to cut the cost of production, use every acre effi- ciently, and conserve the productiveness of each acre. A few weeks ago I had an oppor- tunity to study some figures on what the one practice of contour farming alone would do to help farmers reduce their cost of produc- tion. I was amazed to learn that contour farming alone saves up to 29 percent of the operation time and at least 23 percent of tractor fuel. This saving in power, fuel, and time can only result in affording the farmer ® greater profit in the crops which he pro- duces. Consequently, with this one illustra- tion I am sure that each of you can antjici- pate what the savings might be if conservae tion programs are practiced in an entire farming operation. .* _I know that all of you are interested in the flood-control program which has been recom-= mended for the watersheds of the Savannah River and which will be handled through your local soil-conservation district. Once started, this program will mean much to the farmers along the Seneca, the Tugaloo, and Chauga Rivers, as well as the other tribu- taries in our area. Many of you who own bottom land along these rivers have found it very unprofitable to use them for crops be- cause of the hazardous floods. These floods do not originate in this immediate area, but are the result of runofis which occur and which are unchecked in the mountainous areas above us. It is surprising to realize that the mountain region just to the north of us has the highest annual rainfall of any sec- tion in the continental United States with the exception of the coastal area of the Pacific Northwest. We hear a great deal about damage caused by floods and according to the news stories it would appear that the greatest damage and costs occur along the big streams and to the residents of our larger cities. However, the reverse of this is true. It has been reliably established that 75 percent of all fload dam~- age occurs in areas such as Oconee, Pickens, and Anderson Counties. The only way that this flood damage can be controlled or pre- vented is by proper soil-conservation prac- tices by all of the people in any community. A fitting illustration of the foregoing statement is quite apparent as we look off from this mountain today and see the soil- conservation farming being done by Charlie Maudlin, LeRoy Parrott, Roy LeMance, Jim Holliday, and on the farm of the late Frank Merck. When noticing their practices it is easy tc see why the Soil Conservation Service has noted a marked decrease in the land siltation in Lake Isaqueena. It looked at one time as if Lake Isaqueena would be a muddy lake. I am told that due to the conservation farming being done in this community, the life expectancy of the lake promises to be many times longer than would have been dreamed of a few years ago. The preservation of the soil and water from in- filtrating into Lake Isaqueena can only mean that the soil, seed, and fertilizer are remaining in the production area of its watershed and thereby resulting in a sav- ing to the farmers in this area. The benefits of effective soil and water conservation are never-ending. The pro- gressive program of the Upper Savannah Soil Conservation District helps bring this fact to life. The 60-odd school teachers from this district who attended Clemson College for a period of 3 weeks last summer studying conservation recognize this and they are pre- paring to do their part in teaching our youth, our future farmers, that an appreciation of the soil is fundamental to success. To insure the posterity of our Nation it is mandatory and incumbent upon all of us and the churches, the business houses, the newspapers, magazines, civic and social organizations, to accept the Biblical direc- tive and challenge to preserve our soil be- cause it is a Christian directive to each of us to protect God's good earth. In this chal~ lenge we must not fail. . American Policy in the Middle East EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. ELBERT D. THOMAS , OF UTAH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES ‘Thursday, May 25 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 " Mr. THOMAS of Utah. Mr. Presl-+ dent, I ask unanimous consent to have A3993 printed in the Appendix of the Recor» an editorial entitled “What Are We Up to in the Middle East?” which appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune, published in Salt Lake City, Utah. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the RrEcorp, as follows: Wuat ARE WE UP To IN THE MippLEe East? On the twenty-fifth anniversary of the founding of the great Hebrew University just outside of Jerusalem, President Weis- mann, of the State of Israel, expressed hopes that someday “the Jewish and Arab nations will to their mutual benefit contribute to the establishment of a belt of flourishing countries * * * where the people of Israel and of the Arab countries will co~ operate in harmony.” No doubt Hebrew University, a growing center of learning on Mount Scopus, can foster the spirit of the Middle East about which Dr. Weismann spoke so glowingly. There are discouraging obstacles at pres- ent, however, and many of them are related to the blindly selfish policies of Great Brit~ ain, sanctioned by the United States State Department. . Since the lifting of the United Nations Security Council embargo on shipment of arms to the Middle East last August, Britain has been shipping planes, tanks, artillery, and other matériel to the Arab nations. Many observers in the unhappy region are convinced that the Arab reluctance to make final peace with Israel grows in proportion to the arms received regularly from Britain. An Israeli request for war matériel has been rejected by the United States on grounds this country does not have enough due to treaty arrangements with other countries. Defending American approval of British action recently, Secretary Acheson said that the arms being furnished the Arabs were solely for keeping internal order. He went on to say that the Arab states must be armed to resist aggression in the Middle East. Ag- gression from what source? If action is ex- pected from Russia, why is it not equally important to arm Israel? Resumption of hostilities between the Arab states and Israel is feared as soon as the Arabs feel strong enough. Is this what Britain and the United States want? The American Government hkoasts of its sym- pathy and assistance to democracies threat- ened by other powers. Yet, in the case of Israel, Washington is evasive and unccop- erative. Indecision and often hyprocisy have marked the United States policy toward Israel, This has helped to tie the hands of the United Nations. Behind the “silken cur- tain” of policy in the Middle East is one word, “oll.” Justice and fair play get secondary consideration while the dickering and deal- ing goes on for that commodity, ~ West Losing Good Friend in Florida Congressman EXTENSION OF REMARKS fe) Ju HON. MIKE MANSFIELD OF MONTANA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVSS Thursday, May 25, 1950 Mr.MANSFIELD. Mr.Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I am in- serting a story which appeared in the Great Falls (Mont.) Tribune of May 21,
A3994 1950, about the chairman of the Pub- lic Lands Committee. The West has had a tried a true friend jn Chairman Peterson and I want to express to him my sincere thanks for the many courtesies he has extended to the Montana and Rocky Mountain Rep- resentatives in Congress and to assure him of our deep appreciation for his efforts in helping to build up our part of the country. We will miss Pete, bui we will always remember him for the gentleman and statesman he is. The latchstring will always be out whenever he comes to see us—which we hope will be soon and often. The article follows: West Lostnc Goop FRIEND IN FLORIDA CONGRESSMAN WasHIncron, May 21.—The West is losing one of its best friends from Congress, a southerner, this year. Representative J. HarpIN PETERSON is go- ing back to his beloved Florida to stay. For most of the last 2 years Peterson has been chairman of the House Public Lands Committee, which deals mainly with western problems, such as mining, reclamation, Indian affairs, and public lands. Few of the committee’s bills directly af- fect his own State but colleagues do not believe PETERSON could be more sympathetic toward the legislation if each one was tagged “Florida special.” The Public Lands Committee generally handles more bills than any other House committee, except that on judiciary. That means work, and the committee, or subcom- mittees, meet almost daily when Congress is in session, with Prererson constantly hur- tying to get measures before the House. An indication of the volume of work is shown by the Recorp. Since the beginning of this session, in January 1949, the Public Lands Committee has received 650 bills. Of this number, 254 have been reported, and 180 have passed Congress and are now law. Peterson prefers to let the westerners on the committee decide for themselves what new legislation they want. But, having de- cided, he backs them to the limit. On sev- eral occasions, when the powerful Rules Committee refused to clear measures for House action, he used his own authority as a committee chairman to call them up on the floor. Both the Alaska and Hawaii statehood bills won House passage in this fashion. Politics probably never can be entirely eliminated from a congressional committee. PETERSON is a Democrat, but under his lead< ership the Public Lands Committee is one of the most nonpolitical in Congress. Recently when a group of North Dakota Indians passed a resolution expressing ap- preciationh of the work of Representative Lemke, Republican, of North Dakota, a Dem- ocrat, Representative Morris, of Oklahoma, took the lead in saying nice things about Lrmxe at a committee hearing. When Frrerson quits Congress this year, he intends to go home to Lakeland, Fla., to practice law and spend more time classify- ing his collection of rocks. He has tons of rock samples stored away, from all parts of the world. One of his chief pleasures is to drive out of Washington on a Sunday afternoon and add to his collec~ tion. An Indian tribe once gave him a name which means “rock hound.” Even this hobby had its roots in the com~= mittee work. Earlier in his congressional cae reer PETERSON was chairman of the old Mines and Mining Committee. He started bring- ing rock samples to meetings to add to the interest of Members who weren’t too famil- jar with mining. From that beginning, he couldn’t stop. The westerners, and the West, are going to miss PETERSON. Mobilization of Merale EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HAROLD D. DONOHUE OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 25, 1950 Mr. DONOHUE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I should like to include a very timely editorial entitled “Mobilization of Morale,” which appeared in the May 23, 1950, issue of the Christian Science Monitor. The article follows: MosiLizaTION OF MORALE Armed Services Day is one visible achieve- ment of the military unification program. We question whether everything is as cozy as Defense Secretary Johnson indicates. Much of the supposed saving from ending duplication is illusory. But eliminating separate days each year for each service is a genuine gain. Among the speeches made to mark the day, Gen. Omar Bradley’s merited special notice. Recognizing the damage that the 1946 demobilization of American power did. General Bradley is endeavoring to get the United States into a posture of alert but calm preparedness. Opposing both ap- peasement at the Elbe and a preventive war, he urges Americans to base their diplomatic and military policy on a recognition that western Europe must be a part of the free world. General Bradley was the first of American military leaders to show that he understood how vital an American resolve to help hold western Europe was to the mobilization of morale among the free peoples. For several months he has been combating the defeatist belief that the Continent would have to be abandoned. He insists that Europe must be made reasonably secure from the danger of being quickly overrun and that it not be abandoned to atomic blackmail by the Soviet. But the most notable feature of his speech was an appeal for stand-by plans for quick mobilization of our entire civilian economy. This looks like a direct response to Bernard Baruch’s declaration a few days ago that to advocate selective service without including plans for a wartime draft of labor and in- dustry was an immoral proposal, General Bradley pointed out that legislation to give emergency powers to the President would be necessary. So long as Congress would have to declare war before such authority became effective, such legislation should cause no great uneasiness. Many Americans were convinced by the last war’s experience that the freezing of wages and profits would have made mobili- zation speedier, fairer, and less costly. If there should be another war the United States would have far less time to complete such defense arrangements. To provide for them ahead of time is as necessary as train- ing soldiers and making arms. It would prove that Americans not only see what would be required but do not flinch from any necessary measures. By mobilizing morale both at home and abroad such a step could deter aggression and strengthen the defenses of peace, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Plymouth Local Fights Sam Sweet’s Deportation EXTENSION OF REMARKS F HON. GEORGE G. SADOWSKI CF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 25, 1950 Mr. SADOWSEI. Mr. Speaker, an- other victim of this wave of hysteria is Sam Sweet, one of our leading and most active trade-unionists in Detroit. Sam Sweet is Plymouth Local No. 51, UAW-CIO, director of education and compensation. He is also editor of the union paper and chairman of the strike welfare committee. He is charged with alleged naturaliza- tion irregularities and the Justice De- partment is trying to deport him to Po- Jand. I do not know all the facts in the case, but I do know that he is the father of two American-born children, Louise, 10, and Fred, 7 years of age. Sam is well liked and highly respected by the members of Plymouth Local No. 51. His greatest offense seems to be that he has worked and fought too hard for the wel- fare of the members of his union. I am glad to see that a defense com- mittee has been formed to fight these charges and I wish them every success, I feel confident that Sam will be cleared of these charges. I would not be surprised if some of the bosses have a hand in this persecution. I wish to include an article which ap- peared in the Detroit edition of the Pitts- burgh Courier on May 13, 1950, as fol- lows: PLymMourH Local Ficuts Sam SwEet’s DEPORTATION Members of Plymouth Local 51, UAW-CIO, recently reported the organization of a Sam Sweet defense committee whose function it is to fight the proposed deportation of Sam. Sweet, director of the local’s education and compensation department, editor of its local union newspaper, and chairman of its strike welfare committee. The Department of Justice, local union spokesmen report, has requested the can~- cellation of Sweet’s citizenship for alleged naturalization irregularities. Sweet became @ United States citizen 4 years ago, they said, and is the father of two American-born chil- dren, Fred, 7, and Louise, 10. His case is pending in Federal court in Detroit. Members of the defense committee are Olen Manley, chairman; Robert Elliott, sec< retary; Nelson Perry, Dorothy Knight, and Stanley Bartnicki, financial secretary of local 51. In a resolution deploring the Jus~ tice Department’s action, member of Ply- mouth local said: “Whereas it is individuals like Sam Sweet who, because of loyalty to labor’s cause, are always picked as a target by employers and their stoolpigeons; and now Sam Sweet needs our support more than ever to defend him- self from the attack of the Justice Depart- ment, which is no doubt instigated by the Chrysler Corp.: Therefore be it “Resolved, That local 51, UAW-CIO, go on record reiterating our position and now we give support in full defense of Sam Sweet and condemn the Justice Department for its intimidation.” The committee further pointed out that “We have known Sweet since 1937 and the only crime he has committed has been to
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD serve the interest of labor, and not the bosses. He has lived in Detroit since 1930 and hes been respected everywhere. “We believe that an attack against indi- viduals like Sam Sweet represents a threat to every one of us. If they succeed in their attempt to revoke his citizenship papers and possibly deport him, not one of the militant and courageous union leaders in this coun- try who are naturalized citizens will he safe from persecutions of this nature.” Armed Forces Day at Rapid City EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FRANCIS CASE OF SOUTH DAKOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 25, 1950 Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my re- marks, I place in the Rscorp an address by Maj. Gen. Thomas D. White, of the United States Air Force, delivered at the Rapid City Air Force Base, Rapid City, S. Dak., on May 20, 1950. The occasion dedicated the new mono- lithic hangar that will house B-26 planes, the largest hangar of its kind in the world. The significance of the occasion was recognized in the area for a crowd esti- mated at 75,000 people were on hand. A check by military police showed that 22,600 cars went through the gates. In an area where the largest city within 350 miles has a population of 25,000, it is at once evident that such an attendance was nothing less than phenomenal. Such an attendance gave double sig- nificance to what the speaker of the day, Maj. Gen. Thomas D. White, of the United States Air Force said, about the place of the people in the defense or- ganization of the United States. General White’s address follows: REMARKS BY Mas. Gen. THomAs D. WHITE AT THE ARMED Forces DAY OBSERVANCE, RaPID Crry Amr Force Basz, Rarin Crry, 8. Dax., May 20, 1950 The invitation to speak at the dedication of this new hangar and at your observance of Armed Forces Day is one for which IT am most grateful. Mr. Symington, as Secretary of the Air Force, had accepted the invitation to speak on this occasion, and had been looking for- ward to it. When his services were required as Chairman of the National Security Re- sources Board, he asked to be excused from this engagement, both because he is no longer Secretary of the Air Force and be- cause the heavy responsibilities of his new job have required him to cancel all speak- ing engagements for the present. Mr, Finletter, who is Mr. Symington’s suc- cessor as Secretary of the Air Force, was un- able to come in his place today because the responsibilities of his own new job have so far kept him from accepting any speaking engagements. Both Mr. Symington and Mr. Finletter, however, have asked me to express their re- grets and to bring you their greetings. The importance of Rapid City Air Force Base is such that they felt as honored as I to be in- vited here. And anyone connected with the Air Force, or actively interested in strength- ening American air power, must welcome the opportunity to see this new hangar that is being dedicated today, the largest hangar in the United States and large enough to house two of our giant intercontinental B-36 bombers. This occasion is important for another reason also. Today is the first Armed Forces Day in our history. Looking back in later years, we will be able to say with pride that we were here, that we witnessed the dedica- ticn of this enormous hangar—360 by 340 feet—and that we commemorated, with to- day’s observance, the unification of our Armed Forces. I am sure the significance of this occasion will not be Icst on any of us. Among the many distinguished people who are gathered here, among the many friends of the Armed Forces, are two who have a very special interest in this hangar and in this occasion. Senator GurNEy and Con- gressman Case serve on the Appropriations Committees of their respective Houses of Congress, and Senator Gurnry is on the Armed Services Committee as well. Both Senator GurRNEY and Congressman CasE have played important parts in passing the legislation that supports the Armed Forces and that has permitted the construc- tion of this hangar, as well as other build- ings and installations of the Armed Forces, They are interested, naturally, in seeing what the Air Force and each of the other of the services is doing with funds appropri- ated to it. They are interested, as all of us are, in observing the state of readiness of our Armed Forces. Because of their interest, and the interest of all of you, the Air Force is grateful for this occasion to call attention to its role as @ member of the national defense team. And I take this opportunity to speak in be- half of the United States Air Force, on what it is doing to justify the trust the Ameri- can people have placed in it. I sometimes wonder if you, voters and tax- payers, are as conscious of the fact as we of the armed forces, that each of the armed forces—Army, Navy, and Air Force—is your organization. Ultimately you control it. The Air Force is, for instance, your Air Force, not ours, though we wear its uniform, You vote for the Senators and Congressmen who determine the scope and the size and the budget of the Air Force. You may not realize it, but through them you control the military strategy of the United States; for by the size of appropriations and other laws, Con- gress, which is your national voice, de- termines definitely the Limits within which strategic plans must be made, It is obvious that American taxpayers, and all of us, in uniform or not, are tax- payers, cannot afford to spend all the money all three services want in order to set up an ideal Army, Navy, and Air Force. There has to be a limit somewhere, and there must he economy everywhere. In the interest of economy and efficiency and increased de- fense, Congress passed and the President signed the National Security Act of 1947, which brought all the armed forces into a single Defense Establishment. Last year, the Secretary of Defense, Mr. Louis Johnson, ordered that henceforth we would not cele- brate Air Force Day or Navy Day, or Army Day, but that there would be one day of observance to pay tribute to all the armed forces on the same day. That day is today, the 20th of May. Thus we have a new day of observance springing from the new con- cept of national security that has been de- veloped since World War If. That concept is one of: unification into a single defense team of all the armed forces without loss of identify by any of them. The motto chosen for this day, “‘Teamed For Defense,” ex- presses that concept beautifully. It ex- presses, miltarily, the same concept ex- pressed politically In the motto of the United States, “E Pluribus Unum”—one out of many. We are one Nation today, and only one. But that Nation has grown from 13 colonies A3995 along the Atlantie seaboard to 48 States stretching across the continent, plus a num- ber of territories, notably Hawaii and Alaska, that are separated geographically, though not in democratic ideals or political aspira- tions, from the 48 States. No Army, Navy, or Air Force alone can defend this great continental expanse which is ours. Only a coordinated team of Army, Navy, and Air Force, of Regular Establishment and Reserve components, can guarantee our security in this air-atomic age. In order that you may understand the re~ quirements and obligations of the Air Force, as a member of this unified military defense team, it is essential that you be generally fa. miliar with the roles and missions—the job, if you will—assigned the Air Force by the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The Air Force is today our country’s basic strategic force. As such, and as outlined in the basic plans of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Air Force is responsible for the protection of our terri- tory against air attack. It is responsible for supplying the Army with required tactical air suoport. And it is responsible for launching the counteroffensive against the heart of an aggressor nation to crush his industrial po. tential and to destroy his capacity to continue his attack upon us. The Air Force will receive full cooperation and support from both the Army and the Navy in accomplishing its mission. But the responsibility for strategic bombing is basi- cally ours, and our budget, our training, our procurement, and our strategic plans are predicated upon this principle. The Air Force accepts the responsibility imposed by its mission and our structure-in-being is prepared to discharge our responsibility in a manner that will reflect credit on us. The wartime accomplishments of our stra- tegic Air Force in Europe and in the Pacific are well known. Since the end of the war we have increased considerably the range of our striking capacity and the destructive- ness of our weapons. The B-36 heavy bomber, some of which you see here now, and which this new hangar will house, is itself both the means and the symbol of that increase in range and in destructiveness. With the development of the B-36 speedy intercontinental warfare became possible for the first time; but with methods of in-flight, refueling developed since the B-36, even older and smaller planes, such as the B-29 and the B-50, can be given range that will permit intercontinental use. Iam sure you will all recall the round-the- world, nonstop flight in March 1949 of the B-50 Lucky Ledy II, a feat made possible by four air-to-air in-flight refuelings. Cer- tainly, the flight of the Lucky Lady 1, as well as routine flights of the B-36, demon- strate our ability to carry initial retaliatory offensive blows sufficiently far as to reach within the heartland of any possible enemy. Not only the range, but also the speed of aircraft has increased several times in recent years. A year and a half ago a standard Air Force combat fighter, and F-86 jet, four of which are here today, with its six machine guns and a full load of ammunition, set a new official world’s speed record for all types of aircraft by flying over 670 miles per hour— over 11 miles a minute. Only 14 months ago a six-engine B-47 jet bomber flew from Moses Lake, Wash., to Washington, D. C., a distance of 2,300 miles across the continent, in 3 hours 46 minutes, at an average speed of 607 miles per hour. But the experimental X-1 has been flown not once but many times hun- dreds of miles per hour faster than the speed of sound, That means that not once, but many times, our pilots have exceeded 760 miles per hour under standard conditions of temperature and altitude,
A3996 I think these achievements—and I could name many more—indicate that the Air Force is facing, and solving, the problems pre- sented by the changed geographic and stra~ tegic situation in which we find ourselves in this air-age world. Our country has the scientific and tech- nical ability to develop and produce the pest Air Force in the world. Most Americans believe we should have such an Air Force. But let me voice a word of warning. To have such an Air Force will require a degree of sacrifice by all of us. In the Strategic Air Command, of which Rapid City is one base, that need of sacrifice is particularly great, and the sense of it must be appreciated. Strategic air operations, aimed at the de- struction and dislocation of the eneiny’s military, industrial, political, and economic systems, and the undermining of the morale of the enemy’s people, are world-wide in nature. The units of the Strategic Air Command must not only be ready, like all military units, to defend themselves, and us, when attacked; they must be ready to counter- attack immediately after an aggressive at- tack ig made. And since that act of aggres- sion that could precipitate us into another war, might come from any direction, across any geographic barrier, it follows that units of the Strategic Air Command must train in all sorts of climates, under all sorts of con- ditions, and take long operational training flights into many different parts of the world. The training of combat crews is @ mever- ending task which must be pursued with - vigor and consistency, because in the last analysis, when the bomber is airborne and on the way to the enemy target, the skill, de- termination, teamwork and morale of the crew Will in large measure determine the suc- cess or failure of the mission. And here we come to a point where con- ditions on the ground, right here at Rapid City, for instance, can influence combat operations. Several years ago, the Air Force deter- mined, by analysis of reenlistments and by actual polls, that the effect of inadequate housing on Air Force morale and effective- ness is serious indeed. Service personnel whose families either are not adequately quartered or who are required to pay exorbi- tant prices for moderate off-base aczommo- dations cannot reasonably be expected to work at top efficiency or to achieve satis- factory productivity. Airmen who give prime consideration to adequate housing for their dependents are in general the kind of stable, dependable men we most need. They repre- sent a human investment which must be protected. To retain them, to protect the investment we have in their knowledge and specialized training, their experience and their capabilities, we must give them ade-~ quate family housing. With this in mind, the Air Force helped in sponsoring legislation that would permit the construction of adequate family housing on or near permanent Armed Forces installa- tions. This legislation was passed by the present Congress, and signed by President Truman on August 8, 1949, as an amend- ment to the National Housing Act of 1934. It is popularly known as the Wherry Act because it was introduced in the Senate by Senator WHerry of your neighboring State of Nebraska. No legislation of recent times is so im- portant to the morale and welfare of military / personnel as this recently enacted amend- _ment adding title VIII to the National Hous- ing Act. It is not concerned in any way with , barracks on a base, but it does make possible , with Government aid, the constructiou of adequate family housing, with modern con- ‘veniences and modern comfort, at a reason~ able rental military personnel can afford to pay. It relieves pressure on the civilian housing shortage by placing service person- nel in housing reserved especially for them. Thus, it works in two ways, to strengthen the National Mulitary Establishment and the national security and to benefit the civilian community which the Department of De- fense is set up to protect. The housing situation has been particu- larly bad 1n respect to Air Force bases be~ cause most of the Air Force bases are new, and because of the tremendous growth in the size of the Air Force between 1939 and 1950. Other services have some old and well- established bases. Most of the Air Force bases which have been constructed were built during the war when it was more important to provide operating facilities than it was to provide family housing, and in the postwar period private enterprise has not been able to provide the living quarters that the Air Force has itself been unauthorized to provide. What the Wherry Act makes possible is the insurance by the Federal Government of mortgages on rental family housing units, puilt by private enterprise, and the chance for such private enterprise to make proper profits out of their activity. It is all good, sound business. It is private enterprise of the sort we expect and encourage in the United States. But one thing is required of the Air Force before such construction is undertaken, or the corporation to construct it can be set up. That is a certification, by the Secretary of Defense or his designee, that the Air Force pase, for which the housing will be con-~ structed, is deemed a permanent base, I think you will be interested if I tell you what the chances are of having Rapid City Air Force Base given this certificate of per- manency, and of having a housing project initiated here. A group of public-spirited citizens in this community, working through your chamber of commerce, have provided 65 acres of land, adjacent to the base, suitable for the sort of housing project the Air Force needs and which would be a credit to your progressive community. Negotiations are now under way for the planning, design, and construc- tion of such a project. Five factors must be considered before any Air Force base can be designated a perma- nent installation in the ordinary sense of the word. These factors are: 1. The condition of the runways. Rapid City Air Force Base has the sort of runways required for Strategic Air Command opera- tions off this base. 2. The construction of the base itself. It is satisfactory. 8. The facilities provided, both on the base and in the adjacent community. No cause for complaint. 4, The type of construction. Look around you. The type is good. So far as the Air Force is concerned, these four factors are excellent at Rapid City Air Force Base. Now for the fifth factor: Adequate housing. We anticipate that our negotiations with a construction company will be successful, and as soon as they are we will execute a cer- tificate of permanency with the Federal Housing Administration, indicating that this base is part of our permanent military in- stallations. ’ So, for all planning purposes, Rapid City is a permanent base of the regular Air Force; and though we cannot say that it is such Officially until we have a permanent housing project under way, I know no reason to an~ ticipate failure in our planning. Apparently you want us here, and we want to stay here, But I can also say that when the housing is provided, we can expect an even higher degree of morale on the part of the personnel stationed here. And nothing ‘APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD could be more important for the success of Air Force operations than the maintenance of this morale at its peak. Secretary of Defense Louis Johnson has re- cently spelled out his definition of national security. “National security,” he said, “is not just the strength of our arms. It is the sum of all our strength—our political, eco- nomic, moral, and military strength—and the strength of all the other peaceful nations of the world.” Our political, economic, and moral strengths determine what our military strength should be. They lend themselves to no ready appraisal in comparison with armaments in the hands of some enemy na~ tion, but their value for our defense cannot be denied. Our moral strength as part of our total defense potential is vital, though it is impos- sible to estimate it in terms of men and munitions. It is the strength of happy, con- tented families, enjoying life and demo- cratic liberties in such a community as this. It is the strength of freemen serving will- ingly to preserve that freedom. Today’s observance is one evidence of that moral strength. You have come here to participate in this observance of Armed Forces Day because you believe in the United States, and you believe in democracy. You believe in peace, and you hate war. And you believe in democracy and in the United States to the extent that you are willing to fight for both and—if necessary—to die for both. You are willing to make sacrifices, to pay taxes, to serve in the armed forces, to train with the Reserves, and in other ways to support the Military Establishment we must maintain. With this observance we honor all mem- bers of the Armed Forces, both past and present, and we pay respect especially to the memory of all who have given their lives in war. We also reexamine our responsibili- ties—whether we are in one of the services or in civilian life—to the Nation and to our democratic way of life. The Air Force is convinced that the mili- tary security of our Nation and the preser- vation of our way of life depends upon the teamwork developed within the componenis of the Department of Defense. No one serv- ice can do the job alone. All services must be teamed for defense, and ready to defend the United States against aggression in any form, But if air power is to be a decisive ele- ment in our national strength, we must have air power adequate for the purpose. And that we can have with the support of you who have come here today, and the mil- lions of others like you in other communi- ties and other States throughout these United States that are one Nation. Such support is the greatest assurance that, teamed together, we can reach our com-= mon objectives—peace and security for the United States and for peace-loving people throughout the world. Lesson in Semantics—Phrases “Iron Cur- tain” and “Cold War” Have Created Grim State of Mind EXTENSION OF REMARKS Or HON. GEORGE G. SADOWSKI OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 25, 1950 Mr. SADOWSKI. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- ORD, I wish to include an article hy
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Thomas L. Stokes, which appeared in the Washington Evening Star of May 24, 1950: Lesson In SemantTics—PuHrases “Iron Cur-~ TAIN” AND “COLD WAR” HAVE CREATED GRIM StaTE oF MinpD (By Thomas L. Stokes) It is about time now to look at a couple of phrases composed of ordinary Anglo-Saxon words from the standpoint of semantics, That big hunk of word is defined as “the science of meaning” and “that science deal~ ing with the relations between symbols (signs) and what they refer to and with human behavior in reaction to symbols, in- cluding unconscious attitudes,” and so on. There is first, then, “iron curtain.” Wins- ton Churchill coined it in his Fulton (Mo.) speech 5 years ago and thus lowered a barrier figuratively across eastern Europe. Cartoon- ists illustrated 1t for us. All of us on this side of it became righteous folks and all on the other side became unrighteous. That was the first division of one world into two worlds—by semantics. We long have accept- ed the phrase and it has become an ominous fact. AFFECTED OUR THINKING Then along came another “cold war.” That, too, has affected our thinking and behavior. It has created a state of mind, a rather grim one. Unfortunate and un- healthy is the constant repetition of the word “war.” If you traveled eastward across Europe, you would not see an iron curtain, of course. What would you see? You’d see people working in the fields, trying to raise some- thing to eat and something over to sell, and the country and the people would look about the way they do in Iowa or Nebraska, and if you could speak the language you’d find their daily problems about the same as those of folks over here. Some of them would be grumbling about the government, just as we do, and lots of them, you’d find, would detest communism just as much as we do. You’d travel also through cities like Des Moines and Lincoln or bigger ones like Pitts- burgh and Cleveland and you’d find people there going about their jobs, just as we do here, trying to make a living and make ends meet. In city and on farms, also, you'd find them worrying about another war—they know what it’s like too—just as we worry. OUT TO DESTROY ILLUSION One bold man with vision recently has begun to destroy the iron-curtain illusion. Trygve Lie, Secretary-General of the United Nations, flew right through it, went to Mos- cow and sat down with Joe Stalin. As a re- sult he is pursuing his talks with the French and the British and soon again with us in an effort to get us all about the UN table once more and there to try to eliminate those phrases “iron curtain” and “cold war” from our language. It is a happy circumstance that President Truman-has reasserted dur faith in the United Nations in submitting to Congress the 1949 report of the UN’s work, and has pointed to its success in settling disputes in Indonesia, Palestine, and Kashmir, thus moving such conflicts indoors—from battle- grounds to conference tables, and empha-« sized the fine work it is doing in social, eco- nomic, and humanitarian fields through the specialized agencies recently discussed in a series of columns here, and some of it hbe- hind the iron curtain. Very properly he rebuked Russia for her willful flouting of the UN in current walk- outs, and at the same time emphasized the common-sense attitude of the UN, in the face of this display, of proceeding with its business as usual. Here he gave effective XCVI—App.—§252 answer to Herbert Hoover’s proposal to re- organize UN without Russia. Through making the UN work we can get rid of our semantic troubles—‘“iron curtain” and “cold war.” How to Help the Small-Business Man EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WILLIAM M. McCULLOCH OF OHIO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 25, 1950 Mr. McCULLOCH. Mr. Speaker, the Lima (Ohio) News in an editorial of May 28, 1950, has clearly and logically pointed out the way to help the small-business man. In accordance with permission granted by the House, the editorial fol- lows: How To Herp Him There is a great Fair Deal drive on to help the small-business man. The planners in Washington are beating their breasts in agony for his welfare and are denouncing the giant concentrations that are stifling him. They propose measures to liberalize and to extend his credit. All of this is designed, of course, to win the gratitude of the small-business man and add his vote to the dependable Fair Deal reser- voir. One California businessman got to think- ing and turned in a list of some of the governmental liabilities that are hindering him. These are: City license tax, city sales tax, city income tax, State sales tax, State corporation income tax, State corporate franchise tax, State use tax on materials for his products, State un- employment insurance tax, property taxes, Federal social-security tax, Federal corpora- tion income tax and (if his business is still” good) both Federal and State income taxes on personal imcome. It is estimated his Fed- eral taxes would be doubled if the Truman program were adopted in toto. ‘What is it that is most troubling the small- business man? Scan that list (1t varies only slightly by States) and the answer is as plain as the vote-bait ghost written into a Truman speech. EE Dr. Townsend’s Contributicn to Social Legislation EXTENSION OF REMARKS o HON. REID F. MURRAY OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 25, 1950 Mr. MURRAY of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, before becoming a Member of Congress and since I have been a Mem~ ber of Congress I have been interested in the problem of our elderly people. An ever-increasing number of them have been forced into retirement without any resources or means of support. Adverse economic conditions have increased the problems. : While social security has been in exist- ence for 15 years, it has not been ex- tended to take in the large percentage of A3997 our population, especially the rural peo- ple. The Social Security Act that is un- der consideration at this time was brought into the House of Representa- tives under a gag rule, which means that it could not be amended so as to include many, many groups that are entitled to consideration. From present indications the Senate will broaden this base, but still other millions of Americans are go- ing to be excluded. The rural people are to be the large group that will not be in- cluded. Most people agree that labor is labor, and that all Americans are entitled to the benefits of the same social legis- lation. In many industries adequate provi- sions are being made, but great numbers of our citizens are not the beneficiaries of any private or governmental security agency. In other words, the millions of Americans who are among the elderly group at this time still have to depend upon welfare or relief funds. The movement sponsored originally by Dr. Francis E. Townsend has been severely criticized. The facts are that much of the social legislation that has been passed is a result of the spadework that has been done by Dr. Townsend and his group. Although the Town- send movement itself may not have had the legislative consideration that it de- served, the fact remains-that if it had not been for the spadework done by this organization the elderly people of this country would not have the legislative consideration that they have had. It has always been my purpose and always will be to support legislation that gives equal consideration for every individual and every group, with the hopes that ultimately every American will have the same social security, the same benefits of unemployment insurance, and the same benefits under any social legisla- tion that is to be considered by the Congress. A gradual improvement in the atti- tude of the industrial leaders, as well as the public thinking on these impor- tant issues, leads one to believe that steady although slow progress has been made, and that the time will come when these elderly people will enjoy the bene- fits of an across-the-board program that will be fair to all, Seattle’s Ed Guthman—Pulitzer Prize Winner—A Job Well Done EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. HUGH B. MITCHELL OF WASHINGTON IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 25, 1950 Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, a Pulitzer prize for outstanding journal- ism was awarded to Mr. Ed Guthman, a reporter on the Seattle Times. Seattle is proud of the honor bestowed on one of her sons—proud not only because this was a newspaper job well done, but be- cause it vindicated a man wrongfully accused of being a Communist.
A8$98 In these days of tension and fear, to call a man a Communist without solid evidence to back up the charge, is to jeopardize his livelihood, to besmirch his reputation, to expose his family and himself to bodily harm. We know that from sad and repeated experience. Here in the Nation’s Capital we have seen un- scrupulous persons indulge in smear campaigns; we have heard them fling charges of communism recklessly about, causing damage and suffering, not only to individuals, but to the Nation itself. Certain ex-Communists have made for themselves a profession as stand-by witnesses before investigating commit- tees. They have wandered carelessly in their chosen field, not hesitating to smear the innocent with their venom, while they are supposed to identify the Communist conspirators with whom they once engaged in their nefarious and subversive work. In the State of Washington we had 2 committee investigating people’s loy- alty, and one of these ex-Communists, Hewitt by name, was imported into the State to tell what he knew, according to the usual procedure. Hewitt testified that Dr. Melvin Rader, of the university, was a Communist, making allegations of fact which turned out finally to be false. Mr. Guthman, of the Seattle Times, undertook to run down these charges. By painstaking investigation, encouraged by Dr. Raymond Allen, president of the University of Washington, Guthman gathered the evidence that proved Dr. Rader to be innocent, and Hewitt in effect a perjurer. Unfortunately, a New York court had prevented Hewitt from being sent back to Washington to stand trial for perjury. It was only because a Washington newspaper reporter, inter- ested solely in the truth, devoted him- self to this case that justice was finally done to the man wrongfully accused. Under leave to extend my remarks, I include an editorial from the Bremer- ton (Wash.) Sun of May 17, 1950, con- cerning Mr. Guthman’s fine work: TRUTH, A Free NEWSPAPER, AND THE PULITZER PRIZE The recent honor that came to a member of the Washington State press and a good reporter—the Seattle Times and its Ed Guth- man—is worthy of more than passing atten- tion. In winning a Pulitzer prize for high journalistic endeavor, young Mr. Guthman has directed public attention anew upon the vital role of a free and unfettered press us & cornerstone of democracy. The Pulitzer prizes for journalism reflect the platform which the late Joseph Pulitzer evolved for his St. Louis Post-Dispatch. It is a platform that any good newspaper strives to fulfill in serving its readers: “Fight for progress and reform, never tolerate in- justice or corruption, always fight dema- gogues of all parties, never belong to any party, always oppose privileged classes and public plunderers, never lack sympathy with the poor, always remain devoted to the public welfare; never be satisfied with merely printing the news; always be drastically in- dependent; never be afraid to attack wrong, whether by predatory plutocracy or preda- tory poverty.” In the case of Mr. Guthman, the Pulitzer award was made for a series of well-docu- mented articles which he wrote for the Times to vindicate Dr. Melvin Rader of the Uni- versity of Washington, who had been labeled a Communist. The newspaper and reporter had no prior convictions in the matter; they merely sought out the truth, and the truth was—as it always is—sufficient. In an era when the truth is often be- smirched in other lands, and issues clouded beyond honest recognition, it is satisfying to observe its bright light in American news~ papers, Mr, Guthman’s own story of the Rader case is an absorbing one. This is the way he tells it: “The Times didn’t get interested actively in the Rader-Hewitt dispute until after the New York judge, Aaron Levy, refused to send Hewitt back here to stand trial for perjury. Judge Levy inferred that the courts here were controlled by Communists and that if Hewitt returned he would be facing slaugh- ter. Levy wondered what the civilization of this State really was like. “We wondered how a judge could make such irrational statements. That was one factor in motivating our entry into the case. We were curious about the judge and decided to find out what evidence prompted him to render that decision. “The other reason was that the judge’s de- cision left the case unsettled, and there was little likelihood that it ever would be settled. Russell McGrath and Henry Macleod (man- aging and city editors) felt that the question of who told the truth was of great interest and importance. Not only was the reputa- tion of a university professor in doubt, but the reputation of the (Canwell) committee and Hewitt—-who had figured as an impor- tant witness for the Government in immigra- tion cases—also were at stake. Their only instructions to me were to see if I could find out the truth. “First thing I did was to have the Asso- ciated Press get us photostatic copies of the evidence and testimony of the New York hearing. Meanwhile, I began talking to all individuals who could be counted upon—or so I thought—to be interested but neutral. “The evidence presented to Judge Levy showed that the case had heen completely “one-sided and contained four misstatements of fact which were harmful to Rader. That caused us to look deeper into the case. “From the so-called neutral sources, the only encouragement I got was from Dr. Allen (president of the University of Washington). Others took the attitude that Rader was a Communist or a fellow traveler and there- fore, even though a mistake may have been made, nothing should have been done to help him. “after all, he’s only one man and presum~ ing you do find he’s right, you'll be up- setting the work of the committee,’ one man told me. “Then I went to Rader and told him we wanted to check his story. He was glad and was very cooperative. His story checked out. Meanwhile, I also questioned most of the ex-Commies I knew in town. None of them could put Rader in the party. “We kept turning up evidence and affi- davits which further supported Rader’s case. Finally it was overwhelming in the eyes of every fair-minded person who has taken the time to study it.” This demonstration of the industry and vigilance of a newspaper and a reporter has deep significance. Dr. Rader was the princi- pal figure in the case at hand—but it could have been you, or your neighbor, or your best friend. A free press, with courage, sets the record straight when others were unwilling, or negli- gent, in their duty to do so. Dr. Rader’s dignity was restored and a damaging infer- me against our State courts was labeled @ e. ; All because a newspaper, and a reporter, sought out the truth in the best tradition of their business, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Curtailment of Postal Service EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HUGH J. ADDONIZIO OF NEW JERSEY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 25, 1950 Mr. ADDONIZIO. Mr. Speaker, as sponsor of H. ®. 8205, to rescind the order of the Postmaster General curtail- ing certain postal services, I was pleased to receive the following resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of East Orange, N. J., on May 8, 1950: Whereas it is the judgment of the city council that the plan of the United States Post Office Department to reduce the number of mail deliveries and to effect other curtail- ment of mail service is not warranted; and Whereas numerous objections have been received from the citizens of East Orange to any reduction of mail service: Be it Resolved, That the City Council of the City of Hast Orange does hereby express its opposition to the plan of the United States Post Office Department to curtail the mail service in the city of East Orange and re- spectiully urges the Members of Congress of this State to oppose such plan; and be it further Resolved, That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Senators and Congressmen from this State and that a copy be forwarded to the Postmaster General. Tariff Reduction Program EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THOMAS J. LANE OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 25, 1950 Mr. LANE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following statement made before the committee for reciprocity in- formation of the United States Inter- departmental Trade Agreement Organi- zation, May 24, 1950, Washington, D. C.: Greetings. The President’s Council of Eco- nomic Advisers points with pride to the drop in unemployment, which, Nation-wide, is down to an average of 5% percent. This is a most encouraging improvement from a general viewpoint. There are several soft spots in the picture, however. On close scrutiny they do not show up 50 favorably. One of them is New England, where the average percentage of people who cannot find employment is up to 12 out of each 100 workers. Roughly speaking, 1 out of every 8 employable persons is jobless. This is a serious situation. It will become worse instead of better if the State Department is permitted to open the gates to a flood of foreign imports that will undersell the woolen and worsted indus- tries of New England—even in New England. Because the labor costs of foreign manu- facturers who are engaged in similar work are from 4 to 20 times lower than our own. There is not one person at this hearing who dares to suggest that we slash the pays of our own textile workers and reduce their standard of living to a bare subsistence level
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD in order to offset such starvation compe- _ tition. Foreign textile manufacturers are doing well, in a financial sense, even though it is at the expense of their underpaid workers. They have many other markets throughout the world where they are selling their goods without hurting the countries to which they export. In fuct, we do not need their woolen and worsted goods, because we have adequate production facilities to supply our own wants. Why, then, should the State Depart- ment encourage them to send their products here, when the immediate result would be a solar plexus blow to our own depressed tex- tile industry? It makes sense to help these other nations and ourselves by importing those raw mate- rials and manufactures which we do not have or produce. But why open up the whole of the United States to all imports, when such @ policy would surely harm our established industries? Our problem is to expand rather than con- tract in order to provide job opportunities for our growing labor force. We cannot take care of our own workers and foreign workers at the same time when both are producing the same type of goods for the American home market under conditions that penalize the American manufacturer and the Ameri- can worker. ° Instead of this sacrificial policy I think the State Department would do better to advocate a point 4 program for those foreign nations to follow in their colonial holdings which they have failed to build up as markets over the years. Africa and the Orient offer tremendous opportunities for England, France, Italy, and other textile-manufactur- ing nations, if they would only pay some attention to the need for increasing the pur- chasing power of those substandard areas. Such a policy would open up additional mar- kets in places where people need textile goods but do not have the facilities to produce them. In turn, it would help to raise the wage rates and living standards of European textile workers. But no, the State Department is so eager to please foreign nations tl:at 11 hesitates to tell them the adjustments which these na- tions themselves must make to meet the realities of the mid-twentieth century. In- stead, it invites them to come into the over= crowded American market and just take, to the detriment of our own people. Perhaps the trouble lies in the fact that the State De- partment is so concerned with foreign affairs that it has alienated itself completely from the United States and its domestic problems. You will notice that the European nations with disarming coyness are not pushing this tariff-reduction program. That is what I fear. They do not’ wish to arouse the suspicions of the American people before the gullible State Department commits this Nation to a policy that once in effect cannot be remedied. Then they will drop the pretense and really move into the American textile market with a trade blitz against which there will be no protective barriers. Foreseeing this, we are here to oppose it. And I do not think that we are presump- tuous in speaking up beforehand when the economic survival of basic New England industries is at stake. Suppose we put the shoe on the other foot, just to see how reciprocal or fair, this whole business is. Sylvan I. Strook, a leader in American textile manufacturing, had this revealing experience when his company tried to sell some woolen goods to England. The price of the cloth was $15.50 per yard. On top of this, the British Government added im- port duties and purchase taxes to the amount of $19.20 per yard, totaling 123 per- cent more than the cost of the goods them~- selves. It seems that the door to the textile market over there is closed, locked, and barred. Spokesmen for the State Department and the ECA in hinting at the advisability of training textile workers for other jobs, are admitting that if their pet tariff reduction program is carried through, still more New England men and women will be thrown out of work. In view of the administration’s concern over the number of people who are out of work in the Northeastern States, it is a shocking contradiction to find two major agencies of the Government obstinately re- solved to follow a plan that will increase such unemployment. We hear much about Europe’s dollar shortage, but it’s Hush, “Hush, when any- one happens to okserve the scanty supply of same in the pocketbooks of displaced workers in our own American communities. Could it be, gentlemen, that New England js chosen to be the humble and uncomplain- ing sacrifice on the altar of free trade so that other American industries may win con- cessions that will permit them to enjoy the double advantage of both home and foreign markets? Mr. Paul Hoffman, Economic Cooperation Administrator, tries to make us accept the dim prospects with resignation by the fol- lowing sophistry. New England textiles should not be afraid to meet this com- petition because I, as an automobile manu- facturer on leave, do not fear competition from European manufacturers of motorcars. Mr. Hoffman goes on to say that he per- sonally favors the abolition of tariffs on automobile imports. Now all this sounds very logical, if not generous. But how would it work out? Our automobile production 1s rolling at such. a record-breaking pace that supply 1s bound to pass demand before many months have passed. Then what? Will Mr. Reuther, of the automotive workers union, go along with Mr. Hoffman and say: “Sure; we're not afraid. Let low-priced foreign cars come in, the more the better. It promotes interna- tional understanding.” Somehow, I do not believe that Mr, Reuthcr will be enthusiastic about the idea, for many members of his union will then be out of work. At least the members will not be happy about it. Because a man who is having difficulty in providing for his own family in the United States is not disposed to cheer on those high-policy programs that give away his job. But to get back to New England, its textile industry, and what some call its semidepres- sion. In your consideration of proposed tariff reductions, never forget that your first re- sponsibility is to work for a system of free trade that will not evict American workers from their trades. Too many have lost them already in New England. Visitor’s Effort Unrecognized EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. EDWARD H. REES OF KANSAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 25, 1950 Mr. REES. Mr. Speaker, under unanie mous consent granted by the House I am enclosing an interesting article from the A3999 Wichita Eagle of Wichita, Kans., of March 10. The article is entitled “Eight Million Acres Restored for Public Do- main,” It is a fascinating story of T. C. Elliot, who retired after 33 years of Fed- eral service, most of which was in Wash- ington. The story concerns the restoration of 8,000,000 acres of land for public domain that came about through the efforts of Mr. Elliot, Here is a case where a Federal em- ployee rendered unusual service, even though his efforts have gone unrecog- nized: Vistror’s Errort UNRECOGNIZED—EIGHT MIL- LION ACRES RESTORED FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN Eight million acres of land have been re- turned to the public domain thanks to the efforts of a former Government clerk, but the part he played in the vast transaction never has been fully told. This is the story of T. C. Elliot, 74, rew tired after 33 years of Federal service, in Wichita this week visiting relatives. Elliot has two letters, one signed by the President of the United States, and the other written by a Senator from Texas, proving almost conclusively that it was he who fa- thered the idea for the huge land transfer, put the irony of it is he has never received any real recognition for the act. Elliot was a subordinate in the General Accounting Office at Washington, auditing transportation vouchers, and nearing his time for retirement, when the plan took shape in his mind. As one close to the transportation field, Elliot knew, e recounted Tuesday, that land-grant railroads long had been lobbying in Congress to have removed from their charters the stipulation that Government supplies must be carried over their lines at reduced freight rates. He also was aware that millions of acres of land, left over from the some 152 millions granted the railroads by the United States during the development of the West, re- mained unused. Placing these facts side by side, Elliot evolved his scheme: Why not a barter ar- rangement, where the Government would voluntarily withdraw its right to lower rates if the railroads would return to Federal con- trol that portion of the land grants they had not put to productive use? A Government underling can dream up grandiose plans but obtaining a hearing is often another matter. That is where El- liot’s large acquaintanceship in Washington stood him in good stead, he said. Drafting his plan in a 12-page memoran- dum, he discarded the idea of submitting it through channels, electing instead to take it to a good friend, the late Senator Morris Sheppard of Texas. This was in the summer of 1939. “Senator Sheppard looked over the papers and hesitated over whom to send the memo-~ randum to,” Elliot narrated. “So I sug- gested, ‘Why not go to the top?” Thus the memorandum was forwarded to President Franklin D. Roosevelt, and soon a reply was received from the White House re- porting that the matter had been submitted to the Secretaries of Interior and Justice for further action. It is that letter, signed in the President’s hand, in effect acknowledging the suggestion as Elliot’s that the veteran employee always keeps on his person. The other letter is written by the Senator, and it further sub- stantiates his claim. Elliot left the Government service in 1944, put it was not long after, in late 1945 or early 1946, he does not exactly recall which, that @ bill incorporating his idea became law. The initial statute removed the restrictive
£4890 rate clause with respect to nonmilitary sup- plies. An amendment which Elliot says was adopted last year included military items as well, Thus one of the biggest domestic land swaps 10 modern times came about. Now a resident of Daytona Beach, Fla., Flihot plans to remain here another week with his brother, B. W. (Bee) Hihot, and sisters, Mrs. Flora Taylor, 702 South Topeka, and Mrs Bertha Neal, 118 Hast Kellogg, Who Is Competent Te Decide Which News Is Slanted? EXTENSION OF REMARES or HON. ANTHONY F. TAURIELLO OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 25, 1950 Mr. TAURIELLO., Mr. Speaker, un- der leave to extend my remarks in the REcoRD, I include the following editorial from the Saturday Evening Post of May 27, 1950: Wuo Is Compretent To Deacon WHIcH News Is SLANTED? People who are on the alert for the bee ginnings of censorship in this country are taking a second squint at the proceedings brought by the Federal Communications Commission against Mr. G. A. Richards, who cperates three radio stations: in Cleveland, Detroit, and Los Angeles. In February 1948, Mr. Richards, who makes things as hard for himself as possible by holding strong anti- Fair Deal opinions, was the subject of a complaint by three former employees of his Los Angeles station, who stated that he fre- quently ordered newscasts to be slanted in @ manner unfavorable to minority groups, the Truman administration, and the de- pressed and despised of the earth in general. On the basis of these statements, James Roosevelt wrote to the Commission suggest- ing an investigation of all three of Mr, Rich~ ards’ stations. Inasmuch as any attempt to control slanting runs into the touchy issue of censorship, the charges appear to rest mainly on the clause in the communications law which gives the Commission authority to pass on the character of proprietors of radio stations. Ordinary understanding of this require- ment is that by character is meant the degree of responsibility—moral, financial, or other—which might be expected of a man who enjoys the limited monopoly which operation of a radio station confers. The notion that failure to appreciate James Roosevelt imphes deficiency in character would probably not have occurred to the framers of the communications law; nor would it have occurred to them that dis- cussions or orders behind the scenes in a broadcasting studio or the proprietor’s pri- vate views about certain politicians would he serlously considered as grounds on which to challenge a man’s fitness to operate a radio station—particularly when there seems to have been no complaint of the fairness or impartiality of the actual programing. [If a Government commission is to inquire into the opinions, prejudices, or social connections of radio proprietors, we are nearing the point of no return, as far as arbitrary censorship is concerned. The Washington Post aptly challenges the FCC on its claim to deny radio licenses even on the ground that news was actually slanted. “We do not believe,” says the Post, “that the Commission has any standards that would be a safe guide in such a venture. Frery decision as to what shall go on the air and how it shall be ‘played’ is likely to be influenced by the broadcaster’s or the news~ caster’s prejudices. We doubt that the FCC can apply siricter policies in the regulation of broadcasting than the press generally apples without taking upon itself the un- manageable problem of censorship.” A Gov- ernment bureau, permitted to decide whether prejudice or news judgment or lack of time or mere whim accounted for this or that alleged distortion, would be an important instrument of tyranny. The argument has been that the natural limits imposed on the number of stations which can operate justified a stricter censor- ship than would be permissible over the press. New technological developmenis like FM, however, have greatly increased the op- portunities for competition in broadcasting. The Richards case sounds suspiciously hkKe one of those “alarms in the night” which free men fail to heed at their peril. Tribute to the Late Samuel Gompers EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. PHILIP J. PHILBIN OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, May 19, 1950 Mr. PHILBIN. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent to extend my re-~ marks in the Recorp, I include the en- closed tribute which I recently paid to the late and much lamented Mr. Samuel Gompers, former president of the Ameri- can Federation of Labor, on the occasion of a memorial ceremony honoring him held by the Massachusetts Federation of Labor at Boston: May 8, 1950. Mr. Francis E. LAVIGNE, Director, Massachusetts Federation of Labor, Boston, Mass. Drsar FRANCIS: I more than appreciated your kind invitation to be with you on May 13 at the Samuel Gompers centennial dinner. I fear that my official engagements here will not permit me to attend and I very reluctantly must send my regrets. However, please let me compliment you upon the honor and tribute you are paying to one of the truly great Americans of the century. Samuel Gompers stood out as a man, as a labor leader, and as a friend of the inarticu- late and the helpless, But, most of all, he stood out as a devoted patriot imbued with great courage, possessed of clear vision, gifted with inspiring zeal. In his time and genera~ tion, he made outstanding contributions to the preservation of our free American insti- tutions. The clarity of his opinions, the soundness of his judgment, the moderation of his approach, and the unyielding quality of his loyalty were exceeded only by his devotion to the toiling masses, who form the enduring fabric of the Nation. You have honored me greatly in so ger= erously inviting me to join you in honoring him and I am proud and privileged to pay my own humble tribute to the memory of this great man, who learned early in life that, in the words of William Osler, “‘We are here not to get all we can out of life for ourselves, but to try to make the lives of others happier.”* Wishing you a most successful occasion pa with greetings and best wishes to all, am . ‘ Sincerely yours, PHILP J, PHILBIN, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Free Labor Against Communism EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ABRAHAM J. MULTER OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 24, 1950 Mr. MULTER. Mr. Speaker, a most unusually informative article has just come to my attention. It is written by David Dubinsky, the well-known labor leader and president of the Interna- tional Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union, A. F. of L., and was published in the April 1950 issue of the quarterly maga- gine Foreign Affairs. Mr. Dubinsky’s article, World Labor’s New Weapon, deals with the new international labor alliance which was organized recently in London and with the role of free labor throughout the world as a dynamic force in the struggle against communism. I earnestly urge all my colleagues to read this very important article: . Worztp LasBor’s New WEAPON (By David Dubinsky) Students of international affairs were cuick to recognize the establishment of the Tr .oeract‘ii’ Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU), at London during the first week of December 1949, as “an event of his~ toric importance, in many respects the most significant development in the struggle for @ free world.” The ICFTU is not the first attempt at world labor organization. About 85 years, ago, the International Workingmen’s Assaci- ation was founded by Karl Marx; it suc- cumbed to the Bakunin-Marx feud and the differences caused by the Franco-Prussian War. The Second (Social Democratic) In- ternational was established in 1889, but could not weather the crisis of World War I. Its economie counterpart—the International Federation of Trade Unions (IFTU) —founded in 1901, managed to survive the war, but soon thereafter faced the ruthless assaults of the Third (Communist) International and its trade-union auxiliary, the Red International of Labor Unions (Profintern), which were set up by the Bolsheviks after they seized power in Russia. Not even the blows of the Nazis could entirely wipe out the IFTU, however, and it struggled on through World War II while Stalin was, for diplomatic rea- sons, Officially “liquidating” his Comintern. Despite determined opposition from the American Federation of Labor, the IFTU de- cided to merge with the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU), which had been es- tablished in January 1945 and included the Communist-controlled “trade-union” organ- ization of Russia as well as the Congress of Industrial Organization (CIO), which hither- to had had no international affiliation. This marriage turned out to be a quarrelsome and miserable affair, for the Kremlin persisted in exploiting the WFTU as an instrument of its imperialist foreign policy. After about 4 years, the British Trades Union Congress, the CIO, and other free trade-unions with- drew. Meanwhile, a realinement of profound im- portance was maturing in the ranks of world labor, and in June 1949 there was held at Geneva a preliminary conference of the free world labor organizations which set up the preparatory machinery for the recent London conference. It would be false, how- ever, ta conclude that the creation of the ICFTU was merely the results of the disin- tegration of the WFTU.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD bag First of all, the new international is a product of a marked growth of unionism. Since 1938, American trade-unionism has expanded enormously, so that there are now 16,000,000 Americans in its ranks, and the dynamic unity demonstrated by the A. F. of L. and the CIO at the London congress raised the prestige and strength of all Amer- ican labor. Across the Atlantic, the British trade-unions have not only survived a ter- rible total war but have risen to new heights of power. The free trade-unions of demo- cratic Europe have revived, despite the cruel havoc wrought ty the Nazis; in western Ger- many glone, the restored free-trade-union federation now has more than 5,000,000 mem- bers. In Latin America, labor has grown in numbers and maturity m the face of severe aifficulties. In Japan there are today about 6,0C0,C00 1n the trade-unions. And in India and in the underdeveloped colonial areas, unionization has also made notable headway. Secondly, the new international repre- sents a fundamental departure from the pat- tern of allits predecessors. European trade- union aims and actions, though very impor- tant, are not its main wellspring. The pres- ent and potential strength of the new organi- zation stem in large measure from the strength of labor in the Western Hemisphere and from the rising trade-union movements of Asia and Africa. At the London congress 4 @ tet ccoT tc 97 Of the young trade-union blu utnr. o . . and the colonial countries were vigorously independent. Here was no staging of a puppet show of colored folks, as is done—supposedly in the name of racial equality—at Communist-controlled confer- ences. That there was genuine cooperation on a basis of equality was demonstrated when 8 of the 19 members of the executive commit- tee were chosen from organizations outside Europe and North America, where the great bulk of the present membershiy is to be found—3 from Asia and che Middle Hast, 2 from Latin America, 1 each from Africa, Aus= tralia-New Zealand and the West Indies. One of the most encouraging features of the uondon congress was the absence of great power domination. The president, Paul Finet, of Belgium; and the general secretary, J. H, Oldenbroek, of Holland; are represent- atives of small countries; and in order to avoid even the appearance of control by any one big power in the trade-union world, Brussels was chosen as the headquarters. How profound a departure this is from the old game of power politics in world-labor affairs is strikingly confirmed by a compari- son with the attitude of the Russian unions in 1938. The British TUC, desperately seek- ing to bolster the forces that were supposed, to be in opposition to Nazi Germany, sought at that time to have the Soviet unions affili- ate with the IFTU. But the Russians agreed to consider affiliation only on the condition that the IFTU first amend its constitution so as to provide for two presidents and two general secretaries with separate but equal authority—one president and one secretary to be selected exclusively by the Russian trade unions and the other president and secretary to be elected by a general vote of the IFTU congress, with the Russian dele- gates participating. The Russian unions also stipulated that no dues paid by them were to be used in any way that might be construed as hostile to the Soviet labor or- ganization, the Communist Party of Russia, and the Soviet Government. At the same time, the Soviet trade-unions were to be as= sured the freedom to act as they pleased toward all other labor movements and gov- ernments. The democratic structure of the ICFTU is anchored in the complete equality of rights of all its affiliates, regardless of the size of the country in which they function. No affiliate, no matter how small its member- ship, is compelled to accept the viewpoint of any other national trade-union center and the constitution provides effective dem- ceratic machinery for ascertaining common aspirations and for meeving common needs. This principle of autonomy for national affiliates runs like a steel red through the constitution and structure of the new or- ganization. The prospects for full collabo~ ration by the imternational trade secretare iats—which are organizations for world=- wide cooperation of affiliated unions in spe- cific trades or industries—are much en- hanced by the cceven*airce of the principle of autoncmy. ‘ine IF'LU and especially the WFTU could never reconcile themselves to the insistence of the international trade sec- retariats that them autonomy be main-« tained. Prior to the First World War, Ger- man trade-unionism, with its high degree of centralism, was predominant in the IFTU, and this militated against a full understand- ing with the trade secretariats. After World War II, the supercentralized Russian trade-unions dominated the WFTU and sought to turn these trade secretariats into mere departments of the :nternational cen- ter. In its unrelenting counterofiensive, the A. F. of L. relied heavily on the trade secre- tariats and championed their autonomy. Experience has taught the free-trade un- jonists the dangers of overcentralization. Hence the constitution of the ICFTU provides that: “With a view to giving special atten- tion to problems affecting the workers in special arcas or regions, in order to seek to further the aims and objects of the confed- eration, regional machinery shall be estab- lished for such continents or areas as may be determined by the congress or general coun- cil.” The foundation for such regional ma- chinery 1s already at hand in the Western Hemisphere through the Inter-American Confederation of Labor, and steps have re- cently been taken to consolidate effective re- gional machinery in Asia. Ir A third factor that made possible the for- mation of the new international is that in recent years there has been much rethinking of fundamentals in the ranks of free labor. Even before the London congress got under way some people prophesied that its sessions would be torn by a conflict between the non- Socialist American trade-unionists and their Socialist-minded colleagues from other lands. These prophets were wrong. On more than one occasion, when there was a differ- ence of opinion, the delegates of the A. F. of L., CLO, and the United Mine Workers were actively supported by trade unions with a Socialist tradition and orientation. The congress steadfastly adhered to the policy of opposing communism by defending the dem- ocratic form of government. It consistently avoided becoming involved in disputes over the question of so-called free enterprise, which would divide its ranks unnecessarily. Neither British labor, the free labor organi- zations on the European Continent, nor some of the Asiatic unions, are advocates of free enterprise. Yet no one can question the vigor or reliability of their defense of de- mocracy in their respective countries. More and more American labor has come to realize that the vital line of demarcation dividing mankind today, within every nation as well as among the nations, is drawn not between those who would have the govern- ment own some industries and those who would have such industries remain under private enterprise, but between those who have contempt for the dignity of human life and those to whom human. values, rights, and liberties are paramount. Last year American labor rallied to the support of the British Labor Government while it was under heavy attack in the United States and in Britain as a welfare state. This new ap- proach represents the highest common de~ nominator of agreement ever attained among A4001 the trade-unionisis of Europe, Asia, Africa, and the Americas. Free labor everywhere recognizes the essential identity of nazism, fascism, falangism, and communism, and holds that free trade unions and govern- mentally controlled labor fronts are as in- compatible as are democracy and dictator- ship. Adhering to this principle, the Lon- don Congress rejected the Thailand and Do- minican delegations because they did not represent bona fide unions. The London declarations breathe a spirit of self-reliance, rather than a reliance on the state. The ICFTU declarations of policy have very litle Socialist phraseology in them and are refreshingly free from the clichés of the past. The word “‘sccialism” has lost much of its luster in the eyes of labor as a re- sult of national socialism in Germany and the “Socialist paradise” in the Soviet Empire. There is a widespread and growing feeling that though Marx is buried in London, Marx- ism is buried in Moscow. In its Manifesto and Declaration of Basic Social and Economic Demands, the ICFTU does not rule out com- petitive enterprise. Neither does it rule out public or government ownership; but in both public and private enterprise, the ICFTU insists that the workers shall enjoy certain basic rights and have an adequate voice in the economic life of their country. It is dedicated to the maintenance and expansion of democracy. In his significant address to the London Congress, President William Green of the A. F. of L., won hearty approval when he extended the concept of citizenship and democracy from the realm of political re- lations to the field of economy. The Mani« festo of the London congress reads: “We assert that economic and political de- mocracy are inseparable. We demand full participation by worker organizations in eco- nomic decisions affecting planning, produc- tion, and distribution. Where vested eco- nomic interests block the road to human progress, private planning for profit must yield to public planning for the people.” In the light of the triumphant counter- revolution in Russia and the emergence of communism’s offspring, Nazi-Fascist totali- tarianism, an increasing number of people in the European labor movement have begun to doubt that state control is the panacea for social ills. As this doubt grows, there is a growing confidence in the usefulness of in- dependent trade-unionism. In nearly every European country, the organization of labor into a political party preceded and, indeed, inspired the trade-union movement. The result was that political ideology greatly in- fluenced the policies of the trade-unions. But since the war, trade-unionism even in Germany, where this development had ap- peared in its classical form, has undergone a profound change. In western Germany the trade-unions are bona fide and free, and are now separate from the Social Democratic Party, which is still generally recognized as the political party of labor. The British Trades Union Congress, which has been the backbone of all British labor governments, is not immune to this process of change, and much hard thinking about basic principles is going on in its ranks. This has been especially stimulated by the fact that in Britain the trade-union move- ment is at one and the same time the back- bone of the Government and the guardian of the prerogatives of 1ts working-class mem-~- bership. Experience has taught British labor that it is much easier to embrace a general program than to execute a particular policy. In sum, all the free trade-unions of the Old World, while still largely continuing to advocate Socialist measures, have become aware of the dangers of bureaucratization of economic life and the growth of the octopus state. Even unions with the strongest So- cialist leanings now realize the necessity of safeguarding the independence of their or- ganizations in nationalized industries.
A4002 Vv The insistence that free labor and de- mocracy are inseparable is at the very heart of the unequivocal opposition of the new international to all types of totalitarianism, the autocracy of Franco Spain or of Latin American dictatorships no less than the to- talitarianism of Communist Russia and her satellites. With the defeat of Nazi Germany, Moscow-directed communism has, however, become the main danger to democracy and world peace. It is much more difficult to combat communism than it was to fight nazism and fascism, since communism pre- tends to be the champion of labor and poses as a bigher form of democracy, to which it tirelessly pays homage. This is calculated hypocrisy, yet it is because of this pretense that the Communist fifth columns, with their numerous fronts, have so much more influence than the Nazi-Fascist outfits. The defense of democracy against the Com= munist effort of.world domination must in- clude military measures. But military se- curity alone is not enough. The ICFTU in- sists that political liberty, social justice, and economic security together form the life stream of every free nation. Economic help for the underdeveloped countries, and full national freedorn for the dependent peoples at the earliest possible moment, are both es=- sential for the defeat of totalitarianism. The paramount prerequisite in the defense of world democracy against communism or any other species of totalitarianism is not piecemeal or temporary recovery, but the in- tegration of the economic life of the free countries into a balanced and sound world economy. The new international considers that the European recovery program and President ‘Truman’s point 4 are sound, effec~ tive policies leading to economic integration on a continental and world-wide scale. Plainly, American trade-unionism, occu-~ pying a major place in the strongest sector of world economy, has a major part to play in this world-wide campaign. Perhaps it has something to teach its friends abroad. The standing which American trade-union- ism enjoys today in the eyes of world labor is due above all to the benefits which labor organizations have won for the working people of the United States. Foreign trade- unionists are impressed by the high standard of living in the United States, and by the fact that organized labor in the United States enjoys greater recognition and more rights than in most other countries; and they have come to realize that, though Amer-= ican labor has a different and less radical- sounding philosophy than their own, the labor movement in the United States has in practice been very successful in defending and expanding the workers’ interests. Moreover, trade~unionists abroad have be~ gun to perceive that, contrary to the old assumption, American labor does not limit its activities to questions of hours, wages, and working conditions, but takes an in- creasingly effective part in community prob- lems and in international affairs. The tra- ditional independence of American labor from all political parties, its critical atti- tude toward the state, and its inveterate and unceasing hostility to all species of totali- tarianism have, nonetheless, been main- tained. The success of this policy has aroused new interest abroad. American labor has much more to offer the international free-trade-union movement than material aid. In its structure American trade-unionism provides the practical way of building a democratic labor movement free from denominational limitations. The American labor movement recognizes that the common struggle against the totalitarian menace demands that all democratic free trade-unions—Socialist, Catholic, Protes=- tant, and the so-called pure and simple type—must unite their ranks on an internae tional scale. The unity of American labor at London was the decisive factor in building the first international bridge between the Christian- and Socialist-minded trade-unionists. Amer-~ ican trade-unionism is, in principle, opposed to the organization of labor along denomi- national lines. In Germany, Austria, Swit- zerland, and Italy, American labor spokes- men, who are not Socialist-minded, minced no words in condemning ali attempts to organize trade-unions on denominational lines which would only divide the ranks of free trade-unionism. Because of its resolute opposition to the organization of Christian trade-unions, American labor has gained con- siderable confidence among the Socialist- minded trade-unionists in their relations with the Catholic labor organizations. At the same time it must be noted that American labor has within its leadership and membership a substantial number of adher- ents to the Catholic faith. Yet there are no separate Catholic trade-unions in the United States. There is not even any serious call for the creation of such labor unions. Amer~ ican trade-unionism has demonstrated in practice that there can be room aplenty for Catholic workers in the membership and leadership of a bona fide free trade-union movement organized on nondenominational lines. This obvious fact has convinced the overseas Catholic trade-unionists of the soundness of American labor practices. In Europe some of the Christian trade- union organizations have been in existence for decades. In some countries they fought side by side with trade-unions whose leader~ ship is largely Socialist-minded. The mere affiliation with the ICFIU by both of these types of unions in any one country should not be taken to mean their organic unifica- tion at an early date. Even in the United States, where no denominational differences enter into the picture, the A. F. of L. and CIO are both affiliated to the ICFTU as dis- tinct bodies; no immediate organic unifica- tion has followed from such international affiliation. But in other countries, as in the United States, the affiliation with a common international trade-union center makes for closer coordination and cooperation among the various labor bodies. Furthermore, the common affiliation of the Christian- and the Socialist-minded free trade-unions in the ICFTU will tend to reduce the old suspicions and prejudices which have developed over the years between the two types of bona fide labor unionism. As an active member of the ICFTU, the American trade-union movement, which is free from the antipathies and grudges rooted in the nineteenth century European con- flicts between lay and clerical forces, will certainly play a prominent role in helping to overcome such diverse influences among the democratic trade-union movements. In London American labor made its first sig- nificant contribution in this direction, when Socialist trade-unionists voted to enlarge the executive committee of the ICFTU by adding the Italian Catholic trade-union leader, Giulio Pastore. Mr. Pastore was nominated by an Italian Socialist trade-unionist as the unanimous choice of the Catholic and non- Catholic democratic labor organizations in ‘taly. At the same time American labor has been learning many things, and has been reorient- ing itself, quietly, steadily, and profoundly. After World War I foreign relations really seemed “foreign” to the American trade- union movement. Today the situation is completely reversed. American labor’s com- plete break with isolationism first revealed itself after the destruction of the free trade- union movement in Germany and Austria, and the common struggle against nazism and fascism ushered in a new era for American labor. The change of mood of course re- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD flected the changing attitude of the United States Government and of the American people as a whole. In 1934 the convention of the A. F. of L. considered the resolution of the International Ladies’ Garment Work- ers’ Union delegation “to instruct the execu- tive council to take steps for affiliation with the IFTU”’: and after some hesitation and negotiation, the A. F. of L. reaffiliated with the IFTU. It was actively associated with the International for only about 4 years; during the period 1919-39, however, for the A. F. of L. feared that the preoccupation of the IFTU with political problems would open the door tocommunism. United States labor did not yet realize how fundamentally antagonistic democratic socialism is to totali- tarian communism; the CIO and the British TUC believed until quite recently that they could cooperate with Communist-dominated unions. Today, the A. F. of L., the CIO, and Ameri- can labor organizations outside both na~ tional federations share with Socialist- minded European unions and all other free trade-unions a common hostility to Com- munist despotism, and to its tools and agen-~ cies. The A. F. of L., which foreign labor once considered a conservative organization, is firmest of all in its insistence that the international trade-union movement shall continuously and energetically concern itself with such general political issues as human -rights, political discrimination, genocide, the crisis in China, the national freedom and territorial integrity of weaker peoples, and the rising menace of forced labor. How far the wheel has turned is illustrated by the fact that today it is precisely the A. F. of L. which is most insistent that organized labor occupy itself with such problems. It does so because it has learned that only thus can the door be shut to communism. More and more the forces of free labor throughout the world are facing the complex problems of our difi- cult era in an undogmatic way; more and more they are freeing themselves from rub- ber-stamp phrases and absolutist phileso- phies, to seek practical, realistic solutions for present-day problems. v America was born in a revolutionary strug- gle for national independence, and the Amer- ican people and the organized labor move- ment have a time-honored tradition of op- position to all forms of colonialism. The rising trade-union movements of the un- derdeveloped countries count on American labor to bring them powerful support in their struggles for national independence. American labor can in turn immensely strengthen the world position of the United States if it assumes its full obligations in the ICFTU. Judging by the fantastic no- tions that some people abroad hold about our country, a darker and more forbidding Atlantic now hides America from the rest of the world than in the days of the first voyage of Columbus. By full participation in the international free trade-union movement, American unionism can make a major con- tribution toward the rediscovery of America— the real America—by the people of the Old World. The London Congress is thus a landmark in world labor history. The road before the ICFTU will not be smooth nor will the course be easy to steer, even though a map has been provided. A basic unity of purpose and plan was achieved at London, but there are obstacles ahead and inner strains and stresses among the affiliates. Years of an- tagonisms will not be dissipated overnight. Much will depend on the energy and extent of American labor participation in the work of the new international. Indeed, Ameri- can labor carries a doubled responsibility, for it must not only support the work of the ICFTU, but must be no less resolute in keeping the foreign policy of the United
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD States Government consistently and vigor- ously demccratic. Vacillating policies, such as the one recently proposed by our State Department toward Franco Spain, can create grave misunderstandings of the American purposes among the laboring forces of Europe and Asia. Moreover, the conflict between the ICFTU and the WFTU is bound to grew in intensity and bitterness. Both organizations are fighting for the biggest stakes in the worla— the hearts and souls and minds of many milhons cf working people in scores cf countries. Neither organization can side- track or soft pedal. Moscow could not pos- sicly impose totalitarian communism on the rest of the world without first getting a stranglehold on the remaining free-labor organizations. That would entail the de- struction of the ICFTU, now the head and heart of intcrmational democratic lahor. The new international fully realizes the ceriousness of the threat. The battle is all the more difficult because the WFTU is per- mitted full freedom to operate against free trade-unions in democratic lands, while the road is heavily barred to the ICFTU in ail iron-curtain countries. What is more, in France, Italy, and sec- tions of Africa and Asia the WFTU still holds formidable positions, which the Communists won by infiltration during the 4 years when their association with the free unions cov- ered them with a mantle of respectability. It will be a primary task for the ICFTU to unmask these organizations dominated hy the WFTU and to liberate the workers from their influence. The challenge and threat of totalitarian communism to labor is world~ wide. It can be met and defeated by free lakor only on a world-wide basis. No trade- union movement struggling against totali- tarianism in any country should he left to battle alone against an international menace promoted and supported by a gigantic totali- tarian world power. A democratic world labor international is now a vital necessity for the preservation and growth of human freedom and social progress. The reality of this new internationalism was demonstrated at the London Congress, where all were allies, welded in a common cause against the threat of totalitarianism and reaction. German and Japanese free trade-union rep- resentatives arc in the top leadership of the ICFTU on a kasis of equality. The new international is not based on al- liances among various powers, and unlike the WFTU will not be a political instrument for any nation or combination of powers. But though it will be entirely independent of the governments of the countries where its affiliates are located, it cannot and will not _ be neutral in the historic struggle now going on between the democratic and totalitarian countries. No organization dedicated to the struggle for human rights and social justice can be above the battle when freedom and peace are so gravely endangered. It is precisely because the role of free labor is so dynamic that the Communist attacks on the ICFTU are so full of fury. The estab- lishment of the ICFTU is a categorical re- pudiation of the myth that Soviet totali- tarianism is a progressive idea, or that the Communist system offers anything that will advance the interests of the international working class. Delegates representing 60,- 000,000 workers in more than 50 countries have now branded holshevism the arch- enemy of labor. This may well turn out to be the blow that destroys the pretense under which bolshevism has for several decades made most of its gains—the supposition that it is a friend of the workers of the world. The international free-trade-union move- ment is a powerful weapon in the struggle for a society in which all human beings and institutions can strive to fulfill their aspira- tions in a civilized manner and under the guaranties of freedom. Address of Louis Nizer, of the New York Bar EXTENSION OF REMARKS iF HON. LOUIS B. HELLER OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 11, 1950 Mr. HELLER. Mr. Speaker, Louis Nizer is a brilliant young man who prac- tices law in New York City. He also finds time to do a little writing, and has au- thored the following books: New Courts of Industry, 1935; Thinking on Your Feet, 1849; What To Do With Germany, 1944; Between You and Me, 1948. He is in great demand as an after- dinner speaker, and as a toastmaster he is without peer. At the fiftieth anniver- sary dinner of the Municipal Court of the city of New York, held at the Hotel Commodore, New York City, on Decem- ber 5, 1949, he delivered an address which I am pleased to commend to the reading of my colleagues: May it please Your Honors, may it please the distinguished guests on these daises, and may it please the highest court of all on this occasion—you ladies and gentlemen: Judge Lyman’s words were not merely an introduc- tion. They were a diploma—and I accept it even though I have never attended the school of virtues which it betokens. I am particu- larly grateful to him for presenting it with generosity cum laude. A lawyer is the eager youth of a judge, and a judge is the mellowed ascetic age of the lawyer. It is good on such an occasion as this, all too rare, to fuse the two into one unity of professional comradeship devoted to the noblest of all causes—the cause of doing justice. I am mindful of the distinc- tion which you have conferred upon me to represent the bar amongst such a galaxy of learned judges. But I am not unaware of the fact that this distinction is ringed with some hazards, and I intend to summon up all the resources of tact which every lawyer has a goodly supply of until he becomes a judge. A young British naval student was ex- amined by an admiral who had made a sur- prise visit to his academy. He was asked who the three greatest admirals in British history were. The young student replied, “Drake, Nelson, and I beg your pardon, sir, I didn’t catch your name.” If any lawyer in this gathering doesn’t know the name of every judge who bejewels this dais, I am authorized to say on his be- half that we still include those judges among the most distinguished of our day. Indeed, I am ready to make another concession to tact. We lawyers are ready this evening to obliterate from our minds those decisions which were rendered against us unjustly. I refer, of course, to all adverse decisions. We are ready to take the position which a lawyer took when he told the appellate court: “Your honors decided a case identical to this a year ago for the plaintiff. Six months ago, Your Honors reversed yourselves and in an identi- cal case decided for the defendant. And, may I say, Your Honors, in both cases most admirably.” For we lawyers are like Shake- speare’s character—we take our pleasures with sadness and our troubles with a smile. If you look upon these tiers of judicial weight (and if there are any amongst you who are not lawyers, I hope you don’t mis- understand the upper tier to represent the highest court) you will see that there is room for one more dais. I should like to A4003 imagine that there is such an additional dais, peopled with the great law givers of the past. Perhaps Socrates sits on that imaginary dais, with his long white beard, his rude nose, thick lips, and his bald pate—not a very appealing man, until ke speaks. If he were called upon, I think he would say to you: “The law is not always wise, but it 1s wiser than those who administer it. It ex- presses the will and the reason of the body politic and claims by that title to overrule the will and reason of the judge and these of private men. To seek to be wiser than the laws is the very thing which is by good laws forbidden.” I should like to imagine that next to him sits rotund Lord Braugham. He says to you in a deep basso voice: “A judge can boast of his achievements only when he can say that ” he found the law dear and left it cheap; that he found it a sealed book and left it a living letter; that he found it the patrimony of the rich and left it the inheritance of the poor; that he found it a two-edged sword of craft and opposition, and left it the staff of honesty and the shield of innocence.” I imagine that next to him sits our own great John Marshall. If you had met John Marshall in the anteroom of this ballroom where all the judges were having cocktails before this event, you would probably have seen a man of tousled hair, unkempt suit, and mud still on his shoes from the unpaved sidewalks of Washington. He would have been convivial and informal. He might have said to you what he once did say: “The acme of judicial distinction is the ability to look a lawyer straight in the eyes for 2 hours and not hear a damned word he says.” And if you were encouraged by the in- formality of the occasion and the fact that at least your cocktail glass was on a plane with his, you might recall to him what Lord Hewitt once said about the failure of judges to listen: “The only impartiality possible to the human mind is that which arises from an understanding of neither side of the case.” If Judge Marshall had been inspired by the light mood, he might have told you his favorite ancedote about the time he told his brethren on the United States Supreme Court that they must no longer sip wine during the discussions of cases, except on rainy days. On one occasion he asked his Associate Jus- tice, brother Justice Storey—to whom, in- cidentally, he usually turned and said, “This is the law. Now go out and find me a precedent’’—he asked Judge Storey to go to the window to see whether it was raining. Judge Storey reported lugubriously that the sun was dazzlingly bright. Judge Marshall, with the resourcefulness which was later to be reflected in his constitutional opinions, said: “Well, our jurisdiction extends over so wide a territory, that under the doctrine of chance, it is very likely that it is raining some place, so we shall have Madeira.” But if Judge Marshall had ascended this imaginary dais, then you would have seen six feet two of majesty and authority, and if he would have spoken to you he might well have said: “A constitutional government is as good as its courts, no better and no worse. Its laws are only its promises. It keeps its promises or it breaks its promises in its courts.” Next to him, I should like to imagine sits William Murray, better known to you as Lord Mansfield. It was he who was responsible for the maxim of the great seal of the United States, which reads “Fiat justitia ruat coelum”—‘“Let justice be done though the leavens fall.” He had a sensitive eye and heart. He once said: “Law and equity are two things which God hath joined together but which man has put asunder. It is the weak and the poor who need most the safe- guard of a strong and independent judi- ciary. One cannot be sure always of running
A4004 with the pack. He may find himself the pur- sued rabbit.” On Lord Mansfield’s left, I should like to imagine sits Judge Cardozo. Some of us feel we have been touched with greatness by knowing him. Here was a man who com- pined genius with saintliness. Are there any lesser words to do him justice? Ata gather- ing such as this of lawyers and judges, in which he delighted, he would combine his wit with his judgment, like brushwood with tim- ber, to make a bright fire. I remember his description of that rarity, an arrogant judge, whom he described with his customary felicity, as “a judge who had a suspicious familiarity with those sections of the Civil Practice Act under the title ‘contempt.’ ” Te delighted in telling the story of the fledgling lawyer who appeared before the highest court and proceeded with great elab- oration to expatiate on very elementary principles of law. The chief judge leaned down very benignly, and in a friendly man- ner apologized for his interruption and said, “I trust that counsel will give this court credit for knowing the fundamentals of the common law.” The young lawyer replied, “Oh, no, sir; that is the mistake I made in the lower court.” Finally, Judge Cardozo might well have drawn upon his great fund of aphorisms to tell you that in a London gallery there is a famous painting by Champaigne showing Cardinal Richelieu in three poses—~—one of the front of his face and two profiles facing the center. He would have told you that that is the way justice looks—both lawyers present the profiles, and only the judge in the center looks the truth directly and fully in the face. At the end of this imaginary dais sits Judge Roger Taney. He had deep, sunken eyes and a high forehead which accentu- ated his ill health. He was a man of ardent temperament and iron will, and when he reviewed the changes in jurisprudence he used to tell of the old English judge who exulted in giving harsh judgments. “When- ever the facts were nicely balanced, he seemed to be friendly to injustice. The kind of judge,” he would say, “who would indict you for blowing your nose and then quash the indictment because it didn’t describe which hand blew it.” He demonstrated the high mission of the judge who affects all eternity because he can never tell where his influence stops. From this imaginary dais, ladies and gen- tlemen, and from the live dais beneath of distinguished judges, we learn, I think, the great service of our judiciary. In the Netherlands, there are stonecutters who live in obscure little huts and each day they weigh on their scales jewels so precious, that any one of them would suffice to take them out of their poverty forever. But at the end of the day, when they have returned the jewels to their anxious owners, they sit down serenely to dinner. On the same table where they weighed another’s treasure with- out envy, they spread their frugal meal. So lives the Judge. He decides enormous issues involving other men’s treasures, and even their lives, but after he has polished his opinions so that they will reflect the bril- liance of his wisdom, he retires to a simple life of learning and serenity. Tonight, we celebrate the fiftieth anni- versary of the municipal court, the court of the poor who are most in need of justice; the poor who understand that justice should be the highest expediency; that justice is the bread of the nation and that the nation hungers for it. If there were 50 candles here tonight on a birthday cake, they would throw a symbolic light across the Nation. For those who govern lead the blind, but those who administer justice give light to their eyes, And now I have finished, and I know from experience as a lawyer that there is one moment in every trial when, no matter how much the lawyer has taxed the court’s pa- tience, he is forgiven. Love flows down from the bench to him. A smile embraces him and, for a moment, the lawyer feels that he is the most popular man in the courtroom. All this is occasioned by a few words which the lawyer utters. It always happens when he says, “Your Honor, we rest.” Ladies and gentlemen, I rest. Transportation of the Mails EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. JOHN R. WALSH OF INDIANA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 25, 1950 Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, there has been a great deal of discussion in the House of Representatives pertaining to the recent order of the Postmaster Gen- eral curtailing mail service. I recently addressed the House re- garding the serious situation existing in the postal service, as it pertains to the transportation of the mail by the rail- roads of this country, and I pointed out at that time that the Post Office Depart- ment takes nearly 50 percent of what we are paying for in the transportation of the mail for empty railroad cars. Ever since the Railway Mail Pay Act of 1916 the railroads of this Nation have collected millions and millions of dollars from the Post Office Department for the carrying of these empty mail cars, and I recently introduced House Resolution 547 calling for a complete investigation of the situation, and I wish to call to the attention of the House of Representa- tives, an editorial that appears in the Aviation Week, the leading aviation magazine in the United States. The edi- torial is as follows: Tre GreaT TRAIN ROBBERY OR OvuR SELF- SuPrortiIne RAILROADS We have before us the Southern Railway’s System’s new advertisement in Business Week for May 6. The rails have been pretty noisy for a long time about subsidies and how they don’t have any. This ad is typical. It says that of all the forms of intercity commercial transportation, only the railroads are self-supporting. “They don’t leave it to George,” says the Southern. George is you, Mr. Taxpayer. “The railroads pay their own way. * * * It isn’t easy, especially when we have to compete for business with subsidized carriers, But it’s easier on you and your pocketbook, George.” Frankly, to the contrary, it does look pretty easy to us, but if what we read in the stuffy ConcGrressionsn Recorp is true, it definitely isn’t easy on us tax-paying “Georges.” For we started reading the fine print in the Appendix of the Rzcorp and after we got through some of the complaints of a certain Indiana Congressman we could practically feel you railroads snitching our wallets. Tt certainly smashed a lot of illusions we Georges had built up in our minds from reading all those ads and press releases about how only you in the transportation world got none of those juicy subsidies. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Because Representative Joun R. WaLsH contends that ever since the Railway Mail Pay Act of 1916 was passed your railroads have pocketed millions and millions of our dollars which the Post Office Department al- lows you for carrying empty mail cars all over the biggest railway system in the world. One big reason, it seems, that you rail- roads can be so self-supporting is that we Georges paid you in 1946, for example, for carrying 580,462,152,219 cubic-foot-miles on nonlocal surface mails, and yet you really carried only 328,677,844,195 cubic-foot-miles. That means that in 1946, 44.24 percent of the space we tax-paying Georges paid for was not used. Even now, Mr. WatsH says, the Government—meaning us Georges—pays about $250,000,000 annually to you railroads for transporting mail, but we receive only half this service we pay for. This is be- cause—as you fellows knew all along, you jokesters—the 1916 act requires the same rate for the return of a mail-storage car as was paid for its full outbound movement, pro- vided the car is not used by the railroad for other traffic on the return run. In dramatic fashion, Mr. WautsH intro- duces testimony in Postmaster General Bonaldson’s own words before the House Committee on Post Office and Civil Service: “Yes * * ™ there is a difference in pay to railroads. * * * I think what you are talking about is space purchased by full cars or storage cars or what-not. That is differ- ent from the regular RPO lines, the lines in which railway postal clerks operate. Now with reference to the space for transporting mails by full carlots or by 15 feet or 30 feet or 45 feet or what-not, I think that our in- vestigation indicated that we used about half of the space that we paid for. Under the law, if we transport a carload of mail from New York City to San Francisco we pay for that so much per foot per mile, so to speak, and then we pay for the return move- ment of the car, whether we use it or not, There is far more mail moving west than there is mail moving back.” After reading this, the rest of you Georges may like to know what the General Account- ing Office told the Senate Post Office Com-~ mittee about this particular manner in which the railroads self-support themselves out of our pockets. After its own study of the so-called round-trip provision of the act, it told the Senators: “The study has indicated that cars carry- ing full pay loads out do not return prompt- ly, but are often directed to other use for the carrier’s convenience and substitute cars are returned, making it possible for the rail- roads to realize a greater income. The pro- priety of this practice is a possible question since the act’ does not appear to anticipate such substitution. * * * Many substitute cars are returned in freight trains and the trip is paid for at passenger rates. “The operation of the round-trip provi- sions has resulted in numerous complex agreements, which assure the railroads full payment for all returned deadhead cars and empty space. In some instances the return movement is in advance of the out-bound loaded movement.” This last idea is ingenious. This wrinkle extracts our money to buy empty space on the return portion of a round trip that hasn’t started yet. How self-supporting can you he? And C. B. Allen, a very capable news hawk, finds interest in the GAO’s comment: “In practically all instances, the carrier is paid more by the Post Office for the return of a car empty than if the car was carrying a payload of a private shipper. Returning a car empty is to the railroad’s advantage.” (Especially if it can get paid for the return trip before it starts out.) Two years ago, Mr. Allen reported in the New York Herald Tribune, the railroad post
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD office practice reached the proportions of a minor wartime scandal when it was charged in Government circles that the railroads had been operating empty cars back and forth across the country, despite an acute shortage of shipping space, to collect the higher mail pay rate. Mr. Walsh, in a final word, says “The Post Office Department has permitted the rail- roads to abuse this provision of law in such a way as to increase greatly the amount of empty space paid for. While some empty returns must, under the law, be paid for, this has been turned into a racket by the railroads with Post Office Department ap- proval.” So ends today’s lesson on how America’s self-supporting railroads are the only form of intercity commercial transportation who don’t still rely on help from the people’s tax dollars. That’s how the railroads are easier on you and your pocketbook. Civil Government for Guam EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JAY LeFEVRE OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, May 23, 1950 Mr. LEFEVRE. Mr. Speaker, as a Member of the House Committee on Public Lands, I am very happy that today the House acted favorably on H. R. 7273, a bill to provide civil govern- ment for Guam, and for other purposes. The people of Guam have been Ameri- cans for over 50 years. They are na- tionals of the United States. Some have gained citizenship, but citizenship has been only open to the few. None are aliens. Politically, economically, social- ly, linguistically these people are Ameri- cans. Let us look at these people on whom we are considering bestowing the great- est privilege in this world today. The original Guamanians are known as Chamorros, who inhabited all the Mariana Islands in which Guam lies, They were large handsome people, per- haps kin to the native Polynesians of Hawaii. But no full-blood Chamorro now survives. Chamorro is the basic stock with which Spanish, Filipino, Mex- ican, Chinese, Japanese, and American have mixed to form the present Guama- nian people. This intermixture began over 250 years ago. The Filipino and Spanish blood have been the strongest. During the years of Spanish rule the esti- mated population living in 1521, the year of Magellan’s discovery of Guam, was 35,000. When officers of the United States Navy took the first census, the population had been reduced to 9,676. The Chamorro were almost reduced to extinction. The surviving Guamanians had long since been Christianized, thor- oughly imbued with the influences of western civilization and citizens of Spain. Since the American regime be- gan following the Treaty of Paris in 1898, American influences have been strongest and further racial intermixture has been slight. Only 15 Japanese were found on the island in 1901 and only 39 lived there in 1840. The number of Filipinos residing among the Guamanians have decreased, until only 32 remained in 1940. The American period has been one of racial consolidation and increase. The once mixed population has merged into a Guamanian people. By 1940 they had increased to 23,067 in number. The Guamanians have continued to increase in spite of the deaths and priva- tions suffered at the hands of the Japa- nese for 2% years during World War II. They number over 26,700 and half this population is under 16 years of age. All indications point to a future population of 50,000. These people have not only merged and increased during 50 years of Ameri- can rule, but, what is more important, they have also become Americans in habit, thinking, and language. English is spoken everywhere except by the very old, although the Chamorro tongue is still the language of the homes. Eighty- five percent of the people over 10 years of age are literate. Today almost the entire school-age population of 8,460 students are enrolled in schools. The village schools and high school run on two shifts to take care of all the pupils. Education is demanded as strongly in Guam as it is here in the United States. Guamanians have come to the United States to college and _ professional schools. They are coming now in greater numbers to train for the work of doctors, lawyers, engineers, businessmen, and Government administrators that are needed on their island. One cannot be among the Guamanians put a short while before being forcibly struck with their American ways. The men and women who appeared before the hearings of the House Committee on Public Lands in November 1949, revealed a thorough grasp of the meaning of citizenship and of an organic act, and understood and presented their prob- lems in a way that would do credit to any American community. No interpre- tations were needed there. They were articulate in their English presentations, clear and precise in their thinking. A trip down the business district of the capital and adjoining villages, re- built since the war, show Guamanians in the business of any small American city. Two young members of the Guam Congress have a construction company and import prefabricated houses. An- other is building a large modern laundry. Department stores carry well-known brands of American clothing, shoes, and dry goods. Guamanians are the owners, the bookkeepers and- the clerks. The familiar sign of American famous brands, insurance agencies, shipping lines, sporting’ goods stores, lawyers’ shingles, restaurants, hamburger stands, pool halls, and’ taxi companies give an index of how American the Guamanians have become. A walk through the administration building shows all offices staffed with Guamanian clerks. In a visit to the houses of the Guam government meet- ing in their beautiful, mahogany-paneled. A4005 modern building, one hears earnest men and women discussing intelligently and with great dignity the problems and needs of their people in a tynically Amer- ican manner. Across the street is a modern police station, with latest radio equipment, record systems, investigation devices, and mobile crime laboratory. A staff of 275 alert Guamanians man the force that polices the entire island, out- side the military reservations. They have the responsibility of law and order for a population of 75,000 now residing in Guam. Guamanians preside over the Guam courts except for the court han- dling Federal business and the court of appeals. One meets Guamanians as priests of the church, the superintendent and teachers of the schools, the island post- master, and staff of the agriculture de- partment. The people for whom this legislation is proposed have been long in contact with the Western World and the American way of life. These are an educated and so- phisticated people in search of local self- government and a permanent govern- ment by law. I was struck during my recent visit in Guam by the completely American character of these people. These Guamanians are no South Sea na- tives dressed in cotton wrap-arounds and living leisurely from the fruit of their island. Nothing could be further from pictures drawn by fiction of the South Sea people than the Guamanians. They are called Guamanians, but they are truly Americans. Ifound farmers tilling the soil and raising cattle, businessmen importing American manufactures and retailing goods in impressively sized de- partment stores, young men teaching in the schools, trained lawyers sitting in the legislature and the bench of the island courts, young men and women dressed as young men and women are dressed in the offices of Washington, performing the duties of clerks and minor administra- tors. Cars, radios, juke boxes, soft-drink dispensers, attractive frame cottages, athletic teams, and church socials are as characteristic of their lives as any Amer-~ ican small town. In the past 50 years the Guamanians have become Americans. In the postwar years the influence of up to 60,000 -Amer- icans in their island has intensified the Americanism of the Guamanians. Many of them have become American citizens under the laws existing in the 1920's, when a Guamanian child could inherit citizenship if either parent were an American citizen. Hundreds of veterans who served in our armed forces became citizens in 1946 under the authority of the Naturalization Act of 1940. Many more would follow suit if there were available courts or if the naturalization law had been extended beyond 1946. The Guamanians now live as proven Americans in custom and in loyalty, part citizens and part noncitizens. They live with American citizens all about them. Their every wish is to become citizens and gain the .recognition which they highly deserve.
‘A4006 American Taxpayers Have Sent Nearly $100,600,000,000 to Foreign Coun- tries EXTENSION CF REMARES HON. JAMES E. VAN ZANDT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 24, 1950 Mr. VAN ZANDT. Mr. Speaker, with Congress giving final approval to Mar- snall plan funds for the fiscal year 1951 of more than $3,000,000,000, our foreign- aid program, including $15,000,000,000 of World War I debts, is rapidly nearing $100,000,000,000. This huge sum of money represents the aftermath of both World Wars to which has been added a part of the stupendous cost of the present cold war, My purpose in calling attention to our foreign expenditures is to emphasize the part American taxpayers are playing in an effort to promote a permanent world peace by aiding friendly nations. The $100,000,000,000 of foreign aid does not include the vast sums of money spent on our own national defense and which are also a part of the over-all cost of the cold war. The following tables compiled at my request by the Clearing Office for For~ eign Transactions, Office of Business Economics, Department of Commerce, summarize the foreign transactions of the United States Government and re- veal the huge cost of our foreign-aid programs through December 31, 1949: TaBLe 1.—Summary of foreign grants and credits utilized and capital investment in the International Bank and Monetary Fund—By program: World War II and postwar periods, through Dee. 31, 1949 [In dollars, rounded to nearest million] Total_...----------- 78, 048, 000, 000 International Monetary Fund-_-----.-------.---. 2, '750, 000, 000 International Bank for Re- construction and Devel- 47, 286, 000, 000 4, 983, 000, 000 5, 182, 000, 000 Lend-lease.__..-.-.... Civilian supplies..-... European recovery._.__ UNRRA.-.---.--..---- 2, 660, 000, 000 Post-UNRRA__.....-~= 800, 000, 000 Interim aid. - 55'7, 000, 000 Chinese stabilization... 500, 000, 000 Chinese military aid. 116, 000, 000 Chinese aid... 160, 000, 000 Greek-Turkish aid... Philippine rehabilita- 594, 000, 000 tion._---.---...---- 452, 000, 000 Korean aid_....-..-. 29, 000, 000 Refugee assistance... 214, 000, 000 International Chil= dren’s Emergency Fund__..-----~-..- - 45, 000, 000 Inter-American aid__.. 84, 000, 000 American Red Cross... 78, 000, 000 Taste 1—Summary of foreign grants and credits utilized and capital investment in the International Bank and Monetary Fund—By program: World War II and postwar periods, through Dec. 31, 1949— Continued Credits........---.-------= 11, 477, 000, 000 Special British loan... 3, 750, 00C, 000 Export-Import Bank loans_.----.-------. 8, 022, 000, 000 902, 000, 000 1, 363, 000, 000 1, 672, 000, 000 768, 000, 000 Source: Foreign Transactions of the U.S. Government (basic data through Dec. 31, 1949), Clearing Office for Foreign Transac- tions, Office of Business Economics, Depart- ment of Commerce. Taste 2.—Summary of foreign grants and credits ulilized—By major country: World War II and postwar periods, through Dec. 31, 1949 [In dollars, rounded to nearest million] European recovery---.. Surplus property...-.. Lend-lease__._.------- Total_.....---.- w--. 74, 663, 000, 000 Grants._....-.-~------+--.~ 63, 186, 000, 000 Credits... -------------—- 11, 477, 000, 000 EEO ERP countries and partici- pating dependent areas. 52, 721, 000, 000 Austria_.....--------~... 650, 000, 000 Belgium-Luxemburg..___. 610, 000, 000 eee eee ee ee 164, 000, 000 ew ee eee eee 6, 221, 000, 000 Germany._..--.----~---- 2, 624, 000, 000 eee eee ene 1, 165, 000, 000 weno eee eee 8, 000, 000 meena anne nee ee 67, 000, 000 women none ee eee 2, 169, 000, 000 Netherlands-Indonesia.._. 1,015, 000, 000 pete ween eee enn 208, 000, 000 peewee eee nee 1, 000, 0cO ween new nnn eee 49, 000, 000 een een eee 2, 000, 000 eee ee ewe nee 81, 000, 000 -- 228, 000, 000 United Kingdom.....__-- 86, 872, 000, 000 Unallocated ERP countries 635, 000, 000 Other Europe_._.-.-.....--- 12, 474, 000, 000 Be Albania__-.---- +e 20, 000, 000 Czechoslovakia.._..-._---. 220, 000, 000 Finland..-.-.-.---------. 151, 000, 000 Hungary—.w------.~-—--~ 18, 000, 000 Poland._..----:-.-~----~ 469, 000, 000 Spain -.-.-..-----.-.--. 15, 000, 000 U.S. S. Rou -..------- 11, 249, 000, 000 Yugoslavia.__._-.-__.--.- ~ 832, 000, 000 American Republics.__t_tt... 1, 196, 000, 000 Australia.....-- eee 17, 000, 000 Bahrein__.....----~~ anna 17, 000, 000 Canada....-----~---------~ 173, 000, 000 China_.----..--.----.-—-.. 8, 106, 000, 000 Egypt—------.--~-.-....--- ~ 20, 000, 000 India. ee ~ 176, 000, 000 Tran_....-..---..----~-+.---. 38, 000, 000 Japan... ae ee 1, 716, 000, 000 Korea_...---~--.-~-.--.---- 800, 000, 000 Liberia.....----.---..-----. 17, 000, 000 Philippines._--....-_.-----~ 620, 000, 000 Ryukyu Islands....-..---- ~ 53, 000, 000 Saudi Arabia___--.-.-..--- - 84, 000, 000 All other countries._._-._. - 41, 000, 000 International organization... 610, 000, 000 Unallocated....----.--..-- - 1,335, 000, 000 Source: Foreign Transactions of the U. 8S. Government (basic data through Dec. 81, 1949), Clearing Office for Foreign Transac- tions, Office of Business Economics, Depart« ment of Commerce. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Taste 3.—Indebtedness of foreign govern=- ments to U. S. Government arising from World War I as of Jan, 1, 1950 Total... enenasce $15, 995, 659, 288 Armenia__.--------------. 29, 881, 350 Austria_...-.-.-.---------. 26, 024, 540 Belgium._._~------------~ 541, 001, 078 Czechoslovakia_.._--.-~--.~ 195, 716, 022 Estonia_..-.--- -~ 27, 068, 086 Finland... -- 7, 791, 558 France___.-------~----..-~ 4,958, 341, 449 Great Britain.--....--.--. 7, 099, 209, 302 Greece.._..-------.-------- 38, 834, 815 Hungary--.----~---------- 8, 039, 604 Italy......---.------------ 2, 074, 631, 284 Latvia...-...---------.---~ 11, 191, 461 Lithuania..__.-----.------- 10, 034, 194 Poland.._.-~--.~---------- 838, 743, 114 Rumania_._..--.-...------- 83, 065, 257 Russia.._....~---.---------- 491, 302, 893 Yugoslavia...--------~---~- 64, '783, 281 Source: Foreign Transactions of the U. S. Government (basic data through Dec. 31, 1949), Clearing Office for Foreign Transac- tions, Office of Business Economics, Depart- ment of Commerce (Bureau of Accounts, Treasury Department). President Truman’s Speeches at Various Points in the West EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WARREN G. MAGNUSON OF WASHINGTON IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, May 25 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. President, the President of the United States recently took a trip to the west coast. On that trip he made several stops throughout the country, at which he made several statements and speeches. There has been some controversy because of re- ports of those speeches and answers to the speeches, made by our Republican friends. In order that the Rrecorp may be clear, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there be printed in the Appendix of the Rrcorp, separately, each speech made by the President, at Grand Coulee Dam, at Wallula, Oreg.; at Pendleton, Oreg.; Umatilla, Oreg.;: La Grande, Oreg.; Baker, Oreg.; Ontario, Oreg.; Huntington, Oreg.; Pasco, Wash.; Wilbur, Wash.; and at Gonzaga Uni- versity, Spokane, Wash. I commend these speeches which were made at so-called whistle stops as being good reading not only for all Americans, but particularly for Republican critics of the President of the United States. There being no objection, the speeches were ordered to be printed in the Recorn, as follows: ADDRESS OF THE PRESIDENT DELIVERED AT THE DEDICATION CEREMONIES OF GRAND COULEE Dam, THURSDAY, May 11, 1950 This is an inspiring occasion. We have come here to dedicate Grand Coulee Dam— one of the mightiest structures man has ever built. With this dam, man’s ingenuity and per- severance haye dramatically transformed the
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD energy of a mighty river into a great new source of national strength. At the foot of this dam is the world’s larg- est power plant. It is already generating more low-cost electric energy than any other plant in the world. Behind this dam is a reservoir which ex- tends 151 miles to the Canadian border. The water in that reservoir not only gen- erates electricity, it helps prevent floods. And soon, it will pour forth to irrigate thou- sands of acres of land which are now desert. Grand Coulee Dam—with its tremendous power and irrigation benefits—is an instru- ment cf our democracy, forged to contribute to a better life for ourselves and our children, This dam was not built by accident. It is here because men with vision and deter- mination fought for its construction. Men in the State of Washirngton—many of whom are here today—saw what this dam could mean to the Northwest and to the Nation, President Franklin Roosevelt, whose name honors the reservoir behind the dam, trans- formed their vision into reality. This dam had to be fought for. It had to be built over furious opposition. You re- member what its opponents said. One Con< gressman said: “Up in the Grand Coulee country there is no one to sell power to except the coyotes and jack rabbits, and there never will be.” Other opponents of Grand Coulee said it would be a “white elephant.” They said it would be of no more value than the Pyramids. We can laugh today at such foolishness. Right now, the generators at this dam are being run at overcapacity, straining to meet the soaring demands for power. All about us in the Pacific Northwest—in this land that was called the land of “coyotes and jack rabbits’—new jobs, new industries, new opportunities have been created. Today those who opposed Grand Coulee are trying to cover their tracks. They are trying to jump on the band wagon. But they can’t erase the record. They did not understand then, and they do not under- stand now, the progressive steps that are necessary to keep our democracy strong, and confident, and moving forward. The fundamental error of those who op-~ posed Grand Coulee was their failure to understand that the United States is a growing, dynamic country. They saw no need to plan and work for a greater future. The way things were, was good enough for them. But the American people have never been satisfied with the way things have been in the past. Our whole history is a record of eager striving to make things better. One hundred years ago, out here in the Northwest, men and women were opening up new frontiers along the Oregon Trail. They struggled and fought to create farms and ciuies out of the wilderness. The opponents of progress would have you believe that the frontiers are closed. They think we should now relax and struggle no more. Those are the men of little faith. I say to you that the American spirit which blazed the Oregon Trail is not dead. Here in the Northwest you are still pushing pack frontiers. There is no better example of that than this great dam. Less than 15 years ago, the energy of the Columbia River poured unused into the Pacific Ocean. It flowed past cities which were hampered by lack of power, and past farm lands which had been abandoned for lack of water. In those days, the people of the Northwest made their living primarily from timber and farming. They exported raw materials and imported finished goods. They lacked the power needed to process and manufacture their own raw materials, Yet, through the heart of their rich coun« try flowed the greatest potential source of hydroelectric power in the Nation—the Co- lumbia River system. This area, tremen« dously rich in natural resources, was stifled, its future was limited, because 1t was uns able to tap its own native source of power, Today, we are well on the way to harness- ing that power. The imagination and vigor of freemen have put the Columbia to work. The results are clear. The Northwest is no longer a backward colony. It is now one of the fastest-growing parts of the country. In the past 10 years, the -cswintic of Wash- ington and Oregon has .'..1¢...:. nore than 30 percent. Jobs—permanent, productive jobs—have been available in new industries that have been established to use the Columbia’s low~ cost power. In the past 12 years, 11 new plants alone have paid more than $135,000,~ 000 in wages and nearly $50,000,000 in taxes. Power from the Columbia has not only served industry. It has made life easier in homes and on farms. The use of electricity on homes and farms in the State of Wash= ington is more than twice the national average, When Grand Coulee was being built, some thought it would hurt other parts of the country by drawing plants and industries from them, Of course, that has not hap- pened. The plants that have sprung up here were not moved from other States. They are new enterprises, adding to the productive capac- ity of the whole country. The growing payrolls of the Northwest have made bigger markets for producers in every State. The products turned out here are needed elsewhere. Nearly half the alu- minum of the United States is produced along the banks of the Columbia. This alu- minum is used everywhere in the country. A single rolling mill 90 miles from here— at Spokane—is providing basic materials for 600 factories, from Boston to San Diego, What has happened here is what happens in the case of underdeveloped areas every- where—in our country and the world. Sound, productive investment always makes bigger markets and more jobs. Not only is Grand Coulee contributing to the growth and strength of the Nation. It is also a paying proposition from the stand- point of the taxpayers. When the dam was being built it was at- tacked as a colossal waste of public funds. ‘Well, that was a colossal misstatement. The investment in the power facilities of Grand Coulee is being repaid right now, and with interest. And in a broader sense, the entire investment has already been repaid several times over in the increased national wealth it has brought. We are not stopping our work at this point. The Grand Coulee project itself is not fin- ished. More power generators are being added. And over the next several years we shall begin to put water on the land below here. Thousands of family-size farms will replace the present sagebrush, Elsewhere in the Northwest work on other dams is proceeding. Hungry Horse Dam in Montana, Chief Joseph Dam just down the Columbia from here, and McNary Dam on the Oregon-Washington border, are all under construction. These and other dams are part of the great work that must be done to produce power, promote inland navigation, reclaim land for cultivation, and prevent destructive floods. But even more than this is involved in the development of the resources of this area for solid growth. Forests and grasslands should be placed on a permanent, sustained-yield basis, Soil should be conserved and im- proved. Fisheries should be protected and enhanced. Mineral resources should be opened up and developed. A4007 All this work can and should go forward together. Resources that occur together in nature must be developed and improved together, This is the goal we are working toward here in the Northwest. It is the same goal for which we are working in other parts of the country. In the Central Valley of California we are developing great power resources. With the help of that power we are redirecting the available water of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers to bring about the most pro- ductive agricultural use. In the Colorado River Basin we are work-< ing to achieve the most sensible uses of the very limited water supply, and to expand the power supply threnvho tee basin, Down in the Texas Oasys a and Arkan- sas area a number of dams are producing power, and others are being built. In that area, also, as in the lower Mississippi Valley, soil conservation, flood control, drainage, and navigation work is going forward. In the Southeastern States we are moving ahead with the construction of flood-control and power dams on the Savannah River, the Roanoke, and other streams. In that area, also, it is necessary to shift land uses to con- servation farming and to restore the pine forests. . The northeastern part of the country has great possibilities for the development of additional hydroelectric power resources. Power from the redevelopment of Niagara Falls and from the St. Lawrence project will be nearly as cheap as the power out here in the Northwest. It is badly needed. We should construct these projects as soon as possible. And there are also power sites on the rivers of New England which should be developed soon. In the Ohio Valley, and around the Great Lakes, the principal work that is being done is on flood control, navigation, and soil con- servation. There is also much need for re- forestation. The Missouri River Basin is so large that it requires consideration of all aspects of resource development. From the high plains in the West to the humid areas of the lower Missouri, this basin presents perhaps the most complex problem of all. The work that is necessary includes extensive devel- opment of flood control, irrigation, and power works, as well as increased conserva- tion efforts on crop and range land. T have left till last mention of the Ten- nessee Valley. In that valley we have made more progress than in any other. There the idea of coordinated planning for all re- sources was first worked out and most com- pletely applied. The Tennessee Valley Au- thority has bsen outstandingly successful in its area. We have worked out a set of recommenda- tions for a Columbia Valley Administration which builds on that successful experience but recognizes the different circumstances out here. Take one simple example. In this area, a farmer’s right to the use of water is vital to his livelihood, and is protected by State laws. That is the way it should be, and the Columbia Valley Administration I have recommended would have no power to tamper with anyone’s water rights, The private power lobby, and other people who have selfish interests to maintain, say the Columbia Valley Administration would be a superstate. Of course, that is not true. Ask the people in the Tennessee Val- ley. Ask the mayors of the cities and the governors of the States in that valley wheth- er State and local governments are stronger or weaker as a result of the progress the TVA has brought. Ask them whether they have more or less influence on what hap- pens in their valley with an agency that has its headquarters right there where they deal with it at first hand.