APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Director of Production of the War Produc. tion Board, Assistant to the Chief of Pro- duction of the Army Service Forces and Chief of the Army Signal Corps Production and Distribution Division, you have gained an insight into both civilian and military op- erations. Therefore, you can properly eval- uate. the relative needs and requirements of both the civilian and the military. For a number of years I have been mak- ing a study of military-supply operations for the purpose of assisting the House Armed Services Committee, of which I am a mem- ber, in seeing that our fighting men were the best trained and equipped soldiers in the world. We have found that military supplies cannot be procured and distributed with any degree of certainty unless a com- mon language is used for all military-sup- ply installations. Therefore, in 1949 I intro. duced a bill, H. R. 321, that would establish a single catalog system to be developed by the armed services but which could be used by all the Federal agencies. Action on this bill was postponed to give the Defense De- partment an opportunity to take steps with- out legislation toward the development and installation of a single catalog system. At the same time the Congress approved Public Law 152, Eighty-first Congress, that included a provision for the establishment of a single catalog system. Unfortunately, this law did not define clearly what was meant by a single catalog system. Advantage has been taken of the lack of definition of Public Law 152 and of the post- ponement of action on H. R. 321 to further delay the establishment and installation of a single catalog system for the Armed Forces. Recent reports issued jointly by the Munitions Board and the General Services Administration, although filled with high sounding phrases, make it clear that noth- ing has been accomplished and that their program does not even contemplate the use of a single catalog or the elimination of all existing catalogs with their duplicating names and numbers. This should not be news to you. One of your outstanding contributions during your Army career was the development and in- stallation of the single catalog system for the Signal Corps, replacing 13 existing cata- log systems. This system was so efficient and so useful to supply operations that it was voluntarily adopted for communications items by the Air Force, the Marine Corps, and by the armed forces of other allied na- tions. With this as a tool, you were able to make the Signal Corps procurement and distribution operations the finest in the services. In developing and installing a single cat- alog system, even though for communica- tions items only, you have been able to ac- complish something that has been attempt- ed for almost 50 years without success. You recognized what was later confirmed in great detail by the Hoover Commission that supply management is impossible with- out a single catalog system. You no doubt recognize that your present mission cannot be accomplished without it. It is impossible to contro) the allocation of critical mate- rials or pass upon the necessity for new facilities where items are procured, stored, and issued under hundreds of duplicating names and numbers. Without a common identification system and a common supply language it is diffi- cult and many times impossible to coordi- nate supply activities; interchange of items between services is impossible; the diffi- culties of supplying arms and equipment to our allies are magnified; civil defense sup- ply problems are multiplied; and the waste of materials, manpower, facilities, transpor- tation costs, and storage space mounts to astronomical figures. Therefore it would seem that the respon- sibility for seeing that a single catalog sys- tem is developed and used by the Armed Forces and the civilian agencies should be delegated tc you by the Congress and by the President, At the same time the Congress should accept the recommendation of the Hoover Commission and enact legislation that would clearly define what is meant by the development and establishment of a single catalog system for the Federal Gov- ernment, As the armed services, for ob- vious reasons, should be the agent of the Federal Government in carrying out this had I have reentered H. R. 321 as H. R. Your comments on these proposals would be appreciated. If I can he of assistance to you in any way please do not hesitate to call upon me. We realize that you are carrying @ heavy burden. Sincerely yours, Jack Z, ANDERSON, ommeamad DEFENSE PRODUCTION ADMINISTRATION, Washington, D.C., February 5, 1951. Hon. Jack Z. ANDERSON, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. Dear MR. ANDERSON: As General Harrison will be away from the city for several days, I am acknowledging your letter to him of January 25 concerning the desirability of developing a single catalog system which would be used for procurement not only by the Armed Services, but also other Federal agencies. Your letter will, of course, be placed before General Harrison upon his re- turn. During the last war, I served as General Harrison’s executive officer handling Signal Corps procurement and distribution opera- tions. The cataloging system initiated by us during that period was, as you indicated in your letter, most helpful in carrying out our job. On the procurement side, it point- ed up duplications of the same item having been procured under different nomenclature and description which, of course, would, if repeated, often lead to excessive purchases. Where one can provide a common identifi- cation, there is no doubt that procurement work as well as the distribution end, would be materially assisted. As the result of our procurement and dis- tribution work in the Signal Corps, T can gesure you that strong arguments may be made for placing responsibility of develop- ing a single catalog system with the agen- cles doing the actual purchasing and dis- tributing. The people doing the above work recetve the direct benefits, and it is their understanding and acceptance of this which will bring forth an accurate and usable sys- tem. Sincerely, H. G. Witor, Assistant to the Administrator, Passage on India EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDGAR A. JONAS OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 8, 1951 Mr. JONAS. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Ap- pendix of the Recorp, I wish to call attention to an editorial that appeared in the Washington Times-Herald on Tuesday, February 6, and which bears the title “Passage on India,” The editorial analyzes a subject which heretofore, from a publicity standpoint, A661 has received little more than passive attention. Recently the attitude mani- fested by Nehru and his followers has demonstrated that considerable merit may be attributed to the facts as detailed in the editorial. Aside from the spot- lights which Nehru occupies in this pic- ture, the editorial contains much valua- ble factual information, the benefit of pach cannot be overstressed at this me. Undoubtedly, the American people will welcome an impartial exposé of Nehru’s temporary rule in India and his adamant position recently taken by his representatives sitting at the United Na- tions table. The editorial follows: PASSAGE OW INDIA Nehru and company, who temporarily rule India, have been having fun lately kicking Uncle Sam in the ribs at the meetings of the United Nations, IMPOLITE BLACKMAIL FROM A RICH BEGGAR At the same time, millions of people who live in India have been suffering what Nehru and company guardedly admit to be a tech- nical inability to eat, due to no food. Naturally, therefore, Messrs. Truman and Acheson are very much interested in a prop- osition to send Nehru and company some 2,000,000 tons of the United States taxpayers’ wheat. Nehru and company may then dis- tribute it to the taxpayers of India and per- haps thereby be saved from being kicked in the ribs, themselves, by the folks down at the Indian grassroots, if any. There is some objection to this procedure, of course, but when all is said and done you may be sure the wheat will be on its way. Our masters in power always follow the form book, sooner or later. So, since another huge chunk of our prop- erty looks outward bound, it may be of some interest to have a few facts on this further beggar at our gates, India is a word that points vaguely at a@ wedge of land in Asia bounded on the north by the world’s most rugged and fear~ some mountain chain, and on the other two sides by an ocean open to the world. In size, this wedge of land works out to about half as big as the United States. In natural resources and the means for wealth, it 1s tremendous. Properly run, India could give the United States of America plenty to think about as a rival in industry, agricul- ture or war, For instance, its tremendous river system could be harnessed to electric power dams to give India potency second only to the United States of America and far more than Russia's, India has one of the world’s great reserves of coal and high-grade iron ore, It is a treas- ure house of other minerals and metals, ranging from gold, silver and copper through tungsten, bauxite, mica, chromite and mag- nesite. All these are commonly used throughout American industry to make your kitchen equipment and your automobile shiny, long-wearing and smooth-working— but now off to Truman’s wars. There are tremendous forests in India, too, and a herd of some 200,000,000 head of cat- tle, one-third of all the cows in the world, And above all, India has one of the world’s richest farm belts. The climate goes through many shifts. In the extreme north it is temperate and pleas- ant most of the year, with big winter sports in the celebrated Vale of Kashmir, The wind ts a big thing in India. In winter it is dry and keeps pulling the cover off the central land plain, to make deserts, In summer it sweeps in from the ocean and floods the coastal regions with rain as high as 60 inches a season, But in the United
A662 Btates of America there are regions as hot and desert as any of India, and winds that rip and tear. Our climate is as harsh as any in the world, but here we've licked it tor day-in-day-out purposes. Taken all in all, India has no cause to complain agninst nature. It has the stuff for & great power, Now, as to people, they number nearly 390,- 000,000 and average out to about 245 persons to the square mile, About 87 percent live in the country and 13 percent in the city. They range from elmost prehistoric primi- tive tribesmen to a highly cultivated few, The great mass in between are underfed, fast-breeding, quick-dying, ignorant hand farmers. WHY ARE WE DIFFERENT? We have here a population running some- where near 150,000,000, about 45 per square mile. We divide about 57 percent in the city, 48 percent on the farm. Nowhere do we have any poverty to com- pare with India's. The great mass of the American people is the beat educated, best fed, most skilled, healthiest, and longest lived of all the human race, in spite of the drains put upon us by reckless government in the paat 50 years. Why has India, with all her wealth, sunk so far? Some blame the confiict of Hindu relt- gion with Buddhism, Mohammedanism, Jain- ism, and the vast number of offshoots from these which develop such fantastic con- sequences as the caste systems, the refusal of Hindus to eat meat of sows, and Moham- medans even to so much as touch a piece of pigskin. But the United States of America also has many religions at work in its national life, utterly unrestrained by law. Yet none has gone overboard against common sense. Taken all in all, we would say the root cause of India’s maladjustment is that the power of government there is traditionally from beyond the border, Alexander the Great was her first well- known conqueror, back in 326 B. C. After him there came o Golden Age, significantly under the rule of native kinga of the famous Gupta dynasty. Then the Mogul empire crashed in from the outside again, and there followed a turn-down that has never really been corrected. The British in the elght- eenth century started picking up the leav- ings any others had missed. Now this above-mentioned wedge of Asia has 8 supposed independent status, but actually not. It ts split into two nations— Pakistan for the Mohammedans and India for the Hindus, The minorities get killed. Pakistan has a long way to go, and India is governed by # gang of doctrinaire Social- iets who can't wait to get into some kind of world order or other that submerges their own life to foreign domination. The United States of America, which now for the first time in its history takes orders trom beyond tts own borders, by way of the United Nations, can look at India and think about what comes from that kind of thing. Soviet Union’s Plan for World Domination EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. WILLIAM H. BATES OF MAS&ACHUGETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 8, 1951 Mr. BATES of Massachusetts, Mr. Bpeaker, the following study is taken from an address delivered by the Very Reverend Edmund A. Walsh, 8. J., regent of Georgetawn’s famed School of Foreign Service before an assembly of the Na- tional Guard of Massachusetts on Sat- urday, January 20, 1951. The address is entitled “Soviet Strategy and Soviet Tactics”: I invite your attention to the success of Soviet strategy and tactics in the broad fleld of world geography. It will be remembered. that Nazi Germany made its own the cele- brated theory of the British geographer, Sir Halford Mackinder respecting the influence of geographical environment on history. As early as 1904, and again in 1919, and finally in 1044, he warned the Western World that the pivot of history lay in that vast inner land mass of Eurasia to which he gave the pictureque title of the heartland. De- scribing tt as roughly coinciding with what is now Soviet territory, he declared, with extraordinary foresight, that if this natural fortress, inaccessible, as it is, to sea power, should ever be properly garrisoned militarily and developed economically by a virile people, it could become the center of an empire capa- ble of ruling the world. Mackinder's bril- Hiant hypothesis enced with the warning: “Who rules East Europe commands the heart- land; who rules heartland commands the world island; who rules the world island commands the world.” This thoughtful condensation of much human history and accurate observation of the influence of geography on history was conceived and formulated, to be sure, in an age when air power had not yet become @ major component of military potential. Hence, the theory has been modified, but not entirely canceled out by the coming of the age of air power. Soviet Russia, consciously or unconsciously, is supplying the deficiency in terms of military aviation. I believe the unknown geopoliticinns be- hind the iron curtain have adapted Mac- kinder’s formula to the new circumstances of the air age. They have probably changed and shifted some elements and emphasized others, so that their consolidation of land power in Central and Eastern Europe now lenves thein free to accelerate control of marginal lands on the rim of the world island. It may well be that they are saying: “who controls the rimlands of Europe and Asia can protect the heartland of the world revolution.” The growth of Soviet sea power, eapecially of submarines, is not without meaning in such & program. Take a map of the world and follow with your finger the creeping progress of the Soviet Empire since the disappearance of the Nazi and the Japanese Empires, Through Petsamo on the north, acquired from Finland by force, she now has a new outlet to the Atlantic. Drop a Mne from that point, through central Europe, to Albania, her sat- ellite on the Adriatic, noting as you pass Yugoslavia, which would be repossessed when Stalin finally decides to deal with Tito. At the terminus of this fringe of her power she has access to the Adriatic, and hence to the Mediterranean. Her march toward Greece ‘w s countered by the Truman doctrine and he. hopes for Communist triumph there have been frustrated with American assist- ance. Had her plans succeeded in the Hel- Jenic world, she would have been enabled to anchor her power firmly in the western end of the Mediterranean, then turn to a cor- responding eastern anchor in Spain, which always remains a factor in her planning. But her hopes for gaining control of Spain, which go back even before 1935, have been frustrated thus far by the tough hidalgos. Should she ever succeed tn fomenting civil ‘war in the Iberian Peninsula, with the emer- gence of a satellite Communist state such as the Marxist pattern always assumes will fol- low a domestic revolution, Gibraltar would be the next target. Istanbul and the Dar- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD danelies have always bulked farge in the expansionist program of Russian imperialiam, and this craving for that traditional objec- tive, inherited from the czars, has not ‘been neglected by the new autocrats. Unreason- able concessions have been demanded from Turkey in recent years but denied with equal determination, and the refusal backed up by American economic aid. But the demand will surely be renewed at a pronitious moment, BEA CONTACT SOUGHT Meanwhile, the atmosphere of pressure will serve to maintain that psychological tension and expensive defense program along Dar- danelles which Moscow utilizes so consist- ently in tts war of nerves, The measure of validity in Russia's historical claims for free exit through the Dardanelles is not slight. More than one European statesman has gone so far in tne past as to concede publicly that Russia should have Constantinople. Both England and France so declared in 1916, but thrt age-old controversy between Moscow and Constantinople was limited in its appli- cation to the ancient capital of the Byzan- tine emperors. It now carries a wholly dif- ferent significance, in view of the Communist program of world revolution and the hope to overthrow all non-Communist governments such as Turkey. This new messianic uni- versalism is, as we have already noted, what Soviet Russia has added to her inherited cz.rist tradition. This urge to the sea and ths constant process of opening up new ter- ritories and colonization of them was noted by the greatest of Russian historians, V. O. Kluchevaky, as the principal fundamental f. ctor in Russian history. “All other fac- tors,” he writes in volume I of his celebrated History of Russia, ‘have been more or less inseparably connected therewith. * * ° Debarred from settlement by the geographi- cr* features of their country, the eastern Sluvs (in their historical evolution) were forced for centuries to maintain a nomad lie, as well as to engage in ceaseless war- fare with their nelghbors, It was this par- ticular conjunction of circumstances which caused the history of Russia to become the history of a country forever undergoing colo- nization—a movement continued up to, and given fresh Impetus by, the emancipation of the serfs, and remaining in progress to the present day.” FORCES OF WORLD REVOLUTION An entirely new factor, possessing the dynamic energy which Lenin imparted to it by dialectical materialism has now been superimposed on Kluchevsky's summution of Russian national history. The evangel of world revolution and the specific instruments to achieve it, whether in the form of the Third International or the Cominform are commonly ignored by those who seek to justify Soviet conduct. They keep referring to certain old grievances, such as her land- locked isolation, her legitimate striving to acquire warm-water ports, the ignoring of her existence at Versailles, the refusal to accord diplomatic recognition during s0 many years, and her exclusion from the powers which met at Munich, although the latter should now be cause for gratitude and not a stigma, Soviet Russia was predestined to bellicos- ity from the very moment Lenin turned the successful domestic revolution of 1917 into an organized Marxist revolution on a world scale. And each decade as it passes will add to her manpower, Her population trend and fertility rate indicate an increase which should bring her population to something over 260,000,000 by the year 1970, whereas the rest of all Europe combined will probably not exceed 400,000,000, And if we consider the population of newly acquired territories, the Soviet total should reach 270,000,000. ‘This is not to include ron-Russian satellite countries of Europe, Manchuria, lia, and China, in all of which fertility 1s he
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Since population ts one of the important componente of military power, these new ac- quisitions will progressively encourage the Politburo to more frequent use of its favorite weapon—aggression by proxy. CONTROL OF RIMLANDS Return now to the northern perimeter of Eurasia and continue along Soviet Russia’s Arctic coasts with a geopolitical eye. She is dominant there, and has no contestant in those icy solitudes. She already claims ap- proximately 50 percent of all offshore terri- tory lying within the Arctic Cirole, including such potential landing fields as Novaya Zemlya, Wrangel Island, Franz Josef Land, and the new Siberian group. Rounding the eastern shoulder of Siberia as it projects into the Bering Strait you will note that she pos- sesses not only Kamchata, Sakhalin, the Kurile and Komandorskie Islands, exercises control over North Korea and still controls the important harbors of Port Arthur and Dairen, both of them strategic ports of China. The encirclement of East Asia, by control of its rimlands, is nearly complete. These developments underscore a cardinal point in the program of world revolution; Communist strategists have always main- “tained that the way China goes furnishes the key to all problems on the international front. The general headquarters for the forthcoming struggle for Asia is believed to be located in Thailand, where Soviet per- sonnel in Bangkok is reported to be enor- mously in excess of any legitimate diplo- matic need. From the Pacific, then, to the fron curtain on the west, she will be in a position to mount an outer ring of offensive and defensive installations around her heart- land, particularly in marginal regions adapted to land-based air power, If her efforts to secure a base in Tripoll- tania, the western half of Libya, had not been refused in the United Nations, she would have gained a coveted foothold in the Mediterranean basin. That great inland sea, if ever dominated by Soviet influence, would prove of inestimable strategic value in seal- ing the outer rim of protective areas, pro- viding at the same time a sea route to west- ern Europe und the Atlantic world. That is why Tito’s rebellion particularly enrages the Moscow geopoliticians. LOOK TOWARD INDIA The invasion of Tibet in early November 1950 by Communist troops from China re- veals two constant factors in Soviet strategy. The geographical position of that hitherto inaccessible region makes it a strategic, though difficult, passageway for a military advance on India, provided sultable airfields can be located somewhere among its tower- ing mountains. Reports are already current that locations for the firet potential air bases have been surveyed by Russian agents on a flat plain in western Tibet between Lake Rakas and Lake Manasarowar. This would bring Soviet striking power dangerously near the heart of India. New Delhi, the capital, lies approximately 300 miles to the south- ‘west, an easy two-way run for Soviet bombers through negotiable passes of the Himalayas. To meet the requirements of political strategy, the planners of the aggression in- voked their usual pretext. They welcomed the existence of a riva) Dalal Lama—another claimant to the position of ruler and high priest—who was living in exile in China, By supporting the claims of a second living Buddha of mercy against the actual incum- bent, the Communist politburo of China staged another “liberation.” They activated the familiar pattern of a civil war to be in- stigated by Communists and utilized by the Soviet Union for hidden intervention. The device is an old one and was employed in Greece, China, and Korea. It was tried in Finland, where a Communist regime was first installed under Kusenin as prelude to the invasion of 1939. The erection of a pup- pet state usually follows and the iron cur- tain falls, Then, to preclude assistance from outside powers, the Communist legalists in- voke international law as forbidding foreign Intervention in a purely civil war. This concept was introduced into the So- viet argument against the United Nations resolution to come to assistance of South Korea, It makes both the United Nations and the United States of America not only iniquitous warmongers, but actual aggres- sors by unilateral, legal definition. Since, ac- cording to Mr. Vishinsky and all Communist jurists, the Soviet concept of law is the only valid interpretation of legality in any situa- tion, the invasion of Tibet, like that of South Korea, became an act of moral heroism and dialectical purity. There may well be other considerations arising from the historical development of Tibetan autonomy. China, to be sure, has never officially acknowledged the separation of that remote province from her sovereign- ty, although for a long time Tibet has acted independently. The significant fact for humanity is the steady advance of the Communist World Revolution into another area of Asia and the establishment of new outposts in what has been called the roof of the world. EYES ON WEST This geographical pattern would seem to extend itself to other significant spots much nearer the Western World, where forward bases would be indispensable for logistical preparation of the eventuality prophesied s0 unequivocally by Mr. Stalin: “* * * @ series of the most terrible collisions between the Soviet Republic and the bourgeois states is inevitable.” Two other Soviet maneuvers acquire special geopolitical meaning when related to this persuasion of inevitability, and when integrated with the concrete position already taken by Soviet strategists and diplo- mats. In December of 1946, Ecuador was re-~ quested to grant fishing rights to the Bovict Union in the waters adjacent to the Gala- pagos Islands, a highly strategic area off the west coast of South America approximately 1,000 miles from the Panama Canal. The distance could easily be covered 1n 4 hours by hostile war planes launched from the deck of a properly camouflaged fishing bark. One bomb would be enough to cripple the locks and sever one oi the vital defense lines of the two Americas. Then, in January 1947 Norway was presented with a Woviet de. mand for bases on Spitsbergen, the ice-cov- ered group of Arctic Islands, 3,500 miles from New York, Chicago, and the industrial heart of the United States. Modern bombers, with & 5,000 mile one-way cruising range from Spitsbergen, could reach not only industrial centers represented by Detroit and Pitts- burgh, but penetrate deep into continental America. Should the Communist Empire ever advance as far as the English Channel on one side of the world and eventually dominate the full coastline of China and its pendants on the other, the position of the United States would indeed be pertlous, North America would become in effect a huge island flanked east and west by a great power which hates us. UNITED STATES ULTIMATE TARGET The Russian Revolution, now at the very genith of its accomplishments, is on the march from Berlin to Korea. Eight nations have had their freedom burned to ashes already, The United States will be the ulti- mate target with the richest booty in the world piled on the scales of the balance. The final confrontation has come and the first American blood has been shed, The two central figures whose emergence Stalin pre- dicted sit facing each other across confer- ence tables which atretch from the Kremlin to the English Channel, from Brussels and A663 Berlin and Paris to New York and Wash« ington. The unprecedented character and stark realism of the conflict became evident when the President of the United States could bluntly declare last year that he could no longer put falth or credence tn any prom~ ise made by Soviet Russia. In normal times such a statement from the head of & government would have meant instant rupture of diplomatic relations and @ probable full mobilization for war on both sides. But we are not engaged in conven- tional diplomacy under accepted standards of international decency such as prevailed at Vienna in 1816, after the Napoleonic wars. We are embarked on a kind of cosmic poker game for the highest stakes in his- tory. Some there are who believe one of the players has been prologning a colossal bluff which began at Yalta and Tehran, and which succeeded notably against the leading player on the opposite side, who was then in failing health, The Government of the United States finally decided to call for a show-down on the Korean crisis—and was supported by the United Nations, Had both done so earlier, the odds in favor of true peace in Europe and Asia would have been far more favorable and Soviet Russia would not have had the gains that began with the desertion of Poland by her former allies. On the issue, when the cards eventually fall, may well depend the quality and quan- tity of human freedom for generations to come. WHAT ALTERNATIVE? The record is clear and the designs of Soviet Russia were never unclear, Her gam- ble in Korea was logical perfidy. Edmund Burke in 1772 warned Europe that the par- tition of Poland by Prussia, Austria, and Russia would not be the end of the feasting. It was, he pointed out, only a breakfast for the great armed powers; but where would they dine? He knew vhat neither history nor appetitie for power ever stops short, The true question before the American people and before their Representatives in Congress is not so much the cost in dollars, though heavy, but the alternative possibili- ties. There is need of complete thinking at this point, not spurts of enthusiasm, of volatile sentiment, or unfounded fears, or programs for the partial containment of Soviet aggession. The cost of a needed com- modity or of an essential service ic not truly stated by the price tag but by the foresee- able consequences if it is not bought. A fire extinguisher for a modest home or & sprinkler system for an industrial establish. ment may seem expensive in terms of the present income of the respective buyers; it can be immesaurably more expensive, possibly fatal, not to have them on hand and in working condition when a fire breaks out. If the grim record of the past 5 years of Soviet-American relations has achieved anything, it has clarified the cold war down to a basic consideration. The debate 1s not whether we can afford to do the necessary things for the defense of Christian civiliza- tion, but can we afford not to do them. Big Hugh, the Father of Soil Conservation EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. A. LEONARD ALLEN OF LOUISIANA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 8, 1951 Mr. ALLEN of Louisiana. Mr. Speak- er, I have just received a book entitled “Big Hugh, the Father of Soil Conser- vation,” written by Wellington Brink
A664 with a preface by Louis Bromfield. I have not had an opportunity to read the book. I shall do so right away. I do want to say a word concerning Dr. Hugh Bennett, the subject of this book. Dr. Bennett is well known throughout the Nation. Many of us have had the great privilege to have known Dr. Bennett a long time personally. I met Dr. Bennett soon after I came to Congress 14 years ago and I have been with him on many occasions since that time. I have had an opportunity to observe his work and I think I know something of how he is regarded in the Nation. I consider Dr. Bennett not only the foremost man in soit conservation in the Nation, but I think he ranks among the very top men in the Nation in abilty and achievement. As a man, he is a lovable character. He 4s a pioneer in his field. I am confident that the work which he has accomplished and the plans which he has launched to conserve the soils will forever remain the basic principles for our thinking and action in this moct important field of endeavor in our Nation. The good which Dr. Bennett has done cannot be esti- mated. He has gone far toward turning this Nation around from a wasteful course to one of ccnservation of our land and natural resources. The United States is fortunate to have had a man of the energy, the foresight, and the prac- tical common sense possessed by this outstanding public servant. The Nation owes to him a debt of gratitude. Mr. Speaker, I hope that tens of thousands of psople all over the Nation will be able to read this book concerning Dr. Bennett. The preface to the book, by Louis Bromfield, is so well written and gives such an accurate picture of Dr. Bennett that I think it would be well to include this in my remarks. I so request. The above-mentioned follows: PREFACE A good many years ago while in the midst of the wasted cotton lands of Georgia I met @ big hearty man named Hugh Bennett. I knew what his job was. At that time and to- day I think the biggest problema of this country and the world are food and the con- servation of natural resources and real wealth. I had seen nation after nation in every part of the world reduced to poverty and virtual starvation by the very process which had been taking place in the United States since the first soil was dug up by the white man. Here, tramping about on the barren, eroded red soil of a Georgia cotton field, was the man who was doing something about the disaster. The important thing was that he was get- ting the job done and getting {t done largely through the force, vigor, and intelli- gence of his own personality, Within 5 minutes I knew that I was in the presence of a great man and a man to whom this Nation and the whole world owed a very great debt. Like all great men, he was simple and direct, with no time for ahiftiness or pomposity. The farmer liked him, the average citizen liked him, the acientists recognized in him that most needed of all forces—the one which translates research and knowledge into action and achieves results, In the many years which have intervened since that first meet Hugh Bennett be- came one of my best friends. We have talked from the same platform many times and have traveled hundreds, perhaps thousands, of miles acroaa country over back roads, past farmhouses where in summer you could look through the sides of a house and see the wasting gullies on the other side. I know jim as well as I know any man alive and there is no man whom I respect and admire go much. I think this 1s because he has the old American virtues of integrity, simplicity, directness, and honor—virtues which are not too plentiful in these times or are, at least, obscured by the age in which we live, In those same years I have traveled on an average fifty to sixty thousand miles a year moatly helping to fight the battle which Hugh Bennett started and organized for con~ servation of our natural resources and for a better agriculture which could stand on its own feet and contribute to the wealth and welfare and health of the Nation rather than simply devour its economy. And in all that traveling I have seen something miraculous happening. I have seen, perhaps for the first time in history, a whole Nation turning to right a wrong, to check an evil, before it was forced to do so by utter disaster. I doubt that this could have been accomplished with- out the leadership and wisdom of Hugh Ben- nett. Certainly without him the progress would have been infinitely slower. It has not been an easy fight. There were and still are many enemies and many fools and many small men whose jealousies loomed larger than their interest tn the Nation's welfare. Because we spend two to three bil- lions a year in attempting to aid and edu- cate the farmer, it is assumed by the average citizen that we have, and had, in this coun- try a sound agriculture. Few errors of pub- lic thinking could be greater. In the past, particularly in the single-crop corn, cotton, and tokccco areas, we had one of the worst agricultures ever practiced by man and much of our agriculture is still upon that level. Except for the isolated “good” farmer, we practiced in the past a system of tillage which could certainly not be dignified by the word “agriculture” and could, indeed, scarcely have been called “farming.” This fact has cost the Nation billions of dollars in real wealth and the Individual citizens billions in high prices and in taxes, and industry billions in pur- chasing power, Conditions fortunately have begun to change and every year there are more good farmers, and more bad farmers are economi- cally liquidated regardless of subsidies, parity guarantics, and Government support buying. Eventually out of grim economic necessity the level of our agriculture will be raised and we shall have lower costs for consumers and higher profits for the farmer arising out of high and efficient production and the arrest- ing of destruction by erosion and flood. The progress already made ia astonishing to any veteran in conservation and much of the progress can be credited to Hugh Ben- nett, who dramatized the situation, formu- lated the pattern of its cure, and then pressed forward to translate theory into action. Every year there are more contoured and terraced farms; every year there are more grass and legumes planted; every year more sensible and effective crop rotations come into operation; and every acre properly treated can be measured in benefits to every citizen of the United States. The battle has not been an easy one and in the field of erosion and floods Hugh Ben- nett has been in the bruised and bloody van- guard, fighting to get knowledge to the larmer—fAghting, sometimes desperately, for appropriations from Congressmen who were willing to vote hundreds of millions in log- rolling, pork-barrel operations but grew pene ny-wise when it came to spending money for the benefit of the whole country instead of some single small area. The word “bureaucrat” has come to be a term of opprobrium in the last generation to designate those good ernment who work devotedly at low salaries APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD for the welfare of all of us. Such men, in so vast and e Government as ou: own, are atill in the minority. They deserve a fine and nobie word to designate them—to distinguish them from the pare- sites and the meddlers. Perhaps “public servant” is the expression needed. There are many of them in the fields of research and action, of constructive public under- taking, who do not depend upon politics to provide them with jobs, but upon their own churacter and abilities and the contribution they can make to the good of all of us in terms of intelligence, integrity, and human dignity. Such a man is Hugh Bennett, who deserves the greatest honor from the American people as one of the greatest benefactors since the beginning of their history. Lovie BromFtetn, Lustron Housing Corp. EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. PAT SUTTON ; OF TENNESSES IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 8, 1951 Mr. SUTTON. Mr. Speaker, a few evenings ago I sat in front of a television and observed and listened to what I con- sidered one of the strongest and most conscientious appeals for unity and co- operation among the citizens of America that I have ever heard. I refer to the very strong and able speech delivered by the Honorable Charles FE. Wilson, who at the present time probably possesses more administrative power than any man in the United States, with the exception of the President. As we all know, he is the Director of the Office of Defense Mobili- zation. I respect Charlie Wilson and, having recently discussed matters with him on different occasions, I know that he is a man of sincerity and with devout respect for this Nation. His loyalty is unquestioned. He beams his love for America, the country that has been so good to him during the years that he has achieved such a remarkable financial success. I was intensely interested with what Administrator Wilson had to say with reference to the reaction that our railroad strike would have among our enemies. I agree with every word that Charlie Wilson had to say, and sincerely hope and believe that his almost prayerful pleading will be heeded by the railroad men and that soon our transportation will be again up to par. However, I could not help but wonder what caused such discontentment, dis- gruntlement, and unhappiness among the working classes of the American people. I refer to those of us in the lower-income bracket, and with prices so high as they are nowadays, that bracket embraces a very large percent- age of our American citizens. We in the Congress realize that taxes must be asseed in order to build up our defenses and, frankly, it is apparent that we in the lower income brackets are go- ing to bear the brunt of the burden. So, hence, it should be easily understood why there is so much resentment and so much
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD bitter criticism of certain of our admin- istrators in the Government who would absolutely destroy and throw away one of the finest manufacturing establish- ments that has ever been produced with taxpayers’ money. I refer to the Lustron Housing Corp., near Columbus, Ohio. Such actions are what cause discontent- ment among those of us who have not been blessed financially to the extent that we can own a $50,000 home and live in luxuries and on the fat of the land. The very same pleadings and the very same arguments that were so ably spoken by Director Wilson on last evening, apply in the case of the closing of the Lustron plant, only on a smaller scale. Thou- sands of workmen lost their jobs when the plant was closed, and many thou- sands of would-be home owners were denied the luxuries that only Lustron houses provide, in that particular price range. Regardless of whether certain admin- istrators’ wishes are carried out or not, regardless of how much they detest re- versing their former opinions, and re- gardless of how determined certain plutocrats may be, to have their way, or shylocks may be in their lust for gold, the wishes of the masses and taxpaying American public must be observed if this democracy is to continue to survive. Mr. Speaker, I regret to say that, in my opinion, there are administrative officers in this Government who have ab- solutely no feeling or respect for a very large majority of the working people of this Nation. They are selfish to the core, and unless those in authority rid this Nation of that type of administrator, we will be paying through the nose when Gabriel blows his horn. The history of the Lustron Corp. reads like a novel. At the close of World War II, the Navy made available to Lustron their present quarters, which are a part of the old Curtiss-Wright bomber fac- tory. The site on which the Lustron plant is situated covers 210 acres of land. The Lustron plant embraces approxi- mately 23 acres. I am advised that the North American Aviation Co. has been leased the remaining portion of the manufacturing establishment for the purpose of constructing airplanes. Now it develops that the North Amer- ican Aviation Co., is in need of space for modification and assembly centers. I have been untiring in my efforts to find out just how much additional space that the North American Aviation Co, needs for assembly and modification and have been given figures all the way from 200,- 000 to 1,000,000 square feet. There are more than 150 idle acres adjacent and contiguous to the North American plant and for the life of me I have not been able to ascertain why that any man who has attained sufficient success in life to be an administrator in the world’s great- est Government and be in charge of the expenditure of millions of dollars of the taxpayers’ money, would recommend the destruction of $55,000,000 worth of prop- erty in order to utilize a million feet of warehouse space, Now here are the facts: The citizens and taxpayers of America loaned the Lustron Housing Corp. $87,500,000, $36,- 500,000 of which is unpaid and an out- standing obligation due the United States Government. The Lustron plant is now equipped with $15,500,00¢ worth of the most modern prefabricated hous- ing machinery known to the engineers of America. In order to junk the $15,- 500,000 worth of machinery and remodel the building to suit the North American Aviation Co. for airplane assembly and modification uses, the Government must further expend some $2,500,000 to $3,- 000,000. Thus, the $36,500,000 loan to Lustron, plus the $15,500,000, the value of the equipment, plus $3,000,000 for re- modeling of the building, equals a total of $55,000,000 initial losses that the Gov- ernment incurs if we are to use the Lus- tron plant for airplane-assembly pur- poses. Mr. Speaker, what manner of a brain- storm could any administrator be hav- ing when he would make a recommen- dation that would cost the American taxpayers $55,000,000, when he could just as easily expend not more than $6,000,000 at a maximum and get the type of assembly plant, according to spe- cific specifications, and save the Lus- tron Corp. for the purposes for which it was originally constructed, namely, the building of houses that we so direly need? Mr. Speaker, there are many reasons why that after weeks of investigation I am so definitely certain that the Lus- tron Corp. should be in full operation, The method of construction and de- sign used by the Lustron Corp. makes it possible to construct many types and sizes of buildings needed in our defense program. I refer to barracks, ware- houses, hospitals, and field quarters, all of which are fireproof, acid resistant, rust proof, portable, clean, and health- ful structures which require no paint and which may be cleaned by washing with soap and water, just like we scrub our ice boxes. They contain no refuge for vermin, insects, bedbugs, or disease germs. They are practically hermet- ically sealed, and thus are ideal for storing perishable items, explosives and ammunition or other materials that must be protected from fire or weather conditions as well as rodents and any other destructive element. This is not speculation, as close to 8,000 homes were built and sold during the productive lifetime of the Lustron plant. For the past several weeks, I have been amazed at the testimonials received from the owners and occupants of Lustron houses. Everyone, without a single exception, with whom I have dis- cussed this house have spoken in glow- ing terms. Our best example of the value of this product for defense purposes is the fact that at the present time there are 60- odd houses in use at our marine base at Quantico, Va. In my remarks before this House on January 12, 1951, I in- serted a letter in the ConaressionaL Record which appears on page 194, from Gen. Lemuel C. Shepherd, Jr., of the United States Marine Corps, and who is at the present time in charge of our gallant marines who have always A665 and are now giving such a wonderful account of themselves in the fighting over in Korea. The general was lavish in his praise of the Lustron house. It is true that General Shepherd is de- tained in Korea, on a very important mission, and cannot appear and speak in person, but in his absence, Iam happy to refer anyone who is interested in Lus- tron housing to Commander Davis, who is now the Public Works Officer at the said marine reservation at Quantico, Va. Commander Davis is proud of the Lustron house at Quantico and speaks in no uncertain terms of their value and regards them as probably the most sat- jsfactory houses that we ‘ave on the ASE, It is a known fact that it is a policy of this Government to spare no rea- sonable expenditure in research. I un- derstand that the research that was made in connection with the machin- ery that has been installed in the Lus- tron plant was complete in every detail and that one of the finest engineers that this country has produced employed some of the best engineering minds in the Nation to work out a complete and satisfactory blueprint of what is now a reality. It is nothing short of stupidity or collusion on the part of administra- tors or competitors that would even dare to recommend that the Nation be denied the benefit of the information obtained in the expenditure of millions of dollars in this research. Another thing in which we should be very definitely interested is the conserva- tion of our naiural resources. Lustron fits into this picture so far as coal, wood, ard oil are concerned, because of the type of construction of the Lustron house. I am adv.sed that considerable savings has been proved in heating these houses. When we take into consideration that oil, coal, and gas are in great demand, we must not overlook the fact that we can perfect material savings of these materials by utilizing the Lustron house. One of the crucial problems facing this Government today is the question of manpower. The military is parading daily from the Pentagon to the congres- sional committees screaming their heads off for the Congress to give them permis- sion to draft our 18-year-olds. Mr. Speaker, and ladies and gentlemen of the Congress, this is a serious matter. I know something of the hardships that are suffered by our fighting men and, in my opinion, a battle front is no place for our 18-year-olds. Of course, it is necessary to use a large portion of our military manpower behind the lines, many of our men are utilized by the Engineering Corps in construction work. When we are so badly in need of housing, naturally it requires a large corps of men for this particular work. By reactivating the Lustron Corp. and permitting them to furnish their capacity of houses for our defense program, we can save four out of every five men for house construction purposes that we are using today. That is, after the house is delivered to the site or on the field where it is to be erected. Just think, 80 percent of manpower savings, men who are classed in the IV-F, can erect houses and
A666 thus permit those of us who are in physi- eal condition to do the fighting, but yet, apparently certain administrators in this democratic Government of ours care little for the hardships and the sorrows that they are forcing the mothers of this Nation to bear. Another angle to be considered, and the one which is probably the most im- portant t> the future of this Nation, is the questton of health, I understand that the Mayo brothers, who ve all recog- nize as some of the world’s finest physi- cians, have recommended on more than one occasion to sufferers of the dreaded disease known as asthma, that they live in a Lustron house. Insofar as I am concerned, if we have a product that can be manufactured at the proven reason- able figure of the Lustron house that will cure or relieve the sufferers of asthma, our expenditures for research are not in vain, and the cost was cheap at any price. Furthermore, housing is one of the flelds in which America has not pro- gressed as fast as in numerous other undertakings. By that I mean that we pow have many of our conventional houses constructed along the specific lines of our homes of 500 years ago. They are vulnerable to termites; they must be constantly repaired; they have joints, nicks, corners, anc crevices; they harbor filth, vermin, cockroaches, water bugs, bedbugs, and insects of various kinds—all of which are carriers of dis- ease and affect the very health and hap- piness of our people. I recall that not so long ago some of the outstanding magazines of our coun- try carried numerous pictures of living conditions in Spain and in various other foreign countries. The pictures were of the slum areas, showing the destruction ceused by vermin, rats, and the filthy conditions under which some human beings were forced to live. Why, Mr. Speaker, I do not know of any reason why it is necessary that the photog- raphers journey to foreign lands to pro- cure pictures of such filth-infested slum aeas when it has been to my extreme sorrow to walk not more than half a mile from the dome of this Capitol and observe Americans living under conditions just as bad, if not worse, than those described in France, England, and Spain, or any other country on the face of the globe; and yet we are offering to destroy the only plant that the engineers of this country have ever developed, after the expenditure of millions of dollars of taxpayers’ funds, that is capable of con- structing 100 prefabricated houses each day that are just about as sanitary as can be designed. They require no paint; they have no nicks and corners in which vermin can live; they are acid- resistant, will not absorb moisture, and, according to actual tests, are warmer in the wintertime and cooler in the sum- mer, and can he procured at a savings in the United States of some $6,000 per unit over conventional houses, and from $14,000 up in savings outside of the con- tinental United States. Another thing in which we should be vitally interested when we consider pur- chasing a house is its resistance to fire. Hardly a day passes that we do not notice in the press such horrible happenings as persons, mostly the aged and infirm or little children, being burned to death when their homes are destroyed by fire. I have seen all kinds of bloodcurdling deaths, but for the life of me I cannot conceive of any more horrible way to die than to be burned to death. I am ad- vised that the underwriters gave the Lustron house as low insurance rates as fas ever been given on any structure in this country—the same rate as that given to completely concrete and steel houses. I know that we cannot overlook such improvements in the safety field. Mr. Speaker, there are so many rea- sons why the Lustron plant should be in full production, operating three shifts, that there was bound to be skuldueggery, inside maneuvering, competitive jeal- ousy, and persons seeking hand-outs before a plant lke Lustron could be ordered closed by sensible men. The members of our legal profession tel me that it is not unusual that cir- cumstantial evidence is much stronger than real evidence. Therefore, I would li.e to review a little of the evidence that has been uncovered concerning the Lustron loan and its subsequent closing or attempted foreclosure. Whether or not the loan should have been originally made is no longer perti- nent. The picture is just this. Theloan wns made. The money has been ex- pended, the plant 1s completely equipped, ready for production; in fact, production of some 3,000 houses was accomplished and 8,000 orders were on hand at the time the plant was closed; in fact, the fires in the furnace are still lighted. Now that is the picture. While Lustron was in operation, this financial genius, who has been identified to us as Merl Young, appeared on the scene. At the request of RFC officials Merl was placed upon the Lustron pay- roll at $12,000 a year. Later, at the re- quest of an official of the RFC to the president of the Lustron Corp., his sal- ary was raised to $18,000 a year, provided the increase was approved by the RFC Board in writing. That approval was given. It later developed that at the same time this financial wizard was drawing $10,000 a year from a firm headed by one Rex Jacobs. A few months before Lustron was closed, Merl Young and others notified the officials of the Lustron Corp. that they were sending an engineer to in- spect the Lustron plant. It turns out that the engineer was none other than one of Merl Young’s employers and one of his old cronies, Rex Jacobs, with whom Mer! often fraternized, and Jolled in the Florida sunshine while visiting with Jacobs in his mansion down in the sun- shine State of Florida. According to the press, Merl Young originally was a messenger in the Gov- ernment service, making $1,080 a year. At one time Merl resided at Greenbelt, Md., and, by the way, he had a brother who likewise resided at Greenbelt. His mame is Herchel. Now I understand from reliable sources that all of a sudden, Merl came into the money. Then Her- chel moved to swanky East Braddock Lane, Chevy Chase, Md., in a fine home APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD which he reputedly purchased and later he opened an office in the Statler Hotel and claimed to be an industrial con- sultant. I understand further that Meri had another brother named Gene, who was induced to Washington from Dallas, Tex., and was likewise in some way con- nected with Rex Jacobs for some 7 months. Now I understand that Gene is holding one of the top jobs in the Gov- ernment. According to Méerl'’s own statement, his income many months ago was $60,000 a year. This morning a person came to see me and asked that I endeavor to get the Government to investigate what he had understood to be a loan or a prospective Joan to some furrier, and that according to his advice, that Mrs. Merl Young, who by the way is one of the confidential sec- retaries in the White House, was wear-~ ing a beautiful white mink or ermine coat, that he understood was a part of Mer!’s fee for interceding with the RFC. Mr. Speaker, we know for a fact that many of these charges are true, and it goes without saying, that where there is smoke there is bound to be fire. Now after I appeared before this house on the 12th day of January, and made certain accusations, that have already been com- pletely confirmed by the report that was recently submitted by the subcommit- tee investigating the RFC, I had a call from a White House confidant who came by to see me to ascertain whether or not I would confer personally with Merl Young. I told him that I would be happy to talk with anyone regarding any mat- ter that could be helpful in my duties as a Representative in the Congress. Thereupon, Merl Young came to see me the next day. I had a very lengthy con- ference with Mr. Young, and he denied that he was ever on Rex Jacob's pay- roll. A few days thereafter, another former RFC employee appeared on the scene. I refer to the Honorable James Windham, who I understand is at the present time the secretary and treasurer of the F. L. Jacobs Manufacturing Co. of which Rex Jacobs is the president. In my conversation with Mr. Wind- ham, I learned that he was a former em- ployee of the RFC, in fact being the Ad- ministrative Assistant to the Director of the Corporation at the time that Rex Jacobs procured a $3,000,000 loan from the RFC. Shortly after the loan was made, Mr. Windham joined the Jacobs firm and certainly he should know who was on their payrolls. I asked him— Mr. Windham—if Merl Young was ever on their rolls. His answer was “Yes.” Then I heard that Mr. Windham had been visiting the Lustron plant. Mr. Jacobs visited the Lustron plant and he had barely entered the office when & long-distance telephone call was re- ceived by the president of the Lustron Corp. from Washington inquiring if Mr. Jacobs had arrived. The president of the Lustron Corp. was prompted to talk to Jacobs freely and to show the said Jacobs through the Lustron plant. When his inspection tour was over Mr. Jacobs suggested that, although he was perfect- ing a sale for his washing-machine busi- ness, that he had made arrangements for the purchaser thereof to furnish the
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD washing machines that were to be in- stalled in Lustron houses and that Merl Young would receive $15 apiece for each machine installed. Thus, if Lustron had been permitted to operate around the clock, they would have produced a mini- mum of 100 houses a day, which would have produced an additional income of $375,000 annually for the financier Merl Young. Not bad, Mr. Speaker and ladies and gentlemen of the Congress. I am reminded of the story of from “rags to riches.” What a clique. Young, Young, Windham, Jacobs, administrators in the Government of the highest influence, Hunt, Robert Hagarty, et al. In the renegotiation section of the Department of Justice Jacobs is a famil- far name. At the Reconstruction Fi- nance Corporation Jacobs is a most fa- miliar name. Some of the courts of this Nation are thoroughly cognizant of the name of Jacobs. The F. L. Jacobs Co., of whom Rex Jacobs is the president, according to reliable information, was forced by the Department of Justice to renegotiate with the Government and repay many millions of dollars in excess profits growing out of contracts given to the said Jacobs Co. to produce necessities and munitions of war during World War II, I believe that Iam right in say- ing that the case was so strong that when the Department of Justice appealed to the courts that Jacobs refused to con- test their claims and voluntarily paid some $15,000,000 in excess profits. If this is not the exact figure, it is in the neighborhood of right, because my informer is none other than James Windham, the former administrative as- sistant of the Director of the Recon- struction Finance Corporation, but at the present time the secretary and treas- urer of the F. L. Jacobs Co. Now, Mr. Speaker, and ladies and gen- tlemen of this Congress, if the adminis- trators of this Government who are in charge of letting contracts under our present defense program are not required to stay on the alert in dealing with such concerns as the F. L. Jacobs Co., history is bound to repeat itself. Oh, yes: now I am reminded of the proposal that Lustron stock be vested in a substantial part in the hands of Merl Young, Robert Hagarty, and Ed Hunt. Hagarty was later found to be a business associate of Merl Young and his brother Herchel, and Hunt was identified as an associate of Rex Jacobs. They proposed that enough stock be sold to these men to offset the 86,000 shares owned by the Lustron president at 1 percent per share or $860 for an equal number of shares. This proposition was turned down and Rex Jacobs was flatly refused in his sug- gestion that the Lustron Corp. use his washing machines in order that Merl Young could collect an additional $375,000 yearly. Unfavorable publicity concerning the Lustron Corp. began to trickle out of the RFC. It was not long thereafter until they were set for the kill, Then the attempted foreclosure. Mr. Speaker, and ladies and gentle- men of the Congress, these are the simple facts of the case, and I am perfectly willing for the taxpaying public of Ameriea to be the jury and I will be con- tented with their verdict. Mr. Speaker, in addition to the many reasons that have heretofore been set out, why Amer- ica needs Lustron, I want to call your attention to what 1 year’s savings will buy in the way of munitions for war; 250 medium tanks; 260 jet-fighter planes; 10 aircraft carriers of the Midway class; 20 bombers; 10 modern subs; and 25 anti- aircraft guns, Scarcity of steel is now a legitimate reason fc refusing to reactivate this plant. Recently Administrator William Henry Harrison, head of the Defense Production Administration, and I had an extended conversation with regard to the subject of steel. At the time, he advised me that lumber was more of & problem than steel, and that we had more of a shortage of timber than of steel. The general stated further that 60 far as the material was concerned, that he could make out our case. So I assume that the general] is the last word upon the production of the respec- tive commodities, and fully aware of what is available. To say the least, it is like I stated before this House yester- day, the Lustron Corp. would use 80,000 tons less steel each year than we are now utilizing in the manufacture of beer cans. Lustron has become a matter of grave concern to the people of this Na- tion and I sh cerely hope that the Mem- bers of Congress will rise up in their wrath, and defy any administrative officer of this Government to salvage and destroy the efforts of thousands of tech- nical engineers and deny our defense agencies and citizens the benefit of this house. - Mr. Speaker, I have refrained from calling too many names, as it is not my nature to be jealous of or to harm any- one. Honesty and fair play is all that I demand, but I hope that by my refusal to accurately describe many persons who are as deep in the muck as the ones who have been named are in the mire will not be taken adversely. I trust that it will not be necessa.y for me to com- plete this ‘flnanceer” family tree through affinity, “consinquinity,” or “goldinity” and specifically name and trace the ma- neuvers of the other members of this ‘‘al- mighty dollar fraternity.” If the American people are denied the progress that they have so dearly paid for in developing the Lustron house, during the weeks to come I assure you that the entire country will learn and realize that up until now the half has never been told. February Anniversaries EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. DONALD L. JACKSON OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 8, 1951 Mr, JACKSON of California. Mr, Speaker, February, our month of heroes, is again upon us, During the next few A667 days our people will celebrate, each in his own way, the red-letter dates unon the calendar which mark again the an- niversaries of the birth of two of our greatest national heroes: George Wash- ington and Abraham Lincoln. Here were two men who were ever willing servants of liberty; ever the guardsmen of national honor. The days in which they lived, served, and died were fraught, with tragedy, but with the held of di- vine guidance they were able to not only rise above the turmoil of their times but above the horizon of history as well. But there are other and darker anni- versaries this month. There are Feb- ruary dates which are inscribed in our contemporary history in blood and are tragic in no less degree than were those through which Washington and Lincoln, each in his turn, bore the burden of sor- row. These, too, are dates which free- men should keep in their minds and hearts as we seek again to stem the on- rush of tyranny and the oppression of tyrants, Many peoples, once proud and free, today stagger and groan under the merciless shackles of a servitude no less real to them because it is remote from us. These are the speechless and these are the human beings from whose shoul- ders has been stripped ruthlessly the mantle of human dignity. These are the slaves and the blood brothers of the millions who have gone to nameless graves under the lash of brutal masters whose lust for power drives them to their own eventual destruction. But for this moment the power mad wield the whip of absolute authority without thought of God, man, or constitutional govern- ments. Judgment day is a long distance along the road of eternity, and to be hopeless, as many are, is to suffer a cancer of the soul. Little wonder, then, that men, women, and children of a dozen nations see no hope in the morn- ing light and no promise in the sunset. But we who are free can and should reaffirm that the prisoners of brute force are not without friends and not without a real and sincere pledge of succor in this hour of desperate need, for without hope the human soul is already half en- slaved. We Americans are slow to anger and loath to violence, but once aroused we become a power and a fury in the defense of human liberty and the pre- cepts of common international decency. We do not feel that because a brigand escapes with his loot, that he is forever tree of Judgment, nor that the murderer goes scot free because he escapes the dragnet in the first few hours after his crime. Neither do we believe that the welding of manacles on weaker hands means eternal slavery. There is no desert so arid that tor- tured liberty cannot quench its thirst. There is no heaven so high and no ocean so deep that the soul of liberty can be deprived of its breath. The spirit of human liberty is far beyond the reach of @ lash or the scalpel in the hand of the most able surgeon. It leaves the mortal frame when life itself departs, but until that instant it is the most elusive ele- ment in the entire spectrum of human emotions.
A668 Thirty-three years ago today the Lith- uanian nation came into being. Febru- ery 16 is a date that will mock those Lithuanians who today are in bondage. Pebruary 6 is an infamous date on the calendars of the liberty-loving Polish people, for it was on that date that the vulture of Yalta cast its shadow over Warsaw. Our concern and our shame must be the part that this Nation played in the tragedy of Poland. That the Yalta agreement was never ratified by the representatives of the American people in no way diminishes the ravages and the terror which followed the imple- mentation of our national policy at that time. Thus it is that we have a moral responsibility to insure that freedom shall again flower wherever a Pole places his foot. We have an even greater re- sponsibility to ourselves and to those who follow us in our cherished tradition of American liberty. If the millions of citizens of this great Nation could speak to the enslaved to- day they would say: “Be of good cheer and let hope be the star upon which your eyes rest. Keep liberty and the love of Uberty the silent password on your lips and in your hearts. The free world ‘s not the decadent creature depicted by your captors, but in its every manifesta- tion it is a virile and living thing. We cannot in this moment commune to- gether, but in spirit we stand beside you. As we increase our strength to meet the great test that appears with every pass- ing day to be the more inevitable, we Jook to you as allies and as friends. Freedom will come again to the Poles, to the Lithuanians, to the Estonians, and to all of the others who place their faith in a divine being and an ordered world.” Mr. Speaker, there has been tntro- duced into the Congress legislation to empower the Department of Defense to utilize the willing hands of those abroad who want to strike a blow for their own ideals and their national traditions. The bill would permit enlistments in the United States Army of aliens who are qualified to bear arms; bear arms not in the defense of this country or of an ally, but in support of their own prin- ciples. Hundreds of thousands of aliens have good reason to hate Communists and communism. The more intelligent, the more sincere, the more enlightened the service of these men to their own democratic institutions and govern- ments, the more violent the punishment meted out to them and to their loved ones on the fall of those governments. Individually, they represent haunted shadows, drifting through the free world, stateless and embittered, or worse yet, hounded slaves behind the fron cur- tain. United. these men could and would represent a force designed to exact just retribution from the common enemy of free men. Their services should be uti- lized and quickly, To those who say that we have never employed mercenary troops, I would answer only that the spirit of liberty and the desire for free- dom, which burns alike in the soul of every human creature, has no knowledge and no need of mercenary troops. We seek allies in the great struggle ahead. ‘We have at hand, anxious and willing to strike a blow in their own behalf, un- counted thousands of recruits who ask only the opportunity to fight back with something more lethal than a hand sickle or a hoe. Are we to give them their chance in the common cause? I hope so, Mr. Speaker. Prominent Internationalists Who Have the Same Objective as Joe Stalin EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. JOHN T. WOOD OF IDAHO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 8, 1951 Mr. WOOD of Idaho. Mr. Speaker, on pages A607 and A608 of the Appendix to the ConarzssronaL Recorp, I showed how a powerful segment of the press and radio are diligently engaged in sell- ing America down the river. Today I am listing 33 prominent inter- nationalists calling themselves the Committee on Present Danger, and the Crisis Committee, who are whooping it up to draft 18-year-olds, send an army and unlimited military supplies to Eu- rope, and thereby hasten the day so fer- vently hoped for by Joe Stalin when we will have spent ourselves into bankruptcy. This is the same gang who sold us the Marshall Plan on the promise that it would stop communism and furnish a market for our surplus production. Since then communism has spread over one-third of the globe and we now real- ize the Marshall plan was just a slick trick to force the American taxpayers to pay interest on foreign bonds heid by international banker-racketeers of Wall Street and the London counting houses; and to tax free enterprise in the United States to build up socialistic-communis- tic regimes in Europe and Asia which are committed to the destruction of free en- terprise everywhere. What this committee of 33 advocates will accomplish from within could never be accomplished by any enemies from without. Communist Russia is the greatest eco- nomic hoax in all history, The Balkans are seething with revolt, and Russia would fall apart from her own internal weaknesses if our enemies within and without would stop financing her. It is time to think and talk and act American; and designate international- ists for what they are—potential traitors to the United States. The real facts of the present situation are that the internationalists—deliber- ately, and the New Deal-Fair Deal— stupidly, have made such a mess of our economy that they must depend on war and the rumors of war to keep it going. Unless the American people demand a return to sound monetary and fiscal policies in Government, they should stop complaining about high prices, high taxes, and the imminent danger that their sons be sent to fight more foreign wars; for in the last analysis, the Amer- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ican people have only themselves to blame for the kind of government they get. The following article is from the Washington Times-Herald of February 8, 1951: One Hunprep Txovusand Doriars Sovart For Lonsyina sy INTERNATIONALISTS A Grive to raise an initial $100,000 to lobby for sending troops to Europe and for the drafting of 18-year-olds was launched last night by a group of citizens supporting inter- ventionism of the Truman administration. Telegrams were sent to business men throughout the Nation asking them to listen to @ radio speech on the world orisis by James B. Conant, president of Harvard Unt- versity, and then make contributions to the $100,000 lobby goal. Conant, at the age of 24, served as @ lieutenant in the Sanitary Corps in World War I. HEADQUARTERS HERE The drive is being pushed by the Com- mittee on the Present Danger, which has headquarters in Washington. The commit- tee has $3 members, all prominent inter- nationalists. Nineteen of the thirty-three members of this committee are also mem- bers of a crisis committee, which is pleading for unity behind Truman foreign policy. Many of the 33 committee members served on the committee for the Marshall plan, which spent almost $150,000 lobbying the multi-billion dollar Marshall plan through Congress as the sure means of promoting peace. Many of the members of the Marshall plan committee profited handsomely from the spending under the Marshall aid pro- gram. They will also profit from spending under the defense program. MEMBERS LISTED The 88 membera of the committee, by States, are: Alabama, William D, Arant, lawyer; Calf- fornia, Dr. Robert G. Sproul, president of the University of California; Colorado, Dr. Robert L. Strearns, president, Univorsity of Colorado; District of Columbia, Dr. Vannevar Bush, president, Carnegie Institution of Washing- ton, and John Lord O’Brian, formerly gen- eral counsel for War Production Board. Tilinois, Laird Bell, chairman, buard of trustees, University of Chicago; Truman K. Gibson, Jr., lawyer and member of Presi- dent’s Commission on Universal Military Training, 1947; and Theodore W. Schultz, professor of economics, Universtty of Chi- cago. Kansas, Dr. William C. Menninger of the Menninger Foundation; Louisiana, Monte M. Lemann, lawyer; Maryland, William L. Marbury, lawyer. Massachusetts, Dr. James Phinney Baxter IU, president, Williams College; Dr. James B, Conant, president, Harvard University; Gen. Robert Cutler, president, Old Colony Trust Co.; and R. Ammi Cutter, lawyer. Minnesota, Harry A. Bullis, chairman of the board, General Mills, Inc.; Missour!, Dr. Prederick A. Middlebush, president, Univer- sity of Missourl; New Jersey, Dr. Harold W. Dodds, president, Princeton University. ADLER ON COMMITTEE New York, Gen. Julius Ochs Adler, gen- eral manager, New York Times; Frank Alt- schul, chairman of committee on interna- tional policy, National Planning Assooia- tion; Lewis H. Brown, chairman of the board, Johna-Manville Corp.; Dr. Charles Dollard, president, Carnegie Corporation of New York; Gen. Wiliiem J. Donovan, former Director of Office of Strategic Services; Edward 8. Greenbaum, lawyer; Rabert P. Patterson, for- mer of War; Stanley Resor, chair- mean of the board, J. Walter Thampson Co.; Robert B. Sherwood, author and playwright; and Tracy 8. Voorhees, former Under Secre- tary of the Army,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Pennsylvania, Howard C. Petersen, prest- dent, Fidelity Philadelphia Trust Oo.; Rhode Island, Dr. Henry M. Wriston, president, Brown University; Texas, Will L. Clayton, former Under Secretary of State; Virginia, Miss Meta Glass, former president, Sweet Briar College; Washington, Dr. Raymond B, Allen, president, University of Washington. URGES SUPPORT FOR IKE In his radio speech, Conant said there is “a good chance” a third global war may be avoided if the free world becomes strong and united behind the Eisenhower mission, He urged troops for Europe and drafting 18-year-olds. He expressed bellef the catastrophe of world war III may be avoided “if Europe is made defensible and without delay.” Lives at Stake in the Railroad Strike EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWARD J. THYE OF MINNESOTA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 8 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. THYE. Mr. President, I hold in my hand an article entitled “Lives, Not Profits, At Stake.” The article is by Constantine Brown, and deals with the current railroad strike. I ask unanimous consent to have the article printed in the Appendix of the Recor, inasmuch as it is a very impressive one. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the REcorp, as follows: {From the Washington (D. C.) Evening Star of February 6, 1951] Lives, Nor Proyirs, aT Stake—RatL STRIKE Sorry SPECTACLE TO FREE NATIONS; GIVES ENEMY PROPAGANDA AMMUNITION (By Constantine Brown) House-cleaning during a storm is difficult, But when the dirt under the rugs menaces the health of the family, the big broom must be used and the windows opened. We are presenting a sorry spectacle today to the free nations of the world, whom we are supposed to lead in their struggle for survival against Communist imperialism. We are supposed to show a determination, through unity at home, to weather the Krem- lin-raised hurricane. And what 1s the pic- ture our allies and friends get from the United States? Railroad men are on strike at a time when more than 100,000 American soldiers are fighting for their life in Korea. The soldiers in Korea receive in the neigh- borhood of $100 a month. It is true that they also get board and lodging—the board represented by K rations and the lodging a foxhole in subzero weather. When they work only 18 hours a day they consider them- selves lucky. Death and injury are the GIs’ professional risks, and they get no work- men’s compensation, The strike is an inherent right of all work- ers, But a strike which affects men whose chances of survival depend largely on the arms and ammunition they receive from America, 7,000 miles away, is a crime, for it hits directly at those who are fighting for the preservation of American freedoms, which includes the right to strike. The switchmen’s strike not only has slowed the sending of military equipment to Korea, but it 4s also interfering with the production of desperately needed war materials. Strikes by railroad men, longshoremen, steel work- ers, and miners no longer interfere with profits, but menace the lves of the sons of the strikers themselves. We pointed with scorn last year at the po- litical strikes provoked by the Communists in Western Europe. We criticized them be- cause they were jeopardizing the countries’ chances of preparing themselves against the Russian threat. They now see the same thing happening in this country, when we are waging a full-fledged war against overwhelm- ing odds. The strike is not caused by polit- ical subversion It is merely the result of economic dissatisfaction of a group of men who, however just their demands may be, do not have to place the lives of American boys in jeopardy, In the past we have adopted a holier-than- thou attitude toward the lack of financial integrity among some of the governments with which we are associated. The wrath of the administration and of many radio and newspaper commentators was directed against the venality of the Chiang Kai-shek regime. We wanted no part of it, because Chiang’s relatives and many members of the Kuomintang had dipped their hands into public funds. What do we see today at home? “Five per- centers” offer their services to contractors and are able to obtain favors through their connections with high Government officials, Only last we3k the Fulbright committee made public an unsavory story of how persons high in the Government—including the White House—were able to influence loans made by the tax-supported Reconstruction Fi- nance Corp. How many similar instances exist today is not known But there is an uneasy feeling in congressional quarters that the Fulbright committee has lifted only a corner of the rug under which much of Washington’s daily dirt has been swept. It is true that the country is still rich enough and the country, by and large, healthy enough that such peccadillos will not damage its fiber. But these disclosures give our enemies their bost propaganda ammuni- tion, and one which the Voice of America cannot offset. Our Tragedy in China EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ANDREW F. SCHOEPPEL OF KANSAS IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 8 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. SCHOEPPEL. Mr. President, in the January 31, 1951, edition of the Kan- sas City Times there appeared an edi- torial entitled “Our Tragedy in China.” This editorial points out two funda- mental truths which stand out in bold relief despite all the controversy that might develop over the position of indi- viduals who have the courage to tell the American people what has been happen- ing in China during the past several years. I ask unanimous consent that the editorial be printed in the Appendix of the Recorp. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: A669 Our Tracepy mv Cana At the Republican Party's Kansas Day celé« bration in Topeka Senator JosrpH McCaarny, of Wisconsin, again developed his charge that 8 “crimson clique" in the State Department deliberately fostered the recent victory of communism on the Chinese mainland and so must be held directly accountable for the present fighting in Korea with its tragic cost in American lives. The controversy which has raged over who specifically in the State Department was re- sponsible for the formulation of our policy toward China, say between 1943 and 10949, and what their motives may have been—a controversy initially provoked by the ex- treme partisanship with which the Senator phrased his original indictment—should not be allowed to obscure two fundamental truths. One is that our relations with China were grossly mishandled throughout the period in question. The other Js that a whole series o1 evil consequences, of which the most conspicuous at the moment is the Korean conflict, has now resulted from our protracted blundering. The basic facts are hardly open to dis- pute. Indeed, most of the factual material can readily be obtained from any careful reading of the State Department's own pub-+ lication, entitled “United States Relations with China,” which was released as long ago as August 10949. The weakness of this lengthy report to the American people les in its failure to draw obvious conclusion, or, rather, in its tendency to draw false con- clusions from the record by implication. The Department asked us to believe, es- sentially, that the outlook in China (from the point of view of our interests) was hope- less from the start, that nothing we vould have done would have halted the emergence of a Communist dictatorship on the main- land and that we made no mistakes, either of omission or commission, tn dealing with the Chinese situation during and imme- diately after the Second World War. Even before McCarruy launched his bitter attacks on the State Department, it was being pointed out by responsible observers on every hand that this reading of the record ‘was not in the least persuasive and that on the most charitable estimate those in charge of our Chinese policy had shown themselves confused and inept. Whether the situation in China was ac- tually hopeless and whether the seizure of control of the country by the Communists could have been prevented, of course, will never be known. What seems perfectly clear is that the State Department’s approach to the situation was hopeless and that our policy was not calculated to prevent that seizure. We tried first to force a coalition between the Chinese Nationalists and Chinese Com- munists. And when those efforts broke down—as they were bound to break down— we then threw up our hands and did nothing, The outcome was inevitable. Instead of try- ing in any effective way to compel Chiang Kai-shek to clean his governmental and mill- tary house, by taking power away from a reactionary clique and giving it to the pro- greasive and enlightened Chinese among his associates, we confronted the generalissimo with an impossible demand that he join forces with the Soviet-dominated Commu- nist leaders. The net result was that the Nationalist Government steadily lost the confidence of the Chinese people, its armies steadily be- came more ineffictent, and Mao Tze-tung and his associates rode to power while we pro- nounced a futile curse “on both your houses” and watched helplessly the mergence of Red China as 4 sprit.gboard for Commu- nist aggression in Asia.
A670 Modern American diplomacy probably never made a greater error Or one more ter~- rible in its consequences. That is why, for all the extravagance of some of his state- ments (those at Topeka appeared more re- strained than usual), the Wisconsin Senator can never be ignored or dismissed entirely from the foreign policy dehate. Quite apart from the question of personal loyalty which he has injected, the State Department is simply too vulnerable to criticism on its past course in China. The Point 4 Program EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HARLEY M. KILGORE OF WEST VIRGINIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 8 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. KILGORE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp excerpts from a broadcast by Raymond Swing over Station WOL on January 15, 1951, in regard to the point 4 program. There being no objection, the excerpts were ordered to be printed in the Rrcorp, as follows: I wish to put In a word for point 4, Point 4 has become a term of world-wide meaning ever since President Truman, in a Presiden- tial message, proposed that the United States make a policy of aiding underdeveloped areas with ita unique technical assistance. In a foreign policy that has been otherwiso heavily weighted with more immediate kinds of self-interest the point 4 program has beamed forth like a candle as the most effec- tive expression of American ideology. How- ever, Congress hasn't cared much for it. It takes a wide first-hand knowledge of the ‘world, a vivid senso of the many hundreds of millions of people living in abject poverty and familiarity with the ways by which their living standards can be raised by modern technical methods you see what @ power a point 4 program can be. It would be etrong in the ideological fight with communism. It would be atill stronger in assuring the United States the warm friendship of the great bulk of the world’s population, as liv- ing standards come to be lifted. But, as I said, Congress hasn't eyes and ears attuned to these more-distant realities and has never been generous with point 4. Last year it appropriated less than half the cost of a single cruiser to the entire point 4 program, 634,000,000. However, this small activity has given American foreign policy a slight sparkle and luster. I venture to say that the United States geta more posi- tive prestige from this $34,000,000 than any other single outlay of similar size in the budget. It had been hoped to raise the sum of more than $100,000,000 this year—certain~ ly a bagatelle in relation to the @71,000,000,- 000 of the budget. But instead of this amount, it now appears that the point 4 program is to be turned into a straight-cut device to get raw materials for defense pur- poses. Plans are being laid for this along with the reorganization of ECA. It is hoped to divest the State Department of all opera- tional agencies and put the aid ‘am. throughout the world under ECA. Point 4, then, is to be something like the Board of Economic Warfare, with an eye on special possibilities where raw materials oan be de- veloped by timely financing and technical guidance. Now no one can object to the development of raw materials needed for de- fense. No one can object to ECA having charge of el} technical assistance everywhere. But objection can be raised to the trans- formation of point 4 into a Board of Eco- nomic Warfare or anything like it, It de- serves to be retained and expanded for ita original objective, and instead of trying to sell Congress something that sounds more selfishly nationalistic, an effort should be made to interest Congress in point 4 as being one of the Anest and least expensive expres- sions of Americanism in our foreign policy. It’s not a foreign program out of which individual Americans can hope to get rich. It's not a program of capital expansion, It's not a Twentieth Century brand of enlight- ened imperialism. It is devoted simply to bringing to the neglected parts of the world and their neglected peoples the technical ald that can help them increase their own efforts on their own behalf. It’s designed to expand their agriculture, develop thelr power, and get them started on the spiral of increased production. It's not done in the expectation of recruiting soldiers to stand on-—stand against—the Soviet bloc or of sombat- ting immediate communism infiltration. It simply makes a start on helping the vast majority of people in the world to improve their economic status. Obviously, the United States will share any expansion of the wealth of the world, but the share would not be in dividends on stocks and bonds; 4t would be in a closer and richer brotherhood and to drop this chapter from American for- eign policy would be to lose the one many would like to consider most characteris- tically American, Problems Confronting the United States —d EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWARD J. THYE OF MINNESOTA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 8 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. THYE. Mr. President, I hold in my hand a very unusual letter which I h’.ve received from Dr. Ericson, a medi- cal doctor at LeSueur, Minn. Forty years ago he was an immigrant to the United States from Sweden. His letter is so unusual and so impressive that I ask unanimous consent to have it printed in the Appendix of the Recorp. There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the Rscorp, as follows: LeSurur, Minn., January 13, 1951. Hon. Enwarp Tirvs, Senate Chambers, Washington, D.C. My Dean Mn. Ture: The reason for this letter 1s that the country ts in a mess and may be in @ worse one unless something can be done. What I write may do no more good than grandmother’s onion poultice of long ago. Wa need to get ready and also stay ready for many years. We need to conserve man- power. We need to find if our people will adjust themselves to go without many things, work harder for less and produce more with less manpower, and yet pay more taxes; all to the purpose of staying solvent. To do this we need to live democracy, not glibly talk about it. We must reinstate responsi- bility to the country fm all citigens, not con- tinue to make the country responsible for the people. Self-government imposes obliga- tions on everyone-—something that is often forgotten. To be free does not mean to APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD have license to do what one wished at all thnea—there must be regard for others. Our foreign policy as of today should be: Keep ourselves free and strong without im- posing our will on others; help those who gre willing to help themselves and us to keep free, not by words but by deeds; im- prove the functioning of the UN (set up mllitary force) so that it can do its work— assure peace, If there is a will to do this, it can be done Without national insolvency or ourselves be- coming a dictatorship. We must keep a sense of proportion. We are only 7 to 100 in world population. We should conduct our affairs eo that the rest of the people will choose our way of doing things. Then they will help us protect ourselves in common. We cannot garrison the world, We have neither the will nor the manpower. Some 40 years ago I felt Sweden partly on account of forced military training, adopted by that country as a protection. Today, I am convinced that we should ask every young man to accept this obligation in this country as our safest way to avoid de- struction, financially or militarily. A large standing army will prove so wasteful over the years as to endanger solvency, as well as tend to divide us. Universal training will give all availoble strength at all time, as in periods of stress it can be augmented by a fatr process of draft of those who have served. It should be possible to keep the cost of this training within reasonable limits, and also set up safeguards as to its use. The physical fitness could be started in the schools, and 13 an asset in peace as well. After high school the defense services could give the required training for a balanced de- fense, with refresher courses for a few years to remind them to keep fit. When the world situation improved the military training could be curtailed, but the fitness program would still be valuable. There would be about a 6 months’ gap in the flow of stu- dents to the colleges, depending on length of the first training period. If the program is to continue for many years, as it seems now, it must be Impartial, all contribute and share the dangers and burdens equally, or thore will never be unity and wholehearted effort. The drait and exemptions are subject to too many errors or outright fraud. The prob- Jems of the colleges must be secondary, if we really are in danger and the whole thing ts not a political expedient. Of primary tm- portanco is a system that is {mpartial, sup- plies the men when needed with the best training and in best condition, with the least dislocation of the national economy. Therefore, the best time ts after school, #9 that college or life work can be started after the initial period, and the refresher courses come during vacations. This would stagger work for both the schools and the services, 80 that less installations would be needed. In this way there would be the least interruption in getting higher train- ing, except in times of stress, and that would be true no matter what system were used, Above all, we must face the fact that we cannot diaplace communism by war. Proper individual and national conduct of affairs, coupled with faith and devotion, are more important. Then we can spread ideas that will win for us where bullets do only harm. In the meantime, we should keep strong so that no bully can overtake us or our friends. Now, what should we do? 1. Adopt some form of UMT until the UN fe ready, using a draft in addition if need be. I have served on the local board and am doubtful as to the selective part. The UMT 1s impartial. The services will have to get used to taking and using substandard men, That is the safest way to give us unity and enough men for all services. The older must get into thelr life work to keep the economy going. There is no sense in having protection if there is nothing to protect,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD 2. Let anti-Communist Chinese do what they can, with our supplies and technical help-~no massed manpower, Our part to keep the Pacific open. 8. Assist Europe when those nations have shown determination to help themselves and do their share in actual accomplishments. If the people there are apathetic, we risk more than it ts worth for them or us. 4. Conclude peace with Germany, Japan, and Austria, ignoring Russta if necessary. 5. Get Japan back in production to help stabilize Asia. 6, Keep Red China out of the UN, and drop Russia if need be to get things done. Russia has not acted In good faith and Red China is not behaving any better. Given time, the Russian people will overthrow the present rulers. With intelligent help, they can do it earlier. If we adopt a policy of live and let live, even if our living standards should drop for a time, the people there will know we are not only talking. There are enough DP's in Europe to let some of our ideas through the curtain. Giving something for nothing is not helping as much as helping people to help themselves. That should be our real foreign policy. 7. When it comes to setting up of national policy for the present emergency, we should be careful so as not to start another war in the future. There is much in the world his- tory to hint that quotas, supports, and other means to protect certain groups or peoples may lead to such states and pressures that war results. These supports lead to higher prices—lers people can enjoy the items pro- tected—with envy and hate easily engendered by political opportunists. Our policy should be to encourage competitive cooperation 60 that prices can come down, with better living for more people. That is the only way to a possible permanent peace. By a competitive cooperation I moan competition among groups to improve production by cooperation among groups to improve the means of pro- duction—i. e., exchange processes and pat- ents There is no better way to give the world population what it needs until human relations are better. In this respect the ag- ricultural program here must be watched. A rather long letter, but there are s0 many angles. Yours very truly, Swan Ericson, M. D, Civilian Defense Activity in Manchester, N. H. EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. STYLES BRIDGES OF NEW HAMPSHIRE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 8 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. BRIDGES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an account of a recent civilian defense activity in the State of New Hampshire. There being no objection, the account was ordered to be printed in the Rzcorp, as follows: The following is a report of what can be done by a civic-minded business organiza- tion in civilian defense planning and prepa- ration. Recently the residents of Manchester, N. H., witnessed a demonstration by a mobile disaster emergency relief unit which had just been established by the N. G. Gurnsey Distributing Co., of Manchester, Modeling their equipment after that of the P. Ballantine & Sons large mobile disaster relief units, the Gurnsey Co, showed how the trucks of any private company could be equipped at no sacrifice of usual service to deal with an emergency. Blankets, stretchers, tools, first-aid kits, flares, portable lights, ropes and ladders pro- vided by the Gurnsey Co. converted their delivery trucks for services as evacuation vehicles, ambulances and first ald stations, ane drivers are all Red Cross-trained in first Rear Adm. Miles R. Browning, (USN, Ret.), State Coordinator of Civilian Defense, was among the many officials and industrial lead- ers of New Hampshire who witnessed the demonstration. Already other firma in other cities in New Hampshire are adopting similar plans and are preparing their own trucks as units of the New Hampshire civilian defense, Mr. Carl Badenhausen, president of P. Ballantine & Sons, first concetved the idea of civilian disaster units last May. They have been at the call of the New Jersey authori- ties twice already, in the South Amboy ex- plosion and during the recent hurricane. These units are now enrolled in the civilian defense structures of New Jersey and New York. They also exist in Washington and in Boston, Several similar units are planned in other cities in the near future. Recognition of the Marine Corps EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. DONALD L. JACKSON OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 8, 1951 Mr. JACKSON of California. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my own remarks in the Recorp, I should like to include two resolutions adopted by the twenty-fifth Patriotic Conference on National Defense, held at the Statler Hotel here in Washington from Jan- uary 25 to 27 last. The many Members of the House and Senate who have in- troduced measures to accomplish the ends set forth in the following resolu- tions, welcome the support of the great organization, whose spendid work in the field of national defense has done much to spur production and to rekindle the spirit of patriotism and devotion to country. As one of the sponsors of the proposed Marine Corps legislation, may I assure the resolutions committee and the mem- bers of the Patriotic Conference on Na- tional Defense that we shall continue in our efforts to obtain early hearings on the subject matters of the resolu- tions, and that we welcome their assist- ance in carrying the message back to their respective organizations. The resolutions read as follows: RECOGNITION OF THE MARINE Corrs Whereas the Marine Corps has demon- strated ite efficiency, loyalty, and capability in the defense of our country since 1775; and ‘Whereas the Marine Corps is a part of the United States Navy, trained in naval as well gas other military strategy and tactics, hav- ing as their specialty amphibious landings in warfare; and A671 Whereas the Marine Corps has no repre sentation on the Joint Chiefs of Staif, ex- cept directly through the Chief of Naval Operations; and Whereas it is the consensus of opinion of this body that such reprcsentation is essential to the proper planning of any of- fensive or defensive action proposed or con- sidered by our Armed Forces; and Whereas the Commandant of the Marine Corps, by virtue of his position and train- ing, is the logical and proper person to so represent his branch of the service and its specialty, the amphibious phase of warfare: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Twenty-Fifth Women’s Patriotic Conference on National Defense do hereby endorse and heartily support all bills and/or resolutions introduced in the Con- gress of the United States to make the Com- mandant of the Marine Corps a permanent member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. STRENGTHENING OF MARINE Conps Whereas the Marine Corps has been, and is, an efficient fighting force of the United States and the firat combat group to be called on for service outside the limits of the continental United States in time of hostility or other emergency requiring force and arms; and Whereas the recent peacetime history of the Marine Corps is replete with attempts to diminish the number of its personnel be- yond a point requisite for the safety and welfare of our country; and Whereas a permanent personnel strength within the Marine Corps of 400,000 persons is considered essential to the safety and security of our country: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Twenty-fifth Women’s Patriotic Conference on National Defense endorse and bind itself to support those Members of the United States Senate and House of Representatives who have intro- duced bills and/or resolutions in either House of Congress to fix the personnel strength of the Marine Corps at 400,000 per- sons; be it further Resolved, That copies of this resolution be sent to the President of the United States, the Secretary of National Defense, and all Senators and Members of the House of Representatives. Possible Big Four Meeting EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THOMAS J. LANE OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 7, 1951 Mr, LANE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I wish to include the following regular Tuesday broad- cast, The Christian Science Monitor Views the News, over the American Broadcasting Co, network, which ap- peared in the Christian Science Monl- tor: ‘ Tux Door Is Str. Oren-——-Down THE Mippun oY THE Roap (By Erwin D. Canham) Soviet Russia has answered the last Allied note concerning a possible meeting of the Big Four. Its note left open the door to a meeting, but there are still major points to fron out. The big new fact is that Moscow is willing to discuas matters other than the arming of
A672 Germany, as the Allies had demanded, 4l- though tt insists that the German question must come first on the list. Perhaps this attitude is partly a result of softening policy on the arming of Western Germany. It was apparent from General Eisenhower's statements last week that the United States is not proceeding heedleasly with the preparation of German unite in the European Army. Russian warn- ings against such action have been taken seriously. Moreover, German disinclination to participate—except, perhaps—on extor~ ttonate terms, was an element in slowing up ‘Waahington's pressure for arming the Ger- mans. This easing of the situation on German armament is very encouraging. That situa- tion was one of the most difficult_and dan- gerous elements in the world picture. But the United States, under General Eisen- hower's apparent influence, seems now to have put Germany last on the list. This was only realistic, since we are far from being ready with enough war material to supply the western Allies in the immediate future. Our threat to arm the Germans—a threat which the Germans themselves greeted with @ mixture of alarm and bargaining seal— was an obvious response to the Russians’ act in arming the East Germans. We are therefore perhaps in a bargaining position ourselves, if and when the Big Four meeting ig ever held. The cruoial question is whether, tf the Western powers drop their plans for arming Western Germany, the Russians will reduce or disband thetr already well-armed German police army in the east. At any rate, Russian policy has now moved somewhat closer to Allied policy concerning the possible Big Four meeting. The door is still open, and it is up to state-craft to see 1° something substantial can pass through the portals. Nobody has much optimism about the results of such a meeting, but all rational men are glad that meetings can still take place, and that all contacts have not been broken off. , One reason for the present Russian wil- lingness to meet is revealed in the results of a public opinion poll in West Germany made public in Frankfurt at the meeting of American diplomats. The Germans were asked which would be better for them: to join the West politically and militarily, or to try and unify Germany and remain neu- tral. While 44 percent favored linking with the West, 41 percent chose unity and neu- trality. ‘This shows pleinly that if Russia at a Big Four meeting proposes unity and neutrality, which it is almost certain to do, it would have strong support even in West Germany. It 1s emphasised on the other hand that an overwhelming majority of the Germans oppose communisny They oppose being @rawn into a trap with the East German Communist state. But they manifestly fear that rearmament will make them the frst victims of a possible war. Their viewpoint is thoroughly understandable. The fifth and last of the atomio explosions has shaken Las Vegas. The Atomic Energy Commission says it hes concluded its expert- ments for the present and is completely satisfied with the resulta. This blast was sighted by television from Los Angeles, and in Boise, Idaho, 500 miles away. It te evident that these explosions are diplomatic and political as well as atomic and experimental. And the chain reaction they set up in Moscow may he even more vivd than the view from Las Vegas. They are blunt warning at a time when the physi- cal strength of the West in other areas has yet to be mobilized. In Eorea, however, the strength of the UN forces continues to manifest iteelf, There are many signs that the Communist resistance has become much stiffer, and a major counteroffensive may be launched goon. But General Ridgway's troops are sure of themselves; they are extorting a tremen-~- ‘dous toll of the Communists; and they seem quite able to maintain their positions and to make small gains. How long this eort of thing can continue remaing to be seen. We are grinding the pick of the Chinese armies to pleces at little manpower cost to the UN forces. There would seem to be every reason why Peiping would be willing to negotiate. And yet it is not. Presumably the Russians are supporting Obina in every way to continue this involvement of American troops. But it is obviously a bad business for the Chinese, and—in its way—for the United Nations. Yet the UN oan take satisfaction in its struggle to reeist and punish aggression, and to uphold the goal of collective security. Questions and Answers in Which the Public Is Intensely Interested EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HAMILTON C. JONES OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 8, 1951 Mr. HAMILTON C. JONES. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my re- marks in the Recorp, I am inserting a reprint of a radio broadcast over radio station WBT, Charlotte, N. C., which was made the early part of this week. As these questions are being propounded to Representatives throughout our great Nation, I am taking the liberty of in- serting these questions and answers in the Appendix of the Recorp: 1. What do you think of General Eisen- hower’s report to Congress? Answer. I was very much impressed by General Eisenhower's report to the Congress realizing that he had to be very guarded in the remarks to us. It would bave been de- cidedly unwise for him to make any dis- closures that would show Russia any vital part of the program which the United Na- tions plans for the settlement of the crisis with Korea. The information he furnished us could not be used in any strong or lengthy argument by the Members of Con- gress, but it was such as to tmpress this most distinguished body of the stupendous task that he had undertaken and the very prac- tical and serious wey that he had gone about a solution of preparing the United Nations countries for any emergencies. 2. How do you feel about drafting 18-year~ olds? Answer, The question of drafting 18-year- olds has probably produced more difference of opinion by people who are absolutely con~ cerned over the welfare of this Nation than any other question before the United States at the present time. It is very plain that if young men at this early age are drafted they should not be sent into combat service until they have been in training for at least 1 year. This is in strict conflict with the Govern- ment's plan as announced by General Mar- aball and may be considered impractical, but these are my views at the present. There is another complexity to the situation in that it would be a serious handicap to the boy's education who would reach 18 in the middle of his graduating year and be drafted at that time, preventing his continuing his course for 6 months longer until he could complete his course. This might result In many hoys not completing their education at all. It APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD may be that General Eisenhower ts right when he says that it does not make a great amount of difference if the boys are drafted at 18 or 19, providing they are not drafted at & inter age. 8. How do you feel about taxes? Answer. I feel that our taxes should not be increased any more than is necessary to adequately arm our three branches of the service so that we may resist any dangerous aggression on the part of Russia. And cut as much, as is possible, expenditures for non- military purposes. Having spent so much in preparation, we should try to cut all we can in unnecessary civilian expenses. 4. Do you feel we can effect some economy in nondefense spending? Answer. I do fee] that some economy can be effected .n nondefense spending which was indicated by a provision in the last ap- propriation bill providing for a $6,000,000,000 cut in civilian expenses, 5. How do you feel about prices and wage controls? Can they be effected? Answer, I feel that price and wage con- trols wiil be effected, but that they need ad- jJustment at the present time which can only be effected through trial and experience. If properly carried out, the program should have a strong effect on stabilizing our econ- omy and controlling inflation as much as possible. 6. Regarding the international situation, how do you feel about withdrawing our troops from the Far East in order to strength- en Europe? Answer. I would not be opposed to with- Grawing our troops from the Far East if the effect was to strengthen the military set-up of our country and to bring us nearer to a permanent peace. But just how and on what terms our troope ere to be withdrawn de- serves careful consideration by our chiefs of staf and should be done in such 8 way as to Maintain the preatige and honor of the United States of America. 7. Do you feel an international army in Europe under General Eisenhower would be & real deterrent to the Reds should they decide to attack in force through Western Europe? Answer. I do feel that an international army in Europe unde. General Eisenhower would be a real deterrent to the Reds should they decide to attack in force through West- ern Europe. 8. Do you feel we are doing enough finen- cially and diplomatically in Europe to coun- teract Communist propaganda? Answer. I would say without trying to analyze just what is being done to counter- act Communist propaganda in Europe that too much could not be dane in this direction and until communtam ts beaten down in this strategic area, a permanent pence cannot be attained. 9. What should our future strategy be in Europe? Answer. Our future strategy in Europe should be left to the decision of our chiefs of staff in the United States 12 collaboration with military leaders of all the countries rep- resented in the United Nations. 10. Should we continue to fight in the United Nations for sanction against Red China? Answer. I am satisfied that we should cone tinue to fight in the United Nations for sanc- tions against Red China as I am satisfied that they are plainly the aggressors in the Korean confiict and have no reason whatscever in inflicting themselves into the armed conflict between the United Nations on one hand and the North Koreans on the other. 11, How do you feel ebout the atomic bomb and should we use it? Answer. The knowledge of the atomic bomb is of great defense power to the United States and the other countries of the United Nations and is probably the main reason that the Russians have not been more aggressive
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD and threatening to the Americans than al- ready, Although her conduct hes been quite disreapectful and intimidating and at times threatening, I do not believe that the atomic bomb should be used as an offensive weapon under present circumstances as the use of same might immediately precipitate a war, 12, How do you feel about Russia and the atomic bomb? Do you believe Russia can match ws in atomic research? Answer. I do not believe that Russia can match America in atomic reserve and that ehe is getting more and more behind Amer- ica than ahead of her. I consider this the principal reason that Russia has not already attempted to humiliate us in a positive way or opened war on the United States and the Nations that are friendly to us. 18. Do you believe that Russia has the atomic bomb? Answer. Frankly, I do not believe that Ruseia has the atomic bomb in the sense that America has. I have good reason to feel that she has not had the time nor means to perfect the atomic research in any manner comparable with that of the United States. In other words, it is my belief that they lack both the knowledge and the funds with which to produce an atomic bomb in the least comparable to the atomic bomb now being produced by the chemists and workmen in America. Freedom of Information EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HUBERT H. HUMPHREY OF MINNESOTA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Ghursday, February 8 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr, HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a statement by Mr. Carroll Binder, United States representative, in the Committee on Freedom of Information, on the Pre- amble of the Freedom of Information Convention submitted by the U. 8.58. R., be printed in the Appendix of the Recorp. There being no objection, the state- ment was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Mr. Chairman, I should iike to comment on the remarks of the distinguished repre- sentative of the Soviet Union concerning the preamLle of this convention. Those of us who had been following this subject for the past 3 years see in this text the same old Soviet arguments, and indeed we could have anticipated almost all of them. I do not think {t is necessary to present any de- tailed analyses of the real significance of the text he has proposed, but it may be of some usefulness to examine its relationship to the actions of the Soviet Union during the past 8 years. Now the Soviet preamble begins on the premise—the false promise—that freedom of the press can only be secured {if the prees ig free from pressure and dictation exercised by private publishing monopolies, trusts and syndicates. This is not the place nor the time to engage in an argument over the mertts of the private enterprise press sys- tem, In another forum I would be delighted to engage in such a discussion with the dele- gate of the Soviet Union. But I do want to point out that the proposition he now puts before us ignores the greatest monopoly of all, the monopolistic, all-powerful Soviet in- formation system. It ignores the elementary XCVII-—App.——-43 fact that there can be no semblance of a free press if a government, through a rul> ing party or otherwise, completely controls all press and information activities. In the Soviet Union these activities are conducted under the pressure and dictation exercised by the Soviet Government. It is therefore obvious that there is no freedom of the press in the Soviet Union. This fact is worth repeating now only if there are those who still find it poasib.e to maintain that freedom of the press means complete and rigorous censorship by the state, that free- dom of speech means freedom only to praise an absolute dictatorship, that freedom to receive information means freedom to be indoctrinated, without choice, in the dogmas of a single ruling party and to have access to no other sources of information. But there is another aspect of this Soviet line that is somewhat more subtle. It is the thesis that there are principal tasks in the dissemination of information. Now this concept that the prcss must carry out cer- tain “tasks” has had a certain allure for the unwary. From the premise that organs of information are a powerful means of influencing public opinion, they have been tempted to conclude that these organs should carry out certain tasks, that is, that they have a certain set of prescribed func- tions in the interest of soctety. ‘ At this point one mig’it logically inquire: Who is to assign these tasks? Who ts to be the taskmaster to see that the tasks are carried out? In practice this can only be done, and in fact is only being done, by governments which have assumed the power to control the press. In essence then, the tasks which are assigned to the press are those which further the policies and objec- tives of those governments. Of course there are some who would contend that the press can assign itself such ‘asks. But in prao- tice this would require, at least, control by @ political party; and again we would not have a free press as we know it, Mr. Chairman, the press does have one great responsibility. It is the responsibility to seek the truth and to report its findings as comprehensively and objectively as possi- ble. The press succeeds in promoting desir- able social, economic and political ends only to the extent that it succeeds in providing the general public with available facis and opinions and thus enables them to reach thelr own decisions. But it ts not the func- tion of the press to become an advocate or dispenser of party lines or governmental policies. It is not the function of the press to indoctrinate the reading public. Now, I would like to turn to the tasks which are set forth in the Soviet preamble. The dissemination of truth and objective information is of course a favorite objective of the Soviet Union. In the context of this preamble and of the political line which the representative of the Soviet Union has laid down this really means the dissemination of such information as the government con- siders truthful and objective. This can be the truth or half-truths or complete falee- hoods. If it is in the tnterest of the policy and grand strategy of a government to assert that the Republic of Korea attacked the North Korean regime, then the press of that government disseminates this as a fact, even in the face of conclusive evidence, accepted by the rest of the world, that precisely the opposite is true. Another favorite task of the Soviet Union, of course, is the development of friendly re- lations among states based upon respect for the principles of the Independence and sov- ereign equality of nations and the achieve- ment of the lofty purposes of the United Nations. And once again the government aasigning these tasks decides what nations ere worthy of being treated as independent and sovereign equals and what the lofty pur- poses of the United Nations should be. I A673. hardly think tt necessary to cite any exame ples of the way in which the Soviet Union has carried out this great task, There is hardly 8 nation represented around this table that has not been the object of the Soviet Union's tender solicitude as expressed in this task of the Soviet press. Another great task of the press as set forth in this Soviet preamble is to promote the ap- pitcation of meseures against propoganda and the inciters of a new war and the coun- tering of any propaganda of aggression capa- ble of creating a threat to the peace or a breach of the peace. Now, the Soviet Union has labored long and hard to promote this notion. When this iesue is presented in the United Nations, the effect always has been to pose the question, are you against war? It presumes the answer, yes, whereupon the reply ts, “then you must support action curtailing propaganda which threatens to disturb the peuce.” The question is pre- cisely the same as that posed by the familiar joke, used frequently in America and per- haps in other countries: “Have you stopped beating your wife yet?" I am sure we need waste no time puzzling over the answer to the Soviet question. The root of the issue lies in the fact that this Soviet task poses the problem of who is going to decide what constitutes propagan- da for war and aggression. Once again the Government is the taskmaster, and to en- force tts decisions {t would resort to cen- sorship and suppression of ‘news whenever it was in its interest to do so. Once again the Soviet formula for Itberty becomes prison for free minds. But I think the time has come to take a good, hard look at this proposition from another angle. Obviously, we can assume that all peoples are against war and against propaganda for aggression. But what has been the real objective of the government which has labored so hard to promote this Proposition? I suggest that an interesting answer to this would be provided if one were to plot on a chart the dates when these propositions were being urged in the United Nations and elsewhere, together with the dates when certain violent events were tak- ing place, or about to take place—events in which these same governments were, shall ‘we say, not exactly disinterested. Note, for example, the timing of the first raising of this issue in the UN in the General Assembly of 1947 in relation to the violent assault on the independence of Greece. Note the timing of the repeat performances on antiwarmongering resolutions in the UN in relation to the Berlin blockade, and sev- eral other points of international tension during the past 2 years Note the timing of the false and treacherous Stockholm ap- peal in relation to recent events in Korea. Mr. Chairman, I do not wish to push this exercise too far, but I do suggest that these coincidences are rather interesting. The point is, Mr Chairman, how long shall we go on being the dupes in this treacherous game? Once more we are asked, Are you against war and the spreading of war propa- ganda? This may still be a legitimate ques- tion, but are we the ones who are called upon to answer it or is an answer forthcoming from the questioner? Mr. Chairman, this game has many aspects and ramifications. The Stockholm appeal, now somewhat more presentably disguised, has become the com-~ mon-front device of the 1950's. It is a stealthy new device for entrapping the un- wary, the confused, and the alarmed people who have a real horror of war and securing their innocent collaboration. It is the new tactic of infiltration and intrigue. In East- ern Europe, a succession of laws have re- cently been promulgated for punishing the propagation of war or incitement to war. @ puppet regime of East Germany has already demonstrated how this law ts to be used as a device to blackmail the weak and
A674 the unwary in West Germany into collabora- tion with the party Ine. Mr. Chairman, these tactics may continue to be successful, they may snare those who dare not voice their suspicion and fears, they may snare those who are not in pos- session of the facta, But, I repeat, 1s it still incumbent on us to play along with this game? We cannot plead ignorance of the facts. We need not gtve any further testi- mony of our desire for peace and genuine cooperation for the ends which the UN was established to serve. It is not we, but they who must now give some concrete evidence of these same intentions, That is why I do not consider it necessary to give any further consideration to proposi- tions of this nature. The United Nations has already gone on record. It is now time for those who have promoted these propo- sitions to go on record. Individualized War Against Red Leaders EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. STYLES BRIDGES OF NEW HAMPSHIRE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 8 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. BRIDGES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an article entitled “The Eventful Present: Indi- vidualized War Against Red Leaders,” by Arnold Perreton, of Concord, N. H., as it appeared in the Manchester Union Lead- er of January 27, 1951. I believe the article may be of interest to Members of the Congress. There being no objection, the article ‘was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Tur EvENTFUL PRESENT—INDIVIDUALIZED WAR Agausst Rep Leapers (The article below was written expressly for the Union Leader by Arnold Perreton, of Concord. Mr. Perreton is well known as an architect and planning consultant.) The United Nations is faced today with the critical problem of how to prevent the pre- cipitation of World War II between the Soviet Union and the free nations. So far the Korean crisis has precipitated confusion among all leaders and people. Confusion reigns in the midst of impending great danger. It is now a well known fact that the rulers of the Soviet Union are determined to de- atroy the free nations and to win domina- tion over all people tn the whole world, Un- less we can defend it in time we face the possibility of the eventual fall of Japan and Europe. With ample war plants in Europe, Japan and its own hidden areas in Russia, along with immense military supplies, abun- dant resources and manpower, the Soviet Union will be able to concentrate on us from almost all directions. We pride our- selves on our vastly superior war produc=- tion capacity to defend ourselves, But we must also face the very likely possibility of extenaive sabotage and subversive activities in our poorly defended midst. Mighty France of World War II fell in 40 days and we may also have a similar fate. Realizing this, a frenzied rush of delayed ‘war production is on the way. Confiscatory tax measures and conscription of all man- power are ours to face. Alarmed at our scope of war preparation, it will also spur the Soviets to even greater effort of preparation; and a race of war preparation of a magni- tude inconceivable by man may result. Our preparation of war, possible efforts at counter revolution and mass defense against aggres- sion will also present the Soviets with the golden opportunity to use it as excellent hate propaganda to consolidate her people and strength. A war between two giants, leading to ultimate exhaustion and stalemate is a definite possibility. Continued chaos, joss of individual security and freedom over the whole world is ours to face. If mass preparation and war will lead to chaos, what tactics can we use to make @ quick end to war? How are the Soviets vul- nerable? The Soviet Union has a totalitarian Com- munist structure in which the rulers, mem- bers of a minority Communist Party, doml- nate and hold the majority of people: in com- plete subjection to the state. The strength of the rulers is perpetuated by maintaining a state of fear and consequent obedience by all people. The weakness of the rulers rests on their own fear of revolt by the people. The strength and weakness of the Soviet Union is therefore based on fear. How can we capitalize on this fear? What precedent do we have for dealing with fears provoking totalitarian rulers? A few short years ago World War II was fought. On termination of the war, after many thousands were Killed and billions were spent, an international tribunal was created to try the heads of a nation for starting a war and for committing outrages in violation of international law. Two new principles were established by the convictions, namely: (1) That starting and waging aggressive war was declared to be a crime for which individ- uals were responsible, and (2) that violation of the laws of war such as extermination of civilians and the enslavement, deportation, and torture of prisoners were crimes for which individuals were responsible even when done under orders of a superior. Here then is our clue, our basic tactic for combating and counterattacking the evils of totalitarian communism. For, haven't we sufficient evidence already of extensive vio- lation by the rulers and leaders of the Soviet Union? Why must we now engage in an- other exhaustive mass war before we can apprehend these few rulers and leaders? In- stead of conducting a mass war against the Soviet nation, why not conduct an individ- ualized war against only the rulers of the Soviet Union and the leaders of the Commu- nist Party; and invoke the support and re- volt of the subjected Soviet people? To instrument an individualized war against the rulers and leaders of the Soviet Union, the United Nations must be author- ized to— 1. Suspend the representative members of the Soviet Union to the United Nations on the grounds of suspicion of having vio- lated the principles of international law and having misused and discredited the United Nations by their conduct at its sessions. 2. Appoint an international tribunal to collect evidence of violation and prepare a case against the individual violators, and to summon them to stand trial. 8. Declare a state of war against all in- dividual violators and members of the Com- munist Party in case the summons to stand trial are ignored and war activity is con- tinued. No war shall be declared on the Soviet Union as a nation or any of its satel- lite nations. 4. Organize an international espionage— police force to effect the capture or elim- ination of each individual violator and leader of the Communist Party. Furthermore, all sessions of communistic controlled govern- ment, and communistic meeting and public Tallies shall be reported and subjected to bombing of required scope. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD 8. Organize a propaganda force to invoke the aid of all non-Communist Party mem- bers in Soviet Union to assist in the cap- ture and elimination of individual violators; and to invoke the subjected people to revolt from the Communist-controlled govern- ment, The free nations must be authorized to— 1, Seize and imprison every known mem- ber of the Communist Party within the boundaries of its nation on the first evidence of any sabotage or incident of disorder. 2. Maintain a civilian defense force to de- fend all power installations, water-supply areas, and war-defense plants from any at- tempts at sabotage; and to provide the nec- essary help and protection in case of dis- order, attack, and bombing. 3. Maintain a military force of Army, Navy, and Air to participate in only the defense of any and all areas of aggression by the Soviet Union. Penetration within the boun- daries of the Soviet Union for the purpose of bombing military supply bases, war pro- duction plants, transportation facilities, and oll fields is to be construed here as a defense measure. As indicated by these principles, the offen- sive war by the United Nations will be con- ducted entirely against individual violators and not against the nation of people as a whole; and the defensive war by the free nations will be conducted only as a means of defense against sabotage and military aggression by the Soviet Union. It is con- strued here that with the gradual elimina- tion of the key violators and the adverse psychological effect on the remaining rulers and lenders of the Communist Party, the brain and heart of the Communist organiza- tion will be greatly endangered and a col- lapse of the Communist octopus will be in- evitable. The winning of the war, conse- quently, can be accomplished in a compara- tively quick, easy, and economical way. Instead of the necessity of waging war, however, the effective threat of the individ- ualized war may now be used as a poten- tial factor to negotiate peace. By the en- thuslastic manner in which all the people support this measure, they have now the op- portunity to indicate that the prospect for the success of totalitarian communism in the advanced free nations is slight. Also, the rulers of the Soviet Union may be prevailed upon to perform a great good by fostering amongst their backward people the inevitable democratic growth and gradu- ally decrease their totalitarian control, and thereby enjoy the pleasure of seeing their creation serve a profound social need and, at the same time, live to an enjoyable and justi- flable old age. On the contrary, if the rulers and leaders are despotic inclined and mad men bent on the domination of the whole world, they can be eliminated by means of the individualized war as quickly as neces- sary. Whether for war or for peace, the instru- ment of individualized war presents to the United Nations the definite military policy to end the war and achieve and maintain everlasting peace. Since a mass war would inevitably lead to complete world chaos, the United Nations and all free nations must, therefore, be charged to supplement their preparation of mass-war tactics to include also the tactics of individualized war. With the danger of delay because of the confusion in the ranks of all leaders, it is the responsi- bility of the people to express their desire. Consequently, if the prinotples of individ- ualized war as outlined here makes sense and appeals to their better Judgment, each and every individual is enjoined to notify their Congressman, the President, and the delegate to the United Nations to adopt the principles of individualized war to make a quick end to war,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Draft Convention om Freedom of Information eee EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. HUBERT H. HUMPHREY OF MINNESOTA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 8 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, Mr. Carroll Binder, editorial editor of the Minneapolis Tribune, is one of the out- standing foreign affairs experts in America. Minnesota is proud of his ac- complishments, and particularly proud of the fact that he was a representative of the United States Government on the drafting of a Convention on Freedom of Information in the United Nations. It is a pleasure for me to ask unani- mous consent that a statement by Mr, Binder on January 17, delivered in the Special Committee of the General As- sembly on the Draft Convention on Free- dom of Information, be printed in the Appendix of the Recorp. There being no objection, the state- ment was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: My. Chairman, During the 3 years of United Nations debates on freedom of in- formation, my Government has had many opportunities to set forth its concept of this freedom and to suggest how !t might be ex- tended and safeguarded throughout the world. The record will show that the United States has been foremost among the govern- ments urging the United Nations to promote and protect this freedom everywhere, I shall confine myself now to matters which are directly relevant to the draft con- vention on freedom of information, I be- lieve it is essential that our respective at- titudes be made clear as possible at the outset in order that we may know from the beginning where we are heading. This ig especially important because the long de- bate which has already taken place in this document has, I believe, confused rather than clartfied the real issue. To dispel this confusion we must lay bare the basic need for freedom of information in the world today, The setting in which we meet is one in which freedom itself is under attack. It is not a new attack. Free- dom has been under constant, unremit- ting attack by totalitarian regimes—Nazl, Fascist, and now Communist—during much of the twentieth century. Use is made of every weapon—political intrigue, propaganda, and even military force. In this setting each one of us must ask ourselves these basic questions: Will our actions here add strength to the force of freedom? Are we likely to advance and pro- tect the principle of freedom of information? Or will our efforts evolve into a document which in effect will utilize the prestige of the United Nations to legitimize certain re- strictive governmental practices which do not now enjoy international respectability? I suggest that the answer to these questions should be the only determining factor in our work. Each of us must seek to answer them In the light of his own understanding of this freedom. I should, therefore, like to sum- marize the principles which my Government y believes should underlie any con- vention in this field. 1 shall attempt to do eo with all the candor which the subject warrants and I shall begin by asking: What is this freedom we are discussing? Freedom of information {s the basic come munioations system of a democratic society, and without it that society and that way of life cannot thrive. In my country, and in many other countries, it 1s the means by which common, every-day citizens seek and receive information about their work and about new methods of work; about their ltv- ing conditions, good or bad, and the reasons for them; about their local officials, their state government, and thetr National Gov- ernment. It is the process by which they reach their decisions and make them felt upon those who govern, #0 that their coun- try is ruled according to the wishes of the people. Therefore, when information ts in- adequate, when it 1s incorrect, when !t is false, the decisions of our society are warped and misshapen and the common good suffers, But freedom is not only essential to a balanced political life. It is the source of intellectual, cultural, and scientific strength and independence, The individual must be free to express his aesthetic feelings eaccord- ing to his own motivations and to explore every avenue of thought. Whether he is an architect or artist, an engineer or writer, a atonemason or a teacher, his country de- velops and flourishes in its own richness only insofar as he is enabled to develop his own talents to the limit of his capacity and in his own way. Freedom of information is the right of every person to have access to all available facts, {deas, and opinions regardless of source, and not only to the information ap~ proved by his government or any party, It is his right to test the official pronounce- ments of his government against the opin« iong of his fellow citizens, and those held by other peoples; his right to advocate his be- Mefs through organs of his choice. It is his right to state his frank opinion of his public officials, and those of other governments as well. It is his right to communicate freely with his fellow citizens, and with those of other nations. ‘We believe that the exercise of this free- dom is the inalienable right of every person. We believe that this freedom belongs to that relatively small but vital area of the demo- eratic process which must remain, as far as possible, immune from governmental Inter- ference. This is the absolute test of demo- cratic government. To the extent that the exercise of this freedom is not free, no other liberty is secure. Freedom of information, ]ike all forms of freedom, is subject to abuse and must, there- fore, be subject to certain restraints. But such limitations must never go so far as to impair the basic freedoms. A doctor never prescribes the abolition of food to cure a stomach ache, even though the food may be the direct cause of the discomfort. The doctor knows from long study and experience that there are certain specific remedies that will alleviate the local suffering without im- pairing the patient's basic health. Following this simple analogy, we believe that such limitations as must be imposed on freedom of information must evolve out of long and democratic experience in the use of this freedom. They must be such as to safeguard the maximum of freedom for each person. They must not be experimental in character, like regulations to control traffic in our streets, nor must they be applied to every transient irritant. They must always be subject to public criticiam and to review by impartial judictal authority. And finally, we believe that such limitatiors ag are neces- sary must, whenever poasible, operate after the fact, as a means of penalizing proven and serious abuses, and not as a prior gag on A675 freedom of . That ts our understand. ing of this freedom and its proper use. Now to some this concept may appear to be tmpractical, It will appear so if this freedom ts confused with less fundamental liberties, It will seem so to some governments which, for various reasons, do not consider their people capable of reaching sound conclus« jons in the light of all available facta, or to governments which feel that they cannot wait for the public to make up its mind. And, of course, this concept ts extreme and completely impractical for totalitarian sys- tema, since it is the strongest weapon against distatorship. But this is the only concept which my Government believes capable of promoting freedom of information, and therefore the only concept we can support. Now the debate which has taken place In the United Nations on this subject has shown. that there are, broadly speaking, three other main points of view with respect to this con. vention. There is, first of all, the totali- tarian view as exemplified by the Soviet Union, which does not believe in freedom of information. This view maintains that freedom of information is to be guaran- teed only to the extent thet it furthers the doctrines and objectives of communism as practiced in the U. 8. 8, R. This ts essen- tially the meaning of the guaranty set forth in the Soviet constitution. In practice the governments which support this view have created a vast information control apparatus for the indoctrination of their peoples in the, dogmas and dictates of the ruling party and. for insulating them against all contrary facts and opinions. \ ‘These governments are engaged in a terrify-' ing experiment to condition the minds of! hundreds of millions of persons in an at-; tempt to make them respond automatically to the commands of their rulers. In their hands information has been transformed from a means of enlightenment and under- standing into a political weapon taking any, form or shape required by the situation. It‘ has become a knife to assassinate reputa-' tions, a drug to dull the senses, or a poison to instill suspicion and fear. Of course, when they have sought support for their view in the United Nations, they have been careful to present it in the most disarming disguise. They have maintained that to promote friendly international rela. tions it is first necessary to define what in- formation is and then to suppress the dis- semination of anything which does not con- form to the definition. The suppression is, of course, to be accomplished by censorship and the definition is to be interpreted only by the government. With a few exceptions the United Nations has seen the danger in these proposals and I trust we shall not fail to do so now. Another view apparently assumes that the Teal danger to freedom of information today ig that it is abused by certain foreign cor- respondents and newspapers, Those who share this view seem to look upon this con- vention as a means of putting certain re- straints on the work of journalists. They are willing to include in the convention some general language about freedom of informa~- tion, but their primary concern seems to be to nelude certain specific curbs on journal- sts. This is, I believe, a short-sighted and dangerous point of view. This convention Was never, ag I understand it, intended to deal primarily or even directly with the work of journalists. I have understood its intent to be the promotion and protection of every- one’s right to freedom of information. To distort it into a punitive measure directed at journalists would certainly be a mockery of everything the United Nations has attempted
A676 to do in this field. We must realize that un- desirable checks placed on journalists would apply equally to artista and teachers, to lawyers and politiciane—and in the last analysis to people like ourselves drawn from every walk of life. Even if the grievances against some journalists and newspapers are assumed to be real, this is certainly too high & price to pay to settle a few scores. And finally there is what I have heard described as the middle view. This is the view which accepts the fundamental prin- ciples of genuine freedom of information, but it is preoccupied with ways and means of insuring that the freedom will be exer- cised responsibly and that abuses will be punished. It is dedicated to insuring re- sponsibility by law and apparently it is not especially concerned that those who will administer the law may also determine the real content and meaning of the freedom. Now the real danger posed by this view is its stress on the need and desirability of arriving at some sort of compromise among the other dominant points of view. Those who hold this view seek to harmonize the maximum of liberty with the highest degree of discipline, and while they shun the totalitarian conception of freedom, they do hot rule out the possibility of arriving at some sort of working agreement with at least some aspects of It. This is, in our opinion, the greatest danger facing this committee. Compromise is an essential part of the democratic process. The people of the United States have learned to regard it as the key to the successful func- tioning of their Government. My Govern- ment has on many occasions also demon- strated its willingness to apply it to its inter- national relations. But we must make 4 careful distinction between compromises re- lating to the way in which fundamental princtples are to be executed and compro- mises of the principles themselves. We are convinced that the fundamental principles of freedom of information can- not be the subject of compromise. We must, therefore, ask those who urge compromises what they propose to achieve by them. It ia obvious to all by now that the totalitarian states will not, and indeed they cannot, agree to any compromise as regards their basic doctrines. Clearly then, the likely result of a compromise in this area would be to weaken and dilute the democratic concept of freedom by pulling it down toward a lower common denominator. To seek compromises merely for the sake of reaching some sort of agree-~ ment, even among the nontotalitarian points of view, would hardly promote freedom. It is much more likely to restrict tt. There are those who sincerely feel that we must reach some agreement or the prestige of the United Nations will suffer. But it will suffer for more if we agree on measures which entail repressive limitations on free speech and the free press. I would summarize the position of the United States on this mat~- ter by saying that we are anxious to partici- pate in any effort to reach agreement on measures to further the cause of freedom of information. But we are strongly opposed to any compromise which is likely to en- Ganger that freedom, regardless of its moti. vation. T have felt it necessary to review frankly the background of this convention in order to make absolutely clear the frame of mind ta which my Government approaches the task before this committee. I must state with equal frankness that we do not believe that the cause of freedom of information will be furthered by an attempt to complete this convention now. The debates which have already taken place on this matter sug- gest that the convention, which was in- tended to advance this freedom, is more likely to restrict it. This ts not a hasty con- clusion, nor am I attempting to prejudge our work. It is a conclusion based on 3 years of discussion and negotiation, not only in formal committee meetings but in many ‘informal talks and in exchanges of views with a majority of the foreign offices of the members of the United Nations. Unless many governments have now changed their minds and will no longer press some of the proposals advanced in the past, it is dificult to see how we can hope to arrive at any agreement, let alone a constructive agree- ment worthy of the United Nations. My Government ts convinced that it would be far preferable to acknowledge that we have reached a temporary impasse and to await the development of the draft Interna- tional Covenant on Human Rights. The draft covenant now contains provisions in article 14 which, in our opinion, embody the maximum constructive agreement now at- tainable on this difficult subject. Moreover, we cannot see that this proposed covention would add anything of concrete and positive value to the guarantee now set forth in the draft covenant. But we do see clearly the prospect of adding undesirable limitations and restrictions. That is why I would urge this committee to recommend that this convention be held in abeyance until we have taken definite ac~ tion on the Covenant on Human Rights. Only then will we be in a position to deter- mine to what extent it might be possible to advance still more the cause of this freedom. And only then would we really know what it might be desirable to add to the guaran- tee contained in the covenant. This is not only more logical; it 1s also more realistic and practical. To proceed now with the com- pletion of a more specific convention would in our opinion, only add to the difficulties in the way of a successful covenant. We do not consider it necessary to attempt once more, and in a small group of the United Nations, to reconcile views which have not been reconciled over a period of 3 years in the United Nations as a whole. If the committee should decide nevertheless to make still another attempt, we must stand on the principles I have outlined. Mr. Chairman, we are a small group dis- cussing a subject which has already been debated at great length. As we sit here, momentous decisions are being considered by the United Nations and we are apt to feel that our work has no great significance, But our work is of the greatest significance and, what is more, it is related to the dis- cussions which are under way elsewhere in this organization. We live in @ world which, in terms of com- munciations, has been reduced to the size of what was once a small principality. The remarkable advances which have been made in the facilities for mass communications have created an instrument whose potential- ities for good or evil have never before been available. It is being utilized by a few gov- ernments as means of forceful persuasion and as a cloak for policies and actions which their peoples would never willingly accept if given a free and informed choice. Now, more than ever before, it is vitally impor- tant to see to it that all facts and opinion receive the widest dissemination in order that people everywhere may have a chance to seek the truth and to make up thelr own minds. We have a free choice. We can either face up to this great challenge and avoid any action which might hamper still more the spread of facts and ideas, or we can seek escape into the realm of purely verbal agree- ments which may only serve to strengthen the hand of those whose actions are respon- sible for the grave threat to world peace. I trust this committee will keep its eyes on the real jasue and not permit itself to add to the confusion and indecision which endanger the free world at this moment. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD This Way to Suicide EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. STYLES BRIDGES OF NEW HAMPSHIRE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 8 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. BRIDGES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an editorial entitled “This Way to Suicide,’ which . appeared in the January 22 edition of Life magazine. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: THs Way to Svuriciwe “If we build our strength—and we are building it—the Soviet rulers may face the facts and lay aside their plans to take over the world. That is what we hope will hap- pen, and that is what we are trying to bring about. That is the only realistic road to peace.” The foregoing words should be read and reread by every American, They were spoken last week by President Truman in his sixth Iessage on the state of the Union. On their face they are attractive and rea- sonable words. They reflect a hope of peace and a dread of war which endure in millions of human hearts. These words of the President occur in a message which, but for them, would deserve to be applauded as a fine and forceful speech, It may very well be argued that the Presi- dent's words are a useful concession to the universal desire for peace, a neceasary recog- een of the European and Asiatic state of mind. But these words of the President cannot be dismissed in so easy a fashion, They can- not be dismissed on any ground. The President has shown too many times that he believes in the capacity of the Soviet rulers to face the facts and lay aside their plans to take over the world, Mr. Truman's principal adviser on world affairs, Secretary of State Dean Acheson, has shown too many times that he believes in what he has chosen to call the possibility of coexistence, a cooperative peace, a coopera~- tive relationship with the rulers of Soviet coromunism, On the record the passage quoted here from the President's message must be taken for what it unquestionably ts—a considered restatement, made in all good faith and with full conviction, of the major conception and major purpose underlying American policy, THE FATAL FALLACY Taken for what they are, these words of the President are mistaken and dangerous. Taken for what they.are, these words de- mand the attention and the talents of all the participants in the great debate over United States policy, a debate which has explored almost every aspect of the subject except the corrosive and fatal fallacy which the Prest- dent preserved and restated, The nature of the fallacy is clear. The fallacy is that those whom Mr. Truman calls the Soviet rulers are capable of arriving, by their own decision, at a state of peace with the non-Communist world. There is no prospect whatever that they are capabie of doing so. Not so long as they are the Soviet rulers. Not so long as the system which drives them to their conquests, feeds their purposes and gives them their power is in being. Not so long as the vast complex of doctrine, nations, governments, parties and
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD men called Soviet communism is intact, un- defeated and undestroyed. Not until its power—tis inherent compulsion—to harags, agsault, and engulf the non-Communist world is effectively eliminated can there bo any chance of pence in the world. The defeat and abolition of Soviet Com- munist purpose and power are not enough; the forces of anticoommuniam must always have other and more positive objectives. But, to repeat, there can be no peace worth the name and no secure progress toward a better life and a better society everywhere so long as Soviet communism retains its power to obstruct all progress and to assault all non- Communist societies. THE FALSE CONCEPT Make no mistake: the President does not assume and require the defeat and dismem-~- berment of the Soviet system. The official author of this fatal fallacy, Mr. Acheson, has recently said in so many words that to sub- vert the Soviet Union—that is, to bring about the downfall of Soviet communism—is neither required for peace nor a proper pur- pose of American policy. When Mr. Truman speaks of enforcing peace through strength, he must, on the record of what he and his Secretary of State have sald, be supposed to mean peace with the present rulers of the present Soviet system. Many Americans do not need to be told that this concept is false. With their minds, in their hearts and in their bones they know that it is false. Many others would like to believe in the possibility that Mr. Truman says he believes in, Many Americans do believe in it still. But their number lessens. Events visible to all, and the actual behavior of the Soviet rulers, make any belief in the possibility of peace with the present rulers of the present Soviet system more unreal with every day that passes. There is something nightmarish in the spectacle of a President of the United States who at this late and awful hour refuses to perceive that the concept which he restated last week is false. There is something night- marish, too, in the continued presence at the President's right hand of a Secretary of State who has so long cultivated this pernicious fallacy. It is terrifying, it is wrong, that this proud priest of coexistence with Soviet com- munism, Dean Acheson, should still be in a position to shape the President’s most vital conceptions and statements of American policy. Here, Life once more submits, is a real and present danger to this Republic. So long as the nature, the purposes, and the capacities of our enemy are misunder- stood and underestimated st the very pin- nacle of American policy, what hope is there that our policy will make sufficient sense? What hope is there that American power will be fully and effectively mobilized? What hope is there that, once mobilized, it will be used to maximum effect and with ade- quate awareness of the tasks before 1t? What price the great debate over policy when the declared objective of our policy is founded upon so glaring a fallacy? This fallacy is a source of weakness—a cancer—which only the President can eradt- cate, He can eradicate it. He can at long last drive from his councils all who have sold and fed him on the pap of coexistence with Soviet communism. He can drive from his own mind, and drop from his utterances, the paralyzing illusion that the rulers of Soviet communism as it now exists can be persuaded to peace or foroed to. peace. He can perceive that the situations of atrength on which he relies can be effective only if they are used to bring about the dis- memberment of the Soviet Communist sys- tem as it now exists and to remove from the world the threat of Soviet power at it is now exercised, - He can perceive that peaceful, stable co- exlatence with Soviet communism is utterly imposaible. To hold that it is possible, as the President holds when he talks of forc- ing or persuading “the Soviet rulers” to “lay aside their plans,” ts to perpetrate a pietistic fraud. THIS PAODIGIOUS KVIL If coexistence with the present Soviet Communist syetem is impossible, is total war inevitable? Maybe so. Maybe not. Given the pres- sures resulting from a full recognition on our part of what must be accomplished and a full determination to accomplish it, the Soviet empire may start to change within and to crumble. No man can say just how the pure wickedness of Soviet communism will ultimately be banished from the earth, as some day it will be banished. But what no man has a right to say ts that we can live peaceably and happily with this prodigious evil, Meanwhile what must be said is that the Soviet empire, far from retreating, will con- tinue to expand unless it is opposed with all our strength and all our mind and all our will. That includes the steady, calm, and constant acceptance of the risk of all-out war. The President said last week that his chosen road—the road to a contrived peace with the present rulers of the present Com- munist system—is “the only realistic road to peace." It tg not a realistic road to peace. It is not a realistic road to anything. It is the road our enemy wants ut to take, It is the road to our defeat. It is the way to suicide. Proposed Assistance to India EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HERBERT H. LEHMAN OF NEW TORK IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 8 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. LEHMAN. Mr. President, in be- half of the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. Benton}, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the RecorD, an editorial entitled “India’s Need,” from the Washington Post of last Tuesday. The view of one newspaperman on the problem of India’s famine is summed up in a New York Times dispatch from New Delhi by Robert Trumbull, which I also ask to have printed in the Appendix. There being no objection, the editorial and article were ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: [From the Washington Post of February 6, 1951] Inpta’s Nexo Considerable misapprehension has arisen over the position of the Senate Foreign Re- lations Committee on relief of hunger in India. Senator CoNNALLY has done well to point out that nothing has been sidetracked for the reason that no legislation has been ted to the committee. It would be un- fortunate for the Indiana or anyone else to conclude that the Senate is cool to the pro- posal to send 2,000,000 tons of grain to India. AGTT What happened fs that Assistant Secretary of State George MoGhee went to the Senate last Friday to consult with a subcommittee headed by Senator Guerre and including Senators Winey, Fuurricmt, and Toary. Mr. MoGhee tald the Senators the facta of India's famine and added that the requistte amount of American grain and ships for transporting it are available, though some ships would have to be withdriwn from the reserve fest. If the situation in India ts as serious as it appears to be, the State Department had no course but to acquaint Congress with it now. This sort of consultation in advance of legislation is exactly what the Senate has clamored for. Apart from the very real influence of drought and earthquakes, India has wors- ened her situation, as we recently pointed out, by continuing to divert food cropland to jute production. She refused to buy grain from Pakistan when grain was avaliahie, and it is by no means clear whether she has made full use of her sterling balances in London to obtain dollars to buy food. Her trade war with Pakistan, az a correspondent notes elsewhere on this page, has continued unabated. The statement of the Indian Min- ister of Agriculture this month relative to attempt to atain self-sufficiency in cotton and jute at the expense of food production seems to ws a shocking piece of short~- sightedness. Regardless of n.istakes in policy, however, the fact is that famine impends. No large amounts of food are available from India’s neighbors, and if a catastrophe is to be pre~ vented, ald will have to be forthcoming from the United States. Congress should ask some hard questions about the man~ made factors in India's plight. But the food ought to be granted, and quickly. It would be # grave mistake for Congress in any way to connect the question of aid with Prime Miniater Nehru’s attitude toward Ko- rea. However unrealistic that atitude may be in our eyes, hunger and politics do not mix, and any attempt to assoclate them would do this country incalculable harm in Asia. {From the New York Times} Inv Stes Famine Wrrnovr Unirsp States Grain—Country Lacks Rexsrave, Foop Minister Says, EMPHASIZING DxEsPERATE SirvaTion (By Robert Trumbull) New Dewy, Inpia, January 28.—India’s central food reserve, which normally would be about 1,000,000 tons, are now down to zero, and, unless 2,000,000 tons of grain can be obtained from the United States on con- cessional terms, famine is virtually certain before the next crop is harvested in October, K. M. Munshi, Minister of Food and Agricul- ture, said today. With newspapers lying before him head- lining cold congressional reaction to Indla‘s request to Washington for help, the frail Food Minister’s tone was despairing. He declined to discuss the political aspects of India’s relations with the United States, which now turn on the Chinese situation, but dwelt on the cold figures that make India’s desperate food position plain. Elsewhere, however, indications are that 1f Congress rejects India’s pleas, friends of the United States in the Government—of whom Mr. Munshi is known to be one—will suffer a great loss of influence in the wave of anti-American feeling that is likely to arise Indian legislators, whose con- stituents are hungry. And this 1s India’s election year. [India’s request for 2,000,000 tons of wheats has been referred to Congreas by the State Department, The matter has been sent to committee, and the outlook for action by Congress appears wnfavorable.}
A678 ANTI-UNITED STATES PROPAGANDIATS BUSY The question in India is not one of buying India’s goodwill with food or of India’s threatening the United States with 111 will if grain is not forthcoming. What will hap- pen, it ia believed, will be the natural reac- tion of anyone who asks a prosperous friend for help in a desperate position and is re- buffed. In recent days, as reports have been pub- lashed here of the stand-offish attitude in Congress because of Prime Minister Jawa- harlal Nehru's urging of negotiations with Communist China on Korea and other Far Eastern problems, anti-United States propa- gandists, both Indian and foreign, have been exceptionally busy. Their first tactic was to point to published Washington reaction against a food loan or grant as proof that United States aid to needy peoples is merely a political bribe, False propaganda also has been made that the Soviet Union has offered large quantities of grin to India with no strings attached, SOVIET AID REPORTS DENIED This latter allegation 1s said by Govern- ment officiuls to be completely untrue. Rus- sia has never been an important source of food for India, Indian officials know of no surplus in the Soviet Union, and no Rus- sian offer has been made. However, there has been much informal and unofficial talk of prospective Soviet aid which responsible persons in the Indian Government are in- clined to put down as propaganda, since there have heen no formal approaches, India, in her present situation, would aecept grain from the Soviet Union or any- one else willing to make it available. That is official policy. Communist China's offer of 50,000 tons—-a negligible amount—on a har- ter was accepted, and 30,000 tons are being purchased from Bao Dai’s Vietnam, a Gov- ernment that India does not recognize. The food position, as outlined by Mr. Munshi in the interview today showed that the country was Hving, as he expressed it, “from ship to mouth.” Only 2 states out of 22—Punjab and Pepsu (Patiala and the East Punjab States Union)—are now rated as surplus areas becaur> of crop fallures elsewhere due to natural causes. They are expected to pro- duce about 300,000 tons beyond their own needs by April and May. This amount, which ia infinitesimal in a country that annually consumes 60,000,000 tons, will have to be spread over all the shortage areas. SOME WITHOUT FOOD FOR DAYS Wher a food ship is delayed a few days, which is a common occurrence, it means that some rationed area is without food for that period, unless reserves are in the imme- diate area for quick distribution. Such situations are handled by “pipeline” stocks constantly shuttled about the vast country from warehouses and railroad cars. India's pipeline contains 700,000 tons. This amount ts rock bottom. Normally, there would be another million tons or s0 available to the Central Government to take care of contingencies that continually arise and to provide a cushion. “Today,” said Mr. Munshi, “no such reserve exists,” This year India, at a high price in for- eign exchange, has contracted for 3,700,000 tons of grain from abroad, to arrive at the rate of about 300,000 tons monthly. Grant- ed that these imports arrive on time, this will in no way alleviate the tightness Sf the present situation. “For instance,” Mr. Mun- ahi said “290,000 tons are scheduled to ar- rive in February and already 280,000 tons have been allocated to the deficit state for that month.” Mr. Munshi indicated that the 32,000,000 tons asked from the United States were ur- gently necessary to maintain the vital pipe. line and keep the country’s head above water. “Without it,” he said, “a collapse in any one area would mean a national calamity.” He denied an assertion made in Wash- ington that India had refused to buy 600,000 tons of grain offered by Pakistan. Remit, Please! EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. EDWARD MARTIN OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 8 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. MARTIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an editorial entitled “Remit, Please!" which appeared recently in the Oil City (Pa.) Derrick. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: REMIT, PLEAsE! Corp. Earl Booth, of the Fifth Cavalry Division, has written to a collection agency in his home town of Louisville, Ky., enclos- ing a bundle of Korean currency as down payment on a $23.50 grocery bill. The corporal wrote: ‘T haven’t been paid since July, so don't have much American currency at present, “Iam most grateful to you for inform- ing me of the fact you are sending the cops after me. 1 will be very happy to see them because, you see, 1 am uo policeman myself, presently engaged in a police action for a force called the United Nations. “My police squad ts located in central Korea, and I am sure you have heard of our chief, MacArthur. “If you had sent the cops after me last August or September I would have been easy to Jocate in a hospital.” The collection agency gave the letter to the press, but didn't forget its business integrity. It sent Corporal Booth a receipt for the exchange amount represented by the depreciated Korean currency—American cash totaling 26 cents. Somewhere hidden in this little yarn is a@ moral, or maybe a couple of them, having to do with thousands of doughboys who are giving everything, and with some civilians who are taking everything. Welcome of Israeli Ambassador Abba Eban EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN MARSHALL BUTLER OF MARYLAND IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 8 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. BUTLER of Maryland. Mr. Pres- ident, on Saturday, February 38, Hon. Theodore Roosevelt McKeldin, Governor of the State of Maryland, welcomed the Israeli Ambassador to the United States on his visit to Maryland. Since I be- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD lieve that the Governor’s remarks are of interest to the entire Nation, as well as to the State of Maryland, I ask unani- mous consent that the Governor’s ad- dress be printed in the Appendix of the Recor. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Appress By Gov. THEODORE R, MCKELDIN It is no merely routine duty of office to welcome the truly distinguished Israeli Am- bassador to the United States, but I take it as one of the most congenial privileges that has fallen to my lot as Chief Executive of the State of Maryland. Even if Mr. Eban's great reputation as scholar, orator, and statesman had not been heralded before him, we should neverthe- less wish to greet with the greatest interest and friendiness the representative of the new State of Israel. The land of Israel is the focal point of religious interest of everyone in the vast assemblage, be he Jew or Christian. We have been nurtured from infancy upon the stories of the Bible; and the ground which consti- tutes the modern State of Israel is hallowed by the footsteps of the ancient prophets and seers and singers of Israel, and of our own Lord and His apostles. The very men- tion of the land of Israel, therefore, stirs us with emotion as does no other place on earth outside our own, native country. I am one of those Christians who believed completely and literally God’s promise to restore Israel to its ancient home. We re- Joice that it happened in our generation. We are filled with admiration for the valor and sacrifice of the small population of Is- rael which successfully withstood the attack of its more numerous enemies in the very hour of its birth. In the past two years we have been thrilled again and again by the magnitude of the successes they have achieved in the face of odds that would have spelled discouragement and failure for a less resolute people. We are proud that the United States, through the United Nations, had a part in establishing this new sister nation, thus fulfilling the Holy Bible’s sacred promise, and allowing a people whose spirit and ideals are so much like our own to join the world's family of great democracies When all this is symbolized for us in the person of Abba Eban, universally recognized, despite his youth, as a man of the highest intellectual powers, an accomplished scholar, an orator of renown and a statesman of the very first rank, I am double pleased to wel- come him most heartily to Maryland; and with you, my friends, I anticipate with pleas- ure, the message he brings us. The Rise in Coffee Prices EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. GUY M. GILLETTE or l0WA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 8 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. GILLETTE. Mr, President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Reoorp, an article entitled “Who Made the Money on Cof- ree?” published in Cosmopolitan maga- ne,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Rec- ORD, as follows: Wo MADE THE Monty on Correr?—Wnrar Is BESIND THE PHENOMENAL Rise in Correr Prtcts?—Tar Rea. ANswsz Wit AsTOUND anp ANGER You (By Leslie Gould) When {t comes mother’s turn to glance at the family newspaper, she generally doesn't have much time or even the inclination to look at the stories buried in the back section on the financial pages. That’s a pity be- cause, if she’d been reading those pages two summers ago, she might have got some warn- ing that once again the bite was about to be put on her purse. Maybe she couldn't hare done anything about it, but she would now know why she is paying over 75 percent more for coffee, and why father's noontime cup of java has gone from 5 cents to 10 or 15 cents, Those stories she missed—which, inciden- tally, didn’t contain a word of truth—paved the way for some brazen market manipula- tions by a small band of speculators. These manipulations have cost her 40 cents on each pound of coffee she buys. While the price of her coffee rose, she kept denouncing the corner grocer as a bandit because he was handiest, but she was pointing her finger at the wrong man. The corner grocer was tak- ing a bite, but his was just a measly nibble sompared to what others were grabbing from er, Within 10 weeks, behind-the-scene specu- lators in coffee—here and in South America— became richer by millions, and their uncon- scionable, artificial rigging of the market added six to seven hundred million dollars @ year to America’s annual coffee bill, or, roughly, around 825 a year for each coffee- drinking family. This increase can be added to the cost of our State Department’s good-neighbor policy. The State Department felt that exposing the South American speculators might have en- dangered the good-neighbor policy. There- fore, !t actively worked to cover up the for- eigners’ manipulations on the New York Cof- fee and Sugar Exchange. The State Depart- ment even went so far as to force a powerful senatorial investigating committee to tone down its report and soften its criticism of the boodlers. The sly operation in the speculative coffee market had all the earmarks of the sort of stock manipulations common in the early twenties, before the stock market crash. Stories from South America appeared in United States newspapers alleging that coffee crops would be small because of storms and drought, and that Americans and Europeans were drinking more coffee than ever. All such stories were false. A financial-page story said that drought in Brazil had reduced that country’s crop severely; the truth was that Brazil had suffl- cient rain, and that the crop was about nor- mal. “Floods in Guatemala,” sald another story, “damaged the crop there, and there was hurricane damage in Haiti"; the truth was that the production of coffee in Guate- mala was within five percent of normal, and that Haiti's crop was normal that year. Those were the stories the American house- wife missed. The story that the consump- tion of coffee in America was rising was just ae false, Actually, Americans drank no more and perhaps even slightly less coffee in 1949 than they had consumed the previous year. Although coffee consumption went down twenty-four percent Just before the outbreak of the Korean war, the Pan-American Coffee Bureau issued a “survey” purporting to prove that there had been @ great rise in coffee drinking! All this, of course, was to justify the in- crease in the price of coffee. Coffee is one of the few commodities under the control of interests outside the United States. The National Federation of Coffee Growers of Colombia is 8 100,000,000 combine that buys and sells all the coffee produced tn that country, and even operates the mills there. Its directors, act- ing through the headman, Manuel Mejia who is known, for reason, as “Mr. Coffee’ can hold coffee off the market or release it for sale according to the condition of the market. Braztl controls the amount of coffee that can go out of its country. The real trading in the coffee market, how- ever, takes place on the New York Coffee and Sugar Exchange. Half the purchase contracts are held by foreign interests, and 30 percent of that half is controlled by one Brazilian broker. In the early spring of 1049, the price of coffee on the exchange was 21 cents a pound. By September, in line with general inflation, the price had gone up to 28 cents a pound. There was no shortage of coffee, de- spite the planted stories, but in September the price went up another 3 cents, and then, in October, it went “through the roof,” to use & speculator’s term. The price reached 46 cents that month, and 62 cents the following month. These rigged increases, to which the roasters, wholesalers, and retaliers added in- creases all along the line, raised the price housewives paid for e leading chain-store brand from 42 cents to 69 cents between September and December 1949. The retail price of a nationally advertised brand jumped, during the same period, from 53 cents to 80 cents. The rise continued un- abated in 1950. By last October, the chain- store coffee sold at 79 cents a pound, and in September, housewives were paying 90 cents for a nationally advertised brand. Although the Central and South American coffee growers didn’t get any of the loot muleted from the United States housewife in 1949 (most of it went to the speculators), in 1950 a bag of coffee brought the growers twice as much. In Brazil a deficit of $48,- 000,000 was changed by 1960 into 6 surplus of more than €@250,000,000. In addition to Brazil's all-time high in dollar earnings, that country has also obtained loans of $126,- 000,000 from the American Export-Import Bank and the World Bank. Colombia. too, thanks to the generosity of the American housewife, has increased its gold and foreign exchange from $68,000,000 to $130,000,000. All this prosperity, naturally, makes the South Americans very fond of us. The manipulations that raised the price of coffee and kept it so high as to make it 4 major item on the budget of the American housewife were easy for the South American speculators because the United States anti- trust and antimonopoly laws do not apply to them. And the State Department—which forced the Senate's Gillette committee, in- vestigating the sudden and uncalled-for rise in coffe prices, to take the teeth out of its report—did not help the housewife. The action of the State Department, which had the effect of concealing the identity of the speculators responsible for the price rise, has Jed to rumors that there may be some Washington politiclans who are splitting some of the millions snatched from the American housewlfe's purse. It has happened before; several years ago investigation re- vealed that a member of the White House staff, a State Department Official, and at least one Scnator were in on the ride when the price of grains shot up. Nobody likes a good neighbor better than the American housewife, but six or seven hundred million dollars a year added to her household budget seems to be too high price for keeping her neighbor's love affection, Ee A679 Threat of Russian Aggression EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. STYLES BRIDGES OF NEW HAMPSHIRE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 8 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. BRIDGES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Recorp an article entitled “You Can't Play Games With Gangsters,” published in the Manchester (N. H.) Union Leader on January 30, 1951. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: You Can't Pray Games Wrre Ganastras The absurdity and unreality of the United Nations trying to operate in a world facing the threat of Russian aggression with Suviet Russta sitting as one of its major members is beginning to filter into many minds. This situation has been stated in a renlistic way by George V. Denny, whose brilliant work as moderator of America’s Town Meet- ing of the Air has contributed so much to a public understanding of the grave problems facing us as a Nation today. Mr. Denny has shown rare ability in balancing opposing views on the various issues presented by Town Meeting, so as to enable the American people to reach intelligent conclusions. Referring to Russia's place on the United Nations, Mr. Denny recently asked this per- tinent question: “When will we learn that we endanger our lives, our fortunes, and our honor when we try to play games with gangsters?” Then he answered his own question by declaring that it would have been as sensti- ble to give Al Capone a place on the Chicago city council at a time when he controlled much of that city's life, as it {s to give Mos- cow’s rulers a place in the UN, After which he added this pithy statement: “The time has come for us to organize a real United Nations consisting of those who have demonstrated their desire and ability to live and work under law to stop our com- mon enemy before he destroys us one by one.” The real issue facing the UN today is whether Soviet Russia sball be allowed to use that organization to promote its plan of world domination. That ts what Boviet Russia has been doing since the UN was established. By the use of ite veto power, it has blocked all effective UN action against Soviet aggression, except for the few months that it stayed home and sulked over the UN refusal to seat Red China. During that in- terim the non-Soviet members sought to re- move the obstacle of the Russian veto by em- powering the UN Assembly to take action if the Security Council was paralyzed. But today Russia is using this change in UN procedure to create division in that organti- gation by playing on the fears of weaker and more credulous members and thereby restraining them from taking action against open aggression. Thus once more the pur- pose of the UN is defeated and tho organiza- tion is made a tool of Soviet aggression. The outcome therefore is perfectly plain. Either Soviet Russia should be kicked out of the UN and the organization remodeled to include only those who have the desire and ability to withstand aggression, or the UN should fold up and cease its make-he- Meve. These are the two slternatives as Mr. Denny sees them. And Denny is absolutely right.
A680 Lost Prestige in Orient EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. H. R. GROSS OF IOWA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 8, 1951 Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, the letter I have here submitted for publication in the Recorp was published a few days ago in the Waterloo (Iowa) Daily Courier. The writer, the Reverend J. E. Prit- chard, of Cedar Falls, Iowa, is perform- ing a most vital service in calling atten- tion to what is probably America’s great- est need in this hour—that of real friends throughout the world. The record shows that we do not have these friends, and why? Because, through international bribery, we have attempted to buy friends—because we have aided and abetted certain of our so-called European allies in their con- tinued exploitation of millions of people in their colonial domains—and because our own Government has failed to stop the diabolical operations of our own in- ternationalists-for-a-profit. Here is the letter: Lost PRESTIGE IN ORIENT Cepar Fas, Iowa. To the Epiror: The magazine, United States News and World Report, one of our top publications, under date of February 2, page 7, made this statement, “War in Asia is showing United States to have few real friends in a hard world.” To me, that is one of the most depress- ing lines I have read in these last few years. For, an individual with scarcely a friend is in a sad condition. It is true also for a nation, When I was young, my country was loved all around the world. People came to Amer- iea by the millions and we were busy welcom- ing them and helping them to obtain the blessings of democracy. The poor and the oppressed from the ends of the earth looked to us for freedom. Not only that, we sent missionaries to fare away lands to establish schools, hospitals, and churches. We staffed these institutions with capable leaders who carried good will to benighted lands. Thirty years ago our missionary bishop to China, Bishop Wilson Seeley Lewis spoke to the Methodist conference at Sioux City. He said, “China loves us. I can go anywhere in China without fear.” He pulled a tiny American flag from his pocket. “This ts all the bodyguard I need even among ban- dits.” Then he said, “Remember, all of China loves us.” Now what has pened to change that? What has happened that our country has come to the place where it has few real friends in a hard world. Two late books will shed considerable light on the question, Half of One World, by Hai- ley, and The Situation in Asia, by Owen Lat- timore. Lattimore says that at the close of World War II all of the Far East respected us, We had knocked the Japs off their necks and they felt that we would support them in their efforts to establish their own govern- ments, We failed them, Our leaders supported Chiang and tried to keep him afloat. His corrupt regime fi- nally failed. We gave our support to our European allies and tried to keep the rump end of decadent colonial empires alive, And lastly, our own country has become another white nation battling on the soll of Asia. It is pathetic for a man who has reached the pinnacle of high esteem to fall to the gutter of disrespect. It is a tragedy for a Nation to take the wrong road and tumble until it has few real friends in a hard world. Our leaders are trying to solve this prob- lem by calling people to prayer. What an- swer will a righteous God give to a Nation that prays for peace and prepares and en- gages in obliteration? There is a road to peace. When this Na- tion gets its cheeks wet with the hot tears of repentance and gets right with God, when it quits its wicked ways, then it will again be respected and loved and can live in peace. Rev. J. E. PrrrcHarn. Television Channels for Educational Porposes EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HERBERT H. LEHMAN OF NEW YORK IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, February 8 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. LEHMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there be printed in the Appendix of the Recorp a tele- gram addressed by the Medical Society of the County of Queens, N. Y¥., to Com- missioner Wayne Coy, Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, on the subject of assuring a certain num- ber of television channels for educational purposes on the television band. The question raised and noW being considered by the Federal Communications Com- mission is one which I believe merits consideration and study by Members of the Senate. There being no objection, the telegram was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: The Queens County Medical Society peti- tions the Federa] Communications Commis- sion to do all in its power to assure an ade- quate number of channels for educational purposes in the television band. The advan- tages to public health in keeping physicians abreast of the active modern advances in medicine makes the assignment of some tel- evision bands for this purpose an important public-health measure. Is There a Military Supply Conspiracy? EXTENSION OF REMARKS IF HON. JACK Z. ANDERSON OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 7, 1951 Mr. ANDERSON of California. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my re- marks in the Recorp, I wish to include the following thought-provoking article by Col. P, Joseph Smith which appeared recently in the Reserve Officer maga- ne, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD I commend it to my colleagues, par- ticularly those who served in World Wars I and II: Is Tuxre a Miurrary Supruy Conspiracy? (By Col. P, Joseph Smith) Since World War I, every effort to develop and install a unified supply catalog system for the services has met with failure. Now, Reservists want to know why their wartime knowledge and hard-won victories over sup- ply problems are being casually cast aside. A multitude of Reservists insist there is a conspiracy to prevent the President, the Sec- retary of Defense. the service secretaries, and the Congress from improving the efficiency and reducing the tax burden of the Armed Forces. And further, they contend that this resistance is being carried on ruthlessly and in complete disregard of the safety of the men at the fighting front and of the na- tional security. As proof of their contention, these experi- enced Reservists point to their own trials during the war and to the events in the military forces since the war. Supply confusion was prevalent through- out the Armed Forces during the early stages of the war. Reserve officers, when first they came tn contact with the situation, assumed that this was caused by the sudden expan- sion of military operations (wondering at the same time why plans, techniques, and methods were not available for this certain contingency) and went to work to overcome the mountainous obstacles that were clogging the movement of supplies and equipment. Miles of red tape were cut, Colonel Blimp inhibitions were cast aside, ingenious ncw devices and methods were developed, dupli- cations of staffs and facilities were elimi- nated, and by the end of the war the vast machinery of supplying our theaters scat- tered over the world as well as our allies had been streamlined and was being operated with improved efficiency. The reservists found that the key to any supply improvement was a single catalog of supply items that provided a single designa- tion and a standard reference symbol for all items. They found that such a system to include all the items used by all the services could be developed and installed within 2 years' time. This was tested out on supply functions that included almost all the allied armed services and was greater in magnitude than all the postwar supply functions of the Department of Defense. The results were so spectacular that steps were immediately started toward the devel- opment of a single-catalog system to include all the Armed Forces. However, with the end of the war, the Reserves were released or transferred and the services lapsed into their old lethargy. The reservists waited for the services to follow through with the programs and im- provements that had been initiated during the war. Instead they learned through the Hoover reports that conditions in the Armed Forces had reverted to those prevailing in the Armed Forces when the war started; and it dawned on them that the supply confu- sion that they found and were on the way to overcoming, may not have been an acci- dent of the war, but a result of a specific plan, HOOVER REPORT EXPOSE Their suspicions were confirmed by the Hoover Commission's reports that attributed the inefficiency and waste to “great and stub- born resistance of supply officials” and “to the realization by the technical services and the bureaus that a standard commodity cat- alog, when made mandatory in use, will require adjustments and changes in their time-honored methods of purchasing, stor- ing, and distribution, and will provide the means for eliminating duplication of staffs and facilities”