APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD served 14 years before being elected to the Senate in 1931. The venerable old Senator was elected President pro tempore of the Senate three times, in 1896, 1901, and 1908, and was chair- man of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce when he died in 1911. Wurrs's latest conquest, as majority leader of the Republican-controlled Senate, moves him a step nearer to his grandfather's highest point of attainment, while the coveted chairmanship of the Commerce Committee tied another knot in the paral- leled careers. Both were extremely active committee members, Frye having served on many boards, including the important Coast and Insular Survey, Foreign Relations, and Pacific Railroads. WHute, active during more hec- tic eras when committees in Corgress were as thick as Missouri cousins, is one of the few men in Congress today who served through both World Wars I and II. Like his grandfather, ne has been assigned to powerful Senate committees, which guide the legislative prograin from day to day. He has examined charges of extravagance and waste as a member of the Appropriations Committee; maintained close touch with diplomatic developments the world around on the Foreign Relations Committee; has guided and tempered Federal policies touch- ing railroads, telegraph, trucking, and a host of other problems as a member of the Inter- state Commerce Committee; and has served on a few others, including the Merchant Marine, Monopoly, Civil Service, Education and Labor, Claims, Patents, and Wildlife Conservation, He sponsored the White-Jones Merc.ant Marine Act, the White bill for regulation and development of Alaska fisheries, and the Radio Act of 1927. PROTECTED MAINE'S WELFARE An ardent champion of his own State of Maine, WHITE fought against the Canadian reciprocal trade agreement, importation of Russian and Swedish pulpwood, coastwise trading by foreign vessels, and rallied to the cause of the Quoddy project. He fought for the protection and care of inland fisheries and protested the St. Lawrence Seaway project. His time and energies have been called upon by five Presidents of the United States, from Woodrow Wilson down through Frank- lin Roosevelt, and now a sixth, President Truman. The Honorable O. Gardner, of Maine, in making his memorial address to Senator William P. Frye, said of Wrrn's grand- father: “He was an idealist. He was that kind of a man who would always make his politics expreas his honest opinion. Senator Frye is @ partisan, who said, ‘I have little faith in a man connected with a political party and who really and honestly believes in its principles, who is not ready at all times to defend and maintain them’.” TAKES BROADER VIEW There the two differ slightly. Wuitx is an idealist, but not so avidly partisan that he does not recognize some worth in the opposing party's creed. One of his biogra- phers has said: “With some people, patriotism is a holi- day garb to be taken out of the moth balls on Washington's birthday and the Fourth of July. With Wars, patriotism is an atti- tude of mind and being which applies 365 days a year—a profound faith in the destiny of America—plus a quiet devotion to those everyday, humdrum chores which Kipling once described ag ‘the meaner damnabilities of life.’” Some patriots join the chorus of God Bless America and call it a day. Others sit up until midnight to get the committee re- port into the Government Printing Office in time for the next day’s debate. Every coun- try, of course, needs both types—but, when the going gets tough, the warbling patriots always find a narrowing market for their wares, and the burners of midnight oi] grow to their full stature of responsibility and service. Wnt is an idealist, but a burner of mid- night oil as well. He has closely paralleled his illustrious grandfather's career, but his full stature has not yet been attained, he is still building unmeasured authority and influence as a spokesman for Maine in the highest councils of the Nation. The old Senator can rest assured that the eet is doing a man’s errand, and doing well, Wool Production EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FRANK A. BARRETT OF WYOMING IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, January 13, 1947 Mr. BARRETT. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I include in the Recorn a statement I made today before the Committee for Reciprocity In- formation, State Department, and other Departments: Wyoming ranks second in wool production among the States. The records disclose that about 30,000,000 head of sheep, which repre- sents 72 percent of all the stock sheep of the country, are owned by ranchers in the West- ern States. The sheep, lamb, and wool in- dustry is sixth in importance in the entire area, with an annual income of over $270,- 000,000. Over 100,000 people are employed to run sheep in the West. Livestock is the basic industry in the 200 counties in the range States. About 96 percent of the range of nearly 800,000,000 acres in these States is usable only for grazing purposes. Any ac- tion which will reduce the numbers of live- stock running on these lands, which are worthless except for grazing purposes, and thereby reducing the return which our econ- omy receives from these lands is detrimental to the economy of the whole country. Grass is the chief crop to be harvested from this immense area, The 30,000,000 head of sheep we run on the western ranges are daily gath- ering the products of the soil and processing them for utilization in our economy. The livestock industry is Nature's free contribu- tion to society. Our livestock is a free labor force whose value is inestimable, and anything that hampers our livestock pro- duction and prevents the complete use of Nature's free labor and processing plant af- fects the welfare of our entire economy. Raw material income, particularly from agricul- ture, including livestock, represents new wealth annually created by production. Over a 20-year period before the war the national income averaged $7 for each dollar of total farm income. This average held in good times and in bad times. Over the same period our factory pay rolls total the same amount as our total farm income. Our live- stock industry is the greatest source of new income in the Nation. The investment in livestock is equal to the combined invest- ment in the steel and automobile industries, Any action that will promote greater use of our grazing lands and the enlargement of our livestock industry will help every segment of our economy and every dollar of income thus created will turn into 87 of national income for use in trade. It follows there- fore that any reduction in livestock income will be followed in a few months by a4 cor- responding reduction in factory pay rolls and in our national income, All7 As I have said, we in Wyoming are deeply interested in the tariff on wool and wool tex- tiles. Now, what are we here for? It seems absurd to us that this great department of Government would give serious consideration to a reduction in the world tariff at this time. As I have pointed out, any action that will impair the situation of that industry will be refiected shortly in reduced factory pay rolls and national income. It is unbelievable that any action will be taken that will weaken a great industry which produces an essential commodity for our national econ- omy, and one which so vitally affects the welfare of all the pecple in the Western States. It is unthinkable that any action will be taken that will destroy the utilization of the grass, the chief if not sole crop of the western range. No one can deny that such action would seriously affect the economy of the West and consequently the economy of the Nation. During the war the wool industry has been kicked around from pillar to post. Let me briefly call to your attention some salient tacts: 1. The stock-sheep population on the farms and ranches of the United States has declined from 49,000,000 in 1942 to 37,000,000 in 1946. 2. The number of lambs saved has dropped from 32,000,000 in 1942 to 26,000,000 in 1946. This indicates a further reduction in our stock-sheep population in the next year or two. 3. During the 5-year period from 1936 to 1940, inclusive, our domestic wool supplied on the average over 82 percent of the wool consumed in this country, whereas last year our domestic woo] supplied less than 20 per- cent of the wool consumption of the United States. 4. In the 5-year period from 1942 to 1946, inclusive, this country consumed 5,159,000,- 000 pounds of wool. During the same period our domestic production amounted to 2,071,- 000,000 pounds of wool. On November 9 last the Commodity Credit Corporation reported it had a stock pile of 517,000,000 pounds of unsold wool from the domestic production for the year 1943 to 1946, inclusive. We were able to sell only a billion and a half pounds of our domestic wool during that period, when our consumption during each year of that period was over 1,000,000,000 pounds annually, and it must be noted that prac- tically the entire market for domestic wools in those years was in supplying military re- quirements. Congress required the use of domestic wool for that purpose, otherwise: we would have been unable to have sold any of our domestic wool in the American market. 5. During the 5-year period from Septem- ber 15, 1941, to September 15, 1946, the woo) growers of this country received an average price increase of only 18 percent for their wool. During the same period, the average price increase for 23 other farm commod- ities was 94 percent. A few of the increases are: Corn, 144 percent; hay, 94 percent; cot- ton, 101 percent; peanuts, 100 percent; to- bacco, 84 percent. Wool received the lowest price increase and the next lowest was an increase of 37 percent. 6. United States Tariff Commission shows by its report that in 1944 the wool growers of the United States lost 10.8 cents on each pound of wool produced or a loss of 80 cents on the wool produced from each head of sheep. They further show that during the same year the loss on sheep and lambs amounted to 42 cents per head or a total loss of $1.22 per head on wool and meat pro- duction, 7. The apparel wool imports to the United States less reexports for the 5-year period of 1986 to 1940, inclusive, total 612,861,000 pounds. For every year from 1941 to 1946, inclusive, the imports exceeded the total im- ports for the preceding 5-year period. 8. England and her dominions shipped 600,000,000 pounds of apparel wool to the
A118 United States for the year ending last July, and Argentina shipped 847,000,000 pounds for the year ending last September. 9. World stock piles of wool amounted to over 5,000,000 pounds at the close of the war. England and her dominions control over 85 percent of the fine wool of the world under what is known as the joint organiza- tion (J.O.), which gives it a virtual monopoly on fine wool. 10. The United Kingdom has provided 80 percent of the woolen and worsted textiles imported into this country and it is antic- tpated that under the 41-percent reduction in ad valorem rates on woolen and worsted textiles under the trade agreement of 1939 that imports will be increased sixfold in the years that lie ahead. Without question the British Government ts presently engaged in an expanding program of its textile in- dustry for the purpose of increasing its ex- portation of worsted and woolen textiles to this country. Delivery by air of these textiles from England makes their plants as close to the American trade as the manufacturing plants of our mills. 11. The average hourly earnings in the wool-textile mills in England as of last No- vember was 35 cents, whereas in the United States it was @1.05. Labor costs therefore are three times as high in the United States as in the United Kingdom. 12. The woolen and worsted manufacturing industry employs 150,000 persons and is sev- enth in point of employment in this country. The clothing industry employs over 500,000 persons. A reduction in our tariff means the exportation of jobs, make no mistake about that. From these facts, it seems to me that the conclusion is .rresistible that a reduction in the tariff on wool and woolen textiles would be disastrous to our industry and to the Nation. Tarifts are merely an equalizer be- tween our price levels and the rest of the world. The American market should be open to the domestic wool growers and our wool textiles manufacturers and in order to do that the tariff should equalize the difference in costs at home and abroad. A reduction in the tariff? now would be the knockout blow for the wool industry of the United States. If the tariff on fine wool was in- creased from 84 to 51 cents foreign wool could still be brought into this country at less than the cost of production of our Gomestic wool. It seems to me, therefore, that the best interests of the United States demand that our first concern be the welfare of the people of the United States and that common sense dictates that our course of action should be either to increase the tariff in order to ade- quately protect this great industry, or to provide an import quota which would insure proper protection for both the wool growers and the manufacturers of wool and worsted textiles. The American people are unwilling co sace rifice the American market to foreign pro- ducers and manufacturers who can produce cheaper by reason of low wages, long hours, and lower living standards. How To Solve the Potato-Surplus Problem EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. PAUL W. SHAFER OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 14, 1947 Mr. SHAFER. Mr. Speaker, I want to give the Congress a few facts on a mat- ter which is of the utmost importance to the American farmer—the American public—yes, and to the people of the world. It relates to the surplus crop of po- tatoes, In 1946, the potato surplus was one of the largest on record. H. C. Moore, head of the potato section of the Michigan State College, reports that the latest statistics show the po- tato output in this country will total 477,000,000 bushels. This indicates a surplus of approximately 105,000,000 bushels and, in the so-called late States alone, the surplus will run upward of 65,000,000 bushels. Certain phases of this problem were discussed on the floor of the Senate last July. At that time, it was proposed that potatoes be dehydrated and shipped abroad for relief purposes. It was point- ed out that the Government was com- mitted to buy the surplus potatoes any- way as part of the price stabilization policy, and, therefore, the only added cost to the taxpayer would be that of de- hydration and shipping. As I recall, the Department of Agricul- ture maintained at that time that the only alternative was to leave the pota- toes rot in the ground or above the ground. I did some checking in Michigan on the situation and I have found another alternative—one that is not only prac- tical but also points the way toward a major contribution to the long-range stability and prosperity of the American farmer. Then I found that potatoes cannot be stored like wheat or other grains, that the only method of saving parts of the crop was either to dehydrate the pota- toes or—and this is most important— convert them into potato flour. The dehydration of potatoes, accord- ing to the testimony last July in the Senate, is a fairly expensive proposition. However, dehydrating plants were set up during the war and subsidized by the Government. The price of finished de- hydrated potatoes runs around 35 or 40 cents a pound. Processing and packag- ing alone runs from 8 to 10 cents a pound. Despite the fact that dehy- drated potatoes have all the nourishment and good that whole potatoes—or, for that matter, wheat—have, it was a very costly method of saving millions of bush- els of potatoes. Not much, if anything, has been said about potato flour, despite its great im- portance in the ultimate solution of the problem. Potato flour is selling in a com- petitive market at only 8 cents a pound. That is less than 2 cents a pound more than wheat flour. Potato flour is pro- duced only in comparatively smal] quan- tities. Therefore, it is logical to believe that if production of potato flour climbed to large proportions the price could be reduced much more. The commercial price of potato flour includes the open-market cost of raw potatoes used. Obviously, then, the cost of processing a pound of potato flour is far below the cost of processing a pound of dehydrated potatoes. It is also a fact that potato flour retains all the essential minerals and vitamins and is more nutri- tious than wheat flour. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD William Stuart, senior horticulturist for the Department of Agriculture, wrote a book called The Potato. In it he stated, and I quote: Potato flour contains all the chemical con- stituents of the potato tuber, retains all the minerals and salts which dietitians say are vital to the human body. It is also a matter of record that potato flour, if properly stored, will keep indefi- nitely—and that is most important in this program. Some of my colleagues will recall that as early as World War I we shipped potato flour to France. But the big problem is that there are comparatively few flour-processing plants in this country. However, I submit that making pota- toes into flour is a far more logical and economic method of utilizing surplus potatoes than is dehydration. Now the question is, should the use of this method, and any plants which might be created to do the job, be confined to the current emergency when much of the flour would be shipped to Europe and Asia for relief purposes? Admittedly, that might be wasteful, although in view of the lower processing costs, I am not so sure. But that brings me to the second and even more important phase of this program. There is a man from my State who runs five Lakeries in which he features potato bread. What he had to tell me was a revelation. He indicated that this program could provide one of the great- est single contributions to long-term farm prosperity in this Nation. We know that 71 percent of our potato crops are produced in 12 States—and that makes this program mighty tmpor- tant to a large segment of this Congress. Well, this man, Jack Schafer—inci- dentally, he is no relation of mine, al- though he is a good friend—started some 15 years ago with a single smal] bakery. The expansion and growth of his busi- ness has been fantastic, and he tells me that most of it is due to the popu- larity of potato bread. He makes it from a potato culture, which in turn is made from potato flour. He uses a ratio of about 4 pounds of potato culture to every 100 pounds of wheat flour. The result is a bread which has the old-fashioned potato taste, or flavor, keeps longer, and is generally said to be a better loaf. The increase in his sales bears this out, but he also had tests made by the famous Siebel Institute of Technology in Chicago. I want to quote from the official Siebel report: Two-day-old Schafer's bread containing potato culture scored higher than any of the other bread tested. It rated 96.5 percent as against 83.4 to 84.2 for the three com- petitive makes. It was also higher than the Schafer's bread without potato culture. Purthermore, in comparison, the superior- ity of the culturized bread became more pronounced when it was 6 days old. External appearance was excellent and texture, flavor, and eating qualities were such as to produce = unusually flavorful and setisfying piece That was at the end of 6 days, a time when ordinary bread is already moldy and discarded. The Siebel report showed that loaves of culturized bread did not show mold until the seventh day,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD although they were kept in incubators at an average of 90° to 95° heat and 80 to 85 percent humidity, thus approx- imating poorest summer conditions. Even then the mold could only be found under a microscope. As the result of these tests the potato bread received the Siebel certificate of merit. But most of us here would not have needed chemical tests to show the logic of adding potatoes to bread. We could just recall when we were young and mother baked her own bread. Remem- ber how she used to add mashed pota- toes or potato water? Do you know why? Because, in addition to the better potato flavor, the bread stayed fresh longer and, because she only baked once a week, that was mighty important to her. Schafer gets that same old-fashioned flavor and keeping quality by using po- tato cullure. It proved so sensational that he bought the company which man- ufactured the culture and now nearly 300 bakeries around the country are adding this potato culture to all their white and dark bread, buns, rolls, doughnuts—and in fact, just about all of their yeast-raised baked goods. I have a number of testimonial letters here which bear out the contention that potato bread has universal popularity. They come from top bakers the country over. One Wisconsin baker says: “I could sell more if I could get the wrappers,” and another in California says: “We have used a number of carloads and find that culturized potato flour is beneficial to flavor and keeping qualities and all- around uniformity.” A Mount Vernon, N. Y., baker says that he believes potato culture has a def- inite part in the baking industry and a Boston bread maker says that the cul- ture adds that “particular something” which people want in bread. The question now comes up: What to do about this? I anticipate, naturally, that some of my colleagues from the Wheat Belt may be a bit apprehensive over what they might feel to be an effort to sell potato flour as at least a partial substitute for wheat flour. Nothing could be farther from the truth. This program actually will benefit their constituents both directly and indi- rectly. It will bring an over-all improve- ment of the farm picture and the elimi- nation of the need for broad potato sub~ sidies year after year, which, inci- dentally, this year consist of a $1.75- to $2-a-bushel support price. Also, it is a known fact that the trend over a period of the last two decades has been toward eating less and less bread. A temporary halt in the trend resulted from the bread-enrichment program, but bakers fear that the down trend will be resumed, That means less bread bought and less wheat used. Now, per capita consumption of bread climbs where potato flour and culture are used in bread, This Michigan baker, Jack Schafer, president of Peter Pan Bakeries, tells me that bread should be neutral and have the old-fashioned neutral flavor which potatoes impart. Bread should be the foundation for sandwiches made with butter, jelly, cheese, or a hundred other ways of using bread, Surveys show that people actually eat more bread when it is neutral in flavor, It is something like water. People nor- mally drink a lot of water; but if all they get is pop or something like that, their normal intake oi liquids declines. It is contended that addition of potato culture to bread actually will boost the over-all corsumption to such an extent that wheat growers would benefit to a great degree. And this really is just another step forward in the bread enrichment pro- gram which has helped so much and enabled bakers to bring to the American public a white bread that is both nour- ishing and palatable. Addition of po- tato culture further enriches bread. Let me summarize the benefits which could be derived from the universal adoption of about a 4 percent potato flour or culture content in all white bread, dark bread, rolls, buns, dough- nuts, and so forth. It would mean that the bakers of this country would be using 4 pounds of po- tato flour to every 100 pounds of wheat flour they now use. It takes 5 pounds of raw potatoes to make a pound of flour, so that would result in an annual con- sumption of upwards of 100,000,000 bushels of potatoes. That would wipe out the surplus. It would be even more beneficial to farmers than appears on the surface, because the commercial grades of po- tatoes used to make the flour are the hardest grades for him to market. In fact, the demand is so poor that millions of bushels are used each year as cattle feed and additional millions are never even taken from the ground. This would be a new and most stable source of income for every farmer grow- ing potatoes. It would mean new millions of dollars in extra income for America’s farmers and coming in at the very time when the effects of inflated wartime demand for foodstuffs can be expected to be on the wane. I believe that this potato program could prove a source of income for the farmer which could well be a major fac- tor in keeping his earnings stable over the coming years and help prevent another depression. This could not be accomplished in time to solve the immediate problem but steps could be taken and the program started. And if flour-processing plants were put up they could process surplus potatoes for shipment abroad for relief during the twilight period in which a widespread program of encouraging the use of potato flour in bread was being made effective. This is a common sense approach which would benefit every American by eliminating a problem which has long contributed to higher taxes—as every subsidy must. It means a better bread for the Ameri- can public. It means more money and stable markets for the farmer. A119 If the bakers of this country were to adopt this program of including that small portion of potato flour in their products, it would solve the surplus po- tato problem immediately. However, we must realize that there is not enough potato flour processing capacity in exist- ence at this time to handle the job and an educational program is desirable and necessary. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend these facts to the attention of the Secretary of Agriculture, who, I know, wants to help solve the potato surplus problem. I am calling on the Department of Agriculture to gather all available data—and to give the Congress soon a tangible recom- mendation of a plan of action to make the program effective. The Late Honorable Lynn J. Frazier EXTENSION OF REMARKE HON. CHARLES R. ROBERTSON OF NORTH DAKOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 14, 1947 Mr. ROBERTSON. Mr. Speaker, my distinguished colleague the Honorable Witutiam LEMKE announced to the Con- gress yesterday the death of Lynn J. Frazier, former Senator, of North Dakota. I, too, share with my colleague and the people of North Dakota in the loss sustained by the Ctate of North Dakota in the passing of Lynn J. Frazier. It has never been my pleasure to become inti- mately associated with the Senator, nor to have known him well. It was in the early years of his governorship that I entered the State. I recall that those were stormy days in North Dakota. It was under his regime that the Re- publican Party was snlit into two fac- tions. He became the Governor of the State and the leader of the faction that is known to this day as the Non-Partisan League. But throughout these many years the league has remained Republi- can at election time. At no time have they ever sought a separate ballot or a third column. For many years prior to the arrival of Lynn J. Frazier on the scene, there had been great dissension within the State over the prices of grain and the control of funds. The leaders of the Non-Parti- san League charged the Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce and the business interests, including banks and railroads, of exercising dominant power over the economic life of the people of the State. It was under his leadership as Governor that the State constitution was changed permitting the bonding of the State to engage in an industrial program. Lynn J. Frazier, then the Governor, entered upon his duties in the year 1916. He served two full terms and part of the third term. Under his direction many changes were wrought in the State’s gov- ernment and many bitter political bat- tles took place. As a result of these bat- tiles the Governor was recalled in his third term. He was, however, after his
A120 recall, elected by the people of the State of North Dakota United States Senator in the year 1922, and he served in this capacity for 18 years. Despite the many who disagreed with Senator Frazier as Governor, it must be remembered in fairness to him that he administered well the affairs of the State, and he was confronted with difficult problems in putting into effect the new laws and the industrial program. At no time was there any charge against his character or his record. His record as a United States Senator was one that highly commends him among the Members of that distin- guished body. He has ever sought the welfare of the less fortunate people in the country and moved in the direction of legislation in their behalf on all oc- casions, Senator Frazier leaves his wife and -five children: two boys, Willis and Ver- non; twin daughters, Uni and Versa; and a third daughter born during the second year of his term as Governor, named Lucille. I extend to all the members of the family and those closely associated with him my profound sympathy in the loss of this distinguished citizen, husband, and father. The Teachers’ Pay Problem EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. MAX SCHWABE OF MISSOURI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 14, 1947 Mr. SCHWABE of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my re- marks in the Recorp, I include the fol- lowing editorial from the Columbia (Mo.) Dally Tribune of January 9, 1947: THE TEACHERS’ PAY PROBLEM The National Education Association, the national professional organization of educa- tors, with a membership of more than 775,000, has come forth with a challenging declara- tion of policy calling for improved schools, higher professional standards for teachers, more adequate salaries for teachers, and more State and Federal aid for education. The story of the shortage of teachers has been told so frequently in recent months that there seems no good reason for repeating it here. Most potent reason for the shortage, of course, is the low salary and other un- attractive factors which go along with teach- ing school. That story is well known, too, and the present salary levels are a far cry from what the NEA describes as an essential minimum—-$2,400 for a qualified beginner who is a college graduate, with increments beginning the second year of teaching and leading to a professtonal salary level of @4,000 to 06,000 for experienced teachers. Even granting that the $2,400 is the “ask- ing price,” and that teachers would be willing to settle for less, especially since compara- tively few college graduates in other fields make $2,400 during the first year they sport & cOllege degree, it is going to take a lot of money to put teachers’ salaries on a plane that will attract—and keep—the right kind of talent. The teachers have looked around and called upon Uncle Sam as the only man with ennugh money to do the Job. They must realise that Pederal financing will mean, to a greater or lesser degree, Fed- eral control. Governor Donnelly and his squabble with the Labor Department over the State employment service is the most recent, but not the only, example of what happens when the school district or the city or the State goes to Uncle Sam for help. And, of course, Uncle Sam har only one Place to get the money he so generously doles out to the school district, the city, or the State. It comes from the pockets of the tax- payers in the school district, the city, and the State. He can, of course, even up the benefits as between the rich areas and the poor areas—the haves and the have nots— and that is what the school teachers are seeking. At the same time he creates a lot of administrative jobs that send the cost to the taxpayers kiting. Even considering the need for equaliza- tion of educational opportunity, we wonder whether the teaching profession is providing @ very constructive sort of leadership for the Nation; whether it has considered the pit- falls of plunging the schools into Federal control; and whether it has explored other means of providing adequate and economical education for the Nation’s youth, with teachers who are reasonably paid. It is, of course, an accepted fact that there must be State aid to insure proper school facilities in some poorer districts, bu. it alec is pretty obvious that somewher: there is @ back- breaking point in taxation. Somehow we are going to have to cut our pattern in educa- tion and other governmental functions to fit the cloth of our resources. We wonder if our educators ever have con- sidered the possibility that our public schools may be spending money on too many things; that the cost of the frills of education has made it impossible to raise salaries for those who are teaching the basi subjects which will prepare the pupil for college or a job. That, of course, may be a narrow view of the matter. There will be many educators who will say it is. On the other hand, the schools cannot do everything. And perhaps rushing to the Federal Government for money is one of the things they ought not be doing. Significance of the Recent Election EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ELLSWORTH B. FOOTE OF CONNECTICUT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 14, 1947 Mr, FOOTE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include therein an address by the Hon- orable John Q. Tilson, of New Haven, a distinguished Member of this House for 22 years and for 6 years the majority floor leader of the House, speaking before the Graduates Club of New Haven, Conn., on December 4, 1946: Mr. Chairman and fellow club members, had I anticipated that my drawing power was such as to bring out a crowd like this, I might have struck John Plant for a larger hono- rarium. At any rate, I appreciate the fine audience, Bemembering the. precept that a prophet is not without honor save in his own country, I had not expected to see 80 many. I should be leas than candid if I falled to say that an audience made up of men with whom I associate daily, lunch together, talk together, and discuss public questions to- gether, is not an easy one for me to address somewhat formally. Somehow I feel that you APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD know pretty well my “down sittings and up- risings, and understandest my thoughts from afer off.” When your chairman first suggested that I talk on the recent election and the signifi- cance of the result, he appeared really solici- tous that so far as humanly possible my remarks on the subject should be unbiased. What a suggestion to a rock-ribbed, dyed-in- the-wool Republican. It reminded me of the good lady down in Charleston, 8. C., who wished some one would write a really un- biased history of our Civil War—from a southern point of view. Perhaps the best way to leave it is that what I shall say will be unbiased—from a Republican viewpoint. When I was in politics and we tried in ad- vance to figure out the probable result, we usually made a certain percentage discount for damned liars. So if there are any New Dealers left and they are here tonight, they are free to Make such discount as they deem proper for Republican bias. At least 1 do not wish to be a hypocrite, so what I say will be from the heart as well as from the shoulder. The outcome of the recent election was what would be called in countries with a par- Mamentary form of government a vote by the people of lack of confidence in their govern- ment. It was a complete turn-over of the majority in both Houses of Congress. It was @ mid-term reversal, that is, it occurred in the middle of a Presidential term. What does it mean? Broadly, what does it signify? Such mid-term reversals have been of very frequent occurrence in our national history and for all sorts of reasons, good, bad, and trivial. There were at least five such rever- sals between 1865 and 1895. It would serve no present purpose to refer to any of these, except perhaps, a brief reference to 1866. In the election of 1864, Lincoln, a Republi- can, and Johneon, a Democrat, were elected on & Union ticket. Saving the Union was the issue, that 1s, winning the war. Lincoin had repeatedly made evident his policy for re- storing the Union. When Johnson became President, the war being over and Lincoln dead, he tried his best to pursue this Lincoln program for reconstruction, but without success. | In the congressional election of 1866 an overwhelming majority of Republicans was elected. They were called Black Repub- Means then, and thoroughly deserved the name, for they proceeded to write one of the blackest chapters in all our American poiiti- cal history, from which the whole country still suffers. All of the cherished plans af Mr. Lincoln for restoration of the Union were ruthlessly scrapped for what was called reconstruction. It had in it a much larger element of destruction. I speak feelingly on the subject for I was born and brought up in a part of the country that had suffered greatly from the so-called reconstruction. All the other midterm reversals may be skipped over till we come to 1910 when I myself was a Member of Congress. I was unable then and still am not able to figure out any substantial basis for the 1910 turn- over. Perhaps Mr. Taft's ineptitude as a politician was as much responsible as any other cause. At any rate, the Democrats took control of Congress, and, as usually happens after a midterm reversal, the in- cumbent President was not reelected. Almost the same can be said of the 1918 reversal when the Republicans resumed control of Congress. At the time of the congressional elections in 1918 the end of the war was in sight. By all the ordinary rules, Mr. Wilson's party should have been continued in power. There had been no issue between the parties during the war. Both had supported tt loyally, and, as I well recall, most of the Republican candidates for reelection would have been giad to set- tie on a basis of status quo. If Mr. Wilson had asked his party to support at the elec- tion all Members of the war Congress who
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD had loyally supported the war, regardless of party label, few changes would have been made, To the contrary, he appealed to the voters to elect a Democratic Congress which they indignantly refused to do. In the 1930 congressional elections, at the middle of Mr. Hoover's term, the result was very close but the Republicans had a majority of two in the House. Before the old Con- gress expired in March, the Republicans- elect held their caucus as usual, nominated Mr. Longworth for Speaker and unanimously reelected me as the majority floor leader for the new Congress. As was then the practice, Congress was to meet in the December following, but before that date arrived, one Republican had re- signed and five had died, Mr, Longworth being one of them. Of the six vacancies, five of them had been filled by Democrats, so that when Congress convened Texas’ Jack Garner filled Speaker Longworth's place, and I had no majority to lead. In the two earlier instances, under both Taft and Wilson, the change of parties prob- ably made little difference in the legislation, though as usual it indicated a complete change of administration at the next Presi- dential election, which took place as ex- pected. In Mr. Hoover's case it probably did maks @ difference. A depression had descended upon the country and as usual the party in power was being held responsible for it. Mr. Hoover struggled manfully trying to do something about it, but proposals coming from him were coolly received by a hostile Congress and usually got nowhere. In fact, the real spirit of the triumphant majority, looking forward to a complete change, in 1932, was well expressed by one of the lead- ers when he said: “We'll do just enough to save the country, but not enough to save Hoover.” Now coming to the revolution of 1946, was it nothing more than the preliminary skir- mish in the real battle to come off in 1948? Was it nothing more than the time-worn battle cry of “turn the rascals out,” which usually means turn in another crew of ras- cals, or at least as near to that description as those turned out? As a confirmed optl- mist, I refuse to believe it. I believe that it meant a great deal more than this and that the next 2 years will so prove. To my mind the sobered attitude of mind shown by Republicans all over the country in the first blush of a victory, far more sweeping than had been expected, was a good omen. There were no victory parades, no red fire, no brass bands. No singing “Happy Days Are Here Again.” One could feel it in the air that a sobering sense of responsibility held sway over thoughtful minds. All of which tends to give hope to those who look for something constructive to replace some of the legisla- tion and activities under such legislation that have proved unwise and destructive of our domestic economy and our American way of life. A few words as to the causes that brought about the revolution of 1946 may help to throw ight upon its meaning and what may be expected to result from it. There are almost as many explanations as there are explainers, but there are a few things among the many that practically all analysts agree upon as having had an important influence in making the mandate given at the polls so emphatic. Fortunately, we can at once eliminate all international ijasues. Such foreign policy as we have has been loyally supported by Re- publicans as well as Democrats. Republican VANDENBERG worked loyally and unselfishly shoulder to shoulder alongside of Democrat Tom ConNALLY to hold up the hands of Democrat Secretary Byrnes, while New Deal- ers Wallace and Preprzr Were trying to un- dermine him. So there was no mention of foreign issues in the campaign and it could be truly said that beyond the water's edgo we were a united country. However, of do- mestic issues there were plenty. Just a glance at some of the more important ones. One of the two most important causes of the decisive turn-over, as agreed upon by analysts, was the attempt to fix prices and all the countless restrictions affecting the daily life of almost everyone. And it was not simply the inconvenience and sometimes dis- tress caused by the restrictions and controls. These were borne with varying degrees of patience especially while the war lasted, What finally caused the worm to turn was that at last it became evident, even to the masses of the people, that the whole scheme was not only negatively futile but positively harmful, in the final result accomplishing exactly the opposite of what it had been sup- posed to do. Patient in wartime, housewives got tired of waiting for meat, soap, and other necessities, while OPA controls snagged the supply lines. Consumers joined producers in protest. Millions of losers in the race between wages and prices joined the ranks of the dissatis- fied. Honest dealers kept prices down, but their customers soon found that they had little or nothing to sell. The reversal at the polls was especially noticeable in the indus- trial areas, showing loss of faith in the prom- ises that prices of necessities would be kept down. Then people got mad and began to say things, yes, and got ready to do things, which purpose they proceeded to carry out on No- vember 6th. In addition to the inconvenience of s0 many controls steadily increasing, a number of people were beginning to fear that our Government had inclined toward the adop- tion of the kind of controls used under totalitarian forms of government and that these controls in the hands of a bureaucracy might become permanent. There were nu- merous statements to this effect made public. Max Lerner's book It Is Later Than .You Think says: “It is neither accident nor whim that the New Deal is studded with ‘alpha- betical’ agencies. Each of them occupies a salient on the advancing front of the transi- tion to a socialized state.” He speaks of them as essentially an executive government and the spear point of social advance, Mr. Roosevelt being described as the ideal leader for such an advance. To many such notions were cause for alarm. Any administration ought to have known better than to have attempted to put into force and carry out such a colossal scheme of price fixing and controls. An early dem- onstration of the folly of such a scheme is interestingly referred to in an old letter writ- ten by Tom Paine to Danton in tht time of the French Revolution, May 6, 1793, It reads as follows: “I see also another embarrassing circum- stance arising in Paris of which we had full experience in America. I mean that of fiz- ing the price of provisions. * * °* The Convention has nothing to do with regula- tions of this kind; neither can they be car- ried into practice. The people of Paris may say they will not give more than a certain price for provisions, but as they cannot com- pel the country people to bring provisions to market the consequence will be directly contrary to their expectations, and they will find dearness and famine instead of plenty and cheapness. They may force the price down upon the stock in hand, but after that the market will be empty. In Philadelphia we undertook, among other regulations of this kind, to regulate the price of salt; the consequence was that no salt was brought to market, and the price rose to 36 shillings sterling per bushel; and we regulated the Al21 price of flour till there was none in the market, and the people were glad to procure it at any price.” Referring to this letter and recalling the meat famine of last October, we can only say “History repeats itself.” Next to the disillusions and irritations con- nected with price controls and other ex- asperating restrictions, the unhappy labor situation doubtless influenced the election result more than anything else. The urgent need for production and more production was obvious while unprecedented strikes Paralyzed vital major industries. There were strikes against public utilities on which mil- lions depend for the means, comforts, and necessities of their daily lives. Even strikes against agencies of government itself. The voters decided that something must be wrong somewhere and clearly manifested their be- lief—that something should be done about it, Following the election, editors, columnists, analysts, and a lot of plain ordinary people began figuring on what had happened and what might be anticipated in the near and more distant future. It was quite generally agrecd that the CIO and the PAC, having stuck their necks out the farthest, had been the hardest hit. Lumping the two together as a single entity, Mark Sullivan says it “saw defeat of candidates it supported, victory for candidates it opposed. It saw an election outcome which means, more than any other one thing, a mandate by the country to the new Congress to write new labor legislation. It sees a change of mood on the part of the President, who now is undoubtedly willing to sign labor legislation which before the elec- tion he vetoed.” Certainly, the result makes it clear that the country is not ready to go along with the extremists. At least a halt has been called 80 that people may take time to consider the direction in which we are heading. It is my belief that President Truman will welcome the opportunity to change his attitude toward labor legislation. I believe that he will sign any reasonable bill to improve the present impossible situation in regard to labor relations. As a real friend of labor, he can justify his act. In my judgment it will be good party politics to do so besides being the best thing for this country, includ- ing labor, of course. Even if he felt that it would not be wise politically to actually sign such a bill, he could, and, I believe, would, exercise the constitutional privilege of hold- ing it 10 days and permitting it to become a law without his approval. I may be far too much a confirmed opti- mist, but I really believe that Truman as a patriot and a good American will strive dur- ing the coming 2 years to adjust himself to the situation confronting him by cooperating with Congress as far as possible, and that we shall see some good legislation instead of the deadlock and do-nothing feared by many. His greatest handicap will be his political advisers and the millions of officeholders who quite naturally wish to hold on to their jobs. In spite of this, I shall continue to hope that Mr. Truman will so meet the difficult task confronting him as to grow in the confidence of the people rather than lose further ground. Let me close by giving you part of an edi- torial from an Ohio county newspaper be- cause it covers much of the ground I have tried to cover and closes on the same opti- mistic note: “Where do we go from here? It is obvious that New Deal nostrums and quack govern- mental remedies, with every man a king and everyone made happy by Government plan- ning his !ife and fortune, is out the window. ‘The people have turned thumbs down on the planners, But Republican strategists now in the saddle will do well not to seek to hood- wink the public by telling them ‘happy days are here again.’
A122 “The people should be told the truth. After being made to believe for 14 years that black is white and two and two makes five, this novel approach to public questions might be good politics as well as good ethics. A campaign of education should emphasize the truism that no government on earth can create wealth or is gifted with black art which will produce wealth without work or creative industry; the people should be told that for the first time since Alexander Hamil- ton the credit of the Federal Government has been impaired by vast New Deal expenditures before the war and by incomprehensible sums expended in prosecuting the greatest war of all time; they should be told that economy is not optional, it is imperative; and that ambitious programs of public works and s0- Cial legislation must await a clearing of the financial skies; labor should be told that wages come out of profits and the only way to maintain the high standard of American living is by creating wealth by capital and labor working in unison. “Everyone should be told the blunt and unpleasant truth that we cannot juggle our- selves out of the mess we are in through political hocus-pocus or demagogic promises or legerdemain, We have all got to get down to work and produce something beside monkey wrenches to throw into the political machinery. “The road ahead is long and hard, but it is not a hopeless task with which we are confronted. May the Republicans, now in the driver's seat in Congress, with a reason- able assurance of being in power,in the execu- tive branch of government 2 years hence, lead us with wisdom and courage through the troubled postwar waters which lie ahead. We must not fail. This blessed land, this light- house of liberty to millions of enslaved hu- man beings throughout the world, must and shall be preserved.” Why Government Laber Courts Must Fail EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FREDERICK C. SMITH OF OHIO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 14, 1947 Mr. SMITH of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Reoorp, I include a statement made by R. C. Hofles, of Santa Ana, Calif., and published in the Bucyrus (Ohio) Tele- graph-Forum on January 11, 1947, en- titled “Why Government Labor Courts Must Fail.” This is a lucid explanation and goes right to the heart of the matter. It follows: WHY GOVERNMENT LABOR COURTS MUST FAIL (By R. C. Hoiles) Many people think that the labor problem can be solved by government labor courts. If the word “compulsory” were used in dis- cussing these labor courts, most people would not believe in them. But government labor courte would either have to have authority to enforce their decisions, and thus be com-~- pulsory, or else be only advisory. In either case, that is not the solution. If a labor court is to be simply advisory it invariably will side with the party that has the most votes in order to keep its job as adviser, The consumer is the best voluntary counsel for labor disputes. But let’s consider what it would be if it were compulsory. Because we have courts ta settle disagreement, many can have courts to settle labor disputes. But the case is not at all parallel. At present courts attempt only to interpret agreements that have already been made. They never attempt to tell two people they must make an agreement. Let us suppose that an individual has 8 written agreement with his automobile deal- er. He deems that the dealer has transgressed the agreement and takes it to court. The court interprets the agreement and tells what each party must do to comply with the agreement. But the judge does not and would not at- tempt to say, in the absence of any prior commitment, what the automobile dealer should do in the absence of any agreement. The judge would not say that the individual must continue to patronize the automobile dealer or that the dealer must continue to do business with the individual, if there had been no agreement. But compulsory arbitration on labor mat- ters would do exactly that. It would attempt to force two parties to continue a relation- ship which they might not want to continue. If there is a labor dispute the labor court would come tn. It hands down its decision, and the workers, although dissatisfied, must keep on working. They very likely would not keep on working, but we will assume they did. They probably would come to work but lay down on the job, so that the employer would not even want them there. But suppose that the employees do con- tinue their services under a decision unsatis- factory to them. After a year the arbitra- tors would call again. This time suppose the award is more satisfactory to the work- ers but the employer says he cannot abide it and still continue in business, Would he be privileged to close down his shop? Or would the workers have a right to say that since they were forced to accept a distasteful situation a year before, it is poor justice that does not also compel the employer to accept a decision unsatisfactory to him? Hardly any contract is completely satis- factory to both sides. Both would like to have a better contract but it is the best they both can get. So instead of either one quit- ting or striking, both of them agree. Vhen we have no strikes. Then we have continued production. Then everybody, including the customers, workers, and employers, benefits more than if there were no agreement, even if not completely satisfactory to each side. The Government has no magical way of making agreements satisfactory to both sides. The Government is only force. Com- pulsion or force is always distasteful or ob- noxious to those on whom it is used. The only way strikes can be avoided is by agreement. The only way we can have voluntary agreements, and all real agree- ments are voluntary, is to have each party realize that he never can get all he wants and that all he is entitled to is the right to make a bargain with anyone in the world who will give him the best bargain. That is all either the employer or worker is entitled to. Anything else takes away from some person his God-given right to exchange his services with the person who will give him the most. If the Government interferes with free exchanges it is not an impartial government; it is a government of men rather than a government of law. Unless we can get peo- ple to believe that no man, no matter how poor, and no firm, no matter how rich, has a right to have protection from competition, we will continue to have labor troubles. Our production will be restricted, friction will grow, and our standard of living will be less than it would be, and unless we are careful, we will wind up with a dictator who will tell us all how we shall trade. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD people think we Reselution of Nonbasic Steel Coordinating EXTENSION OF REMARKS, HON. HOWARD A. COFFIN OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 14, 1947 Mr. COFFIN. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- orp, I-include the following resolution: To the Congress of the United States: At a meeting of the board of governors of the Nonbasic Steel Coordinating Committee held November 14, 1946, in Washington, D. C., i¢ was unanimously resolved that the Con- gress of the United States be respectfully re- quested to investigate by an appropriate committee the adequacy and results of exist- ing labor laws and regulations, to determine among other basic requisites of sound labor relations the following: A. If the said laws and regulations do give protection to the right of employees to or- ganize and bargain collectively. B. If the equality of bargaining power has been restored between employers and em- ployees. C. If fundamental practices have been en- couraged to the friendly adjustment of in- dustrial disputes arising out of differences as to wages, hours, or other working conditions. D. If business has been safeguarded from injury, impairment or interruption. Respectfully submitted. Nonpagwc SrexL CooRDINATING CoMMITTEE, By E. S. Evans, Jr., Chairman, Board of Governors. Wasuincron, D. C., January 4, 1947. Year of Decision EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KARL E. MUNDT OF SOUTH DAKOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, January 13, 1947 Mr. MUNDT. Mr. Speaker, during the annual convention of the Speech Asso- ration of America, which was held this year e Hotel, of Chicago, Dr. W. Norwood Brees chairman of the speech department of Wabash Col- lege and president of the Speech Asso- ciation of America, delivered one of the most stimulating and thought-provok- ing addresses it has been my pleasure to hear in many years. It is a challenge to Congress as well as to American citizens generally as this Republic surveys its educational prob- lems which include not only the need for the more adequate financing of schools and more respectable salaries for teachers but which also emphatically in- clude the need for a caréful scrutiny and reevaluation of the curricula of our schools and colleges to determine how much of the course of study is adapted and adaptable to the world of today and how much simply remains in the cur- riculum because of tradition, inertia, or indifference.
APPENDIX TO THE, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Mr. Speaker, Congress will have be- fore it many suggestions for strengthen- ing the educational program of America. The following address by Dr. Brigance should be “must” reading for us all be- fore we make final decisions on legisla- tive proposals involving the great cause of education. It is not enough that we promote edu- cation; we should do what we can to improve the types of education to be promoted, Spreco or W. Norwoop BriGaNce, “YEAR oF DECISION” That iconoclastic historian, Bernard De- Voto, wrote a significant book 3 years ago entitled “The Year of Decision: 1846." It was a history of America in that one year, + 1846, and it was DeVoto's contention that the course of American history and the pattern of American life for the half century follow- ing were determined by events and decisions that took place in the year 1846. It is a paradox that the year 1946, even more than 1846, is likely to be significant as & year of decision: 1946 is year one of the atomic bomb; 1946 is year one of the United Nations organization; 1946 is year one of a power struggle between two political philoso- phies, communism and democracy—or what passes for communism and democracy—that ‘is Ukely to test both our ability to handle atomic weapons without explosion and to live under a United Nations organization. As a discerning wit remarked, ‘“‘From now an, we know it is one world, all right; but we don't know yet whether it is to be this world or the next world.” Robert M. Hutchins said last May to the American Council on Education: ‘The great problems before us are first, can we survive? and second, what kind of life are we going to lead if we do?” Then he added that the world must try to arrive at a destination where survival is possible within not more than 5 years. If Hutchins is right, then 1946 is year one of our 5 years of grace. If he is right, it is still a year of decision, because what we have done in this year, and shall do during the first half of 1947, is likely to determine for a long time to come the course of history, not for America alone but for the world. Now this year of decision in international affairs is also a year of decision in American education, for the obvious reason that the repercussions in the political and military world have set off seismic tremors in the academic world: 1946 is year one of the Harvard report on general education in a free society; 1946 is the year of the Columbia University report on a college plan in action; 1946 is a year in which more than 100 col- leges and universities, including what we may call the eminent institutions, have either an- nounced or instituted a revised curriculum; 1946 is a year in which Mr. Hutchins’ pro- nunciamentos on the fall of man have been accelerated in tempo. In brief, 1946 is a year in which American education is attempting to fix a new pattern of education. It is the most widespread cur- riculum revision since the day of Charles W. Eliot, and it is likely to determine the direc- tion of education for at least the next gen- eration. Therefore, I want to look at two of these recommendations for curriculum change— two that are widely Known and that reflect the thinking of a large area of traditionism in education—and I want to estimate their implications, mm The first is that proposed by Mr. Hutchins, Mr. Hutchins, of course, is a curious cross between ‘“Peck's bad boy” tn education and a lonely, austere Savonarcla who thunders, _ pure, was not defiled by time. “Repent ye, or be doomed!” His tenets are these: 1, The human race is either about to de- stroy itself, or to survive under a “peace more horrible than war’—unless we change our present system of education, drastically and at once. 2. To save the human race from this ill- fated alternative, we must abandon voca- tional education in the schools, and make all education a liberal education “for the common vocation of citizenship.” 3. The core of this liberal education is not to be found in a study of modern science or social science, or in focussing on the. contemporary problems that beset man. It 4s to be had in the study of great books of the past—let us say, Homer and Thucydides, Virgil and Augustine. Somewhere along the line I either read or heard a speech of Mr. Hutchins’ in which he said that the curricu- lum he proposed would not be essentially altered over the period of 100 years, or even 1,000 years. Pure knowledge, became it was I believe 1 am not doing Mr. Hutchins an injustice by saying that this is an inherent part of his ‘plan of education. Now, Mr. Hutchins’ faith is appealing. He is so earnest and so unashamed that you cannot help but admire him. In the midst of a modern world, created for the most part by the educators who rebeled against the ascetic pattern of education—I assume it is understood by persons in this room that the scientific and economic foundations of modern society were laid by educators who broke away from the classical tradition—Mr. Hutchins repeats without apology an old refrain: “Faith of our fathers, living still, In spite of dungeon, fire, and sword, We will be true to thee ‘til death!” He stirs in us old memories. We want to believe him. Perhaps we want to believe him because he calis to us with a childlike faith. Perhaps also we want to believe him because his is a simple faith, and we are hungry for simplicity. So many of our problems are compiex. We want to get back to the days when life was simple, or we thought it was simpie, But we cannot quite give our intellectual assent to Mr. Hutchins. If it were wholly an act of faith, we might go along; but rea- son compels us to pause. Perhaps, too, we remember that warning spoken by Dr. Don- ald B. Tresidder, once an eminent physician and now president of Stanford University. Said Dr. Tresidder to a group of educators last May at which Mr. Hutchins was present: “I have long been interested in Robert Hutchins—from a medical point of view!" Essentially, Mr. Hutchins’ grand scheme of education breaks down at that point which Ortega y Gassett calls “historic reason.” Gassett has pointed out that when a people think effectively they think in terms of their historic past, and they use “historic reason.” Mr. Hutchins, in calling upon the faith of his fathers, denies historic reason. He would take us back to the educational concept of the early Middle Ages, to a pat- tern of education that closed the Platonic schools, and rested its learning on the Sacred Books of the Past—with the result that the intellectual world was frozen for 1,000 years, It was not inevitable that we have the Middle Ages. Part of the responsibility for it rests on those educators who closed the Platonic schools and anticipated Mr. Hutchins by 1,500 years. They were the original wore shipers of great books. Mr. Hutchins is seemingly unaware that the educational gospel he preaches was also the dominant theme of education in the oldest of all civilizations—that of China— and that its effect was to still the spirit of inquiry in the Chinese mind, or at least to prevent its ever arising, and that this pat- A123 tern of education was perhaps the single most influential factor in the slow withering of what otherwise might have become a Great civilization. Again, it was not inevi- table that China should be as it is today. Part of that responsibility rests on those educators of China 2,500 yeurs ago who fixed on China the pattern of education that Mr. Hutchins would fix on us. Thomas Jefferson warned us against Mr. Hutchins’ doctrine a century and a quarter ago. At the age of 73, when many minds look backward instead of forward, Jefferson wrote urgently that “* * * institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. * * * as new discov- eries are made * * * institutions must advance also, and keep pace with the times,” and he warned against any society remaining “ever under the regimen of their ancestors” (Writings, Ford, ed. X, 42-43). Ralph Waldo Emerson repeated that warn- ing 108 years ago. Speaking before the Phi Beta Kappa Society of Harvard, he said bluntly: “Each age, it is found, must write its own books. * * * Meek young men grow up in libraries, believing it their duty to accept the views which Cicero, which Locke, which Bacon, have given; forgetful that Cicero, Locke, and Bacon were only young men in libraries when they wrote these books,” Hence, instead of Man Thinking, we have the bookworm. Mr. Hutchins’ plan of bookworm education fails in the test of historic reason. Next, I would like to look at the Harvard report on General Education in a Free So- ciety. I began reading that report before the printer’s ink on it was decently dry. I had been waiting for its appearance for al- most a year. I think I can truthfully say I started reading-it with excitement. I ex- pected something of the institution that had produced Charles W. Eliot, who touched off the educational changes of the late nine- teenth century. Well, one is not wholly disappointed in the Harvard report. Irf many respects it is what one would expect from Harvard: scholarly, thorough, and at times brilliant. But it is characterized by the limitations of the Har- vard institutional mind, limitations from which Charles Eliot had been wholly free (and from which the Harvard scientists are free taday). I do not mean to imply that the institutional mind of Harvard is a sep- arate and distinct species. It is rather a particularized pattern of the academic in- stitutional mind, but it is characterized by its own particular limitations. These lim- itations, for example, are seen in the his- torical writings of those Harvard historians, Albert Bushnell Hart and Edward Channing, as contrasted with their Harvard successor, A. M. Schlesinger, who was educated at Ohio State and Columbia. It was the pattern of mind dealt with by Vernon L. Parrington, himself a Harvard man, in his Main Cur- rents in American Thought. But if you want to meet the Harvard in- stitutional mind at its best, you will find it in John P. Marquand's delightful satire, the Pulitzer prize-winning novel of 1938, The Late George Apley. Marquand under- stood the type of mind that produced the Harvard report, and he satirized it in a wicked and delightful manner. To anyone who plans to read that report, I recommend first reading The Late George Apley. Hav- ing done that, you can read more discern- ingly between the lines of the report: “Drag JouNn: [wrote the late George Apley to his son] When I come I want you to take me to some of the new plays, and please don't feel that I shall be shocked by them. Your father can stand 2 good deal.”
A124 And again: “Dean JOHN: * © © Yesterday I found that your mother had actually taken this [Sigmund] Freud book out of the Athen- aeum. She was embarrassed when I found her reading it * * *, and gave as her reason that she wished to know what [your sister] Eleanor was doing. I am now read- ing it for the same reason.” Throughout the Harvard report there is this shocked acceptance of the present, a resentment that we are living today instead of yesterday. In the allied Harvard report made in 1942 on the training of secondary school teachers, especially with reference to English, this resentment against having to live today produces the following incredibly delightful statement. “Unfortunately, however, there is another element * * * and this is the mass- communication of the newspapers, maga- zines, movies, and (especially) the radio. The tendency of allofthem * * * isto cajole and lull readers, onlookers, or listen- ers into a permanent state of unquestioning receptivity; to prevent their becoming rea- soning, critical beings” (p. 4). The late George Apley said exactly the same thing in the same overtones: “Drak JOHN: I wish there weren't quite so many new ideas. Where do they come from? * * © T try to think what is in back of them and speculation often disturbs my sleep.” This attempt to deny the existence of the present, or at least a resentment against having to deal with it, is the underlying Philosophy of the latter half of the Harvard report. It states and adheres to the premise that one of the purposes of education is to free the student from the tyranny of the present. We all agree with that, of course. I want to make that very clear. There is no understanding the present without knowing e significant part of the past. That is pre- cisely what I had in mind in quoting Ortega y Gassett, that we think effectively only when we think in terms of the historic past and use historic reason. I believe that. But the effect of the Harvard report is to free the student from the tyranny of the present by fixing on him the tyranny of the past. To some of us, tyranny in any form is bad. It was against this tyranny of the past in education that Thomas Jefferson struck when he turned his back on his own alma mater, William and Mary, and established the new University of Virginia—to break the grip of the dead hand of the past that smothered living learning. It was against this tyranny of the past that Charles Francis Adams II protested to Har- vard University itself, in a year when he was & member of the Harvard Board of Over- seers. Of the education he had received at Harvard he said: “No matter how long I may live, I shall never be able * *“ * to overcome some of the great disadvantages which the * * * wrong theories and worse practices of my alma mater inflicted upon me. And not on me alone. * * * We were all college graduates, and yet how many of us could follow out a line of sustained, close thought, expressing ourselves in clear concise terms?” It is one thing to study the past. It is another to be smothered by it. I want to make it clear that much of the Harvard report is good, is in fact very good. Especially, it seems to me, that its statement of the traits of mind that constitute educa- tion are the best I have ever read. These abilities are, the report states, “to think effectively, to communicate thought, to make relevant judgments, to discriminate among values. They are not, in practice, sep- arable and are not to be developed in isola- tion” (p. 65). Its exposition of these abilities is profound and penetrating. For exampie, it recognizes three aspects of effective thinking: (1) Logi- cal thinking, or “the capacity to extract universal truths from particular cases and, in turn, to infer particulars from general laws”; (2) relational thinking, or the “under- standing of complex and fluid situations, in dealing with which logical methods are not uate * * thinking in a context”; (3) the element ot imagination in thinking, which is “distinctive in the thinking of the poet” and may be described as neither straight thinking, nor crooked thinking, but as ‘curved thinking” (pp. 65-67). This part of the report states explicitly that “education is not merely the imparting of knowledge, but the cultivation of certain ‘ aptitudes and attitudes” (p. 64). If the report adhered to this throughout, it would be the greatest document on educa- tion of the twentieth century. Its failure is that it does not. Having set this as the qual- ities of mind to be developed by education, the report then—curiously and without ex- planation—settles back on the orthodox cur- riculum divisions of the natural sciences, the social sciences, and the humanities. From that point it ceases to offer any further origi- nal or profound contribution. One is at loss to explain the inconsistency, or shall we say the failure to follow through. Was it because the tao parts of the report were developed by two subcommittees which, being unable to reconcile their differences, simply let them stand unreconcijed? Or was the committee a victim of structural monism, seeking for a unified simplicity? At any rate, it settled back on a structural unity, simple but adequate, of natural sciences, social sci- ences, and humanities. Basically the weakness of Mr. Hutchins’ grand scheme and of the latter part of Harvard report is that they rest tacitly on the assumption that knowledge is power. “Give students knowledge,” they say in ef- fect, “and they will be able to think effec- tively, to communicate thought, to make relevant judgments, and to discriminate among values.” No one questions this need for knowledge, not in the least, but knowl- edge alone does not enable people to think effectively, to communicate thought, or make relevant judgments, or discriminate among values. Having the knowledge is not enough. There must be added ability to use that knowledge. In every crisis of the twentieth century there has existed enough knowledge in the world to solve it. But it was not in the right place at the right time. That is an- other way of saying that it could not be communicated to the point needed, at the time needed. Twice before I have referred to Ortega y Gassett's insistence on the importance of historic reason. Let me use it now in specific instance. Ramsey Muir, one of the most competent of English historians, at the close of his discussion of the English Civil War, set forth one of the issues of modern education. He had just finished the account of this conflict which rent the Eng- lish people 300 years ago. It was a@ conflict between two political forces that rejected compromise. The Royalists had lost, their King had been executed, their leaders had been proscribed, and Cromwell had been made dictator. The Puritans had won a vic- tory as complete as any victory by force can ever be won. Yet at Cromwell's death 5 years later, the fruits of victory were lost and the Stuart Kings were restored to the throne. It was a conflict in which the Puri- tans lost in the end because they had won the war. After deacribing this, Muir came to his momentous statement: “The war had taught the English people ‘that even the noblest and the most enlight- ened aims are vitiated and will eventually be frustrated if those who advocate them try to secure their victory by force, and not by discussion and persuasion. These [dis- cussion and persuasion] were to be hence- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD forth the characteriatic notes of the growth of free institutions in the British Common: wealth.’” (A Short History of the British Commonwealth, IT, 487.) The British people learned that in the sev- enteenth century, not through their educa- tional system, but threugh war and dicta- torship. What it thus learned is what every democracy must teach to every successive generation: That democracy rests on discus- sion and persuasion, that its people shall discuss their problems and reach an intelli- gent consensus, that they shall not goose- step to military commands, nor yield to mob law. There are two kinds of nations in the world today, only two: Those who in crises want to shoot it out, and those who have learned how to talk it out. There are these two kinds, no more. They are the demo- cratic nations, and the totalitarian nations, That is the essence of what Macaulay meant when he made the famous statement that, “Parliamentary government is government by speaking.” Now the education of each successive gen- eration in this process, always essential to democracy, has now become essential to the survival in its present form of what we choose to call civilization. Uranium 235—and its derivative, plutonium—have brought us ex- actly to that point. Either we accept it, or accept the alternative given by Reuben Gus- taveon: “I believe in one uranium atom, di- visible, with oblivion for all." The England described by Muir could de- velop this by methods not to be relied on today. To paraphrase Disraeli, it was a gov- ernment, “by the few, and the very few.” Only one man in ten had the right to vote, and none of the women. But the gentlemen of England who ran that Government had been trained in the home, trained also by tutors, and trained, finally, in college—not only to communicate their ideas effectively, but also to settle their differences by talk. That was the core of their democracy. Today, in contrast, we have universal suffrage. This is simply another way of saying that the 9 men in 10 who did not vote 300 years ago now control the govern- ment. Yet we have not developed any sys- tem comparable to the home-tutor-college training among the gentlemen of England for educating the whole electorate of today in the use of discussion as an instrument for making group decisions. The Hutchins scheme and the Harvard report fall entirely to provide in any way for this inherent feature on which democracy now rests and has always rested. These educators are irked by the present. They want to escape from it by living in the past. But the relentless pressure of the pres- ent cannot be escaped by ignoring !t. Con- sider one aspect of this pressure of the pres- ent. The radio and talking picture now carry the human voice around the world. They have become the most powerful instruments in existence for mass education and mass thought-stimulation, for people today hear and are influenced by the voices from Holly- wood, Washington, London, Rome, and Mos- cow. The sheer existence of the radio de- termines to a large degree our choice of na- tional rulers. It exerts a constant influence on the operation of democratic government. Is it asking too much that educators in this year of decision face the fact frankly that these inventions compel a reappraisal of some of the older methods of education that were based on the primacy of the printed page? What do Hutchins and the Harvard com- mittee say should be done about these forces of mass education and mass us lation? Nothing. Nothing at all. They not only fail to recognize the new form of an old ferce. They failed to recognise the old foree itself, The only reference I can find to the radio or moving pictures appears in the 1942 Harvard report on the training of English teachers, I quote: “The recom-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD mended program contains no element of spe- cial training * * * in such instruments of education as the radio and the moving Picture” (p. 139). I don't want to be facetious, but the general impression I get from the Harvard report is that the teaching, let us say, of Beowulf is highly acceptable in a modern curriculum, and that one may devote a substantial part of time in college to pursuing the pronuncia- tion of the phoneme |i] in Wessex during the twelfth century—or indeed anything that comes out of the past, just so long as it can be examined in terms of course-content. The fact that “much of yesterday's wisdom is to- day’s banality and tomorrow's boloney” does not trouble the framers of this report. But I submit that an inherent part of edu- cation is to be able to do something, as well as to Knowsomething. I submit further that every educated person ought to know when a@ thing is proved and when it is not proved, should know how to investigate and to analyze a proposition that confronts him, and how to search for a solution, how to talk about it effectively before others, and how to contribute to a discussion on problems of joint interest. Above all, I submit that any educational system should produce an understanding in the next generation—and here I am quoting Eric Hodgins, vice president of Time, Inc.: “That clear and understandable communi- cation between man and man is the most im- portant necessity in the material world; that wars, plagues, pestilences, and famines are eventually to be done away with only through this means. Here indeed is a proposition on which free and Christian mankind can unite as upon almost nothing else.” Mr. Hutchins’ grand scheme and the Har- vard report stop short of this vital aspect of education. They fall short, therefore, of offering a full philosophy of general educa- tion in a free society. It is our duty in this year of decision to see that this omission shall not go unnoticed and unchallenged. VI Here perhaps I ought to stop. But there is one thing more I want to say, a reference to a fact that ought to make every educator uneasy in conscience, namely, the grave in- dictment against education that those great political and social upheavals which have marked the history of man, have been too largely caused by men of education. The French Revolution, the American Revolution, the Jeffersonian revolution, the Jacksonian revolution—and I forbear to mention po- litical disturbances the past 20 years—repre- sent upheavals in which the underprivileged and undereducated were compelled to over- throw the dominion of the privileged and educated. I grant that leadership in these movements came from a few, a very few, of the educated class. I remind you that the majority of the so-called educated people stood against change, until much of the vio- lence of these upheavals came from delayed pressure which the educated people had helped to create. To what extent was this due to the kind of education given them in school—that study of the dead past as a dead past, the curriculum criticized by Jefferson as “the regimen of their ancestors,” the educational practices branded by Charles Francis Adams as the “wrong theories and worse practices * * © inflicted upon me, And not on me alone.”? The concept of Greek education was, “Know thyself.” The concept of some of the educational planners today is, “Know the Greeks,” or “Know the novelists of the nine- teenth century, including the obscure ones.” I heard a man who calls himeelf an educa- tor say the other day, “All right, we can make an atomic bomb. So what? That has nothing to do with the college curriculum.” That our educational system could produce such a man is an indictment of that system. Ogden Reid EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JACOB K. JAVITS OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 14, 1947 Mr. JAVITS. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following editorial from the New York Herald Tribune of January 5, 1947: OGDEN REID For a third of a century Ogden Reid was editor of this newspaper. It is not too much to say that it was the one great concern of his living, night and day, throughout that long term of years. He lived to see it reach new heights of power and prestige; and now that he is gone, perspective emphasizes that his character, his leadership, was the central fact in this achievement. Reserve was instinctive to him. He liked understatement in the written word, and his own speech, for all its straightforward strength, was courtesy itself. The domineer- ing executive was utterly alien to his nature. It was through suggestion and restraint, rather than direct command, that he influ- enced the growth of his paper. Many others contributed to the flowering of the Herald Tribune under his regime. He welcomed skills of every type, knew how to encourage them by a discerning word and stood by his staff with a loyalty that made the paper the best of workshops, His loyalty bears defining. It was part and parcel of his devotion to the newspaper, his love for it, his interest in it. That loyalty ran first of all to the paper as an institution. His thought and desire were that the Her- ald Tribune should live on regardless of the life span of any one individual. His goal was to surround htmsef with the best minds he could discover, to consult his advisers on every major problem and intrust to his heads of departments a maximum of freedom. As a matter of course, such loyalty in- cluded the members of his staff. He knew them as friends. He cared deeply about their personal problems, and if ever in their outside labors they ran afoul of arrogance in public officials there was no question where their chief stood. Ogden Reid took his stand first and investigated later; his man was right until proved wrong. Mayors, governors, presidents could come and go; the Tribune lived on. Such backing brought its reward in a staff unique tin its loyalty and affection. A word belongs to his courage. It could be said of him that he did not know what fear was. Whenever an institution has sur- vived the gales and rides the seas securely it is ensy to forget the narrow escapes and the critical hours. The years of Ogden Reid's captaincy included some of the hard- est weather in newspaper history. The mortality in newspaper life was high every- where. In New York City some of the strongest foundered. It was one of Ogden Reid's greatest qualities as a leader that nothing could shake his confidence, his faith. However grave the threats, he set an example of calm steadiness that served the ship well. If this paper has sought and preserved a distinction in style that was part of its long tradition, there again the taste of its editor gave the tone. Its critics, in art, in music, in literature, or in the theater and the motion pictures, a long and notable line, were a chief interest for Mr. Reid. In their selec- tion as in their encouragement he was deeply concerned. In the style of its writing, as in its typography, he sought to make the paper worthy of its highly intelligent reading public. A125 The 38 years have been not less a period of grave problems with respect to the char- acter and the presentation of news of na- tional and international thinking. No one could have been a more staunch Republican; but it was equally his conviction that a good Republican must be an independent one and that party allegiance must never be per- mitted to outweigh considerations of the na- tional welfare. Whenever times compelled, his editorial page opposed his party and fol- lowed the line of patriotism as he saw it. There was a quality of straightforwardness in his speech as there was of thoroughness in his thinking which gave at once strength and simplicity to his actions. What he knew, he knew. His memory was extraordinary, as accurate as it was retentive. A basic sense of justice underlay his whole approach to life. He had great patience with individuals, as with problems. He refused to jump to conclusions or heed public clamor. The same quality of mind which made him believe in fair play for every human being—in the bal- lot for women, in equality for Negroes, for example—gave balance to his thinking which made his decisions, when reached, almost in- variably sound. Yet if any member of his staff could master a novel proposal it re- ceived a ready welcome on its merits; the fact that it was different from an accepted pattern was a spur rather than a check to its accept- ance. In a period of mighty changes he had the ability alike to hold fast to what was right and to accept open-mindedly what was demonstrably in the line of progress, He was, beyond question, a leader. His were the virtues to hold a staff true to its best. There could be no doubting his cour- age, his loyalty, his strength, his sense of Justice. He lived as he died, beloved and unafraid. Twilight Christians of the Western World EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. JOHN W. McCORMACK OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 14, 1947 Mr. McCORMACK,. Mr. Speaker, un- der leave to extend my remarks, I include herein the text of a powerful and splen- did sermon delivered by the Most Rev- erend Bryan J. McEntegart, D. D., bishop of Ogdensburg, N. Y., at the annual red Mass sponsored by the New York Guild of Catholic Lawyers at St. Andrew’s Church, New York, N., Y., Friday, Sep- tember 27, 1946: TWILIGHT CHRISTIANS OF THE WESTERN WORLD “Beware lest any man cheat you by philos- ophy, and vain deceit; according to the tra- ditions of men, according to the elements of the world, and not according to Christ.” (Colossians 2: 8.) Recently a correspondent in Japan wrote for us the tragic story of the twilight Chris- tians who live in the Gotos Islands, about 60 miles out from Nagasaki. Three hundred years ago when persecution ‘was raging in Japan, their Catholic ancestors fied to these islands and established there a Christian underground. Their priests were murdered or exiled, and they became a flock without a shepherd. In the second half of the nineteenth century, priests were allowed to return. They were recognized and wele comed by about half of the hidden Chris- tians; but thousands of others failed to come forward, Today, some 30,000 of these unrecovered Christians are groping in the twilight of their half-forgotten and half-distorted traditions.
A126 Their form of baptism is a corruption of the Latin used by the early missionaries, At least 11 of their prayers seem to be derived from Catholic prayers. In their “Our Father” there are a few intelligible old Jap- anese words. Their ‘Hail Mary” contains the words “Ave Maria” and “Sancta Maria” but the remainder does not make sense. The remnants of the old Christian traditions are now encrusted with pagan ideas and pagan practices. For these people the thread of history snapped about 1640. Yet they still look for the dy when priests will come from over- seas to reestablish their religion. Though they have eyes to see and ears to hear, they do not realize that in their midst are the saving doctrines they long for. Such is the history of the Twilight Christians of the Far East—a people whose lips speak the time- honored words of Christianity while their minds think the thoughts of a decadent, futile paganism. I, THE CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY OF LIFE Like the early Christians of the Gotos Is- lands, our forefathers enjoyed the fullness of the Christian heritage. From the days when St. Paul first set foot in imperial Rome, Christian missionaries flooded over Europe, driving back the curtain of paganism and setting up great Christian centers. Through many centuries the teachings of Christ in- spired the growth of social and political in- stitutions and formed the basis for a sound juridical order. Following the discovery of the New World, the intrepid colonists brought to the West- ern Hemisphere the culture of their home- lands. The roots of American institutions,- therefore, reach back to the soil of Christian culture and civilization. For the religion of our pioneers was not just a ritual of wor- ship; it was a philosophy of life, permeating man’s daily actions. Let us examine that philosophy of life. In it, as in every philosophy of life, the key is to be found in man’s ultimate values. It recognized, as the supreme possession of man, immortal life; as his final goal, union with God. All else in life had value only in relation to that end. ‘What doth it profit & man if he gain the whole world and suffer the loss of his own soul?” Man's material welfare was the means of promoting his higher activities. His use of this world’s goods was to achieve the ultimate goal of union with God. Man's relationships with other men were based on a more fundamental relationship, that between himself and a personal God. Justice was-a virtue that had as its motive obedience to the will of an infinitely just God. The rights of others were their sacred possessions, inviolable because of the dignity of human nature and the inescapable author- ity of God. Liberty and freedom were not the irresponsible yearnings of an unbridled heart, but a God-given faculty to dispose at will of this world’s goods within the limits of the supernatural purpose of life. The eternal happiness to be found in the unending embrace of God was the center of the Christian philosophy of life, the key to ite meaning, the inherent principle of its unity. As all came from God, all tended to God. Man derived his dignity from the image of God impressed on his immortal soul, Mankind was one under the fatherhood of God. And all men were subject to one uni- versal norm of morality—the will of God, our sanctification, This, in brief, is the Christian philosophy of life, the wellspring of the most cherished ideals of that spiritual order which we know as western civilization. Tl, MATERIALIST PHILOSOPHY OF LIFE Today, however, western civilization faces the challenge of a radically different phi- losophy of life, Marxian materialism. The key to that philosophy, as to all others, lies in its ultimate values. The horizon of Marxian materialism is drawn in to the pon- derable things of life. Its ultimate goal is the unrestrained exploitation of material wealth. Its standard of human conduct is whether an action promotes or retards world domination by the proletariat. Truth, then, in this philosophy, is not the measure of words by reality but the clever use of words to advance political or social aims. Justice means not to “render to each his due” but to seize, to exploit, to gain by whatever means expedient. Right does not depend on a moral obligation and an exter- nel inviolability of the moral law, but rather upon the force which stands behind it. When matter and might are supreme, in- dividuals lose their identity in the masses; human nature loses its dignity. When men are motivated by material values alone, then force becomes their only principle of action. Freedom and liberty cannot exist where force is supreme. Hence, the inevitable result of ® materialistic world order is either slavery for the masses in a totalitarian regime, or the utter annihilation of the human race in the ultimate clash of force upon force. Such, even now, is the verdict of history. Wl. THE MODERN CONFUSION This materialistic philosophy of life, full blown in the communistic state, is drawn up in deadly array against what we call the Christian way of life, our civilization. Its objectives are clear—world domination and the ruthless exploitation of the goods and Peoples of all nations. Its forces are mare shaled under an iron discipline. Against it, the leaders of western civiliza- tion present a scattered array, wavering in indecision and uncertainty. Our objectives are obscured, our ideas befuddled, and our position confused. One thing alone is cer- tain, we are conscious of a crisis in the western world today. Many solutions are being offered by diplo- mats and government officials, by educators, economists, lawyers, and scientists. Time and again, they appeal in all sincerity for justice and human rights, for freedom and human dignity, for democracy and interna- tional unity. Yet, strange to say, their argu- ments carry little conviction and men con- tinue to wrangle about the meaning of these key words taken from the Christian philos- ophy of life. While we grope in the darkness, time is running out. The forces against us gather momentum. What is the source of our confusion? Simply this. The words, which our leaders use, are full of life and meaning and force when they are set in the philosophy of life according to Ohrist, and only then. They lose that life and meaning and force when men wrench them from a spiritual way of life and try to set them in a pagan philosophy according to the traditions of men or accord- ing to the elements of the world. Hence it is that the present widespread confusion of Christian language and pagan purpose may well be regarded as the sorry plight of the Twilight Christians of the Western World. Naturally, the question arises: How did our concepts of the Christian philosophy of life come to be so encrusted with the pagan- ism of our own days? Almost a century ago, Pope Pius IX, like a@ watchman in the tower, saw the clouds coming on the horizon. In unequivocal terms he warned men of the dangers hidden in the so-called liberalism of his day. That danger lay in trying to isolate the economic and political order from all influence of re- ligion and morality. Forty years later, Leo XIII in his series of great encyclicals pleaded with the nations not to attempt to build the structure of society on the shifting sands of utility and selfish interest. That structure, he declared, can withstand the battering and turmoil of life only when it is built on the solid rock of God-given moral law. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Yet the process was not halted. Men still spoke in familiar terms of sacred rights and justice under the law, but gradually the true Meaning behind those words was slipping out of their minds. Then came the wave of secularism. We were told openly that religion was purely an inner and private affair. It was void of any sanctions to guide man's organized social relationships. The existence of God was not explicitly denied, but His influence and His moral law were banished from the organized life of society. By degrees this secularism spread far and wide. In our schools and universities millions learned all about the earth and how to acquire ite riches, but were left ignorant of their duties to the Creator of the earth and their own true dignity and destiny. Eco- nomic life became a hard, cruel, and relent- less pursuit of gain by employers and by workers. Finally, many of our jurists, re- pudiating reason as a basis for law, substi- tuted other norms, all reducible in the last analysis to the will or force of the dominant group. In their thinking there is no place for God's law or man’s inalienable rights. IV. CHRISTIAN RESURGENCE NEEDED Thus it is that the remnants of our Chris- tian inheritance have become saturated with a decadent materialism. While lips speak the familiar words of a Christian philosophy of life, hearts seek the baser goals of greed and gain. One is reminded of the words of Christ: ‘These people honor me with their lips but their hearts are far from me." While our representatives strive to stay the juggernaut of materialism abroad, many have yielded to materialism at home. Like fifth columnists, the princi- ples of Mammon have stealthily wormed their way into our Christian pattern of life and have robbed it of much of its virility, ite force, its singleness of purpose, and its unity. Last June, on the eve of the elections in France and Italy, our Holy Father pointed out the fundamental issue. It was whether these nations would “continue to rest on the firm rock of Christianity, on the ac- knowledgment of a personal God, on belief in the spiritual dignity and the eternal destiny of man,” or whether they would entrust themselves “to the unfeeling omnip- otence of a materialistic state without any ideal beyond this world, without religion, without God.” His words spoken to France and Italy have equal significance for the other nations of the earth. We cannot serve two masters. We must either purge ourselves of the poison of ma- terialism and restore to our institutions and social order the completeness of the Chris- tian, the spiritual way of life—or we must accept the materialistic way of life with ite rule by force, its slavery of the masses, its tyranny, and its subjection. The situation can be set right only by radical changes nationally as well as inter- Nationally. Fifteen yeare ago, Pius XI de- scribed the injustices prevailing in the social and economic order and called for a thorough going social reconstruction, but he also warned us that such reconstruction must be preceded “by a profound renewal of the Christian spirit from which multitudes en- gaged in industry in every country have un- happily departed.” On the international level, few have so well diagnosed the crisis of our times as has General MacArthur. Speaking from the bat- tleship Missouri on the day of the Japanese surrender, he said: “The problem basically ia theological and involves spiritual recrudes- cence and improvement in human character that will synchronize with our matchless ad- vance in ecience, art, literature, and all the material and cultural developments of the past 2,000 years. It must be of the spirit, if it is to save the flesh.” Most certainly a profound renewal of the Christian spirit ts needéd to impel men to seek before all else the kingdom of God and
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD His justice. To effect such a change in a world that seems governed only by material forces and distracted by hatred and greed, may appear to be a fantastic dream, but is it any more hopeless than the enterprise of that handful of unknown and uneducated men from a remote oriental province, who set out to conquer the imperial power of Rome and the intellectual culture of Hellen- ism? The process of regeneration will be on its way in the very hour when we Catholics or a considerable portion of us unite in a serious reform of ourselves. In God’s own provi- dence, it may be given to those who are gathered here to start the dawn of the new age. Sooner or later it is inevitable that men’s minds should turn once more to search for spiritual reality, and when once the tide begins to flow, all the sand castles that have been built during the ebb will disappear. It is not given to me to read the inscrutable secrets of divine providence, but this I do Know: In the present crisis there rests on every man and woman here today a three- fold duty: First, we have a duty to study seriously the principles of the Christian philosophy of life. Great moral and religious truths are deep. They cannot be fully ab- sorbed by school children or inculcated in the ordinary Sunday sermon. The profes- sional man should have an inquiring mind on moral and religious issues. He has a duty to study and to know well the reasons for what he believes. Second. We have a duty to exemplify the principles of Christ in every action of our public and private life. Ours it is, like St. Thomas More to be at all times the cham- pions of God's law as given to us by reason and revelation. And third. We have another duty. More things are wrought by prayer than this world dreams of. You have come here today to pay the solemn tribute of your great profes- sion to the Supreme Lawgiver of the uni- verse. You have gathered about the altar of God to beseech His divine blessing on our country and its institutions. But above all, you are about to join in offering the sublime sacrifice of the cross that men may every- where renounce the weapons of violence, and peacefully submit their affairs to the admin- istration of justice under God and the law. May that continue to be your prayer by day and your prayer by night. And now I leave you in benediction the words of our Holy Father addressed to all men of good will: “Do not become disheartened. You are many, Many more than appearances seem to indicate, even though others by their bravado and arrogance aim to create a false impres- sion of the strength of their ranks. ‘You are strong, and stronger than your adversaries, because your intimate convictions are true, sincere, substantial, founded on eternal prin- ciples. God is with you.” Subsistence Pay Allowances of Veterans EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. MELVIN PRICE OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 14, 1947 Mr. PRICE of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend and revise my re- marks, I desire to include in the Recorp an article taken from the Daily Illini of January 12, 1947, a newspaper of the University of Illinois, containing the re- sult of a survey taken at the University of Illinois with regard to present sub- sistence pay allowances of veterans who are attending school under the GI bill of rights: SURVEY SHOWS VETS’ CHECKS DON’T COVER LIVING COSTS This isn’t news to the veteran, but the ex-serviceman on the campus spends more money on his basic subsistence while in college than his 865 or $90 check covers. A survey on the cost of subsistence re- leased yesterday by the American Veterans Committee discloses that the average single veteran who does not eat in an organized house spends $96 per month on food, rent, cleaning, laundry, toiletries, and miscellane- ous items. The single vet who pays a house bill shells out $82.50 per month. The married veteran who eats out and who has no children spends $141.75 per month, while husband and wife with cooking privi- leges get along on $115.25 every month. More than 190 veterans were interviewed in the 2-week survey, which will be sent by the AVC to all Senators and Representatives from Tlinois in Washington, D. C., and to the Veterans' Administration, in an attempt to increase the subsistence allotment of vet- erans attending colleges and universities. New York University has recently com- pleted a similar study and the nationa) plan- ning committee of the AVC is carrying on @& campaign at present to increase the sub- sistence of student veterans. A break-down of the figures for the single veteran who eats out discloses that on the average he spends 867.50 for food, $17.50 for rent, $4.50 for cleaning, $2 for laundry, $1.50 for toiletries, and 83 for unclassified items. The laundry figure is based on sending clothes home for washing. The miscella- neous figure covers haircuts, shoe repairs, etc. The single veteran who takes his meals in an organized house spends $71.50 per month for his house bill. His other expenses are the same as his buddy who eats out. Being married while a veteran at the uni- versity costs $92.50 per month if you eat out and you have no children to feed. Rent costs $32.50; cleaning, $5.50; laundry, $2.25; toiletries, @4; and miscellaneous, #6, The laundry figure is based upon the little woman doing the cleaning at home. If the veteran and his bride have cook- ing privileges, their food bill amounts to 866 per month, while the other expenditures remain the same as for the vet and his wife who eat out. If the single veteran sends his laundry to be washed in the Twin Cities, the average monthly bill runs to 89. The married vet- eran eating at home with his children is in & separate category, the AVC states, but the added expenditure for children was not large enough to cause an appreciable difference in the survey. But if you ask the man who owns one, the kids cost a lot of money in addition to that 890 a month. General Bradley Receives Philip Murray Award EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. RAY J. MADDEN OF INDIANA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 14, 1947 Mr. MADDEN. Mr. Speaker, last night at the Statler Hotel Gen. Omar N. Bradley received the Philip Murray award for the most outstanding service to our veterans during 1946. This award A127 was given by the nationa] CIO commu- nity services committee. In accepting the same, General Brad- ley delivered a remarkable tribute to the veterans and labor’s great contribution to victory. He also outlined a future program for postwar industrial peace. Every Member of Congress should read the general’s speech. It follows: If someone here were to ask how it was that our wartime generals in the field could have won su many medals, I would point to their troops in making my answer. Generals were awarded medals because they had in their commands the privates, corporals, and sergeants who truthfully won those medals for them. The decorations worn today by fleld com- manders of troops are not rewards for tac- tical skill, or even for the leadership they brought to the front. Instead, they are worn and valued as sym- bols of the courage of their troops. They be- long to the privates, the corporals, and ser- geants; to the licutenants and captains who made—and who often paid for—the victories they represent. And so, Mr. Carey, when I come here to thank you for this award which bears the name of your president, Philip Murray—and which has been generously given me by your community services committee of the CIO—I would like to feel that it is not simply @ personal tribute. But rather that it is one which extends itself to the whole vast organ- ization of the Veterans’ Administration and considerably beyond—to the American peo- ple themselves. For it is the American people who have opened their hearts and their pockets to make possible the vast economic and social undertaking of the Veterans’ Administration. In their wartime creation of the GI bill, the American people have not only sought to repair the damage caused by war to the lives, careers and the job security of number- less veterans. But they have also prescribed & new and daring charter for human welfare that cannot only repair but enrich beyond measure the lives of these young men. By establishing opportunities,for education and the restoration of useful job skills, the American people have granted the veteran his right to share fairly in the wealth of this Nation by honest reward for productive labor. I believe veterans have rejected the doctrine that they can gain long-term benefit in the guise of special privilege. In this, they have reaffirmed the judgment of our American people that whenever they—or any other group—pursue special interest at the cost of national welfare, they shall inevitably penal- ize themselves as well as all others. The GI bill has opened the doors for mil- lions of veterans to opportunities for greater economic security and more abundant happi- ness. These are guarantees we must have for freedom. As long as freedom remains a force for human welfare, men will cherish freedom in their hearts and defend it with their lives. In this recognition of me for the work of our Veterans’ Administration, you have re- stated your faith in the objectives of our program. These objectives have basic political as well as economic implications. If we are to nourish the faith of veterans in the vigor and permanence of democracy, we must offer them sound economic security. We must show these young men that in a democracy men have achieved more personal liberty and greater economic opportunity than has ever been possible in any other nation. Without firm faith in the opportunity democracy offers them, men become suscep- tible to the influences of deceptive political doctrines. I do not believe for one moment that American veterans will ever consciously betray the country to which they have given their loyalty. But we must remember that
A128 empty stomachs, cold-water flats, and job- lessness can so agonize the minds of men that liberty becomes cheap by contrast to the security for which they hunger During the decades of our industrial de- velopment, organized labor captured and sustained the faith of millions of American wage earners, In its ability to guide work- ers toward happier lives through the benefits of collective bargaining, labor has not only contributed to our national economic well- being but it has also championed human rights. And while labor has worked as an instrument of democracy helping to build a more productive industrial machine, the tragic events of history have shown us—it is only in a democracy where business can profit, that labor can also bargain. I shall not devote my time to extolling the achievements of labor in this last World War. Any veteran of the battle front knew that neither industry nor labor let us down. With huge resources of men and machines we could use freely the trucks, tanks, and guns you delivered—to save the lives of soldiers. This is no time to reminisce; it is a time to look ahead. If we are to move forward, we must put the war, and production records, behind us. It is time to measure our problems today, to adjudge our peacetime need for production, and to ask ourselves how well we are doing. These are the answers that veterans want; the 11,000,000 veterans with jobs, and the 2,500,000 veterans in training. It is not only essential that we give the eleven million an assurance of continuing employment. But it ts also critically im- portant that we look shead and ask our- selves: What are the prospects for those 2,500,000 veterans in training? For unless we can offer them jobs to match their skills we are throwing our billions away. And, in the hearts of these young men, we are building fuzes of despair and frustration. We cannot permit the veteran to fall vic- tim to economic disaster without risking the terrible results of his let-down. If we risk large-scale business default and unemployment through ignorance or greed, through ineptness or lack of economy con- trols, through failure of management and labor to reconcile their differences—the vet- eran might suffer a body blow which could forever impair his adjustment. How well and how quickly the veteran shall be in- tegrated into our national life is an economic question the American people must answer. In forecasts for 1947, the Veterans’ Admin- istration must predicate its costs and pros- pects of success on the business health of the Nation. Recessional unemployment would mean increasing expenditures in re- adjustment allowances and render precarious the position of veterans who have exhausted their entitlements. It would excite a re- treat of veterans to schools, aggravating their crowded conditions. On the other hand, full production and abundant employment would lessen the cost of readjustment allowances. It would stim- ulate the economic and intelligent use of edu- cational opportunities. It would enable hundreds of thousands of veterans to pur- chase homes of their own. The intricate task of reorganizing and de- centralizing the Veterans’ Administration is nearing completion. Even s0 we are not yet satisfied with performance in all the States. For although we have tripled the number of employees, although we have acquired an additional 9,000,000 square feet of office space, and although skilled management engineers have worked to simplify procedures and un- ravel red tape—bottlenecks and delays oc- casionally develop.. I do believe that our speed is vastly improved, that our perform- ance is better, and that we are giving vet- erans Nation-wide service which 1 year ago was not obtainable anywhere in the United States, In the entire program only insurance is limping behind. Tens of thousands of vet- erans have suffered irritating délays as con- ditions became successively worse before they could be improved. In varying parts of the country, the situation is still an unhealthy one. For almost a year, we have struggled with increasing business while working to retool. Today that retooling process is on the door- step of completion. However, it will take additional months before day-to-day produc- tion can wipe out our accumulation of de- Mnquent accounts. I frankly know of no other way in which this serious condition could have been reme- died more promptly and still provide a perma- nent solution, We hope that we shall reach satisfactory Nation-wide pertormance by the middle of this year. The budget proposed by the Veterans’ Ad- ministration for the next fiscal year amounts to almost one-fifth of the President’s total Federal Budget. The overwhelming bulk of this huge sum will go directly to financial benefits to veterans and their dependents. Despite these vast dollar resources, the effectiveness of the Veterans’ Administration program is dependent upon the interplay of those economic, social, and political forces which together guide and direct the Nation’s life. The veteran with his billion-dollar benefits shall recover no more quickly and progress no farther than this Nation of which he is part. For all their bonds of comradeship, Ameri- can veterans have no economic identity of their own. They have no political identity of their own. Their prosperity, their happi- ness, will come from the prosperity and hap- piness of the Nation at large. If we are to sustain the veterans’ faith in the political future of democracy and in the economic future of America, we must dem- onstrate that the unity which forced un- conditional surrender upon our enemies dur- ing the war can provide unconditional op- portunity for Americans in peace. The ability of organized labor and man- agement to get together, to work together will provide the barometer of our success. As partners in prosperity or depression, labor and management must learn how to arbitrate the differences that halt produc- tion. They must learn to find agreement on fair wages and job security, and they must learn to respect economic rights of each other in this democracy of ours. These are real and meaningful iseues that confront the veteran in the coming year. I hope that next year I can make an award of my own, with a medal for Philip Murray of the CIO, a medal for William Green of the A. F. of L., a medal for William Jackson of the Chamber of Commerce and a medal for Robert Wason of the NAM—each of them inscribed, like this award, to read: For distinguished service together; for their outstanding and mutual contributions to the welfare of the veteran. The Saintly Scientist, George Washington Carver EXTENSION OF REMARRS HON. ROBERT J. CORBETT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, January 8, 1947 Mr. CORBETT. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recoagp, I include the following address by Hon. Clare Boothe Luce at the memo- rial services commemorating George APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Washington Carver Week, Trinity Cathedral, Pittsburgh, Pa., Sunday, Jan- uary 5, 1947: In the year 1855 a German immigrant called Moses Carver, who owned a pioneer farm in Diamond Grove, Mo., bought a slave for $700. She was a 18-year-old Negro girl called Mar, ‘One day in 1860 a son was born to She named him George. Soon after Gearmen 5 father, a slave on a neighboring farm, was killed in some field-hand accident. These were the bloody border years. Out- law bands of Kansas jayhawkers and red- leggers, Missouri guerrillas and bushwhackers, roamed like maddened beasta, They looted, burned, and raided. A raid struck Moses Carver's farm on a bitter cold night in Jan- uary 1861. When the raiders left they had Mary and her babe. Moses’ wife, Susan, waa very fond of Mary. So Moses sent a friend as a scout to steal her back. He offered him 40 acres of fine timber- land and a $300 race horse for the return of Mary and the baby. The friend came back to report that Mary had disappeared. Her fate was never known. It must have been cruel. But he handed a tattered bundle of sick baby, dying of croup and exposure, to Moses, and took his $300 worth of horsefiesh. This was the child who became one of America’s greatest scientists. This was the child who became the man that the Seventy- ninth Congress, without a dissenting vote, passed a bill to honor on this day evcry year. The elderly German farmer was stern and taciturn, but just. And his good wife was kind, They brought little George up in their rough pioneer home to be a useful, prudent, and resourceful little chap. They taught him to read out of Webster's old Blue Back spell- ing book. But there was no place in Dinamond Grove, Mo., where a little black boy cod go to school. Not even Abe Lincoln had freed the slaves. Not even though Missouri law had proclaimed in 1865 that thereaftar “no Negro should know any master but God,” Now Moses Carver didn’t hold much with God. He was never known to have gone to church. But little George began to obey his new Master early. When he was 10 years oll he made up his mind that God wanted him to have an education. With the good wishes of the Carvers foll him, he lIcft home to get one. He packed his belongings into one bandana handkerchief and set off down the road for a neighboring town, where tNere was a school of sorts for colored children. In the years that followed, young George slowly but surely worked his way through grade schools in e half dozen towns of the Middle West. At odd hours, or in odd months, he earned his school money at odd jobs. He was a laundryman, a cook, a houseman, a carpenter, a farm hand, a rug cleaner, and gardener. He grew into a very tall, thin, gangling, stooped young man, who stammered and seemed very shy. For some inexplicable reason, he began to develop very extraordinary talents. He sang, particu- larly spirituals, well. He played the piano, accordion, and organ with some virtuosity, although he had never had the price of a lesson. He made beautiful laces with his long, clever, fingers. He painted charming pictures of native flowers, uncannily accur- ate in their botanical detail. And with all growing things he had a “green thumb.” He seemed to know more about the common wayside plants than anyone in any town where he worked. Maybe because he rose be- fore the dawn every morning, and roamed the flelds and woods, collecting and classify- ing plant life, although he had no books to tell him what he was looking for, or how to do it. Wherever he went he made friends among colored and white folks. They helped him slot. But he was always most careful to give ‘service for every penny. He saved little, be- cause he always gave his services more gen- erously than he was paid for them.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD In the year 1890 he entered Simpson Col- lege at Indianola, Iowa. This was a white Methodist college which had Christian faith and democratic vision enough to take a few colored men. After he had paid his entrance fees, he had 10 cents left in his pocket. He bought 5 cents worth of corn meal and 5 cents worth of suet, He lived on that for a week. He then worked his way for a year as college laundryman and janitor. There he started and taught Bible classes, which became immensely popular with the white students. A year later he went to Iowa State Agricultural College. He worked his way there, too, as a waiter, and a masseur for the football team. There seemed to be a healing power in his fingers when they touched torn muscles. At Iowa State he began to show a totally inexplicable genius for agricultural chemistry. He got his bach- elor of arts degree in 1894 and his master of arts degree in 1896. When he graduated he was invited to remain as a member of the faculty. But shortly after, the call came from Booker T. Washington to join the staff of the struggling Tuskegee Institute in Alabama, He was offered its department of agriculture and chemistry. He accepted at once. What Negro could refuse Booker T. Washington, that young courageous leader of his people? Washington was among the first colored leaders to see that the Negro problem had not been solved by emancipation. The chil- dren of the beaten backs, and branded breasts had been released from physical slavery only to face economic and political slavery. They had been tossed into liberty without homes, fields, food, clothes, jobs, votes, or education. Never having owned property, they knew neither how to protect it, nor to acquire it. Their families had been torn apart by slave sales. Their women, who had never been al- lowed legally to marry their mates, had often been used by white masters. Their morals and ethics were unstable. Except as faith itself had given them instructions, except as they could “steal away to Jesus,” they had no teacher of any kind. Mentally and spiritually crippled by white men, now they were free. Free to enter in flerce economic competition with these same white men. The men who believed that because of the Negroes’ false pretentions to humanity and liberty the South had been economically ruined and physically devastated. This was the cruel situation that faced Booker T. Washington. In the beginning he began almost single-handed to lick it. By teaching his bewildered and suffering people to help themselves. By teaching them how to work, how to save, how to fit themselves by manual training first and formal educa- tion second, to be responsible citizens of a free country. When Carver came to Tuskegee, it was a pitiful little collection of collapsing old farm buildings, built mostly by the Negroes them- selves. Forty years later it was a well- endowed splendid university. Its crowning glory was its greatest educator, Carver, who never left it all the days of his life. When Carver died in 1943, at the age of 83, he was known, not only throughout the South, but throughout the world. His scien- tific achievements had been great. For 40 years he had urged upon the boll-weevil, cot- ton-ridden South the diversification of crops, soil conservation, increase of live stock, na- tive industrialization, and the dissemination of all related information to the southern farmer, black and white. He lived to see much of his program brought to the South. After the disaster of the depression had left vast areas a Tobacco Road, with the Negro at the bottom of the heap, it took the whole Federal administration of Roosevelt to do what this one colored man had long foreseen must be done if the South was ever to be saved. For 40 years, Carver had urged upon Amer~ ican scientists the need for developing ersats, XCIII—App.——9 synthetic, or substitute products from ani- mal, mineral, and vegetable matter, and waste. He lived to see many of his ideas such as dehydrated foods, plastics, and s0 on, adopted in industry. It took two World Wars to convince America of what this one colored man had long foreseen must be done if America was not to waste its raw materials. His greatest scientific claim to fame rests on what he accomplished with the so-called “lowly” peanut, and the “humble” sweet po- tato. ‘When Carver came to Tuskegee, the peanut was an American crop not worth mention- ing. Peanuts were just hog food, or a clutter to be found at circuses and ball parks. To- day, the peanut is among the six largest American crops. It involves a two hundred million dollar business. Carver found over 300 uses for that funny little ‘“goober-nut.’’ In his laboratory, he made from it milk, butter, flour, soap, shaving lotion, breakfast foods, a variety of oils, and paints, coffee, shampoo, building boards, axle grease, ink, and a treatment for dandruff. He found over a hundred uses for the sweetpotato. He made flour from that, too. And molasses, candy, starch, vinegar, library paste, tapioca, dyes, and shoe-black. From cornstalks he made building boards and painting canvasses. From cotton-waste, he made road-blocks. From sawdust, syn- thetic marble. From clays and loamy soil, many dyes and paints. From Alabama red clay, by @ process of sixtuple oxidization, he made the fabulous blue paint once known to King Tut Ank Kamen’s artists. The secret of this pigment had been lost to the world since Moses’ people were in bondage down in Egyptland. He even made dyes from cow- dung. Who said you can't make a silk purse from 8 sow’s ear? Not Carver. He could have, if he had been interested in purses. He wasn't. Least of all was he interested in his own purse. He could have been a mil- lionnaire. But when he died, he was drawing the same salary as when he came to Tuskegee. And most of that he had saved, to leave in his will to Tuskegee’s Research Foundation. A great mycologist, a student of fungus growths, he found many cures for crop- blights and diseases. The only thing he never licked was the boll-weevil. One sus- pects that's because he didn’t want to. The South had been suffering for a century from its one-crop system. It needed diversifica- tion if it was ever to prosper. No doubt Carver thought God had sent the boll-weevil to teach it this lesson, He fathered a whole new science, chemurgy, which is the study of soil constituents, and what is needed to make the soil produce more, 80 men could eat and sell more, and dress and live better. Carver understood well that wonderful earthly trinity of the soil, its fruits, and man. Many honors came to him at the end. He received degrees from famous northern uni- versities. He was made a director of the Department of Agricultural Research: col- laborator in the division of plant industry jn the United States Department of Agri- culture, a member of the Royal Society of Arts in London. He was awarded the Spingarn Medal; and, in 1939, the Roosevelt Medal for achievement in science. He had the friendship of three Presidents, Theodore Roosevelt, Calvin Coolidge, and Franklin Roosevelt. Henry Ford and Thomas Edison sought his counsel, and both offered him vast sums to join their laboratory staffs. His fame was World-wide. He corresponded with Mahatma Ghandi, with whom he has sometimes been compared. That is the brief biography of George Wash- ington Carver. But now we must ask ourselves, for what shall we honor him most today. Shall we honor him because he was & Negro? Yes, of course. This record of s man born a slave, who wrested an education A129 from an inimical white society, and with it achieved s0 greatly, is a spectacular and heartening triumph for all Negroes, and for all white people who wish to see them fulfill their American destiny. But to honor Car- ver primarily as a Negro, is somehow to patronize him. It is to say, in effect, that what he accomplished is notable chiefly be- cause he was a Negro. It is to deny him something by according him praise for the one thing over which he had no control— the color of his skin. Thus in honoring him primarily as a Negro, we would subtly be- little him as a scientist. Then shall we honor him primarily as a scientist regardless—as the expression goes— of color or birth? ‘Yes, of course. How shall mankind ever honor enough a man whose discoveries made life richer and easier for hundreds of thousands of southerners, both black and white? And yet to honor him pri- marily as a scientist is somehow to ignore that very mysterious quality of his success, the thing in him, the force in him, the strength in him, which brought him from the lowest economic depths of American life to the pinnacle of world fame. It is this somé- thing in him that we should honor. It is this something which makes him stand on a high and singular ground above all other men, black or white, and scientists less fa- mous or more famous. I think we should honor George Washing- ton Carver here today more as a saint than as a Negro or a scientist. For only the saints and the heroes ever have or ever can save the world. The heroes cut our losses. But the saints increase our gains. What do we mean by the word “saint”? We mean more than a man who is generous, kind, patient, and unselfish. We mean by “saint,” a man who consciously tries to live by every word that procceds out of the mouth of God. We mean a man who abundantly possesses those three theological virtues— faith, hope, and charity. A man who hopes in God, when every man’s hand is turned against him; who trusts in God when there seem no grounds for trust: who loves in God when his fellow men hate him. Such a man Carver tried to be, and was. His great and abiding significance for America lies in his saintliness. He was born into slavery and ignorance. He was emanci- pated into poverty and prejudice. And yet he proved to black and white alike that a maao’s will and intellect come to him from God. And that when a man knows this cen- tral fact of the universe, he cannot fail to accomplish what other men call miracles, Carver did know this fact. He also knew that. virtue and knowledge are not assets to be used for the profit of the one to whom they have been given by God. They are burdens, Habilities, obligations, ordained for the use of others. No scientist, or psychoanalyst can explain the genius of Carver in today’s fashionable terms of biological or sociological deter- Minism. By every biological and sociological count, this man should have been warped, twisted, or crippled in his will and intellect. If there had been any birth control or planned parenthood practitioners around in the year of his birth they would havc settled for him as the one child who should never have been conceived. Born in slavery, puny and ailing, orphaned at infancy, he was doomed to failure. He was cradicd in an atmosphere of hatred and contempt for the Negro, that often burst into violence. His people were told that they were little better than animals. They were often treated worse. Carver did not make the tragic error so many of his race have made: he did not believe the white racists. So he was never crippled in his opinion of his own human nature. Nor did he make the mistake latter-day Negroes are making in taking the opinion of some of their own leaders, who tell them that while the Negro
A130 is the equal of the white man, he is neverthe- less different in his nature. For things which are different in nature are not equal. A feeling of difference is bound to resolve itself into a feeling of either superiority or inferiority. In any case, it also cripples a Man in his opinion of his human nature, by setting him apart from other men. Carver knew precisely what he was—a child of God's. That meant that in his essential human nature, with its will and its intellect, he was exactly like all God's children. No real quantitative difference could exist between him and other men. Only a qualitative difference in virtue and knowledge. And these came from God. Therefore, he knew only God's grace could elevate him above others, or if he refused to accept grace, set him below them. And Carver “lifted up his eyes to the hills’, whence came his strength. And God's grace illuminated his human in- tellect, and steeled his human will. So that while he was in no sense different from any other son of Adam, he became better, and stronger and wiser. The truth of God had made him free. The truth of God struck off his chains. And it alone will strike off the chains of his people, and of all people. Carver was simple, with the simplicity of saints, about this real source of his strength and wisdom. He said, “I go into my labora- tory with God.” Carver probably never heard of St. Ig- natius of Loyola. .When he spoke, he spoke almost in the same words of that medieval saint who said, “Receive, O, Lord, my entire liberty—my understanding, my memory, my will. From Thee have I received all things, to Thee do I return all things. Give me but Thy grace, and Thy love. I ask nothing else of Thee.” In Rachkam Holt’s fine biography of Carver, there is a very interesting story told which illustrates his saintly faith. Some years ago, Carver was addressing a religious group. He began at once to preach his constant theme of God's great bounty in the fruits of the earth to man, and man’s great indifference to it. And how, because man would not consult God, he had not even scraped the fringes of the earth’s possibili- ties. Instead, he was laying waste to the Eden that lay beneath his hand, his plow, his test tubes. “Thou madest man to have dominion over the works of Thy hands. Thou hast put all things under his feet,” Carver quoted. Then he said what he had done with the no- account peanut and sweetpotato, man could do with everything else that grew because God had said that everything could be made of use to man. “God is going to reveal things to us that He never revealed before we put our hand in His,” he said. “No books ever gointo my laboratory * * * Inever have to grope for methods; the method is revealed at the moment I am inspired to create something new. Without God to draw aside the curtain, I would be helpless.” Several days later the New York Times published an editorial about Carver's talk. Said the editor, “Itis * * * to be re- gretted that (Carver) should use language that reveals a complete lack of the scientific spirit. Real chemists do not scorn books, and they do not describe their success, when they have any, to ‘inspiration.’ Talk of that sort will bring ridicule on an admirable in- stitution (Tuskegee), and on the (colored) race.” To which we are tempted to say to that unhappy editor that talk of his sort has al- ready brought much disaster on the whole human race, for it was a flat denial of the power of God to ald his own creatures. But let us quote Carver's reply. It ranks, perhaps, as the noblest and most sensible statement made in a century by an Ameri- can scientist. “Inspiration,” Carver wrote, “is not at variance with information; in fact, the more information one has, the greater will be the inspiration. In evolving new creations, I am wondering what value a book would be to the creator, if he is not a master of analytical work, both qualitative and quantitative.” He went on to say how he had seen taro roots in the Tuskegee markets, and how he had begun to explore the possibilities of de- veloping useful byproducts from them. He said, “I know of no one who has ever worked with these roots in this way. I know of no book from which I can get this information. Yet I will have no trouble doing it. Prov- erbs 8: 6: ‘In all thy ways, acknowledge Him, and He shall direct thy paths.’ In- telligent people now believe in God. I am not alone in this. May God deepen and strengthen our religion as a race, rather. than destroy it.” Now that particular editor probably did not reflect the religious views of the Times staff asa whole. Nevertheless, the Times did not publish Carver's reply. Who Knows? Per- haps they refrained from doing so for fear of disillusioning Carver about his belief that he, as a scientist, was not alone in believing in God. The fact is, that science in our age has become increasingly identified with atheism. Many and sometimes famous are the scien- tists who do not believe in God. Some of the most famous lived and prospered in pre- war Nazi Germany. There they did much about making V-1's and V-2’s, and for ex- ample, soap, not out of peanut oil, but out of human bodies. Perhaps our greatest fear of Russta’s atomic scientists is the knowledge that they believe officially in Godlessness. But even in the so-called Christian west, the scientific interpretation of man is all too likely to be that he is either a mere animal, a chemical or electrical set of reactions, or a machine which secretes thought as a dog secretes saliva. And whether they admit it honestly in their columns or not, many a modern editor agrees with them. Yet these are the very same editors who plead for the advancement of the colored people, on the grounds that they are not animals. How incredibly contradictory is their position. How silly is the position of the Godless scientists. Their task, they say, is to discover the laws of nature and the unl- verse, And yet they deny that there is a law- giver and a governor of the order they dis- cover. Carver's mind was too intelligent to be caught in such childish contradictions. Carver, of course, might also have told that Times editor that Archimedes was not read- ing any book in the bathtub the day he sprang forth, not only bookless, but towelless, shouting, “Eureka” seeing, as it were, in a divine flash, the law of the displacement of matter. How many times before Archimedes had taken a bath, we do not know, but cer- tainly this was not his first one. And yet, in that particular tub, he had his greatest scientific inspiration, What book was Newton consulting under the tree the day that apple plopped on his head, and knocked, so to speak, the idea of the law of gravity into him? That could not have been the first time that Newton ever sat under an apple tree. Nor, if he was a normal man, the first time he had been accidentally beaned by some external object. It was not necessary for God to hit Carver over the head with a peck of peanuts to set his mind to work. He had never so far lost contact with his Creator. The above are only two examples of pure scientific inspiration. Indeed, the annals of science are full of inspirational and acci- dental discoveries of major importance. What irritated that Times editor, and what irritates many people today about Carver, was that instead of muttering something about how his ideas “just naturally came to him,” or even shouting an occasional Halle- lujah, he always said, with devastating sim- plicity and honesty, “I am just an interpreter. T have only to listen to God's voice and He tells me what to do.” APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Carver's favorite poem was The Flower by Alfred Lord Tennyson: “Flower in the crannied wall, I pluck you out of the crannies, Thold you here, root and all, in my hand. Little flower, but if I could understand What you are, root and all, and all in all, I should know what man and God is.” And Carver always wore a little flower in the buttonhole of his old, clean, shabby suit. A reminder to him, no doubt, that it was enough for him, as for any man, to try to understand a simple field flower to under- stand all, He never succeeded. No man ever will, this side of the grave. But Carver under- stood better than most, because he let the God who had made the flower help him. Carver never erred, as so many scientists and laymen do who claim to believe in “some- thing” in identifying the Creator with the things He created. God was not in the flower, or in the earth, or in the elements, or in man, a8 some “life force,” or “energy,” developing and perfecting itself along with animal, min- eral, and vegetable matter. Carver knew that God was already perfect, and that He stood outside His created universe. God, although everywhere, was no more to be confused with that flower than Tennyson was to be confused with his poem, or Carver with what he made in his test tubes. No one would hold, in short, that Tennyson was his poem, that Carver was his peanuts, or even that Einstein is his theory of relativity. Tennyson, Carver, Einstein were the creators of the things they created. Their spirits and minds had in- formed and inspired their creations and they bore, so to speak, their imprint, but they stood wholly outside of them. The simple logical fact of the perfect existence of a per- fect Creator, whose imprint was on every- thing, Carver held as naturally as he held the heart in his breast. And, therefore, in trying to find out about what a peanut was made for, he asked quite logically the One who had made it, and who knew all the answers. He got plenty. Because Carver acknowledged God in all his ways he let God direct his paths. God directed him in the path of humility. Hu- mility is not to be confused with servility. Carver faced all men with that dignity, cour- age, and self-confidence which came nat- urally to the man who knows he has been created lord of all the earth, and knows no master but God. “Christ is my strength,” he said over and over. He tried to behave as a follower of Christ ought to behave. He never took refuge in tragic clowning and dumb-nigger fooling. The men of his race have often been pitifully forced to assume this attitude as protective coloration, to con- ceal their breaking hearts, and to avoid a broken hand. In the words of the great Negro poet, Countee Cullen, the average Ne- gro was— “Born of the sorrowful of heart Mirth was a crown upon his heac, Pride kept his twisted lips apart In jest, to hide a heart that bled.” Carver was never melancholy or bitter, How could he be? He had that peace that passeth all understanding, in the joy of the Lord, And because he knew how lavishly God gives, he gave likewise. He tried to return good for evil whenever he had the chance. As a Negro that was daily, sometimes hourly. Our Blessed Lord was crucified for claiming to be Divine. The Negro is often crucified for claiming to be human. It would take a long time to tell all the insults and degradations, the large and small indignities visited on Carver, even after he became a well-known scientist, just because he was colored, Jim Crowism followed him all the days of his life. When he was invited to a hotel by a big group of businessmen, to explain his discoveries to them—%in order that they might make money, he was forced to go
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD up tn the freight elevator. When he traveled to lecture at great white universities, he could not eat in the dining car. Once he addressed a number of divinity students. They applauded his address loudly. But af- terward, some of those young men who were going forth to preach about the Christ who had died to save all men, refused to shake hands with him. In whose hands were the crucifixion nails plunged afresh on that dark evening? Once, under the auspices of the YMCA, he did a Jecture tour of a dozen colleges in Mis- sicsippi. In some of thece towns during the night, the citizens hed put up strange signs to welcome the South’s greatest scientist: “Nigger, don't let the sun set on you in this town.” He spoke at the University of Oxford. Later Senator Bnz0 demanded to know “what the proud University of Mississippi was comin’ to enyhow,” to let “that peanut nigger from Tuskegee” talk to them. What, he fiercely asked, could a dirty coon have to say that would interest fine Southern boys, no less girls? Carver's subject had been how the whole South could grow prosperous by crop rotation. Once Carver was called before a congres- sional committee to testify on his chemical discoveries with the goober. It was the tag- end of a weary legislative day. Carver's time was gruffy limited by the chairman to 10 minutes. At the end of the 10 minutes, even the southern Democrats were enthralled. They extended his time to an hour and a half. When he finished they rose in a body and applauded. As a former Member of Con- gress, who has seen many a busy and bored Congressman cut short the testimony of Cabinet members, or sneak out in the middle of it, I can tell you that this was indeed an astonishing triumph. It gives me some idea of the tremendous power he must have held over even unfriendly and superior audiences. Well, one prediction is safe. No American Congress will ever pass legislation to honor the name of Bir.zo. And today that prince of calumny, whose mouth spews forth the toads of prejudice, and the asps of hate, could do with only a little of the honor the world is now according that “peanut nigger.” And in having said so much against an- other of God’s creatures, I have spoken more harshly than George Washington Carver ever was heard to do of any man in all his life. “They crucified my Lord And He never said a mumblin’ word. Not a word, not a word, not a word!” The Lord had set a watch before his mouth, and kept the door of his lips. And when he could not speak well of a man, he remained ailent. His ascetism, his celibacy, and his poverty, were all marks of his deep piety. He spar- ingly ate only the simplest foods. Often his own herb and wild field flower dishes, He neither smoke nor drank. When someone asked him why he did not smoke, he replied, “If God had intended the human nose to be used for a chimney, He would have turned the nostrils up.” And when a Time reporter once wrote him up “as a shabby, toothless, old man,” he simply smiled and said, “The Teporter did not really seek information. If he hed asked me I would have told him I was not toothless. I had my teeth the whole time in my pocket.” He might have made millions, but what- ever God revealed to him, he shared fully and freely with all who would accept it. It astonished others that he refused all profit from his knowledge. It astonished him that they ever expected him to claim personal re- wards for the information God had given him. He would permit no patents to be taken out on his discoveries, allow no com- mercialization of his name. When some members of Tuskegee urged him to do so, in order to enrich his own people, his answer was that the white men had too long ex- ploited the black man. And black men would not make this process just by turning the tables. Although he was always something of a recluse, like all saints, when he went forth it was to help his fellow men who were moat in need. The poorest Negro got as much of his time as the richest and most im- portant visitor to his laboratory. Did some Negro or po'ah white down the road need a cheap bright paint for his pitiful shack, setting eggs, information on how to Can to- matoes, fill an eroded ditch, cook cowpeas, pickle meat in hot weather, make draperies out of burlap bags? Carver told~him, and if he still didn't understand went and showed him. He prescribed good food—to be found in the fields for diet deficiency, and medicaments made from forest herbs for his neighbors’ ills. He helped them grow their crops. He vetted their animals. Rich men who wrote offering thousands for a cure for a crop blight received the an- swer free by return mail. Free to the asker. The stamp had cost Carver 3 cents. One day it will be clearly seen that in addition to his scientific achievements, Car- ver did more than any man ever born to improve racial relations in America. But over and above all else, his significance for our time ts that in his person he showed that a man of acience functions best for the good of the world when he is a man of God. When American scientists begin to follow with humility in his footsteps, and to con- sult God in their laboratories, that day—- and that day only—will they stop meking atomic bombs, chemical gases to wipe out all life, and all the other frightful weapons, which they are everywhere projecting in the laboratories of white civilization. They won't stop, of course. Our age is far gone down the road to materialism. In 1943 a reporter asked Carver what he thought of world events. He replied, “We are on the verge of a great purification.” And would say no more. Did he mean thet men in vast numbers must yet be stricken to their knees, and enslaved by their brothers? That all the world must be tortured and crucified in a third world war before mankind will come to its senses and see that man can never be free, and stay free, until we admit that the God of Love is our true Master? But if we will not listen now to God, then let us all listen to this saintly American, George Carver. “I indulge in very little lip service,” he said. “But I ask the Great Creator silently, and often many times a day, to permit me to speak to Him through the three kingdoms He has created—the animal, mineral, and vegetable kingdoms—to understand their re- lations to each other, and to the great God who made all of us. I ask Him daily and sometimes momentarily to give me wisdom and understanding and bodily strength. Hence I am asking and receiving all the time.” As twilight fell over Tuskegee on the night of January 5, 1943, George Washington Car- ver died peacefully. It is that day we are here to memoritalize. And that we honor his death-day, instead of his birthday, as is the world-wide custom with all great men, is also strangely significant. Perhaps that, too, is a eign from God, who in his Providence con- cealed Carver's birthday on earth in the mists of chance and time. With the exception of our blessed Lord’s birthday, and His Mother's, the Christian church celebrates the anni- versaries of all saints on their death-days. For that is the day when they are really born: born into the full sight of their Creator. His life story might be told in the titles of the spirituals he loved so well: “Oh, Mary, don't you weep, don't you moan. You tolled in slavery down in the South's land. Your son was young when he began. But the trumpet sounded in his soul, And A131 the walls came tumblin’ down. His knees got acquainted with the hillsides, too, And down came heavenly manna, There was a balm in Gilead. Go, telling doubting Thomas. He climbed the highest rung of Jacob's lad- der. And the sweet chariot swung low to carry him home. To see how the end would be. His people are shouting all over God's heaven.” Oh, yes, do believe without a doubt—we Christians got a right to shout, as well as the angels. For his saintly life, a gospel of self- forgetful service, sowed in us the seeds of a richer faith in God, and a greater love of our brother, How God blessed America, when he blessed George Washington Carver. Views of Country Editors on Our Nation’s Problems EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ROBERT F. RICH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 14, 1947 Mr. RICH. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following article from the American Press for January 1947: Mr, CONGRESSMAN—HkERE's WHAT AMERICA'S Country Eprrors Want Dons ABOUT OUR NATION'S PROBLEMS “Do something immediately to prevent crippling strikes! “Slash Government costs and balance the budget!" Those are the two issues which the Eightieth Congress should act upon first in the opinion of the majority of the weekly newspaper editors of America—the editors whose news and views are read by an audience of nearly 70,000,000 Americans. Following the election, in which it was apparent that the country wanted a change, the American Press determined to find out what changes the editors of the Nation want- ed most. In a three-page poll, this magazine enumerated all of the most publicized pro- posals offered by leaders of the incoming Congress; asked the editors to check those they favored. The questionnaire was sent to one outstanding editor in each of 1,000 rural counties. Over 20 percent sent in complete replies. At the conclusion of the poll, this $64 ques- tion was put to weekly editors: “What two subjects do you consider of first importance to the Nation and therefore warranting the most prompt attention of the new Congress?” LABOR COMES FIRST Answers to this question showed an over- whelming demand that labor legisiantion be taken up first. Other vitg] issues, in order of the number of times they were mentioned, were: Cut Government costs; find the right answer for guaranteeing a lasting peace; cut taxcs if the Budget can be balanced; slash Federal bureaus and the number of employees; abol- ish wartime controls. Also of primary importance to editors are: Housing, reconversion, a hands-off policy to- ward business by Government, giving the States more governmental authority and working out atom-bomb control. On the A No. 1 question of Jabor, Aaron Fischer, of the Woods County Enterprise and Waynoka News, Waynoka, Okla., says: ‘‘La- bor must be brought back into line to where one man or one small group of men cannot tle up the Nation’s entire production.” And most editors go along with Editor Fischer. In fact, they are so convinced that
A132 something must be done about the strike situation that only 2 percent indicated that they completely reject any labor-curb legis- lation. As for the types of labor-curb legislation which editors believed would be most bene- ficial, revision of the Wagner Act was ad- vocated by 92 percent, including 2 percent who would like to see the act repealed en- tirely. A total of 62 percent advocate legislation to force unions to publish financial statements. Bighty percent favor legislation to require compulsory arbitration in disputes affecting the national economy if labor and manage- ment cannot come to an agreement. Seventy-seven percent want legislation to force settlement of jurisdictional strikes caused by rivalry between unions. Seventy-seven percent think legislation is needed to curb feather-bedding or make-work practices by unions. Seventy-two percent approve legislation to outlaw the closed shop. Seventy-two percent favor repeal of the Norris-LaGuardia Anti-Injunction Act. Sixty-four percent would like a provision for a 60-day waiting period after notice of strike. Forty-one percent favor legislation to make strikes illegal for a year. Approximately one-fifth of the editors indi- cated a desire to give labor “the works” by voting in favor of all nine of the above pro- posals, Several editors pointed out that in line with outlawing the closed shop would be abolishment of the check-off system whereby employers deduct union dues and turn them over to union officials. Editor Franz W. Zeiske, of the Bellville (Tex.) Times, thinks a congressional com- Mittee to investigate strikes and then pub- licize the real facts in the situation could be a great aid in settling disputes. “With the cold and simple presentation of the true facts, impartially arrived at by a Gisinterested authority or committee, repre- hensible practices by employers would bring about the deserved opprobrium of the pub- lic, and. similarly, the unreasonable and often destructive, silly, and unfair demands of unscrupulous labor leeches would be ex- posed to the violet ray of public opinion.” Editor Zeiske emphasized that too often the public doesn’t know the real issues in- volved in a strike. One weekly publisher believes that unions should be controlled as is big business with antitrust and monopoly laws, publication of its finances, open records, and elections of officials. The same laws that apply to large interstate corporations should apply to labor, he says. Walter B. Sanders, publisher of the Nunda (N. Y.) News, says: “What is needed is leg- islation that will treat labor organizations on the same basis as business is treated, according labor leaders and labor organiza- tions the same rights as business, no more, and ending the present state of affairs which if allowed to continue can only end in revo- lution.” In the realm of Government finance, week- ly editors are not so much concerned with getting a tax cut—they demand a tax cut only if the Budget can be balanced and some of the national debt retired. VIEWB ON TAXES Editors were asked: “Which comes closest to your view: “1, Reduce income taxes immediately by 20 percent regardless of whether the Budget can be balanced and the national debt reduced? “2. Reduce taxes only if the Budget can be balanced? “3. Reduce taxes only if the Budget can be balanced and if our national debt can be reduced?” Replies showed: Only 12 percent of the editors want an immediate 20-percent tax cut regardless. A total of 58 percent say reduce taxes only if the Budget can be balanced and if our national debt can be reduced. Another 22 percent said reduce taxes only if the Budget can be balanced. A total of ¢ percent desire to maintain taxes at the present rates or raise them to pay off the national debt, while 1 percent was for limiting any tax cut to certain in- come-tax brackets or for providing different exemptions from those now in effect. A total of 8 percent failed to answer the ques- tion, Editor Ralph Van Keuren, of the Troy (Pa.) Gazette-Register, is probably typical of the majority of editors on the tax question when he says, “Reduce taxes only if the Budget may be balanced. Do with Government ex- penditure as you would do with your own business.” BALANCED BUDGET Other editors, however, fear that Govern- ment will not reduce expenses substantially until taxes are reduced and its income is slashed. Says R. A. Brodhecker, of the Brownstown (Ind.) Banner: “As long as Government has money it will spend. Budget could be bal- anced and debt reduced even with 20-percent cut.” Says Publisher Peter A. Dragon, of the Albion (N. Y.) Advertiser, who is for im- mediate tax reduction: “Give labor more money and thereby help reduce the number of strikes.” Several editors were explicit about the type of tax cut that might be put into effect. L. B. Boorman, of the Lemmon (8. Dak.) Leader, asks this of Congress: “Enact an equitable tax law that will adjust the burden on the middle class.” Matt Sheley, of the Pinckneyville (Ill.) Democrat, thinks the 20-percent tax-cut pro- posal smacks of the days of Mellon and Hoover. Says he: “The 20-percent plan would help the man earning less than $10,000 yearly very little. Under the plan * * * (the higher income group) would save hun- dreds of thousands and even millions of dollars. * * * (Any) income-tax cut should be patterned after the fashion of the income-tax assessment practiced these past several years.” While weekly editors believe the Govern- ment can tighten its purse strings consider- ably on many expenditures, the majority do not favor cutting the appropriation for the Army and Navy by up to $5,000,000,000 as suggested by several Senate leaders. They look with even greater disfavor at cutting American occupation forces in Germany and Japan. EXPENSE-CUTTING The following suggested methods of ex- pense-cutting received votes of confidence from weekly editors in these percentages: Elimination of Government bureaus set up to take care of wartime emergencies, 95 per- cent. Making a large slash in the number of Federal employees, 84 percent. Cutting amounts of loans to foreign coun- tries, 58 percent. Eliminate farm subsidies, 57 percent. Cut Federal expenditures for social serv- ices, 45 percent. Across-the-board cut in funds provided for all Government departments, 43 percent. Cut appropriation for Army and Navy by up to $5,000,000,000 as suggested by several Senate leaders, 23 percent. i Cut American occupation forces in Ger- many and Jepan, 17 percent, Comments on cutting Government ex- penses included that of Franklin Yates, of the Bedford County Times, Shelbyville, Tenn., who said farm subsidies should be eliminated now when they are not needed. He added that in 1988 they were justified. T. Ballard Watters, of the Marshfield (Mo.) Mail, gave this opinion: “The Government should quit bullding dams and quit all com- petition with private business.” APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Numerous comments from editors revealed a@ fear of cutting Army and Navy appropria- tions due to the fact that world peace is still only in the formative stages. Said G. Marshall Towneend, of the Milford (Del.) Chronicle: “Let these fellows alone. We may need them badly.” FOREIGN POLICY As for foreign policy, the questions and answers follow: Question. Do you think Congress should encourage a tougher policy with Russia? Answers. Yes, 54 percent; no, 23 percent; no answer, 21 percent. Two percent took the attitude, “not tougher, but tough.” Question, Do you think Congress should continue to support the United Nations? Answers, Yes, 89 percent; no, 3 percent; no answer, 6 percent, Two percent were for limited support. Question. Do you think Congress should, in general, support the present foreign pol- icy of the administration? Answers. Yes, 74 percent; no, 6 percent; no answer, or undecided, 20 percent. In answer to this question several asked “What is that policy?” indicating an underlying disapproval of foreign policy which is not clearly defined, Question. Are you in favor of the Baruch plan for control of the atom bomb? Answers. Yes, 50 percent; no, 12 percent; no answer, 88 percent. Most of the “No” answers opposed it on the grounds, “We should hang on to the bomb ourselves.” The extremely high number who did not answer this question indicates a good deal of indecision on the part of the editora—they want to know more about it. Question, Would you favor a return to the high-tariff policy once practiced by the Re- publicans? Answers. Yes, 9 percent; no, 69 percent; no answer, 18 percent. Four percent want high protective tariffs but don’t want them high enough to “fence America in.” Of those answering “No”, a number underlined their answer or added an exclamation point to emphasize their opposition. Question. Do you favor removing our troops from China? Answers. Yes, 32 percent; no, 43 percent; no answer, 25 percent. RENT CONTROL Opinion among editors varied on what course of action should be pursued in re- spect to rent controls. Question. Which most nearly expresses your views on rent control? 1. Keep rent control but allow a blanket 10 to 15 percent rise in rents. 2, Keep rent control at present levels on old housing, but lift controls from new dwellings. 8. Keep rent control for the immediate future but lay plans immediately for gradual Gecontrol of properties. 4, Lift all rent controls immediately. Answers. Favorite plan of those suggested was No. 8, to keep rent control for the im- mediate future but lay plans immediately for the gradual decontrol] of properties, with 88 percent finding this most desirable; 21 percent think all rent controls should be lifted immediately, 11 percent urge a 10 to 16 percent increase in rentals, 5 percent favored a 10 to 15 percent increase coupled with laying immediate plans for gradually decontrolling properties, 4 percent said, “Keep rent controls,” 4 percent voted for two of the proposals, 8 percent favor keeping rent control at present levels on old housing, put lifting controls from new dwellings. Several of those wanting to keep rent con- trdl thought there were inequalities in the system which should be remedied. As for other wartime controls, the majority of editors favor getting rid of them. Specific questions and answers were: Question. Do you think Congress should immediately end price control over sugar and rice? Answers. Yes, 58 percent; no, 26 percent; no answer, 16 percent. One publisher com-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD mented, “Why not stop controlling United States sugar production in peacetime?” Question. Do you think Congress should end the Housing Administration's priority control over building materials? Answers: (Answers sent in before President Truman relaxed these controls.) Yes, 67 percent; no, 18 percent; no answer, 16 per- cent, Question. Should the act giving the Presi- dent wartime emergency powers be revoked at once? Answers. Yes, 50 percent; no, 33 percent; no answer, 17 percent. The fact that a amaller percentage of editors favor revoking these powers than favor getting rid of other controls seems to be directly traceable to the strike situation. Typical of the negative vote was Harold H. Smith, of the North Side News, Jerome, Idaho, who said: “No, Lewis was stopped by this power alone.” Several indi- cated that the act should be retained until the new Congress demonstrates whether or not it can adequately deal with the labor problem. Other general questions and the answers of editors follow: Question. Do you think Congress should pass a law requiring every physically ft young man who has not served in the armed forces to take milttary or naval training for 1 year? Answers. Yes, 51 percent; no, 38 percent; no answer, 11 percent. Question. Do you think Congress should pass a law raising minimum wages through- out the country from 40 to 65 cents an hour? Answers. Yes, 16 percent; no, 76 percent; no answer, 7 percent. One peroent said there should be a 50- to 55-cent minimum. Question. Do you favor extending Social Security to those groups not now covered by the Social] Security Act, such as farmers, pro- fessional people, domestics, and Government workers? Answers. Yes, 47 percent; no, 44 percent; no answer, 9 percent. Question. Do you think Congress should enact legislation for Government-sponsored medical insurance? Answers. Yes, 12 percent; no, 80 percent: no answer, 8 percent. (The “no” vote was exactly the same as the vote in a poll con- ducted by the American Press on this sub- ject in September 1945.) Question. Do you think a firmer policy to- ward Communists and fifth-column activity in this country is needed? Answers. Yes, 85 percent; no, 9 percent; no answer, 6 percent. Question. Do you think Congress should carry out the Congressional reorganization bill cutting the number of committees as passed by the Seventy-ninth Congress? Answers. Yes, 79 percent; no, 3 percent; no answer, 18 percent. Question. Should more governmental au- thority be returned to the States by the Fed- eral Government now that the war is over? Answers: Yes, 86 percent; no, 3 percent; no answer, 11 percent. Question. Do you want Congress to pass the Wagner-Ellender-Taft bill to have the Government participate in large-scale financ- ing of low-cost housing, slum clearance, and building research? Answers. Yes, 30 percent; no, 51 percent; no answer, 19 percent. Carl B, Miller, of the Putnam Democrat, Winfield, W. Va., we think, summed up the opinions of the majority of country editors when he commented: “What people want here is a ‘damn good letting alone.’ Reduce services of govern- ment; eliminate a number of so-called social services; repeal ‘closed shop’ as un-American; abolish ‘check-off’ as an imposition upon em- ployers and un-American, Keep taxes at the present level until the Budget can be bal- anced. Stop playing Santa Claus to every nation in the world. Stay out of private businese—and individuals’ personal busi- ness. The Future of University Education EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. W. STERLING COLE OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 14, 1947 Mr. COLE of New York. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following address of President Edmund Ezra Day, of Cor- nell University, at the University of Buffalo Centennial on October 4, 1946: We are gathered here to consider the future of university education. We might do this in terms of any one or more of a wide variety of subjects, such as curriculum construction, instructional methods, teach- ing aids, structural alterations, the inter- dependence of education and research, the means of adequate financing, the interrela- tionships of public and private agencies. Attention to any or all these aspects of higher education, not to mention others of similar character, is quite in order on this occasion. Perhaps the other speakers will deal with at least some of these matters. I hope they will. As for myself, I feel drawn to a phase of higher education which lies in & somewhat different realm What I have in mind is a clear identification of the basic responsibilities with which higher education is charged in a free society such as ours. To deal with higher education in these terms is a difficult undertaking at any time. For education at all levels is essentially a means of social adaptation and social prog- ress, In other words, educational policy is but a special phase of social policy. Hence it is impossible to plan educational tnnova- tions intelligently without making basic assumptions with respect to social organiza- tion, social purpose, and the nature of social progress. Inevitably the future of higher education will involve responses to the social changes that are in prospect Currently the social outlook is both obscure end uncertain. However, it is highly prob- able that social changes of great moment Me ahead. More and more it becomes evi- dent that we live in revolutionary times. Two world wars within a single generation have released tremendous unsettling forces. Some of these have taken the form of scien- tific and technological advances. Others have appeared as national and racial upris- ings. Already these great forces have broken the established moorings of civilization. At least temporarily we are adrift. We have no sure sense of direction; we lack the means with which to steer a charted course even if we knew where that course lay. Amid this confusion two facts stand out: (1) 1f international war comes again, it will exhibit means and degrees of destructiveness World War IT was not ended by the defeat of the enemy dictatorships but remains un- abated in our postwar world. These two momentous facts are slowly sinking into the mind of the American peo- ple. With the first we are endeavoring to deal with specific proposals—proposals for security. With the other fact—the continu- ing conflict of ideologies—we have not yet come to grips. If, as seems perfectly evident, we face a growing conflict of fundamental ideologies, it We speak glibly of Amer- Of what does it consist? A133 By what means have we striven to estab- lish and maintain it? In answering questions of this sort refer- ence is invariably made to our respect for the dignity and worth of the individual. We ultimately appraise all our social arrange- ments and procedures in terms of the benefits they bestow upon the people, not in terms of the advantages they yield to the state. We think of the state as an instrument for the service of the people, not of the people as slaves in the service of the state. All this is sound as far as it goes, but the basic ques- tion remains, How have we undertaken to implement by specific measures or policies this concept of the ordering of our social and political life in the service of the ultimate interests of the common man? Any full answer to this question entails a much more extended analysis than can be undertaken on this occasion. However, it is quite possible to expose here in outline at least four of the fundamental components of the national policy through which we have striven to enrich our common life. In the first place, we have insisted upon an extraordinary amount of individual liberty. Much of the early settlement of the conti- nent was in search of freedom. The Ameri- can Revolution was successfully fought to establish it. It became the very soul of our Federal and State constitutions. No ideals have played quite so important a part in our national life as those of freedom of speech, frecdom of conscience, and of worship, freedom of the press and of inquiry, freedom of enterprise and of economic venture, free- dom of assembly and of group organization. We have been truly the land of liberty. In the second place, we have confirmed our faith in the rule of the people by sweeping extensions of the suffrage. We have elimi- nated all property qualifications from the right to ballot, and given to women the sume voting power enjoyed by men. The fact that in some sections of the country certain ele- ments of the population are in practice dis- enfranchised impnirs but does not destroy the ideal we have set for ourselves. Govern- ment in America is by consent of the gov- erned. We have endeavored to establish a rule which is by, for, and of the people. In the third place, we have sought from the outset to extend the range of individual opportunity through free public education. We have exhibited a confidence in education matched nowhere else in the world. We have poured money in unparalleled amounts into the support of education. We have steadily expnnded the scope of the schoo! systems of the country and have developed an amazing array of tax-supported institutions of higher education. Doubtless we shall go further in this same direction. Educational oppor- tunity is nowhere in the world as great as it is in America, and as a people we propose to keep it that way. We believe that only as people are educated can they expect to govern themselves wisely. Finally, our national life has been char- acterized by phenomenal achievements in the field of science and technology. In part these achievements have been due to the freedom we have enjoyed and to the provi- stons we have made for popular education. In part, however, they appear to sprirg from & special genius of the American people. We have a flair for the mechanical and techno- logical and as a people have won great mate- rial advantages from the assiduous cultiva- tion of science in both its pure and applied forms. All this has proven enormously prof- itable. Our victories in the two world wars are a case in point. It may fairly be said that the victories in both instances were due in no small part to the almost incred- ible scientific and technological resources we were able to bring to bear. These four great elements are not by any means all that He in the American way of life, but they surely compose a substantial part of it. It is fair to say that we have de- pended primarily on these four to assure
A134 our national progress and prosperity. View- ing the record in retrospect, we can see clearly enough that this dependence has not been misplaced. We have enjoyed a measure of well-being unmatched in any other coun- try of comparable size and power. The rec- ord to date is one of which we can all be tremendously proud, and one for which we should surely all be profoundly grateful. The fact remains that the current situa- tion is not reassuring. Without question not a few of the present trends are ominous. More and more it becomes clear that the poli- cies upon which we have relied so fully have a fundamental limitation in common: They supply no clear moral or spiritual im- perative. Liberty is not invariably disct- plined, and when it is not, becomes license. The exerciae of the ballot is not uniformly either enlightened or public spirited, and may relapse into corruption. Free edu- cation may be selfishty exploited and effect no social gains whatever. Science and tech- nology respect no system of social and moral valttes and are quite as capable of destroying ctvilisation as of building it Gtven liberty and educational opportunity, the right to vote and all the powers that science and technology can convey, we still face the problem of what we choose to make of life. What we cannot get slong without is a fundamental faith by which to order and direct our strivings. This is true of each one of us individually; it is true of us all as a great self-governing people. For the concentrations of power we have developed, economically, politically, and socially, make it quite apparent that we can no. longer as- sume that the at the interplay of selfish interests will au fuse in a serving of the public good. Power politics can wreck us domestically as well as internationally. More and more we are driven to this conclusion: We cannot hope to survive as a free people except as we develop a pervasive sense of social responsibility with all that this entails in indtvidual morality. It is with this idea fast in mind that we must, with others, plan the future of uni- versity education in America. Hf we are to move forward successfully we must first agree on fundamental objectives, set in the light of the social outlook of our times; then we must work imaginatively and assiduously to devise the specific means by which these fundamental objectives are to be attained. As we do this at the level of higher edu- cation, we shall be dealing with both general and vocational education. There is an in- clination in some quarters to rule that uni- versities should not concern themselves with instruction looking toward the mastery of any of the practical arts. This is an alto- gether unrealistic attitude. Higher educa- tion in this country has always been in part vocational in ultimate purpose. It will con- tinue to be so. But, tn seeking vocational ends, it must not be allowed to become purely technical. Vocational education at the level of the university should be professional in character. This is tantamount to saying that it should respect three governing principles: (1) an emphasis upon fundamental disci- plines as distinguished from immediately ap- plicable, narrowly conceived practical tech- niques; (2) a sustained pursuit, through scholarly and scientific research, of new knowledge bearing significantly upon the vyo- cational arts; and (8) a steadfast devotion to the broader implications and social obliga- tions of the vocation for whieh the training is provided. Vocational education at the uni- versity level should, in other words, have a substantial cultural content and bearing. That professional education has not always met these requirements has to be frankly admitted. It is part of the responsibility of our universities to see that it does so. There s sno other way in which to make sure that professions are alerted to their public respcastbllttien It is in this area that we should recognize one of the most important challenges with which higher education in America is now faced. In general, the future of higher education ig bound fast to the future of all education. Higher education will progress satisfactorily only as all education effects certain impor- tant advances. The goals toward which these advances have to be made are multiple. There are at least five I feel impelled to specify. We must make education connect more directly and explicitly with the forthright pursuit of truth. This is true of education at all levels and of all types. Too many students move through our schools and col- leges without ever acquiring a first-hand acquaintance with what it means to seek truth honestly and fatthfulty. The experi- ence is one which can be given within widely varying levels of tntellectual capacity and educational endowment. The love of truth and the disinterested pursuit of it lie at the very heart of freedom. They should be culti- vated assiduously through the work of our schools and colleges. We must do: better than-we have in tm- throngh formal education a wide- formation is not enough. We must build information into: ress and into understanding. The.common. man. must. know where he is, and where he is going; the character of the leadership he is of- fered and the requisites of the followership he must exhibit. -Formal education must contribute more than it has to social wisdom. We must make education minister more effectively than it has to an expanding so- cial sympathy. Mankind is being knit more and more closely together. We must all come to see more clearly the nature and force of the common bonds of humankind the world over. The schools and colleges, especially as they learn to use some of the new devices, such as the teaching film, can make highly important contributions to this end, We must, through education, give work an improved status. There are few things in life so rewarding as a satisfactory job, and few things as unprofitable as sheer idleness. Leisure there should be when we have learned how to use it to advantage, but work itself should give its enduring satisfactions. The idea that we seek education in part to lighten our work load is basically fallacious. The more education we get, the greater are our obligations to serve. We must develop through popular education a philosophy of work in which productive labor becomes both a duty and a privilege. It is a respon- sibility of the schools and colleges to see that satisfaction is taken by students in work well done. It is equaily important that young people get a clear conception of the rewards that Me in honest and sustained industry, be the occupation high or low. Finally, we must in education in America come to grips with the everlasting moral im- peratives of a free society. Our public schools and colleges have avoided this as- signment all too long. Whatever may be the necessary consequences of the complete sep- aration of church and state, they surely do not entail. avoidance of all moral responsi- bilities. Formal education cannot possibly be regarded as an amorsl social function. It ‘is high time that our schools and colleges dealt more explicitly and responsibly with their obligations to the moral order in Amer- ican democracy. Not long ago we were given a profound and moving statement of the sort of faith that I believe higher education in America ‘must proclaim if it.is.to win its way through the confusion, disorder, and dismay with “which the world of free.men is now beset. -This statement comes from‘ one of the wisest our APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD proponents of democracy this country has yet seen. It is from the pen of the distin- guished historian, who was until recently my colleague, the late Carl Becker. I quote: “To have faith in the dignity and worth of the individual man as an end in himself; to believe that it is better to be governed by per- suasion than by coercion; to believe that fraternal good will is more worthy than a selfish and contentious spirit; to believe that in the long run all values are inseparable from the love of truth and the disinterested search for it; to believe that knowledge and the power it confers should be used to pro- mote the welfare and happiness of all men rather than to serve the interests of those individuals and classes whom fortune and intelligence endow with temporary advan- tage: these are the values which are affirmed by the traditional democratic ideology. They are the values which, since the time of Bud- - dha and Confucius, Solomon and Zoroaster, Piato and Aristotle, Socrates and Jesus, men have eommonly employed to measure the ad- vance or the detiine of civilization, the vaities they have celebrated in the saints and sages.” It is m this sort of faith that the future’ of higher education in America rests. Our planning and our hopes must be framed in universities and colleges will play in shap- ing all aspects of society. We stand looking at the results of a war that has changed the - fnee and the customs of the world as we knew ‘4t. The growth of new technologies, a phe- crowned nomenon of war, has this time been with the emergency of a force which, in a blinding instant above Hiroshima, has called a dramatic turn in human affairs. In atomic energy we have a force with which the world must reckon from this time forward, yet which the world seems altogether unprepared to accept. We have no option but to reappraise our attitudes, our habits of thought, our funda- mental convictions, and our interests, both material and spiritual, as the new age opens before us. We cannot escape the fact that higher education has a special relevance to the social and political aspects of our exist- ence as a people, and that it must be effec- tively brought to bear upon the challenging problems which now confront us. May we with all the resources at our command, strive to make human endeavor in every walk of life, work more and more surely for righteous- ness and truth, for justice and mercy, for peace and good will among men. Limitation of Presidential Tenure EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. LEO E. ALLEN OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 14, 1947 Mr. ALLEN of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I wish to call to your attention and that of the entire Nation a profound editorial which appeared in the June 1946 issue of the Republican, the national. magazine ‘of the Republican Party. This editorial clearty sets forth the thinking in con- nection with the proposition of limiting the terms of the Presidency of the United States. This editorial is entitled “A Job for Republicans” and it might ‘ave been called a job for Americans. Now is the time for us to take up this -important job and complete it. : To the
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD editor of the Republican I feel we owe a debt of gratitude for his determined stand on this issue which expresses, I believe, the sentiments ef this House. The editorial follows: A JOB VOR REPUBLICANS Now that the tradition which formerly limited Presidential tenure to two terms has been shattered, most Republicans agree that @ constitutional amendment restricting the length of time one man may the White House is urgently destrabie. Mere agreement among Republicans is use- less. It is time for aggresstve action if the principle of free government which the tra- ann upheld ts to remain alive. only major argument ever raised against limitation of tenure ls based on the notion that America’s survival might some day depend on retention of a particular indi- vidual as President. That presumptuous argument was used in 1940. It was then believed by many who now may be willing to that the Nation owes its survival from 1940 to 194¢ to ite millions of armed young men and skilled in- dustrial workefs, its production wizards, and its acientific , and that these saviors of the Nation would have performed their functions no matter who was in the White House. The argument was used again in 1944. That time its fumdamental fallacy was trag- ically and conclusively exposed within a very few months. Some of the 27,000,000 citizens who voted in 1940 to wipe out the traditions that no Preakient should be permitted more than two terms pretended the tradition did not matter. “After all,” said Harald Ickes, “what is a sacred tradition among friends?" The answer to Ickes’ question is that the “sacred tradition” provided one of our major guaranties that our Government would re- main forever the servant of the people and never become their master. The “sacred tradition” wes a safeguard that would, by itaelf, have kept America from slipping into the abyss of one-man, one-party, totalitarian government. This ts not retrospective political belly- aching. It 15 a statement of simple fact. The “sacred tradition” at which Ickes eneered was established by George Washing- ton and articulated by Thomas Jefferson as an outgrowth of the fine contempt in which American revolutionists held the decrepit and fraudulent doctrine of the “divine right And in a land where men seemed endowed with a rugged instinct for keeping their “big shots” trimmed down to a reasonable and controllable sise, it served for 152 years to prevent the self-perpetuation of any ruling clique in the land. It made it impossible for any man to hold the vast powers of the Presidency long enough to destroy effectively the American form of a government of checks and balances. It was a basic part of our fabric of free government. But 6 years ago boss Frank , Jersey City, declared himself “absolutely 100 per- cent for a third term.” Mayor Edward Kelly, Chicago, said, “I suppose I was one of the very first to go on record for a third term.” Earl Browder, Communist candidate, pro- claimed, “The tradition against a third term im the Presidency must be set aside.” And eo the tradition was set aside. Most of the 27,000,000 who followed the lead of Hague, Ickes, Kelly, and Browder probably were not voting to undermine the principle of free government in America; they were merely voting for a man. But now the man for whom they voted is gone and so is the tradition that upheld the principle. With the tradition gone, the principle can no longer depend upon gocd faith and general acceptance for its survival, as it formerly did. It must be made a part of the law of the land. Tt is not important whether an amendment be adopted limiting Presidential tenure to one 6-year term or two 4-year terms. But it is important that quibdbling over details be halted and an amendment be adopted. amendment and the requisite num- Such a campaign is necessarily up to all the Repubticans. ‘When the voting starts, many Democratic legislators will be found to be fully aware of the danger that arose when the “sacred tradition” was broken. But the Democrats cannot be expected to take the initiative. @o so would be to cinfess the errors of snd 1944, and in the realm of practical that is -mthinkable. , this ts clearly a fob for the Repub- £33 Ey ne Every Gay of delay, whether du€é to leth- argy or to squabbling over the exact terms of the limitation, is a day in which the principle of free government in America is in perti. The Federal Budget Is Seidl Teo High EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. RALPH A. GAMBLE OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, January 13, 1947 Mr. GAMBLE. Mr. Speaker, under leave granted by the House, I present for insertion in the ConcressionaL Recoap the following editorial which appeared January 11, 1947, in the Sun, published in New York City, entitled “The Federal Budget Is Still Too High”: THE FEDERAL BUDGET 15 STILL TOO HIGH The President's Budget message pours a deluge of cold water upon the Nation's hopes for genuine economy at Washington. It pre- Gicta a decline in Federal spending in the coming fiscal year of 96,000,000,000, or about 14 percent down from the current fiscal year. If the President's estimates of receipts are accurate, if Congress reenacts the emergency excise taxes which would otherwise expire on June 20, if Congress increases postal rates, if nothing is added to the expenditures now budgeted, then on June 90, 1948, there will be a surplus of about 81,800,000,000. If this surplus should then be applied to reduction of the public debt, about two-thirds of 1 percent of the principal could be retired. Such is the measly objective provided by the 1948 Budget and even this goal cannot be reached unless taxes are held at present levels. During the war a number of economists attempted to forecast the postwar Budget. Their estimates ranged from a low of 618,- 000,000,000 to a high of $25,000,090,00v. The proposed level of 1948 expenditures is 60 percent above that highest estimate. But there ts another and more direct way of showing the magnitude of the Budget. In his message Mr. Truman says that it will cost less than 8 pereent of the national income to pay interest on the public debt. national income, to use about one-seventh of that amount to pay the interest on its indebtedness and to use less than twentieth of what it receives to reduce fts indebtedness. For the ordinary person judgment of the Budget message is Foade. more dificult by A135 changes m names and classifications, but he will recognise one of the old lamcmarks of al} Budget messages. Category by cate- gory, Mr. Truman goes through the list, men- téoms a lump sum and then, in effect, asks how it could possibly be reduced. He is not always on solid ground. It will be the duty of Congress, in the interest of more than a pittance payment to reduce the public debt, to examine with akeptical eye virtually every Classification. It is trrefutable that pay- ment of interest on the national debt, in the amount budgeted, ts an obligation of the Government which cannot be reduced. The same thing is true of some other categories. But the administration has sought to mark each and every category with the warning, “Do not touch,” and that is plain and un- adulterated nonsense. The heavy hand of ruthless economy should and will fall upon many a category. This Budget is a chal- lenge to the Republican majority in Congress and it will not go unanswered. That Balanced Budget EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. PAUL W. SHAFER Ov MICHIGAN THE HOUSE CF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 14, 1947 Mr. SHAPER. Mr. Speaker, I com- mend to every Member of Congress a timely and excellent discussion of Presi- dent Truman's Budget by Tom Munger, able news commentator and analyst, whose column, Capitol Watchtower, ap- pears in many of the leading newspapers in Michigan. Under leave to extend my remarks, I include Mr. Munger’s analysis of Mr. Truman’s Budget message, as fol- lows: CAPITAL WATCHTOWER (By Tom Munger) The Federal Budget presented to Congress last Friday by President Harry 8. Truman was widely characterized in the press over the week end as a balanced Budget. This was largely because the President said it is a balanced Budget, the first in 18 years by his own admission. Furthermore, be called it a realistic, tight, complete Budget, justified in every detail. He challenged Congress to pare anything further off it. Thus the President indicated his belief that the Budget contains only those items in the amounts absolutely necessary to the operation of the Government, ang the safety and welfare of the people. All of this sounded like something the GOP doctor ordered, until it was revealed that the Budget total is 837,528,000,000 for the 1047-48 fiscal year, which begins next duly 1. This is only $4.995,000,000 less than the 1946-47 Budget of $42,523,000,000, which was the highest peacetime Budget in the his- tory of this or any other nation. As a matter of fact, the 1946-47 Budget was more than three times any previous peace- time Budget, even under the New Deal, and the 1947-48 Budget is only slightly less than three times the largest previous peacetime total, It took about 24 hours for the more Budget-minded of the national legislators to digest the huge volume, larger than a tele- phone book and devoted largely to figures, and statistical tables, and diagrams. They were caught unawares by reason of the fact President Truman recently closed all the “pipe lines” from the White House, and no- body knew authoritatively in advance just what the Budget would be like.