A1080 husband, Bruce Minton, a Communist writer, was second in command when the venture got going. In a recent letter to a national magazine which had denounced In Pact as a party-line sheet, Seldes blandly disclaimed responsi- bility for Minton, even implying he did not know his partner was a Communist. The disclaimer is a piece of effrontery. Minton had been on the Communist New Masses masthead from October 1935 to October 1939, a few months before he teamed up witb Seldes. He was back there in October 1940, soon after he left In Fact. It doesn’t call for a Sherlock Holmes to deduce that he had been given a leave of absence from the official magazine for en unofficial chore. This essociation with a notorious Commu- nist was hardly smart on Seldes’ part. An even worse act of recklessness—uncorrected to this day—was that they had their news letter printed in a shop devoted almost en- tirely to pro-Communist work. The union labels 209 on In Fact at an early stage and 412 on its later and current issues identify the products of the Prompt Press and the New Union Press respectively. The two firms cecupy the eame offices at 113-119 Fourth Avenue, New York City, and between them monopolize most of the party and party- front printing. The same presses that turn out In Fact heve also turned out, at various times, the New Messes, the Communist, Science and Society, Equality, and other party-line peri- odicals. They have done the printing for the League of American Writers, the National Negro Congress, Intourist (Soviet travel bu- reau), the American League for Peace and Democracy, the American Peace Mobilization, and many other fronts. The designation of Mrs. William Browder as business manager of In Fact, a post like her husband's on the Daily Worker, was an- other big gap in the camouflage. She worked as Rose Euler, presumably her maiden name; friends and comrades were under strict in- structions not to address her as Mrs. Browder in writing or phoning her at In Fact. When her brother-in-law, Earl Browder, was ousted as Party chief due to a change in the Moscow line, her husband was also re- moved from the Daily Worker. But Rose Browder remained on In Fact; her expulsion would have exposed the Party contact with the weekly too glaringly. Bruce Minton’s successors on In Fact have been less prominent in the Communist periphery and hence less vulnerable. Robert Terrall, who followed Minton, had been on the faculty of the School of Democracy, which later merged with the Workers School, a Party institution, to form the present Jefferson School of Social Science, foremost Communist educational] outfit in the country. The current incumbent as second in com- mand is Victor Weingarten, who wes one of the leaders of the Communist-inspired strike on the Brooklyn Eagle at the end of 1937. In 1942 he left the Eagle for an editorial post on The Pilot, official organ of the Commu- nist-dominated National Maritime Union. The formal owners of the In Fact corpora- tion at present are George Seldes, his wife Helen, and Henry Geisz. Geiss has been identified with Communist enterprises at least as far back as 1938; he was then an official of the Council for United States Veterans, lineal descendant of the Party- front Workers Ex-Servicemen’s League. He is known to have conferred often with top party leaders. From his first collaborator to his last, Seldes has thus been consistent. In Fact has remained true to its Communist godparents. The opinion of In Fact’'s editor held by the Party High Command is summed up by Budenz as follows: “T can state that Seldes was one of those men without an open Communist label who was regarded by the Communist leadership as one who would always act in accordance with their wishes. That is, the national Jeaders of the Communist Party regarded him as one who wou'd always act as a Com- munist would act under any given circum- stances.” The columns of the newsletter provide the clinching proofs that this confidence was amply deserved. SELDES THE ISOLATIONIST As head of the OWI, Elmer Davis once sald that the best test of a Communist stooge is his attitude toward the war before and after Hitler doublecrossed Stalin by inveding Russia. In Fact and its editor pass that test summa cum laude. Seldes, as we have seen, threw himself hcad- long into the struggle to keep America out of the’ war. He was particularly displeased with our proally press. “It now becomes im- Perative to read the Daily Worker and the New Masses,” he wrote in March 1940, “to get not only the contrasting angle but the actual truth.” His antidote to our journalistic lack of neutrality was In Fact, a biweekly later turned into a weekly. The sheet was born on May 20, 1949, and the first paper to an- nounce the blessed event was the Daily Worker (May 29). The views refiscted in these publications continued remarkably parallel for the next 5 years. Whether by design or because he was a little slow on the uptake, the Se'des brochure lagged a couple cf wecks or months behind the cfficial Party organs on some is- sues, but invariably it caught up, out of breath but faithful. Said the Daily Worker, for instance, May 2, 1940: “Taking advantage of the fact that two of its leading rivals, England and Ger- Many, are now incked in war, United States imperialism is reaching out its hands for the grabbing of colonial loot.” - Echoed In Fact, August 26, 1940, in con- @emning conscription: “It makes possible U. 8. seizure of the disintegrating British Empire, if Germany defeats England. The United States now considers itself heir to the British Empire.” Said Earl Browder, in a speech on May 3 1940: “The War Party of the American bourgeoisie is on the march and Roosevelt stands at its head.” Echoed In Fact, June 17, 1949: “There ts @ perty in Washington * * * which is leading us into war * * ®* and the President of the United States is the leader of this party.” A black headline in the second number of In Fact proclatmed the blacker fact that “the edministration chooses war.” That marked the start of a vituperative campaign against the President, his personal family, and his official family, that was to keep up for 18 months. They were serving “inter- ests,” Seldes charged, intent on dragging the country into the “imperialist” war. They were interfering with labor's right to strike in wer plants. Aid to Britain, conscription, convoys roused the embattled people’s tribune to bursts of anger. “There is no evidence of an emergency,” he exclaimed (September 23, 1940), and “therefore no necessity whatever for the Burke conscript‘on bill.” Moreover, “peacetime conscription is one of the symp- toms of fascism." He poured the hot pitch of his fury on editors, officials, professors who were leaping on the war hysteria band- wagon, and on the FBI for its hysterical interest in enemy agents. “War hysteria is sweeping the country,” Beldes walled on August 12, 1940; fully 87 percent of the press was not telling the awful truth about the draft, to wit: “1. It encourages the British to continue the fight against Germany. 2. It makes pos- alble United States seizure of the disinte- grating British Empire if Germany defeats England. * * °* The great commercial powers, big business, have no destre to see APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Germany grab what they now consider their inheritance. If Britain keeps up the fight, both sides will secon be exhausted. Then a that is, conscripted, disciplined, regimented, Pascisined—America will step in at the right moment and win the war for iteelf at the expense of both England and Germany.” Only 2 weeks before Hitler inconsiderately converted the imperialist into an anti- Pascist war for all party-liners, Seldes eh:d tears for the millions of young Americans who “will risk their arms, their eyes, their lives again to make the world safe for democ- recy,” because “the President, his Cabinet, most of the press, powerful men and forces were conditioning the mind of America— Public opinion—to accept war, and even- tually to raise hysterical enthusiasm for it.” A week later—even closer to the end of the limb on which he was climbing out—Seldes had it from Washington progrescives that the United States defense program aims to increase American domination in Latin America and to prepare for military inter- vention in Europe. If only poor George had had some pre- monition of the coming sanctification of the war. But alas, he continued to babble this to the very last moment. Be had promised his readers “to give news, not dope:” But on July 15, 1940, he notified his customers that “according to In Fact’s reliable informants,” the war would be ended within a month. On December 2, 1940, Seldes had inside information that Wendell Willkie had “reassured his bankers and big- business friends that there was no danger that the British Empire will become a social- ized state. * * * It is, therefore, O. K. for America to save the Britieh Empire.” A record in dope-peddling, bowever, was established in the May 12, 1941, issue of the newsletter. It promised “documented facts” Proving that “the majority of American cit- izens who want peace are being intimidated and harassed by J. Edgar Hoover”; that the FBI was framing “progressive unionists”; that the same FBI was breaking strikes; and that “a witch hunt arainst civil lMberties is being instituted.” IN FACT GOES TO WAR Seldes still owes his readers the ‘“docu- mentation” on these astonishing accusations. For as of June 22, 1941—the day Hitler at- tacked Russia—all the trite denunciations of warmongers, convoys, lend-lense, selective service, FBI vigilance, big business, and strikebreakers ceased in his columns. Instead, Seldes suddenly became vastly agi- tated over failures to implement the arms program he had snarled at for 13 months, Instead, he now sounded the alarm about “bad morale” in the Army, the creation of which he had denounced as a “symptom of fascism.” His American Peace Mobilization gave up the ghost and the old chant was changed slightly to read “The Yanks Are Not Coming Too Late.” His new solicitude for the state of our national defenses became truly touching. “The first question of the American people,” he now proclaimed, “ls the status of the armament program”: “If first Britain and later Russia had not engaged the main forces of Hitlerism, and Hitler had attacked the United States, he would have found nothing but a paper air fleet, tanks on paper, paper guns and ammu- nition. “The failure of the first year of the Amer- fean defense program is due chiefly to the fact that big business ran down the program, that money and industry engaged in the most vicious sit-down in history, and that native Fascist-minded men, appointed by Roosevelt in good faith, sabotaged the ram for the benefit of big business” (September 22, 1941). One must pause to savor such demagogy. ‘Would anyone who missed the first act of the farce guess that this editor had “flayed” the
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Roosevelt administration and denounced big business for arming America for imperialist adventures? Would he believe that Seldes had supported sit-down strikes in war plants and barked at the FBI? In Fact now exhorted its readers to write to soldiers in support of the war. “Tell them the truth,” Seldes pleaded. * * * “Educate the army in the world-wide war against fascism.” Pear] Harbor, please note, was atill in the future. But for In Fact the war was already world-wide. Like the whole pro-Communist crew, Seides had not changed his mind be- cause America was under atvack. That would have made sense. He had changed his mind because Russia was under attack. That mede no sense whatsoever—except for the few Americans whose first loyalty is to Russia. F. D. R. was not the only one, of course, whom H:tler unwittingly restored in Seldes’ good graces. Mrs. Roosevelt, too, came in for that windfall of affection. Then there wus Dorothy Thompson, who had figured in the newsletter as w British agitator “willing to sacrifice a million American lives to save British imperialism from Hitler imperialism” (August 12, 1940). Now she became for Seldes a soothsayer with an “unequaled” rec- ord. Perhaps the happiest beneficiary of the In Fact amnesty was Wendell Willkie, if only because he had been so brutally mauled be- fore that. For 13 months Seldes had never mentioned him without allusions to his villainy. “Willkie, free-press enemy,” ‘Will- kie’s Fascist mentality,” “Coughlin endorses Willkie,” were headlines in a single issue (August 12, 1940). They merely elaborated the thumbnail sketch offered on July 15: “Every newspaperman in Washington knows that the closest thing to a native Fuscist is Wendell Willkie.” Such derogation ceased utterly as soon as Hitler's real character, until then obscured from the world, was at last unveiled by his attack on Stalin. In due time, Willkie, hav- ing spoken up for a second front, became one of In Fact’s heroes. From June 22, 1941, forward, In Fact’s ma- jor campaigns ran absolutely parallel to those in the official Communist press, though some- times a lap behind. This holds true for the great outcry for a second front in defiance of Anglo-American military opinion; the attack on the dangerous theory of victory through air power as presented by Major de Severtky and other aviation experts; the smear cam- paign against General Mikhailovich; the vili- fication of the Polish Government-in-exile; the attack on the Chinese Government. The parallelism has not been marred to date. In Fact, like the uncamoufiaged Com- munist press, has supported every act of Soviet expansion, and abused those who have dared interfere. It has sided with the Chi- nese Communists against the Chinese Gov- ernment, with the Greek Communists against the Greek Government, with the Po- lish and Bulgarian quisling regimes against their respective underground resistance movements. The views of the Daily Worker and In Fact remain indistinguishable, SELDES’ CHARACTER Six years of such faithful if unacknowl- edged cooperation cannot be shrugged off as a coincidence. The phenomenon must be studied in the light of Seldes’ extensive afil- fations with party-line enterprises, the Com- munists connected with his paper, the direct testimony of people like ex-Communist lead- er Budenz. “I do not follow the Communist Party line, I do not know what the phrase means,” Seldes assured his clients on January 31, 1948. Coming from a man who had been for many years a notorious fellow-traveler, such a statement gives the measure of his con- tempt for his readers’ intelligence. One enlightening episode is useful in esti- mating the value of Seldes’ word on any sub- ject. It is one inside story that never ap- peared in In Fact: In 1931 Seldes was entrusted with a num- ber of articles in manuscript by Dr, Angelica Balabanoff, well-known socialist writer. These dealt with aspects of the career of Mussolini, whom she had known before he turned Fascist. Seldes agreed to try to place these articles in American magazines. Years passed, and Dr. Balabanoff did not hear from him. But in 1935 Seldes published a biography of Mussvlini, Sawdust Caesar. Included was one of the Balabanoff articles, without per- mission and without remuneration, but with a footnote statement that she had written it for this book. Dr. Balabanoff was by that time an exile in America. She was horrified by the deceit but did not take legal action. Szldes, however, proceeded to udd insult to the injury. He joined the staff of a new magazine, Ken, and soe@n an alleged Bula- banoff article appeared in its pages, egain without her knowledge or consent. Worse than that, he had rewritten and rearranged the manuscript, and revised the sense of many passages, to give it a strong pro-Com- munist, pro-Stalin ring—this despite the fact that Dr. Balabanoff is violently anti-Com- munist and anti-Stalin. This time the lady's patience cracked. She brought suit. “I recognized passages I had written years ago,” she charged, “but they had been wrenched out of their context— arbitrarily juggled—and interlarded with matter that was not mine and which, whether mine or not, I consider utterly mis- leading. I could only stare at my own name over the concoction with a sense of outrage.” Ken apologized and made a cash settlement with Dr. Balabanoff. Seldes confessed all ina letter dated May 38, 1939. He admitted changing the wording, rearranging ideas and paragraphs and misinterpreting the sup- posed author's thoughts, then publishing the synthetic stuff without consulting Dr. Balabanoff. As the American Mercury sum- med it up in its article on Seldes: “In short, he had done a job for the cause. Most newspapermen, after signing such a confession of distorting facts and inventing opinions, would disappear from public life. Seldes brazened it out. More than that, he set himself up through In Fact as a crusader against the ‘corrupt press’ and a dispenser of unbiased inside news.” Another episode may help in the appraisal of this man. Washington Square Bulletin, the campus paper of Washington fquare College, part of New York University, in its May 6, 1943, issue condemned Seldes’ smear techniques and irresponsible name calling. Did this tribune of the people smile indul- gently at the antics of school children? Far from it. He promptly stigmatized the col- lege paper in print as a semiharlot press, and wrote in a letter to the youthful editors reek- ing with gutter ideas: “It is shocking to find perverted journalism in noncommercial papers. Perhaps the edi- tors of the Bulletin are members of the red- light district of journalism merely because they like the life.” The recipients of the letter were in a po- sition to understand what Representative J. PARNELL THOMAS meant when in a speech in Congress he described Seldes as “the ace smear artist of the American Communists” and “unquestionably the most perfidious in his smearing.” (CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, March 6, 1946.) Perhaps the Congressman overdrew the picture. In a contest for hon- ors in perfidious Communist smearing there would be other worthy entries. Those who have suffered from his irre- sponsible party-line angers are legion. They include publications, organizations, individ- uals as various as the Reader's Digest, the New Leader, the National Geographic; the Book-of-the-Month Club and the American Legion; Franklin D. Roosevelt and Clare Boothe Luce. His hatreds are almost uni- versal in scope. But the telltale fact about these attacks is that in almost every in- A1081 stance they coincided with similar attacks in the open Communist press. Such is the record of the man and his smear sheet. In full awareness of his pro- pensity to threaten libel proceedings when his Communist connections are exposed, I do not hesitate to charge: 1, That In Fact is a Communist party- line publication; 2, That Seldes has been for at least 10 years a prominent and active fellow traveler of the Communists; and 3. That in concealing these facts from his subscribers he has perpetrated a fraud and impo:ture upon them, palming off the chang- ing Communist propaganda us his own in- dependent views, Never Ending National Emergencies REMARKS fo) EON. CLARE E. HOFFMAN OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 17, 1947 Mr. HOFFMAN. Mr. Speaker, in what I am about to say now no reference is intended to any person living or dead. The snakes that were reputed to have followed St. Patrick out of Ireland went with no more eagerness or pleasure than that exhibited by certain individuals who, elected on a Republican ticket, now follow the songs which the New Dealers and the internationalists are singing at the present time. Every time Republicans attempt to comply with some promise they made, every time we try to be honest with the people, the minority and the administration comes along with another emergency, one thing of which there is never a scarcity, never will be a scarcity so long as New Dealers want office, so long as One Worlders follow a policy which will in the end destroy American inde- pendence. You, on the minority side, can always cook up some crisis, some emergency the effect of which is to deny the taxpayers a tax reduction, the rais- ing of the exemption, some idea which followed will keep us ever bankrunt, ever giving away something. Let me congratulate you. You are past masters of that alluring art. But why Repub- licans should be soft-headed enough to follow you is beyond me. Fabrics for Fair Profits EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. ROBERT F. RICH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 18, 1947 Mr. RICH. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following article from Ameri- can Wool and Cotton Reporter for March 13, 1947: FABRICS FOR FAIR PROFITS One of the great and important indus- trials of the country and a real leader in the
A1082 textile industry is the Berkshire Fine Spin- ning Associates under the very able manage- ment of John H. McMahon, president. Berkshire is a consolidation of long time established New England cotton mills, the name coming from the original, the Berk- shire Cotton Mill, of Adams, Mass. That great Berkshire, which for many years as an individual concern gave employment to thou- sands of operatives, paying millions of dol- lars of wages and over a term of years many millions of dollars of taxes, was incorpo- rated—the money found for it and equipped and started up coincident with the election of William McKinley as President of the United States—something like a half century ago. At that time the peuple of this country had suffered under a free-trade policy and it was very obvious thut the temper of the Nation promised a return to a high protec- tive tariff policy and the encouragement of business and industry. So, at that time William B. Plunkett and his associates in- itiated the Berkshire for the production of fine combed gray goods on the assumption— administrated through many following years as a fact—that with a high protective tariff policy in this country we could manufacture fine cotton goods and meet world-wide com- petition. It was only the protective tariff that war- ranted the investment of the several million dollars in the then new Berkshire, and the maintaining of that economic policy over a long period of following years made possible that long time payment of millions in wages and taxes, the building of great mills, the consumption of hundreds of thousands of bales of fine cotton, the distribution of the resultant cotton mill product and the pay- ment of freight rates and the employment of garment makers all over the United States. Subsequent to that time Charles Fletcher of Providence, who became one of the great worsted manufacturers of the country, had a woolen mill at Fulton, N. Y. That mill was operated by John W. Nary and Arthur Schwartz, hired executives and manufactur- ers of Mr. Fletcher's. That mill and all the other woolen and worsted mills of the in- austry—but right now we are particulariz- ing as to Fulton—ran into the free trade era under the Cleveland Administration. The miil couldn't compete without a protective tariff so Fulton was shut down and John Nary and Arthur Schwartz went to Bradford, England, and manufactured worsted fabrics on English machinery, with English oper- atives, paying the wages to non-Americans and sent those goods into this country. In that instance and in all similar instances the foreign manufacturer had the advantage because we had gone off the high tariff, our mills were shutting down, they couldn't compete. Nary and Schwartz ctayed at Bradford through the free trade era and then in 1905 returned to the United States, for we had again gone on to a sound economy basis. Those two men found the idle P. K. Wilson Mill in Trenton, N. J., which had gone out during the free trade era—but now tariff protection had been reestablished, and Nary and Schwartz started in that old plant. Then incorporated as the Princeton Worsted Mills, which has become one of the outstand- ing worsted mills of the world, paying mil- lions and millions of wages and taxes, giving employment steadily with hardly—if as much as—a single day of nonactivity for more than 40 years, an example of the be- neficence of sound economics as depicted in our old high tariff policy. Four or five years ago, when England was suffering under the threat of German inva- sion, the American Viscose Co., at that time owned tn England, was sold to American in- vestors for something like 200,000,000, prov- ing a §200,000,000 activity in this country wholly due to the benign influence of the protective tariff. The American Viscose Co. was initiated in this country by the Cour- taulds of England. The big plant with ita dis- tribution of hundreds of millions over a course of years was solely possible for us in this country because of our then protective tariff which prevented Courtaulds from mak- ing the filament rayon in England and ehip- ping it to us. So we gained that tremendous industry and the employment of thousands of our own American wage earners. The Duplan Co.—it used to be the Dupian Silk Co.—was initiated in Pennsylvania and New York by the original Duplan of Switzer- land. Many years ago Duplan silk fabrics were made in Switserland and France and distributed in this country through the great primary market—New York. Then a half cen- tury ago following the depressions of a non- tariff era the Duplan mills were sect up here because of our return to tariff protection. So, here is another instance where the in- vestment of millions of dollars of European money in plant machinery in thia country made possible the employment of thousands of American workers. The American Thread Co. and the Clark Thread plants in the United States are other examples. The American Thread Co.—several hundred thousands of spindies on fine cot- ton yarns and similarly the Clarks and Coates and Kerr and Chadwick mills—are all English capital, mills built or acquired in the United States because of tariff protection, preventing the English mills with English machinery, wages and taxes producing those fine cotton yarns in the Old World for our domestic markets. One of the great textile manufacturing corporations in the world—much more than a@ $100,000,000 organization—is J. P. Stevens & Co, Th> original Stevens Mill, nucleus around which that great big Stevens group has been consolidated, is the M. T. Sievens Plant at North Andover, Mass. The original Nathaniel Stevens, along about 1813, set up and started his Irst woolen mill because of the conditions concomitant with the war with England in 1812, and the embargo, itself a prohibitive tariff policy which pre- vented the purchase and use of forcign-made woolens in our own markets. The whole J. P. Stevens organization is largely—except for the personal ability—based on the pro- tective tariff. One of the best, most successful dyeing and finishing plants in the world is the Brad- ford Dyein Association of Bradford, R. L., the American-owned plant of an English dyeing and finishing concern operating in this country beceuse—due to our tariff pro- tective policy it is best economy to process these goods in this country. Years ago this was a carded woolen mar- ket, practically all of our mills were on those fabrics. The combed worsted industry was negligible. Then with the permanency of protective tariff seemingly guaranteed, the great Washington Mills, of Lawrence, and the Arlington and the Cleveland Worsted and the Wanskuck, and all those other big worsted organizations were financed, equipped, and maintained profitable opera- tions because of the protective tariff. About the same time the great German worsted manufacturers, Stoehrs of Leipsig, Germany, for example—to particularize by name—built the Botany and Forstmann and the Gera Mill, and the Garfield, and the N. J. Worsted in and around Paasaic, N. J., all of them proof positive of wage paying in this coun- try, rather than the purchase of foreign goods, because of the tariff protection. Perhaps the book that we will now refer to has been removed from the shelves of the New York public library where we saw it years ago, but it is a fact that there was such @ book written by Thomas Barbour, a linen thread manufacturer in Belfast, Ireland— @ book praying for free trade policy in the United States written by an Irish (British) linen manufacturer. He wanted to maintain APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD his then big importer position in this coun- try—the sale of Irish manufactured fabrics— the wages and taxes were paid in the old country. But we returned, long after the Cleveland Administration, to the high pro- tective policy and the Barbours came over from Belfast and built their mills in this country and became the great Linen Thread Co., 80 all of those millions of dollars in wages are paid to wage earners and municipalities Incidentally the Barbours are now all high tarlf! men which perhaps accounts for the removal from the New York public library shelves of the free trade booklet written by the late Thomas Barbour 59 or so years ago. The American Fabrics Co. in Bridgeport, manufacturers of narrow laces, was set up by German money with the work done in this country and the wages paid here instead of in Germany; and the American Fabrics Co. can pay dividends to its shareholders—we, ourselves are one of them—only when we have tariff protection. The Richmond Lace Co, of Rhode Island is in exactly the same situation—we are shareholders in it—the only time we got dividends was in the high tariff period or under an embargo in war years. A few years prior to this Second World War—as everybody in the industry remem- bers—Japan was flooding us with cotton goods, gray and finished, and rayon fabrics in the gray and finished, and beginning to dis- rupt our markets with Japanese woolen and worsted goods. We all remember that a com- mission from the textile industry of this country went to Japan and pleaded with the Imperial Government and with the Japanese industrialists themselves asking them to “pleace not ship so much of your goods to our country,” that our own industries would be ruined. The pleas seemed to be partially suc- ceasful, the Japanese did let up on us a little, we thought that we had brought about a personal accomplishment—we did not know at that time that Japan was preparing to jump on us, getting ready for Pearl Harbor and wanted the goods for their own stock Piles—but the whole thing did and does prove that only the enforcement of the high protective tariff or a terrible war Can pre- serve us from the ravages of the low-paying waze policy of Asiatic as well as the European manufacturers. All political and economic arguments of other eras favoring high tariff protection are still sound—but we amplify those arguments by the presentation above of a score or 80 of actual instances which could be multiplied to a total of hundreds of actual proofs—by names and by dates. The only way that we can be sure of fabrics for fair profits is by the return to and the maintenance of the high protective tariff policy, looking askance always at any of these so-called reciprocal trade treaties. A Parliament for Europe EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. ELBERT D. THOMAS OF UTAN IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, March 18 (legislative day of Wednesday, February 19), 1947 Mr. THOMAS of Utah. Mr. Presi- dent, I ask unanimous consent to have inserted in the Apyendix of the Rrecorp an address delivered on the New York Herald Tribune Forum on the subject A Parliament for Europe, by Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, professor at the New York University.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the REcorp, as follows: CoupENHOvE-KaLEera! ENVISIONS UNITED Ev- ROPE AS UNITED STATES BULWARK—NEWw YoRK Universtry History Prorzssor Says Pou. OF MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT IN NATIONS Outsipe Soviet SPHERE SHOWS StTronc SEN- TIMENT FOR FEDERATION The address at the second session by Rich- ard Coudenhove-Kalergi, professor of history at New York University, on a parliament for Europe, follows: “Last year I spent a few months in Europe. Before returning to New York, I wrote 3,913 letters to members of European parliaments, asking whether they were in favor of the establishment of an European federation within the framework of the United Na- tions, These letters were sent to all mem- bers of freely elected parliaments of unques- tionably European states with independent foreign policies: that is, to the parliamentary representatives of the peoples of France, Brit- ain, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxem- burg, Greece, Switzerland, Ireland, Sweden, Norway, and Denmark. “Among the answers I have received up to date are 612 ‘yes’ and only 12 ‘no.’ “Among the 86 members of the French National Assembly who have answered ‘yes’ figures first of all the great Socialist, who has meanwhile been elected President of the French Republic, Vincent Auriol; the Catholic Vice Premier, Henry Teitgen; the Minister of War, Paul Coste-Floret; the founder of the M. R. P. Maurice Schumann, and the leader of the De Gaulist Union, Rene Capi- tant. “Among the 107 members of the British Parliament who have voted for European federation, 64 belong to the Labor Party and 34 to the conservatives. Among those who belong to neither of these parties is Sir Ar- thur Salter, the former head of the economic section of the League of Nations and one of Britain’s best experts on Europe.” ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY-SIX ITALIANS IN FAVOR “One-third of all members of Italy’s Na- tional Assembly voted for European federa- tion. Among these 186 Italians are the Cath- olic leader Guido Gonella, now Minister of Public Instruction; the Socialist leader Gui- seppe Saragat, former president of the Na- tional Assembly; Matteotti’s two sons; the leader of the Common Mun Party, Guglie!- mo Giannini; Ferruccio Parri, the leader of Italy’s underground resistance and former Prime Minister, and Count Sforza, now Min- ister of Foreign Affairs. “Among the 67 Greeks are three party leaders and former prime ministers, at pres- ent members of the government: Gonatas, Papandreou and Venizelos; with Dragoumis, the former foreign minister, they represent a strong majority of the peoples of Greece. “Time is too short to enumerate all other party leaders, members of governments and of former governments, Socialist and Catho- lics, liberals, conservatives and Communists, leaders of various nations who have thus voted for European union. But beside these prominent names stand the still unknown names of Europe’s leaders of tomorrow, of ardent young men and women elected for the first time after years of fighting and suffer- . ing in the resistance movements, in trenches and in prisons. Now they are grimly deter- mined to save Europe from a third world war, and have, therefore, become enthusiastic sup- porters of the cause of a united Europe.” EUROPEANS FOR UNITY “This parliamentary Gallup poll on Euro- pean federation, with its amazing result, 612 “yes” to 12 “no,” gives a definite answer to those who still doubt whether the peoples of Europe wish to see their continent divided or united. For all these memberf of Parliament have soon to face thelr constituents when asking for reelection. Had they any doubt on the popular feeling toward European union, most of them would not have risked their political future by voting publicly for this cause. “But they are well aware that the over- whelming majority of the peoples of Europe wish to see a new and united continent emerge from the ruins of the war; a Europe without wars, without starvation, without concentration camps; a Europe peaceful like Switzerland, prosperous like America and free like both. “If a fair plebiscite Were to be held tomor- row on the issue of European federation, men and women of all parties and nations, on both sides of the ‘iron curtain’ would stream to the polls to give overwhelming sup- port to the cause of peace by union.” CONTINENTAL PARLIAMENT “This is the reason why I appealed not to the governments but to the people of Europe, through their freely elected representatives. Europe needs a European parliament, as a symbol of its common destiny and an instru- ment of its growing integration; as a new continental authority, to coordinate its na- tional and social aspirations. “To prepare the organization of such a continental parliament, I have just asked the 612 pioneers of European federation to constitute nonpartisan committees for Eu- Topean federation in their respective par- Maments and to invite all their colleagues who share their views to join them. We may expect that some of the most important of these committees will soon embrace parlia- mentary majorities, strong enough to compel their governments to go ahead toward union, and to overthrow those who refuse. “This summer the first Congress of Euro- pean Members of Parliament will meet at Geneva. Each parliamentary committee will be invited to send delegates in proportion to the total of its national population, one dele- gate corresponding to 1,000,000 of his coun- trymen. “These 185 delegates shall constitute the first preliminary parliament of Europe, en- tirely free in its program and decisions; free to invite other European parliaments to co- operate. Some of the parliamentary Pplo- neers of European federation insist on the inclusion of the Soviet Union; it will be up to these delegates to present their case, al- though I have some doubts whether the Sovicts would be inclined to respect a Euro- pean bill of rights or to accept pan-European control of their foreign, economic and mili- tary policy. “The Congress will draft a European char- ter and submit practical suggestions for Europe’s economic and political integration to the interested governments and to the United Nations. It will discuss the problem of a European plebiscite on the issue of un- fon, and elect a European Council as Eu- rope’s supreme authority in its struggle for unity. “All this work of the European congress will aim at a regional union strictly within the framework of the United Nations, ac- cording to article 52 of its Charter, which provides for such regional agreements and agencies. “Pan American has given a great example of how continental solidarity may be made compatible with global unity; pan Europe will follow it.” THIRD PILLAR FOR UN “Stretching between the Pan American and the Soviet Unions, and in close cordial relation with both the European union will constitute a third solid pillar of the United Nations, “The old League of Nations collapsed be- cause it attempted vainly to organize a& united world around a disunited Europe. We must realize that the future of the United A1083 Nations will lurgely depend on, whether or not Europe will unite. “The establishment of a European region under the supreme authority of the United Nations and its Security Council will also help to dispel Russia's objections to Euro- pean union. It will make it possible tu co- ordinate the existing treaties between Euro- pean states and the Soviet Union within an all-out system of European security. “Europe's economic integration will pre- cede its political union, because ruined Eu- rope can rise again only through coordinated efforts.” A START IN LOW COUNTRIES “This great task has been started already by the governments of the Netherlands, Bel- gium, and Luxemburg with their bold at- tempt to get up a customs union in the heart of western Europe. If they succeed, their union will become the nucleus of a much wider market, breaking down progressively the artificial trade barriers that are now cut- ting through Europe's lifelines and blocking its reconstruction and recovery. “In this question of life and death for Europe a new chapter has begun, since some of the world’s outstanding statesmen are backing the cause of European federation. “Winston Churchill, Europe’s greatest cit- izen and inspired statesman, has given a tre- mendous impetus to the Pan-European movement by his historic Zurich speech last Ssptember. And Generval Smuts, one of the wisest leaders of our age, took up this theme in his address before the Netherlands Parlia- ment. Europe recalls that it was Smuts who organized the Union of South Africa imme- diately after ‘he Boer War, a war that had devastated his country and apparently plunged South Africa into a sea of irrecon- cilable hatreds. “And only 6 weeks ago, from the very place from which I am now speaking, one of America's outstanding statesmen, backed by the Congress majority, brought new hopes for federation to the distressed and desperate people of Europe: John Foster Dulles. “Those messages of hope and of faith have restored Europe's confidence in its own fu- ture. Some time. ago many Europeans looked upon the idea of federation as a beau- tiful dream—but impossible of achicvement. Now the promoters of European federation are no longer considered utopians. Suddenly the roles are reversed. Today, since the world’s greatest statesmen dcclare European federation a realistic aim and political pro- gram, those must be considered utopiuns who still dream of the survival of a divided and dismembered Eurupe. “After 25 ycars of uninterrupted struggle, the pun-European movement appeals to post- war Europe more strongly than ever. The people of Europe now realize that the Third Reich and World War No. II could casily have been prevented if Europe's governments had accepted in 1930 Aristide Briand's offer to federate. They recall that President Tiu- man, in a recent interview published by George Creel, gave his blessing to European union, and that Prime Minister Attlee coined the phrase “Europe must federate or perish;” that men like Leon Blum and Edouard Her- riot have been for years, and still are, cham- pions of European federation, and that De Gaulle’s sympathy for this cause is an open secrct.” SPURRED BY WAR “But the horrors and sufferings of the war did more to convince the peoples of Eu- rope of the necessity of federation than any authorities, arguments, or propaganda could do. Under the snow of war, the seed of Eu- ropean union developed to un irresistible force, springing up everywhere throughout the Continent. “This rising tide of public opinion can no longer be ignored. It asks for speedy de- cisions and initiatives. On the eve of the Moscow conference the statesmen of the
A1084 world are bound to determine their attitude on European union. For tt is tmpossible to know what to do about Germany without knowing what to do about Europe, and from the outcome of the Moscow talks may depend the future of Europe. “The German and the European questions are inseparably interwoven. None of Ger- many’s weaker neighbors could accept mem- bership in a European federation around a fourth Reich that is bound to become sooner or later the mouthpiece of pan-German- ‘ ism, and a time bomb in the heart of Eu- rope. European reconciliation is possible only if Germany's political structure is radl- cally changed, shifting sovereignty from the Reich to the states, while integrating Ger- man preduction into the general system of a pan-European market.” BARRIER TO GERMANY “The idea of a United States of Europe is the only force capable of competing success- fully with pan-Germanism and with world revolution. Thus, only can the dangerous vacuum in the German eoul, resulting from the breck-down of old ideals, be filled with the fascinating vision of a new European community based on fraternal ties, on th> reck of Christian tradition and of western civilization, “This great vision of a united Europe ris- ing like a new dawn after the night cf war cen become reality only with America's help. Even if all of Europe were willing to unite, its federation would be impossible without American support. “For America alone can break the tragic deadlock resulting from Europe's shameful partition into spheres of influence, by insist- ing on the loyal fulfillment of the sacred pledge given by the Big Three to the people of eastern Europe for free and unfettered elections; because European freedom is the only peaceful path to union. “But not only does Europe's future depend on America; America's destiny, too, is linked inseparably to the fate of Europe. If Europe collapses tn revolution and anarchy it would be submerged by Asia. In such a world a united Western Hemisphere would become an encircled island, floating in a_ hostile world.” ATLANTIC BRIDGE Therefore, Europe's peace is the safest guaranty for America’s peace and Europe's prosperity for America's prosperity. “The Atlantic is no longer a gap separating two worlds, but a huge bridge uniting two sister continents—the Mediterranean of our dey, center of one. of history's greatest civilizations. “This vision of a new and united Europe in a new and united world can become true if approached in a new and bold spirit, in the spirit of two great men who saw beyond their days the outlines of things to come, one American, the other European. It was George Washington who wrote the following prediction to General Lafayette: ‘We have sowed seeds of liberty and union that will spring up everywhere upon earth. One day, taking its pattern from the United States, there will be founded the United States of Europe.’ “And it was the great French poet Victor Hugo who pronounced, one century ago, this amazing prophecy: ‘The day will come when these two huge unions, the United States of America and the United States of Europe, will face and greet each other across the Atlantic; when they will exchange their goods, their commerce, their industry, their art, and their genius—to civilize the globe, to fertilize the deserts, to improve creation under the eyes of the Creator, and to assure the greatest benefit for all by combining these two infinite forces: the brotherhood of man and the might of God.'” Demonstrating Democracy EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. H. ALEXANDER SMITH OF NEW JERSEY IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, March 18 (legislative day of Wednesday, February 19), 1947 Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, at a time when we are all deeply concerned with foreign relations, it seems to me proper that there should be printed in the Con- GRESSIONAL Record editorials dealing with passing events-which seem to have relevancy. I ask unanimous consent to publish in the Appendix of the Recorp an editorial entitled ‘Demonstrating Democrecy,” which appeared in the New York Herald Tribune yesterday morning, March 17. The editorial pays deserved tribute to Secretary Marshall for his splendid statement on democracy in Moscow a few days ago. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: DEMONSTRATING DEMOCRACY Secretary Marshall's quiet expcsition, given to the foreign ministers on Friday, of what the United States considers democracy to mean lacked the immediately sensational as- pects of President Truman’s message on Greece and Turkey. Yet it may well come to stand as a state paper of equal rank; just as it was clearly an expression of an- other facet of the same policy. Mr. Mar- shall not only stated the American under- standing of the word “democracy” as it was used in the Potsdam agreement; he declared that this definition is regarded as funda- mental by the United States and made it clear that he will press for its implementa- tion in Germany. Mr. Molotov has promised an early reply. It will be one which the Soviet statesmen will unquestionably have to weigh with care. Disclosures by the State and War Depart- ments of the projected program for Greece— which includes a military mission cf no more than 590 men and officers but a corps of highway and transport engineers and of agricultural, health, fiscal and administra- tive experts, which includes some arma- ments with which to keep order but also food, seed, clothes, tools with which to give social order, a viable economic basis—show that this is not a military project. It is a project in holding Greece for the West by showing what western democracy can do there, with its immense strengths of capital and technology, for the Greek people. The Truman message calls for a demonstration of the practical values of our system in ac- tion. The Marshall statement proclaims for the world the ideological values of the prin- ciples on which the system rests, says they have specific meaning, says that we believe in them and says that we are going to atand up for them. In a deeply significant sense, the message and the statement are com- plementary. Together they announce the end of the policy of largely verbal, and, as it proved, unworkable, compromise that ran from long before Yalta down to well after Potsdam. Neither we nor the Russians can any longer hide behind the convenient device of call- ing by the same words purposes, policies, and methods which are basically opposed. Sec- retary Marshall's five freedoms of individual Tight, of political association and elections, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD of trade-union association, of the press and of movement and trade (which differ sig- nificantly in their precision from the “four freedoms” of his late Commander in Chief) do not exist in the Soviet zone of Germany. They do not in any real sense exiet any- where in the Soviet Empire, for the simple reason that they are impossible under the system and that the system would be im- possible if they appeared within it. In com- mitting our policy to support them in the whole of Germany, Secretary Marshall is ex- posing the real issue on the ideologica) level just as the President exposed it on the prac- tical level. it will not ke casy for Mr. Molotov to meet a challenge of this kind, for it exposes him to the necessity of confessing that these freedoms and liberties—which many men still valu3 highly—are not in the gift of Soviet “demccracy.” It would be a grave mistake for Americans to imagine that the Russians are insincere in their use of the word “democracy” or that the mass “demo- cratic’ rights which their totalitarian sys- tem guarantees—rights to full employment, to the stability of a police state, to social equality—do not have their appeal to men. But a belief in our own convictions will at least compel the Russians to stand wpon the real rather than the fictitious virtues of their one-party state; and a capacity to demonstrate our own economic strength in meeting the basic human needs will put their economic claims to searching test. All the hysterical talk abcut war we have heard 1s beside the point; threats of war would bother the Kremlin fer lees than the kind of challenge we have now acccpted, which puts the contest on a ground not only very difficult for the Russians but likely to be really fruitful in the development of his- tory. For as long as the issue between Rus- sia and the West remained concealed in a series of supposed agreements which each side interpreted as a victory cf the other, the issue itself was bound to remain in- soluble. With the issue exposed, statesman- ship may conceivably begin to consider the possibility of adjusting it. Report on the Jewish Colony in Sosua, Dominican Republic EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. STYLES BRIDGES OF NEW AMPSHIRE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, March 18 (legislative day of Wednesday, February 19), 1947 Mr. BRIDGES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have inserted in the Appendix of the Recorp a report on the Jewish Colony in Sosua, Dominican Republic, by David Silberman, which I think is of general interest. There being no objection, the report was ordered to be printed in the Rzcorp, ‘as follows: REPORT ON THE JEWISH COLONY IN SOSUA, DOMINICAN REPUBLIC (By David Silberman) During a business trip to the Dominican Republic I had occasion to visit a Jewish colony located in Sosua. I was accompanied on this trip by Mr. Noel Span, an attorney, Mr. Swain, a tobacco manufacturer, and Mr. Kottle, a wood specialities manufacturer. I had particular personal interest in mak- ing the visit ta this colony and frankly, from
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD all the stories I had heard in the States, I came here very much prejudiced. I was told that President Trujillo exploited and taxed and took advantage of the people he invited to the country, and then gave them poor land, and that the venture was doomed to failure. However, because of the situation now ex- isting in Palestine and further because of Secretary Marshall's recent statement, I de- cided to investigate as thoroughly as I could the actual situation. This is what I saw and this is what I heard, and all this can be confirmed by a visit requested by the Presi- dent of the Dominicans, at the expense of the Government, by any committee selected by UJA to check. Mr. David Slern authorizes me to quote him as follows: “I came here in 1944. This colony was founded in 1940 by Mr. Joseph Rosen. About 500 people came here. These people were the usual type of refugees, most of them who had lost families, fathers, mothers, children because of Hitlerism. They were a disheart- ened lot. Unfortunately, Mr. Rosen died a year after he arrived, and until I got here in 1944 after his death, there was no planning and no leadership. The settlers did nothing except sit around, because they were sup- ported by the Hadassah from whom they got about @50 or $60 per month and so they felt they did not have to work. “T attempted to change all that and there- fore got a reputation of being a tyrant and a hard man, but it must be understood that this is a great country which however, re- quires pioneering. The UJA knows my repu- tation from Palestine as a pioneer. I started planning and putting these people to work. A number of them resented what I was try- ing to do and left, but before they left, they circulated reports in the United States which were false, condemning the colony and its work, “Today, we have a wood shop which Is self- supporting; we have a creamery; we have a cheese-manufacturing plant; we extract lem- on oil from grass which we sell to the United States. We are building new homes; we have a hospital, and we are now starting a poultry farm. Some of these things are cooperative, some are individual. We encourage private enterprise. ‘ “Now despite stories to the contrary, it is because of the atsistance and the liberality of President Trujillo that these things are possible. Conditions are good here. There are no political difficulties, no religicus or racial discrimination, no excessive taxes, no customs tax for the things we import fcr our colony, and we have the full cooperation of the President. “Originally a 8500 poverty-bond payment was required for each person who came to this country; now that has been waived. The storics and rumors thav our people are being exploited and taxed is false and un- true, and we would be indecd ungrateful if we permit these stories to circulate.” I spoke to a Mr. Schweitzer; Mr. Schweit- ger arrived just 2 weeks ago from Shanghal, and told me that after 8 years in Shanghat, he could no longer stay. The antagonism against all whites, including Americans, was go strong that once again, after Germany, he had to be on the move. He happened to read in Shanghai about the Dominican Republic. He wrote directly to President Trujillo and received a personal reply asking him to come, and all arrangements were made for his visa. Mr. Schweitzer is here only 2 weeks. He came with five children. His wife untortu- nately died just before he left. He now lives in a modest three-room bungalow. He al- ready is earning @4 a day over his food and rent, selling farm products. He has all the e@pportunity to earn more, depending on his ability. Mr. Schweitzer’s previous protes- sion was as owner of a merry-go-round in Germany. He will raise his children to be good Dominican citizens. I spoke to Mr. Blackwood. Mr. Blackwood was born in Maine, U. 8. A., but lived until 1940 in the West Indies. Mr. Blackwood is Mr. Stern's right-hand man. “This colony is the only one in Central or South America that will succeed. The Jand is good. We have gotten rid almost com- pletely of al] the complainants that origi- nally were here. There are a few left. When they go, we will have an ideal colony. We need more families, men with their wives and children, rather than bachelors, because the social problem is important We would like to have a plano. “We require two tractors, a station wagon, @ dump wagon, 4 passenger car, and two pick- un wagons. We have ordered these in New York from our own budget, but have not so far gotten delivery. We would appreciate your pushing these for us. “So far as President Trujillo is concerned, I was one of the original settlers here. This incident I know is true. Recently a young man who had been in the service of ycur country was being deported and wrote to a friend of the President, and through his in- tervention, this man not only received his visa, but a loan from the Gcvernment and is on his way here. This man ts not a Jew and he is not a member of this colony. If this colony had 200 more families, it would be completely self-supporting.” I spoke to Mr. Olshinsky, a cheese manu- facturer, who was also one of the first set- tlers. He processes 80 pounds of cheese daily. selling it to the cooperative at 40 cents per pound, and the cooperative resells it at 59 cents per pound, and profits are divided among the cooperatives. I asked him how he felt about the colony. His answer was that it was heaven to him. His total taxes for which he shcwed me in receipts, were less than 8100 yearly. We had lunch with my friends at the colony. It was an excellent meal, veal cut- lets, soup, orange juice, vesctables, butter, and coffee, one of the best meals I had in Santo Domingo. In conclusion, Mr. Stern said, “This colony will be successful. I think it is essential that UJA accept the President's invitation and send a committee here. It is only a day's journey. They can sce for themselves what is going on in this place and this colony will be succsssful if New York wants it to be. The budget originally was $400,000 per annum and will be down to 820,000 per annum as each member becomes more self- supporting and contributes to the running of the colony.” As for President Trujillo, he needs no de- fenders. Aside from the colony, I have ridden with my friends a thousand miles through this territory. I have seen the country which is surrounded by primitive people, and if Trujillo is a dictator, he is an unusual one, because a dictator can com- mand respect and fear, but it is difficult to command love. His people love him. I have spoken to them in the schools, in the fac- tories, and on their farms, and he is doing an excellent job. He is willing to do more. At the moment he feels, because of the bad press in the United States, that the Jews are ungrateful. This can be remedied. Dominica looks like the United States did 60 years ago. It certainly is clean, it is in- dustrious, and there seems to be a wonder- ful opportunity for this country as an ex- porting center to South and Central America. Trujillo is not limiting his invitation to Jewish settlers only. At the moment his country is negotiating with the Yugoslavian exiles for a thousand families and has gone Al085 so far as to agree to provide the ships to bring them over if necessary. I think the Jews of America should be notified of this situation, in a more favorable tent than has previously been presented to em, America’s Educational Slums EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWARD G. ROHRBOUGH OF WEST VIRGINIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 18, 1947 Mr. ROHRBOUGH. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I include an editorial from the Christian Science Monitor for March 3, 1947, en- titled “America’s Educational Slums.” In view of the fact that this publica- tion is very independent and conserva- tive and that it has not heretofore com- mitted itself, it seems to me quite signifi- cant that it takes the position it does with respect to Federal support for pub- lic education. The article follows: The two poles of American democracy are freedom and equality. As applied to educa- tion, these id2als should ensure for all children equality of educational opportunity in a free public school system—a system free cf charges, free of politics, free of any cfficial state philosophy... A3 in other spheres of d2mccratic life, the two ideals seem to collid>, To provide actual equality of opportunity would necessiiate Federal control of education. This in turn would wipe out that freedom of locel con- trol which Americans lock on as vital to democratic education. A recent speech, reprinted in an adjoining column, points out that the best American public school systems spend sixty times as much per classroom unit as the poorest sys- tems. This is not the fault of the States with the poor systems. In many cases they expend @ greater percentage of their total income on education than wealthier States. They simply haven’t the means to keep their schools at a minimum level of adequacy. These educational “slums” are not the whcle of the present crisis. They are only its worst—and intolerable—manifestaticn. Their evil results are felt in all parts of the country and even find their way into ths United States Senate. They belie in the field of education the American ideal of equal cpportunity. Many pecple who in the past have opposed Federal aid to education are now convinced that the present crisis is so preat that some- thing must be done. Senator Tarr, a former opponent of Federal aid who is also com- mitted to Federal econemy, has introduced a bill into the Senate on bzhalf of eight Senators of all political complexions which would make funds available to the poorest States to bring their standards up to a bare minimum, The chief provisions of this bill (S. 472) are: (1) It absolutely prohibits Federal con- trol of education. (2) It authorizes Federal funds in direct proportion to need and effort and in indirect prcportion to the financial ability of the States to support schools. (3) It establishes a minimum sum for the States to spend on the education of every American child. According to Senator Tart, it is based on the theory of merely assisting the
A1086 Btates * * * 80 that the 48 States may remain completely free to conduct their affairs as they wish to conduct them in this field. Conservative church and educational groups are supporting the bill on this basis. Under its provisions no funds would go to parochial schools except where the States make these eligible for State support. Fed- eral aid in such cases could and should prop- erly be withheld, but the present bill does not go so far, This newspaper has consistently opposed any threat of Federal interference with local control of education. It recognizes, however, that today the whole educational structure of the United States is in a critical condi- tion. It recognizes that democracy itself is jeopardized when the educational system breaks down. And it recognizes that care- fully safeguarded Federal] aid alone can put & foundation under the most badly sagging parts of public-school education in America. Under these circumstances it believes that the Taft bill should be supported. The bill does not aim at an ideal equality of oppor- tunity. Its provision that no child shall get an education costing less than $40 a year still guarantees the child less than one-fourth of what some States expend per child. It aims only at abolishing America’s most Gangerous educational slums and goes only so far toward equalizing opportunity as it can safely do while maintaining freedom of local control. In common with the coun- try’s leading educators, we accept this as the middle-road answer to a situation that threatens the deepest traditions and ideals of American democracy. Role of United Nations in Greek Situation EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. H. ALEXANDER SMITH Or NEW JERSEY IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, March 18 (legislative day of Wednesday, February 19), 1947 Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an article written by Walter Lippmann entitled “A Golden Opportunity,” and published in the New York Herald Tribune of March 18, in which Mr. Lippmann takes a posi- tion which is very close to my heart, namely, that at this time our action in connection with the Greek and Turkish situation should not be unilateral but should be in connection and in consulta- tion with the United Nations. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Topay AND Tomorrow (By Walter Lippmann) & GOLDEN O>PORTUNITY In addition to its vague globalism, which has already caused much misunderstanding in many parts of the world, a most serious defect of the President's message was the treatment accorded the United Nations. This defect can be corrected. It urgently needs to be corrected. Otherwise the American intervention will be highly vulnerable to criticiam at home and abroad, and our task will be more difficult than it needs to be. The treatment of UN has been explained, for example by Senator VaNnvDENsrac, on the ground that while “we must keep faith with the pledges to the Charter,” it is “not prac- tical at the immediate moment” to proceed “within the United Nations” because UN has.no relief funds—and it has not yet con- cluded agreements with member nations for military support, Now, it is quite true that UN has netther the money nor the power to act. Almost cer- tainly tt is also true that if UN had the money and the power, the Soviet Union would veto action by the UN. But that does not release us from our pledges under the Charter. Be- cause the UN is unable to act collectively, it does not follow that we have the right to act unilaterally, or even that if we have the tight, that it ts wise to exercise it. The heart of the United Nations Charter and the soul of the whole undertaking is the covenant to consult with the other mem- bers, particularly the permanent members of the Security Council, when an tasue of international security and peace its raised. Indisputably such an issue is raised here: the President said eso in his message. The fact that the UN is not capable of acting swiftly, effectively, or even of acting at all, does not relieve us of the obligation to con- sult the United Nations before we act. It is poes:bie, I realise, to argue that the letter of the Charter, if article 106 is strictly and narrowly construed, does not oblige us in this specific case to “consult with one an- other" with “a view to such joint action on bshalf of the organization es may be neces- sary for the purpose of maintaining inter- national peace and security.” We could argue that the Greek Govern- ment has invited us to intervene, that the exact language of article 106 does not fit this case exactly. But if we do, we shall be sacrificing the spirit to the letter. For the obligation to consult is the paramount prin- ciple of the United Nations, and we do not have the right, nor is it in our interest, to fail to uphold that principle. ' It was—to put it conservatively—an over- sight to have discussed our proposed action before the President announced it to the world only with the British Government, and not also with the French, the Chinese, and the Russians. That, however, is water over the dam, and the mistake can be repaired. The policy is not yet adopted. The Presi- dent has not yet acted. He is still only ask- ing Congress for authority to act. Before he can act the whole proposal will be examined publicly by the committees and it will then be debated in Congress. If the policy can be explained to Congress. and therefore to the worki, it can also be explained to the United Nations. A full explanation, and a willingness to consider objections, would meet the obligation to con- sult. There are many ways of doing this, and any one of them, or all, would relieve us of the suspicion that we are evading our ebligations. We could inform the Secretary- General of the United Nations about our pro- posals and invite him to take notice of the explanations which will be offered to Ccn- Greas. Mr. Austin could go before the Secu- rity Council and explain the proposals, not waiting until Mr. Gromyko attacks them. We could notify the United Nattons that we shall not only expiain what we intend to do and why, but also that we shall report to them at regular intervals what we have done and why. We could, moreover, invite the leading interested nations to send official ob- servers to Greece to see for themselves what we are doing. The great advantage of some such action on our part is that it ~ould at once rehabili- tate the moral authority of the United Na- tions and would not interfere with the efi- ciency of our action since the whole interven- tion must, because Congress is a party to it, be conducted without secrecy and in full public view APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD But there are many other advantages of acting, as Senator VANDENBEEG pute It, “with- in the United Nations"—even though we do not act through the United Nations. This is the best way to answer the charge that we are doing whet we have so often charged others, particularly the Russians, with do- ing—that we are acting unilaterally and for the purpose of domination and imperial aggrandisement. Moreover, by going into Greece, we shall set up right on the frontier of the Soviet orbit, a demonstration of how we think a weak country, which is strategically impor- tant, should be treated by a great power. We must make the demonstration attractive as well as convincing. We must show not only that we have money and military strength and technical skill but also that we are the willing and eager servante of an in- tecnational order, within which small nations can obtain assistance and protection without sacrificing their independence or their self- resvect. Not to act within the United Nations, and in accord with a broad affirmation of the spirit of the Charter, would be to aggravate our difficulties and to miss a golden oppor- tunity. Let it not be said of us: “They rushed to meet the insulting foe. They took the spear, but left the shield.” For if the spear is our money, our prestige, and our power, the shield is our readiness to be always faithful to the spirit of our pledges to mankind, Prepesed Budget Cuts Affecting Our Personnel! in Germany Opposed EXTEN3ION OF REMARKS HON. EMANUEL CELLER OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 18, 1947 Mr. CELLER. Mr. Speaker, I here- with insert the letter of Mr. Herbert J. Scrong, published in the March 13 issue of the New York Times, on the need for occupation forces: LErrens To THE TrmMEs PROPOGED BUDGET CUTS AFFECTING OUR PERSONNEL IN GERMANY OPPOSED To the Entrox or tHe New Yorx Times: Last September I returned from Germany, where I was attached as attorney to the War Crimes Branch, United States Army, and had the privilege of taking an active part in va- rious wer crime trials, especially the so-called Malmedy trial, conducted at Dachau to punish the killers of American soldiers taken prisoners in the Battle of tho Bulge. Dur- ing my stay over there I had ample oppor- tunity to observe cur cccupation forces at work and to notice that most of our military government offices which I saw were ade- quately manned, but that none of them was overstaffed. Since that time conditions have radically changed. True, the total of American wives and children surpasses the total strength of our constabulary, but I doubt that this fact will enhanoe our military and administra- tive efficiency. The Seventh and Third Arm- fea have been deactivated. The constabu- lary, upon whom the military government counts to any resistance move- ments, is without its tanks; our Air Forces are without bombers. General Clay was compelled to announce several radical personnel cuts, resulting in 30- to 4C-percent reduction of MG's person-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD nel by July 1, 1947; doing away with practi- cally all of the liaison detachments in the amaller places of the “Landkreise” and cut- ting the strength of various administrative departments to the bone—not even to men- tion the complete lack of personnel for one of the most important tasks, denazification, the handling of which we should have re- served for ourselves. Moreover, although all these reductiong were instituted on the basis of a greatly re- duced tentative budget for 1947, the present economy drive in Congress threatens even this budget with further very substantial cuts, which well might make occupation a meaningless gesture and a hollow shell. Al- ready AMG is compelled to cancel running contracts with civilian employees. All per- sonnel with a rating below CAF-8 and P-3, ~ho have their families over there, cannot, pursuant to a notice recently appearing in Stars and Stripes, expect a renewal of their contracts. Result of cut What will happen if the intended &6,- 000,000,000 cut, or evem the liberal $4,500,- 000,000 cut, should become law is only too obvious. While I was still over there, many of the Germans in all walks of life expressed their doubts about the seriousness of our intention “to stay and sweat it out” in Germany. But what is our alternative? To turn over the occupation of our zone to the French or the English, who, although they on their small war-ravaged and impoverished island certainly do not have the financial resources of this country, now have substan- tially more troops (800,000) under arms in Germany than we have? Or to continue to occupy Germany with totally inadequate and insufficient forces? When will we ever learn that power is the only language all of the other countries un- derstand? There cannot be the slightest doubt in anybody's mind that by indiscrim- inately cutting down our occupation forces (as will be the inevitable result of the in- tended budget reductions) we will not only lose face in the eyes of the German people, who would certainly be the first ones to avail themselves of our weakness, but will also lose the much-needed bargaining power in AMG's dealings with the other occupying gov- ernments. From all I have seen, the military govern- ment and its military and administrative per- sonnel have done an excellent job. Un- doubtedly, mistakes and errors have been made; undoubtedly, people were occasionally placed in positions for which they were not fit and in which they exercised faulty judg- ment; undoubtedly, a small minority placed good living and personal gains above their tasks. But, on the whole, the military gov- ernment’s personnel are efficient, honest, and capable, deeply devoted to their duties; they measure up fully to the forces of any of the other occupying powers, and do not deserve to be let down now by economy measures, however well intended they may be, which would cripple this efficiency beyond repair. Congress, before cutting the budgets of the War and Navy Departments, should listen to the warning voices of men like Secretaries Marshall, Patterson, and Forrestal, and Gen- erals Eisenhower, MacArthur, McNarney, and Olay, who are certainly no New Dealers, and whose personalities and backgrounds should vouch for the absence of any bias or personal interest. Warnings of leaders The Secretaries of the War and Navy De- partments are civilians themselves. Generals Marshall and Eisenhower are professional military men, who have time and time again in the past placed the interest of the Nation above the gains or interest of any particular group or class. In General Olay we are happy to possess a man who combines, to an other- wise rarely attained degree, the top qualifica- tions of a soldier with the qualifications of a civilian administrator and diplomat. Their warning voices should not be heard in vain. And it is more than a coincidence that there seem to be not many supporters of the budget cuts among the Republican Members of Congress who have actually been over there, be it as a fighting man, like Senator Lopse, or as an observer, like Senator MORSE. These men know what is at stake. A substantial cut in income taxes would, no doubt, be welcomed by everybcdy, but I think much too highly of the patriotism and intelligence of the average American to be- Heve that they would also welcome such cut if it can be achteved only by “wielding an ax in a dark room,” by the relinquishment of our international obligations, and by paying a price which might not fall due for another 10 or 20 years, but which we one day would have to pay. We did have money enough to bring dozens “of witnesses from everywhere to Washington to testify in the 6-week fight against Mr. Lilienthal’s confirmation. Concededly, the amounts needed for the efficient occupation of Germany and Japan are bigger. But big- ger things are also at stake, and for these bigger things we ought to, and must, have the money, even if it means a tax reduction of less than 20 percent, or no tax reducticn at all. The Second World War is not yet ended, Hostilities have merely ceased. HERBERT J. STRONG. New Yor, March 8, 1947. Communism REMARKS HON. PHILIP J. PHILBIN OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 18, 1947 Mr. PHILBIN. Mr. Speaker, if the United States is to assume responsibility for putting down communism and es- tablishing stable, free governments throughout the world, we should at this time recognize and carefully weigh the implications of such a policy. It would have in part the following probable con- sequences: First. Abandonment of the principle of collective security under the United Nations in favor of unilateral action by the United States alone in which we would be called upon to furnish money, food, supplies, munitions, arms, and fighting men in certain eventualities bound to occur. Second. The early restoration and re- sumption of the selective-service draft or, in its place, a system of universal military service, otherwise known as the peacetime draft—a permanent system of military regimentation. Third. Intervention by the United States into every substantial dispute throughout the world which involves the penetration of communism through po- litical action, or unstable social and eco- nomic conditions. This will involve the expenditure of vast sums of money, the dissemination of relief on a practically unlimited scale and responsibility for American boys policing vast and remote areas of the world for indefinite periods. Fourth, Conflict with Communist sat- ellites or puppets in the Mediterranean, A1087 in Europe, the Near East, the Persian Gulf region, India, China, or the Dutch East Indies which may well involve our country in World War III. Fifth. If we should emerge victorious from such a war then we would have to assume on a unilateral basis the task of policing vast conquered areas. This task alone would mean that for an indefinite time in the future young American boys would be required to perform military service in foreign lands far away from their homes, that our Nation would ac- cept guardianship of many foreign na- tions—a new imperialism differing from the old only in the benevolence of mo- tives and methods. Sixth. This policy does not consider the tragic plight of Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Esthonia, Finland, and other small nations, already by agreement heartlessly consigned to Communist dcmination as an accomplished fact, to which the American people will never accede. Nor does it alter our traditional practice of relieving hunger and starva- tion wherever we reasonably can. In any policy there are calculated risks which the Nation will have to assume. However, before we embrace measures which will undoubtedly bring such for- cible impact upon our own political, so- cial, and economic institutions as well as the integrity and stability of our own Government the American people should carefully weigh the consequences and fully realize the gravity and impli- cations of their decision. To us of this generation is entrusted the high privilege of living under free institutions—a privilege that would be eagerly embraced by the oppressed in many other lands. Ours is the duty of preserving these institutions for those who come after us. There must never be any question concerning our unswerv- ing determination to support and sustain the Government, the Constitution, and the free American system of equal op- portunity for all. We must maintain and preserve the American standard of living the highest in the world, the high- est that any nation in all history has ever enjoyed. The rights and liberties of American citizenship were not easily won, but they can be easily lost. That is demonstrated by the experience of other nations. We must therefore stanchly fight to pro- tect these great basic truths that underly our free Government, free worship, free speech, free press, free assembly, and freedom of thought, conscience, and action. In a world permeated with subversive doctrines, in a world where governmental tyranny suppresses freedom in many Jands, we must pledge ourselves and gird ourselves to fight incessantly against the inroads into America of communism, fascism, or any other form of despotism over the mind and spirit of man which debases the dignity and worth of the human being and renders men and women and children alike servile to a superstate of commissars. It is no less important that we uphold the basic principles of our economic sys- tem which accords to all the right and
A1088 opportunity to reach the top of the lad- der of success in every field of endeavor. We must continue to recognize and re- ward ability, merit, willingness to work, industrious habits under the capitalistic system without allowing selfishness and greed to exploit the worker, the farmer, the sthalj]l businessman, and those who must struggle and work for a living. We must without hesitation renounce spe- cial privileges, monopoly, and exploita- tion by any class or group. We must ac- cord to every man regardless of origin, race, creed, class, or station in life ab- solute equality and protection under the law. We must secure our cit:zens in the right to pursue honest, gainful occupa- tions, to aim for and achieve leadership and success. We must safeguard the conditions under which our citiz2ns work and remove all unnecessary restraints upon the driving power of their energies and ambitions. We must guarantee that taxes levied on individuals and business enterprises will not unconscionably con- fiscate private property and in that man- ner stifle incentive, dry up the well springs of venture capital and thus hin- der the ful] employment of our ordinary citizens and impede the proper develop- ment of the Nation. We must generously provide for our veterans who saved the country and who will be its guardians and protectors in the future. We must give living effect to the prin- ciple that hard persevering work is at the foundation of our whole structure and is most frequently the basis for suc- cess, that in general the individual, not the Government, is in normal times and under normal conditions responsible for himself and his family and support of his community and his Government and that the Federal Treasury cannot be ex- pected to solve the ordinary financial problems of our citizzns who should and must in the main under normal condi- tions look to private ventures, private employment, and private incustry, and not the Government for livelihood, sup- port, and accomplishment. We must foster personal initiative, ambition, and the spirit of enterprise among our people and militantly resist the efforts of radical reformers to re- shape the democratic pattern of Ameri- can life into a totalitarian form. Let us reaffirm the time-honored American theory that the sick, the in- firm, the handicapped, the unfortunate, and the underprivileged and all those who for any reason are unable to care for themselves can be provided for humanely and justly without destroying our basic democratic institutions, and that we will continue to provide for them. In this connection we must put our elaborate Federal fiscal system in order, balance the budget, move to the dis- charge of the huge national debt, and live as a nation within our income and means so that we can respond to the urgent needs of our own people. We must recognize our obligations to maintain world peace anc to seek to pre- serve the dignity and freedom of man throughout the world. At the same time we must recognize that it is impossible for a nation of 140,000,000 people consti- tuted as we are, as a great democracy, to feed, clothe, support, and sustain large portions of the earth indefinitely without bringing ruin and destructions upon our own Nation. There must be a rule of reasonableness governing our relief ex- penditures and our military commit- ments in foreign lands lest abnormally expanded relief and militaristic pro- grams designed to support political sta- bility throughout the world may overbur- den our own people with debt, taxes, and collapse of our own politica] and eco- nomic institutions. Other nations must cooperate to solve their own problems. By the same token in the light of un- settled world con-itions, in the light of poesible-threats to our way of life we must maintain a strong mechenized up- to-date national defense embodying the latest atomic weapons, so constituted as an army, nevy and air force that it will be Jarge and powerful enough to defend our shores against aggression, carry out our international commitments and fur- nish adequate support for a strong, mili- tant, pro-American foreign policy which will seek international justice through cooperation with all peoples o. good will. I must re-emphasize a very important part of our American program. We must fight and fight hard against the infiuence of subversive groups and organ:zed crackpots who are working to establish the totalitarian, Marxist state in this country. There is no place in America for agitators against our institutions who are engaged in fomenting class struggle, overthrow of the Government, strife and antagonism. The tyranny of totalitar- jienism has already ruined the culture and freedom of many foreign peoples. Let us keep our own Nation safe and secure from the baneful effects of such doctrines. Let us work and live by the American principle that no clique, class, group, or faction shall ever control Amer- ica, that the only rule to be recognized here is the rule of the majority and by that means we intend to carry out the destiny of the Nation and the heritage of free men. The foregoing remarks were delivered in substance in a speech by me before the American Legion, Palmer, Mass., March 15, 1947 and before the Fraternal Order of Eagles, Leominster, Mass., March 16, 1947. Military Justice—Suggested Reforms EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. LEROY JOHNSON OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 18, Mr. JOHNSON of California. Mr. Speaker, in the last Congress I was a member of a subcommittee of the Mili- tary Affairs Committee of the House which considered the matter of military justice. It considered some factual data collected for us by the investigator of the Military Affairs Committee. After much discussion and consideration we recom- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD mended certain changes in the adminis- _tration of military justice. The War Department recently ob- _tained the assistance of a committee of the American Bar Association in trying to determine what if any changes should be made in the handling of military jus- tice problems. This committee, com- posed of eminent lawyers, made a report in which they recommended a number of changes. This report, in many respects, follows the ideas set forth in the report of our subcommittee. I recently sent the report of the Amer- ican Bar Association to two California lawyers to obtain their reaction and sug- gestions with reference to the problem of military justice and what if anything should be done te make it more effec- tive and to render exact justice. These two men are lawyers of much experi- ence, they left their law practice to serve in the Judge Advocate’s Department in the war which has just closed. They are thoroughly well trained and ethical prac- jtloners with a good backlog of experi- ence in private practice and considerable experience in the handling of the prob- lems of the Judge Advocate General's De- partment. They were k'nd enough to give me their candid suggestions as to what should be done and I value them most highly. In order that other Members may have the benefit of their rcaction and their sugges- tions, I am asking unanimous consent that the lctters which they sent me, with the names deleted, be placed in the Ap- pendix to the Rgecorp as a part of this statement. Therefore, the two letters referred to are hereby set forth and I trust that those Members who are interested in this prob- lem may have the time to read them as they give us much food for thought and represent the considered opinion of two very able lawyers. These are the letters: SacRaMENTO, CALIF., March 10, 1947. Hon. Lazoy JoHNSon, Congressman, Third District of California, House Office Building, Washington, D.C. zar Leror: This will acknowledge your letter enclosing the report of the War De- partment Advisory Committee on Military Justice to the Secretary of War, dated De- cember 18, 1946, with the request for com- ments by Ben Frantz and me. Ben and I have conferred as requested but have found it dificult to get together for the purpose of drafting a joint reply to you and he has therefore written his separate views and [ herewith submit mine. Conference has been held with eight other former judge advocates or legal officers and many of the following comments are not original but suggestive of my own conclu- sions. It should not be lost sight of that in adopting changes there are some basic con- siderations so fundamental they are obvious and because you are a lawyer they will be immediately recognized by you. First, the best system of justice can pe destroyed by an incapable judge (administration) and a good judge may often times work out justice with poor system of justiee. Second, a lawyer trained in the technical requirements for the administration of justice is unquall- fied to approve or disapprove the technical work of a scientist, surgeon, engineer, cr infantry soldier, nor are the latter qualified to approve or disapprove the work of a tech. nically trained lawyer (judge advocate). "In addition to those considerations, is it
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD not significant and indicative of required change that so many. men, who like myself were judge advocates, have so many criti- cisms of the present system of military jus- tice and make sO many sweeping recom- mendations for corrective action? Where, in any civilian structure of courte could be found nearly so many objections or judges and lawyers to make recommendations for changing the structure? It is not believed possible’ that so many judge advocates can be wrong about something that was so real and close to them as their war service. The recommendations of the advisory committee are all concurred in by me and are splendid us far as they go. All of the recommendations are considered good. They do not, however, grapple with the basic faults. The present unsatisfactory system of mili- tary justice as written would probably be workable if the administration were good and the pressure of command contro] ab- sent. The present system of military justice as written contemplates neither poor ad- ministration nor pressure from any quarter, including command control, upon the courts, The fundamental problem, therefore, to correct present evils, involves the develop- ment of a system of military justice which will eliminate the two glaring faults of maladministration and command control. Faulty administration of various activities by the Government, including the Army, has repeatedly demonstrated its failures to properly administer the laws of our country committed to its care. Our history is re- plete with failures and maladministration under the pressure of armed conflict or national emergency. Look at what happened to claims. In the middle of the recent war the procedure providing for the Iiability for and settlement of claims so completely broke down by delays that an entirely new law and set of regulations was required. Look at what happened and is still happen- ing to the retirement of civilian personnel from the armed forces. An act of Congress provides that officers retired for physical disability shall receive the same retirement pay and benefits as those of the Regular Army. But civilian officers being retired are believed not to be receiving the same pay and benefits under similar circumstances. Look at the failures involved in the selection of personnel for the armed forces. Men by the thousands, who if properly screened would have been initially rejected. were in- ducted into the armed forces to be later found entirely unqualified or unfit for the rigors of service in the armed forces with the consequent loss of time, money to the Government, and injustice to those men. Look at what happened to assignment of personnel in the armed forces and how fre- quent it was the experience of practically all concerned that square pegs in round holes were found to be the rule rather than the exception. The basic law and even the reg- ulations thereunder were not bad, but the administration of them was, under the pres- sure of war, not The dame failures and maladministration under the same pressures resulted in the same kind of administrative failures as to military justice. But quite apart from the objectionable administrative failures which impaired the effectiveness of the military courts, another and equally objectionable in- fluence has its effect. Command control over military courts and their personnel introduced into the admin- istration of justice what, by all American standards, is considered an intolerable out- side influence because it is capable of com- pletely destroying the purpose of justice for which those courts were created. Line officers of infantry, artillery, and the others are an integral part of command con- trol, and their entire effort is directed toward the actual training and employment of men and matérie] for and in combat. Discipline is an essential part of that training and XCITI—App.——69 effort and makes the work of those officers possible. Discipline {s employed by those Ine officers to the extent required to obtain compliance with the requirements of their mission. Discipline by them, except in a small fraction of 1 percent of the cases, ob- tains such compliance. But when discipline falls to obtain such compliance, they look for something beyond their own available disciplinary methods, and in that search they usually go to the military courts. But they are still thinking about discipline, not justice. In the administration of justice by the military courts, line officers who train and are trained for a lifetime with the imperative need for discipline, comprise the military courts which are expected in the fraction of 1 percent of the cases where ordinary dis- cipline breaks down, to administer justice. Is it not too much to expect that those fine line officers so constituted will not on the courts continue to administer discipline rather than justice? In short, to provide military courts with acceptable fustice for those brought before them, is it not basic that those courts must be under the exclusive control of men in that field as technically qualified as those in the fields of science, surgery, engineer- ing, etc.? It will be observed that command control by a line officer exercising general court mar- tial jurisdiction making his influence felt either by enforcing his destres upon the court or disapproving or approving the conclusions of the court, is only one of the reasons for the failure of military courts to acceptably administer justice. Another and equally basic reason is the lack of technical training and temperament of the line officers who sit on the courts which unfite them to adminis- ter the courts other than arbitrarily. The recommendations of the War Depart- Ment Advisory Committee on Military Jus- tice can therefore be said to be helpful but will only result in the same problems during the next war. The corrective measures should include: 1. That the Judge Advocate General and his entire corps of officers should be abso- lutely and completely severed from Army ad- ministrative control and this should be ac- complished by making the Judge Advocate General’s Department an independent de- partment directly under the Secretary of War. So long as any commander has con- trol over his judge advocate we can expect trouble. 2. The judge advocates should serve as judges for all classes of military courts. In special and general courts martial the ac- cused should be given the choice of a trial by the court (that is, the judge advocate) or with the usual officers now comprising those courts sitting not as a court, but as a fury. The judge advocate should be given the same judicial tndependence and the same if not greater authority as that exercised by civilian Judges. ©. For reasons stated above, legislation and Teguiations should discourage the transfer of line officers to the Judge Advocate Gener- al’s Department because their previous train- ing, temperament and qualifications will usually unfit them for the proper administra- tion of justice as distinguished from dis- cipline, even though they be lawyers. Judge advocates—that ts, fudges—should be selected with greatest care and emphasis upon their previous background, training and temperament to qualify for the important work of judge. 4. To assist the Judge Advocate General's Department in the procurement of the de- sirable personne! from the civilian legal pro- fession of the Nation, the living and other conditions offered to them (including the separate promotion list recommended by the War Department Committee) should be made desirable for lawyers by ac- cording them treatment at least commensu- A1089 rate with that which they as professional men enjoy in civilian life. 5. The Judge Advocate General’s Depart- ment, which administers not only justice but as well provides the legal services for the Army, should be augmented many times over tts present strength as recommended by the War Department Advisory Committee. It is believed that large industrial concerns, such as General Motors, Ford, General Electric, United States Steel, none of whom can be said to have the ramified legal responsibilities or problems as that of the Judge Advocate General's Department for the United States Army, each has a legal staff without any re- sponsibilities for the administration of any justice between individuals in their personal affairs many times the size of that of the Judge Advocate General's Department in either wartime or peacetime. Assuring you that it has been a pleasure and an honor to present to you my com- ments on the report of the War Department Advisory Committee, and with kindest per- sonal regards, I am Sincerely yours, ALBERT E, SHEETS. 4, 1947. Dear Roy: Examination of the report of Advisory Committee on Military Justice im- pels me to compliment the committee and those who contributed to its report on a workmanlike Job and a real contribution to the advancement of the administration of military justice. It is my desire to suggest 9 procedure that is perhaps more advanced than the commit- tee is at this time willing to recommend. I suggest that the primary function of ad- ministering military justice be vested in and moade the responsibility of the Judge Ad- vocate General's Department. To this end, the department should be made a separate branch of the Army answerable only to the President of the United States. To each command exercising general court-martial jurisdiction, there should be assigned three officers of the Judge Advocate General's De- partment: (1) an officer of suitable rank to act as the law member; (2) an officer to act as trial Judge advocate; and (3) an officer to act as defense counsel. The law member would preside over the court; and it might be found advisable for the trial Judge ad- vocate and defense counsel to change places after every 50 many trials. The right of the accused to choose his own counsel in addition to or in lieu of the defense counsel shou!d be retained. These three officers would perform no other duties and would provide the nu- cleus for every general court he!d within the command. These officers would be entirely removed from any direction by the com- mander of the command to which they are assigncd and would be responsible only to the Judge Advocate General. The other members of the court would be sclected by the law member from a panel of available officers submitted by the commander. The commander would order the same pretrial investigation he does now and would order the soldier to trial if he so determined from the Investigation; but there his authority would cease. Any evidence that the court’s decision was in any way influenced by pres- sure or suggestion upon any court member by the commander would immediately be re- ported by the law member to the Judge Ad- vocate General for investigation and would be a ground for ordering a new trial. The Judgment would be the free judgment of the members of the court except tnat it would be subject to a table of maximum punirh- ments and, in a few cases, minimum punish- ments. The record of the trial would be reviewed by the Judge Advocate General and not by the commander’s staff fudge advocate. The sentence could be reduced by the Judge Advocate General but not by the commander. When * speak of the Judge Advocate Gen- eral, I refer, of course, to his authorised
A1090 subordinates insofar as taking care of the details 1s concerned, There are many details to be completed in the foregoing plan; but it is my purpose only to outline the essentials for your considera- tion. Except as the foregoing suggestions are in conflict with the report, I commend it as a realistic approach to a problem that needs a@ direct and open-minded solution. While there are some recommendations which I do not endorse with enthusiasm, these are in the minority; and, in general, I have great admiration for the report and those respon- sible for it. To the Eightieth Congress EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. GEORGE B. SCHWABE OF OKLAHOMA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 18, 1947 Mr. SCHWABE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I have been very much intrigued by the reading of the following article written by Mr. E. F. Hutton, of New York City, entitled “To the Eightieth Con- gress”: . To THE EIGHTIETH Conarrss BENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES, IT's NOW UP To vou GENTLEMEN OF THE CoNGRESs: The vote which elected you was an insistent protest against interference with the lives and liber- ties of the people. This interference came from two sources. One was by a vast bureaucracy asserting the power to rule and regulate our lives, often in disregard of statutes passed by the Con- Gress of the United States of America. The second was by the “invisible govern- ment” of irresponsible labor leaders who have been exempt from the law under which all others must live. We want breaucrats and labor leaders to be governed by law. We want social security from strikes. We want to be sure that our cities shall not be plunged into darkness. We are tired of all economic wars. Congress must reclaim and perform tts constitutional duties as the Board of Direc- tors of this Nation, responsible to its bond- holders. We demand government by law. We op- pose government by men. We must keep the doors of opportunity open to every American, whether born in a tenement or on a boulevard. That is part of our Constitution and Bill of Rightse—that is America. Return to the check and balance—trial and error—profit and loss and competitive system. Take Government out of business which 1s conducted with taxpayers’ money. We oppose whittling away our charter of liberty. We want irresponsible power curbed, We want representative government to fight monopolistic despotism—whether in Government, business, or labor. We want to return to constitutional gov- ernment—"equal justice under law.” We want the Wagner Act reviewed in the light of the abuses which have grown up under it. We want to know why there have been three times as many strikes since that act Was passed. We want all workers to prosper—because they are all customers, There are no labor gains when the loss of wages from strikes leaves the worker behind the eight-ball for months or years before he can catch up. There are no labor gains when strikes force wage increases which do not result in in- creased production and must therefore be Paid by all the people through higher prices. Labor unions have exerted power over the lives of millions. More power than the Gov- ernment can constitutionally assert. This must be stopped. No man or group of men has the right to paralyze all business activities and throw millions out of work. No American should be compelled to pay tribute to anyone for the right to a job. Slavery was supposed to have been abolished 81 years ago. No American should be compelled to go on strike without a democratic opportunity to voice his opinion. We want the working people of this Na- tion to have the freedom and the liberty promised under our Constitution. Labor is worthy of its hire—capital in- centive risk is no longer worthy of its hire. Labor should return for its hire an honest day’s work to capital incentive risk. Representative government should be worthy of its hire. It should return an honest day’s work. I pose the question: When representative government falls to protect and defend and uphold constitu- tiona] liberties, have they given an honest day's work to those who pay their salaries— the taxpayers? Congress has witnessed the whittling away of the liberties of the American people. It is time for Congress to go to work. We want waste in Government ended. Congress must demand a drastic reduc- tion in Federal expenditures so that there may be no further increase in Federal debt, but rather a progressive reduction. It is only a corrupt, stupid government that de- stroys the value of the people’s money, therefore Congresa, to maintain the integrity of the dollar, must stop deficit financing and direct an honest basis of meeting debts squarely and living within its income. This is only one of many public questions on which industry should express its view- point. We want taxes reduced. Too much money is now being poured into Government bu- reaus and spent without thought or reason. We want this money made available to buy better tools and equipment and thus en- courage increased production by human energy and sKills. Only in this way will we enjoy lower costs as wages and standards rise. ‘We want you to encourage the enterprise system which built this country from 13 weak colonies into the No. 1 world power. ‘We want you to say to every American, “Speak up. Express your opinion. Give your counsel freely on all public questions. Have no fear of retaliation.” We want more men who can create pay checks—more pay checks—bigger pay checks, Gentlemen, you are the trustees of Amer- ican liberty, the guardians of American pros- perity. As you face this trust, act upon what is right not who 1s right. Put aside political expediency. Legislate for America. Cooper- ate with the President of the United States and let him cooperate with you. Make some sacrifice of opinion for national unity, You, gentlemen of the Congress, must re- unite our people. You must reinstate the incentive to work, the incentive to risk cap- ital in new ventures, free from crushing tax- ation and crippling red tape. Your success in this effort will Justify the faith of our founding fathers. Your failure may mark the collapse of the last citadel of a free people anywhere on this globe. Respectfully yours, E. F. Hurron. Wretsvuay, Lona Isuanp, N. Y. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The Man With Green Fingers EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THOMAS J. LANE OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 18, 1947 Mr. LANE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I enclose the fol- lowing entitled “The Man With Green Fingers,” the story of Luther Burbank, which was presented at 8 p. m. on the evening of March 17, over the National Broadcasting Co., and starring Lionel Barrymore. This was one of a long and notable series of weekly dramatizations, familiar to listeners as the Cavalcade of America and sponsored by the du Pont Co., of Wilmington, Del. To me, it was one of the most impres- sive. March 17 is happily associated with “the wearing of the green,” symbolic of the Emerald Isle. It is also the last fes- tive occasion before the birth of Spring, when we eagerly look for the first tender shoots of green to push up from the good earth. It is the season of hope and faith and discovery and expectant growth. On March 17, we honored St. Patrick, the spiritual leader, who brought the glowing belief in a life everlasting to many millions of our people. In this year of 1947, on the evening of that same day, we also honored one of our fellow-men who employed his God- given talents for the benefit of all hu- manity. With imagination, industry, and skill, he opened up new horizons in the world about us, and as he experi- mented with the secrets of nature, he came to Know the all-abiding love that Spells creation. His love of plants and all growing things reached out to em- brace humanity and to glimpse the fun- damental truth which is God. He was “the man with green fingers,” the eminent naturalist and horticul- turist, Luther Burbank. As a Congressman from Massachusetts, the State which has given so many ideals and so many great men to the shaping of our lives, I am proud to bring to the at- tention of my colleagues, the name of one of her most distinguished sons, Luther Burbank, He was born at Lancaster, Mass., on March 7, 1849, the son of a farmer, and was brought up in a typical New England home. It is unlikely that Luther would have grown up to mold plant life to the needs of humanity, if he had lived his childhood away from the constant com- pany of trees and flowers, unobservant of earth and sky. New England is a land of varied and stimulating climate. From the first ap- pearance of the trailing arbutus from be- neath the melting snows of March until the purple wild aster goes to sleep in the last full glory of autumn’s ending, all plant life is active. Like all country boys, he had chores to do—bringing in the wood, pulling weeds, feeding the chickens, driving the cows to
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD pasture, learning the habits of work and self-reliance. He was awakened in the morning by the song of the robin, and the last thing he heard at night before he went to sleep was the chorus of the green-coated frogs. To a boy of so in- tense a nature, Nature spoke to him in a language rich with meaning. His father liked to point out to him the habits of ants, birds, and squirrels, Lu- ther saw not only the jay, the robin, and the bluebird, but the life that was in growing flowers. As his powers of observation devel- oped, he was drawn into the great out- of-doors. He roamed through the fields and along the meadow’s streams. In the woodlands he looked for wild roses, col- umbines, and in the deeper shade, the thickets of laurel. He learned the names and uses of the different roots and herbs, wondering what separated them from one another, his fancy dwelling on new forms that might be born He was a nat- uralist by birth, reveling in the trees and fields and all the plants that seemed to him as living children of Nature. The story goes that when little Luther saw a petal fall from a flower, he would try to put it back. His affection for the plant world was like that which other children lavish on their pet animals. From his tender care of them developed that interest and eagerness to under- stand. His curiosity and love was the first step toward knowledge. Burbank had little formal schooling. At the age of 15, he entered Lancaster Academy and attended it for several win- ters. During the summers, he was em- ployed in the Aimes plow works at Worcester, learning the pattern-maker’s trade. Like so many other great men, mem- bers of his family and his friends thotight he might never be stable and settled in any vocation. He had shown an enthusi- asm for so many different lines of inves- tigation—plant life, animals, medicine, literature, the arts and sciences—that it seemed he would never fully concentrate on any one of them. In later years, however, knowledge in these subjects all proved valuable in his plant work. Writing of this period, he says: When I was about 19, in 1868, probably the turning point of my career in fixing my life work in the production of new species and varieties of plant life was fixed by the read- ing of Darwin’s Variation of Animals and Plants Under Domestication, which I ob- tained from the library at Lancaster, Mass., my old home. I think it is impossible for most people to realize the thrills of joy I had in reading this most wonderful work. The reading of this book was without doubt the turning point in my life work. At the age of 21 he purchased, with the smal] amount of money obtained from his father’s estate and a mortgage, a small tract of land—17 acres—in the town of Lunenburg. He at once began market gardening. Original and practical in his methods, he developed a potato which made him world famous. The Burbank potato added $20,000,000 to the wealth of the Nation, which fact is very important when judged by the standards of those times. This discovery averted an immi- nent potato famine. For this achieve- ment, however, he received only $150, which was the sum paid to him by a local seedsman. In 1875, he moved to California, locat- ing at Santa Rosa. He established a very successful nursery business and later enlarged his holdings to include exten- sive experimental grounds, where over a million plants were raised each year for testing. Through cross-brecding and selection, he developed many new forms of plant life, which gained for him a world-wide reputation. In addition to the Burbank potato, he originated many rapid-grow- ing edible thornless cacti, to give nourish- ment to men and animals in desert coun- tries. He developed the Santa Rosa, Climax Wickson, Apple, Gold and other plums; a new fruit, the Plumcot; the Giant, Sugar and Stoneless prunes; the Burbank cherry; the Burbank, Santa Rosa and Peachblow roses; Shasta daisies, Giant and Fragrance Callas, and many other new flowers, fruits, vegcta- bles, grasses, ferns, and trees, and nuts. In the field of fruit and flowers which he improved, his work is without a rival. For over 50 years he worked hand in hand with Nature. As he said: What a joy lif. 1s when you have made a close working partnership with Nature, help- ing her to produce for the benefit of man- kind new forms, size, color and flavor never before seen on this globe, and grains of enormously increased productiveness. On April 11, 1926, he died, leaving many valuable experiments unfinished. True to his first love, he was laid to rest under the sheltering branches of his favorite tree in the garden of his home at Santa Rosa. And a world mourned his passing. Luther Burbank was a benefactor of the human race, but, more than this, a man whose intimate awareness of the secrets of natural life brourht him closer to an undcrstanding of God. With all of his being, he sought com- munion with creation. He left to us the inspiration to work, in all ways, for the growth of self in service to others on the road toward Eternal Truth. Build Warships on Pacific Coast EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FRANCK R. HAVENNER OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 18, 1947 Mr. HAVENNER. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Ap- pendix of the Recorp, I include a letter from Mr. Thomas A. Rotell, executive secretary of the Pacific Coast District Metal Trades Council, San Francisco, Calif., reading as follows: At the seventh annual convention of the Pacific Coast District Metal Trades Council, convened in San Francisco last month and attended by 800 delegates representing thou- sands of shipyard and metal craftsmen who performed their jobs in an exemplary way A1091 during the war period, the following reso- lution was unanimously adopted: “Whereas during the past 5 years there has been an urgent demand for warships in order to enable our Nation adequately to fight common enemies, and “Whereas the workers and employers in the shipbuilding industry on the Pacific coast have demonstrated not merely their ability to construct warships but by their numerous production records their excellence and pro- ficiency in this art; and “Whereas unless the Congress of the United States is immediately and forcefully im- pressed with the outstanding record of the Pacific coast area, a return to prewar condi- tions with almost complete construction of all warships in areas other than the Pacific cosst will result, and “Whereas it is a matter of national con- cern as well as the concern of the workers and employcrs in the shipbuilding industry to insure that a proportionate amount of warships will continue to be constructed on the Pacific ccast: Thercfore be it “Resolved, That Snipfitters and Helpers, Local No. 9, go on record at the seventh an- nual convention of the Pacific Coast District Mctal Trades Council! that Conrress ke peti- tioned to provide that a proportionste num- ber of warships will be built on the Pacific coast.”’ Alaskan Defenses EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. GLEN D. JOHNSON OF OKLAHOMA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesaday, March 18, 1947 Mr. JCHNSON of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my re- marks, I desire to call to the attention of the House an article quoting mc citing the strategic position of the Territory of Alaska, which appeared in the Ketchikan (Alaska) Chronicle on March 14, 1947: SoLOoN URGES STRONG ALASKA DEFENSES— OKLAHOMAN CITES STRATEGIC POSITION OF TERRITORY (By Charles Haslet) WasHINGTON.—The United States should fortify Alaska and maintain highway, aire port, and communication facilities there “so We can remain strong in that area,” Rep- resentative GLEN D. JOHNSON, Democrat, Ok- lahoma, said today. The Okinzhoman said: ‘Alaska commands a strategic position should we become in- volved at any time in the future with a Eu- ropean nation. It also is in a strategic posi- tion in connection with our mandated is- lands in the Pacific. “As long as we have a tense situation in China, Korea, and with present unsettled conditions in Europe, we should keep Alaska impregnable.” Congress should provide appropriations necessary to keep open radio, telegraph, and other communication facilities with Alaska and to maintain any airport facilities need- ed there by the military, he continued. WANTS ALCAN OPEN In addition, he said, the United States and Canada should keep open the Alcan Highway as a vital lifeline. JOHNSON said some suggestions had been made that some displaced persons and refugees should be settled in Alaska. Expressing his opposition to such a plan, he said that if anyone is going to settle in Alaska, it should be the veterans of World ar II.
A1092 It Must Be Our Own Program EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. JOSEPH P. O’HARA OF MINNESOTA IN THE HOUSE Ol’ REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 18, 1947 Mr. O’HARA. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- orp, I include the following editorial from the Mankato Free Press, of Mankato, Minn., dated March 14, 1947, IT MUST EE OUR OWN PROGRAM There is certain to be delay, debate and careful consideration by Congress, before the long-range implications of President Tru- man's proposal for “taking over” in Greece, are finally decided. That is as it should be. Instead of criticizing the public should wel- come and encourage weighty consideration before we commit ourselves irrevocably to such a, program, which muy and probably will, have worldwide ramifications, Immediate relief for Greece is necessary, also for Turkey. That should be provided but only with the understanding that it does not commit us to further action until Congress has had the opportunity to hear and we:gh all sides of this proposal. It is true that this country cannot set itself apart, follow a policy of isolation and say that we have no interest in the future of international events. There are few Mem- bers of Congress, few citizens the Nation over who still] cling to unregenerate isolationism of this kind. But it is equally true that a great majority of citizens of this Nation are unalterably opposed to taking over Britain’s policies of imperialism, as well as her commitments, in bolstering the tottering, so-called democratic regimes in the Mediterrancan, in the Orient, in the South Pacific, and elsewhere over the globe. We cannot afford to have the people of Greece, or of the rest of the world, believe that we are moving into Greece to support the throne occupied by a member of Brit- ain’s royal family, if it can be shown that the Greek people do not want him as ruler. We cannot afford to have it understood that we are placing our wealth, our man- power, and our fighting forces back of Eng- land's territorial demands and imperialistic aims in China or Burma, or Africa, or any- where else. That is why many Congressmen and Sen- ators have asked the seemingly logical ques- tion, “Why are we doing this on our own? Why are we not acting through the United Nations?” The thing that we want is to give democ- racy, liberty, and independence a free oppor- tunity to survive throughout the world. We believe that only by such an assurance of freedom for democratic ideals can future peace be assured. On two occasions within the past 80 years we have demonstrated effectively that we are willing to hazard everything that we have or may possess to assure these privileges to other people. We see in the continued expansion and aggression of Russia a serious threat to these aims and hopes. That does not mean, however, that we are willing to place our unreserved support back of British imperialism merely to block the designs of communistic aggression. If we are to carry out, in all of its broad and dangerous implications, the policy which President Truman sketchily outlined in his address to Congress on Wednesday, then we must do it as an American policy, founded on our own democratic ideals and principles of freedom, independence and liberty. It will never win the support, either of the American people or of freedom-loving peo- ples throughout the world, if we proceed otherwise. To set up and formulate such a policy will take time. This crisis has dropped on Congress and on the American people with great suddenness. If the administration knew it was coming then most assuredly the President erred in not taking the people into his confidence sooner. If he did not realize that it was coming, then he should be the first to request care- ful consideration on the part of Congress and patience and forbearance on the part of the public, before a final decision is rendered, Such temporary aid as may be necessary should be extended to Greece and to Turkey now but the final decision on long-range commitments toward a general policy of tak- ing over Britain's commitments around the world should be carefully weighed by Con- gress and should be thoroughly understood by the American public, before the final ticket is written. In Desperate Need of Jackson Today EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. GEORGE B. SCHWABE OF OKLAHOMA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 18, 1947 Mr. SCHWABE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I have just read a most impres- sive and, in many respects, pertinent and timely editorial in the Tulsa (Okla.) Tribune of March 15, 1947. by Mr. Rich- ard Lloyd Jones, one of the ablest edi- torial writers in America. By way of introduction to this edito- rial, Mr, Jones quotes Andrew Jackson as having said: “One man with courage makes a majority.” I am pleased to quote Mr. Jones’ edi- torial: IN DESPERATE NEED OF JACKSON TODAY (By Richard Lloyd Jones) Down in old South Carolina Andrew Jack- son was born 180 years ago today. What this country needs now is an Andrew Jackson in the White House, a President who has a back- bone that Russia will notice. We have played politics for the benefit of courthouse politiclans until the country is getting sick and tired of the shilly-shally performances in our National Capital. Last November the people, in despair, turned to the Republican Party. The Demo- cratic Party had failed the people. It had built up office holding by taxing and buying and electing until we were on the road to complete autocracy. Because the Democratic Party was no longer democratic, the voters turned to the only party available and put @ majority of Republicans in Congress. There are some forthright, sincere, and courageous statesmen on the Republican side of both the Senate and the House, but they are few. There are a lot of petty politicians who should have no place in the Congress of the United States and who only got there because they were registered as Republicans and rode into office on the people's protest to the party in power. Senator Moore has put Oklahoma before the public as a State of resolute American principles as it has never been placed before, The only reason the Republican Party is in oontrol of Congress now is there is no all- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD out stalwart and uncompromising American- minded party to put there. We need a Republican Party today with the courage and the character that brought the Republican Party into being, that was the champion of the United States when effort was made to divide the States. No, we do not have that kind of Republican Pariy today. The best that can be said for it, with all its weakness, it is infinitely more Amer!- can than the Democratic Party which has concerned itself with spending the people’s money to keep 8,000,000 office-holding voters on the public pay roll to vote them. As a party, the Democrats have lost all sense of consecration. Not a statesman among them. Unless the Republicans in the House and Senate cease to be divided among themselves, quibbling and quarreling over petty patron- age and unite to give strength and power to America, there should be and will be a new party born to save our country, as was done before. There wasn’t much talk of a new party in 1856. Only a few country newspapers pro- claimed for it. But it happened. And it can happen again. There is more discussion go- ing through the mails now than there was in 1856. There is a growing cry for a party of Americans who do not trim and trade. Our domestic matters are in a mess, and the majority of our Representatives and Senators of both parties appear to have no idea how to correct our evils. And what is worse, they show no disposition to do s0 evon though they know what should be done. And in international matters, we have just gone soft and sappy to the point that it is not only alarming but it is disgusting. Think of our State Department spending our money to buy and ship abroad as exhibits of our culture a lot of grotesque paintings that an art teacher wouldn’t pin up on a 4th grade classroom wall. Think of our Department of State spending millions of dollars to broadcast to the few receiving sets there are in Russia such con- summate lollypop nonsense as Turkey in the strow and hillbilly guitar songs. We nced an Andrew Jackson in the White House, and not a White House in Jackson County, Mo. We need an Andrew Jackson in the White House who will be smart enough and brave enough to tell the Ameri- can people that in our national capital there are a lot of social gullibles, as well as political trimmers and hangers-on, who can be bought for a caviar sandwich, The most sumptuous lay-out of foods and @rinks and display of costly dishes, silvcr- wure, goldware, and jewelry anywhere in America is in the Russian Embassy at Wash- ington. There the great slave-driver Molotov smiles and entertains the stuffed shirts of Washington who crowd about his buffct board believing they are so “liberal” they can comprehend the Communistic political bill of fare, just as their palates comprehend the delectable eatables with which the Russian masterminds bait them. Why doesn’t the President of the United States name and denounce citizens who fall for this kind of cheap bribery? Andrew Jackson would. Why does not President Tru- man call the whole country’s attention to the fact that out on Long Island the Rus- sians at Moscow have purchased Killen- worth, the onetime country home of one of America’s richest men said to be the finest house in this country. It is such a cozy little country cottage that it cost $40,000 to tune up the parlor organ. The President of the United States has no such country retreat to enjoy. But into this kind of a costly castle Molotov invites the gullible American saps who are flattered with his display of extravagance, as well as arrogance. And this while we speak no more of the “four freedoms” and silence the Atlantic Charter.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD America needs an American party. Amer- ica needs an American president. Right now we haven't got either. America needs a moral and spiritual rearmament. In Lincoln Park in Chicago there is a great giant of a gorilla. When it came to that zoo it was such a baby of a brute, weighing only 38 pounds, that the Keeper took him out on the park green to play ball. But the gorilla grew. He grew until it was best not to trust him too much tn the open. But the keeper could trust. The gorilla knew his friend. But one day the gorilla gave the keeper an ugly look, and the man who fed the gorilla got out of the cage and he has never been back again. Molotov ts that kind of gorilla. So is Stalin. We fed them with lend-lease. And now we do not dare trust them. But they reverse the Lincoln Park gorilla. They feed us with cakes and cham- pagne that they may rob other peoples of their liberty while we no longer care. The great Russian gorillas who placate us with cookies don’t dare let their own soldiers re- turn to find out how bad thelr homeland now is. We need an Andrew Jackson, who will put that gorilla in a cage where he will not ter- rorize this great nation, and force little coun- tries into slavery. Last Wednesday Truman was admirable in his talk to Congress. But the time has come to talk to Stalin slam-bang, mug up. That beast must be told with an Andrew Jackson emphatic “stop it—period.” Where can we find an Andrew Jackson who will be the fleld marshal of our integ- rities, and the master of the gorillas who threaten the peace of all the peoples of the earth? Let Our Dead Rest EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FRANCES P. BOLTON Or OHIO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 18, 1947 Mrs. BOLTON. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- orp, I include the following letter by Mrs. George 8. Patton, Jr.: Ler Our Dean Rest A LETTER TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FROM MRS. GEORGE S. PATTON, JR. Wherever our soldiers are buried over- seas, there is America, and American ceme- teries mark the triumphal march of our armies through the islands of the Pacific and from Africa, Sicily, and Italy, through Prance to the borders of Germany. No Amer- icans are buried in any enemy soil. The crosses, each with its identification tag, stand in long rows guarding the dead, and on my journey overseas last June I saw local people everywhere, both grown-ups and children, putting flowers on the graves of the men they call “our liberators.” I have seen this picture repeated three times, in 1921, 1938, and 1946, and I believe every American who some day visits a grave in one of these cemeteries will come away feeling “it is completely right that he should lie there.” This is the judgment of many of the be- reaved of World Wer I who have talked with me after the first poignancy of their grief subsided. . After the last war I saw the dead brought back. I watched them being put into graves on funeral day at a national cemetery, week after week. Each of those coffins had meant the bereavement of some family when the word of death was received, and in that time of great emotion the relatives had asked to have the bodies returned. But on the day of burial it was rare to see & family present. Many of them did not come, I think, because the wound of sorrow had begun to heal, the meaning of the burial ceremony had changed for them, and they had begun to realize that the broken bodies brought back in sealed caskets bore no rcla- tion to the men they had known and loved. Our Army graves registration units under the quartermaster general are making in- credible efforts in all parts of the world to identify the bodies of lost Amcricans, thus ending the strain of uncertainty in many homes. Our Government will either bury their bodies in national cemeteries overseas or send them home, according to the decision of their next of kin. As a specious comfort to the bereaved rela- tives, sending them home is called “repatri- ation;” the word is a misnomer, for every American cemetery, wherever it is, is already American soil, owned and cared for by the United States Government. My husband felt this deeply, and in 1919 he wrote the poem in which he said: “Our free souls will be far, Holding the line in Sunny France Where we died to win the war.” Lt. Gen. Lesley J. McNair, killed in Nor- mandy, held the same belief. Mrs. McNair wrote: “lesley was a soldier and wanted to die a soldier’s death. I know he would want to stay where he is, surrounded by the men he trained and with whom he died. He would not want his body moved.” What do most of those graves overseas hole? Parts of men wrapped in blankets or mattress covers, without coffiins—gone back to earth because they could no longer serve their purpose. Will it comfort you to hear that your soldier is being shipped home tn a box or an urn to be reburied? What will come home to you isn’t what you remember and love. Will it ease your grief, or make you happier to know that some young soldier, drafted to serve Our country overseas, is digging up these bones? If the family of the fallen soldier would find comfort in a permanent, tangible record near at hand, let them erect a simple mon- ument in the family cemetery plot, inscribed with the man’s name and record and the place of his burial overseas. Or this could be added to the list on a family monument already established. Thus there would be a lasting memorial at home where it could be seen, without the gruesome performance of moving the re- mains. And what would your man himself say if he could speak? Every good soldier I have ever known wanted to be buried where he fell. Mine did. Our dead have earned the right to rest in peace. Another Crisis EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOSEPH P. O'HARA OF MINNESOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 18, 1947 Mr. O'HARA. Mr. Speaker, under Jeave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- onp, I inclide the following column, Round Our Town, edited by C. H. Russell, A10S3 in the Mankato Free Press, of Mankato, Minn.: ROUND OUR TOWN (By C. H.R.) It was a good deal like putting a record on the machine and playing it over again, to experience the tension around the newsroom yesterday noon, The President was before Congress, both Houses were listening to him in joint ses- sion; the Russian ambassador had been or- dered home from Washington; the Soviet am- basador in London had been ordered home also; the entire world hung in eager antici- pation on the words of the President as he started to speak—not so much on what he said but for an interpretation of what he meant, of all of the vast implications that may lie behind his words. “What do you think—does it mean we are going to war again?” Citizens called to ask that question over the telephone; pedestrians voiced it us they stopped to read the bulletins on the board; linotypers repeated it as they set the copy and printers as they tossed up headlines. “What does it mean—what do you think?” It brought home so poignantly again the inevitable conclusion that the little people everywhere, who fight our wars, make the sacrifices, and shoulder the burdens, know so little about it all, why it starts, or what it means, or where such a fatal decision eventu- ally may lead. You wonder if the men who make these decisions know, either. There was that fateful morning back in early September of 1939—the AP callin: in the wee small hours of a chill, foggy autumn dawn. The die was cast. Hitler's gray le- gions were rolling across the borders of Po- land. You turned on the radio and Hitler's guttural, impossible but still electrifying German came pouring cver the ether waves. The world was at war again. It brought memories of Lord Grey’s pro- phetic words in 1914—"“The lights of the world are slowly going out, one by one.” And then on the following Sunday thcre was that broadcast from London, when the British accepted the challenge. Hultingly but clearly King George made that typical pledge. “England will not fail in her duty.” Today England is bankrupt, and we are asked to fulfill that duty—whatever it means. And what does it mean? The war went on, the clouds darkened, France fell and Churchill gave his people and the world that impassioned promise, “We will fight on the beaches, we will fight in the fields’ and to his people the grim warning, nothing but “blood and tears and sweat.” There has been victory since then, it is true, still little more than blood and tears and sweat, for all of us. Still another part of the record—the clear, vigorous, furious voice of President Roose- velt, branding the Pearl Harbor attack “a day in infamy.” Congreas again in joint session—the Presi- dent again speaking from the House ros- trum—tension and fears and uncertainty. Still again the question, “What does it mean—why did it happen?” We were in it then, actively rather than passively. The lights of the world seemed to burn very low for a couple of years, then brightened slowly, then to come on full and gloriously. But with that victory came still another message—words equally firm, equally vigor- ous, and passionately prophetic; not the words of « president or ruler; not the words of a diplomat or statesman as such—instead the words of a man who had lived the life and built the career of a great warrior, Gen. Douglas MacArthur, speaking from the deck of the battleship Missouri in Tokyo Bay as
A1094 the Japanese envoys signed the articles of: surrender: “This is your last chance.” He wes warning all the world against the folly of another war. The world would do well to pause and ponder those words today. Yesterday again the joint session of Con- gress, again the tension, again the ques- tioning and anxtety. President Truman on the rostrum this time and he speaks of “this fateful hour.” The Republican whip of the House, intro- ducing him, refers to his speech as “tanta- mount to a declaration of war against aggression.” What does it mean, why is it happening, and where is it all leading us? Certainly somewhere there is and there should be an answer to this question that the little people everywhere are asking. In the secrecy of their hearts, and in the privacy of their homes, where they dare speak their innermost thoughts and fears, husband to wife and father to son, the people of Russia are asking this question, even as we are voice ing it more publicly here in a nation where there are no fears of the secret police. For more than 80 years now this thing has been going on, with only brief breathing spells between crises, with virtually no breaks at all for the past 10 years. It is time that somewhere in the world there arose a people and a leadership strong enough to give us the answer. What does it all mean? As we weigh that question the very fate of our western civilization hangs in the balance. This is our last chance. If peace falls now the light of the western world may go out completely, C. H.R. Some Sound Advice EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. GEORGE B. SCHWABE OF OKLAHOMA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 18, 1947 Mr. SCHWABE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I am just in receipt of a letter from a constituent of mine who volun- tarily expresses what I believe is repre- sentative of some of the best thinking and clearest reasoning we have witnessed in some time. Without further com- ment, I quote: I write for the purpose of urging you to use every effort in support of the action of the Joint Legislative Budget Committee in setting a ceiling of 831,600,000,000 on Fed- eral expenditures for the next fiscal year. There appears to be a good deal of pres- sure aimed at a much higher figure. The dangers incident to cutting military expendi- tures have been urged, and the possibility of war with Russia is cited. While a sub- stantial reduction in our military strength would not be a good thing, I feel sure that the Army and Navy could save many millions of dollars without seriously reducing their strength, by adopting economies and fol- lowing more efficient and businesslike prac- tices. Furthermore, there does not appear to be real danger of war with Russia for a generation. There are many reasons in sup- port of this conclusion, the chief of which is that Russia is too exhausted economically and physically to fight a major war. In the words of a great Oklahoman, we should stop spending money we don't have for things we don’t need. In particular, I urge you to give careful consideration to cutting Federal moneys spent for subsidy purposes For the most part, if a business cannot stand on its own feet, it“should not be kept alive by public funds. Aid for Greeee and Turkey. EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KENNETH B. KEATING OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 18, 1947 Mr. KEATING. Mr. Speaker, before arriving at a final conclusion regarding the recommendations of President Tru- man for aid to Greece and Turkey, a de- cision fraught with such far-reaching implications, I shall want to study with care the legislation submitted to imple- ment this enunciation of foreign policy. There are many questions which need to be answered by the President, the State Department, and others, before we take this momentous step. There is no doubt in my mind, how- ever, that our final decision must rest primarily upon a determination as to the most effective method of meeting the Communist threat, both in this country and abroad. I am an implacable foe of communism and all that it stands for. Any attempt by the Soviet Union to extend the influ- ence of this ideology so as to take con- trol of the governments of free and inde- pendent countries must be checked be- fore it is too late. The best course to follow to accomplish that objective re- quires mature deliberation, prayerful consideration, and statesmanship of a high order. My attention has been called by a number of my constituents to the words of a great American from my district, Mr. Frank E. Gannett, of Rochester, N. Y., uttered the morning after the President told us of the critical decision which our country faces. Under leave to extend my remarks, as requested by these constituents, I include Mr. Gannett’s stirring and thought-pro- voking editorial, from the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle. We have not always seen eye to eye on every issue, nor is it to be expected that we will in the future. I salute, how- ever, the words of a true patriot. COMMUNIST ISSUE NOW IN OPEN, SAYS -GANNETT Every American should understand the full significance of all that President Truman said yesterday to the Members of the Con- gress. He asked for aid for Greece and for Turkey and pointed out that we must come to the assistance of these two countries if they are to be saved from domination by a totalitarian state. He did not mention the Soviet Gov- ernment by name, but the implication was as plain as it would have been had the words been spelled out. The intense, solemn attitude of those who hoard him indicated that they realized that his address was momentous. It was the declaration of a foreign policy that may, if carried out, decide not only our future but the future of the whole world. It might conceivably mean ultimately war with the Soviets;_a final decision whether we and APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD other nations on the earth shall be domi- nated by a dictator, be subjects and slaves of oppressive government or whether we and our fellow men shall be free and be masters of government, Yes, the issue as I have said again and again is squarely before us. Today it is out in the open where all may see it and under- stand its tremendous significance. It is out in the open so that the American people can decide what shall be done about. it, decide our fate. What will be Russia’s reaction to this declaration of policy? Stalin and the Soviet party leaders know full well what President Truman meant when he said, “We must save Greece and Turkey from totalitarianism.” Will they find that the “coat fits” and de- flantly resent the implications or will they keep quiet and apparently ignore the great issue involved until they are ready for it? That remains to be seen. For my part, I believe we must check the spread of communism and the totalitarian government that agressively has been foster- ing it. It is terribly important to all Eu- rope that Greece and Turkey be supported in resisting this great threat to all freedom and liberty We should advance the money needed immediately. We then shall see whether or not Russia will raise serious ob- jection to our humanitarian effort. If she does protest vigorously and say that we are making a war move, we shall know that we are surely in for real trouble with Stalin’s government. War to all of us is unthinkable and yet eternal slavery to a state and unbearable tyranny can be worse even than war. We have just fought and won a terrible war to ward off the dangers of an all-powerful dic- tatorship. All the frightful losses that we suffered, all the terrible costs in lives and property, must not be in vain. We must fol- low up and make secure our victory. This tremendous question that has been raised can be met only by a strong, power- ful America. This issue should have been settled immediately after VE-day while we and Great Britain had great strength and were in position to dictate terms. We have allowed matters to drift so that today we are weak and Great Britain in a state of collapse. Yes, America must awake. We must drive out into the open those who here in our land are subtly trying to weaken our country and trying to undermine our form of govern= ment. We should give to traitorous Com- munists the punishment they deserve, And we should not only help check the spread of communism in Europe, but also in South America and in the Far East. . If we are doomed to a life or death fight with communism, if we must decide whether or not we want communism to dominate us, let’s begin now to build up our strength for the conflict. Russia doesn't want war now. She is not ready for it. Let’s make America invincible— 80 powerful in every respect that no one will ever dare attack us. Frank GANNETT. Aid to Veterans by Local Communities EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. EMANUEL CELLER OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 18, 1947 Mr. CELLER. Mr. Speaker, my atten- tion has been called to the splendid work done in Naperville, outside of Chicago, in aid of the veteran. The example set by
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Naperville should be followed in the com- munities throughout the length and breadth of the land. General Eisenhower has drawn my at- tention to an article on this subject which I am pleased to insert in the Recorp: VETERANS BUILD HOMES IN NAPERVILLE Naperville is an average American town of about 6,000 except that it is suburban to Chi- cago, just 28 miles west. It is largely a resi- dential community, with but one factory. About 1,150 veterans were to come back to Naperville and the surrounding area—if they all wished to come back to the home town. About 50 percent of the contractors in town are unionized, most of the plumbers and electricians. The community is zoned with the stated minimum restriction of $5,000 in most areas. Availability of lots, reasonably priced ($800) were, before we started, fairly limited. During the war our USO was called the Naperville Service Organization and func- tioned as such. As the end of the war ap- proached the veterans’ committee began to work on plans to help GI Joe get back in step. It was this committee which chose the high-school counseline office as head- quarters for the veterans’ counseling and re- ferral center. As part of the counselor's func- tion is also to be interested in solutions, I be- gan to work on that end too. After 20 years of service as a teacher and counselor in the local high school, it was natural that I would know and be interested in the men and the boys who went to war. During the course of the war I wrote to many of them and nat- urally began to discuss the process of getting home. So I have worked as counselor, gratu- itously during the school year and for a small sum in the summer months. I have been busy around the clock, I assure you. I find that Fort Sheridan even recognizes us as a Veterans’ Administration office. Having earned the title as a community trouble shooter for the vets, I obviously couldn't let the housing problem go unsolved. Some- thing tangible had to be done and without delay. Talk of State housing, county housing, apartment houses, and barracks all blew up and we faced a dismal dead end. I main- tained that the same thing that won the war could lick this, too—and that was the mobili- gation of community effort behind the syn- chronized drive and energy of the veterans themselves. What could be more of an Amer- ican solution than that? I was interested in tonight's paper to see Eisenhower maintain- ing the very same thesis. As a student and teacher in international relations and vitally interested in the peace, I maintained that peace had to begin in the human heart and that was where I was going to begin. Why more people can't see that, is more than I know. So, one day the last of June 1946, a local Navy veteran and a machine technician, James Goetsch, and I went in to see the head of a concern producing prefabricated houses. On the way in we agreed we had to have a sales talk, and so, between the two of us, we cooked up the idea. A college vet- eran had already begun to build his pre- fabricated houses, so we had an exhibit A to begin with. Before I went in I asked the local bank cashier to visit that house that day if such was possible. When we told the business manager of the company our plans, he agreed that we definitely had some- thing and he would cooperate 100 percent, even though we had no local dealer. That night we had an emergency meeting of a few veterans, a few interested community leaders, including two representatives of the local bank. We got their enthusiastic sup- port, and by phone the next day called an emergency meeting of as many veterans as could be contacted. And so, within 28 hours of the birth of the idea, we had bank ap- proval, a skeletal organization, and 13 vet- eran home builders signed up. Possibly we succeeded because of the tempo of the idea, our enthusiasm, the need, and our ignorance of the obstacles ahead. No one could have really stopped us after that Friday night meeting. As the plan unfolded it worked in much this fashion: 1. The veteran was to first spot an avail- able lot. Appraisal on the 8800 lot for the completed home was given at $6,200, so we would clear on the $5,000 zoning restrictions. However, we warned against building in areas where contrasts would be too great and op- position might be aroused. We agreed from the beginning that we would avoid concen- tration of houses and rowing them up. Homes were to be built according to the vet- erans’ choice but the availability of the pre- fabricated houses made us concentrate on them for our cooperative project. Later on the bank refused to grant loans {f, in their opinion, too many houses were being built in a given area. Remember that we have no community of prefabs, but rather prefabs within the community. 2. A lot once spotted, the veteran went to the bank with his official envelope. The lot number was sent to the title company with promise of speed up on clearance. Papers for negotiation of the loan were completed at the bank. At the beginning the veteran didn’t even have to show a bank balance, but later on $300 minimum was asked. It was esti- mated that the project would cost about $5,500, including the lot so that usually the veteran borrowed $5,000 on a 20-year mort- gage, which would make a monthly payment of $30.30. As expenses went up and unfore- seen incidentals appeared, the last fellows usually borrowed @6,000. The bank absorbed a good deal of extra banking business in officially clearing delivery of the houses, mak- ing payment therefor, etc. Much credit must be given to the loyal support and en- thusiasm of Louis H. Clemens, then cashier of the Naperville National Bank, now de- ceased. Without his help the project would never have succeeded. He died just a weck before he was to have appeared at the Na- tional American Legion Convention to tell about our project. 3. With title cleared, excavation was done by a World War II veteran who had the neces- sary equipment and did the Job for $50 per hole, rather than the usual 880. The bank insisted that every house must have a full basement, which was wise. 4. Then a local Legionnaire (World War I) proved our greatest help in the foundation work on cement blocks, cost about $500. He worked most of the time on wages, without contractor's fees. 5. Foundation ready and the first carload of five houses arrived. If you have never seen @ boxcar with five houses in it, including fur- naces, plumbing, etc—you should have watched the fellows unload after their own working hours. I was present when the seal was Officially broken and we were under way. Trucks were loaned by local lumber dealers, as well as storehouse facilities. It was a terrific job and we learned to have only one house delivered by a nearby dealer on the lot where it was to be erected. 6. The first five fellows built each other’s houses from basement to roof. The com- pany sent out two men to assist. The first five acted as an advisory committee for the other builders—working in crews of five as their houses arrived. The second five gave some time helping the first five in order to learn on the job. After the roof was on co- operative effort ceased, except for cooperation in getting scarcities such as tile, cement, paint etc. Some of our fellows went as far as 400 miles away for tile. Some of the fellows found that they could not take enough time off their regular jobs - A1095 to complete the task of building five houses. One fellow wanted to save his off time for a honeymoon, etc. I got five unmarried vets who could work until college started in the fall to agree to work for 75 cents an hour (to be paid by the veteran who used him as a substitute). This crew proudly boasted by the end of the season that they could put up the outside shell of the house from basement to roof in 99 man-hours. 7. The house we used (Home-Ola) came with plumbing, wiring, and heating units, We found some conflict with local ordinances but finally most of them were waived with the understanding that there would be an inspection at the end of 6 years. Because oi opposition by plumbers and electricians, there was some delay until they began to realize the power that our veteran group held in the community and then we got the action that we demanded. 8. While we had commendation from a lo- cal construction engineer and several car- penters and offers to help, actually the vet- erans worked their own problems out coop- eratively. Many local citizens found op- portunity to work along on the job in the evening hours, some helped out with the pur- chase of scarcities, and so forth. Work went on by artificial light, especially as the days became shorter. One night about 10 I saw a whole family, including mom, dad, two sisters, wife, and veteran, all shoveling as though their lives depended upon it. 1 wished for an action picture of it. It was action, cooperative action, on into the night. 9. Our delay came in waiting for electri- cians, plumbers, for cement for the basement floor so that the furnace could be put in, for the masons to get the chimney in, and 50 forth. Then when daylight hours shortened we were slowed up some. Wives helped a lot on the interior finishing. The whole family is going to love every nook and cranny of the house, because they literally saw the whole anatomy of the house and saw it come to life. Thirty-eight different veterans—we origi- nally estimated 40 in necd—signed@ up for houses, but 12 found other solutions or de- cided to wait until spring. Some of those are living in the 10 trailers we brought in for emergency housing. Nineteen are now occu- pied. five soon should be, and one 1s still in the basement stage, held up for title clear- ance, Oh, they aren't completely furnished, but they don’t need to be to be home. Some of the interiors are being built around the family, but that is often much better than living in crowded, strained conditions. One Sunday afternoon a veteran called me up and said: ‘‘We've becn in half an hour, and we're thrilled pink. Come on over.” Believe you me I wasted no time getting over, and the dividends I collected right there paid for all of the hours I had put into the project. The little girl took me upstairs and showed me where her dresses could finally hang, where her toys could be kept, and the wife showed me where she could finally put her wedding presents for the first time for use. Dreams had come true, finally. One guy said to me as he proudly showed me his home: “I dreamed all of this in a fox hole, but I never thought I would actually have it this quick " Mcst important, he believes in himself, and he has established himself as the head of the house. Need I say what it meant to me at Christ- mas time to see the lighted Christmas trees begin to appear in each home? This was the first Christmas for the family unit to be together and begin family traditions. Any part I have had in the project is negligibic. The veteran himself has done it within the framework of a cooperative project which has added but more cement to the wartime comradeship. I consider it a great privilege to have been a part of such a project. The American simplicity of the idea is what makes it workable. What could be more American than to have the owner build
A1096 his own home with the same cooperative spirit found on the American frontier when from surrounding areas the neighbors helped with “barn raising,” etc. Of course, com- munity support must be given, but why shouldn't it be given in the same whole- hearted fashion that won the war? Why can't we push aside greed and selfishness when peace is at stake? That is the lesson we still must learn. Pray God, that it does not take another war to learn it. It has been a constant source of amaze- ment to me to see the publicity given the project. Newspapers from all over the coun- try, six national magazines, and even the November 11 issue of a paper issued by the First Infantry in Korea ran publicity on it. The February issue of Woman's Home Com- panion has a short article on it now. Let- ters have come in from coast to coast. The mayor and the local Legion have been con- tacted many, many times—I know because they give me the job of answering the letters. One day a man came in from Massachusetts— expenses paid by the Legion—he was a con- tractor. He left approving of the plan. Al- Ways, over and over again, it is—we face a desperate situation, and we wonder how you did it.” I admit and the fellows do that without me as their coordinator and trouble shooter perhaps the project wouldn’t have held to- gether. Surely every community has some- one who thinks people are important, fami- lies are important, and therefore homes, not mere houses, are important. They won't get paid in cash, but my payment has been in something that is nonnegotiable and will last @ lifetime. I honestly feel that I have con- tributed to my version of a lasting peace. We haven't been unmindful that veterans from other communities may desperately need help also. In fact, there are five who have chosen to live in Naperville because they could build here and they liked us. Every community can do what we have done, I know. Eisenhower said, “Take housing to your hearts. See what you can do about it without waiting for Washington to do it.” If you work with your heart it will become contagious and the cooperative spirit will again function as it should in every Ameri- can community. Just realized a cost statement isn’t in- cluded: lot, $800 average: title, 865; founda- tion, $500; excavation, $50; house, 83,500; chimney, $100; incidentals, $500; total, 85,- 600 plus. I am sorry this is so long. Obviously I could say more and more, In closing I want to say that all of the credit should be given where all of the credit belongs, to the grand- est bunch of veterans in the world, my work- ing gang here in Naperville. Branch of the service, period of service, previous training and rank were all forgotten, as the gang worked together as a team, and what a team! ANGELINE GALE, Veterans’ Counselor. NAPERVILLE, ILL. The United States and Greece EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. WALTER NORBLAD OF OREGON IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 18, 1947 Mr. NORBLAD. Mr. Speaker, under feave granted to extend my remarks in the RecorpD, I include the following edi- torial from a recent issue of the Astorian- Budget, written by the very capable Mr, Fred Andrus: THE UNITED STATES AND GREECE The matter of a United States loan to Greece will come before Congress tomorrow, with press reports stating that President Tru- man has already discussed it privately with congressional leaders of both parties. This is an important question involving our acceptance of a part of the British im- perial burden and our alinement, at least in part, with the British on their foreign policy. It also involves plain humanitarianism, un effort to get one of our allies in the recent war back on its economic feet. American concern with Greek troubles is nothing new. President James Monroe pub- licly expressed sympathy with Grecce's orig- inal struggle for independence from Turkey in 1822. Daniel Webster and Henry Clay led the debate in favor of a resolution the fol- lowing year to recognize the provisional Greek Government set-up while the war of inde- pendence was still raging. Greece finally won independence in 1829 with the assistance of British, Russian, and French Fleets. The United States, however, had in the meanwhile promulgated the Mon- roe doctrine and we kept our hands strictly off the situation, limiting ourselves to the resolution recognizing the Greek Govern- ment and kept our Mediterranean naval squadron out of the fighting with the Turks. Since then the United States has sym- pathized with Greece in its many troubles, but we have never involved ourselves direct- ly with Greek affairs. We followed President Monroe’s policy of assuming that the Monroe Doctrine bound us to stay out of European affairs, Just as we expected European nations to stay out of affairs that concerned only the Americas. Thus the proposal that we involve our- selves now in a loan to preserve the present Greek Government calls for something of a departure from a historic policy of more than a century’s standing. It is a question not to be settled lightly. We are considering assuming Great Britain's burden, a load that Britain carried princi- pally for preservation of control of the Medi- terranean Sea. One thing Congress should insist on— should it consider the loan favorably—we must insist on reform and true democratic processes in Greece. We do not want our- selves in the position of supporting a dic- tatorial government—which apparently the Greek Government now is. Congress Gets Tax Counsel From a Couple of Men Who Know EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. HUBERT S. ELLIS OF WEST VIRGINIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 18, 1947 Mr. ELLIS. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following editorial appearing in the Baltimore Sun on March 17, 1947: CONGRESS GETS TAX COUNSEL FROM A COUPLE OF MEN WHO KNOW The country will have to sit up and take notice when two former Under Secretaries of the (post-1938) Treasury advocate an across-the-board tax cut. And it will have to pay special attention to former Under APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Secretary Hanes’ defense of such a reduction proposal. Mr. Hanes says that the steeply progressive taxation of the present schedules means that “the incentive in working and assuming great responsibility is gone * * *. WhatI pro- test is not a tax on wealth or income but a tax on brains—-a stupid levy against the know-how and the managerial experience that are the Nation's greatest assets.” What Mr. Hanes is asking, to put it an- other way, is that we accept the implications of our unanimous defense of the free en- terprise and profit system, Wushington is full of people who are for free enterprise and the profit motive except that they want to control enterprise and extirpate profit. They have had a disproportionate part in drafting recent tax legislation. The effect is apparent in the schedules applying to cor- porate income. It shows up particularly in the rates on individual income, as is indi- cated by o recent study of the National City Bank of New York. This study shows that under the present law (which reduces but Httle the emergency rates appropriate only to wartime) a mar- ried man with two dependents making $8.000 @ year can keep only 75 cents of an extra dollar if he makes it. At $16,000 a year he can keep only 59 cents if he makes an extra dollar. And if he is making around $22,000 a year, he can keep only 50 cents of an addi- tional dollar. Plainly there will be lees push for him to make the extra dollar when it will mean only a half dollar in actual return to him. And above the $22,000 level the Treasury's share of the extra dollar earned increases rapidly until the larger-income man finds himself working for the Treasury almost altogether. With what result? With the natural result described by Mr. Hanes—"“the incentive in working and assuming great responsibility is gone.” But the present time is one in which our Industrialism must produce more abundantly than ever in the past. The foreign-policy crisis, far from reducing the nced for econ- omy and stimulative tax cuts, has increased that need. It has always been clear that a sound postwar fiscal policy would require budget balance, firm maintenance of the military services, debt reduction, and tax cuts, about in that order. The order ought to stand, but recent unexpected gains in tax yields make it more than ever imperative that attention be paid to valid taxz-cut proposals. It would be cynical nonsense, of course, to overlook the need for relief in al] seotions of the income-tax pyramid. The great num- bers of moderate-income men merit aid as much as the smaller groups farther up the ladder. But it is the push and drive of the latter groups, their willingness to invest and risk that sparks the whole productive Bys- tem. An income-tax schedule which damp- ens that spark is, to quote Mr. Hanes again, stupid. The Radiance of a Genius Personality EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FRANK L. SUNDSTROM OF NEW JERSEY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 18, 1947 Mr. SUNDSTROM. Mr. Speaker, une der leave to extend my remarks in the Recor, I include an address delivered by George E. Stringfellow, former business associate of Thomas Alva Edison, and at
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD present vice president of Edison Indus- tries, before the Methodist Church in Orange, N. J., February 9, 1947: Today I have the honor of speaking to you of Thomas Alva Edison, in the radiance of whose genius personality I lived a signifi- cant part of my life. It was a divine bless- ing to be associated with the great bene- factor of the human race. Any success which I may have attained is due, in large part, to the influence of this relationship. It has been my sincere effort, since he passed on to his great reward, to perpetuate his ideals, his philosophy, and his memory. Light and understanding—these were Edi- son's gifts to humanity. He made light a social force and, through his inventions, the luxury of the kings of the past became the household accommodation of all of us. His contributions to the sciences of com- munication developed better understanding throughout the world. The phonograph, one of the moat original inventions in the an- nals of history, brought the world’s greatest artists into the humbiest of homes. The wonders of his inventions which made possible the moving picture industry, the telephone, the telegraph, and the radio all helped greatly to make the United States a Nation of humanity and brotherhood. Edison believed in America, He felt that here in the United States we have the oppor- tunity of improving life for everyone and setting a constructive example for the rest of the world. It has been said—indeed \—by col- lectivists that Edison was an individualist. Indeed he was. So were Washington, Jef- ferson, Marshall, Lincoln, Brandeis, Holmes, and all other benefactors of the human race. They, Uke Edison, glorified and liberated the individual. It was their belief that the state exists for the people. Such collectivists as Hitler, Mussolini, and their counterpart, Stalin, who enslave human beings, contend that the people exist for the state. Fundamental in Edison’s philosophy was his hope that more human beings would think of local, state, national and world problems, and thus provide a broader base of thought and a better understanding among the peoples of the world. His associates were always mindful of the forceful saying of Sir Joshua Reynolds, which Edison had on the wall of his office and to which he often referred: “There is no expedient to which a man will not re- sort to avoid the real labor of thinking.” Edison believed thoroughly in our system of profits and competition. His thoughts on the subject were admirably expressed in the following statement made by him in a business conference: “It is the competitive system, as much as any other thing, that has made us a great Nation. We must de- pend on competition for the development of more and better products, and for better services at lower costs and thus increase our living standards. I need competition to keep me on my toes. 80 does my manage- ment. Competition is good for business.” “Competition,” he continued, “develops re- sourcefulness in our citizens. Competition is good for the individual.” And then, with a twinkle in his bright blue eyes, Edisan concluded: “Although at times, it is a bit uncomfortable.” Edison learned early in life that difficul- ties are challenges which develop latent re- sources in man, Failure and disaster never discouraged him. After inventing the electric light, he per- fected a process for the separation of low- grade fron ore. He put 10 years into this project and spent millions of dollars tn ex- periments. Then a freak of fortune laid bare a great field of rich bessemer ore and obsoleted all of his work. The experiment bad to be abandoned. Turning to one of his associates, Edison asked, ‘Well, what next?” Then he set out to invent a new type of storage battery. When he had conducted more than 45,000 experiments, without any apparent measure of success, an associate asked, “Are you not discouraged?” ‘Cer- tainly not,” responded the inventor, “I have learned 45,000 ways the job cannot be done, and I am therefore 45,000 ways nearer my goal.” At the age of 66, when most men are think- ing of retiring, his factory was destroyed by fire. Before the ashes had cooled, Edison was laying plans to build a new factory. Perhaps no man ever lived who was more industrious than he. There were times when he would not leave the laboratory for a week or more. He and his many assistants were inspired by the hope of achieving great ends. Often he worked for long periods with only 4 hours of sleep a day. When Edison was 82 years old, the world celebrated the 50th anniversary of his inven- tion of the incandescent lamp. President Hoover and a host of other notables from all parts of the world came to do him honor, The next day Edison was back at work. Indeed, the day that fatal illness overtook him, the 84-year-old genius was busily en- gaged in the problem of extracting rubber from the common goldenrod. There was a burning torch in this man Edi- son. From early youth, his mind was filled with new ideas. The list of his inventions 1s staggering. He was granted more than 1,150 patents. Like the prophets of Israel, like Christ Him- self, like every true artist and every great scientist, Edison was motivated by a burning desire to create. What was the driving power behind Edi- son's enthusiasm and energy? It was, of course, a keen interest in mastering problems which retard and stymie the progress of man- kind. In the face of this and other glorious ex- amples of how to succeed in life, it is difi- cult to understand why a large segment of our people still practice the crazy theory that one can have more by producing less. I like to think of Edison as exemplifying that faithful servant in the parable of the talents, related by the gentle Carpenter of Nazareth, as He and His disciples sat to- gether on the Mount of Olives. You have read the story in St. Mat- thew’'s gospel: how the Master, before going to a far country, called His servants to Him. To one He gave five talents, to another two, and to another one. How the one servant buried his one talent tn the ground; but he that had two gained still another two; and he that had five gained still another five. Wherefore, when the Master returned, Be was well pleased with the stewardship of the two servants who had made the most of their gifts, and because they had been faith- ful over a few things, He set them over many. Edison was indeed a faithful servant. Vision, imagination, genius, industry, and character were the potentialities with which he was endowed. By the wise use of the talents committed to his care, the world has been a thousandfold enriched. May we, whether we be given one, two, or five talents, use them to advance humanity as the great genius of Menlo Park used his, May we devote our gifts to the well-being of our fellow men in the same measure as Edison dedicated his. May we, when we render the account of our stewardship, deserve to hear from our Master, “Well done, good and faithful servant.” A1097 Aid for Greece EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN M-DOWELL OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 18, 1947 Mr. MCDOWELL. Mr. Speaker, un- der leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following article by Thomas L. Stokes, from the Washing- ton Daily News: BITTER GREEK PLAN? (By Thomas L. Stokes) Almost overnight the world has seen the Creation of an international crisis over Greece. A bit dazed, we have watched the dizzy drama, starting with that hush-hush pow- wow at the White House. It was attractively labeled very secret for the sort of publicity build-up familiar to Hollywood and our National Capital. The usual leaks provided long authoritative dispatches to whet the appetite, and we learned suddenly that Britain was pulling out of Greece in a mat- ter of a month, and something must be done by us quickly. A fev days of this set the stage properly for President Truman's entrance before a special joint session of Congress with a message that left much to the imagination, except no mistaking that military personnel was in- cluded with economic uid. Meanwhile, State Secretary Marshall had arrived tn Moscow itn time to have all this burst upon the Russian capital and the world with opening of the Foreign Ministers’ conference. Some method in all this, perhaps? It has been observed that international politics, in method and manner, is little different from that played at home, much as we might like to see it otherwise in this dangerous day of the atomic bomb. After watching this spectacle and wonder- ing, some began to ask why this problem of the Greek-Turkish frontier wasn’t a job for the United Nations—a logical question. The answer, and President Truman gave it offi- Clally, was that the UN wasn't ready to handle it. It was learned about the same time that the State Department had known the seri- ousness of the Greek situation for a long time, some 8 months, and others around here hed heard of it, though not much was let out to the people and a Congress that re- vealed its own ignorance by the shock with which it recelved the President’s message. It now turns out not only that there was plenty of information about Greece's des- perate plight, but that as long as 6 months ago a plan for the rehabilitation of Greece had been prepared, after exhaustive investi- gation on the ground beginning nearly a year ago. This was done by a mission sent out by a UN adjunct, the Food and Agricultural Or- ganization. Franklin S. Harris, president of the Utah State College of Agriculture, head- ed the mission, which included representa- tives of the United States, Britain, and France. The principal findings and recommenda- tions were presented in a preliminary report to the Copenhagen FAO Conference last Sep- tember, and the full report was approved when the mission met here last November. This is revealed in the complete report of nearly 200 pages just released here, The report fixed $100,000,000 as suffictent to start rehabilitation and carry tt forward during 1947 and 1948. The amount was to be provided by a loan from the International
A1098 Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Worth noting here is that, since $100,000,- 000 is regarded sufficient for economic re- habilitation, then presumably more than half of the $260,000,000 of the proposed ad- vance to Greece for this same initial period is for military purposes. Previously it had becn indicated that about half was to be for military purposes. The report is based on the theory that the major effort of reconstruction must come from the Greek people themselves, making it less of a supervised enterprise than our plan seems to contemplate. But, perhaps most important, the report recommends that the UN support the Greek Government in its rehabilitation program through an advisory mission for Greece to include representatives of FAO, the Inter- national Bank, International Monetary Fund, and other cooperating international agencies. Why isn't this still the proper course? General Marshall Raises the Ideological Issue EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. WALTER H. JUDD OF MINNESOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, March 6, 1947 Mr. JUDD. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following article by Edwin L. James, from the New York Times of March 16, 1947: GENERAL MARSHALL RAISES THE IDEOLOGICAL Issur—He TeLtts Moscow CONFERENCE How We Fret Ancor INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND BASIC Human PriviLeGes—CLARIFIng A WORLD Dz- BATE (By Edwin L. James) When, on Friday, General Marshall told the Moscow Conference what his country Meant when it talked about democracy, he ‘was speaking, on the record, about the kind of government which should be set up in Germany. But his words had a far wider scope than that, because he brought right out in the open the ideological contest be- tween regimes which recognize human rights and regimes which are totalitarian. In one the state exists to serve the individual; in the other the individual exists to serve the state. That is just what it is all about. Now, our Secretary of State was talking in ® capital where once the word “democracy” was taboo; it was something outside of the Marxian world. Things have changed now and vocifcrously, if belatedly, the Russian regime has found that it is the world’s best form of democracy. But the change is one of semantics and not one of government. Since the Russians have called their regime a democracy, a good many people, including apologists for the Kremlin, have tried to make the point that the United States does not have a democracy in the Greek sense of rule by the people but rather has a repre- sentative form of republic. Maybe so, but it is still difficult to see how therein lies any analogy hich prcves anything about the Russian Government, where the Com- munist Party, numbering 5,500,000 persons, or $ percent of the population, runs the country. There is always the story of how ea Russian can, if he likes, vote against the Communist ticket, but it remains true that it is not of record that any members of the Politburo are other than good party members. ° THE UNITED STATES SPEAKS General Marshall began by recalling that at the Potsdam Conference instructions were given to reestablish Germany on a demo- cratic basis, He added that apparently the instructions were not specific enough. He said that he realized that different interpre- tations were being placed on the word “de- mocracy,” and then, for the record, he added: “To the American Government and citi- zens it has a basic meaning. We believe that human beings have certain inalienable rights—that is, rights which may not be given or taken away. “They include the right of every individual to develop his mind and his soul in the way of his own choice, free of fear and co- ercion—provided only that he does not in- terfere with the rights of others. To us a society is not democratic if men who respect the rights of their fellow men are not free to express their own belief and convictions without fear that they may be snatched away from their home or family.” That, said General Marshall, was the kind of democracy we wanted in Germany. He sought a regime which would “assure such rights to every individual and effectively pre- vent any government or group, however pow- erful or however numerous, from taking such rights away from or imposing any such fears on any individuals, however weak or how- ever few.” ‘ FIVE THINGS LACKING The General then said he found five faults in political reorganization in Germany. 1, There was insignificant guaranty of hu- man rights in all zones. 2. There was no uniform protection of the rights of political parties. 3 There was no uniform guarantee of the rights of labor unions. 4. There was no general guarantee of the freedom of the press and radio. 5. There was too much interference with free travel in Germany. He laid special emphasis on the need for & free press and free information of all kinds in Germany if the Germans were to be won away from Nazi doctrines. In addition to the wider purpose of letting the Russians know what we mean when we say “democracy,” the speech of the Sccretary of State is important for the procedure of the conference because it lays down a line of thought which is bound to be heard again when the meeting gets around to the task of organizing a government in the Reich. It will surely be taken as a demand by the Americans that things be changed in the Russian zone of occupation and that all parties should be given a fair run in any and all zones of occupation in Germany. - ISSUE OF FREE PRESS The issue of a free press is bound to come up. Foreign Minister Molotov said after hearing General Marshall that there was much worth weighing in what he said but did not think the press should be free to preach fascism. Now that might look rea- sonable until one scratches the surface by reading what the Government-controlled press has been saying about the United States. Over here, according to Pravda and Izvestia, Fascist bankers in Wall Street are preparing a new war; President Truman has taken sides with the Fascists of Greece; our foreign policy is one directed toward impe- rialist expansion and against democracy. If that is the basis of Mr. Molotov’s judgment, it can be seen that his kind of free press is not going to be what General Marshall says should exist in Germany. As a matter of fact, the difference lies deeper. It is the American idea that a free press should inform the people in the belief that the people will then come to a good con- clusion. It is the Russian theory that the press should be used as a weapon of the Communist Party. M. Kuzmichev in Prob- lems of Journalism states the Russian position as follows: “The aim of information does not consist in commercializing news but in educating the APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD great mass of the workers, in organizing them under the exclusive direction of the party for clearly defined tasks. This aim will not be attained by objective reporting of events. Liberty and objectivity of the press—these are fictions. Information is the means of class struggle, not a mirror to reflect events objectively.” ° CLEARING THE ATMOSPHERE The statement by General Marshall shoula be helpful. It serves to bring into the open the discussion of what is democracy and the general has said what we think it is. Of course, the Russians think it is something else because they say the Russians have a democracy and it is plain that their govern- ment is not what the Americans regard as @ democracy. Our Secretary of State has spelled it out, so far as we are concerned. It is a good guess that Mr. Molotov will ate tack parts of his address and if the Russian Foreign Minister should spell out his ideas on democracy, the issue would be joined in @ manner which should remove some of the diplomatic fog which has existed whenever, at a conference, there is talk of democracy. It is not that General Marshall is trying to tell the Russians what sort of government they should have. That is not our business. Our interest begins when Russia tries to export her form of government into regions wnere we have a legitimate interest that we take the liberty of questioning the tag it bears, There is not only Germany. There are also Poland, Hungary, Austria, Bulgaria, Rumania, and perhaps Greece. And maybe other countries. That is where the argu- ment lies, Immediate Action Necessary To Save Rent Control EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. JOHN A. BLATNIK OF MINNESOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 18, 1947 Mr. BLATNIK. Mr. Speaker, during the last year the American people have been told by the enemies of price and rent controls that the elimination of Gov- ernment controls would not cause infla- tion. During the congressional debates on price control last summer, the Na- tional Association of Manufacturers ar- gued that if price controls were removed, production would be immediately stepped up, the market would be flooded with goods, and prices would be forced down. But what happened when controls were relaxed with respect to food, clothing, and other consumer goods? The cost of living is over 50 percent higher today than it was 8 months ago, and it is still rising. The elimination of price controls has not meant more goods and lower prices, but only higher prices. Now the same lobby groups who op- posed price controls are telling us that if rent controls are removed the building industry will be stimulated, more houses will be built, and rents will shortly fall. Experience proves, however, that these predictions of false prophets are not valid, and the destruction of the rent- control program will mean only higher rents for 50,000,000 people in America. I wish to include an editorial which appeared in the March 6, 1947, issue of
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the Floodwood Forum at Floodwood, Minn. In my opinion this editorial re- fiects the attitudes of many of the Ameri- can people. Prices ConTInvE Urwarp DEsprre PREDICTIONS Those people who pumped for removal of price controls must swallow more words this week as prices on most commodity indexes hit a new high. Critics’ of OPA said that after a temporary soaring of prices, competition would bring prices down. That is not happening yet. And {t’s been a long time already for those who must pay for their living out of wages which do not rise with every increase in price. The trend of prices upward despite the supposedly (fictitious) law of supply and demand is further evidence of the effect of monopoly control in the United States. During the past 8 weeks, food prices have inerease1 more than 7 percent and we now hear about 61 per pound pork chops being just around the corner. The price of foodstuffs to the consumer has risen faster than farm prices, indicating that the profit is not going to the farmer but that huge profits are being reaped between the time the produce leaves the farmer and its arrival in the consumcr's market basket. True, prices may come down sometime. But the longer it takes and the higher prices go, the bigger chunk is chopped from con- sumer savings, current wages buy less goods and buyers must forego many durable goods coming on the market in order to keep even with mere living costs. As people stop buying durable goods, in- ventories in those lines accumulate, bankers have to make more loans for business to carry those excessive inventories—and the closer the country gets to an economic break-down. Price manipulators are taking ea larger and jJarger volume from the cap of the pyramid representing buying power in the country. The longer this goes on, the more consumer aavings are depleted and the more of the Nation's purchasing power transfers into the hands of the top-dogs who already control too large a percentage of the life blood of our economic system. THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED IN 1929—IT MIGHT HAPPEN AGAIN And in spite of these trends, Congress pre- pared to bury what is left of OPA, leaving the way open to ditching of rent controls. Sonring rents will only add fuel to the fire and make prices soar higher. In the name of common sense, how can any former critic of the OPA now look any- one in the eye and say that it was sound economic policy to remove price controls formerly preserved by OPA? Any reputable business magazine or fore- cast will bear out the facts we have cited above. ‘We have sown a breeze and are now reaping a whirlwind. Medicine’s Changing Order EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. H. ALEXANDER SMITH OF NEW JERSEY IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, March 18 (legislative day of Wednesday, February 19), 1947 Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, as a mem- ber of the Committee on Labor and Pub- lic Welfare, I have been charged with the responsibility of taking the leadership in connection with the health program. I ask unanimous consent to have pub- lished in the Appendix of the Recorp an editorial entitled “Medicine's Changing Order,” appearing in this morning's New York Herald Tribune, and paying a very worthy tribute to a report which has just been issued by the New York Academy of Medicine after 4 years of study of the changing situation in medicine through- out the United States. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: MEDICINE’S CHANGING ORDER The report of a 4-year study made by the Committee on Medicine and the Changing Order has been issued in conjunction with the centennial of the New York Academy of Medicine. The distinguished lay and medi- cal authorities on the committee, headed by Dr. Malcolm Goodridge, have painstakingly and open-mindedly addressed themselves to the problem of how to make adequate med- ical care available to more people. Their re- port, in our opinion, represents the best thought on that topic to date. The committee agrees “that medical serv- ice should eventually provide everything that science can offer toward the preservation and the cure cf disease and that it should make available thcse benefits to the entire popu- lation.” It agrees also that the profession is not now “optimally” organized to meet that goal end that medical insurance is one of the “essential requirements” in solving the prob- lem. Though the report covers many more, and as important, topics, public interest cen- ters on the controversial issue of compulsory versus voluntary insurance. The committee concludes against “compulsory health insur- ance at the present time.” But the corollary conclusion is “that everything should be done * * * to Fasten the growth of vol- untary medical insurance.” Those who seu the Wagner-Murray-Dingell bill as the final answer may be tempted to dismiss this commitiee’s findings as merely what was to be expected of any study under medical auspices. Any such dismissal would be a grave error, The study uscs the his- torical approach to point the vast gap in ex- pericnce which must be bridged before any final reorganization of medical practice js made. The only experience there is to draw on with compulsory insurance, chiefly Euro- pean, indicates that “national compulsory medical insurance would not and could not realize the promises made for it and would inevitably create new and formidable evils of its own.” The committee soes voluntary insurance as an essentin! experiment in prepayment as the only way to acquire requisite knowledge, both actuarial and in terms of what con- stitutes adequate medical care. It bespeaks Government aid at all levels to hasten such plans, preferring that Federal assistance take the form of grants-in-aid allowing for local administration and experiment. Suggesting how little our experience, even with volun- tary plans, has crystallized, the committee refrains from recommending any one type of plan, preferring that even the method of paying doctors be the subject of continuing experiment The American tendency ts to look for im- mediate action, usually in the form of cover- all legislation, to correct any such inadequacy as is now recognized in the field of health and medical care. In this case hasty legis- lation, the committee points out, is “a leap in the dark; the results are at hest uncertain, may even be disastrous and, in any event, are irrevocable.” No citizen who is sincerely interested in wider distribution of good med- ical care, either from an individual or from a@ social and humanitarian viewpoint, can afford to dismiss the academy committee’s report. A1099 The Knutson Tax Bill EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. AIME J. FORAND OF RHODE ISLAND IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, March 18, 1947 Mr. FORAND. Mr. S»ycaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I inc!ude herewith the following editorial entitled “Incpt Tax Bill” which appeared in the Washington Post on Sunday, March 16, 1947: INEPT TaX BILL Chairman Knutson's prediction that the Ways and Means Committee will act next Thursday to report out his bill calling for an immediate 20 percent across-the-board re- duction in personal income taxes, after only 2 days of hearings, warrants Democratic charges of steam-roller tactics. The bill stands candemned bec:.use of the indecent haste with which it 1s being rushed through the committee. The House and Senate have not yet agreed as to the amount of over-all reductions in expenditures that is to be their goal. And when they do, the figure will be highly tentative. For, os Secretary of the Treasury Snyder has testified, it is “‘impossi- ble to foresee what the requirements of peacetime public expenditures will be.” The outlook is even more uncertain as regards our defense expenditures, including recom- mended unbudgeted outlays for Greece and Turkey. To try to rush a tax-reduction bill throuch the House in these circumstances discredits its sponsors. This is no time for tax cutting. With the economic outlook promising and the national income at a high level, cxisting taxes can be borne with much less hardshin to individuals and to business than would normally be the case. If we ever intend to reduce our hure national debt, now is the time to begin. If the debt is reduced as rapidly as possible in good ycars, there will be less reason to feel concerned if debt retirement is sus- pended in some future less prosperous year. The Knutson bill is not only ill-timed; it is also open to criticism for offering a flat 20-percent reduction of income taxe3 paid by persons with net income below $303,000. For the 1.100 income-tax payers above this dividing line, tax cuts would be graduated down to a minimum of 10.5 percent. Ex- emptions for taxpayers ovcr 65 years of age would also be raised by $590, regardless of the size of the incomes of these aged per- sons. Concerning the latter extraordinary proposal, Secretary Snyder statcd emphati- cally thut it would be unfair to incrcase exemptions for this particular group without giving relief to many other spccial groups with low incomes. Many aged persons are very well off, indeed, and in no need of spe- cial dispensations. Although believing that substantial tax relief for upper-income groups is imperative to stimulate the spirit of enterprise essen- tial to economic progress, we think Secre. tary Snyder is right in saying that the Knutson tax bill “gives too little reduction to lower incomes and relatively too much to higher incomes.” For instance, a married person with no dependents and a net income of 81,200, now paying a tax of 638, would be taxed $30 under the Knutson bill. A mar- ried man with a $50,000 income, on the other hand, would have his $24,795 tax reduced to $19,836, and the tax on a $100,000 income would be cut from @63,128 to $50,502. In view of recent sharp dcclines in the purchasing power of the dollar, the case for tax relief of individuals in the low- income brackets has been greatly strength- ened. Effective reductions in tax rates for