APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD pay for themselves. That is true as far as it goes. But it is not the whole truth. It is also true that private investments in human resources pay for themselves—a fact to which every field of private business will testify. For myself, I would prefer to put it this way: Wisely planned investments in human resources, both private and public, not only lift the quality of life by salvaging and pre- serving the dignity of man in the face of an impersonal society; these private and public investments pay off, too, through the strength and happiness and leisure and en- joyment of the people, and through the un- dergirding of our American way of life. And rightly planned, these investments in human resources also pay a rich dividend in dollar values— both through increased pro- ductivity and through saving great money losses which would have to be borne by the general public if these investments were not made. a It is one thing to say that investments in human resources pay for themselves. It is another thing to inquire as to the source of the funds for this investment. In reality, the total amount invested in human welfare comes from one ultimate source, and only one: It comes out of what is produced. The funds invested in human resources are a charge on the gross national product. This is as it should be, because the return on these investments show up in exactly the same place—as increases in the gross national product. Investments in hu- man resources are paid out of the national product, just as they, in turn, pay off with an increase in that product. The flow of these funds for investment re- sources is principally through three chan~- nels: (a) Individual rpending and donations are out of personal income; (b) corporate spending and donations out of corporate in- come; and (c) public spending out of tax revenues. Sometimes the investment is a personal one, as when a man sees his den-~ tist regularly at his own cost, or when he gives to the community chest out of his per- sonal income. Sometimes the investment is corporate, as when a company introduces measures of industrial health and safety or adds a pension plan or community recrea- tion facilities to its operating budget. Both individuals and corporations contribute to the support of the voluntary and private philanthropic agencies and _ institutions which have played an important part in bringing this Nation to its present high level of well-being. . And I wish to leave no doubt in anyone’s mind as to my attitude toward private phi- lanthropy in its investments in human re- sources. The remarkable story of philan- thropic effort in this Nation is one of the finest chapters in American history. It is the story of wise and expanding investments in human welfare, and its pay-off is undeni- able. Every investment through private philanthropy, to the extent that it is a wise investment, means not merely the sal- vaging of the individuals benefiting from the philanthropy but also the enlargement and enrichment of the whole economy of the people. But the total capital investment in human welfare cannot come exclusively through private and corporate donors—and even if it could, there are sound reasons why they should not be expected to carry the whole load. What private enterprises or philan- thropies should or could undertake to rid the Nation of malaria? Many important invest- ments in human resources and human wel- fare call for concerted action throughout a whole community, a whole State, the entire Nation. Sometimes these activities involve the use of the police power of the Govern- ment (as in controlling the pollution of ‘water and air). ™n most cases they call for the kind of combined operations which can only be achieved through the full coopera- tion of all private and public agencies con- cerned. Consider, for example, how far along we would be in education in this country if uni- versal free compulsory schooling had not been adopted. We would still be in the days of the private tutor and the private academy for the children of the few, while the chil- dren of the many continued in illiteracy and ignorance. At the same time, our great pri- vate schools and universities are invaluable to sound education; thus public and private together further our national welfare. Where would transportation be today if local, State, and Federal Governments had not in- vested huge sums in free public highways? Motorists would be stopped at every cross- roads to pay another toll, and our roads would be today where canals were a hundred years ago. It is not enough that a man patches the roof over his own particular bed, if he permits it to rain on the pantry and the parlor which others use as well as he, yet, since all will benefit from having a dry roof over the entire house, ought not all to share in putting on a good roof? This, then, is the justification or public in- vestment in addition to private investment in human resources: (1) sometimes the job is too big for private endeavor to do without public aid; (2) sometimes the job calls for the doing of things which only Government can do; and (8) since everybody benefits, it is only fair for everybody to share in the support. There is a good deal of interest these days in the notion of a capital budget as it inter- prets the meaning of public expenditures for enduring purposes. It is argued with some cogency that the only fair way to interpret the total expenditure of Government is to divide that expenditure between the items which represent current operations and those which represent long-term invest- ments. It is silly, for example, to put the entire costs of the Grand Coulee Dam into the budget for the years bracketed by its period of construction. Any wise industry takes its capital investments and sets up ac- counts which amortize the value of that in- vestment over the life span of the capital goods purchased. Should not wise Govern- ment policy also begin to speak of tae en- during investments which are annually paid for out of each budget, and let the invest- ment itself be charged over against the life span of the capital goods which are pur- chased? And if there be any merit in that suggestion, then I am ready to urge a corol- lary which is at least as important. The same principle applies to investments in human resources. Funds invested in human welfare can properly be thought of as in- yestments which pay back their returns over the life span of the people who benefit. Just as surely as a farmer’s tractor which costs him $800 and lasts 8 years actually costs him only $100 a year for capital invest- ment, so also $445 invested in the rehabilita- tion of a disabled worker who thereby he- comes a productive worker for 30 years costs less than $15 a year over the life span of the man in whom that capital is invested. : Take education. Would anyone question ‘that the money invested in a child’s school- ing pays dividends? And should the total cost of education be charged against the 12 to 16 years of school attendance—or against the whole lifetime during which the individual—and society—reap its benefits? Our investments in future scientists and skilled workers—and alert citizens—are as truly fundamental investments as our in- vestments in highways and hydroelectric power. My argument can now be summarized in a single sentence: Investments in human resources come out of the total national product, flow through both private and pub- lic channels as they are invested in human A3153 beings, and in turn pay off in an increased national product as well as in human hap- piness and effectiveness. These are what I term basic investments in human resources. I am quite ready to leave entirely to the area of what is debatable any questions hav- ing to do with how much should be invested at what time in which human welfare en- terprise. The free play of debate and dis- cussion in the light of what research and experience uncover is the only means which a democratic people should employ in plan- ning and making their investments in human resources or natural resources. But what I am unwilling to leave in the doubt- ful limbo of the undiscussed is the matter on which we have been speaking tonight. Investments in human resources are invest- ments which (a) come out of the total na- tional product and (b) feed back into the total national product at least as much as they cost—and usually much more than they cost—and can properly be considered as hard-headed, long-term investments. mr I do not cohtend that the full justification of this investment can be measured in dollars and cents. On the contrary, at every step of my argument I have insisted that there are other dimensions which are primary and basic, and that the money return is simply an added dividend. I am one of those—and there are many of us, both in and out of Government—who believe deeply in the practice of self~help and mutual aid, as these have come down ta us through the Judeo-Christian tradition. I would be prepared to defend investments in human resources even if they did not pay off financially. It would be a strange kind of concern for one’s fellows which would check each generous impulse with a prudential caution—just as it would be a futile con- cern which would debase each generous im- pulse into an empty day dream. The practical argument in behalf of these investments comes. actually to this: bread cast upon the waters returns after many days—an ancient truth which we have on the best authority. Deep in the wellsprings of humanity is a noble impulse of human worth and human dignity on which we must and can rely, if our children are to realize the full stature of their heritage. Address of Rev. George S. L. Connor EXTENSION OF REMARKS ° HON. FOSTER FURCOLO OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, May 1, 1950 Mr. FURCOLO. Mr. Speaker, I thought the Members might be inter- ested ia the following address of welcome to Most Reverend Christopher Joseph Weldon, delivered by Rev. George S. L. Connor, on hehalf of clergy, in Hotel Waldorf-Astoria, New York City, on March 24, 1950: It is indeed a privilege to be permitted to say a brief word on this happy occasion for the priests and people of the diocese of Springfield. If a man would travel from New York City east and north through Con-~ necticut he would come to the historic State of Massachusetts. If he entered that sec- tion nearest to New York he would find him- self in a Jovely country known as western Massachusetts, ‘This is a land of thriving cities, historic towns, green meadows, roll- ing hills, winding rivers and purple-tinted mountains. There is in it a quiet beauty
A3ib4 and a refined magnificence that only the hand of God could bestow. In the north where the Green Mountains of Vermont cast their shadow over the verdant fields of Massachusetts, the majestic Connecticut flows gently on her course. A traveler fol- lowing that river south, could see some of the strength and beauty of the diocese of Springfield. Greenfield, the gateway to the Mohawk Trail would be his first stop. He would find there broad streets and spread- ing elms, green fields and colonial homes, but he would find there too a vigorous church, with magnificent school, and a Catholic hospital caring for the sick of this lovely section. Below Greenfield the river feeds a farm land second to none in the East. Great fields of tokacco and onions line her banks and stretch off to the roll- ing hills in the distance. A sturdy Polish people with the background of their Chris~- tian faith has gradually taken over these farms from their Yankee neighbors, and the historic towns of Deerfield and Hatfield and Hadley know now the sound of marching feet on the way to Catholic worship. Still following the river our traveler would come to the beautiful city of Northampton. This is the center of a section, where education is a business, and where the renowned col- leges of Smith, Mount Holyoke, Amherst, and University of Massachusetts cater to the youth of this land. The church is standing guard there, striving earnestly to protect the sound principles of Christianity in a youth that needs this protection. She stands there not in the spirit of apology or defense but with an aggressiveness that makes even the scoffer stop and investigate. And because the truth is in her she is win- ning converts from a group that ridiculed her claims because, though scholars, they never knew the beauty of her doctrine. Still the river rolls on toward the sea. Her banks grow farther apart, her descent becomes more rapid, she develops more power as she rushes into Holyoke to turn the wheels of industry in a city that will make our new bishop proud and happy. Nestling along the banks of the majestic Connecticut she has imbibed into her spirit some of the grandeur and grace of the river that en- folds her. She has a heart to love and a will to do, and these she has used most ef- fectively in producing a way of life that marks her distinctly as a genuine Catholic city. She has magnificent churches, many of them; a Catholic school population larger than the public-school enrollment, hospitals, day nursery, two old people’s homes, two orphanages, a mother house of the Sisters of Providence, and many other evidences of a faith that is deep and productive. The faith has been well planted in Holyoke. Just below on the other side of the river lies the city of Chicopee, the home of the first Catholic school in our diocese, and the site of our Diocesan College of Our Lady of the Elms. Chicopee is a city composed of Poles, French, and Irish, with a few Yankees thrown in to keep the peace. The churches there are numerous, the schools strong, the faith deep, and the Catholic way of life the accepted rule in a city where three-fourths of the population claim allegiance to our church. As you stand in Chicopee on the banks of the Connecticut you look across to the thriving town of West Springfield. It is a lovely rambling town clinging for miles to the river’s bank and quietly surveying the activities of her busier neighbors on the other shore. West Springfield is served by four progressive parishes, but West Spring- field serves the whole diocese by the prayers of her cloistered Dominican Nuns and by the incomparable work of the Bishop O’Leary retreat house conducted by tye zealous Passionist Fathers. Two bridges lead from west Springfield to the heart of the Episcopal See. Springfield is known as the city of homes. It is a good name, and we trust always she may live up to it. Springfield is a good place in which to live, and we know that Bishop Weldon will find there a home in the truest sense of that word with all the joy and comfort that only a real home may bring. Spring- field is a center of indusiry and commerce put with a background of culture and re- finement that makes living there a delight- ful experience for one who seeks the good things in life. No more about Springfield for a new bishop soon finds out all there is to know about his Episcopal city. But is there no more to the diocese of Springfield? Oh, yes. If you journey di- rectly westward from the Episcopal city you will enjoy an experience that has thrilled many who have traveled broadly in this glorious land of ours. Hight miles from Springfield you will find yourself in the hus- tling city of Westfield. It is not big in pop- ulation, but it is big in spirit, where people of many nations have joined forces to make @ community where living is good. The church is there, too, speaking many lan- guages, but teaching one doctrine, the sav- ing doctrine of Christ’s divine revelation. Still traveling westward you come to the foothills of the Berkshires, and soon begin the climb up Jacob’s ladder. And as you climb you readily see a striking resemblance to the ladder of Jacob’s dream. For the rugged beauty of the mountains, the tum- pling waters of the onrushing streams, the myriads of majestic trees piercing the heav- ens, the whole scene flooded with a green- ness greener than anything this side of Ire- land, gives one a foretaste of the heaven, where the scriptural ladder terminated. . From the summit, 2,300 feet above sea level, you may feast your eyes on the beauty of the Berkshires unfolding befo:e you. Down in the valley how eagerly you seek out the secluded grandeur of Lenox, the soft beauty of Stockbridge, the entrancing loveliness of Great Barrington, and the arresting peace of all the towns nestling so gently at the foot of the Berkshires. In all these towns churches as beautiful as the hills that enfold them minister to the needs of a devout Cath- olic people, while the great religious orders taking over the elaborate estates of the rich have skillfully turned them to the works of religion. Turning north at Lenox this road takes you through a vista of enchanting scenery until suddenly it bends and there below you is the city of Pittsfield, *he heart of the Berk- shire hills. Pittsfield is an unusual city. Today she is highly industrialized, her marts of commerce are busy, and yet she retains some of the quiet e’2gance, the rustic charm, the inviting friendliness of the days when the horse and carriage with pomp paraded down her aristocratic, elm-shaded South Street. The catholicity of Pittsfield, like the city, is unusual. The people are friendly, cooperative, and highly progressive. Par- ishes there have multiplied very rapidly, schools have been built, a magnificent Cen- tral High School crowning them all, a mod- ern, perfectly equipped St. Luke’s Hospital -cares for the sick and infirm, and a Catholic Community Conter caters to the recreational and social needs of the people. Pittsfield is a progressive city. ‘The last leg of the journey takes you northward. Skirting the mighty Greylock Mountain you pass through the Catholic town of Adams with her three splendid parishes, and come to the city in the moun- tains, North Adams. This is a rugged city for the mountains dip down almost to the main street, and the people in it are rug- ged. They have four excellent parishes with three schools and a central high school where the Sisters of St. Joseph have been training the youth of several generations. A step out of North Adams and you are in Vermont. A step on the other side and you are hack APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD in New York. This is the end of your jour- ney. This, Bishop Weldon, is your diocese. It is a good diocese with a fine historical background, and many of us love it sin- cerely. Because we love it we are happy today to welcome as our new bishop the ex- cellent choice of our holy father, Most Rev- erend Christopher Joseph Weldon. We can’t do much for you today except to proffer our obedience and our love. These we give you gladly with the assurance that you will have a long life as bishop of Springfield. We have an unique pattern for our bishops there. We treat them so kindly; we make their liy- ing so pleasant; we remove so many diffi- culties from their path that they live many, many years to preside over the destinies of our diocese. In our 78 years as a diocese only three bishops have occupied the episco- pal throne. Patrick Thomas O’Reilly served 22 years. Thomas Daniel Beaven directed us for 28 years, and our late beloved Bishop, Thomas Mary O’Leary was with us for 28 years. This further fact is worthy of com- ment, we kept all of them so well so long that an auxiliary bishop never lived in the confines of our diocese. Be of good heart, then, Bishop Weldon. Your stay with us should be long and happy. We are receiy- ing you in the full flower of your young, vig- orous, manhood. Your every movement gives indication of a healthy body and a con- tented mind. We like you that way, and a loyal clergy, a zealous sisterhood, and a devoted laity will do everything to keep you as you are, a noble successor of the 12 apostles of Christ. . Your record is known to us. We have been thrilled by your achievements in the priest- hood. Your service in the Navy of our coun- try has won the admiration of all. By the favor of His Eminence, Cardinal Spellman, I was charged as vicar delegate in the Military Ordinariate to visit at their posts all the chaplains of New England. On one occasion I called at the naval air station at Quonset Point, R.I. Did you ever visit Quonset Point? It is the station de luxe of the Navy. It is the aristocrat of the air force. It has an Officers’ club that would do justice to any institution in the land. We met there the chaplain in charge. He was an upstand- ing, intelligent, vigorous young priest, who organized skillfully the spiritual activities under his control. He understood perfectly why he was in the Navy and he permitted nothing to interfere with his work as a priest. The type of priest in the service was uni- versally good, but in my memory two stood out above the others, and one of them was Christopher J. Weldon. This estimate of his worth was later confirmed by the command- ing officer of his ship, who termed him “the ideal chaplain of a fighting ship,” and the Secretary of the Navy, who stated that “his outstanding record in the Navy as a war- time chaplain was a noteworthy one.” The thought of service seems to have per- meated his whole life. Everything he has turned his hand to he has done well, and his hand and his heart have been turned to many things. His priesthood is the dominat- ing factor of his life. It so consumes his being that the days scem too short to carry out its divine mission. A bishop is the ser- vant of servants, and what an ideal bishop this man will be, who has made service the driving force of his life. His best friend communicating with me has said, “wherever he might serve that area will profit by his service, and come to glory in his complete dedication to the cause. Iam glad and proud that this will be in Springfield.” Thus spoke his best friend, and thus we speak. We are glad and proud that Springfield will be the object of his loving care, and that ours shall be the joy to glory in his complete dedication to our cause. In return we promise him the undivided support of priestly men, and the prayerful service of man'y priesls. Our bishop—ad multos annos,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The Late Generoso Pope, Sr. EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ANTHONY F. TAURIELLO OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, May 1, 1950 Mr, TAURIELLO. Mr. Speaker, it was with great sorrow that I learned of the death last Friday of Generoso Pope, Sr., and 1 want to join with many of my col- leagues in paying tribute to a truly great man. Gene Pope’s passing brings to an end a colorful, dynamic, and distinguished ca- reer. He came to America from Italy a penniless young immigrant and secured a job as water boy with one of the con- struction companies in New York. Through diligence and hard work he rose to the top through the ranks, became a construction superintendent, and later established his own construction com- pany. In the 1920’s he purchased the Ii Pro- gresso italo-Americano, which, through his guidance, became the largest Italian- American daily newspaper in the country. As a publisher and editor, with clarity and forcefulness he made known to the people of America his thoughts upon social, economic, and political problems. His was never a doubting voice. He was a positive character, sure of the right- ness of his convictions, and loyal always to them. Throughout his lifetime countless in- dividuals were the beneficiaries of his works and America is likewise the real beneficiary of his good deeds. Progress is not automatic. The world grows better because people wish that it should and because they take the right steps to make it better. Gene Pope played his full part in the destiny of America. He was known for his out- standing citizenship and his many phi- lanthropic works. He was the masterful advocate of many humanitarian, educational, polit- ical, and r-ligious causes and exerted wide influence. We respect him for his undaunted courage and the energy and devotion with which he championed all just causes. He was loyal to the very core of his being, loyal to his friends and family, loyal to the country which gave him birth, and loyal to his adopted country which gave him opportunity. He recognized the fact that he owed much to America and made a magnifi- cent individual contribution to the in- spiration, the courage, and the strength of his adopted land. In turn, America owes much to men like him who, by giv- ing of their best energies and talents, have done much to guarantee its future existence not only as a free country for Americans but the hope of the freedom- loving people of the entire world. Not only will the Italian-American people miss him—all America will mourn him. It was my privilege to know him personally, and to know him was to loye him. His death is a personal blow to me. To his widow and his family, I extend my sincere and heartfelt sympathy in their great sorrow. The World’s Monetary Problems EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. COMPTON I. WHITE OF IDAHO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, April 26, 1950 Mr. WHITE of Idaho. Mr. Speaker, there is inserted herewith an interesting and illuminating article on the problems confronting our country and I may say the other nations of the world by Mr. Frank Lilly, prominent mining statis- tician of Spokane, Wash. Mr. Lilly’s article follows: THe Worip’s MoNETARY PROBLEMS Problems! Problems! Problems !—they abound throughout the world. There are problems of war, problems of peace. There are problems of overproduction and sur- pluses. There are problems of shortages and starvation. There are Communist problems, Socialist problems, health problems, and dis- ease problems. There are social problems, racial problems, and political problems. There are labor problems, industrial prob- lems, and housing problems. There are de- fense problems, offense problems, tax prob- lems, debt problems, economic problems, etc., and almost ad infinitum. When thoroughly analyzed, all of the major problems largely resolve themselves into monetary problems. Wars cannot be waged without money. Peace cannot be at- tained or maintained without money. In fact, one may say without fear of successful contradiction that monetary p.oblems are at the root of wars, and a corollary of this fact is that peace can be established and main- tained only by an honest monetary system. No one can deny that most of the health problems of the world could be solved, or at least ameliorated, with money. Money would solve most of our social problems and even some of our political problems. In fact, money is in itself a good and positive force; it is only the greed for money (“love of money”) and the greed for the power that money gives that is evil. The essayist Swift said that “Money should be in the heads of men and not in their hearts.” I interpret this statement to mean that money is a proper subject for thinking and not for feeling. Unfortunately, most of the things that people believe they know about money are really what they feel about it. A little boy from the city slums was spend- ing a few weeks at a summer camp under the direction of a social worker who, one day when some baby chicks were hatching, pointed out how wonderful it was that the little chicks had been given an instinct with which to solve the problem of getting out of their shells. The little boy’s comment was: “Yeah, but the big problem is how in hell did the chicks get into the shells,” Therefore, before discussing the way out of the world’s monetary problems, I propose that we first consider how we got into the shell, ° LOOKING BACKWARD Briefly reviewing world history, you will recall that, beginning with Greece, or, fur- A3155 ther back with Assyria and Babylonia, and coming on down to the present, the great nations have thrived up to the point where they became greedy and sought by war to grab the wealth of their neighbors. All of them succeeded to an extent, but, in the end, the wars they waged finally plunged them into the debts that destroyed them. Debts and the Devil are the two greatest negative forces in the world. Debt, because it is negative, enslaves men and brings de- cay to civilizations and death to nations. A man who is in debt 1s, in effect, a slave to his creditors and slavery fosters injustice. Debt is, substantially, synonymous with dan~ ger, disaster, dishonesty, disease, decline, dis- sipation, and death. The D-bomb of debt is a far greater dan~ ger to the world than the A-bomb or the H-bomb. The A-bomb can, of course, kill in units of thousands and possibly the H- bomb could kill in units of tens of thousands. The D-bomb can kill the souls and destroy, through the slow death of its moral fiber, the millions of the greatest of nations. This bomb destroyed Greece, and when Rome plunged. intc debt, it, too, was doomed. The Roman Government, by the way, resorted to every monetary device known to the mod- ern banking system, including the fixing of Prices, wages, etc. and resorted to every finan- cial trick that in recent years has been used throughout the world in an effort to manage its monetary system, but to no avail. Thinking men of that day saw the dangers of inflation, deflation, and managed currency, but the demagogues and do-gooders pre- vailed, and finally, when people would no longer accept the dishonest money which had been created out of and on its debt. Rome fell and plunged the world into 600 years of darkness because there was no hon- est money with which to maintain the in- dustrial and cultural elements essential to civilization. Until the time of Nero, Roman money was honest, hard money, principally in the form of the 99-percent pure silver denarius, but there was not enough silver denarii and gold to provide the honest money that the Ro- man Empire, which was being expanded by wars, needed to meet the mounting debt. Therefore, as in our day, currencies in the form of credits issued in exchange for a debt, were utilized. The time came, during the reign of Dio- cletian, when it took 1,440 of these promis- sory denarii, or the equivalent of $216, to buy a pound of steak. The hoarding of gold and silver had started in the meantime and metal money all but disappeared. Finally, after the more prudent Romans had con- verted their currency into bullion, real es- tate, jewelry, and anything else that had concrete value, the debt-based Roman cur- rency went the way that was subsequently followed by the paper currency of Kubla Khan in China, the continental currency in tre United States, the assignats in France, the mark in Germany, and so forth. TODAY’S WORLD DEBTS What is the debt situation as it exists in the world today? Almost unk>lievably, most of the nations of the world are in debt, the United States most of all. In 1914, be- fore the first World War, the public debt of the United States was only a little over a billion dollars. Today it is over $255,000,- 000,000. In other words, our debt is now ov.r 250 times as much as in 1914. The debt of France is 56 times what it was in 1914. Canada’s debt is 32 times; Great Britain’s debt, 35 times; Australia’s, 8 times; India’s, 4 times; and Mexico's, 8 times. In comparison with 1938, the United States debt has increased six and one-half times; France’s, five times; Canada’s, five times; Great Britain’s, three times; Australia’s, two times; and India’s, two times; Mexico and
A3156 Venezuela, on the other hand, have reduced their debts. There is a fallacy in the widespread as- sumption that because the debt of the United States is largely owed to its own people, it is not really an important matter. This fallacy can best be appreciated when we re- duce the situation to a family basis. One or more memkers of a family may borrow from other members of the family, including cousins and other relatives but if, for any reason, these debts are not paid, someone loses. We all know how often this happens in the best of families and with the best of intentions on the part of the debtor. There is a great deal of fuzzy thinking about debts because too often both the creditor and the debtor tend to think of the debt as an asset. Sam had loaned Rastus $20, for which he received a note, Time passed, as 1t will, and Rastus had made no payment. Finally Sam collared him and said, ‘Now Rastus, if you don’t pay this note, I’se gwine tear it up.” To this threat, Ras~ tus indignantly replied, “You all tears up my note and I’se gwine to have the law on ou.” * Our national debt far exceeds the total assessed value of all the taxable property in this country. The per capita debt is ap- proximately $1,700. Note in this connection that if you now own $1,500 worth of Gov~ ernment bonds, you are, nevertheless, ap-~ proximately $200 in debt. It 1s beside the point that the first World War and the Second were inevitable and that the greater part of the debt was justified by the circumstances. The important point is that the debt must, in the end, be paid or repudiated. Incidentally, it cannot be paid in a currency created by debt because that would amount to piling Ossa upon Pelion, compounding the debt. It is elementary that the value of a note or a bill is not in the debt involved, but lies in the ability of the debtor to fulfill the promise to pay. And this is true not only for individuals but also for nations. Without the shadow of a doubt, the Amer- ican Colonies intended to pay the currency they authorized and obligated themselves to pay, but they could not do so and the con~ tinentals became worthless in spite of the fact that by law they were legal tender. In the autumn of 1779, Congress spurned the idea of repudiation as ridiculous but less than five months later it undertook to re- deem the continentals on the basis of 40 paper dollars for one silver dollar—and failed, The founding fathers, aware of the dan- gers inherent in paper promise-to-pay cur- rency, expressly stipulated that United States money should be gold and silver coins, and delegated to Congress the power to regu- late the value thereof. Thus, only gold and silver colns comply with the monetary pro- visions of the United States Constitution, THE WAY IN How did it happen that we got our present “shell” of debt-based currency notes and bills system in which it is illegal for a citizen to possess either gold coin or bullion, and in which silver is given minor role to paper cur- rency? The answer is, debt, primarily cre- ated by war and, incidentally, by political expediency. Actually, the monetary situation in the United States today is strikingly similar to what it was in Rome when Rome was lured away from honest hard money into the man~ aged soft currencies that resulted in infla- tion, deflation, debt moratoriums, interest cancellations, bank holidays, land banks es- tablished to help the farmers—and finally disaster. War-debt currency is tainted with blood and tears because it is the ill-begotten child of Mars. Such currency is dishonest in that it exacts an indirect and hidden tax by rea- son of the fact that it is based upon an inter- est-bearing debt. In connection with our Federal Reserve notes, Congressman CompTon I. WHITE points out that the way in which this currency 1s created is “fine except for the taxpayer. * * * The Government puts up its bonds that bear interest in exchange for Federal Reserve notes that do not bear interest.” Incidentally, it is not generally recognized that the Federal Reserve banks are not Gov- ernment agencies. Debt-based currency is good only for spending and for loans upon which to col- lect interest; it is not sound saving money because it has no intrinsic value. Such cur- rency is only a medium of exchange and a measure of price; 1t 1s not real money be- cause it lacks storage of value, which gold and silver money provide. Gold and silver are fundamental and uni- versal forms of wealth. They were created and stored in the bosom of the earth by the Almighty and can be obtained only by the sweat of man’s brow. Either in the form of coin or bullion, they are forms of wealth whose value cannot be wholly destroyed, even by fire. Gold and silver money is honest money because it provides a permanent stor- age of value in addition to serving as a medium of exchange and a measure of price. In this connection, one should bear in mind that no business, no form of insurance, no social security can be considered safe unless money is sound. No substitute can be as good as the thing for which it is substi- tuted. The fact that debt-based paper cur- rencies are being widely used as a substitute for hard money does not make them money. A wooden leg is not the same thing as a blood, bone, and muscle leg. You can walk with a wooden leg, but you can’t run very fast nor jump very far if, in a pinch, you need to do so in order to protect yourself against an accident. Debt-based currency 1s a wooden leg. The contention that confidence makes paper debt-based currency the equal of hard money is at best a half-truth for, in any event, 1t applies only as long as confidence is maintained. Confidence is a mental atti- tude and may or may not be justified by subsequent events. The Germans were, up to a certain point, confident that they would win the recent war, but— DEBT-BOMB EXPLOSIONS The Roman Empire’s D-vomb finally ex- ploded in a chain reaction of inflation-defla- tion-repudiation that plunged the civiliza- tion of Europe and Asia Minor into almost total darkness. No nation can long endure when there is no inducement for it to labor and produce and store away in honest money the fruit of its efforts. Kublai Khan and his Mongol army came close to conquering all of Europe, but his debt problem, which he attempted to solve with paper notes, conquered both him and the huge Chinese Empire that had, during the thirteenth century, grown into the world’s major power. Debt-based currency brought inflation, which, in turn, was fol- lowed by deflation and repudiation. During a period of 200 years, up to 1780, France defaulted 56 times. Complete repu- diation came in 1796. By frequent recourse to devaluation of its present currency, finally down to a mere fraction of what it was at the beginning of the First World War, an- other repudiation has been avoided. Ger- many’s repudiation was, of course, complete; its paper currency finally becoming worth less than the paper on which it was printed. Czarist Russia’s paper currency obligations were also completely repudiated. Note, how- ever, that the value of German, French, and Russian gold coins have, in the meantime, more than doubled, even in terms of United States currency. GOLD VALUE INCREASES England has met its major debt crises by increases in the measuring value of gold in APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD its monetary system and/or devaluations which, in effect, have given gold a higher working value in the country’s economy. In England, gold was priced at the equiva- lent of $4.05 an ounce around the middle of the fourteenth century. Approximately a century later, the price was more than doubled to approximately $10 an ounce to offset the debt incurred during the War of the Roses, By the time of Henry VIII, debts had again increased and the price of gold was raised to nearly $15 an ounce. The debt of the Marlborough wars brought on an in- crease to $24 33 an ounce. This figure proved to be a little higher than necessary and the price reacted to around $21. Following the Napoleonic Wars, the price advanced to above $24 and was finally pegged at $20 67 an ounce on a 16-to-1 basis with silver, which was ample <t the time because silver was also an integral part of the monetary system with a fixed price of $1.25 an ounce. The chain reaction of the D-bomb is illustrated by the events that followed the First World War. Great Britain was forced off the gold standard in 1918 and by 1920 the price of gold reached $27.49 an ounce in the free market which was then permitted in London. In 1925 the gold standard was re- stored on the basis of the old $20.67 an ounce, but, as this figure was not realistic in rela- tion to the debt, Great Britain was again forced, in September 1931, to abandon the gold standard and by 1933 the gold price was higher than ever, at $30.38 an ounce. In the meantime, Germany had liquidated its debt by repudiation, and France had de- valued the franc both in terms of sterling and the dollar. Then, inasmuch as gold had a higher purchasing value in terms of for- eign currencies than the United States price of $20.67, gold began to flow out of the United States. The final result was depres- sion and the so-called bank holiday, which forced the United States off the gold stand- ard despite the fact that the price of gold was increased in 1934—at least 2 years too late—to $85 an ounce. Germany’s “D” bomb exploded despite the World Bank, League of Nations, Dawes plan, Young plan, and United States aid. This explosion spread by chain reaction, so to speak, to every other country in the world, finally hitting the United States with the most disastrous depression of modern times. Then, because all of the leading nations failed to recognize the dangers inherent in soft debt-based currencies and overlooked the fact that there is no substitute for honest money, the stage was set for World War II. History repeats itself because each gen- eration of mankind tends to make the same mistakes. Thus, history has been repeated in the post-World War II inflations that have wound up with repudiation in Hungary and Greece and the devaluations that have, to date, occurred in every leading country of the world except the United States and Switzerland. Because Switzcrland’s money is backed 100 percent with gold, devaluation can be avoided there, but can the United States do so—that is the question and the problem : The fact that we have more gold than all other countries combined is offset by the fact that our debt is proportionately much larger and our monetary requirements enor- mous. Past experience has shown that a national debt should not be more than four times larger than the value of the gold sup- ply, and the paper currency and check credit supply should not be more than 60 percent greater. Actually, this country’s national debt is ten times larger than the value of our gold at $85 an ounce, and its paper currency and check credit supply, 500 percent greater. WHAT TO DO? We can take a page out of history and give gold a larger measure of value or, in other
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD words, give it a price that will enable it to do more work in the monetary system. This is a tried and proven method that makes sense. The past has demonstrated time and time again that a monetary system consisting of debt-based currency is doomed to failure. Such currency is at best useful only under fair weather conditions; when the rains come the shifting sands on which it is built give way and the house falls apart. There is no point in being married, so to speak, to a ¢85-an-ounce price any more than there was to the $20.67 price, or any of the still lower prices of past history. We couldn’t hold the price of bread to 5 cents a loaf; why should we expect to be able to hold gold at that equivalent? We cannot, in fact, do it, and we run grave risk in trying to do so: Depression and/or repudiation. We know what happened when Great Brit- ain devalued its currency in 1931—that country got a large part of our gold because the gold had greater buying power in that country-—$80.33 there as against $20.67 here. Great Britain’s devaluation in September of last year gave gold a $60.79 measure of value in that country as compared with $35 here. No wonder our exports have declined and our imports increased. And the end of devalua- tion is not yet, for England and the sterling- ploc countries need more gold—lots of it. As @ matter of fact, since last September 41 different countries have by devaluation increased the measure of gold in their cur- rencies in order to get more gold into their monetary systems. Russia devalued its currency 90 percent in the latter part of 1947. Then on March 1 of this year Russia revalued the ruble in terms of gold, not at the old rate of $35 an ounce (since she did not have enough gold to make that practical), but realistically, by increas- ing its measure of value upward to the equiv- alent of $79.10 an ounce. Obviously, it does not require as much gold at $79.10 an ounce to provide currency backing as it does at $35. And because gold obtained at $35 an ounce in trading with us has a buying power of $79.10 in Russia, that country will get the gold and the trade of its ruble-bloc coun- tries and also, in all probability, some of our gold, as Great Britain and the sterling-bloc countries have been doing since their de- valuations of last September. This country avoided repudiation of United States notes following the Civil War only for two reasons: (1) Approximately half the debt was wiped out by repudiation of Con- federate currency; (2) mining development of the West was encouraged by a free market and higher prices for gold and by the Gov- ernment, especially President Abraham Lin~ coln, with the result that the new gold and silver produced was soon sufficient to provide for redemption in honest hard money. To debts which this country incurred in two world wars have now been added the purden of unpaid debts owed to us and our aid to foreign countries. There is no chance this time that the mines of the West can produce the enormous amounts of gold and silver that we need, even if mining were encouraged instead of being, as it is, dis- couraged and restricted. The inherent power of gold properly meas- ured and utilized is the only sure solution for the world’s monetary problems which, when solved, will in turn provide a solution for most of its other major problems, and while Congress delays in regulating the valua of gold upward as an initial step toward re- establishing honest constitutional money, the United States is going deeper and deeper into debt with more and more debt-based currency. As for a solution to our debt problem, thera are only two ways out of the present situa- tion: (1) Ultimate repudiation; (2) a reale istic revaluation of gold at a figure that will give it the larger measure of value needed to provide an honest monetary system based on hard money. Repudiation? No, A larger measure of value for gold? Yes. We can and should take the path of honest money. Will we do it? National Science Foundation Act Among Great Accomplishments of the Eighty- first Congress EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. BARRATT O'HARA OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, April 27, 1950 Mr. O’HARA of Illinois. Mr, Speaker, among the accomplishments of the Eighty-first Congress, the importance of which will come greater and greater into realization with the unfolding of the future ahead, was the passage of the bill establishing a National Science Founda- ion. With ours the responsibility of world leadership, and the fountains of basic science in the Old World upon which we had drawn dried up and no longer availa- ' ble to our need in the application thereof, it was imperative that we provide here in the United States a source of knowl- edge in the realm of basic science keep- ing us ever ready while in the today to step, prepared, into the tomorrow. The fact that the heads of our great universities, I believe without exception, and our eminent scientists and educators generally, united in urging upon the Conzress legislation establishing this Foundation is sufficient to show its im- portance. Briefly, it was a matter of makin? provision, and immediately, for the creation of a well of basic science in the United States or of starting on the slip backward as scientific progress might advance elsewhere and we were outdis- tanced. As the Representative of the Second District in Ilinois, wherein ‘is located the University of Chicago, having on its fac- ulty so many scientists of world-wide re- nown, I felt there devolved upon me in the faithful representation of my con- stituency the duty to support this meas- ure not merely by my vote when it reached the floor of the House but also by all honorable means open to me prior to the reporting out of the bill. DR. GERARD’S PRESENTATION HELPS. Thus, on June 9, 1949, I requested and was granted unanimous consent to in- clude in my extended remarks in the Ap- pendix of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the address of Ralph W. Gerard, professor of physiology at the University of Chi- cago, delivered at the St. Louis, Mo., meeting of the American Association of University Professors. The forceful pre- sentment of the arguments for a Na- tional Science Foundation in the article by Dr. Gerard, as printed in the Ap- pendix of the CoNGrEssIONAL REcorD, volume 95, part 14, pages A3635—A3637, as part of my extended remarks, I feel, . A3157 was most helpful in creating among many of my colleagues an intensified interest in the pending legislation. THIRTY EMINENT EDUCATORS SPEAK On July 5, 1949—see extension of my remarks on pages A4275-A4276, volume 95, part 15, of the Appendix of the Con- GRESSIONAL RECORD—I again called to the attention of the House the importance of the measure establishing a National Science Foundation. I included in my remarks excerpts from letters favoring the Science Foundation received from 17 eminent scientists and educators in the Second District of Illinois and the names of 18 other scientists and educators of high standing in my district who had written me in like manner. LOYALTY OF SCIENTISTS In my remarks on that day—July 5, 1949—I said, as bearing upon provisions which had been suggested in the name of national security but which many thought were carried to the extreme of unnecessarily casting a reflection upon the unquestioned loyalty of our scientists and educators: The question that will be presented to us is not, I think, one that relates to national security. If it were such, I of course, would support the provision. In two wars, in one just passing 15, and in the other past draft age and the father of four children, I think that my loyalty to country was placed where never it could be an issue. But I do not believe that we strengthen the security of country by placing our sci~ entists and our educators in the category of suspicious persons. The greatness of America has been that in America free men have enjoyed freedom of thought. We wisely have accorded to all citizens the presumption of loyalty to the same extent that we have presumed them to be law abiding. Under the orderly processes there is a procedure to be followed when there is violation of the criminal laws, and this procedure has always protected us against the criminal acts and conspiracies of those who would use, or advocate the use of, violence in the overthrow of Government. DEBATE ON FLOOR OF HOUSE On February 27, 1950, the National Science Foundation bill being under de- bate in the House, I spoke in its support and stated that I had received over 100 letters from the distinguished members and great scientists of the faculty of the University of Chicago who were united in saying that there was no legislation pending that, in their opinion, was more necessary to continue the predominance of the United States in industry as well as in science and to assure its security, Yielding to the distinguished chairman of the committee, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Crosser], the following col- loquy took place, as reported on pages 2413-2414 of the CoNGRESSIONAL RECORD, February 27, 1950: Mr. Crosser. Mr. Chairman, will the gen~ tleman yield? ; Mr. O'Hara of Llinois. I yield to the gen~ tleman from Ohio. Mr. Crosser. Does the gentleman know that the president of Harvard, the president’ of Cornell, the president of Columbia, and the presidents of any number of the other big institutions that rank with the institu~- tion which the gentleman from Illinois re- ferred have been begging for this legislation?
A3158 Mr. O'Hara of Illmois. I thank the gen- tleman from Ohio for his contribution in making it perfectly clear that the great educators of the Nation are pretty thor- oughly in accord in their endorsement of the plan for a National Science Foundation as set forth in the measure before us. THE SMITH AMENDMENT On February 28, 1959, an amendment was cffered by the gentleman from Vir- ginia (Mr. SiurrH] which I understand was hastily drawn by the author during the heat and excitement of a debate which had carried into the evening and which was adopted without the careful study which, under ordinary circum- stances, it would have received. In fair- ness to the distinguished gentleman from Virginia I wish to say that I do not be- lieve it was his intention that the amend- ment offered by him should have gone as far as it did in according to the FBI the authority not merely of investigation but of passing judgment. I, with a few others, voted against the Smith amendment, but on March 1, 1950, when the National Service Foundation bill, as amended, came to a roll call on first passage, I voted affirmatively. The pill was passed, 247 to 126, as shown by the roll call appearing on page 2603 of the ConcrEssionaL REcorp, March 1, 1950. DANGER OF POLICE STATISM But before voting for the bill, the gen- tleman from California [Mr. HoxiFrreLD] and I, in speeches from the well of the House, pointed out the unprecedented Jengths to which it appeared on care- ful study and analysis the Smith amendment would carry us in the direc- tion of a police state. The gentleman from California [Mr. HotIrIzip] and I stated thai we would vote for the bill with the expectation that the conferees would eliminate the objectionable fea~ tures of the Smith amendment, but if the bill came back from conference with the amendment we would vote against the bill. In my remarks from the well of the House I said, as reported on page 2581 of the CONGRESSIONAL RECoRD, March 1, 1950. Mr. O'Hara of Dlinois, * * * yester~ day in committee I voted against the Smith amendment, and in so voting I was respond~ ing to the sentiment of the good, patriotic people of the district I represent. This amendment would go further in the establishment of a police state than any~- thing that has been suggested up to this time by the most rabid advocate of police statism. It does not end with order- ing a police investigation of every person applying for a scholarship. It goes much further—to hitherto unheard-~of lengths. It gives the investigating police the power to exclude the applicant on a police finding, without hearing and without judicial review, that such applicant, in the opinion of the police, is not loyal. I am sure that Mr. Hoover of the FBI would be the first to say that such power—the power both to investi~ gate and to pass judgment—should not be vested in his or any other policing body. Furthermore, the Smith amendment makes ineligible any applicant who at any time, whether with knowledge and disloyal intent or not, belonged to an organization which the Attorney General later declared sub- versive, When hysteria goes to the extreme of making the billy of the policeman the crosier of benediction, it is time that we got back to common sense and the cood, old-fashioned sort of American patriotism. PUBLIC SENTIMENT AROUSED The dangerous lengths to which the Smith amendment would carry the policing power—far beyond its proper and legitimate field—far beyond what the gentleman from California [Mr. Hourienp], and I ‘felt strongly Mr. Hoover of the FBI would wish and ap- prove—immediately following the re- marks in the well of the House on March 1, 1950, referred to, became the subject of wide discussion in educational circles and in the editorial columns of the news- papers of the Nation. The Washington Post, I might add, is entitled to a large measure of credit for the intelligent manner in which it gave both editorial and news coverage to a matter which so vitally affected the very fundamentals of our democracy. OPPOSITION OF SCIENTISTS In the extension of my remarks in the Appendix of the ConcrEsstonaL REcorp— see pages A1810—A1811—I included a let- ter from Cyril Stanley Smith, director of the Institute for the Study of Metals, University of Chicago, which sets forth in clarifying manner the sound objec- tions of the scientists and educators of the Nation to the Smith amendment. On March 13, 1950, I extended my remarks to include an article by Clifford Grobstein, vice chairman of the Federa- tion of American Scientists—see page A1863 of the Appendix of the ConcrEs- SIonAaL Recorp—-and on March 28, 1950, included a letter from Joseph E, Mayer, of the faculty of the Institute for Nuclear Studies of the University of Chicago. On that occasion, I said, as reported on page A2268 of the Appendix of the Concrzs- SIONAL RecorD: Mr. O’Hara of Tilinois. Mr. Speaker, among the scientists and educators of the Nation, as I have remarked on other occa~ sions, there is a strong feeling that the . great promise held forth both to our indus- trial development and our security by the National Science Foundation bill is sadly dimmed by the Smith amendment. This feeling is growing, and I am sure my col- leagues would wish to give the subject further study in the light of the intelligent and well-considered objections raised in so many quarters of unquestioned loyalty. REPORT OF THE CONFEREES On April 26, 1950, the conferees filed their report, which appears on pages 5828 to 5834, inclusive, of the Concres- stonaL RecorD under that date, and on April 27, 1950, the House agreed to the conference report. Concerning the amendment which he had offered and which had been adopted—although not by unanimous vote—the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Smrrw] said, as reported on page 5907 of the CoNGRESSIONAL RecorD, April 27, 1950: Mr. Smira of Virginia. * * * It was hastily drawn. It was subject to the objec- tion that it required the FBI to evaluate as well as secure the information. I am glad to be corrected in that respect. I think the language now adequately covers what I had in mind, and I am very happy that the conferees should have worked the matter out as carefully as they have, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD I wish to join, Mr. Speaker, with my colleague from Virginia in compliment-~ ing the conferees on returning to us a bill for which all of us who support the establishment of a National Science Foundation could vote with that good conscience which is possible only when in our voting there is no violence to the fundamental principles of our in- dividual convictions. I would compli- ment also the gentleman from Virginia on his forthrightness and honest frank~ ness in stating that the amendment, having been hastily drawn, went further than he had intended and that, his at- tention being called to it, he was glad to be corrected. DANGER IN COLD-WAR HYSTERIA No one in this body, I am sure, wants in our United States of America a police state. The danger we face is that in the period of a cold war the hasty con~ sideration of measures conscientiously proposed in the spirit of loyalty and patriotism for reasons of security never~ theless may result if passed without calm and poised consideration in destruction of the very rights and liberties we seek to preserve. A cold war is characterized as a war of nerves. May I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that in the Congress of the United States we well may continue to exercise an eternal vigilance against the infiltration into this Chamber and into our deliberations of that hysteria to be expected when nerves are unstrung and cool judgment is dethroned. The best proof to the country that calm reason- ing, and an honest attempt by all Mem- bers to reach common grounds of under- standing, prevail in this Chamber over hysteria is furnished by the manner in which the disputed phases of the Na- tional Science Foundation bill were worked out to the general satisfaction. EXCERPTS FROM FORD LETTER I commend to the country, and espe~ cially to the scientists and educators who were so much concerned, a reading of the full text of the conference report which is to be found on pages 5899-5906, in- clusive, of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, April 26, 1950. Chief of the objections to the Smith amendment voiced by me in my remarks from the well of the House on March 1, 1950, prior to the vote on the bill as amended, were, first, the amendment gave to the FBI the power no only to investigate but to pass judgment, an ex- tension of authority which I expressed the opinion Mr. Hoover would not wish or approve; and second, it made ineligi- ble for scholarship any person who at any time, whether with intent or not to join in disloyal activities, had belonged to an organization later declared by the Attorney General to be subversive, On these points the letter of the Hon- orable Peyton Ford, the Assistant to the Attorney General, which was adopted by and included in the report of the con- ferees, stated: Concerning point 1: , To place the Bureau in the position of an evaluating agency regarding the loyalty of persons affected by this legislation is fraught with peril, not only to the Bureau itself, but also to the country at large. In the opinion of the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (Mr. Hoover), with which I
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD agree, such legislation would constitute a clear departure from accepted fundamental theories of American Governraent and lay a foundation of criticism of the Bureau as a state pclice organization. Concerning point 2: It is elso to be noted that the amendments, in precluding the employment of, or the awarding of a scholarship to, any person who has at any time been a member of any subversive organization seeks to deny to the Foundation the services of many Americans of unquestioned loyalty to the United States and its form of governmer+ who in~orontiy joined a so-called front cvet rizr wa the highest motives and who withdrew their membership from such organization upon vtheir first suspicion of its subversive char- acter. * * * This amendment would unjustly penalize many completely loyal Americans who innocently joined such or- ganizations and would, in some measure, tend to defeat the carrying out of the pur- poses of the act. * * * This oppor- tunity (in the showing of innocent member- ship) to defend oneself in a manner con- sistent with American concepts of justice and fairness is lacking from the amend- ments. Iam happy, Mr. Speaker, that the con- tentions first raised by me in my address to the House on March 1, 1950, and in which the gentleman from California (Mr. HouiFIeELp] joined, were upheld by the conference committee. A NOTABLE PUBLIC SERVICE In closing I wish, for myself as well as for my constituents among the sci- entists and educators on the faculty of the University of Chicago and else- where in my district, to express to the distinguished majority whip of the House, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Priest], appreciation of and com- pliment on the great public service he has rendered in assuring the future of science in the United States and all the developments in industry, in medicine, in national security, and in the cultural arts which start in the well of basic sci- ence. The gentleman from Tennessee may well be proud that the National Sci- ence Foundation Act bears his name and the imprint of the months of hard work he gave in its behalf. UN Should Be Rebuilt or Scrapped EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. CHESTER E. MERROW OF NEW HAMPSHIRE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, May 1, 1950 Mr. MERROW. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- orD, I include therein an editorial from the New Hampshire Morning Union of April 29, 1950, entitled “UN Should Be Rebuilt or Scrapped.” The Union is published in Manchester, N. H. UN SHOULD BE REBUILT OR SCRAPPED In his address before the American News- paper Publishers Association, former Presi- dent Herbert Hoover stressed a note that should be given prompt attention by our national leaders. Mr. Hoover proposed that the United Nations should be reorganized without the Communists, and that if this roved impractical, then a new united front should be established among those people who disavow communism and stand for morals and religion and who love freedom. That position is held by this newspaper, and it is encouraging to have it advanced now by our ablest elder statesman. There is no doubt whatever that the United Na- tions as it exists today is washed up and a hindrance, rather than a help, to world understanding. Soviet Russia has slugged every constructive move the agency has made and has used 1t as a cloak to its aggressive designs. It has been employed chiefly by the Soviets as a propaganda forum for smearing free peoples. The time has come when this kind of thing should be stopped. There has been some talk about abolis’ ug the veto, the weapon by which the Soviets have carried out their tactics of obstructicn. But this 1s not enough. The real fact is that the one- world idea has gone into the discard. In- stead of one world in which it was hoped the United Nations would be able to estab- lish peace, we have today two worlds irre- trievably split in their objectives. One of these worlds, as M1. Hoover so well said, is militaristic, imperialistic, atheistic, and without compassion. The other still holds to belief in God, free nations, human dignity, and peace. I. is folly to believe that these two worlds can be brought together in a world peace organization. The time has come when the nations that believe in God, free- dom, and human dignity, must mobilize against Red atheism, Red imperialism, the hideous practices of the police state, and hu- man slavery, if they and the principles for which they stand are to survive. Members of the Secretariat of the United Nations will fight to justify the continu- ance of that orgariz-tion. They want to Keep their jobs. But the United States can~ not afford to hand out millions of doliars to pay the bulk of the expense of a defunct and futile organization, whose perpetuation in its present form constitutes a cloak for the godless, grasping, perfidious Soviets to use for their purposes. Western civilization is at the crossroads, faced with the question of survival. The time has come for all nations that believe in morals, religion, and freedom to stand to- gether and be counted. Such an alinement, as Mr. Hoover said, could be invincible if it is made in deep earnestness. In any case “by their cries ye shall know them.” We cannot afford to entertain longer vain dreams and fatuous hopes about world peace and cooperation while the foundation of our very lives is crumbling away. Free, God-fearing peoples must unite in their own defense against the ruthless forces of anti-Christ or see themselves des:royed. Tariff on Imports From Communist- Dominated Countries EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. JAMES T. PATTERSON OF CONNECTICUT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, May 1, 1950 Mr. PATTERSON. Mr. Speaker, I wish to have the Rrecorp show that af- firmative action was taken by Post 17, American Legion, of Naugatuck, Conn., in protecting reductions in tariff on im- ports from Communist-dominated areas of the world. A3159 The letter setting forth this action follows: AMERICAN LEGION, NatcatTucK Post, No. 17, Naugatuck, Conn., April 24, 1950. Congressman James T. PATTERSON, House Office Buiiding, Washington, D. C. Dear CoNcRzassaan Patterson: Naveatuck Post, No. 17, American Legion, Naugatuck, Conn., home of Charles Gocdyear and the pioneer rubber town of the world, protests against any American law, regulation, or agreement now existing cr under considera- tion which affects favorably in any way the importation for competition with American products of any rubber products manutfac- tured un-American—in fact, anti-Ameri- can standards in Czechoslovakia or any other area dominated by the Russian communistic government. This post is strongly opposed to ahy such trade arrangements not only on the general principles affecting the interests of the rubber industry and the rubber work- ers of Naugatuck, but also because the post believes the United States Government should not make any concessions to Russian communism compromising the livelihood or other interests of American industry and workers. Very truly yours, : CHARLES CLARK, Commander. For Whom Do the Bells Toll? EXTENSION OF REMARKS iF HON. PAUL J. KILDAY OF TEXAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, May 1, 1950 Mr. KILDAY. Mr. Speaker, under per- mission to extend my remarks, I in- corporate into the Record an original oration written by Miss Gay Zedier of box 465, Luling, Tex., who won the oratorical contest sponsored by the women of the Pan-American Round Table at the Battle of Flowers in San Antonio recently. In my judgment Miss Zedler has made an outstanding contribution in so well expressing the thought that out of the conflict between the Latin-American and Anglo-Saxon that occurred on Texas soil today comes forth the movement to cement friendly relations between the peoples of the United States and the peoples of Latin-America. Her oration follows: For WHom Do THe Brits ToL? Listen with me to the cathedral bells in San Antonio de Bexar, magnificent city of missions: “Spain and France sowed every sentient elod with brave romance The cloven hoofprint of the buffalo Outlined its course three centuries ago.” Planting the holy rugged cross on the site where a hamlet was soon to arise, the “Con- quistadores and their followers pressed on sternly toward empire in the fabled west.” But following in their footsteps came the penitential Franciscan monk, with holy urge,’ barefooted, at his waist the knotted scourge, whose lonely, self-sacrificing work was to make possible San Antonio, Tex., most pic- turesque city whose past is pregnant with dramatic action, romantic appeal, and heroic sacrifice, no city in the Nation can match its charm and historic interest. Here in the
A3i60 fiesta city are a happy blending of two cul- tures, a harmonious mingling of two races and a concerted effort to preserve the best of Latin civilizat’on. The first officially recognized civil settle- meni in Texas was the villa of San Fernando, settled at the order of the Spanish King in 1781 by 10 families from the Canary Islands. Symbolic of their Old World culture is the historic San Fernando cathedral which these families bunlt in 1788. The names of these Spanish seitlers are familiar to the ears of San Antonians today and within the sacred walls of the cathedral still worship direct descendants of its builders. San Fernando cathedral became the social and civic center of San Antonio. From its tower rang the pells which called strong men, booted and spurred to repel Indian raids. The parochial bells of the cathedral joyfull, proclaimed the coronation of a sovereign, gravely tolled the death of a ruler, or pealed a glad wel- come to illustrious visitors. The cross on the dome of San Fernando is today as it was in yesteryear: the golden milestone from which San Antonio measured all distances and the bells of San Fernando echo sweetly as in the days of long ago. But today the tolling of the bells is more than a call to worship, it is a call to remember the conflict that in the shadow of the cathe- dral spilled and mingled the blood of the Latin-American and the Anglo-Saxon. A call to awaken in the heart of every Texan the realization that out of this conflict was woven a strong and durable fabric for lasting peace, a fabric woven from the fiber of the souls of strong men, both Latin and Anglo-Saxon; a fabric dyed in their lifeblood, mingled with the tears of their noble women. It is fitting that San Antonio de Bexar, the city of the cathedral bells, should be the birthplace of a movement to cement friendly relations between the peoples of the United States and the peoples of Latin-America. A movement unique in the annals of man’s everlasting search for peace. This foresight was given over a generation ago to the brilliant mind and generous heart of a Texas woman, the beloved Florence T. Griswold—founder of the pan-American round table, Remembering the Arthurian legend that only at a round table could all be equal in precedence, and peace and har~ mony thus prevail, her’s was the vision, the foresight and the wisdom which called to- gether in round table a group of Texas women whose ancestors had spilled their blood for Texas independence, to form a nu- cleus for drawing together the women of the Americas. In recognition of the principle that when ‘the women of a country unite on a firm foun- dation of mutual understanding and trust, coupled with unanimous concerted action, the men of that country cannot long misun- derstand one another; the pan-American round table was founded. The round table is convinced that through education and not through legislation will the ultimate aims of the organization be at- tained. With this conviction, the round table views with interest the educational systems of the Latin-American countries, and points with pride to the fact that San Antonio, the city of its origin, is also a pioneer in the educational field. Pan-Americanism is one of the natural phases through which the Western Hemi- spLere must pass in its onward progress to- ward that unity of western ideals which will inevitably make of this continent a solidi- fied front for the defense of democracy. Just as truly as that the Cathedral of San Fernando was built in the shape of a per- fect cross, just as truly as the bells from its tower ring out the same sweet tones they rang in years of old, just so truly is the spirit of pan-Americanism ringing in the ears of the Western Hemisphere, pervading its general structure, revitalizing interrela- tions among its countries. With the trend in that direction it re- mained for some one potent element to or- ganize and direct the forces that will ulti- mately bring about a workable basis upon which to predicate a union of western na- tions. Womanhood knows not national bounda- ries. Motherhood is a universal concept, and womanhood is a logical ground on which a representative proportion of the constituent members of any nation, or group of nations, may find a meeting point. Logical it is therefore and economically sound that women should marshal their forces and group themselves into an organization that has for its objective provision of mutual knowledge, understanding and friendship among the people of the Western Hemisphere, to develop closer ties between those nations whose interdependence and solid front would create a formidable barrier against foreign ageression and make of them a world power for peace. On April 14, 1935, in Laredo, Tex., on the International Bridge, there was unveiled a Pan-American good-will marker. Lighted by rays of a perpetual light the marker will ever be a reminder to all passing between these nations of the pan-American aim. This marker, dedicated as it is to the woman~ hood of all the Americas, bears the hopes and prayers of its donors that it may worthily represent them in the promotion of peace and good will among the nations of the Western Hemisphere, thereby fulfilling a prophetic rather than a commemorative purpose. Although the organization of round tables has spread from San Antonio throughout the Americas, the spirit of pan- Americanism must not be confined to the limits of this exemplary organization. Every Texan who thrills with pride at his glorious heritage, who participates with joy in the commemorative battle of flowers, must seat himself at the round table of pan-American brotherhood and understanding, that the bells of San Fernando may toll never again for bloodshed but for everlasting peace. In the words of John Dunne, “Send not to know for whom the bells toll, they toll for thee and for me.” Gay ZEDLER. Mr. Hoover’s Proposal for United Nations Reorganization EXTENSION OF REMARKS Or HON. HAROLD D. DONOHUE OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, May 1, 1950 Mr. DONOHUE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I should like to include an editorial, entitled ‘‘Hoover’s Plan,” which appeared in the April 29, 1950, edition of the Worcester (Mass.) Telegram. Former President Hoover’s proposal to reorganize the United Nations has un- doubtedly excited wide interest and re- flection. These wise and practical com- ments, from the Telegram, on his sug- gestion are well worth reading. The editorial follows: Hoover’s PLAN There can be no doubt that former Presi- dent Hoover speaks the grim truth that the APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD free peoples of the world need @ new and dynamic and united front against the “‘creep- ing Red imperialism.” His criticisms of So- viet purposes and Soviet actions are not in any way exaggerated. He has the record to pack him up. But it is a highly debatable question as to whether it would be wise just now to try to reorganize the United Nations with the Communist countries left out. That was the radical step which Mr. Hoover pro- posed Thursday night in New York when he addressed the Bureau of Advertising of the American Newspaper Publishers Association. Mr. Hoover recalled that he had warned the people 9 years ago that cooperation with Stalin would be a “gargantuan jest.” Five years ago, however, Mr. Hoover said this: “Russia has again, and I hope forever, demonstrated by her gallantarmies * * * that she is impregnable.” At that time, in April 1945, Mr. Hoover also said that he be- lieved “that with collaboration between the great centers of power in Washington, Lon- don, Paris, Moscow, and Chungking that peace can be developed in an atmosphere of good will and understanding.” That’s what virtually everybody was say- ing then, on the eve of our victory in Ger- many. They said the same thing when the Charter of the United Nations was being drafted at San Francisco, and after the sur- render of Japan, and during the first few months of the existence of the UN. Even the realistic Mr. Churchill had faith in So- viet purposes—at first. With all respect to Mr. Hoover, his own record in foreign affairs does not in itself make his voice a supremely authoritative one at the present moment. When he was Presi- dent he made much of the Kellogg Treaty and he and Secretary of State Stimson evolved the nonrecognition doctrine. Those instruments were valueless—utterly useless in curbing the Japanese and other aggres- sors. Also, Mr. Hoover persistently opposed President Roosevelt’s foreign policy, from Munich to Pearl Harbor. Five years ago, and a little later, Mr. Hoover was not talking about the menace of Russian imperialism or of communism, That is nothing against him. The Russian conduct after the war came as a disagreeable sur- prise to countless Americans. Mr. Hoover did, however, make a keen and farseeing re- mark 5 years ago when he said that the big five veto practically “puts all the great military powers out of reach; and world wars are not started by small nations.” Herbert Hoover was thus one of the first American leaders—perhaps the very first— to recognize a fundamental weakness in the UN Charter. But that fact is not proof that he is necessarily right in saying that we should seek to reorganize the UN without the Communist nations. Neither does it prove that Mr. Hoover’s new proposal is un- wise, merely because some of his measures failed in the past. This proposal cannot be settled in terms of Mr. Hoover’s record. It needs to be fully argued, not only by the critics of the UN but also by its supporters. There Shall Be No Retreat EXTENSION OF REMARKS oO HON. L. MENDEL RIVERS OF SOUTH CAROLINA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, May 1, 1950 Mr. RIVERS. Mr. Speaker, under the leave to extend my remarks in the Rrc-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD orp, I include the following keynote ad- dress of George Warren: THERE SHALL Be No RETREAT (Keynote address of George Warren, South Carolina Democratic Convention, Colum- bia, S. C., April 19, 1950) Today, in America, aye, in the world, free- dom is the major issue. Amidst the com- plex problems facing the people of this coun- try now, the maintenance of liberty stands out as the dominant problem. Never before in recorded history was there more need for an intelligent approach to the solution of these problems. Our people thought that they were secure in the enjoyment of their liberty and freedom under the best Government in the world, and that the talk about “eternal vigilance being the price of liberty” was a catch phrase coined for the guidance of our forefathers— not us. And many people still are thinking similarly. But the world is on fire with tyranny in the form of communism and socialism, and in America we have a creeping socialistic revolution in progress which, unless stopped in its development, will engulf this Nation and destroy our Government and the Amer- ican way of life. So -gain I plead for the preservation of our Constitution, the continuation of our dual form of government with its proper balance of powers between the States and the Na- tion; and with all the force at my command, I condemn encroachments upon the powers of the States by either Congress or the Presi- dent, in whatever form, whether ty enact- ments of law, by usurpations, or oligarchy masquerading under the banner of democ- racy. Two years ago the democracy of South Carolina in convention assembled, calmly and without passion or prejudice, mapped out a course it would pursue, declared its platform and principles and directed its offi- cials as to its policies. And in pursuance to its declarations the chairman, the executive committeemen, its delegates to the national convention, and its other officials have faith- fully, honestly, and fearlessly carried out those pol:cies and principles. Those officials were at times booed and heckled and sub- jected to rebuffs in uhe performance of the tasks assigned them. In the di.charge of their duties those representing the party— State executive committeemen and county chairmen—were hailed into a Federal court and actually in so many words threatened with a Federal prison. What shall we tell these men who have acquitted their steward- ship with honor and faith? Shall we re- pudiate their actions? Shall we turn our backs upon them and disclaim our own di- rections? By the immortal God who made me, I am sure I speak the sentiments of the noble people, the proud people of this State, when I say to them, “Well done, good and faithful men. From the stand you took there shall be no retreat.” And those wo.ds, ‘“‘no retreat,” should be the keynote of this convention. All that we say and do here today can be put in concentrated form. All people of all parties can know exactly what our keynote is and exactly where we stand. In just two words that keynote is no retreat. At our last convention and subsequently the South Carolina Democratic Party demon- strated to the Nation and to both Republican Party and National Democratic Party that this State was no longer “in the bag,” that our people could still exercise independence of action on matters of broad policy, that by ® concert of action the people of the South eould actually become the balance of polit- {cal power in national elections, and that we are now a factor to be considered both in party councils and national elections. I cannot picture any political party in a na- tional election deliberately turning down electoral votes which may constitute the dif- ference between success and failure in a country-wide election. I very much doubt that any future representatives of this or- ganization will meet with the treatment ac- corded your delegates at Philadelphia last election year. Nor do I think that our pres- entation of the ideals and principles of gov- ernment will again be jeered and hooted in a national convention. After all, national committees and national party chairmen, and even candidates for President and Vice Pres- ident are looking for electoral votes. If they want our votes 1t is pretty certain we at least will be permitted to take part in party coun- cils and espouse the policies and principles of government in which we believe. Our stand of 2 years ago publicized great prin- ciples and concepts of government and focused the attention of the people of the country in an emphatic way upon the in- roads of socialism upon the body politic and upon the national economy. Ata time when both of the great political parties—and their respective candidates—-were vying with one another to see which could outdo the other in advocacy of a totalitarian state, a police state, a socialistic state, a poorhouse state, our voice was the real voice of America sounding a clarion call to preserve our con- stitutional form of government, to sustain our traditional way of life and battle the evil forces of socialism. And while we did not elect a President, we won a great victory, because in the minds of the people of Amer- ica we planted the thoughts that even now are blocking socialistic programs. The thinkers of America are saying, “Thus far you have gone. No further shall you go.” Today in America our fight has the Reds and the pinks on the run. Let’s keep them run- ning. Let there be no retreat. In May 1948, awakened to the need of militant action to stem the onrushing tide of socialism which threatened (and still threatens) free America, the democracy of this State calmly and dispassionately de- clared its platform of principles which for decades had been the cardinal foundation of the Democratic Party of this Nation. We claimed then, and I proclaim today that the members of the Democratic Party of South Carolina constitute the defenders of true democratic principles, the opponents of to- talitarian rule, supporters of constitutional government, and preservers of the ideals and concepts and traditions revered by our party for generations past. Succinctly and pre- cisely we took our stand and proclaimed it to the world. No misunderstanding could possibly exist about where we stood. Noth- ing has happened in the past 2 years, so far as I know, that would cause us to change or to consider that we were wrong then; unless there are those here whose social con~ cepts and election law predilections follow those of a Federal judge of this State who, deserting the doctrines of his forefathers, advocates outside interference and Federal force to impose his will upon a people once free. It is true we have had court orders. But undying principles cannot be changed by order of a court. It is true we have had a few hand-outs from Washington—very few— and we may get back some part—a small part—of the Federal taxes we pay in the form of grants or benefits. But these hand- outs or grants—a mess of pottage—cannot buy the souls of a free people. The trend toward socialism has been accelerated some sinc. then. The need today is perhaps greater for us to maintain and declare and militantly defend those principles, ideals and concepts and traditions. We cannot lightly brush aside the threat of a socialistic state. Socialism inevitably leads to tyranny. Take the case of Russia. Those who started the break from Czarist tyranny were old A3161 Socialists. They fought tyranny, but when socialism was set in motion it grew into the most tyrannical government in human history—present-day Russia. This country was settled by those fleeing from tyranny and established to free us from tyrannical rule. Today it is our bounden duty to hold the line for the American way of life. First, we should recognize the pres- ence of a creeping Socialist revolution and make our leaders not only recognize that fact but put a stop once and for all to any further advance to cocialistic laws and eco- nomic trends. We are the sovereign people. Let’s make the Congress and the judiciary and the executive of our Government get back to the Constitution and to the Declara- tion of Independence and the American way of life. We told the world of our ideals and prin- ciples; on the ramparts of American life we hoisted our fag. We maintain the same ideals and principles today. If you will join me, I say, “There let it wave, and long may it wave.” We make no retreat. The people of America do not believe in socialized labor. They do believe in collec- tive bargaining, the right of the laboring man to join together for the benefit of himself and his fellow laborers for their mutual benefit; they believe in individual freedom; and the people of America believe in free labor—not slave labor. When any party or the leadership of any party attempts to herd the working people of this country into the corrals of a socialistic order, then is the time for warnings to be sounded. South Carolina democracy today should tell the laboring people of America and their organizations that heed should be given to the signs of the times—the gradual drift of the United States into socialism which will embrace labor as well as business. The examples of Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and Communist Russia disclose accurately where the laboring man will stand under socialism. The people of America do not believe in socialized medicine. They do believe in gov- ernmental public-health activities to the ex- tent that such shall preserve freedom of our péople to choose their own doctors and hospitals and medical care and shall not interfere with the freedom of our surgeons and doctors to practice where, when, and for what they please under the regulatory power of the States to prescribe their quali- fications. Socialized medicine is directly op- posed to the fundamental concepts of Amer- icanism. South Carolina democracy today should tell the people of America that the time has come when these concepts of gov- ernment are endangered and that the creep- ing progress of socialism will be advanced unless strong efforts to curb that progress are made. Do I have to give examples today of the dire results of socialized medicine? Look to any country where it has been tried. The people of America do not believe in socialized business. They believe in free enterprise and individual initiative. When ‘ any leadership of a party or any government advocates laws or enactment of laws aimed directly at doing away with those beliefs, the time has arrived for.the business people of the Nation to put forth every possible effort to prevent socialized business. In view of the trend of our National Legislature to regi- ment the Nation’s business and circumscribe free enterprise and individual and corporate initiative, the Democratic Party of South Carolina should send out a call to the busi- ness people of America to combat with all of its force the advancing march of socialized business. The American people do not believe in a socialized state. They believe in democracy as that term is defined by the acts of the founding fathers of this country. When any party-or its leadership or any official of our governmental set-up would, by act or
A3162 deed, send America down the road to social- ism, a time of danger has arrived, and the Democratic Party of South Carolina should speak out to the people of the Nation words of warning with a call to join us in safe- guarding and perpetuating the representative democracy under which for nearly two cen- turies we have lived in happiness and pros- perity. Voicing the feelings of the great people of this State, I say that South Carolina’s de- mocracy views with alarm these signs of a drift away from fundamental Americanism, and with all of our resources we dedicate our- selves and our party to combat socialism. We are doing this today; we should do this in all party councils elsewhere and every- where in the future. With sincerity we feel that the salvation of our Government de- pends upon setting up a road block in the path of socialism. We call on the national Democratic Party to join in that effort, and all true Americans everywhere to do like- wise. The fight transcends persons and parties. So today South Carolina democ- racy gives to the Nation a motto all can well adopt: Fight socialism. ; Everyone everywhere knows that if an in- dividual spends more than he makes over a period of time he will go broke, and if a business spends more than it makes over a period of time, 1t will wind up proke. It does not require an economic expert to know that when a government spends more than it takes in, such government over a period of time will go broke. (Let me interpolate here that it seemingly does require an eco- nomic expert to decide otherwise.) There- fore, when it appears that the United States Government or a State government under- takes over a period of time, in a time of peace, a planned system of deficit financing, it embarks upon dangerous seas, and we would not be true to our concepts of honesty if we withheld our disapproval of any such program. Today the democracy of South Carolina should view with alarm and con- demn deficit financing, and our Representa- tives in the Congress and the State legis- lature should be told of our views. In line with our views, those truly repre- senting the South in the Congress many times find themselves alined against legisla- tive proposals of the present national admin- istration. On this account we are called conservative, and even reactionary, although in fact we are the true liberals, in the tradi- tional meaning of the term. Because we have dared to fight for the historic doctrines and principles of the great Democratic Party, we have been referred to as Dixiecrats by the hatchet men and character assassins of the motley crew who have temporarily captured our party. The term “Dixiecrat” is nothing more nor less than a smear word, designed to obscure the unanswerable logic and reason. of our stand by a base effort to create sec- tional prejudice. We repudiate the term and proudly reaffirm our faith in and adherence ‘to the traditions and beliefs of the great Democratic leaders and standard bearers who have gone before us. It is true that we have not blindly fol- lowed radical proposals or radical leadership. If a party or a person advocates measures or men which we regard as un-American or socialistic we would be craven cowards to forsake our ideals. We fought within the national party for States’ rights, under what- ever name called. Within the national party we battled for State sovereignty, free enter- prise, local home rule, and for the preserva- tion of constitutional government. We waged that fight in the national convention after first telling the national committee that we would not abandon the old-line Democratic principles and ideals carried in the platforms of the party for many, many years. There was no misapprehension of our stand when we participated in the conven~- tion at Philadelphia. In the following na- tional election we invoked and exercised our right to vote for the preannounced program. We carried our fight to that election and established to all and everyone that the Democratic Party of South Carolina stands for State sovereignty, home rule, and consti- tutional government. We maintain that should the national party tell us to stick our heads into the fires of socialism we do not have to obey such a demand. We still pos- sess freedom and are not abject slaves to the forces of.evil that would shackle us to a so- cialistic order. And from that stand I say there should be no retreat. The older members of our party know why the dual form of government here was adopt- ed, with the States, originally separate and independent republics, surrendering certain rights to the Federal Government and re- taining and reserving all other rights to themselves. However, they should tell the large number of new voters of the great pur- pose of the founding fathers, which was to create a government of divided powers to prevent autocratic rule, to prevent tyranny, to prescribe home rule or local self-govern- ment, to preserve for posterity that free- dom and liberty which they had bought and paid for in human blood. The old and new members of our party should remember the conception of George Washington that the balanced powers constituted a system of “‘re- ciprocal checks” which was necessary; should remember that Jefferson said that “support of State governments in all of their rights” was the “surest bulwark” against anti- republican tendencies and that Franklin Roosevelt said. “We are safe from the danger of any departure from the principles upon which this country was founded just so long as independent home rule of the States is scrupulously preserved”—and he added, “and fought for whenever it seems in danger.” Until recently the old Democratic Party has followed the States’ rights line, and but for a few of the ilk of Humphreys we think would have followed the States’ rights line 2 years ago. The South Carolina Democratic Party ad- hered to the States’ rights line 2 years ago. From that commendable stand for the pres- ervation of our great form of government there should today be “no retreat.” Those in high places have brought about bloc government in the place of party gov- ernment in this country through their barter~ ing for votes of one kind or another. In pur- suing this policy, they have cynically sought to stir up the fires of racial and sectional prejudices. Two years ago, we Knew that there were those in the party who advocated the enactment of laws such as FEPC, remov- ing all separation of the races in our places of business and other laws removing all sepa- ration of the races in schools and colleges. We found that there were those who by ex- ecutive edict would integrate the white and Negro races in the armed forces. But until recently we never thought any Democrat would declare that any and all separation of the races constitutes discrimination and is unlawful. Such has happened. Article 3, section 33, of South Carolina’s constitution says “The marriage of a white person with a Negro or mulatto, shall be un. lawful and void.” There are those who even approve intermarriage of whites and Negroes, and contend for the annulment of this provi- slon of our constitution. For the record let it be said that in Columbia at high noon on April 19, 1950, the keynoter of the Demo. cratic convention with all of the emphasis at his command said that the Democrats of this proud State repudiate any such principle, frown upon any such efforts, and militantly declare our intention to uphold our State constitution. . We do not believe that the informed Ne- groes of this State advocate doing away with APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the constitutional provisions against inter- marriage, or the abrogation of separation of the races. For many years the white and Negro races have lived in South Carolina in peace and harmony. The better elements of both races have worked hard to improve the lots in life of both races. Great headway has been made py both. Both want to preserve the racial purity of each. Outside agitators, for purely selfish political reasons, seek to stir up racial prejudices and animosities. We condemn such efforts and declare our belief that social and educational separation 1s not discrimi- natory. On May 19, 1948, the South Caro- lina Democratic Convention in its platform and its principles said: “We believe in the social and educational secrzc*icy. of the races.” From that stand to: :.". be no retreat. We have been insulted with a civil- disturbance program, erroneously labeled a civil-rights plan. We were outraged by the threats of “force bills’ which violated our em.ccotiewes of freedom as guaranteed to us tueer .tce@ Constitution. All separation of races is sought to be declared discrimina~ tion; even our laws respecting intermarriage of whites and Negroes being threatened with annulment. And those insults and outrages are still being heaped upon the people of the South. These things have happened be- fore. Our political institutions have been assailed before. We have faced perilous ordeals before. Bayonets of Federal soldiers have been crossed over our ballot boxes in the past. But never yet have our heads been bowed in shame; never yet have we truckled even in defeat. And though we may be deserted by an errant national party leadership, and Federal courts attempt to control our elections, yet we face the problems confronting us with courage and faith that right and justice will finally triumph. Under God, the author of liberty, we still stand for the individual freedom and personal dignity of the Ameri- can citizen. Education on Radio EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FRANCIS J. MYERS OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, May 2 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. MYERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an address by me at the television dinner spon- sored by the Association for Education on Radio, University of Pennsylvania Museum, April 20, 1950. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Rzcorp, as follows: ADDRESS BY UNITED States SENATOR FrRANcIS J. MYERS AT TELEVISION DINNER SPONSOTED BY THE ASSOCIATION roR EpucaTION ON Rapio, UNIVERSITY OF PXNNSYLVANIA Museum, Aprit, 20, 1950 Like many parents who have a TV set in their home, I’m forced to admit that my chil- dren are the television experts of the family. The children sold me on i-levision over 2 years ago, and at that time, my son—then in junior high—was prepared to explain to me, his not too up-to-date father, just how television worked. I strongly suspect this has pretty much been the experience of most families who
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD have bought, or are thinking of buying, a television set. So, with several years of experience in looking and listening to their credit, my children are old hands in terms of the lively young television industry. From time to time, I’ve heard some spirited dinner table discussion of some of the fine programs the children have seen and heard on TV, and from these and other discussions, I’ve gath- ered that some splendid work is being done right here in Philadelphia in television pro- gramming. I must admit, however, that much of my information about this is second-hand—be- cause my work in the Senate keeps me away from Philadelphia most of the time—and as a matter of fact, I’ve probably participated in almost as many television broadcasts as I’ve actually seen. I got a real eye opener several months ago on Philadelphia television developments when Miss Martha Gable of the Philadelphia board of education sent me quite a bit of material describing the education shows that have been worked out jointly by our local television stations and school officials. 4s I say, I was aware that something of this sort was going on from what others had told me, but I had no idea that anything so comprehensive and significant was being de- veloped right here in Philadelphia. The story which emerged from reading the material Miss Gable sent me indicates that Philadelphia is wl.r-ny a lt.ca’ng role in evolving a Vital :- ~. New edu- cational and oi crim zl technique. Moreover, it was quite apparent that a great many people were working together to make these new programs possible. The managements of the local television stations have given freely of their time, im- agination, and other resources. Teachers and officials of all our schools—public, pri- vate, parochial—have worked hand in hand with the stations and with each other. School children themselves have been very much involved, both as participants in the programs, and as the audience for whom the programs were intended. Too, several large manufacturers of television sets have lent equipment to schools, and the parent-teach- ers associations have assisted by raising funds for the purchase of TV equipments to bring the programs to more of the children. Now I’m extremely proud of the trail- blazing work which has been done here at Philadelphia in utilizing the assets of tele- vision to further education and promote better understanding among our people. Without question, there has never been a time in our past where the American people have needed to know as much about as many things as they do today. The complex life that all of us share in this year of 1950 is - too involved merely to let matters take care of themselves. It is imperative that we—as a people—Know where we are, where we are going, and where we want to go. We no longer can afford the luxury of letting things grow-like Topsy. In this age where men themselves may travel at the speed of sound—where we can communicate with one another at the speed of light—the man on the street needs far more facts to pass sound judgment on the issues that must be met to keep democratic institutions alive. It is a real blessing that the same kind of technical advancement which has compli- cated our lives so much has, at the same time, provided us with extraordinary means of acquiring information. Radio and television provide us with ringside seats at the great events of the day. Within a short space of time thereafter, the same events are reca- pitulated in our newspapers, newsreels, and magazines, and in the long run, books run off on giant presses furnish us With perma- nent records and assist us in fitting events into sensible historical perspective, No one underestimates the potential of television as the newest addition to our fountainhead of information sources. It is taking an important place in partnership with our other communications and shares with them the dual responsibility of furnish- ing us with enjoyment and with information which we must have to meet the future. Returning for a moment to the educational programs that have been developed locally here in Philadelphia, I was particularly gratified to notice the extent to which in- formation about world affairs had become a part of these telecasts. Irecall seeing names of foreign students who described life in their countries, and of newly arrived displaced per- sons, and others which referred in some fashion or another to events and places be- yond our shores. Because world peace is the central issue of our time, I think this sort of program is of particular significance—not only for our chil- dren in school, but for everyone—and I want to enlarge on some of the factors which seem to me so essential to an understanding of the world problems which confront us today. As a nation, America has done a lot of growing up in the past 10 years orso. With- out doubt, the biggest single obligation we’ve undertaken—in our recent history, at least— is that of assuming our share of the responsi- bility for world peace, And by shedding our former policy of isolation, we have under- taken a vast new job which requires us to come up with solutions to problems which had never previously been of much im- portance to us. With the coming of our new international responsibilities, we’ve had to think in new terms, and unlearn many modes of thinking which were adapted to the policy of isolation. This is not an easy job to do—and all things considered, I believe we have shoul- dered our load and have met our new prob- lems in a mature and straightforward fashion. We must remember that we broke with the past when we repudiated isola- tion. But the break was clean, and it was wholeheartedly supported by the overwhelm- ing majority of our people. It’s true there are still a few who urge us to let the rest of the world go hang—but I’m satisfied this is a minority which is growing steadily smaller as we continue to go forward with the job of peacemaking. But isolation, as a matter of national pol- icy, served the best interests of America for a substantial part of our national history. Broad oceans insulated us from the recur- rent strife of Europe and Asia, and by turn- ing our backs on the troubles of the rest of the world for a hundred years or so we kept ourselves busy and grew great in expanding our Nation across the continent. And by the close of the nineteenth century the United States had become a factor of wealth and resources to be reckoned with. But the policy of isolation—so useful in frontier days—had the rug pulled out from under it by science. Not all at once, but gradually and steadily. Transportation did it. The nineteenth-century developments of power through steam, electricity, and the internal-combustion engine shrank the size of continents and pulled them closer together as ocean vessels grew larger, faster, and began. to use steel hulls. Whether we liked it or not, the nations of the world were being brought together. The airplane was really the last straw so far as isolation was concerned. Even at the close of World War I the potential of the air- plane was not real enough to convince a ma- jority of Americans that the world’s troubles were our troubles, too. We turned thumbs down on the League of Nations, and said in effect, if isolation was good enough for grand- A3163 ma, it was good enough for us. And even those nations which joined the League weren’t prepared to think in terms of working cooperatively on an international basis. Na- tional jealousies were, if anything, stronger at the time of the Versailles Treaty and in the years which followed than they were prior to 1914. War does things like that to people and nations. When the prosperity bubble burst here in the late twenties and the ever-darkening night of depression settled upon us, we were too preoccupied with our own troubles to pay much attention to the fact that we weren’t alone in our misery. The depression was world-wide—and as a nation we failed to realize that the American economy had be= come so linked to that of large parts of the world that even depressions were no longer isolated affairs. The totalitarian dictatorships which spread their evil through the depression years and finally plunged the world into a second great war within a quarter of a century were the ones who exposed to everyone the fallacy of isolation. By the time World War II drew to a close in 1945 the American people recog~ nized that if we could take our armed forces to Europe and into the far reaches of the Pacific and on to the Continent of Asia it- self—and there achieve victory—others might some day bring war to us across those same oceans. No wonder we were ready to repudiate iso- lation by 1945. No wonder our participation in the United Nations was so overwhelm~ ingly acclaimed by the same people who, 25 years earlier, could not be convinced that a League of Nations was necessary to world peace. The Russian delegates in the United Na-= tions soon made us realize, however, that the Communists had their own schemes for world peace—schemes which would carry out their long-announced plans for world communism. With the economy of Europe tottering, the Russian veto fell across every measure to come before the UN which offered to bolster Europe’s foundations, and judging from Com- munist tactics in eastern Europe, it was ap- parent that Russia sought the domination of all of Europe without firing a shot. The Communists were counting on the democra- cies to collapse, and they expected Commu- nist dictatorships to rise up from the wreckage. To save Europe, something had to be done, and done fast. In rapid succession, interim aid program was created to furnish American food to a starving Europe. The Truman doctrine was born to aid the Greek Government in stamping out Communist-led guerrilla warfare and to strengthen Turkey against Russian threats of aggression. Just 2 years ago this month, the first of the Mar- shall plan shipments began to flow across the Atlantic to aid the western European democracies in getting back on their feet. Last year, the Atlantic Pact was signed, and the nations of the North Atlantic community pledged themselves to stand united against any threatened aggression. Last month the first supplies crossed the Atlantic under the military assistance program which is de- signed to furnish the additional arms the Atlantic Pact nations will need to make good their pledge of mutual defense. These programs are stopping the spread of communism. Europe is getting back on its feet with its industry well above pre- war levels, and progress is being made at reducing the trade barriers which have hampered Europe’s economic development for the past half century. Peace has been restored in Greece, and Turkey is much bet~ ter prepared to call any Communist bluff hurled at her. The Marshall plan still has a big job ahead—in fact, a job which will cost an estimated $3,000,000,000 in the coming year. But Mr. Paul Hoffman, whose splendid
A3164 leadership and visior. have had so much to d> wih che success of the Marshall plan to date, feels that the program is ahead of schedule and that we can safely afford to re- duce ECA spending to the $3,000,000,000 level this next year. He adds the precaution, however, that the figure cannot be reduced below that amount without endangering all the good which has been accomplished thus far. We have much more work ahead of us on the world front. But I am confident that we possess the intelligence and the ability to do the job. In large areas of the world, great masses of people live at primitive, star~ vation levels. The Communists have already made overtures to them, promising them pie in the sky through dictatorship. There is, however, as we all know, an honest solution to the problems of the people who lve in the underdeveloped areas of the world—a solution which does not hold out the empty promise of security through dictatorship. The solution I have in mind is to be found through the point 4 program which is now pending in Congress. Under point 4, Amer~ ican technical know-how will be one of our major exports. We will furnish, through the United Nations wherever n-+ihie ‘rained technical assistance which «.." *' urbe back- ward nations in improving their agricultural methods and in laying the foundation for industry. The experience we’ve had in this sort of work under the Marshall plan has demonstrated its effectiveness, and in addi- tion, has taught us a great deal about that problem. Another phase of point 4 will encourage the investment of American dollars in the underdeveloped areas by insuring the inves- tors against political.risks of loss through changes in policies of the countries in which the investments are made—and the coun- tries which will participate in point 4 will give their assurance through treaties that they will safeguard the investments of for- eign capital which goes in to promote ndus- trial production. Point 4 promises to be a major vehicle in meeting the Communist threat in such areas as the Middle East and the Far East, Another grave problem as yet unsolved lies in the fact that the atom, now harnessed by science, has yet to be harnessed politically. Once more, it is Russian opposition which has stalemated things—this time by the So- viet refusal to permit free international in- spection, which is of course essential if in- ternational control of the atom is to be achieved. We have, on the other hand, met and mas- tered other difficult problems in carrying out our international responsibilities in this post- war period, and I am quite confident of our ability to do so in the future. ‘ I do not underestimate the magnitude of the job ahead. We have, up to this time, faced the world united in our desire to co- operate in helping the world achieve peace and freedom under democratic institutions, We cannot turn back the clock. We cannot retreat to isolation. We cannot permit our foreign policy to tumble into the political arena. Our foreign programs have been shaped on a bipartisan basis up to this point—and responsible members of both major political parties have redoubled their efforts to keep foreign policy on that high plane as the isolationist remnant in Con- gress and elsewhere have sought to under- mine bipartisanship by trying to stampede and divide us. I am very proud that America has accepted the mantle of world responsibility in a spirit of dignity, sincerity and devotion. We have been willing to settle world problems squarely on their facts and merits. So long as we continue to conduct ourselves thus—so long as we continue to inform ourselves as fully as possible and think clear-headedly—I have no fear for our future. Freedom and the Welfare State—Citation From League for Industrial Democracy EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ESTES KEFAUVER OF TENNESSEE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, May 2 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. KEFAUVER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Rrecorp an address by the distinguished junior Senator from New York [Mr. Leaman], entitled ‘‘Free- dom and the Welfare State,” which he delivered on the occasion of the forty- fifth anniversary of the League for In- dustrial Democracy, at the Hotel Com- modore, New York, N. Y., on April 15, 1950, together with a citation to him by the League for Industrial Democracy. There being no objection, the address and citation were ordered to be printed in the Rrcorp, as follows: FREEDOM AND THE \WELFARE STATE (Address by Senator Hzersrrr H. LEHMAN at luncheon on the occasion of the forty-fifth anniversary of the League for Industrial Democracy, Hotel Commodore, New York City, Saturday, April 15, 1950) I feel deeply honored today at this forty- fifth anniversary luncheon of the League for Industrial Democracy to receive the league’s citation for public service in behalf of a more democratic world. I particularly ap- preciate this citation because of your organ- ization’s long and consistent record of devo-~ tion to the ideals and the achievement of a more democratic Nation and a more demo- cratic world. I cite the words of the honorary president of this organization, that beloved philoso- pher, Dr. John Dewey, who defined the goal of the LID as the creation of a democracy that shall be a living reality in every aspect and reach of our common life. And what do we mean by ‘democracy?” Another great contemporary of ours, the Reverend Harry Emerson Fosdick, put it this way. “Democracy,” Dr. Fosdick said, ‘‘is based on the conviction that there are extraordinary possibilities in ordinary people.” I know that your organization is dedicated to that conviction. The title of my remarks today is “Freedom and the Welfare State.” I can think of no more appropriate audience than this for such a@ discussion. The League for Industrial De- mocracy, in striving for almost half a cen- tury to promote industrial democracy, has been working at the same time in behalf of both freedom and the welfare state. Your ideal as well as mine is a nation conceived in freedom and dedicated to the welfare of all the people. But that ideal is no inno- vation of ours. We are not its original spon- sors. One hundred and seventy years ago the welfare state concept was translated into the basic law of this land by the founders of the Republic. This concept was set forth in the preamble of the American Constitution. The object of our Federal Union, the Con- stitution states, is “to establish justice, pro- mote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and to our posterity.” Hence, the founding fathers were the ones who really originated the wel- fare state. And in many lands, long before our Nation was born, courageous champions of human liberty were working toward this same ideal. ‘Democracy,” said one of the world’s greatest men, “arose from men’s thinking that if they are equal in any respect, they APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD are equal absolutely.” Those words were written more than 2,000 years ago by a Greek named Aristotle. Those words define the welfare state as much as any phrase of Frank- lin D. Roosevelt or Harry S. Truman. It has become fashionable in circles of pol:tical reaction to attack the concept of the wel.are state as being prejudicial to in- dividual liberty and freedom. These reac- tionaries view with fright and alarm the cur- rent and proposed activities of government in the fields of housing, health, and social security. “These are stepS on the road to commu- nism,” the alarmists cry. But these same men uttered the same cries in the same tones of fear and outrage when President Roose- velt proposed the Securities Exchange Act, the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Hold- ing Company Act, the Federal Deposit In- surance Act and many other pieces of legis- lation which even reactionaries would not dare to attack today. The same cries were raised when Woodrow Wilson proposed the Federal Trade Commission Act in 1913 and when the Railway Labor Act was first placed on the ciatute books in 1926. I could cite laws and programs by the score enacted over the violent opposition of the reaction- aries—laws and programs which were assailed as communistic at the time—but which are now accepted even in the most conserva- tive circles. This cry of state tyranny has been raised during the last half century whenever the community has attempted to interfere with the right of a few to destroy forests, exploit little children, operate unsanitary and un- safe shops, indulge in race or religious dis- crimination, and pursue other policies en- dangering the health, safety and welfare of the community. These few have completely ignored the fact that, when their license to exploit the community was restricted, the freedom of the many from ignorance, inse- curity, and want—the freedom of the many to live the good life—was measurably en- hanced. I do not believe that our Federal Gov- ernment should seek to assume functions which properly belong to the individual or to the family, to the local community or to free organizations of individuals. But I do believe that our Federal Government should and must perform those functions which, in this complex and interdependent society, the individual, the family, or the commu- nity cannot practicably perform for them- selves. Today we in America and in the entire freedom-loving world are confronted with a world-wide threat to that principle which we hold most dear, the principle of individual dignity and of individual freedom. For the preservation of that principle we are willing to dedicate our lives, if it should prove neces- sary. But while this is a threat which we face on the world front, we face another danger here at home. That is the threat to our freedom from those within our own country who would identify individual free- dom with special privilege. Any move to diminish privilege, to stamp out discrimina- tion and to bring security to our citizens is branded by these people as un-Amercan. Not so long ago an American political leader said that the governments of the past could fairly be characterized as devices for maintaining in perpetuity the place and po- sition of certain privileged classes. The Government of the United States, on the other hand, is a device for maintaining in perpetuity the rights of the people, with the ultimate extinction of all privileged classes. Was it some Communist, some irresponsible radical or reformer who made that state-~ ment? No, it was not. It was the late Pres- ident Calvin Coolidge in a speech at Phila- delphia in 1924. It is my firm belief that the extinction of special privilege is an essential and basic pro- gram of the welfure state, Today the forces
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ot special privilege provide the chief opposi- tion and raise the wildest cries of alarm against economic security for all. In addition to the forces of special privi- lege who are opposed, on principle, to all social legislation, there are some who, while paying lip service to liberalism, claim to ke troubled by the expanding scope of govern- ment in its direct concern with the welfare of the individual citizen. These people, while conceding merit to the specific pro- grams of the welfare state, and while ap- proving the welfare state programs of the past, join with the forces of privilege in con- tending that if the Government provides any further services, it is moving in the direc- tion of totalitarianism. In my opinion these men of little vision have lost sight of the most important—and to me the most obvious—truth of our times—that a government which has secured the greatest degree of welfare for its people is the government which stands most firmly against totalitarianism. The critics of the welfare state do not understand this simple fact. They spend their time looking for Communists in and out of government and at the same time attack those measures which would deprive Communists and would-be Communists of their ammuni- tion—and of their audience. The measures which would provide for the welfare of the people are the surest weapons against totali- tarianism. The Communist International, its leaders, and their philosophy, have been responsible for many designs which we in the democratic world consider the quintessence of evil. Certainly the suppression of basic rights— the police state and the slave-labor camp— constitute the most repulsive and obnoxious way of life we can imagine. But, as a liberal, I have a special resent- ment against the Communists. I feel that one of their greatest disservices to the cause of human progress has been their identifica~ tion of economic security with the suppres- sion of freedom. It is their claim that in order to achieve the solution of the economic needs of the many, it is necessary to curb the freedoms of all. They say, in effect, that you cannot have a full stomach and a free mind at the same time. I reject this concept. I reject it as being the ultimate in reaction. This is but another demonstration of the basic affinity between Communists and reactionaries in thefr think- ing about man and his problems, Both groups believe that a nation of freenen can-~ not possibly conquer the scourges of hunger, disease, lack of shelter, intolerance, and ignorance. And they both have much to gain if they convince enough people that freedom and s curity are incompatible. It is a strange paradox that the same con- servatives and reactionaries who pose as champions of national security express the greatest antagonism toward individual secu- rity. Most of us readily acknowledge that the nations of the world cannot be free if they are not secure. It seems equally logical to me that individuals cannot be free if they are beset by fear and insecurity. Tomy mind the welfare state is simply a state in which people are free to develop their individual capacities, to receive just rewards for their talents, and to engage in the pursuit of happiness, unburdened by fear of actual hunger, actual homelessness, or oppression Ly reason of race, creed, or color. The fear of old age, the fear of sickness, the fear of unemployment, ‘and the fear of homelessness are not—as some would have us believe—essential drives in a productive society. These fears are not necessary to make free competitive enterprise work. The fear of insecurity is rather a cancer upon free competitive enterprise. 1t is the greatest threat which confronts our economic system. I hasten to add that I be- lieve in free competitive enterprise. I believe XCVI—App.——200 it is the best system yet devised by man, but it is not a goal in itself. It must always serve the public interest. We have had 20 years of the New Deal and the Fair Deal. Who would say that the American worker, the American farmer and the ordinary American businessman is less free than he was 20 years ago? Actually, freedom in the true sense flourishes more generally and more widely today than ever before in our history. The worker, the farm- er, and the Lusinessman have vastly more freedom than they ever had before. They are freer to enjoy the fruits and benefits of a productive economy and afulllife. But they are not yet free enough. We are still far from the goal we seek, In- security still haunts millions. Inadequate housing poisons the wells of family life in vast numbers of cases. Inadequate school- ing handicaps a great segment of our people. And the fear of sickness and old age still clutches at the hearts of many, if not most, of our fellow citizens. Until we solve all these problems and quiet all these fears, our people will not be truly free. This must be our goal and purpose, to set our people free, to win for them, and with them, the fullest measure of freedom which can be secured in a dangerous and dynamic world. Toward this end the welfare state is @ means. It is not, in itself, an end. My efforts are pledged, as they always have been, to work with and for my fellow men to achieve security and equality of opportunity. Let us strike hard at the shackles of fear and insecurity. Our goal is freedom and ful- fillment. With faith in mankind and con- fidence in the rightness of reason, we press forward together toward this goal. CrraTion By LEAGUE FoR INDUSTRIAL DEMOC- RACY TO HERBERT H. LEHMAN, UNITED STATES Senator From THE StaTe oF NEw YORK Aprin 15, 1950. For over a generation, you have been an outstanding leader in the battle for racial and religious equality, economic and social welfare, and the enlargement of human free- dom, here and abroad. For 10 long years, as Governor of the State of New York, you carried out, ably and de- votediy, the liberal tradition of your distin- guished predecessor, Franklin D. Roosevelt, ‘ and placed upon the statute books a volume of noteworthy labor and social legislation. ‘ On the completion of your decade of serv- ice as chief executive of the State of New York, you threw your magnificent energies into the task of saving from starvation, through the UNRRA and other ptblic agen- cies, tens of thousands of victims of war and dictatorship throughout the world. Last year, in your race for United States Senate, you made it crystal clear that only under a democratic welfare state could maxi- mum freedom be assured to the plain people of our Nation. During the present session of Congress, you ‘aave been in the midst of the good fight to make our National Government increas- ingly responsive to the needs of the people, and to render it a source of help and inspira- tion to the downtrodden of other lands. In recognition of your public services to the Nation and to the world, the board of directors of the League for Industrial De- mocracy dedicated to increasing democracy in our economic, political, and cultural life, expresses its deep gratitude to you, and wishes you many years of continued service in the cause of economic security and human freedom in the chellenging years ahead. ‘ JoHN DEWEY, Honorary President. CLarK STURN, Chairman of the Board. Harry W. LAIDLER, Executive Director. JOSEPH SCHLOSBERG, Treasurer. A3165 Proposed Rent Control Extension EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FRANCIS J. MYERS OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, May 2 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. MYERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Rrcorp a statement by me before the Senate Committee on Banking and Currency on Wednesday, April 26, in support of rent-control ex- tension. There being no objection, the state- ment was ordered to be printed in the REcorD, as follows: . SraTeMENT oF SENATOR FRANcIS J. MYERS, DemocraT, oF PENNSYLVANIA, BEFORE SENATE BANKING AND CURRENCY CoMMIT= TEE ON WEDNESDAY, APRIL 26, IN SuPPorT oF RENT ContTrRoL EXTENSION My statement this morning will not be detailed. No startling claims remain to be made, no completely unsuspected facts to be explored on this question of rent control extension. The point is—simply—that the arguments which made rent control exten- sion an absolute essential to the Nation’s economy last April are still true today to only a slightly less degree. First and foremost, the fact remains that there still exists in a great majority of the communities in our country an extreme housing shortage. Any rent control exten- sion hinges primarily on this point. And if someone can prove to me that this hous- ing shortage no longer exists, I shall be maore than willing to do everything I can to call off this whole thing. But when those who claim the shortage no longer exists begin presenting their facts and figures, I don’t want them to include completely uninhabitable quarters merely because the roof hasn’t fallen in completely, or because the holes in the floor are still small, or because three walls are still standing. . No, I am not interested in classifying such structures—and I use the term loosely—as inhabitable rental units available for a tenant. Certainly too many people in this country of ours are forced to live in such dwellings now. And certainly too many people will live in such dwellings in the future—particularly if rent controls are lifted now. But I am of the firm conviction that the Congress of these United States must not make itself a party to such shame- ful conditions. These uninhabitable quar- ters—which are in fact inhabited—repre- sent a threat to our national economy, to our national health, to our national moral standards. Perhaps some of you read in this week end papers in Washington the results of a study made by the Washington Housing Association to determine the effect of slum conditions on the health of children. It was found that out of the 211 families studied, 26 percent of all children under 12 years of age required hospitalization in the past 24% years. And when those who now come forth and say a shortage no longer exists show their facts and figures, let them not include awellings many of our people cannot afford. ‘We must be realistic about this problem of insufficient housing. We simply cannot go to the people of the United States and say “Took here, there’s a beautiful new apart- ment right across from the park and _ it’s half empty new. If you need a place to live, why don’t you move in? The rent’s only $110 a month.”
AS5166 It must not be, therefore, the policy of the Government of the United States to encourage people to spend more than they can afford in order to have a roof over their heads. All right then, let us take a look at the in- formation I have which leads me to believe a severe housing shortage still exists. I have in front of me a table summarizing certain recent studies of the Bureau of Labor Sta- tistics giving the over-all vacancy rate and the habitable rental vacancy rate in many of the most important cities in the United State. Pittsburgh, perhaps the most impor- tant production center in the country, had, in January 1950, a habitable vacancy rate of 0.4 percent. Memphis, Tenn., had in De- cember 1949, an over-all vacancy rate of 2.3 percent and a habitable rental vacancy of 06 percent. This marked difference between the vacancy rate and the inhabitable rate in Memphis illustrates what I was referring to earlier when I said we must not consider such sub- standard dwellings in determining the lack of, or presence of, a housing shortage. The results of studies in the other 25 cities show, generally, the same low vacancy rate as Memphis and Pittsburgh. To determine the housing situation specifi- cally in Pennsylvania, I have studied the re= ports made for 14 of the areas still under control in my State. The picture was a con- sistent one—an extreme housing shortage, particularly for those in the lower income brackets. Let us take a few examples. In Bethlehem, a city of about 70,000, the local government runs a trailer camp of 119 trailers. As of about a month ago, all the trailers except two were completely occupied and there was a waiting list of 274 applicants, 212 of which were veterans. These trailers house approxi- mately 420 people—adults and children. In Pittsburgh, the housing shortage is particularly acute. The administrator of the ptehurzeh Housing Authority estimates that con 85°0 homes are needed for low-cost housing to meet the demand. As of January 1, 1949, a total housing need of 51,000 units for Allegheny County was estimated by the Allegheny Conference on Community Devel- opment. This included the excess of fam- ilies over dwelling units and an estimated needed 4 percent vacancy reserve considered normal, but it did not include 41,000 accom- modations reported as dilapidated and be- yond repair in this area. The total of 51,000 moreover, is hardly affected by the 1949 volume of building which was 1,842 for the eity of Pittsburgh only. Furthermore, with several large industries scheduled to move into Pittsburgh in the near future—General Motors and Continental Can Co. among them—and with expansion being planned by such companies as Jones and Laughlin Steel Corp., and the H. J. Heinz Oo., an increase in population for the Pittsburgh area is now predicted. And such a population increase can mean only continued shortages in housing. The Philadelphia picture is not as gloomy at Pittsburgh’s, but it certainly is far from encouraging. The Philadelphia Housing Au- thority estimates that the city requires ap- proximately 84,000 additional low-rent hous-~ ing units. There is an almost total absence of vacant accommodations in the city in the rental ranges of under $60 to $65 per month, The maintenance of the temporary housing of almost 4,000 units now under the Phila- delphia Housing Authority is becoming more and more difficult, and the executive director of the authority warns that some or all of the units may have to be removed be- fore the housing shortage has been con- quered. This would, of course, add to the needs of the city. It is true that a Philadelphia ordinance of August 1947, provides that “as and when the Federal Government shall relinquish control * * * the rents of such accommodations shall be stabilized as of the date of such relinquishments.” But communities in the Philadelphia metropolitan area would ob- viously not be protected by the Philadelphia ordinance. This would create some difficult problems since for housing purposes, demand and supply do not stop at the city boundary. Furthermore, 1t seems to be the prevailing opinion that the city ordinance would be de- clared unconstitutional because of definite limitation on the city’s powers granted under the State constitution. . The hardest hit area employment-wise in Pennsylvania is the Scranton-Wilkes-Barre area. And to call the housing situation in this area shocking is to use strictly mild language. In 1949 there was not one bit of new construction for sale in Scranton, and the grand total of two units were constructed there for renting purposes. This * * * in a city of 145,000 population. The city treasurer 1s quoted as saying that “‘the hous- ing shortage has resulted in many families trying to occupy condemned citv properties held for taxes by the city of Scrurcon. In some cases we have felt sorry for them and have allowed them to occupy these premises in return for repairing them, but they are not fit to live in.” The Scranton Housing Authority estimated that 41 percent, or 9,000 of the city’s tenanted homes, are substandard. And chamber of commerce officials have indicatec that the housing shortage has seriously affected their attempts to bring new industries into this hard-hit city. In neighboring Wilkes-Barre building activity is even less than in Scranton. There has been no new construction for sale or rent in the city of Wilkes-Barre, a city of 90,000 population, in 1949. The picture is the same throughout the State. Lancaster is one of the most con- gested areas in the United States, with 65,000 people jammed into an extremely small space. The decontrolled rents in Lancaster remain high, one strong indication that the demand for housing has not been reasonably met. A study made of Chester by the Uni- versity of Pennsylvania reveals that 31 per- cent of the dwellings are substandard. In McKeesport, an important industrial center about 15 miles from Pittsburgh, only 41 . permits for new residential one-family units were issued in 1949, though the city has a population of about 60,000 people. Allen- town needs in the neighborhood of 1,300 to 1,500 rental units at a range of between $38 to $50 per month, according to city housing officials. The Housing Authority of the City of Erie has a waiting list of over 2,000 families. Letters I have received from people plead~ ing for the extension of rent control tell the same story as these studies, but in a much more heart-breaking way. Here’s one from @ Philadelphia mother: “I am a mother of two children. As a result, I am forced to live in the slums, For, like many, I am in the lowest income group. No one seems to want to rent to tenants with children. The few who might, ask rents beyond our means. The housing projects refuse to rent to separated families. It is certainly not my fault that my husband chose to desert his family. After rent, I have little for food and other necessities my chil- dren require. Yet if they grow up to be unhealthy citizens, I certainly will be blamed. “Under the rent-control law, I have some protection. Those who claim this bill to be one-sided are wrong. Those landlords who are justified in increases certainly must get them. Only this morning I received notice of an increase. In my particular case, I don’t think an increase was justified. Yet this increase was not entirely unfair. The landlady requested an increase of over 50 APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD percent. This percentage, of course, tas not granted. Can you imagine what would have happened, however, if the rent-control law was nonexistent? I know. Many persons like myself would be living in the streets.” The following letter from an Erie tenant gives some clue as to what the rent increases will amount to in case of decontrol in that highly important industrial center: “My present lease contains a clause to the effect that at the expiration of rent control the rental will be increased 50 percent over that which we are now paying. If other rental units were available, this condition would not be so bad, but in the circumstances the tenants are at the mercy of the land- lord.” These reports, studies, and letters have convinced me that a shortage still exists. I am willing to listen to the proof of those who would challenge this conclusion, but I sincerely doubt that they can come up with anything remotely close to substantial evi- dence. In addition to the fact that a shortage does exist, we must remember that a tight law—a law like the one in effect during the war years—simply does not exist today. New construction is not under controls, Converted structures are not under con- trols. Today, if a landlord presents a reasonable case in applying for rental in- creases, he must be granted such increases. In the past year, the Office of the Housing Expediter has approved 76 percent of re- quests for increases. And the increases granted have averaged 17.8 percent. Mr. Woods, in his testimony on Monday, went over some of the many grounds for granting rent increases. I might say at this point that the Housing Expediter’s office has probably been much too agreeable in au- thorizing increases. They certainly cannot be accused of being too tough. And I think I should indicate at this time my conviction that if Congress had not been in such a hurry to remove controls from certain types of construction we would not face today the problems raised by many Jandlords who honestly feel that they are alone in their failure to cash in on the temporary gravy-~ train which is the inevitable byproduct of inflation. Let us talk now about the present methods of decontrol under the Rent Control Act. Admittedly I opposed the local option pro-~ vision when it was first proposed for the Rent Control Act of 1949. I felt that Con- gress, by adopting such tactics was trying to avoid its responsibility. But local option does have the merit of letting the folks back home decide for themselves what pro-~ tection they wanted against sudden rental increases, And I think the fact that so few citles or States have exercised the option is indeed indicative of the conviction of most of the country that rent controls are still necessary. Perhaps I can make my point most effectively by reading from a February issue of Headlines, the weekly newsletter of the National Association of Real Estate Boards: “e * * Tf we get Federal decontrol on next June 380, it will be because rent decon~ trol actions are rolling up so fast that Con- gress will be persuaded to let the Federal law die. If, at the end of a year of local, option, only one-fifth of the total number of rental units has been decontrolled, then Congress will say, ‘Okay, Mr. President, we'll grant your request for another year of Fed- eral control. *" * * Here’s the tale in a nutshell: National rent decontrol depends on what your board does or has done to get rid of rent control in your town. Now is the time for action on your community.” I read this article because it illustrates the fact that real estate interests recognize the importance of the local-option provision as a test of whether the people hack home
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD really want rents decontrolled. As a matter of fact, according to Mr. Woods’ testimony Monday, there has been a marked decrease in the number of decontrol actions in recent months. Mr. Woods assigns as the reason for this the fact that most communities which no longer needed controls had already lifted them—that those remaining felt the urgent need of some sort of brake on rentals. The results of the study made by the Bu- reau of Labor Statistics on the effects of decontrolling in certain important com- munities throughout the country have al- ready been given the committee. I know you share my feeling that the study indi- cated our present economy would suffer a real jolt if controls over rentals were with- drawn this June 30. I do think—with re- gard to the Bureau’s study—that two points can stand frequent repeating: (1) That the communities included in this study all sup- posedly no longer needed rent controls, and (2) that the increases were highest, per- centage-wise, for those in the lowest income brackets. I introduced yesterday a substitute for the original rent control extension bill I cosponsored with the distinguished senior Senator from Illinois. IVhis subst: u ec is the same as the present bill with one small— put I think highly important—addition. For under my substitute bill, rent decontrol and rent recontrol becomes a two-way street. As you know, under the present bill, the Housing Expediter can only order recon- trolling when he has originally ordered the decontrolling. If the Are-stre"*~r. on the other hand, is done ec. er pr vee local or State governments, there is nothing either the Housing Expediter or the people in the affected communities can do to reinstate once again the badly needed rent controls. By my bill, any community—no matter how it was decontrolled—can again be put under the Federal law 1f the people in the com- munity think such a step is necessary. This would be strictly a local proposition, and no one in Washington or in any regional office would make the decision. We would thus have available some safeguard, some last resort if people faced overnight outrageous increases they could not meet. As to this question of whether rent con- trol still remains to a major degree a Fed- eral problem,.I would like to answer an emphatic ‘most certainly the administration of a rent-control law is an obligation of Congress.” I cannot understand the reason- ing used by those who say the whole thing must be turned over to the States. Are they trying to make us believe, for example, that what happens to the economy of the manu~- facturing cities of our country—most of them still under control—cities like Pitts- burgh-——isn’t reflected in the economic pic- ture of the whole country? Are they so blind to the facts of life that they fail to realize a loss in real wages to a laborer in Pilts- burgh will probably be reflected in an at- tempt at obtaining increased wages at the first opportunity. The average worker in the General Electric plant in Erie is re- ported to receive about $53 a week. If his rent suddenly skyrockets from $50 to $75, don’t think for a moment that come the next contract negotiations time he won’t be out asking for a wage boost to even up the score. There are other reasons, of course, why rent control remains at this time a Federal problem. The Federal Government has the experienced personnel to handle such a set- up. The Federal Government has an ade= quate law, with the necessary interpretations of that law. Probably the most important factor in this problem is the proposition so frankly discussed by Governor Bowles, in his testimony before this committee on Monday. He pointed out that the great majority of the State legislatures are dominated to an out-of-proportion degree by the rural areas in the States. Though the cities in most States represent the bulk of population, all too frequently legislation aimed at helping the population centers just does not stand a chance in a State legislature. And such would probably be the case with regard to State laws on rent controls. I want to thank the members of this committee for the attentiveness they have showed me this morning. I know that the idea of working out once more an adequate rent-control law holds no great attraction for you. We all had hoped that by now the need for such legislation would have evap- orated and that the housing shortage that has plagued our economy all these ycars would have disappeared. But, unfortunately, gentlemen, that shortage is still with us. And I can truthfully say I feel the Con- gress of the United States would be making a tragic error if we permitted the end of Fed- eral rent control within the next few months, Shall We Give Free Rein to the Enemy ia Cur Midst? EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KARL E. MUNDT OF SOUTH DAKOTA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, May 2 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Rrcorp an editorial en- titled “Shall We Give Free Rein to the Enemy in Our Midst?” as published in a recent issue of the Rapid City Daily Jour- nal, Rapid City, S. Dak., which supports the efforts of the Mundt-Ferguson- Johnston bill to both expose and curtail the activities of those subversive organi- zations which seek to establish a con- spiracy against the Government of the United States, There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: SHALL WE Give Free REIN TO THE ENEMY IN Our Mipsr? In a speech to the Federal bar association Monday night Harry Truman, President of the United States, chief executive officer of the Nation, said: “There is no area of American life in which the Communist Party is making headway— except in the deluded minds of some peo- ple.” Mr. American Citizen, whatever your par- tisan hopes and beliefs may be, do you believe that statement? Do you believe that Communist thinking has not made serious headway in this coun- try? Do you believe that it is not now boring from within, with the most cunning malevo- lence and the utmost persistence? Do you believe that the Hisses, the Cop- lons, the Klaus Fuchs did not do this coun- try very great injury? Do you believe, as the President says, that “not a single person who has been adjudged to be a Communist or otherwise disloyal re- mains on the Government payroll today?” If you so believe, are you sure that no such person who has not been so adjudged, may not still be there? Do you believe, as the President implies, that there is today no threat of communism within this country? A3167 Conspicucusly Senator Karn Muwnopt, of South Dakota, has been fighting communism and subversive interests within this country and beyond its borders. He is one of the authors of the Voice of America, taking to the Russian people the true purpose of the American people, showing them the Amer- ican way of life, so free and full compared to their own. Today Senator Munot is one of the authors of the Mundt-Ferguson bill in the Senate, a bill designed reasonably to curb communism in this country. That bill in substance passed the House overwhelmingly in the Eightieth Congress. It has now been favorably reported in the Senate from the Judiciary Committee by a vote of 12 to 1. The bill has been written and rewritten, revised and re-revised, studied with utmost care from every angle in order to obtain a working act that will adequately restrain communism and yet not interfere with the fundamental and constitutional right of the people to freedom of opinion, speech, and action. Communists, naturally, are violently op- posed to the proposed act. But there are also others, some undoubtedly sincere, others perhaps not so sincere. Those who oppose the regulation by law of subversive activity in this country say that the Mundt-Ferguson bill is unconstitu- tional, that it will abridge the right of free speech and free assembly, that it will estab- lish guilt by association, whereas guilt should be a personal matter; that it is so vague that an offender would not know when he was violating the law, and that it violates due processes of law. This bill has been much discussed in the press, and by commentators on the radio. The Washington Star, in a thoughtful recent analysis of the bill, gave this answer to the objections we have briefly named: “These are points on which well-meaning men can and generally do differ when any such legislation as this is under considera- tion. In the Star’s judgment, the criticism is not sound. The bill, of course, will be carefully debated in the Senate. If the lan- guage can be made clearer, if more safeguards can be devised without vitiating the bill, that should and undoubtedly will be done. But it should be kept in mind that the lines on these issues are firmly drawn. What most of the critics really object to is not the form of this particular bill. They will oppose any measure designed to achieve the same ob- jectives and containing the necessary teeth. So the essential questions are whether the Communist conspiracy is real enough to justify the enactment of such a measure, and whether the Constitution will permit its en< forcement if enacted. “The reality of the conspiracy is attested by the fact that we are spending more than $20,000,000,000 a year to defend ourselves against the Communists and to check their encroachments abroad. In that setting, it would be an absurdity not to do all that can be done to curb the Communists and their sympathizers in this country. Will the Con- stitution permit this? If not, then it follows that that document denies to Congress the power to adopt laws to protect the Nation against those who would use our constitu- tional liberties to destroy us. It is hard to believe that this is the case.” We think the Washington Star’s position is further well taken when it suggests that all possible further improvements should be made in the bill and then acted into law and its validity passed upon by the courts. “It should not be allowed to die simply because some people think it is unconstitutional and because some others pretend to think so.” * * *
A3168 It is true, as President Truman said to the Federal bar Monday night, “that the greatest threat does not come from Communists with- in this country.” It is true, also as he says, that Commu- nists are ‘a noisy but small (comparatively) and universally despised group” in this coun- try. But the President does a disservice to his country when he makes light of them. They have already betrayed valuable American defense secrets to the enemy. They have already, over a period of years, given the detailed secrets of the atom bomb to Russia. They infiltrated into the Government in numbers, attempting to corrupt American policy at its source, and to betray it, with all the cunning of the unscrupulous purpose of aggression which dominates them. Worse, far worse, they have instilled the poison of communism into American schools and col- leges and into a shocKing number of Amer- ican minds. Card-carrying Communists may be hard to put the finger on, but communist workers, sympathizers and fellow travelers, hidden or avowed, have been and are in many walks of American life, and some of them have been found in high places. We still nourish such vipers in our breast. Is America so indifferent to the communist dangers from within, or so weak and unre- sourceful, or so chocked with partisan self- ishness that it will not fight except with shot and shell and the blood of its sons? Confusion as to Subversive Activities Investigation EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. JOSEPH R. McCARTHY OF WISCONSIN IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesdat!, May 2 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an editorial entitled “The Confused Press,” from the Maynard News, of Maynard, Minn. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: THE CONFUSED PRESS New Yorr, N. Y. (from the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, April 25, 1950).—William Dwight, general manager of the Holyoke (Mass.) Transcript-Telegram, said today that “clever propagandists” are using newspapers “to put their subversive ideas across.” Dwight was among the speakers at the first session of the convention of American News- paper Publishers Association. He was chair- man of the session devoted to publishers of newspapers with from 10,000 to 50,000 cir- culation. He urged publishers and editors to resist the propaganda of pressure groups. “We print columns of propaganda,” Dwight said, “under the guise of news advo- cating those things which we know threaten to destroy us. We justify it on the basis that we are broadminded and want to give both sides of the story. “If we only would give both sides of the story. Instead, the clever propagandists are using us to put their subversive ideas across while many of us stand by silently.” The editors of the Minneapolis Star-Trib- une are in an embarrassing position. For the past 6 weeks they have been slanting head- lines, writing editorials, and in every way possible defending the character, reputa- tions, loyalty, and personal honesty of Owen Lattimore, and others who have been named by Senator McCartuy as having Communist affiliations. The crowning insult to the fight- ing Senator from Wisconsin was a cartoon published in the Star a few days ago, pictur- ing him in a clown’s suit, being pulled of the stage with a long hook. In addition, Star-Tribune columnists, such as Drew Pearson, Mrs. Roosevelt, and Marquis Childs, are carrying on a campaign of be- littlement, smear, and misrepresentation against McCarruy which is not honest or justified. The testimony given by Budenz is not suf- ficient to convict Lattimore, because to this date it is one man’s word against another. Only the naive would discount the Budenz testimony, because his past record demon- strates that when he “puts his finger” on a Communist the courts ultimately prove him to be right. His collaborating evidence was responsible for the conviction of Gerhart Hisler, Alger Hiss, and the 11 United States Communist Party officials. If the Lattimore case falls into the same pattern there is a good chance that Lattimore will be convicted for perjury and possibly treason. The Star-Tribune editors now recognize the seriousness of the Budenz testimony, and their comments on the case Friday morning of last week were less arbitrary than were their previous editorials against McCarry, Their present reluctance to believe the worst about Lattimore can be summarized in their own words: “What shall we believe? When it is Bu- denz’ word against Lattimore’s, where shall the confused mind go for reassurance?” There are “confused minds”’—but whose? Most of the public is confused because of the anti-McCarthy propaganda that has been hurled at them through the press and radio. However, how about the minds of the men in the editorial offices who are sup- posed to think things through and come up with the right answers? Wouldn’t it be fair to say that the confusion originates in those editorial minds and is transmitted to the public? To the editorialinquiry, “* * * where shall the confused mind go for reassurance?” may we humbly suggest the following advice to the owners of the Star-Tribune? 1. Dismiss the editorial writers who can- not distinguish the difference between civil- rights issues and honest efforts to clean out of Government the subversive radicals who may or may not carry membership cards in the Communist Party. (Alger Hiss did not carry @ card.) Hire writers who will more accurately reflect the good judgment and patriotic philosophy of the president of the two newspapers, Mr. John Cowles. 2. Discontinue the publication of the Drew Pearson column. His record over the years has proven him to be an unreliable, sensa- tional keyhole reporter, who has consistently been the hatchet man for the extreme left wing of the administration. His smear at- tacks against public officials who won’t play ball with the left-wing clique and against Members of Congress who try to expose radi- calism in high places should disqualify him as a contributor to the columns of respect- able newspapers like the Star-Tribune. Mrs. Roosevelt and Marquis Childs adequately represent the philosophy of the New Deal and the Americans for Democratic Action. 3. Give your readers a chance to read the other side of the story by adding the column of George Sokolsky and using more of the material released by David Lawrence of the United States News and World Report. These suggestions are being made in all seriousness and without malice, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Proposed Curtailment of Mail Deliveries EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FRANCIS J. MYERS OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, May 2 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. MYERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Rrcorp a release by me on April 28 regarding the proposed curtailment of mail deliveries. There being no objection, the release was ordered to be printed in the Rxrcorp, as follows: Myers Catits PostaL Cut-Bacx “IuL- CONSIDERED” PHILADELPHIA, April 27.—United States Sen- ator Francis J. Myers (Democrat, Pennsyl- vania) took issue tonight with the Post Office order to curtail mail deliveries, calling it “an ill-considered move—made without any study of the hardship it would cause—-and one which would probably cost more in the long run than it purports to save.” The Pennsylvania senior Senator, assist- ant majority leader of the United States Sen- ate, addressed the Tri-County Postal Meet- ing tonight at the Drexel Brook Inn. “As a matter of fact,” Myers said, “no one seems to know just what the order means. I have seen estimates that 10,000 postal em- ployees would be laid off—but that is about the only concrete number I’ve seen. There doesn’t seem to be any agreement as to how much this move is supposed to save— and no one seems to have any idea whether the need really exists for more than one mail delivery daily. “Apparently the Postmaster General got pressured into this by the House Appropria-~ tions Committee. The committee an- nounced point-blank that it would not rec- ommend the funds necessary to operate the Post Office next year—and in short, told the Post Office to cut deliveries to help make ends meet. . “Well, cutting mail deliveries—without paying the slightest attention to whether the present service is needed—is not any solution to the postal deficit. An impulsive move of this sort is a slip-shod way to do business, and I am dead set against this sort of procedure. The committee, in forcing the order, didn’t hold any public hearings to get the facts—and it didn’t suggest that any effort should be made to get the facts before the cut-back went into effect. In short, all it said was that the cut should be made—and the damage determined later. ‘Last year—as all of you know—there were some changes made in reorganizing the Post Office Department along some of the lines suggested by Hoover Commission recommen- dations. The 21 newest reorganization plans submitted to Congress by President Truman propose several more reorganization chang- es—and though some of the changes have met with a bit of opposition, the Reorgani- zation Plan No. 18, which was the subject of some controversy, received a favorable endorsement just the other day from the House Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments, and at present there dis no indication that a move will be made in the Senate to block the plan. “The important point to keep in mind about the Post Office—and this goes for any Government function—is that we must stick with the merits of the issue; we must get the facts; and we must avoid fly-by-night efforts to achieve ‘economy’ by hastily conceived moves such as the order to cut postal service.” ‘
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The Critical Condition of the Maritime Industry and Its Effect on the Pacific Northwest EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WAYNE MORSE OF OREGON IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, May 2 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp a memoran- dum entitled “The Critical Condition of the Maritime Industry and Its Effect on the Pacific Northwest,” submitted to me by Mr. Homer T. Ghaver, of Portland, Ores. There being no objection, the memo- randum was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: THE CRITICAL CONDITION OF THE MarRiITIME In- DUSTRY AND Its EFFECT ON THE PAciFIC NORTHWEST (By Homer T. Shaver) Very few of the general public and espe- cially the taxpayers who pay the bills realize the investment that they have in water- borne commerce in the United States. They generally take it for a fact and feel that it is the other man’s burden, not theirs. This not only applies to the citizen who does not come directly in contact with it, but also to the man who is in the business and the em- ployees of the maritime industry who are responsible for its production. In confining ourselves locally to the Pacific Northwest the amount of money invested by the taxpayers in the different ports of the States of Oregon, Washington, and Idaho in terminals on both rivers and harbors will run considerably over $63,000,000. Certainly it 1s about time that the people who are pay- ing the bills and their representatives in both Congress and State legislatures should have this fact brought to their direct attention. The public has the investment and the men representing them in public life should real- 142 Tha. it is their duty to protect that in- vestment. Outside of this public capital in- vested in terminals, there are other millions invested by private owners in like terminals and the same obligation by our legislators should apply to them as well as the public ports. To arrive at the full use and benefit of these facilities that are installed on rivers and harbors, it has also been necessary to in- vest both public and private capital in the construction of water transportation sys- tems; such as: the off-shore, coastwise, and intercoastal vessels and last, but not least, the inland water carriers. TERMINAL OPERATOR From the standpoint of port interest, ma- rine terminal facilities whose continued op- erations are predicated upon the commercial movement of maritime shir ping are finding economi: survival difficult. Major port facil- ities, as I have stated before, require large in< vestments. They have large overhead costs which cannot be justified unless they earn regular revenues from a ncrmal shipping service. Also the commodity movements up- on which these terminals depend for revenue present: a serious question to public and pri- vate terminal operators. In fact, the econo- my of the Pacific Northwest is affected by the situation that exists today as far as the mari- time industry goes and will become further intensified unless measures are taken to re- store that which has been lost. The loss of steamship service, coastwise and intercoastal, not only affects the public and private ter- minal but also a large part of our laboring public engaged in the maritime industry; such as: stevedores, warehousemen, and allied trades. STEAMSHIP LINES The situation that the offshore, inter- coastal, and coastwise steamship operators find themseives in at the n~esert time is more serious than the ‘oes ” ru. seems to realize. Due to the enormous increase of costs of operation piled upon steamship op- erators in the last few years, they find them- selves in the position of not being able to obtain sufficient revenues to even pay for the operating ccsts. The postwar adjust- ment that was necessary to be made has been the worst ever faced by the steamship indus- try. Mounting costs, constant crippling strikes, low-cost foreign competitors, and de- pressed noncompensatory rates by railroads have practically eliminated some steamship operations entirely. There are some foreign trade lines that now enjoy a superior competitor position with good earnings, a large fleet, an adequate backlog of tonnage but the domestic trades now must have public assistance. Domestic and offshore maritime commerce is abso- lutely essential to the welfare of the Pacific Northwest for the protection of its invest- ment in terminals and for its economic sur- vival, and we certainly cannot overlook the fact that here again the taxpayer, through the Federal Government, is vitally interested in the capital that he has invested in the maritime fieet and as far as our public rep- resentatives go, the investment of the private shipowners is just as important. INLAND WATER CARRIERS The inland water transportation industry, up until recent years, has received very small recognition 1n the part it plays in the trans- portation system of the United States. Our Federal Government has millions invested in its own barge lines and also through loans from the Reconstruction Finance Corpora~ tion to private owners. The total investment of inland water carriers alone in the Pacific Northwest on the great Columbia River and its tributaries and our harbors and sounds runs well over $20,000,C00. The inland water carrier is an integral part of maritime commerce in feeding and receiving cargo from the steamship lines as well as other forms of transportation, the motor carriers, and is the c-nrec*i~¢ Nnk in many port facilities. Few .° iu ‘oib72 that the accumulated capital investment by the United States for developing its inland water systems and coastal areas, not including navi- gational aids, up .until 1945 had reached a total figure of $1,286,000,000. These figures, no doubt, are impressive but when appor- tioned among the 156,000,000 inhabitants Nation-wide, the investment has returned benefits in economic transportation plus ‘property protection through flood control far in excess of the expenditure. In specifically confining ourselves to the Columbia River system the growth of our in- “ land water industry especially from Portland, Oreg. to Pasco, Wash. shows an increase in total tonnage from 635,400 tons in 1932 to 8,582,700 tons in 1947. These figures seem to show that there is a clear justification for the investments of the Federal Government in our inland waterways in the Pacific North- west and also our public terminals. The Pacific Northwest is doubly blessed in the possession of enormous territorial areas in its hinterland, rich in mineral deposits, grazing and agricultural resources with this entire area served by the Columbia River system. This waterway offers the finest, safe, and economical system of transportation per- mitting the development of this great area of -natural resources, This requires the use of suitable and economical facilities for trans- portation and our inland water system is the most economical known. A3169 WATIONAL DIFENSE In times past there has been national agi- tation against subsidies for the construction and maintenance of services for maritime commerce. The general public seems to lose sight of the fact that the maritime industry is absolutely necessary for our national de- fense. This should be self-evident to our men in public life in hight of the record of our domestic fleet and inland water carriers in World War II. Our merchant marine and Great Lakes fleet bore the first brunt of the war providing us with shipping capacity at a time when our national security hung in the balance. Ships were readily available, manned by experienced crews and furnished our first line of defense until the shipbuild- ing program got into full swing. What would have been the situation in the United States after Pearl Harbor if there had been no in- tercoastal, coastwise, and Great Lakes fleet? National disaster would have ensued. In our own Pacific Northwest there is little known of the magnitude of water transpor~ tation during World War II on the Columbia River by the inland water carriers. If it had not been for the barge lines taking over the entire gasoline supply program for the Army and Navy Air Corps, when there wasn’t enough tank cars available, the program would not have been accomplished. In do- ing this the inland water carriers overcame tremendous navigation hazards and invested an additional $11,000,000 in new equipment— gambling on the future. Still there are people in the face of the war record of the maritime industry who would put their heads in the sand and gam-~ ble with the national security by arguing that domestic shipping has served its role in our national development; that railroads need the traffic; that the water-borne ship- ping should go the way of the horse and buggy. These people are willing to gamble the country’s security for the sake of profit and for the sake of monopolistic control of transportation by one form of transporta- tion only, little realizing that in the end they are asking for complete Government ac- quisition. ' It has been repeatedly stated by our top military authorities that an adequate mer- chant marine and inland water-carrier serv=- ice is essential to our national defense and that the Navy and Army pregrams could not function without them. No detailed dis- cussion on this point should be necessary. INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION REGULA- TIONS The Transportation Act of 1940, part ITI, vests in the Interstate Commerce Commis- sion the duty of regulating water carriers engaged in interstate commerce. Under parts I and II, of the ICC Act, they already have the power of regulating railroads and motor carriers. Under pars III, the Commis- sion is charged with the duty of setting up a national transportation policy of coordina- tion so as to best serve the shipping public and to preserve the inherent advantages of each form of transportation without unfair or destructive competition. It was hoped that this act would provide a@ solution to the ruthless rail-water com- petitive problem as it did for the railroads when this act was originally passed. After 8 years of operation under this law, the situation has deteriorated steadily and in fact has reached the point of the present crisis. While the Maritime Commission is charged with construction and operation of maritime fleets and their services, it has taken en- couraging steps in initiating an investiga- tion of rail-water rate structures, but it has no control over the domestic trades. It can merely recommend or appeal to the Inter- state Commerce Commission.
A3170 Uniess the ICO takes immediate appropri- ate action to terminate this ruthless com-~ petition through mnoncompensatory rates and to restore a reasonable balance between rail and water service in accordance with its duties as charged in the law, it will be absolutely necessary for our legislators in both Congress and the different States to pass a mandate of a character which will permit water-borne commerce to live. It can neither operate nor exist under present conditions. Congress has recently appoint- ed a committee to investigate the noncom- pensatory rates of railroads and also the op- erations of the ICC, but unless this matter is kept before the committees it will just die a natural death. RAILROAD COMPETITION The present situation of our entire water- borne transportation system is due to abuses of long standing. For many years, it has been progressively undermined by ruthless, railroad competitive practices. This is not a mere accusation but a condition which has been recognized in official reports of the In- terstate Commerce Commission and other au- thoritative agencies. The domestic carrier can never hope to renew service under pres- ent operating costs when depressed rates in effect, at the present time, by the railroads which in many cases are noncompensatory to the railroad itself keeping him from receiving sufficient revenues to operate and pay his costs of operation plus a reasonable profit. A full investigation will show that where the ICC has allowed an increase in rate for railroads that they were only increased where they were not in competition with water car- riers. Applying this practice to our Pacific Northwest, every time an increase is allowed by the ICC on a percentage basis, it places the Pacific Northwest in a more unfavorable position in the form of transcontinental rates from the Middle West to the Pacific Coast. Every percentage increase on a long haul makes it cost more to lay cargo down in Pacific Northwest ports moving across the Pacific so that the off-shore carrier who now comes into the picture finds his cargo tied up and being diverted to the east coast or the Gulf ports. This immediately dries up reve- nue for off-shore operators as well as the terminal operators and affects our whole eco- nomic system. Therefore, it resolves itself down to this: Present depressed rail rates are an effective barrier to the increase of water rates and the water carriers are thus unable to recapture the added cost of operation under present inflated conditions. The rail- roads through the maintenance of depressed, rates have made it impossible for water lines to operate on a compensatory rate basis. As long as this situation continues, our marl- time commerce of the Pacific Northwest is in a hopeless position. REMEDIES Innumerable official studies and public hearings are available outlining the handi-~ cap concerning water-borne commerce in the postwar years. It would be superfluous to undertake here a detailed discussion of all these problems, the nature of which is well known to our Maritime Commission, Inter~ state Commerce Commission, various con~ gressional committees and State legislative committees. In considering the rehabilita- tion of water transportation we must recog~ nize the factors of inflated initial costs of construction and inflated operating costs and a depressed rate structure which makes it impossible to operate at a profit. As we see it, there are two possible solu- tions to the water transportation problem: 1. An adequate adjustment of the rail- water rate controversy by the ICC taking immediate appropriate action to terminate this ruthless competition and to restore a reasonable balance between rail and water service in accordance with its duties as charged in part III of the ICC Act or if it fails to do so, direct congressional action by Congress or State legislatures to put through @ legislative mandate of a character which will permit water-borne commerce to live, This adjustment, erther by ICC or legislative action, should once and for all solve the prob- lem of the railroad practice of instituting mnoncompensatory rates on water competitor traffic merely for the purpose of holding this traffic to the railroads even though at a loss. 2. Another possibility for the rejuvenation of water transportation would be a public recognition that maritime commerce is es- sential to the national defense and that it should be maintained by the Government at whatever the cost. This would imply sub- sidies in the form of favorable charter condi- tions or underwriting by the Government of operating losses. Under our form of demo- cratic government, I do not believe that any of us would choose this as the final solution. However, in reviewing the last possibility the Merchant Marine Act was enacted at a time when the merchant marine was unable to compete with foreign operators and con- struction and operating subsidies were pro- vided to overcome this and to assure that the American fleet would continue to ply the seas. Recent statistics have shown that this subsidy for both construction and operation has returned more and cost the taxpayer less than any other subsidy provided by the Fed- eral Government. Our domestic commerce would, under this plan, have to have the same public assist- ance as our off-shore operations. Naturally other forms of transportation would pub- licly oppose any such suggestion contending that it would be discrimination. However, other forms of transportation are forgetting the fact that they are discriminating against the general public and the shipper when they are carrying cargo at a loss where com- peting with water carriers and then charg- ing an excessive rate where there is no com- petition. If domestic water commerce is essential to national defense, then the cost should be carried on as one in the face of our national security program. The American people, whether they know it or not, have a tremendous stake in their water-borne commerce and in their ports and harbors. The Nation has no cheaper form of transportation and this same trans-~ portation has always been a great leveller from high rates from other forms of trans- portation. It has for a great number of years acted as a cover over excessive rates. Its con- tribution to the national welfare in economy in both war and peace cenhot be challenged. As we have said before, there is a great national investment in navigation equip- ment, harbor improvements, and terminal facilities, the full benefits of which cannot be realized unless it is fully restored and protected by either ICC action or legislative action both through Congress and our State legislators. Poll of Minnesota Farmers on Continuance of Egg Supports EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HUBERT H. HUMPHREY OF MINNESOTA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, May 2 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, one of the most vital issues facing the farm community is that of the price-support program. Therefore, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix * APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD of the Recorp the Minnesota poll of April 23, 1950, which was taken on the basis of a State-wide sampling of farm opin- ion. The poll has been conducted for several years, and has a record of rea- sonable accuracy insofor as the sampling of public opinion is concerned. The poll reveals that on the question of whether or not the principles of the Brannan plan should be applied to egg producers, 63 percent of Minnesota farm- ers said they would like to see it tried, and 26 percent said they were opposed to it. So I ask unanimous consent that the poll may be printed in the Appendix of the Recorp. There being no objection, the poll was ordered to be printed in the Fzcorp, as follows: Srarr’s FaRMERS STRONGLY Favor CONTINUED FEDERAL EaG SUPPORTS Farmers throughout Minnesota tend to favor corn acreage allotments and potato production controls, and they strongly ad- vocate continued Federal support of egg prices, a State-wide sampling of farm opinion by the Minnesota poll indicates. Three out of every five farmers questioned in the survey also say they would like to see the Government try out a plan for let- ting market conditions set egg prices, with the Government making payments to egg producers if market prices prove too low to yield a fair return to them. This would he in effect the Brannan plan approach to the problem. A representative cross section of farm men and women in all parts of the State was interviewed in the survey. Results show that 38 percent of the farmers in the sample grow corn for market, 77 percent sell eggs, and 10 percent grow potatoes commercially. Interviewers asked first: “Are you personally for or against acreage allotments this year on corn production?” The answers: Percent For allotments... ene eee eee 45 Against ...---..- 32 Qualified Ll No opinion... ..-.-.-. 2 een eee 22 100 Under corn acreage limitations announced in February—the first in more than a dec- ade—-Minnesota’s commercial corn acreage this year will be 24 percent less than the 1949 corn acreage. Farmers who grow corn for sale are more in favor of the acreage allotment program than are those who grow corn for feed, ac- cording to the survey results. Another question was: “Do you think the Government should oz: showd not continue to support the price of eggs?” The replies: Percent Should.__ oe eee 75 Should not... Qualified... No opinion, 1¢0 Seventy-eight percent of the people who sell eggs on the market endorse Federal price support, as compared with 63 percent of those who do not market eggs. Those answering that the Government “should” continue to support egg prices were asked: “How do you think the Government should support egg prices?” Some suggest a support program based on egg quality—“so that good eggs get the best prices.” Others favor Government pur- chase of surplus eggs, or “setting a minimum price,” or “basing the price on the cost of
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD feed.” Twelve percent think “the present method is all right,” with the Government ~ointsit~> rrices through arrangements my yea, 7 plants. More than two out of every five farmers who favor egg price support say they have no ideas to offer on how that should be done. All farmers were asked: “What would you think of this kind of plan? Let market conditions set the price of eggs, but have the Government make pay- ments to the egg producer if the market prices are too low to give them a fair return. How does that strike you—would you like to see that plan tried, or would you be against it?” ‘ The answers: Percent Like to see it tried--.--_------ 63 Against it-.w-.---__- 26 Qualified_.._---.- 1 No opinion _.--..----- ee 10 100 A Bigelow farmer c-mmented, “That sounds like Brannan’s plan, and I wouldn’t be in favor of it,” and a Lake Elmo farmer said, “I’m against all Government payments.” But a Winthrcep farmer believes such a plan “would be fairer—all could make a living,” and a Pine River farmer said he would favor trying out the plan if the “fair return’’ were based on the cost of production. The final question was: “Bo you favor or oppose production con- trols for potatoes?” The replies: Percent Favor_.__..------ ee ee 49 Oppose____ 22 Qualified___. 1 No opinion._--~-..----.-..----- 28 100 The relatively few commercial potato grow- ers questioned in the survey were evenly divided in their opinions on the question of rreauec~ controls, but among other farm- c's i..07C was a vote of more than 2 to 1 in favor of such controls. News Letter by Senator Myers to the People of Pennsylvania EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. FRANCIS J. MYERS OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, May 2 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. MYERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp a Washington News Letter dated April 29, 1950, written by me, being a personal report to the peo- ple of Pennsylvania. There being no objection, the news let- ter was ordered to be printed in the ReEcorp, as follows: WasHINGTION News LETTER—A PERSONAL RE-= PORT TO THE PEOPLE OF PENNSYLVANIA Aprin 20, 1950. Coal is having its troubles—and to im- portant coal-producing States like Pennsyl- vania, the sweeping changes that have taken place in our fuel tastes in the past 30 years or so have a vital significance in terms of employment and industrial growth. Questions of grave national concern arise from our fuel developments. I have recently introduced Senate Resolution 239 to au- thorize gathering all the facts about fuel in order that a national fuel policy may ultimately be worked out. policy, we must know— Our energy requirements for the foresee~ able future in terms of needs for an expand- ing peacetime economy and for security in event of war. What fuels are best adapted to meet our energy needs—considering costs in terms of available resources—and the possibilities of- fered by research. How much we can rely upon fuel imports in eve it of war, recalling our wartime power shortages, and the difficulty of bringing in materials from abroad. We must have an abundant supply of en- ergy at reasonable prices. This 1s funda- mental, and every phase of our national life depends upon c~ert> cre i to produce, to transport, to kK... “..u..° our homes—in short, energy for everything. Our national energy needs have jumped 70 percent since World War I. But, though our needs have sky-rocketed, coal has stead- ily played a smaller role in supplying them. The recurrent labor-management disputes in coal ure the symptoms, not the cause, of the changes which have taken place since World War I. Here are a few comparisons: Coal furnished 82.3 percent of our energy in 1918—~but by 1949, only 385 percent came from coal—anthracite production last year was 50 percent less than in 1918—and bitu- minous output in 1949 was only 75 percent of the 1938 production. Petroleum supplied 10.9 percent of our energy in 1918—and 37.4 percent last year. Natural gas rose from 86 percent at the end of World War I to 19.1 percent in 1949. Water power, still a small fraction, climbed from 3.2 percent to 5 percent in 1949. There isn’t an easy answer to explain these big shifts. The following points, thouzh the list is far from complete, are involved in the picture: Vast new energy markets have developed that rely on liquid fuels—the automobile, the truck, and the airplane are notable examples. Pipe lines carry energy in the form of oil and gas at far lower costs than are possible through the costly handling of coal by rail and water. Labor costs for coal are far greater than for oil and gas. Once an oil or gas well is drilled, the product is pumped from the earth or flows out under its own pressure. Every ton of coal must be dug—a job which, despite big mine safety improvements, is still difficult, dirty, unhealthy, and costly. Oil imports are capturing important in-~ dustrial markets which formerly used coal, and while it’s true we still export nearly as much oil as we import, the recent rise in oil imports has cut directly into coal markets. Profits in oil and gas have been much higher, permitting far more research—and heavier capital investment—which have low- ered oil prices. Determining a national fuel policy will be a complex job. Facts about particular fuels are frequently contradicted by other fuel suppliers, and comparisons are difficult. Coal makes up 95 percent of our known fuel re- serves, so our much more limited supplies of oil and gas raise questions of conserving our resources. Energy must be available at rea~ sonable prices or our economy will falter— and our economy must expand to meet our goal of full employment. My resolution tackles the necessary job of finding the facts we must have to meet the future. When we know what our future energy needs will be—and where the energy will come from—we have the basis for deter- mining policies which will lead us to still higher living standards, full employment, To establish this and much stronger foundations for our free-" enterprise system. A big and needed task is ahead, but it must be undertaken now as a matter of national welfare. Francis J. MYERS. A3171 Commendation of Senator Wiley by Wis- consin Weekly Newspapers EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWARD J. THYE OF MINNESOTA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED- STATES Tuesday, May 2 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. THYE. Mr. President, we are all familiar with the fact that the weekly newspapers cf America are one of the most vital information links between the Congress and the American people at the grass roots of the Nation. The weekly papers provide indispensable services to folks at the grass roots, keeping them in contact with developments in their own community, in Washington, and throughout the world. In this connection, I was delighted to note in two weekly newspapers of Wis- consin—the Waupaca County Post and the Clintonville Tribune Gazette—pub- lished in the northern part of the Badger State an editorial message in praise of the senior Senator from America’s dairy- jJand. I think that this editorial pub- lished in these two affiliated papers voices the judgment not only of many other Wisconsin weekly newspaper edi- tors, but of daily editors and of the peo- ple of Wisconsin as a whole. I ask unanimous consent, therefore, that the text of this fine and well-de- served editorial as published in the April 27 issues of the Clintonville Tribune Gazette and the Waupaca County Post entitled “Winey Alert for Wisconsin” be printed in the Appendix of the ConcREs- SIONAL RECORD. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Rrcorp, as follows: Witexy ALERT FOR WISCONSIN Senator ALEXANDER WiILEy deserves to be congratulated on his alertness in protecting and advancing the interests of Wisconsin in Washington. The Senator now is engaged in a campaign to force the Department of Agriculture to step up milk research in order to counteract the damage which the Democratic Congress did to the dairy business by passage of the oleomargarine bill. The Department, he discovered, spends four times as much money for cotton re- search as for dairying, yet dairying is the farmer’s greatest source of income. “Some observers have called the present Democratic administration peanut and cot- ton crazy, judging from the constant em- phasis of the administration (dominated by southerners) on expanding cotton and pea- nut production,” said WILEY. The recent farm bill signed by President Truman, the Wisconsin Senator points out, is a fantastic measure to increase farm and peanut acreage, especially, at the expense of the entire Nation. Senator Winer also is seeking removal of barriers to certification of Wisconsin and Minnesota milk for interstate shipment, as a means of aiding farmers in expanding their markets. Another pet project of the Wisconsin senior Senator is authority for an inventory of the forest resources of our State. He has found that the many wood-using industries of the State will be glad to cooperate with the governmental forestry agencies in this task.