A1042 TTALIANS ARE DISILLUSIONED Certuinly there are very few Italians left who believe that any serious help for their unhappy country will come from the United States or Great Britain. Even UNRRA has ceased, and although there is evident a cer- tain preferential treatment for Italy on food supplies, it is by no means enough to make up for all the other calamities that have be- fallen the peninsula and its inhabitants. The possibility that Italy might fare better in the Soviet bloc is being put forward with insistence not only by the Italian Communist Party but by sections of the Socialists and even by segments on the left in the Chris- tian Democratic Party itself. Some day this argument—which may be specious but is the one to which we drive the Italians by aug- menting their despair—may take over even larger elements of the population and the deed wil] be done. When we think back to the days when Mussolini reigned in all his bumptious arro- Bance, the irony of this downfall is keen. Before the war the Italian Government did not even take the trouble to be polite to the governments which now, between them, en- force the conditions of Italy’s ruin. Musso- lini used to make the American, British, and French ambassadors await his pleasure. He treated successive Russian ambassadors with the most frigid disdain. Aside from a single trip to the Lausanne Peace Conference in 1922, Mussolini never took the trouble to travel abroad to see any of the foreign potentates with whom he dealt. Hitler alone could bring him out of Italy but was alweys scrupulous to return the visit. When Mus- solini wanted to see pecple like the British and Prench prime ministers or foreign min- isters, he sent for them and they came to Rome. Now he is dead and his successors amid the ruins of Italy are men who deem themselves lucky if they get half an hour in a hotel room to state their case to some bored rep- resentative of a great allied power. These men, almost all of them, were opponents of fascism; some few were professional dipio- mats who served under fascism and are serv- ing now under whatever government exists. Power, insofar as there is any in an Italian Government, lies in the hands chiefly of the Socialist, Pietro Nenni, and the Christian Democrat (Catholic), Alcide de Gaspari, who have to plead for an audience with the busy western statesmen. It may be said, of course, that all this is poetic justice, but the trouble with poetic Justice is that it usually falls upon the wrong persons. Why should Nenni and de Gaspari, who spent their lives opposing Mussolini, ex- Piate Mussolini's crimes That is the trouble with all dictatorial regimes: by the violence of their nature they are in the end killed, and their heirs are most often chosen from among their victims. It is clear that Italy, as an ex-enemy state, cannot enjoy the privileges of states which were always allied; but some allowance ought to be made for the sacrifices which followed Mussolini's downfall. That was almost two Tull years before the end of the war, and dur- ing that time many Italians gave their lives for the allied cause. ITALY FOUGHT FOR THE ALLIES The Italian Navy, almost intact, went into Allied service and showed its prowess and skill in many operations. Italian fighter squadrons supported Allied operations, par- ticularly those across the Adriatic in Yugo- slavia. There were two Italian squadrons equipped with Macchi 202 which operated consistently that winter in Yugoslavia in sup- port of Marshal Tito, who is now the most ferocious of Italy’s enemies. I was at that time stationed near Bari, an officer in the head of the Tactical Air Force, and from the beginning I was in favor of making public some of the details about how young Italians came to us offering their services. None of this could be released be- cause our Air Force commander, Air Marshal Cunningham, of the RAF, said: “We don't want to make heroes out of the bloody Eyties.” Never shall I forget some of the Italians who flew in to us that winter from all over northern Italy and Greece. They had to steal airplanes from under the noses of the Ger- mans; they had to shoot Germans or some- times their own comrades to escape; they were wild-eyed and exalted with the sheer tension of their effort. They came to us hoping for aircraft, or to be dropped behind the lines by parachute, or to engage in the most dangerous sabotage and espionage work, and for most of them all we had was the routine transfer to Marshal Badoglio’s stag- nant and useless headquarters. SOME JOINED PARTISAN MOVEMENT There were, of course, thanks to that ener- getic outfit, the OSS, some Italians who escaped such a fate. One friend of mine, an Italian air force offer who had stagnated with the best of them under Badoglio, was later on transferred to the O85 and jumped far behind the German lines in the moun- tains of Piedmont. There he organized and commanded a guerrilla operation for almost two whole years, harassing German communi- cations and supplies so successfully that after a year there were two Naz! divisions assigned to the task of holding down that particular province behind Turin in the Italian Alps. Another Italian who worked for the O88 left Naples that winter tn the dress of a Benedictine monk and mace his way through Italy with a radio underneath his monkish robe. There were some who used to Pass back and forth through the Germans regularty with messages and information. There were some who rescued allied prison- ers of war behind the German lines and ran a sort of underground railway for them into our own territory. Aside from all these were the highly organized Partisans (I Partigiani) of northern Italy who carried on warfare against the Germans for two 1ull years and did fer more, in the military sense of damage to be enemy, than the French resistance movement ever did. In fact, one of the astonishing things in the whole war story is the ingratitude with which we treated the Italian people for their remarkable effort at guerrilla warfare, under very adverse condi- tions (especially in the Alps), while at the same time we have wearied the heavens with our praises for the brief and limited help given our enormous invading armies by a handful of young Frenchmen who served in the resistance movement. This, of course, is in part explained by the American sentimentality about France, and in part by the fact that every resource of the Supreme Allied Headquarters was bent on making the best of French resistance efforts, while the much greater Italian efforts went on through the dreary 2 years without ever being mentioned. The Italian Partisan movement was a military secret while it was going on; it has become out of date since then; and between these two dicta it is still almost unknown to the American public, We retain, as a people, the astonishment we felt On that day when Italy dared to declare war upon us, and the fact that many thousands of Italians went through tremendous dan- gers and privations to atone for this has not yet reached our national consciousness, Sometimes I used to wonder why the Ital- jan Partisans fought at all, since by the war's end it had become evident that they were to have no gratitude from us for it and no credit for all they had dane, In the spring of 1945, on the eve of the last offensive, I asked a friend in Rome this exact question: Why were the Partisans fig ‘the Partisan organisations, a daughter of the Philosopher Croce and wife of an under- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ground leader. “They are not fighting for rewards,” she said proudly. “By now they know what your rewards are like: jafl and famine. They are fighting merely to regain their own self-respect.” Well, it may be that self-respect returns under conditions of penury, starvation, and impotence. That was the theory of Marshal Petain, for example, who preached purtifica- tion through suffering. It has been the doc- trine of innumerable religious sects through- out the ages, and it is akin to the oriental doctrines by which every incarnation pre- pares for the next, and the suffering of one life are compensated by the joys of another. But it has very little natural root in either the conditions or culture of Italy, where this world has ordinarily been taken as quite suf- ficient for the happiness of man. Along with the love of beauty which ts native to Italians, there goes a practical sense of making the most of things, getting all there is to get out of life: with Italian people the fogs of Nor- dic idealism—purification through suffering among them—are never fully understood. For these and related reasons I do not be- lieve that any penitential attitude will ac- company the present sufferings of the Italian people. What they will feel tn 1947 is that if the Allies can give them no better than this, then perhaps they would be weil ad- vised to try what the Slav collectiviste have to offer. COLLECTIVISM WOULD CHANGE ITALIAN LIFE What could that conceivably be? Mar- chal Tito and his followers are by nature anti-Italian, because the clash of Slovene or Croat with the Italians is ancestral. They will, therefore, not wish to be unduly gen- erous. And the cultural level of Yugoslavia being what it is, they are not disposed to any leniency towards Italy because of its vast contribution to civilization. But if Italy ever turned toward collectiv- fam, a new attitude would come into being, that of class instead of nation, and the ruth- less totalitartanisam of Tito would force that radical organization of Italian life which the Allies have so far discouraged. Even the Italian collectivists hesitate because they know that this is the hard way, but they may not hesitate forever. Such are the conditions of Italy as imposed by the peace treaty completed in New York. The ruin of Germany is no doubt more eom- plete, as the power of Germany for good or evil was greater, but in the case of Italy no such war guilt is imputed, no such damage was suffered by the Allies. All along it has been assumed, particularly by the Americans, that Italy was deluded and misied but not wicked. It has further been assumed that after a period of inevitable suffering Italy could return to the community of nations as an essentially western and democratic power, It is these fundamental assumptions that are now thrown into doubt by the edicts of the Waldorf-Astoria Towers, the treaties arbitrarily imposed on an impotent Italy by the Allies. Commennism EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KENNETH McKELLAR OF TENNESSIE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, March 17 (legislative day of Wednesday, February 19), 1947 Mr. McKELLAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have inserted in the Appendix of the Recorp three edito- rials relating to communism. The first is one from the Washington Times-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Herald of yesterday morning entitled “Start at Home,” by Frank C. Waldrop. The second is entitled “Fails To Meet Test,” from the Standard-Times of New Bedford, Mass., of March 14. The third is entitled “America’s New World Role,” from the St. Louis Post- Dispatch of March 14. There being no objection, the editorials were ordered to be printed in the Rrcorp, as follows: {From the Washington (D. C.) Times-Herald of March 16, 1947] START AT HOME (By Frank C. Waldrop) Mr. Truman has discovered all of a sudden that the Communists of the world are dan- gerous people, and so they are. But why is it the Communists are more dangerous in Greece and Turkey than they are in Washinston, D. C.? Here he comes to Congress and asks approx- imately half a billion dollars to start an anti-Communist program abroad that says to Russia plain as day, “If you want a war, we're ready.” Yet right now, today, this very Sunday, there are on the pay roll of the taxpayers of the United States Communists who are for Russia first, and heve been ever since Mr. Truman came to Washington a freshman Senator from Missouri. In fact they were in Washington long before him. They came here with his predecessor in the presidency and laughed at Roosevelt as “the Kerensky of our revolution.” They demonstrated their power in the Roosevelt administration right at the start. Who remembers the late Dr. William Wirt, of Gary, Ind. Dr. Wirt was a distinguished and liberal educator of wcrid renown. He came to Washington to see what the brand new deal was like. He didn’t come as & pay-roll patriot but as a plain patriot, wanting to find out what kind of people had risen to power. That crack about Roosevelt being the Kerensky of the new American revolution wasn't the kind of thing he was used to in American government and having heard it one night at a New Deal dinner he stuck around to find out more. What he found out was that the Com- munists and their fellow travelers had at last, with Roosevelt, got themselves into places of power and importance in our Gov- ernment. So he gave warning. Did the newspaper editors and college presidents and members of Congress and other such opinion makers take him serious- ly? Well does this writer remember how for instance the distinguished Baltimore Sun and New York Times gave out gentlemanly haw haws at Dr. Wirt and how college presidents the country over followed up the cue. As for Congress, it was just as guilty as Roosevelt in those days and it deliberately made Dr. Wirt a@ laughing stock. He went to his grave a bitter and frustrated man while the editors of the Baltimore Sun and the New York Times and all such noble- minded heavy thinkers continued to say that we must worry about fascism and naziism abroad but as for communism, why it is nota problem and besides to criticize Communists would be Red baiting and who wants to be a Red baiter? Meanwhile, the Communists climbed aboard the taxpayers’ shoulders. They came in via the NYA, the NRA, the PWA, and the WPA, the CCC, the SEC, the FHA, and all the other early alphabetical trojan horses. They have never left. For when the war came on they simply shifted over to the OWI, the OSS, the OPA, and so forth. They put the President’s wife to work for them. They knocked down the barriers then even in the War and Navy De- partments. Communists became officers in our armed forces. And in time they showed their power by fomenting riots, rebellions, and mutiny in our forces abroad. Has it been forgotten already how United States soldiers barely a year and a half ago gathered on the front steps of the United States Army head- quarters in Frankfurt, Germany, and booed the commanding general, Joseph T. McNar- ney? All in plain sight of the conquered Germans. That, citizens, is a thing to think about, if you wonder whether Communists have ever got into the Government o* the United States in a significant and serious way. Well, and when OSS, OPA, etc., began to fade, what happened to our Communists on the Government pay roll? Gcn. George C. Marshall, Secretary of State, less than 3 weeks ago admitted to a com- mittee of Congress that the reputation of the once great United States State Depart- ment has fallen “very low” since the CSS, OWI, etc., crowd had been blanketed into it by the thousands. For in with the rest went the Communists, their fellow travelers, sympathizers, dupes, dopes, and tools. Such as these were the ones who enmeshed Mrs. Franklin D. Roose- velt in the Hanns Eisler passport case, of which you will be hearing details before very long. Hanns Eisler, in case you may have for- gotten, is the Hollywood musical composer- brother of Gerhard Eisler, now accused by the House Un-American Activities Commit- tee as a leading Russian spy. The same committee promises a full public hearing on the queer details of Hanns’ own story in a few days, and instructive it will be, too, as a lesson in how things were going around here in the Roosevelt heyday. And the trouble is that Mr. Truman has not brought a substantial change. He is making ferocious talk at the Communists in Greece, Turkey, Germany, and so forth. It is the kind of talk that brings on war, as anybody who was alive and reading the papers from 1933 onward can realize. But what is he doing about the Commu- nists on the pay roll of the United States right here in Washington, D. C.? What is he doing today and what was he doing this time a year ago? The Communists certainly are dangerous people, declared enemies of our constitutional government which it is their alm and purpose to overthrow by force and violence. Why has Mr. Truman tolerated them, then? They were just as dangerous a year ago as they are today and they were just as dan- gerous 10 years ago. Yet here they are and here they were, all the time. How about letting the Federal Bureau of Investigation loose on these beauties? J. Edgar Hoover has been an expert on the Communists for 38 years. He knows more about them than any other American and he has the best record against them of any American, And when he speaks he deals in facts, not oratory. How about Hoover making a series of de- tailed addresses to the whole Nation on com- munism while President and Congress listen to a man who knows his business? And then how about following Hoover's outline to kick the Communists cut of our own United States of America before we get tangled up in any more bloody affrays abroad? —_ {From the New Bedford (Mass.) Standard- Times of March 14, 1947] FAILS TO MEET TEST The Senate should not overlook the fact that President Truman’s message urging aid to nations threatened by Russian aggran- dizement has a distinct bearing on the nomination of David E. Lilienthal as chair- man of the United States Atomic Energy Commission, A1043 The implications in the Truman policy are clear and fateful. Its purpose is to call a halt to aggression, direct or indirect, de- signed to impose upon Greece and Turkey the totalitarian regime that the Soviet Union has imposed on all other countries in that part of the world. If that policy is to be effectual, this country must not relinquish any advantage it now possesses, least of all the advantage inherent in the knowledge and facilities for the production of atomic bombs. A stiff attitude toward Russia precludes a soft attitude on the atomic energy issue. Mr. Lilienthal has given indications of soft- ness as shown in his plan which omitted some of the essential safeguards embcdicd in the Baruch propcsal. In both the TVA, and in the Atomic Energy Commission which he now heads provisionally, he has revealed an attitude of tolerance or complacency to- ward Left Wingers who, if not Communists, can be classed as fellow-travelers, and who are alined with the pro-Russian group identificd with the PAC and with Henry Wallace. Mr. Lilfenthal’s supporters class him as a sincere liberal. But it will not be fcr- gotten that another “sincere liberal,” the British Allan Nunn May, was convicted and sentenced for furnishing secret information about the atomic bomb to Russian ergenis in Canada. Freely confessing he had done 89, he defended his action on the ground that Russia deserved to be informed on this mat- ter. There is nothing to show that Mr. Lilienthal agrees with Frofessor May, but the position he has taken suggests a danger that the personnel of the American Commission, somewhere along the Jine, may be expcsed to Communist infiltration. This is precisely what happened in the State Department's Division of Far Eastern Affairs. Leftist “liberals near the top placed in the Department rmen more leftist than themselves, and these let in genuine sub- versives working in the interests of the Chi- nese Communists. An expose of the siiua- tion in 1945 resulted in the arrest of Em- manuel S. Larsen on a charge of a conspiracy to violate the espionage statute through the theft of confidential documents, Later Lar- sen wrote an article in which he said that there had been a well-organized campaign in the Department to shift American Chinese policy to the pro-Soviet line. Relations between Russia and the United States have reached a critical stage. A sali- ent factor in the situation is the atomic bomb. The chairman and members of the Atomic Energy Commission not only must be free from pro-Russia Icanings, but must be men whose contrary attitude is so well proved that they will inspire public confi- dence. As matters stand, Mr. Lilienthal does not fully meet that test. There is no dearth of men who can meet it and who are other- wise qualified for the position. Senators who have been favorable toward confirming Mr. Lilienthal should, in the light of the situa- tion created by Mr. Truman's message, rec- ognize the wisdom of refusing consent to his appointment. [From the St. Louis (Mo.) Post-Dispatch of March 14, 1947.| AMERICA’S NEW WORLD ROLE The struggle for world power between the United States and Soviet Russia was brougit completely into the open Wednesday by President Truman. For more than a year, the two nations have been conducting an unofficial diplomatic war all over the globe. The President's historic addrcss places the United States in this diplomatic war on an official basis. Henceforth, all peoples whose national in- tegrity is threatened by communistic en- croachment—be that encroachment direct or indirect—may look to the United States for aid. Moscow is put on notice that such aid
A1044 will be given. Henceforth, its agents may proceed at their own peril. Mr. Truman's speech is the toughest state- ment of American foreign policy since the quarantine speech of President Roosevelt of Oct. 5, 1937, at Chicago. It is even tougher, since it is accompanied by specific requests for funds to implement the policy. Mr. Truman asks for $400,000,000 to Invest in Greece and Turkey for the purpose of protecting those nations from falling under the infiuence of Soviet Russia. When Con- gress approves the expenditure, it virtually means that the United States has concluded an informal military alliance with Greece and Turkey. It means that any attempt by the Soviet Union to take over the two coun- tries would have to face the full resistance of this Nation. To meet Soviet aggression, this ccuntry has countcred with an attack which carries us to Russia's southern threshold. The power that controls Greece and Turkey holds the key to the Middle East and the Mediter- ranean, with all their immense strategical importance and their valuable oil deposits. Overnight, almost, the United States be- comes heir to the key bastions in the heart of the world held for hundreds of years by the British Empire. It does so, not in a time of trancuillity, but in the midest of a contest fcr world supremacy between two differing ic®. ologies. In a famous statement of the issue be- tween Hitlerism and western democracy, Hamilton Fish Armstrong boiled it down to three words, “We or they.” The badies of the men who died in the last war are herdly ecld, yet once again it has become a ques- tion cf “we cr they.” ‘We means the United States, Britain, and all other nations that represent western civilization, or who have come under the influence or protecting arm of that civilization. “They” means Soviet Ruesia and its satellites. Mr. Truman says: “At the present moment in world history, nearly every nation must choose between alternative ways of Hfe. The choice is too often not a free one.” He cites not only Greece and Turkey, but Poland, Rumania, and Bulgaria. Of the latter three nations, he says that the United States Government has made frequent pro- tests against their coercion and intimida- tion. This coercion and intimidation, of course, has been practiced by the Soviet Union. As to our future attitude toward such prac- tices by the Soviet Union, no language can be clearer than this: “I believe that it must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempied subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures.” The language is somewhat qualified by the President's statement that this support “should be primarily through economic and financial aid which is essential to economic stability and orderly political processes.” But the word “primarily,” taken with the whole content of the speech, means that the United States Government will go farther. if necessary, to enforce its policy. Congress may ponder and debate, but Presi- dent Truman’s address has committed the Nation to all-out diplomatic action, just as a declaration of shooting war must necessarily follow when a President asks for it. The honor and prestige of the Nation are at stake and there is no turning back. Henceforth, this country is up to its ears in international power politics. It will take ’ all our skill and wisdom to fill the new role in the great American tradition. Already, embarrassments appear, since the urgency of circumstance has allied us with the question- able regime of King George Glucksberg of Greece and Dictator Inonu of Turkey. The issue, therefore, is not so simple as Mr. Tru- man stated it. The issue is not simply between democ- racy and communism, because many of the governments with which we now ally our- selves are not democratic. The issue ts rath- er anticommunism versus communism. If we are to fulfill our world destiny in the spirit of George Washington, Tom Paine, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and the other men in whom the genius of America burned brightly, we must seek constantly to make our new world power conform to our philos- ophy. PNO man can tell the outcome of the Presi- dent's decision. It may be the most brilliant blow for world peace that has ever bsen struck. It may eventually mean actual war. But one thing is definitely certain, Moscow has been served with an ultimatum which reads: ‘Thus far and no farther.” Appreciation of Work of Personnel of Es- sex County and Newark, N. J., Advisory Boards for Registrants EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ALBERT W. HAWKES OF NLW JERSEY IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATIS Monday, March 17 (legislative day o} Wednesday, February 19), 1947 Mr. HAWKES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Resorp a copy of the letter enclosing certificate of commenda- tion addressed to the personnel of the Essex County and Newark, N. J., Ad- visory Boards for Registrants. This certificate, issued by Samuel J. Kaufman, general secretary, at the di- rection of the New Jersey Siate director of the Selective Service System, was pre- sented to 865 members of both of these boards, made up of 350 members from the Newark Advisory Board and 510 members from the Essex County Board for Registrants, plus the officers and directors. The members of these boards quietly gave advice and help to the thousands of young men who were called for selective service. They advised them as to their rights as well as their duties, and it is only fitting that the State of New Jersey show its appreciation of the work done under Judge Daniel J. Brennan, general chair- man of the Newark Advisory Board, and Judge Richard Hartshorne, general chairman of the Essex County Advisory Board. The certificate being presented to the members of these two boards is signed by the President of the United States, the National Director of the Selective Service System, the Governor of the State of New Jersey, and the di- rector of the Selective Service System for the State of New Jersey. There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: SELECTIVE SERVICE Systrm, NEWARK ADVISORY BOARDS For REGISTRANTS, Newark, N. J. To the Personnel of the Essex County and Newark Advisory Boards for Registrants: The advisory boards for registrants au- thorized under the selective-service reguia- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD tions was an important cog in the machinery of the Selective Service System. The work performed by the advisory board members ‘was accomplished by private consultation with individual registrants and often was not observed by the general public. Advi- sory boards functioned largely without due recognition of their efforts, Nevertheless, the part played by you, as a member of an advisory board for registrants, was ju3t as important as that performed by any other individual in the entire S2lect.v2 S2rvice System. Your conduct in ccoperating with the registrant, in advising him as to his rights and obligations under the Selective fervice System and the voluntary giving of your time and efforts, greatly aided in placing cur Siate in the foremost position in the Nation with resrect to the efficient operation of the sys- tem. The credit for our success in eiding in the fight for peace—a sustaining peace --not alone for our own America, but for peace-lcv- ing peoples everywhere, is duc largely to ycur efforts. In behalf of Judge Daniel J. Brennan. gen- eval chairman of the Newark Advisory Baard for Registrants, and in behalf of Judsc Rich- ard Hartshorne, gine-al chairman of the Es- sex County Advisory Board for Itezstrants, may v.¢c express our since“e gratitu e and ap- preciation for the prompt and e‘ficicnt man- ner in which you have performed your duties a3 a member of this board. You have l:cen indefatigable in your work and Peve given of your own time, frequently at creat per- sonel eccrifice. Your invaluable a.d has in- voked the good will of all concerned. We fecl a sense of persone! loss in the derth of thcse of our loved ones, at home and ebroad, who gave their I'ves that we at home might continue to enjoy life and barpiness. Their thoughts were of us and the’r memory will always te dear to us all. Piease accept the enclosed certificate of commendation in grateful recognition of the aid and su»port given by you under the Se- lective Eervice System. Your acknowledg- ment of the receipt thereof to the under- signed, as secretary of your board—is re- spectfully solicited. Sincerely ycurs, SAMUEL J. KAUFMAN. Fresruaky 15, 1947, For Greek Freedom First EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CLAUDE PEPPER OF FLORIDA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, March 17 (legislative day of Wednesday, February 19), 1947 Mr. PEPPER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an editorial entitled “For Greek Freedom First,” pub- ished in the Chicago Sun of March 13, There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: POR GREEK FREEDOM FIRST President Truman made a strong case yes- terday for the survival of Greece as a free nation, but he did not show that Greece is in fact free. The point is vital as respects both Greece and Turkey. For unless we re- serve our aid for free governments which actually represent their people, the course Mr. Truman proposes is indistinguishable ‘from naked imperialism. We cannot accept such a policy with national self-respect and we cannot make it work.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Mr. Truman asked Congress to put up $400,000,000 for Greece and Turkey, part of which would be spent to supply and equip their national armies. He asked authority to dispatch civilian and military personnel to supervise use of the funds and instruct the governments in their duties. Such a far-reaching program means one thing if applied to getting a free people on its feet, and another if designed to bolster reactionary and semi-Fascist governments which hold their people in bondage. In the latter case, we would occupy the indefensible position of supporting axy regime so long as it is anti-Russian, end, worse yet, the position of backing ruthless suppression of popular liberties. In such circumstances all our talk of serving the ‘free democracies” would be reduced to a tragic burlesque Not one word did Mr. Truman have to say about attaching any conditions to our pro- posed assistance that might guarantee the emergence of a genuinely representative gov- ernment in Greece. He confined himself to the mild comment that we did not approve everything the Greek Government has done. That is like saying fascism is not nice. For this Greek Government whose Army he pro- poses to prop and strengthen has attracted to its ranks the same contemptible quislings who served the Nazis during the German occupation. Unless there is a wholesale re- form of the Government from top to bottom it 1s a mockery to call it “democratic.” Mr. Truman says the present Government represents 85 percent of the Parliament which was elected last year; but he does not say that those elections were boycotted by most of the Centrist Liberals, the Socialists, and the E. A. M. (Communists and Ag- rarians). He says that foreign observers pro- nounced the elections fair; but he does not say that they were preceded by a rightist reign of terror which is still going on and which can only be emboldened by the pros- pect of unconditional access to American dollars and military support. If the Greek Government really represents its people, why is it now in peril of collapse unless rescued by us? For 2 years the right- ists have been ruling by persecution of the people and with the unstinted aid of British armed might. Yet guerrilla fighting grows more extensive month by month. To at- tribute this entirely to an armed minority or to outside coercion (evidence of which has not yet been reported by the United Na- tions commission of investigation) , demands proof rather than mere assertion. Mr. Tru- man did not bother to prove it. The President's request should not be granted without adequate conditions which assure that we are renlly helping a free and democratic Greece and not a Fascist Greece. If the British could not impose a rightist government, we shall not be able to do so either short of undisguised military domi- nation. The American people did not fight the war for that kind of imperialism and they will not support such a policy which, if applied to Greece, must logically be ap- plied clear around the world. Aid to Greece and Turkey EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CLAUDE PEPPER OF FLORIDA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, March 17 (legislative day of Wednesday, February 19), 1947 Mr. PEPPER. Mr. President, I ask Unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an editorial by Don C. Matchan, appearing in the Valley City (N. Dak.) Times-Record of March 13, 1947, under the heading ‘“‘Com- ments.” There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: CoMMENTS (By Don C. Matchan) NOW OR NEVER 0 heart is heavy on this 13th day of March I have a son, only one, whom I had hoped would be able to live out his life on this planct without being dragged into the curse of a total, obliterative, atomic-bacteriological war, 1 like children. This feeling is rarcly ex- hibited toward them, perhaps bec-use of a mistaken idea I'm too busy, but often while walking to work during the noon hour, I stand a few moments and look out over the playgrounds at Ritchie School. They are laughing, playing, completely enjoying them- selves at games which vary with the seasons. And up the walk they come, little ones, middie-sized ones, and the preadults. Their eyes, particularly the youngest, do not reflect pain nor cares. They look at one with a trustful glance and somehow, the obliga- tions fall heavier upon him who 1s willing to accept responsibility. Those children are playing the same games today that they played yesterday. In their eyes is the same innocence and directness of yesterday. They don’t know, they haven't heard what happened yesterday. Their young minds did not even register an impression when they heard dad or mom talk about a speech that was made in Con- gress around noon Wednesday, March 12, in the year of our Lord, 1947. NOT STRANGE That’s not peculiar, either, because neither dad nor mom fully understood the implica- tions of the awful words which fell from the mouth of a man named Truman who is President of these United States. He talked about two far-away countries called Greece and Turkey; he talked sbout communism; about free people; about money and soldiers and guns. And about the only thing dad and mom remember about Greece is that it once had some philosophers named Plato and Aris- totle; that once it was a world power and its armies overran the portion of the world which existed many centuries ago; they re- member, perhaps, that Greece suffered tor- tuously during World War II, that its people starved by the thousands after they were overrun by Axis hordes. And perhaps their idea of a Turk is a man with a cloth wrapped around his head with maybe a knife between his teeth; or they may remember vaguely reading 25 years ago about how the Turks annihilated a lot of people called Armenians. But both of those countries are far away from comfortable, safe Valley City, so why worry? . Yes; they heard something, too, about communism. They've heard enough about it by reading the papers and magazines to know they should be afraid of it, wherever it exists in the world. Beyond that they know nothing about it. And they heard about a large sum of money—#8400,000,000—which the President has asked be made available to the Govern- ments of Greece and Turkey. But 8400,000,- 000 is 80 much money no human being can visualize it, so we just shrug it off as 400,000,000. And they heard, too, about soldiers and guns to be sent from America to Greece and Turkey if those countries say they need them to fight communism. Now, perhaps the only thing that dad and mom can understand about the whole speech A1045 is that soldiers are men (in the Army, just a number). And soldiers come from families— in this case, American families. And if enough soldiers are needed, perhaps one of them will come from the household in which dad and mom reign supreme. Dad and mom could understand that all right; mom could, anyway, because she brought Johnnie into this world. She suf- fered when he suffered, she laughed when he Jaughed; and he is part of her. And per- heps, just perhaps, che is guing to want to know why he should be trundled off on the Northern Pacific’s No. 2 for Fort Snelling: destination—the world. Mr. Truman has given her the reason he sa7s our Government should be able to com- mandeer American Johnnies. He has not, of course, explained to mom that what he said yesterday, if supported by the Congress, is the start of another world war. Even Mr. Truman, if he were to stand on the sidewalk in front of Ritchie School and watch the ycungsters at play, yes, even Mr. Truman might have difficulty in justifying his position with his inner self. There must be a small voice, deep inside him, asking, “Did you do right?” A VAST BETRAYAL A vast betrayal of people, the world over, is currently being enacted. Primary and moving force in this plot to thrust the world into a new and savage conflict is a mere handful of monopolists—and a tiny group of clerics waging a last-ditch battle for sur- vival as a special-privilege class. These groups have determined the policy, the Pres- ident and Congress are but the political in- strument through which they hope to carry it out. America is about to be cast in the role of successor to imperialist John Bull. Through its spokesman we have served notice on the world that we shall take over where Great Britain left off. Through its imperialist policies Great Britain won the hatred of subjugated people the world over. It ap- pears that that dubious distinction is now about to pass to America. It is sort of a dual role, perhaps, that we now find oursclves in. Besides acting ns stand-in for British imperialism, we also find our leaders astride a large white horse in a crusade against communism. From 1932 to 1945 another leader occupied that white horse, and another nation was at- tempting to rally the world against commu- nism. That country was Germany. Re- member? HE SAID In his message to the Congress Mr, Truman said in part: “Should we fail to aid Greece and Turkey in this fateful hour, the effect will be far reaching to the west as well as to the east. “We must take immediate and resolute action.” He stated he is fully aware of the anti- Russian implications which would follow American assistance to Greece and Turkey, but he regards it as more important to per- mit free peoples to work out their own des- tinies in their own way. YES, MR. PRESIDENT Yes, Mr. President, your decision will have far-reaching effects to the west and the east. It will affect nearly every home in this con- fused and sick world. You are aware, you say, of the anti-Russian implications of your decision, but you regard it as more important to permit “free pecple to work out their destinies in their own way.” There is a contradiction in that statement which cannot escape the most unseeing eye, Mr. President. Will your proposal actually permit the peo- ple of Greece and Turkey to work out their own destinies in their own way? Or will it not, in fact, force them to work out their destinies in your way?
A1046 When have the people of Greece been free? When they attempted to work out their des- tinies in their own way toward the end of World War II, Mr. John Bull stepped into their country with arms and soldiers and forced them to accept the return of an unwanted king; forced down their throate the status quo. British bankere have long dominated the economic Mfe of Greece. They have been extracting interest rates on loan: ranging from 7.75 percent to 16 percent. And when left group3 advocated scaling the intercat rates to 5 percent, British bankers objected, prevailed upon their government to send British troops into Greece to “stabilize” con- ditions. And now, Mr. President, Britain being un- able to carry the occupation load longer, you prcpose to meke American boys the goat in this gigantic tug-of-war. There is one way, and only one way, for the people of Greece to work out their own destinies in their own way. And that is for all nations to adopt a hands-off policy; the same kind of policy which has been proposed by Secretary Ma-:shall for China. UNDENIABLE TRUTH Let the record be clear: It is the United States, not the Soviet Union, that now pro- Poses to enter with economic and military might into the internal affairs of Greece and Turkey. Had Russia announced that her national conscience could not tolerate the treatment of progressive elements in Greece by the British Gestapo, and was therefore planning to send material and military aid to those People, what would have been the reaction in the United States? You know, Mr. President, you know, Mr. and Mrs. Average Citizen. You know that the newspapers would have ec:eamed aggres- sion, imperialism, expansionism. And you know that it would have meant war unless the United States refused to accept the chal- Tenge to an invasion of that sort. But it was not Russia who suggested a $400,000,000 loan to her neighbors; it wes not Russia who proposed sending arms and troops to those nations to stabilize conditions. It is the United States of America which is about to take this step. And it is the United States of America that will pay the awful price which this step must ultimately lead to. WEASEL WORDS _ The President stated that in helping free and independent nations to maintain their freedom, the United States will be giving ef- fect to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, Those are weasel words. The pecple of Greece and Turkey are not free and inde- pendent. They are held between the jaws of an economic-political vice which strangles their opportunity, which dentes them the right to think and act as free men. Why talk about principles of the United Nations in one breath and in the next breath take the unilateral action which the proposed aid to Greece and Turkey actually is? S2lf-determination means selection by the people cf a nation of the kind of government end economic system they prefer, without interference from the outside. We are in absolute violation of the principles of the Atlantic Charter by following the British lion into Greece and Turkey. WHAT IT MEANS The whole issue, of course, is greater than Greece and Turkey. It involves a clash of systems. The United States Government (not all of its people, but its rulers) have determined to arbitrarily impose on other people an economic system known as capi- talism. In taking this step it is inviting an atomic and bacteriological war. It is saying, in efect, “We will not tolerate socialism.” Monopoly capitaliam is issuing the chal- lenge. Monopoly capitalism has announced that it will not even attempt to live on the same globe with socialism. It has not said, “We'll try,” it has said, “We won't.” The provocation, let it be understood and repeated, has come from monopoly capi- taliam. Three times in the past year the spokesman for the world’s largest socialist state—Stalin—has said that socialism and capitalism can live together in peace. This was pointed out clearly by Dr. Harry F. Ward, professor emeritus of Union Theo- logical Seminary, New York, in the February issue of the Witness, an Episcopalian publi- cation. Dr. Ward wrote: “Stalin's recent as- sertion to Elliott Roosevelt that capitalism and communism can live together is the third time within a year he has said that to foreign questioners. It is not merely his opinion. It is the collective decision of the Polit-Bureau, the Cabinet, and the philoso- Pher's brain trust which is required to hold conferences on national policies before they are decided. “This policy is based on the view that the ineccapable struggle between declining cap- italist and rising socialist society can ve prevented from developing into more war, as the struggle between the feudal order and the capitalist order could not. “The condition is that the democratic ele- ments in capitalist society overcome its im- Perlalist tendencies. That is why the Soviet gcvernment is supporting democratic forms of state capitalism in liberated countries and not trying to enforce a socialist economy Out cf bitter experience Soviet leaders have gaincd historical porspective.” It may be that Lenin was right when he said the two systems canno: live side by side. But if he is proved correct in his analyses. it will simply be because capitalism refused to exert the neccesary effort. as revealed in its most recent decision to enter Greece and Turkey with money and guns. IMPACT LATER Life goes on cs usual in Valley City, in Los Angeles, in New York, and in Atlanta— today. Few realize the portent of the Tru- man announcement. Its impact is a thing which will be felt in the future. We are cn the threshold of an undeclared war on the people’s movement. An offensive has been launched by American imperialists hiding behind the cloak of democracy. The consequences of the decision, unless it 1s repudiated by the massed weight of American public opinion will be war. Monopoly capitalism, by this most recent declaration, has admitted that it cannot win with ideas, so it will try to win with guns. On, that the psople could see this thing before it is too late. Oh, that the leaders would thrust the hypocrisy from their think- ing and their deeds. Don't they understand that this thing which they are attempting can lead only to pulverization of civilization? The Charlie McCarthys of our Government cannot see that all the guns and all the ollars under the canopy of heaven will not stop the surge of progress. They cannot win. They can roll into the cauldrons of agony and death new millions of people; they can be responsible for the slaughter of half the earth's population, per- haps more. Yet they cannot stop the inexor- able sweep of progress. They are attempting to freeze the status quo; it is as futile as it wculd be to try to stop the earth from cir- cling the sun once in 24 nours. Why can't they understand this? Why won't they admit to the truth of a phrase in the Declaration of Independence which holds that “all men are created equal’? Why must the children of today be consigned to the whirlpool of oblivion tomorrow? 1s IT TOO LATE? It is late, too late I'm afraid, to halt the trend toward war. The conspirators own APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the avenues of information and they will not g've the people the truth. Without the truth people cannot, will not, awaken until this monstrous thing is upon them. But even if the hour is late, we cannot give up. The maitis still are being carried, the wires still are operating. An avalanche 07 mail pouring into congressional offices might yet turn the tide. But it must be an ava- lanche, a trickle wil] not do. If you want peace, if you want freedcm, if you want life for yourself and your children and all the children everywhere, then, please God, write those letters now. It is—now or never! Italian Peace Treaty EXTENSION OF REM/.RKS HON. IRVING M. IVES OF WEW YORK IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, March 17 (legislative day of Wednesday, February 19), 1947 Mr. IVES. Mr. President, I am a great believer in fair play and in seeing all sides of a question well covered. In that spirit, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an editoriel entitled “No Ratifi- cation Without Revision,” published in the March 5 issue of the Progresso Italo- Americano. I think it would be well for all of us to consider the editorial in the light of fair play, and from the stand- point of a desire to know all sides of a question. There being no objection, the edito- rial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: No RATIFICATION WirHouT REVISION The constituent assembly of the Republic of Italy has adopted an earnest plea to the parliaments of the United Nations emphasiz- ing the hardships caused by the projected peace treaty and urging them to sanction its revision. As Americans, proud of our demo- cratic ideals and institutions, we confidently hope that this plea will be given favorable consideration by the Senate when it acts on the proposed Italian settlement. It is our decp-rooted conviction that the best interests of the American people and international justice demand a fundamental revision of the obnoxious and onerous terms. When the Senate ofens its discussion of the proposed treaty for Italy, it will be doing so in an entirely new world situation. The present international situation is profoundly different from the one which prevailed when the Big Four foreign ministers were haggling and quibbling, bartering and bargaining over how much ‘Italy was to lose and how much Russia and her puppet Tito would be per- mitted to grab from her. The conditions of 1046 are as out of date as the pages of last year's almanac. There has been a kaleido- ecopic shift in the international scene. Great Britain, as a major buttress of western civil- ization and democracy, is no more. Her em- pire ts falling apart fast these days. Burma, Egypt,’ India, and even Greece and Palestine are no longer firmly in her sphere of domi- nation. Under theese circumstances, vastly increased responsibilities have fallen on the shoulders of the United States in the all- important task of preserving demorcracy against the hammer-blows of Asiatic ‘totali- tarianism. It is in the light of this totally new world situation that the Senate will have to re- view, re-examine, and sharply revise the now
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD completely out-dated foreign ministers’ draft treaty. Our country needs every friend it can have and hold under the banner of de- mocracy. With England badly weakened, with France living in mortal fear of Com- munist domination, with Czechoslovakia and the Balkans as prostrate Soviet satellites, the Italian people are potentially the strong- est European bulwark of the democratic way of life. This new overriding factor must be given the first consideration by the Senate. It is indeed fortunate for our country and all mankind that the Italian treaty, which now takes on a new significance, will be con- sidered in a better and cleaner atmosphcre than the one which prevailed in the horse- trading sessions of the Big Four foreign ministers, The Senators speaking for the people who have placed them in their high offices will be serving America best if they refuse to ratify any clause or provision of the treaty which violates any pledge made by our Gov- ernment to the Italian people or disregards the services rendered by the new Italy as a cobelligerent in the war against the Axis. Surely our S2nators realize that it is Just as necessary to honor pledges in foreign rela- tions as it is to respect them in domestic affairs. The good name and horor of our country and its representatives abroad are as vital to our national welfare as are the good name and honor of our legislative, judi- ciary, and executive branches of the govern- ment at home. LINES OF REVISION It is in America's interest that the 46,000,- 000 Italian people should live as a demccracy and thrive as a peaceful nation. It is clearly in the interest of the American people that Italian economy should not be crippled by unbearable reparations like those demanded in the harsh treaty. Especially with central Europe mangled and the Balkans closed to our trade (except for what we wiil give the Kremlin's puppets for nothing) is the emer- gence and maintenance of a healthy Italian economy vital to our national prosperity. Certainly an Italy weakened by brutal viola- tions of its territorial integrity (leading to the loss of 40 percent of her already too mea- ger coal reserves) can never be a prosperous Italy and can never be a .trong friend and good customer of the United States. An Italy robbed of Trieste and her pre-World War I overseas possessions, completely disarmed and stripped of her fleet which rendered such magnificent services in the common cause, cannot be the strong and worthy ally of America that she sincerely wants to be and really can be in the defense of democracy and peace, Not only has democratic Italy earned on the fleld of battle a far better peace, but America's own ideals and interests demand that our Senate demand a revision of the treaty. The American people will, therefore, be counting on the Senate to vote for no ratification without revision of the proposed iniquitous treaty. The points of revision are as clear as they are just and urgent, The territorial integrity of democratic Italy must be preserved in accord with the princi- ples of the Atlantic Charter solemnly pro- claimed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt on August 14, 1941, and providing that “no territorial changes which do not accord with the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned" should be made. In line with this pledged policy of our Government, the Senate should insist on Trieste and western Istria remaining under Italian sovereignty. Then, in recognition of General Eisenhower's declaration of November 10, 1943, that “Italy has a new role in the wdr—that role is to fight the common enemy, Germany,” the Benate should so revise the treaty as to pre- vent any power from grabbing Italy’s pre- Fascist colonies, stripping her of her navy, reducing her armed forces to little more than border and home guards, and imposing crushing reparations on her. On practical as well as moral grounds, on the basis of America’s national as well as international needs, the Senate should vote no ratification without basic revision of the Italian treaty, and should insist on a more just and generous treaty for the democratic Republic of Italy. The present draft makes impossible not only Italian recovery but even Italian survival, Let the world’s great- est democratic legislative body—the Senate of the United States—give the lead to the parliaments of the United Nations in voting an Italian treaty conducive to international stability, security, peace, and progress, Sgt. Haro!d Russell REMARKS HON. EDITH NOURSE ROGERS OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 17, 1947 Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. Mr. Speeker, the New York Times of yester- day had a very fine editorial describing Set. Harold Russell, of Massachusetts, the double-hand amputee who appears in the moving picture entitled ‘The Best Years of Our Lives.” It is a well-deserved editorial, and Sergeant Russell is to be commended for his courage and the in- domitable will he has displayed in becom- ing adjusted to the loss of his hands and to the use of the two mechanical working hands. He sets an example to everyone in the country in working against heavy odds and making a success of one’s life. He is happily married and going on to even greater things, in my opinion. It shows, Mr. Speaker, that we must do more than we have done thus far in per- fecting artificial hands and indeed in per- fecting all kinds of prosthesis. Massa- chusetts takes deep pride in Sergeant Russell. The editorial is as follows: HAROLD RUSSELL'S “OSCARS” Olivia De Haviland and Frederic March received well-earned “O:cars" on Thursdey evening from the Academy of Motion P:cture Arts and Sciences, but it was a new actor, an avowed one-timer, who walked of with the show. Harold Russell got a regular awnd for his work in the Best Years of Our Lives, as the best supporting actor of the year in the Samuel Goldwyn film, which was adjudged the best motion picture of the yzar. Then, to make sure, he wes given one of two spe- cial awards. Russell was a paratrooper who lost both hands in an accident in line of duty. In The Best Years, which also won acting hon- ors for Mr. March, writing honors for Rob- ert E. Sherwood, editing honors for Daniell Mandell, directing honors for William Wyler, and scoring honors for Hugo Friedhofcr, Russell rose to a superb opportunity. He re- vealed, as none but a crippled veteran could have done, the spiritual agonies and possible triumphs of the mutilated. He illuminated Sherwood’s poignant story with his own courage. He did more. In the film and in personal appearances in service hospitals he put courage into other afflicted men, Finally, he turned out to be a gifted actor. That alone would have justified the awards. At the moment he is studying advertising and does not plan to go on with a motion- A1047 picture career. But for the rest of their lives, the best years and the others, those who saw him in this screen play will remember him. He will represent in their minds a protest against the indignities of war. He will stand also for the valor which has its place in time of peace. May success and happiness follow him. Report From Athens EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. GEORGE G. SADOWSKI OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 17, 1947 Mr. SADOWSKI. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- orp, I wish to include an article that ap- peared in the New Republic, written by Constantine Poulos entitled “Report From Athens”: Report From ATHENS (By Constantine Poulos) Magrcn 9.—The description of the economic situation of Greece which the Greek Govern- ment presented in its note appealing for United States assistance is true. What the Greek Government neglected to mention (and what the State Department in its mag- nanimous announcement apparently ignored) is that conditions are almost wholly its own fault. With but brief exceptions, the same crowd of people has been governing Greece for the past 2 years. Their identification with priv- jleged industrial banking and commercial circlces—vested interests in the truest form—has been so clcse and tight that they cannot possibly take the measures necessary for cconomic or political stabilization of the country without committing suicide. Since the liberation of Greece, over $850, 000,000 worth of goods (including UNRRA supplies) have been brought into the ccun- try. Yet Greece's economy is worse off today than before. Thanks to UNRRA, the food situation is an exception. The government crowd has revealed a re- markable unwillingness and inability to pro- ceed with the country’s rehabilitation. It has refused to slap on an effective tax system and today is collecting only 10 percent of what it should, even under the extremely inequitable regressive system in operation. Recently the United States turned over 100 Liberty ships to the Greek merchant service, the Greek Government guaranteeing three-fourths of the purchase price. It was learned here lust week that the Government intends to place a pitiful 15-percent tax on the yearly net profit cf each ship up to $100,0C0 and no tax on any profits over that figure The United States Maritime Com- mission conservatively estimates that these Liberty ships, operated under Greek sailing conditions, will net at least $200,000 a year for private owne:s. LUXURIES ENCOURAGED The regime has refused to clamp down on loose inflationary credit policies, which per- mit extension of credit to those who need it least, and has failed to check on the pro- ductive use of that credit. Last ycar the wool manufacturers forced the Government to lower its prices on UNRRA raw stock by threatening to import raw wool. The manu- facturers then borrowed from the National Bank of Greece (i. e., the Government) to pay the Government, meanwhile continuing to
A1048 hide and hoard their liquid and unproduc- tive wealth. The Government crowd has consistently refused even to guide, let alone control, im- ports and exports. Thus importers were en- couraged to bring in luxury items. These ranged from toy ballons and Buicks to 19 tons of combs—enough to last Greece until 1999. Although UNRRA has brought over $35,000,- 00O worth of clothing and footwear into Greece in the last 2 years, the Greek Govern- ment permitted importers to bring in an addi- tional $38,000,000 worth of luxury and semi- luxury clothing and footwear from February to December of last year. During the same period, badly needed industrial machinery and spare parts, imported into Greece by pri- vate interests, were valued at only ¢4,000,000. Profits on private imports, which are fi- nanced by Government funds, run from 200 to 800 percent. With these enormous profits, importers, industrialists and brokers buy and hoard gold sovereigns from the Government, further depleting the monetary reserve. The Government crowd failed to enforce even the limited controls in existence. When the solidly entrenched textile interests vio- lated the agreement under which £0 percent of the material they spun out of UNRRA raw material was to be cheap utility cloth, the Government took no action. The Greek Gov- ernment dissipated its foreign-exchange as- sets during 1946 to such an extent that until the announcment of substantial American aid came along, a replacement of those assets during 1947 appeared impossible. As of the first of the year, Greece faced a Geficit of roughly $175,000,000 in her balance of international payments for 1947. This fig- ure is based on an austerity budget providing solely for current consumption and normal replacement. It does not take into considera- tion any long-term reconstruction and reha- bilitation projects which are obviously neces- sary if Greece's economy is to make any no- ticeable improvement in the years to come, and of course it does not include any military expenditures. LOOKING THE GIFT HORSE— The special American economic mission to Greece, headed by Paul Porter, had been ad- vised before it left Washington to try to keep any recommendation it might make for finan- cial assistance at a $50,000,000 level. Non- Greek observers believe that a loan of $120,- 000,000 would furnish substantial help—pro- vided the Greek Government imposes import, export, price, production, and credit con- trols, plus adequate taxation. This sum would allow for the inauguration of a few long-range projects. The Greeks wanted from 6200,000,000 to $300,000.000. The Gov- ernment is naturally thinking about its armed forces, whose current expenditures are running at a yearly rate of about 6240,000,- 000. . Porter's mission was sticking pretty close to its original figure with the idea of recom- mending on its return to Washington an ad- ditional grant to be made later this year if the Greek Government faithfully complied with the commission's suggestions for prac- tical controls. Faced with climbing expenditures, declin- ing revenues, with expanding industrial and agricultural credits, with a pathetic trade balance and with an UNRRA about to fold up, the Greek Government was pretty much up against the wall. It was prepared to accept odious controls proposed by the-Porter mis- aion, UNRRA economists, and Anglo-Ameri- can currency experts. PARATIONS FOR D-DAY Then came the unexpected announcement from Washington. It was perfectly timed for the Government crowd. “Porter might as well pack up and go home now,” they said. “Fifty million? Why, we'll get at least $250,- 000,000, and more important, none of Por- ter's provisions, Marshall is a bigger man than Porter.” Reactions like this started only a matter of hours after Secretary of State Marshall's announcement was issued in Washington. The Greek Prime Minister, attending a pre- viously scheduled session with American and British economists on vitally necessary eco- nomic measures, stalled the all-important discussions and then tried to adjourn the meeting. One by one the American-proposed con- trols were being jettisoned by the govern- ment in Athens last week. The Minister of Finance had previously been convinced of the need of financial censorship of the mails. This would help to prevent a tremendous illegal flow of dollars tn and out of the coun- try by big-time operators. He suddenly changed his mind. He also stood firm against any requisitioning of unproductive plants and hoarded stocks, but continued to favor labor conscription. Fully convinced that an anti-Russian United States was backing them solidiy, the Royalist right-wing Government rushed its preparations for what its newspapers call D-day—the start of operations against the Partisans. Within 24 hours after the Wash- ington announcement, the Government an- nounced that it had arrested, sentenced, and deported to island prisons nearly 600 leftists, and a source close to the office of the Minis- ter of Public Security, Napoleon Zervas, told this correspondent that “now it was only a matter of 15 days before the Communists (all non-Royalists) were cleaned out.” The American diplomats in Athens were sur- prised by the deportations, a symptom of their miserable misreading of the Greek sit- uation for the past 8 years. Subsidization of the present Government will fulfill the earnest desire of the American Embassy in Athens, but it will not solve any of Greece’s problems. No government could pull Greece out of her present economic sit- uation without help from the outside. But the regime in power has proved itself abso- lutely incompetent to utilize effectively any cutside help it may receive. It will certainly not use such aid to serve the needs of the Greek people. It is a government dedicated to complete elimination of the left. Its slogan is, “It is either we or they.” So it keeps the most pro- ductive age groups in a dicpirited army and attempts to beat the people into submissive acceptance of its reactionary policies. MEN IN THE MOUNTAINS On the other side is the average Greek worker who ts paid 7,000 drachmas a day but needs 10,000 drachmas daily just to buy him- self (not his family) 2,50) calories of focd. He will not support a government which ig- nores his needs, imprisons his trade-union leaders, and threatens him with prison, exile, and death if he protests. He will take to the mountains. For the problem of the new Greek partisans is largely an internal one, regardless of Greece's efforts to draw atten- tion away from her own shortcomings and internal weaknesses. Two bitterly fu'l years of the exploitation of men who fought Ger- mans by men who collaborated with Ger- mans have driven more Greeks into the mountains than all the encouragement from the north. Greek partisans laid down their arms once. This time they won't until they feel they can return to their homes without fear of per- secution, imprisonment, and death. At the moment, only a strong central government, headed by a8 liberal party, can possibly pro- vide such security and begin to find a blood- less solution to the present impassé, TWO ALTERNATIVES If the United States is going to decide to supplant Great Britain in Greece, it should @o so with its eyes ~pen. The old liberal leader, Themistocles Sofoulis, can pull the APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD country together again. Most of his sco- nomic experts are young, moderate leftists who are convinced of the necessity of plan- ning and control. The Communist and So- Cialist Parties are prepared to accept his leadership. Presumably, this time he will not have to face British intervention in favor of the monarchist right wing. On the other hand, if the United States gives monetary, moral, and military support to the royalists, it will be bolstering a-cruel, selfish gang. Such a policy will lead to more exploitation and larger hoarded profits; to more deportations and deaths. In the end the United States will defeat its own pur- pose—for such a policy is the surest way to hand over Greece, special delivery, to the Communist sphere. Need for National Heusing Program— Address of Hon. Charles W. Tebey, of New Hampshire ——— EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ESTES KEFAUVER OF TENNESSEE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 17, 1947 Mr. KEFAUVER. Mr. Speaker, the housing problem continues as one of our great domestic issues. Senator CHARLES W. Tosry, chairman of the Senate Com- mittee on Banking and Currency, along with a bipartisan group in both the House and Senate, is showing vision and leader- ship in this field. Under leave to extend my remarks, I am pleased to include the excellent address delivered by Senator Tosey at the National Public Housing Conference in Chicago on March 12, 1947. The address is as follows: In January of this year, President Truman told the country, “We urgently need about 5,000,000 additional homes—now.” A few Gays after the President's speech, the Na- tional Association of Home Builders issued an estimate that 1,400,000 new housing units, provided by the summer of 1947, “would re- Heve the extreme pressure.” In the epread between President's Truman's figure and that of the National Association of Home Builders, there are scarcely any good round numbers that have not been presented as somebody's estimate of the housing shortage. The cold facts are that the housing indus- try in this country has at all times failed to provide sufficient housing accommodations for the needs of the people. The sad fact is that housing costa too much. As presently organized, the house-building industry is tied up by the lack of a regular flow of materials, an absence of centralized managerial direction, and outmoded tradi- tionalism in handicraft methods of produc- tion, The result is that ownership of a house has been denied to the average low-income group. The housing industry in the past has catered to the luxury trade. Our main task today is to find some way of producing more houses for the lower-income groups that are now being neglected. Housing ts very important. The home is where a family lives and grows. The home is where the children take root. The home is where good citizenship matures. The home is mnere the mother and father and sister and ther enjoy the pursuits cf hap- piness. The home is the basic, smallest organism of our democracy, and without these organisms democracy will not iiong endure.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD 1t {s not surprising that in almost every community surveyed by housing authorities, the high death and disease rate grows with the areas of poor housing. That slums breed juvenile delinquency and crime has long been contended. They Provide the physical and encourage the so- cial environment that nourishes growth from truant, to juvenile delinquent, to felon. The prevalence of a high delinquency rate in slum reas has been established by many authorities and studies. When slums are replaced by healthy en- vironments, not only is a major cause of maladjustment eliminated, but new values are created that relieve the pressure of other harmful influences. Play areas, under prop- er supervision, go a long way toward re- ducing delinquency, as well as exposure to contagious disease. Social services rendered in -onnection with the project help guide the parent in the care of children. Evidence gathered by the Newark Housing Authority showed the tuberculosis rate among project families to be half that among outside residents of their ward. In 1943 the infant death rate was almost two- thirds lower than in the wards studied, and the rate of communicable diseases less than half that in the wards. The cost of public services in a slum is shown to be considerably higher than in otber neighborhoods. A 1939 report of the Philadelphia Housing Authority indicated that while the city-wide per capita expenditure for crime was 85.36, the cost for a selected slum area was $14.56. The housing authority of Atlanta, Ga., states that the slum areas of that city contributed 5% percent of the city’s tax revenues from real estate, but cost the city 53 percent of its police, fire, health department, and other service costs. Here is a challenging condition. To what extent must we bear the blame, because we have not furnished decent, healthful living quarters to a large segment of our population? I pose that question. I should like to touch upon one solution for America's housing problem which has already proved itself—mutual home owner- ship. It has been likened to the REA solution in the field of rural electrification. In both cases the initiative comes from the people themselves. There are right now s¢attered over the Nation, a number of thriving happy communities, where groups of families have found a way to purchase, and own, their homes through cooperative action. In some cases, loans have been ob- tained from governmental agencies. In others, the financing has been wholly from private sources, though some form of gov- ernmental guaranty of such loans renders the problem much easier. There are millions of families in the Na- tion, who may never be able to afford an individually constructed, individually f- nanced, home. Surely, we want as many of these people as possible to be home owners. Surely, we want as few of them as possible to be dependent upon public housing for decent environment for their children. It has been proved practicable, through the formation of mutual home ownership associ- ations, for groups of 100, 200, 500 families to cooperatively own their homes, Members of these associations first make their member- ship payments, which, taken together, enable the association to make the necessary down payment, Undesirable structures or estab- lishments cannot arise on mutually owned property. Iam glad to ddvise you that the new Wag- ner-Ellender-Taft housing bill, which was passed by the Senate last year but which failed to pass the House, was filed in the Senate Monday. The Banking and Currency Committee of the Senate will soon hold hear- ings on the changes that have been made in the prior bill. The aim of that bill is to deal with the total long-range housing prob- lem. Its purpose is to stimulate the housing industry, to achieve mass production of houses at much reduced cost. Opponents of this legislation have attempted to smear it by branding it “a step to socialism.” The fact 1s that 90 percent of the program is de- voted to encouraging private construction of homes. Only the short-sighted builder will consider it a threat to his establighed business. The farsighted builder will follow the lead of the labor unions, which have recently come to the support of the bill. These unions realize that mass production of houses, by making available to a greater market more and more houses, will give the housing industry the quality of stability, which it has lacked in the pust. So, friends of the National Public Housing Conference, I share your interest in this far- reaching objective of adequate housing fa- cilities, and will demonstrate that interest in @ practical way, by striving for the approval in committee, and passage on the Senate floor, of adequate legislation to implement our common objective. What Is the Republican Policy? EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KARL E. MUNDT OF SOUTH DAKOTA IN THE HOUSE UF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 17, 1947 Mr. MUNDT. Mr. Speaker, since the Republican Party now has a majority in both Houses of Congress for the first time in 16 years it is understandable that many citizens are asking such questions as “What is Republican policy?”, “How is Republican policy defined?”, and “Who fashions the Republican policy?” During the long, expensive regime of the New Deal majorities in Congress there was never any uncertainty as to what was New Deal policy because it was always precisely the policy that the President prescribed. Republicans have a different concept of free government. Republicans oppose one-man govern- ment. Republicans develop their party policies from the ground up rather than from the throne down. It is important that Americans, generally, come to understand the processes and procedures by which Republican Party policies are formulated. In the February issue of the Republi- can, I included some detailed discussion of this subject in an article which I wrote for that magazine. Under leave granted me by the House, I would like to call at- tention to the extracts from that article which deal with the question of Republi- can Party policy. How REPuBLICANS FASHION THEIR PARTY POLICIES (Extracts from an article by Hon. Kart E. Mounot in the Republican for February 1, 1947) On taxes, on labor, on tariffs, on social legislation, and on many other problems, many are asking in Washington these days, and across the length and breadth of America, “What is the Republican policy?” The uninitiated and credulous are too prone to read the newspaper interviews of some prominent Republican, in or out of Congress, on or off the Republican National Committee, and to conclude that because “a Republican said it” it “must be Republican - Al1049 policy.” All of us who are R2publicans can help in our individual capacities to diep2l such illusions and to correct such faulty conclusions. Republican policy is something which comes about thrcugh a voluntary, undr.ven meeting of minds. It is an attitude or a policy which grows up from the ercss roots and registers itself in group action. It is never something simply enunciated by en important Republican—no matter how im- portant or well Known or illustricus---and then handed down to the party as a politi- Cal Mosiac code from a high mountain. WHAT IS THE GOP POLICY? The long years of President Roosevelt's regime have tended to befuddie some news- paper writers and many individual Ameri- cans about the true nature of what is gradu- ally recognized as Republican policy or the Republican position on important issues. Under F. D. R., the Democratic or New Deal Party did become nothing more than an echoing chorus of collective affirmations on the part of the Members of Congress and even the State governors elected on the ticket which F. D. R. headed. Democratic policy was usually whatever the President said it was. Since Democratic committee chairmen and party leaders seldom voiced an opinion on a controversial issue without first clearing it with the White House, it was usually cor- rect to assume that when a prominent Democratic Party or Government official spoke, he was actually stating Democratic policy. Out of this long era of servility to one-man leadership, a mistaken notion has developed among some that Republican policy will likewise be something which can be identified easily by assuming that it is whatever some Republican leader may de- clare 1t to be in public statement. Such is not the case. HOW IS REPUBLICAN POLICY DEFINED? We who are Republicans should appreciate the fact that Republican policy is a party responsibility and not a personal pronounce- ment. Out of party conferences in which not only the leaders but also the rank-and- file Republicans participate this party policy is evolved. It reflects itself in congressional action, not in the acclamation of Members of Congress. It registers itself in our great national convention platforms, not in the pronouncements of candidates for the Presi- dential nomination or by men of lesser stature. It is the work of many authors, not the declaration of a few individuals even when they speak from high places and in agreement. It may be recognized by the votes of Republican majorities in Congress and in the State Icgislatures but not by the reports, even of colgressionnal or legislative committees, much less their respective, indi- vidual chairman. 1t is important, this writer belicves, that we Republicans retain this grass-roots phi- locophy and this broud base in the deter- mination of Republican policy. Individuals should speak freely and forceiully in their own right and in support of their own con- victions, but those who hear or read these individual speeches should keep in mind that one-man rule is not a Revublican prin- Ciple and that Republican policy can never be correctly recugnized by assuming that a personal pronouncement has the weight of @ party policy. In Republican circles, it does not work that way. Let the Democrats continue, if they must, to be a party whore crecd ts the voice of its mightiest man. Let us FRe- publicans keep our party the voice of the people, Mr. Speaker, government of the people, by the people, and for the pcople is a Republican concept. Let us be certain that it continues to function as the gov- erning formula of the Republican Party.
A1050 Tighten Up Your Belt, and Get Ready To Dig Deep Into Your Pocket EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CLARE E. HOFFMAN OF MICHIGAN IN THE FOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 17, 1947 Mr. HOFFMAN. Mr. Speaker, just as we continued to ship scrap metal to Japan, which later was shot back at your sons, we have continued to send mate- rial to Russia which may be used against us if war comes. We saved Russia, gave her military power, now propose to fight her with dollars and men. The President did not indulge in “double talk.” He laid down a policy. Nor did he deny that compliance there- with might, probably would, lead to war. His demand that we give several] hun- dred millions of dollars to Greece and Turkey was this morning followed by requests from other nations for com- parable gifts, and there wil] be more. The President’s demand is backed by some Republicans in the Upper House, who describe themselves as bipartisans on foreign affairs. They have always in- sisted upon the establishment of United Nations, an international organization which the President now bypasses; which was brought into being to settle just such disputes as this, but which now proves ineffective. Neither the President nor his bipar- tisan supporters, while advocating a course which may involve us in war, have apparently counted either the cost or considered our ability to meet it. The President did not, nor has any world statesman in the Upper House, given us any estimate as to how many dollars, how many tons of shipping, how many planes, guns, or men and women, may be required to make good our posi- tion. Nor has anyone determined whether we can supply the necessary ma- terial to raise, equip, and maintain abroad the armies which may be needed. Do not think that the prospect of a third world war is a figment of some- one’s imagination. Read and read again these words from the President's mes- sage: In addition to funds, I ask the Congress to authorize the detail of American civilian and military personnel to Greece and Turkey, at the request of those countries, to assist in the tasks of reconstruction— And so forth. True, an army js not directly asked by Mr. Truman, but a rep- resentative of our country on the ground recently suggested that the first con- tingent should consist of 100,000 men. As always, armies will follow our dollars. The morning, March 14, papers carry the announcement that a committee of the Upper House decided to keep the draft files available right where they are. That means just one thing—that soon there may be a move to draft young men to fight another world war. The productive machinery of this country, without which no war can be won, has not yet been set in order. We are still burdened with an overwhelming public debt. Almost daily come letters from housewives demanding, when com- pared with the demands which wil] be made if and when World War III begins, a petty additional 5 pounds o- sugar, which they cannot get. They ask for sugar and we give them war. The factory worker, with his $35 or $40 take-home pay check, because of the ris- ing cost of living, is having difficulty keeping his wife and children fed, clothed, and housed. Because the war took so much of our material, veterans are homeless. Payments. to veterans mount into the billions, some $7,000,000,- 000 for 1947 and 1948. Another war means millions more veterans and their dependent:. Our national income does not yet equal our outgo. We continue to borrow money to pay current bills. The more we borrow and put into circulation, the higher soar the prices of everything that everyone needs. If we are to make the requested loans or gifts—whichever you prefer to call them—taxpayers might just as well pre- pare for an increase in taxes. Those in the lower-income brackets might just as well forget their hope that further ex- emptions from taxation will be made. Everything we eat, wear or use will cost more. All the individuals and organizations which are asking for additiona) payments and appropriations for this, that, and the other purpose might just as well save their pencils and ‘paper, their pens and ink; forget their desires for Federal aid. The young men, if the present indi- cated policy is continued, might just as well begin to prepare for training camps, embarkation points, service abroad. Parents might just as well begin to make their plans to carry on without the young folks. You don’t like the above. Neither do I. But by just the same sort of propa- ganda that we are getting today we be- came involved in World War Il. And, if the people of America do not make them- selves heard, we will shortly be in World War Ii. I would be less than honest if I did not do my utmost to point out the possibilities of the present situation. A well-organized, sustained effort is now being made to put upon the shoul- ders of our already overburdened tax- payers the load to bail out the British Empire, to finance political minorities and political majorities in many another land. We spent billions in China. We sent an army there and, in the end, General Marshall, now Secretary of State, after a@ personal visit and due consideration, told us to get out and come home, that the task was hopeless. There is no rea- son to believe we can be more successful in Greece, Turkey, the Balkans, or else- where in Europe. Smear propaganda is being hurled at those of us who oppose another war. Now we will be accused of aiding the Communists. Some of us fought the Communists when Mrs. Roosevelt, without disap- proval from the President, and the war- mongers were aiding them; when the ad- ministration welcomed them to Federal key positions—and some of them are APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD still in positions of trust where they can do incalculable harm, We will continue to fight them. Nor will we be frightened from our efforts to prevent war by a smear campaign. - If the question is, Shall we send sup- plies to be distributed under our own ad- ministration to feed hungry people, then my answer is an emphatic yes—send all we can. If the policy is to send our money, sup- plies, and men to aid either a minority or a majority faction to impose our or some other political theory or our choice of a form of government upon their peo- ple, then the answer, more emphatically, is no. We have always insisted that Euro- pean nations—in fact, all other na- tions—should stay out of the Western Hemisphere; should not seck to impose their political or economic theories upon nations in North or South America. Long ago, we told the world that, if any nation across the seas attempted to dic- tate the policy of any South or North American nation, a war would resuit. Now, we reverse the doctrine; insist that we will tell Russia that she shall acquire no new territory; that she shall not attempt to convert other people to her political thought and that, if she does, she will meet our armed forces. We tell the whole world to stay out of, maintain a “hands off” attitude as to North and South America. Then we turn around and say we are going to prescribe the line of conduct which Rus- sia and other nations in Europe shall follow. Does that make sense? Whether it does or whether it does not, can we make good on that policy without de- stroying ourselves? My constructive suggestion is that, while extending, as we always have, charitable aid to the utmost of our ability to unfortunate people, we begin to think and to act in the interests of our own country—our own people. Since the foregoing statements were dictated, one on March 8, prior to the President’s appearance before Congress, and the other on the 14th, after he per- Sonally gave Congress his policy, to my desk came an editorial from the News- Palladium of March 13—Stanley R. Ban- yon, editor and publisher—of Benton Harbor, Mich., which so concisely, so clearly and in fewer words expresses my thought, that I incorporate it herein. The editorial is as follows: ‘ON THE WRONG COURSE President Truman's foreign policy address to Congress Wednesday went far beyond even the most pessimistic forecasts. {In effect, what the Chief Executive asks Congress and the American people to do is to forswear the goal of international amity and cooperation and reduce the United Na- tions ideal to sophistry. The President of the United States proposes, to all intents and purposes, that America embark upon a course of power politics that can, as we see it, lead only to World War II. . Not only did Mr. Truman ask Congress to authorise loans totaling some $400,000,000 to bankrupt Greece and Turkey, but he svig- gests that American military experts be sent to those countries to train native armies equipped by the American taxpayers. This course, we are told, is one of humsni- - To the American people tnat will seem a strange world.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Mr. Truman frankiy stated that his pur- pose is to erect barricades against further expansion of communism. He studiously avoided reference to Russia, but he had no other nation in mind. We do not believe in communism; the vast majority of American people have no use for the communistic theory, but that dis- belief in an economic and political creed does not require us to embark upon a world crusade to crush communism—and Russia— fromthe face of the earth. As we have said before, and say again, we do not believe it to be the duty, moral or otherwise, of America to attempt to take over management of the world. We believe that as a people we should practice what we preach, and we preach freedom of thought and independence. We do not believe in the principle of forcing our theories upon other peoples. We do not believe that the American people want to be made tools of British imperialism, or that the American people will consent to a@ reversion to colonial status. We believe that $400,000,000 for veterans’ housing would constitute a greater bulwark against communism than $400,000,000 turned over to Greek and Turkish dictatorships. Mr. Truman’s address cannot be contem- plated without alarm and the grave:t mis- givings. We cannot fail to meditate, as we consider the Russians' reaction as well as our own, the distrust and fear we would feel, as @ people, should Stalin propose a $200,000,- 000 or 8400,000,000 loan and military advice to Mexico and other Latin-American coun- tries with the implied understanding that it be applied as pressure against the United States. Is the analogy s0 far-fetched? It is assumed Mr. Truman and his advisers believe Russia will absorb Turkey and Greece if we don't act. We have made no move (except of course diplomatically and economically) to establish a protectorate over Latin-Amer- ica. But neither has Stalin invaded Greece or Turkey. New Filipino Attitude Toward American Capital EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. GORDON L. McDONOUGH OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 17, 1947 Mr. McDONOUGH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include as a part of my remarks a statement by Mr. Vicente Villamin, Filipino lawyer and economist, of Los Angeles, Calif. Mr. Villamin’s statement is entitled “American Capital in Filipino Hands.” I believe it gives a new picture of the part that American capital could play in the development of Philippine natural re- sources, Mr. Villamin presents the op- portunity of the Filipinos to undertake the task themselves. That’s a great idea. The American people are interested in seeing that the new independent Philip- pine nation succeed not only tolerably but magnificently. The Filipino people have able political leaders. They now need economic leaders, I think Mr. Vil- lamin is one of them. He is doing his country a great service by giving his peo- ple new economic ideas that tend to make the country greater, richer, and more stable. The American people do not want the Filipinos, or any people, to be exploited or mistreated. We want to help them. They deserve it. They are our friends. The Filipinos have the capacity to make their country great economically. Mr. Villamin is showing the way. It is up to them to act, and it isuptoustoaid. w AMERICAN CAPITAL IN FILIPINO HANDS (By Vicente Villamin) When years ago I opposed immediate and absolute Philippine independence, I was sup- ported in public by an overwhelming minor- ity of the Filipino people. I favored a do- minion status, which is independence plus instead of independence minus, with vast economic and security advantages thrown in. All that is water over the dam. Independ- ence is here and the minority is no more. All of us are now in the national echelon, head- ed by the President of the Republic, plug- ging away to make independence a great success. In a democracy, an imaginary fence marks the division of opinion on public questions. A two-party government is essential, but it is dangerous for a new nation to let the fence rise too high. Independent Filipinos should try and scale the fence down by offering the public ideas and information on national problems for discussion, thereby arresting the easy resort to personalities, trivialities, and recriminations that do the country nothing but harm. With a background of more than 25 years of economic experiences, I am do- ing just that with enthusiasm. Let us discuss American capital, since it is the outstanding issue in the debate on the parity amendment. I wish to present a new concept of American capital; namely, that Filipinos themselves go after it, get it and use it, with the aid of American and foreign managerial and technical help, to expand and diversify their economic activities and to de- velop the country’s natural resources. Only the exploiter of public ignorance and the promoter of backwardness could be against American capital as an instrument of Philippine progress wielded by Filipino hands. Let us test this assertion in the light of simple actualities and prove that the con- cept has dynamic possibilities. Example 1: Supposing a Filipino wants carabaos, plows, seeds, and fertilizers for his farm. He goes to an American bank in Manila—say, the newly opened Bank of America—for a loan of $50,000 and gets it at a fair rate of interest. He then procures his needs, starts to work, raises his crops, sells his product, makes a profit, and after a time starts paying his debt to the bank. There he is using American capital—hiring it to work for him for a reasonable fee. With the bank’s aid he created wealth, providing work and wages, enhancing trade and commerce, paying the Government taxes and putting more money in circulation, How could he be against that capital? And who is the pa- trioteer to tell him to refuse it? This example represents a goodly portion of capital operations in the fleld of agricul- ture. Similar loans may be for a sawmill, a hemp-stripping machine, a copra-drying unit, a rattan furniture factory, a bus line, an office building, and so on. Example 2: A Filipino wants to purchase an electric-power plant in the United States. It costs $500,000, but he has only half of the price. The enterprise has been investigated and found to be a good credit risk. There are at least two sources of financing open to him in the United States. Either the seller could let him have the plant on a long-term credit with the cooperation of his bank, or, on the seller's application, the Export-Import Bank, a Government institution, might finance the purchase as an export proposi- tion, He gets his power plant, operates it, and in due course meets his obligations and becomes its outright owner. That's Ameri- can capital employed by him, a Filipino, to build up his industrial enterprise. Al1051 Example 8: A group of Filipinos organized into a corporation wants to work a mine, a hydroelectric utility, a lumber concession, or a banana plantation. They want $1,000,000 in the United States. Several sources of cap- ital are available: (1) A bank, especially one with a branch in the Philippines; (2) a pri- vate person or persons who have money to invest; (3) an investment trust; (4) the con- sumer, importer, or distributor who, desiring to assure the supply of a commodity, finances, partially at least, its production; and (5) a bank investment house raising capital for the enterprise by issuing bonds and selling stocks to the public. That, again, is American cap- ital in Filipino hands. Who but a bargain wholesaler of false patriotism would shun that capital? Example 6: The Export-Import Bank is @ great reservoir of credit, It has financed ex- ports of materials and services for a steel plant in Chile, for air, railway, and ocean transport in Brazil, for highways, aviation and electric installations in Mexico, for ex- port of raw cOtton and other articles to Eu- ropean countries, for purchase of cargo ves- sels, Coal mining, railway, and generating plants in China, for locomotive and coal cars in Poland, for a line of gocds and serv- ices to Holland, and many other instances, The Reconstruction Finance Corporation, whose organic law is undergoing revision, 1s also a supplier of credit and capital. Example 6: The Philippine Government has asked the American Government tor a budgetary loan of $400,000,000 for a 5-year prriod and the Export-Import Bank for $250,000,000 for reconstruction an new con- struction work. That, of course, is American capital intended to help the Philippines. The Philippine Rehabilitation Corporation has started operations in Manila. It has $150,000.000 capital, two-thirds of which are from sales of surplus property received as a gift from the American Government. It will make loans for new industries and self-liqui- dating projects. The International Bank for Reconstruc- tion and Development will soon open its doors, Offering a source of capital. The Canadian Government, under its Export Credits Insurance Act, is also providing capi- tal to foreign countries at low interest rates for rehabilitation of trade with Canada. As an object lesson, the development of Korea by Japan partly with American capi- tal suggests a course for the island of Min- danao. The Japanese Government organ- ized the Oriental Development Corp., which obtained an initial working capital of $50,000,000 at 414-percent interest from the American money market. That was some 25 years ago. Filipinos mustn't get the idea that getting capital in the United States is as easy as it sounds in the examples here given, but they must know that they have an equal chance, sometimes possibly better, as the Americans themselves to get American capi- tal for use in the Philippines. The Filipino will get it and the American will not if the Filipino has the better credit risk. And that means that the Filipinos must organize and energize themselves and work with the Gov- ernment in their overseas efforts. Without an iota of doubt, the Filipinos need and want American capital. When even anticapitalist Russia is trying to borrow American money, the Philippines couldn’t be the only country in the world that wouldn't hire that money for a charge that would make usury an extinct malady. The basic interest of the Filipinos is to make the Philippines a gocd investment field. A business enterprise may be an excellent credit risk, but located in surroundings of unrest, disorder and uncertainty, uncon- sclonably high taxes and excessive Govern- ment interference, will induce capital to con- sider that enterprise as a speculation inetead of an investment and it wouldn't venture
A1052 there at all, and that would redound to the injury of the people. The United States has lent capital to countries whose stability is precarious on conditions onerous to the borrower to safe- guard it. Those are the cases that have given rise to the hue and cry of capitalistic imperialism, often the alibi of the defaulting borrowers and their springtime leftist friends tn the United States. Loans to a friendly country like the Philippines with ideals and standards similar to the American would naturally be liberal in terms and in amounts. The Philippines have a decided advantage over almost any other country as a pros- pective employer of American capital, both private and governmental. Several acts of the American Congress connect the new Na- ticn to the United States economically and internationally. Thus the plebiscite on the parity amendment to the Philippine Consti- tution involves the implementation of the concept of American capital in Filipino handse—the same formula that Americans worked out when they started building their infant nation with British capital, equip- ment, and technical scrvices. The Passing of the Honorable Walter S. Goodland, ef Wisconsin EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. MERLIN HULL OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 17, 1947 Mr. HULL. Mr. Speaker, on Wednes- day, March 12, Governor Walter S. Gaod- land, Wisconsin’s 84-year-old Governor, quietly passed away. Citizens of Wiscon- sin in all walks of life mourn the depar- ture of their friend and leader. His great courage and independent spirit won for him the respect and admiration of the People of his State and of the Nation. Mr, Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the fol- lowing editorial from the Capital Times, of Madison, Wis., which is a fitting trib- ute to a great public servant: WALTER SAMUEL GOODLAND The death of Gov. Walter Samuel Good- land is a tragic event for Wisconsin. It takes from the State one of the most revered public servants in the State’s history. It removes from the present political scene a man in whom the people had deep trust and faith. But most tragic is the knowledge that the last barrier against the reaction which has engulfed this State is gone. The man who stood as a rugged, unyielding force against those who seek to make the State a minion for the selfish and powerful few no longer stands as the shield of the people. In recent years the hand of special privi- lege has scized political contro] in-this State. It dominates the legislature. Our represen- tation in Congress is overwhelmingly reerc- tionary. The statehouse is manned by the men who look backward and not forward in their concept of the social needs of our time, But the people, under Goodland, had faith in their government because they knew that Walter Goodland was their Governor. He stood ready to use his veto and marshal public opinion against the onslaught of the privileged few. In the past two sessions of the legislature he used his veto power, time . after time, to protect the people's interests, The gamblers and racketeers who were de- basing free government in the State felt his whiplash. Attempts to impose secrecy on income-tax returns, to juggle the election laws for advantage, met the stinging rebuke of the “old man” in the east wing. The lobbyists who infest the State capitol for their spectal interest clients knew his scorn. Rarely did he ever fail to meet an issue head on where tho welfare of the people was being challenged. Walter Goodland’s success was due to the fact that he weighed the issues which come to his desk by balancing them cgainst the common good. If they were fcund wanting, they were vigorously rejected. Unlike a younger man in his position, he was not moved by political expediency; his decisions were not dictated by considera- tions of gaining support from specir! groups, The smart politicians freely predicted that he was committing political suicide by antagonizing powerful and influential] groups. Eut Walter Goodland wars demonstrating something that few politicians secm to kncw today. He showed that the people will re- srond to a man who is honest and fearless enough to make his cecisions on the basis of what ts good for all the people. Bsccuse of that the people were for him. They came to regard him as the symbo!l of honesty in government. They gave him, unreservedly, their trust. Gocdland should stand as an example to other politicians of today who seem to think that pussy-footing and equivocation is the road to politteal succzss. We especially com- mend his recovd and station in the esteem of the peopte to Acting Gov. Oscar Rennebohm. A great and beloved public servant ts gone. But another symbo! of integrity, courage. and a genuine desire to serve the public has been added to Wisconsin's political tradittons. Walier Goodland has won a rightful piace among the great political immortais pro- duced by Wisconsin. We believe that a fitting epitaph for his rich life of service can be found in the motto which he once carried on the masthe2d of his newspaper: “Independent in all things; neutral in none.” The Ti Doctrine EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. GEORGE A. SMATHERS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 17, 1947 Mr. SMATHERS. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- orp, I include the following editorial fram the New York Times of March 16, 1947: THE TRUMAN DOCTRINE American public opinion, so far as it can now be measured, has recetved President Truman's proposals for Greece and Turkey with sober approval. Our mood is anything but war-minded and imperialistic. If we are relieved at the President's statement it is for two reasons: first, because what has been said, unofficially, in low voices and in cor- ners, is now said in the open, for all to hear; second, because we believe that the Truman plan is more likely to prevent than to cause war. We must not be fatalistically misled by the steps which ended in our being forced into the Second World War. There need be no parallel, We are not saying to Russia that she must end or modify her system. We are not saying that she cannot advocate her sys- tem outside her own boundaries. We are not even saying what her boundaries shall be. That is being left to negotiation. We are APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD not trying to dictate the future of the for- mer enemy states of Germany and Austria. Our representatives are discussing these mat- ters across the board in Moscow with the French, British, and Russian delegates. ‘We are not entering into a campaign against communism. We are quite willing to leave the question of how much of the earth is to be communistic to the proccsses of peaceful argument. We have confidence in our own system in any such bloodless war of ideas. What we do object to is the spread of communistic imperialism, or any other Kind of imperialism, by violent or conspira- tor’al methods. President Truman clearly believed that he couid do more for peace by stating this posi- tion now than by remaining silent. We agzce. We believe that the position so taken is in line with the United Nations Charter, which Russia has acoepted. We are bound, and Russia is bound, by the rule that mem- bers of the United Nations “shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or uee of force ageinst the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.” The President does not propose to violate that ordinance tm Greece, and if he did so propore the American public would not sup- port him. We are going into Greece for the purpose of protecting the Greeks against external ion, restoring their economic health, and enabling them to deetde for themselves what kind of government and what kind of system they prefer. We do not intend to set up an American system in Greece, in Tutkey, or in any country beyond our borders. If eny country, in a free elec- tion, chooses communism we will raise no ob‘ections. In the case of Greece our intervention must have the momentary effect of strength- ening the government of King George. The President pointed out that that government was chosen last year in what 692 American observers considered to be “a fair expression of the views of the Greek people.” But those views, let us frankly admit, were colored by the iear that a vote against royalty would be construed as a vote for communism. If this fear were removed the more liberal ele- ments in Greek life would face a different set of alternatives. That they realize this is shown by the expressions of approval President Truman announced yesterday he had received from all Greek perties except the Communists. This newspaper believes that American policy in Greece might well call for a new election when the immediate Crisis is over, with every democratic right protected, and that such an election would modify some of the illiberal tendencies of the present government. We are not partisans of Greek royalty. We are partisans only of democracy. After Secretary Marshall's statement to the Council of Foreign Ministers on Friday the Russians can have no doubt what we mean by democracy. We mean in Germany, and we mean everywhere, civil rights, free and competitive elections, free trade-untons, free- dom of preas and radto, and freedom of move- ment for persons and goods. We mean the “basic rights of the individual.” And these, manifestly, are not weapons by which unwill- ing populations can be controlled. We can trust Secretary Marshall, as oppor- tunity offers, to state our position in detail as clearly and as forcibly as he stated our general principles. Moscow's conoept of international morality is not the same as ours. Yet, we believe the men of the Kremlin do have some comon sense. We believe they must realize as much as we do the folly of war with modern weapons, and must realize also that in such a war their own system might go down. We therefore hold that by being firm and definite at this time we are doing all we can to prevent a war which nobody wants and from which nobody could reap anything but
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD catastrophe. ‘We offer Russia a peaceful con- test between the two systems, without force and on their merits. We make the offer now because a policy of drift might eventually render peaceful processes impossible. Communists War on Greece . EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. GEORGE MacKINNON OF MINNESOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 17, 1947 Mr. MacKINNON, Mr. Speaker, in the President’s message to the Congress on March 12, he made the following state- ment: The very existence of the Greek state is to- day threatened by the terrorist activities of several thousand armed men, led by Com- munists, who defy the Government's au- thority at a number or points, particularly along the northern boundaries. This statement of the President is sup- ported by the following news story which had previously appeared in the Washing- ton (D. C.) Star for February 28, 1947: UNION OF MACEDONIA WITH YUGOSLAVIA AIM, GREEK RED CONFESSES SALONIKA, GREECE, February 27.—A Greek Communist testified today before the United Nations Balkan Investigating Committee that the Macedonian autonomist movement was aimed eventually at attaching all of Mace- donia to the Yugoslav federation. Efstathios Valtadoros, 27, a Salonika rail- road man, said the movement had its head- quarters in Skoplje, Yugoslavia, and that un- derground traffic moved across the ho.dcr regularly with the knowledge of Yuzoslav frontier guards. The movement intended, the witness sa‘d, not only to “liberate” Greek Macedonia, but also to “free all of Macedonia, including the area lying in Bulgaria, and then attach it to the Yugoslav federated states.” Mark F. Ethridge, American representative on the Security Council Commission, asked if this was to be done by peaceful or “other means.” The movement was instructed to follow a “dynamic policy,” the witness said. What did he mean by dynamic, asked the Yugoslav representative, Josip Djerje. “Act of war,” Valtadoros replied. This dispatch was 26 hours in relay from Salonika. In Athens, the Ministry of Tele- graph announced today that, because guer- rillas were cutting telegraph and telephone lines, communications between Salonika and Athens were being carried principally by wireless, which can handle a maximum of 14,000 words in 24 hours. Communications from the north of Greece, therefore, are delayed. School-Lunch Program EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. JOSEPH R. BRYSON OF SOUTH CAROLINA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 17, 1947 Mr. BRYSON. Mr. Speaker, it is in- deed a serious situation that faces the school-lunch program in our Nation. We are told that unless a deficiency ap- propriation is made by Congress, the pro- gram will expire on March 31 for lack of funds. The precipitous rise in the cost of liv- ing has been clearly reflected in this worth-while program and the money ap- propriated last year has just not been sufficient to carry it on until the end of the current school year. I firmly believe that it is very poor economy when we quibble over the ex- penditure of a few million dollars to be invested in the health and well-being of the school children of our Nation. No other program sponsored by the Federal Government has met with more wholehearted approval by the people of the Nation, and no program has had less criticism. The amount of money in- volved is insignificant in proportion to the benefits derived from the school lunch program. The money spent for this program is an investment in health, happiness, and national security. If we are to be strong as a Nation our children must be healthy; they must be assured of the nutritious foods they require. Mr. Speaker, I, for one, do not want to be guilty of depriving a single child of the food that he needs. But I know that if we fail in our responsibility to appro- priate sufficient money to carry this pro- gram on, many thousands of children will be deprived of the food they need. In order that we may have a clear pic- ture of the national school-lunch pro- gram, I would like to quote in part from a pamphlet issued by the Department of Agriculture: The President signed the National School Lunch Act on June 4, 1946. In that act “it is * * ® declared to be the policy of Congress, a8 a measure of national security, to safeguard the health and well-being of the Nation's children and to encourage the do- mestic consumption of nutritious agricul- tural commodities and other food, by assist- ing the States, through grants-in-aid and other means, in providing an adequate sup- ply of foods and other facilities for the es- tablishment, maintenance, operation, and ex- pansion of nonprofit echool-lunch programs.” The United States Department of Agriculture is responsible for carrying out the provisions of the act. Federal funds will be apportioned among the States according to the number of chil- dren enrolled in school and per capita in- come of the State. The law requires, how- ever, that Federal funds accepted be matched dollar for dollar by the State unti: 1951, Atl- ter that year, the State contribution will be increased. School lunches are &® community affair. It’s simple to start a school-lunch program. Any group that is interested, such as parent- teacher association, service club, or other civic group, can cooperate with school offi- cials in initiating one and can become & sponsor. The sponsor js responsible for operating the lunch program in the school. The spon- sor provides facilities, equipment, supervi- sion, labor, and additional funds needed for the program. Expenditures for such items may count toward the matching of Federal funds. A reasonable value may be put on goods and services contributed to the pro- gram. A small amount may be charged the children for the lunch if they are able to pay. Money derived from these sources may piso be counted toward matching Federal nds, A1053 The program must be operated on a non- profit basis. The lunch must be available to all children regardless of their ability to pay and without discrimination. Anplica- tion should be made to the State Dcpart- ment of Education or other State agency designated by the governor, Assistance is in the form of reimbursement after purchases have becn made. The totul amount which a school may receive dcpends on the type of lunch served, the amount spent for food, the need for aid, and the number of lunches served to childien. There is no reimbursement for meals fcr adults. The sponsor enters into an asreement with the State agency. Food is purchased lecally by the sponsor's representative and reim- bursoment is made monthly in keeping with the provisions of the program. There 1s also help for the purchase of equipment u3ed in storing, preparing, and serving food for school lunches. Prior approval must ke otained from the State agency for each plece of equipment to be paid for out cf funds cvail- able for this program. During the 1945-46 school term this program served more than 4 500,000 children, and in this year’s program it has been estimated that more than 7,000,000 have been served. I am convinced that it will be a grave mistake, Mr. Speaker, if we allow this national school-lunch program to go by default. A concurrent rerolution relating to the school-lunch program Whereas the Federal Government has been offering the States assistance to develop and expand achool-lunch programs, and after ex- tended hearing the Seventy-ninth Congress passed the National School Lunch Act, which was signed by the President June 4, 1946, and became Public Law 296; and Whereas section 2 of this act reads as fol- lows: “It is hereby declared to be the policy of Congress, as a measure of national secu- rity, to safeguard the health and well-being of th: Nation’s children, and to encourage the domestic consumption of nutritious agricul- tural commodities and other food, by assist- ing the States, through grants-in-aid and other means, in providing an adequate sup- ply of foods and other facilities for the estab- Hehment, maintenance, operation, and ex- pansion of nonprofit school-lunch program”, an Whereas South Carolina is meeting its share of the costs as required by law and is complying with other phases of the act; and Whereas school officials and the public in general consider the school-lunch program one of the most important Federal-aided activities in the State and Nation; and Whercas the basis for strengthening our Nation is through better nutrition for our school children and a wider market for the products of our farms; and Whereas nothing is more important in our national life than the welfare of our chil- aren, and proper nourishment comes first in attaining this welfare; and Whereas if Congress chould fail to make Necessary financial provisions the echool- lunch program in South Carolina would come to a close in most of our small and poorer schools: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the senate (the house of rep- rescntatives concurring), That the South Carolina delegation in the National Congress are hereby urged to support a deficiency ap- propriation for carrying the school-lunch program for the current year, and an ap- propriation for continuing the program for the next year (1947-43); and. be it further Resolved, That a copy of this resolution b2 forwarded by the clerk of the senate to Senators and Representatives in Congress from South Carolina, in Washington.
Al054 L. Keys, Pullman Porter EXTENSION OF REMARKS KON. A. SIDNEY CAMP OF GEORGIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 17, 1947 Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- ord, I include the following editorial from the Jackson (Ga.) Progress-Argus of March 6, 1947: Ir’s Tus War (By Doyle Jones, Jr.) The nobility of man it seems is not deter- minded by shallow external appearances as wealth, soctal position, clothes, etc., but rather is built on the bedrock of character deep within a person. Neither, as some cnooge to believe, is it reserved for any spe- cial race, color, or creed, yet few have better exemplified the majesty of man over circum- stance as did the humble porter who chose to die that others might live. I imagine to- day that L. Keys, porter, hes a much better jo> on a railway that most will concede is not run on earthly tracks. Reprinted herewith is an editorial from the Atlanta Journal of Sunday, March 2: L. KEYS, PORTER Bauve qui peut—save himself who can— has been the motto of many a man. It even became the cry of the Old Guard as it fied from the fleld of Waterloo. But if it occurred to L. Keys, pullman porter on the Pennsylvania Synshine Spe- cial, Thureday night, he did not heed its blandishment. Instecd, in a careening car dashing in mad flight down Cresson moun- tain, Keys went from passenger to passenger, counseling them to lie on the floor in order best to sustain the crash that would come in a few minutes. Then Keys went to the platform and renewed his desperate efforts to set the emergency brakes. Life was crushed from his body when the car leaped the track and rommed into the mountain- side. L. Keys, pullman porter, probably was a second-class citizen on election days, but he - Was a first-class man in the car Cascade Mirage when death beckoned to many and he erranged that only he should answer the summons. St. Patrick’s Day Radio Address EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HAROLD D. DONOHUE OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 17, 1947 Mr. DONOHUE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- orD, I wish to include the following radio talk given by Mr. George E. Reedy, over Station WOL, Washington, on March 17, 1947, in honor of St. Patrick's birthday: I bid you the top of the morning. Today is St. Patrick's Day. All hail to the Irish. All honor and giory to them. Brilliant are the pages of our country’s history, with their deeds and courage. They have fought through the centuries, on a thousand blood-bought battlefields, and have crimsoned the seven seas. The Irish fought gallantly, under George Washington, in the war for independence. They fought, too, for the preservation of the Union, under General Meagher, at the battle of Predericks- burg. They were at the Alamo, in Texas, and at Custer’s last stand, at Little Bighorn, in Montana. And our World War II casualty list is sprinkled with Ireland's martyred sons. It is delightful to recall that the password adopted by Washington was St. Patrick. John Hancock was the first signer of the Declaration of Independence, John Rutledge was the firat to raise his voice in the Conti- nental Congress, Charles Thomson was the first secretary of that historic Congress. John Dunlop printed, and John Nixon was the first to read, our sacred Declaration. Patrick Henry and Matthew Lyons were the eloquent orators of the colonies. Robert Mor- ris financed the American Revolution, and John Barry was the first Commodore of the United States Navy. It is also refreshing for an Irishman to observe that 11 of Washing- ton's generals and 12 signers of the Declara- tion of Independence were of Irich lineage. | For that matter, I might also mention that Gen. Douglas MacArthur's ancestors dwelt in the same rcgion of Dumbartonshire which gave birth to Saint Patrick. Irish blood has flowed in the veins of six Presidents of the United States: James Buch- anan, James K. Polk, Andrew Jackson, Ches- ter A. Arthur, William McKinley, and Wood- Tow Wilson. I don’t think we ehould forget Robert Ful- ton and his Clermont, Cyrus McCcrmick and his reaper, John Holland and his submarine, Victor Herbert and his immortal composi- tions, and John McCormack and his magic voice—and the other great Irish men and women who have enriched and ennobled the life of cur Nation. Who among us has not been thrilled by the Irish lullaby, or those glorious tunes of When Irish Eyes Are Smiling, My Wild Irish Rose, Mother Machree, and Danny Boy? Throughout this Nation and the world today, wherever Evin’s sons and daughters gather, many the heart will be cheered and thrilled to the echoing feet of the marching Trish. In New York, especially, nearly 40 battalions of marchers composed the parade that passed the reviewcrs on Fifth Avenue. The Irish Republican veterans were there, as were the men and women from Tyrone and Cork. They came from Kerry, from Armagh, Sligo, and Tipperary, from Ccunty Down and Galway, from County Mayo, and County Clare. And, while this was going on in New York, it was also being repeated in Worcester, Mass., and Saint Patrick, Mo., and thousands of other places in the United S‘ates, wherever there are Irishmen. Ireland, that land where the mist of Kil- larney’s lake is ever present, hed a total population, in 1941, of apprcximately 4,£00,- 090. Mire occupies approximately five-sixths of Ireland, and is the nearest of the British Isles to the United States. The rest of the island is included in Northern Ireland, which is, politically, a member of the United King- dom. Its rivers are freighted as much with his- tory and literature as with commerce. They are short in mileage, but long in sentiment, as are the Liffey, which flows into the Irish Sea, at Dublin; the Lee, entering Cork Har- bor; and the Boyne. The biggest river in the British Isles is the Shannon, and many’s the song such golden- voiced tenors as Peter Higgins and Morton Downey are always singing about it. Most famed are the lakes of Killarney, bright, isle-studded mirrors set in the emerald hills of Eire’s County Keddy. No snakes live in Ireland, neither do any toads, or toadys. Swans grace the rivers, cows graze on old abbey grounds. Rural Ireland is a picture-book land. Clean, quiet, green, ering with glassy Jakes and streams; bright with rambling roses and purple heather, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Above its white-stone cottages swirl the blue smoke of peat fires. White-stone ditches wall its twisting lanes leading to storied hills and dales. Nowhere is the Irishman far from water. The sea touches him with wet fingers of fcg and mist. The wind bears salt on its breath, as it whistles over moor and fen, forcing him to rope down his thatched roof, when it wails with the mournfulness of all the banshees. Irishmen are as versatile as they are vocal. They are born poets and taile-tellere; are as expert with the harp, as with the shillelagh. They argue and orate; dance and sing; farm and fight as their forebears did. Individual- ists, all! They demand more than a hun- dred varieties of spades for farm use. English, Manx, Scottish, French, ard Epan- ish ways are no strangers to the Irish. The black-hooded cloaks worn by the women of Kinsale are an old Spanish custom. But Ireland is essentially Irish. The rocky road to Dublin endures in memory. Paddy and his pig survive in commerce. And the persuasive eloquence that put off a queen is perpetuated in biarney. Irishmen gave Captain Boycott a bad name, and the name still stands for com- mercial ostracism. Limerick continues as a form of poetry. From 1820 to 1860, nearly 2,000,009 Irish immigrants came to the United States—and it isn't true that their descendants are all policemen in New York City today, though one of them, an O'Dwyer, is its mayor. The fact is, those 2,000,000 Irish immi- grants were a driving force in the develop- ment of new cities, the establishment of new industries, and the opening of areas of em- pire dimensions. The manpower that pushed the rails westward across this conti- nent was, in large part, Irish. It was from the Irish regiments in Tu- nisia in World War II that the Germans learned, to their cost, the meaning of the phrase, “the fighting Irish.” 8t. Patrick wrote the narrative of his life in the tablets of human hearts. He © preached the gospel of Christianity and taught among the hills and dales. He made the highways and byways his pulpit. Erin's sons and daughters in the United States have woven the chamrock into a gar- land of glory for the Emerald Isle. The greatest gift that ever came to the Trish was the lovely spiritual mother. For in her cyes was the light of the day and the warmth of the sun. She wes the god of all smiles and the salt of all tears. From her the Irish have imbibed the richness of soul that has made them equal to the tasks of the world. May she ever remain enthroned in the hearte of her children. A Union of 50 States EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. E. L. BARTLETT DELEGATE FROM ALASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 17, 1947 Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I desire to call to the attention of the House an edi- torial regarding statehood for Alecka and Hawaii which appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle: 4 UNTON OF 50 STATES The United States flag should have two more stars, one for Hawaii and one for Both stars are stuffed away in congres- aional pigeonholes, but it is time for the
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Eightieth Congress to fetch them out and go to work, like Betsy Ross, with needle and thread, putting them where they belong. Statehood for both of these Pacific out- posts of the continental United States is due and overdue. Their people want it, by 2 to 1. President Truman has called for it. The American people—who have become perforce @ good deal more familiar with both Terri- tories during the past 6 yeara—want it. To bring the case up to date, Secretary of the In- tenior Krug said in Long Beach a couple of days ago that he wants it. The Secretary of the Interior is in nominal charge of Territorial affairs and his Depart- ment stands not to gain but to lose by see- ing Hawaii and Alaska made States. Never- theless, he, like his predecessor, Harold L. Ickes, has repeatedly put what pressure he could on Congress to get going on this‘simple, but profoundly important, structural change «2 the American political, social, and eco- nomic fabric. It is profoundly important t® make these outposts States, because as long as they are kept down as quasi-colonial Territories their development and growth remain frustrated. Hawaii will have been 50 years unde. the American flag next year. The Territory's economy is now in a state of flux; it is going to be different during the next half-century from what it has been in the past. There are 519,000 people in the Hawaiian Islands— more than in half a dozen of the mainland States. There are 73,000 in Alaska, and that's more than Nevada had when it joined the Union. Alaska is twice as big as Texas, and its re- sources haven't been scratched. Both Alaska and Hawaii are nearer to the eastern seaboard than any of the Western States were when they were admitted to the Union. This is a point which the let's-go- slow contingent in Congress would do well to wake up to. So long as these outposts are kept at Terri- torial arm's length, they will continue to get the cold shoulder, the maddening lack of consideration, the deaf-and-dumb treatment where needed funds and facilities for their welfare and development are concerned. At this stage of American history we do not want and cannot afford to hold back the development of American territory. Repre- sentative WELCH’s Public Lands Committee gets down to work on Hawaiian statehood March 7. There should be a prompt and favorable recommendation. The committee should then take up the claim of Alaska, which is also clamoring to get in. The Alaska Senate just yesterday passed a memorial ask- ing Congress for statehood. There is no excuse for delay. these two stars on our flag. We need Eightieth Congress Faces Tremendous Responsibility EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KARL M. LeCOMPTE OF I10WA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 17, 1947 Mr. LECOMPTE. Mr. Speaker, the country is looking with hope and confi- dence to the Eightieth Congress and I believe is not going to be disappointed. We are going to put through a program of constructive legislation and promptly adjourn early this summer. In spite of the difficulties encountered in reorganiz- ing the Congress under the streamlining bil) and other obstacles, the Congress has made splendid progress, . As an example of what is expected of the Eightieth Congress I desire to ex- tend my remarks in the Recorp and in- clude a sound editorial from the pen of Mr. Brace Owings in the Chariton (Iowa) Herald-Patriot of March 13: EIGHTIETH CONGRESS FACES TREMENDOUS RESPONSIBILITY It is time we were clear in our minds about one thing: the Eightieth Congress, controlled by Republicans, must do infinitely more than fulfill a party's campaign pledges. These pledges are important, tut Congress, above all else, must get the Nation back to the fun- damental basis of American representative government. Make no mistake about it, we moved far from our traditional foundation during the years of the New Deal. We abandoned, to a great extent, our historic system of repre- sentative government in favor of a strong centralized one, with enormous powers over the political, social, and economic life of the Nation vested in the Executive. For 14 years we witnessed the creation of an enormous bureaucracy by which we were governed for no other purpose than to escape the responsi- bilities of self-government. This was done by spending prodigious sums of public money to organize various masses of the population into benefiting and voting groups. Witness the early months of the New Deal for proof: First, its agricultural program, with its Government planning and regimentation, and the billions it required; next, the outlawed NRA, with its rights-of- labor clause in all its codes, forerunner of the Wagner Labor Relations Act. Here was a bold attempt. not using the methods of Europe's rulers to erect a party dictatorship, but adopting the most effective method of all to make a single party dominated by a strong leader, the real government; in other words, to use taxpayers’ money to buy mass votes, This form of crisis government was con- tinued throughout 14 years of the New Deal. Each crisis, every one the product of its predecessor, was made the excuse for de- manding and getting new and greater pow- ers for the Executive. These powers still exist. That they are not being used by the present incumbent of the White House 1s no satisfaction to those who know our greatest strength lies in a com- Plete return to constitutional government. In the words of their creator, these powers constitute new instruments of public power, which could and might provide shackles for the liberties of the people. That is why the differences now between the House and the Senate over a $6,000,000,000 cut in the President's budget are important; why labor legislation, as it nears the point of committee action, is significant; why this Republican Congress faces the huge task of repairing the damage done the American system by the New Deal. Perhaps the Senate Republican Confer- ence on Greek Intervention Will Answer These Questions? EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HOWARD H. BUFFETT OF NEBRASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 17, 1947 Mr. BUFFETT. Mr. Spealer, under leave to extend my remarks, I am in- cluding a letter from a constituent. The man who wrote this letter is at the grass roots, All his life he has A1055 worked with his hands and lived among honest, God-fearing, laboring people. His statements reflect their thinking. His letter seems to indicate that if the Republican Party fails to offer organized and full-fledged opposition to Greek in- tervention the Republican Party is lone. If someone can provide worth-while evidence to the contrary to aid me in answering this letter, I can use it. The letter follows: Omana, Newr., March 12, 1947. Hon. Howarp Burretr, Member of Congress, Washington, D.C. Dear Frirenp Howarp: Well, Howard, it looks to me like the man from Pendergast- ville has knocked your budget-cutting plans into a cocked hat. I was not at all surprised at the turn events have tuken. I was hoping you Republicans would sort of take the bit in your teeth and kinda run things, that’s what I and several million other people voted for. But I guess the Republicans had been away too long. The rules of the game have been changed so much that they don’t know how to play it. Those that did stick arownd dur- ing the Roosevelt administration became so indoctrinated with New Deal philosophy that they can no longer think as Republicans. Here is what I mean, back in the Mark Hanna and Harding days you Republicans (I'm a Democrat) used to kick around a few million bucks and shake a few plum trees and -thought you were really handling big money, remember? Then came FDR and the New Deal; cut down the plum trees and planted coconut trees of the super variety; and shook the hell out of them, for the bene- fit of the chosen, Instead of millions, the boys got to play- ing with billions just like you Republicans used to play with millions. The truth is, as I see it, your boys are not used to these big figures. It is like a kid from the sand lots going into the big league. No kidding, the figures are just too big. You don't have any money, you know. You are putting it all on the cuff. You just can't get away from that. Now you are asked to declare an undercover wer. What are you going to finance it with? More cuff. You know there is such a thing as running out of cuff, and then what? I don't pretend to know, I am just asking. As I see it, as long as you boys are to be constantly confused by requests from the White House for aid to the now defunct British Empire, you are not going to do the job for which you were elected, namely—a little for the home folks. Tell me pray, just how can you cut the budget and go to war? Why kid us? It simply can't be done. And for what are we going to war? (It was a declaration of war— nothing else.) Where you send the dollars you will have to send the troops, and he asked for them. Are you willing to gamble the American way of life in the vain hope of saving a few Amer- ican-British oi] investments in the Middle East? To tell you the truth, the asinine actions of this Government following the dictation from England is making more Communists here in America than is Moscow. I am down at the grass roots and can see what is coming up. What will we profit by going into another war, and winning it, and at the same time loze our way of life? Look at it this way. If our way of life is 80 good, why do we have to go to war evcry generation to protect it. You know, as well as I, that capitelism has been on the wane since the French Revoluticn. New ideas in government, new social ideclogies being tried by more and more countries until the only
A1056 real capitalistic nation left is the U.5.A. I say our way of life is good—for us. If others choose another way, are we to force our way upon them with a gun? I say no, if they keep out of our country, let them have the kind of government they want. We don't have a Chinaman’s chance in try- ing to run Europe. The British tried it for 500 years, and what we are faced with today is the result. It looks like when we defeated Germany, we jumped out of the frying pan into the fire. Again I ask, if our way of life is so good, why do we have to sell it to others at the point of a gun? Why don't they just adopt it and have the happiness and plenty we are supposed to have. In theory, at least. It Just doesn’t make sense. I read the article in tonight's World- Herald on your stand on conscription. I agree, but I can't see how we can avoid it if we are going into another war, and we are if Truman has his way. Of course, he doesn’t figure these things out. I think someone at 10 Downing Street in London does most of the script writing. Howerd, I hope you will pardon this garblcd letter and the poor typing. I was so damned mad when I heard that talk today I just had to get this off my chest. I know that there are a lot of things you and I would not agree on, but I am sure we agree on this, that we have the best system in the world. We will share it with those that want it. We are willing to live in peace with those that don’t want it. Does that state it? I hope this finds you and yours in good health, and you able to put up the fight of your life to keep us out of another war. Hopefully yours, Ep. Admissions to the Press Gallery EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KENNETH B. KEATING OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 17, . Mr. KEATING. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I include below an editorial from the Washington Evening Star. It is to be hoped that the committee of correspondents will take the action suggested of issuing a tem- porary card of admission to the press gallery to Mr. Lautier and requesting any alteration of the rules which may be necessary to ensure his continued admis- sion as a matter of right. I do not know Mr. Lautier. I have never met him. Nor is this comment of mine inspired by any pressure group, nor by any motive, except fundamental fair- ness and justice in a great democracy. Newspaper correspondents have been noteworthy, indeed sometimes critic:zed, for their extreme liberality. They would be less than true, it seems to me, to the fine traditions which they profess and would be viewed in an unfortunate light, if a ruling were permitted to stand which, when all the smoke has cleared away, in the minds of the public is considered as excluding Mr. Lautier from the press gal- leries because he 1s a Negro. The Negro papers in this country are entitled to the coverage which represen- tation in the press galleries would insure. Indeed, it is to the distinct advantage of the maintenance of our American way of life, incomparably the finest to be found anywhere, that all men and women in this country, regardless of color or creed, be fully informed regarding the proceedings in our legislative halls. An injustice has been done, perhaps necessarily so, under existing rules. It will be to the everlasting credit of the standing committee of correspondents if they take immediate and effective steps to right this wrong. In such action, I am sure they can count on sympathetic co- operation from this Congress. " WHY NOT CHANGE THE RULE? The Standing Committee of Correspond- ents, which applies the rules of Congress governing the admission of reporters to the House and Senate press galleries, has been made the target of criticiam for refusing to stretch the rule to permit the admission to the galleries of a Negro correspondent, Louis R. Lautier. The tenor of this criticism, buttressed by @ specific accusation from Mr. Lautier, is that he was barred, not because he is in- eligible under a fair interpretation of the rules, but because he is a Negro. Whatever the merits or otherwise of this contention— and the question ts one which cannot be answered without knowing what was in the minds of the members of the committee— the fact remains that a strict application of the pertinent rule would seem to justify the committee’s decision. Mr. Lautier is a correspondent for both the Atlanta Daily World, one of three daily Negro papers in the country, and the Negro Newspaper Publishers’ Association, which services weekly papers. The applicable sec- tion of the rule governing admission to the galleries is that the eligible list shall be composed “only of persons whose chief at- tention is given to telegraphic correspond- ence for daily newspapers or newspaper as- sociations requiring telegraphic service.” A majority of the committee found, and the facts would seem to support theni, that, strictly speaking, Mr. Lautier did not meet these requirements. Heving reached that conclusion, however, the committee was not restricted to a choice between rejecting Mr. Lautier’s application or stretching the rule in his behalf. Problems of this sort are not solved to any- one’s satisfaction by stretching rules. And the problem is a real one, for there are com- pelling reasons why the Negro press, no less than the white press, should have adequate access to the sources of news in this country. Consequently, the Star believes that the standing committee, instead of having been content merely to veto the application, should have granted Mr. Lautier a tempo- rary card of admission, and then should have taken the initiative in asking Congress to revise the rules so that Mr. Leutier and others situated like him can be admitted to the galleries as a clear matter of right and not under the shadow of what would appear to be a sort of special dispensation. It is not yet too late to do this, and it is to be hoped that the committee members will be per- suaded that this is the wise course and the fair one. LaGuardia: “Let UN Handle Greek Crisis” EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. GEORGE G. SADOWSKI OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 17, 1947 Mr, SADOWSEI. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD orD, I wish to include the following ar- ticle that appeared in PM, written by Mr. LaGuardia, entitled “Let UN Handle Greek Crisis”: LET UN HANDLE GREEK CRISIS (By Fiorello H. LaGuardia) The American people have a great decision to make. President Truman has presented to the Nation a momentous problem of tran- ascending importance. He proposes that the United States take direct action in aiding the Government of Greece and in so doing by- pass the United Nations, Therefore, the American people now know exactly what they are called upon to decide. I say the American people advisedly, be- cause the proposition is one which affects every family in this country. I say the American people, because the issue has not been before them and, therefore, this Con- gress has no direct mandate. The American people wilfhave to express themselves in such & Way as to provide guidance for their chosen representatives in the House and in the Senate. The President asks for $400,000,000 for as- sistance to Greece and Turkey, for the period ending June 80, 1948. If 400,000,000 is need- ed to save the lives of men, women, and children, to prevent mass starvation in any country, anywhere, any time, the American people, in keeping with their fine tradition, will cheerfully provide the money. In this instance, however, the President frankly states that it is more than food. A previous message from the President to Con- gress covers the food requirements of needy countries, Greece included, and the Presi- dent points out that he has “taken into con- sideration the maximum amount of relief assistance which would be furnished to Greece out of the $350,000,000 * °* * re- cently requested.” The big question is: Are we, in the very infancy of the United Nations, to assume responsibility and to establish a policy of policing other countries without consulta- tion or in disregard of all provisions of the United Nations Charter? It is apparent that the President pulled no punches when he stated that “the Greek Army is small and poorly equipped. It needs supplies and equipment if it is to restore the authority to the Government throughout Greek terri- tory.” This indicates that part of the money will be spent for military purposes. He also asked for United States military personnel. The President informed Congress that the “very existerice of the Greek state is today threatened by the terrorist activities of sev- eral thousand armed men, led by Commu- nists, who defy the Government's authority at a nunber of points, particularly along the northern boundaries.” This matter has been brought to the attenticn of the United Na- tions and a commission appointed by the United Nations Security Council is investi- gating these conditions. The Commission has not yet reported. The Security Council, however, has acquired jurisdiction. The President pointed out that one has “only to glance at a map to realize that the survival and integrity of the Greek Nation are of grave importance in a much wider situ- ation. If Greece should fall under the con- trol of an armed minority, the effect upon its neighbor, Turkey, would be immediate and serious. Confusion and disorder might well spread throughout the entire Middle East.” This in and of itself is the concern of all nations, not only the United States. The President adds that “The disappear- ance of Greece as an independent state would have a profound effect upon those countries in Europe whose peoples are struggling against great diMicultics to maintain their freedoms and their independence * * *,” If that is so, then the Uaitcd Nations should know about it and tate eprropriate action. Buch a condition, and the fact that it is Tecognized by the head of a memter nation of
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the United Nations, brings the problem aquarely within the framework of the United Nations Charter and presents a problem over which the United Nations has jurisdiction and has the machinery for adjudication and settlement and the power of enforcement. Paragraph 1 of article 1 of the United Na- tions Charter defines the purposes of the United Nations, among other things, ‘‘to take effective collective measures for the preven- tion and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means * * * adjust- ment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace.” The President, with his frank statement, invites frank comment. He did not mince words, and, therefore, in discussing the prob- jem, words should not be minced. He did not mention Russia. I will, as the President left no doubt. If the U. &. 8. R. is encouraging “the terrorist activities * * * led by Communists, who defy the government,” then it is violating the terms ox the Charter to which it subscribed and is disregarding the rules of the United Nations of which it is a part. The matter, therefore, should ke re- ferred immediately to the Security Council ot the United Nations. The Security Council, under article 28, is so organized as to be able to function continuously. It has already been suggested thc inde- pendent, unilateral action proposed by the Prez:dent is necessary because immediate, remedial action, if the facts should warrant, would b+ impossible if Russia exercised its power of veto. That is not so. Russia, in this instance, would have no vote. Para- graph 8 of article 27 of the United Nations Charter provides that: ‘Decisions of the Se- curity Council * * * ghall be made by an effirmative vote of seven members, in- cluding the concurring votes of the perma- nent members: Provided, That, in decisions under chapter VI, and under paragraph 3 of article 62 a party to a dispute shall ab- stain from voting.” Paragraph 3 of article 52, by which the party involved, if a member of the Security Council, must abstein from voting, provides that: “The Security Council shal) encourare the development of pacific settlement of local disputes through such regional arrange- ments or by such regional agencies either on the initiative of the states concerned or by reference from the Security Council.” Article 28 provides the several methods for settlement and adjudication of disputcs and gives the Security Council authority, whenever it deems necessary, to call upon the parties to settle their disputes by such means. The President's statement is clearly tantamount to a dispute with the U.8.5. R. Article 84 gives the Security Ccuncil au- thority to “investigate any dispute, or any situation which might lead to international friction or give rise to a dispute, in order to determine whether the continuance of the dispute or situation is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security.” The creation of the United Nations was the result of centuries of experience. The purpose and principles contained in its Charter, its organization, and its authority are based on present and past history. The very condition described by the President, in which he asks not only for funds but, in addition, authority to “detail American civilian and military personnel to Greece and Turkey,” indicates a condition that brings it within all four of the provisions of article 84 and the whole scheme and genius and purpose of the United Nations Charter, Granted the best of motives, what assur- ance have we that other nations will give us at least their moral support in the event of friction caused by this intervention or this XCITI—App.—_—67 special assistance to the existing Govern- ments of Greece and Turkey? Suppose the U. 8. S. R. should take the view that it is other groups of terrorists agitating in Greece and proceed to provide aid and assistance to Communist groups. Surely there would be a conflict of interest, a con- flict of activities which might well result in a conflict of arms between these two groups. Then what? But if action is taken by any one nation or group of nations, in accord- ance with a decision and a mandate from the Security Council of the United Nations, then the danger of any such conflict is avoided and, if the ruling of the United Na- tions is disregarded by any nation, it is then responsible to all the nations of the world, and the danger of a private quarrel between two nations is entirely eliminated. The situation arises, it is said, because Great Britain is not able to carry out its commitments to Greece. The calendar indi- catcs that at the very same time Great Brit- ain was giving notice of pulling out of Greece and giving the United States the job of bolstering the Greek Army and taking over, it gave assurance of continued friendship and cooperation between Russia and Great Britain through no less an authority than its Foreign Minister, Ernest Bevin. Fe informed the Iccusce of Commons of negotiations to strengthen the alliance and the treaty of mutual defengze between the U. 8. 8. R. and Great Britain. He stressed not only the strengthening of the alliance between Great Britain and the U. 8. 8. R., but he exprested the hone that the treaty would be extended from 26 to £0 years. If we rush into the Balkans with military personnel and with a definite, announced plan of protecting the existing dynasty, of keeping the present King on the throne, without the authority of the United Nations and in disrerard of our cbligations to other nations as a member of the United Nations, could not other nations then charge the United States with interfering or even with menacing the peace of that rcgion of Europe? And while we seek to go to the res.ue of Greece, on cur own initiative, in its quarrels w:th the U.S. 8. R., might the United States not find itcelf in the position of tie chival- rous genticman who, seeing a woman being becten by a man, goes to hcr dcfense only to learn, to his sorrow, that it is her own hus- band and they then both pounce upon him? ‘the ¢400,000,000 requested is the leest of the undcrtaking—though additional appro- priations will be required year after year. How much of this will go for military pur- poses and for the eupport of government itself rather than for food? Suppose the people tire of a king? ‘Lhe situation is azlicate. Nothing should be done to create the impression abroad that the American people are not united in back- ing our Covernment in its foreign relations. That would be misunderstood. On the other hend, we must not act impulsively without taking into account the consequences, the time, the cost, the involvements, and the risk. If we act on our own initiative, if we go it alone, with the very best of motives and intentions, yet disregarding the United Na- tions, will it not weaken every effort to make the United Nations work? Will it not shatter all hope of its success? If it is Greece today may not some other power move into Spain tomorrow? Where will it all end? Remem- ber, there is something more than food here. Even relief of food should be provided through an international agency, as I pledged with the United Nations only a few months ago. This instance is typical of the best of intentions being construed as power politics, as economic pressure. And there is more coming. Congress has an opportunity to cooperate with the President in denouncing any inter- ference from any souroe with the develop- ment of demoocratio institutions in any A1057 country. At the same time, we cannot ignore the principles in the Charter of the United Nations and the definite, clear principle in the Atlantic Charter that declares: “The Tights of all peoples to choose the form of government under which they will live.” The Congress could well authorize the President to spend such money as may be needed for food relief and direct the State Department to submit the entire situation, as described by the President, to the Securi- ity Council of the United Nations, for its immediate action. In addition to that, Con- gress might well, by resolution, urge the State Department to insist upon prompt con- sideration and a speedy, final decision on the Part of the Security Council] to establish a world police force. Then if there were any policing to be done in Greece or anywhere else, it would be by the world police force. The burden would not be entirely ours. What is more, the responsibility wculd not be solely ours. Such matters must be shared by all nations alike, Great Britain included. Let us reason this problem out. We can- not afford to make a mistake. Calm, deliber- ate thought is required. Definite, clear action must be taken. I would not risk a single doughboy for the best king in the world. I would not escape any responeibility, no matter how great, for the maintenance of peace in the world. International Voice Broadcasting EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. C. WAYLAND BROOKS OF ILLINOIS IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Morday, March 17 (legislative day of Wednesday, February 19), 1947 Mr. BROOKS. Mr. President, a few days ago I asked unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the RecorpD a letter from Commander Mc- Donald in which he took a position oppos- ing the Government entering the broad- casting business. At the request of Mr. Peter W. Denzer, of Broadcasting maga- zine, I ask unanimous consent to have printed a statement by Mr. William Ben- ton, Assistant Secretary of State, in re- gard to the matter I had inserted in the REcorD. There being no objection, the state- ment was ordered to be printed in the REcorD, as follows: In his letter to Senator Brooks, Commander McDonald gives voice to many ideas which I held before I joined the Government and found myself responsible for the men han- dling our international broadcust. Many of my idegs, however, have greatly changed as a result of carrying this responsibility. I believe Commander McDonald's ideas would have chanced also if he had been exposed to the operating and other problems involved tn international voice broadcasting and which 80 distinguish it from domestic broadcasting. I have known for years of Commander McDonald's “lifetime experience in radio.” I have supplemented my own experience in private broadcasting by conferring with others who have devoted much of their lives to broadcasting—the broadcasters to whom Commander McDonald refers as “those who pioneered our international shortwave sta- tions.” These are the private licensees whose facilities are now under contract to the State Department.
A1058 Commander McDonald shows lack of familiarity with certain aspects of the prob- lem when he compares international broad- casting to newspapers and magazines, and states, ‘“‘There is no more reason for the Government to own and operate broadcast- ing stations than there is for it to publish newspapers and magazines.” As a matter of fact, the Government does publish one magazine for distribution abroad, the magazine Amerika, in Russian. This is the only magazine from the United States which the Russian Government will allow to circulate in Russia. The other ten or twelve magazines which were published by the OWI and the OJAA I discontinued shortly after I joined the Government. If I had similarly discontinued interna- tional broadcasting by the State Depart- ment, there would have been very little international voice broadcasting from the United States—nothing remotely comparable to the needs. The impact of such broadcast- ing as would have received private support or sponsorship would have been totally in- adequate. Commander McDonald will find, if he inquires, that this fact is generally admitted by thcse who have studied the probiem and are best informed about it. I hope that the State Department will be able shortly to send to Congress the pro- posal I have developed for a plan which will take the international broadcasting out of the Department. The substance of the plan was approved by Secretary Marshall the day he left for Moscow. The plan is now being reviewed by the Bureau of the Budget. It covers or implicitly answers some of the points raised by Commander McDonald. In my opinion, it is, as developed, the most satisfactory plan possible in the present cir- cumstances. I assume that this proposal will receive detailed consideration by Con- gress. My hope is that final congressional action will provide a set-up which will give to Commander McDonald and to me and to the radio industry what we are all seeking: a voice of America overseas that is truly rep- resentative of our American life, that pro- jects fully and fairly our American culture as well as our American economic system, and that is controlled by distinguished rep- resentatives of the American people in the Anterest of all the people in their deep con- cern for the peace and security of the world. Witt1aM BENTON, Aid to Greece EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. C. WAYLAND BROOKS OF ILLINOIS IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, March 17 (legislative day of Wednesday, February 19), 1947 Mr. BROOKS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp two very il- luminating editorials appearing in the Chicago Daily News. These are editorials signed by Mr. John 8. Knight, the distinguished editor and ~ublisher of the Daily News. The first one appeared on March 8, entitled, “United States Must Ration Charity Lest We Join Breadline.” This was immediately prior to the President’s recent speech concerning our policy in Greece, The second editorial appeared on March 15, entitled, “Truman Policy for Greece Risks Bankruptcy and War.” This was printed a few days following the President’s speech. I commend the editorials to the care- ful attention of every Member of Con- gress. There being no objection, the editorials were ordered to be printed in the Rsecorp, as follows: [From the Chicago Daily News of March 8, 1947] Uniten States Must RATION CHARITY LEST We Join Breap LINE Pleas by the Greek Government for “sub- stantial” assistance to prevent that stricken country’s economic collapse should be viewed realistically by the people of the United States. Sentimentally, our hearts go out to the Greeks, who are torn by civil dissension re- sulting from Great Britain's insistence that King George II, a listless and near-Fascist ruler, be returned to the throne. We share also her fears of Russian aggres- sion and sympathize deeply with a gallant people facing up to the inevitable break-down of an already tottering economy. Since Great Britain, Greece's traditional protector, has served notice that she can no longer support a substantial army in Greece to preserve order, the problem is thrown squarely in our laps because we are so closely tied to British foreign policy. The State Department is apparently com- mitted to Greek assistance in the amount of $350,000,000. It is explained publicly that a sum of this size is necessary to purchase food, clothing, and other emergency essentials. Additionally, the Greek note to the United States explained that American technical experts are needed to help the country get to her feet. What neither the State Department nor the Greek diplomatic dispatch did say, and this is the real issue, is that American money and perhaps her zo!diers must be used if we are to prevent the spread of communism throughout the Balkans and the rest of Europe. FUTILE POLICY CRYSTALLIZING The argument, freely used by high officials and military leaders in “off-the-record” ses- sions with Washington newspaper corre- spondents, is “fight communism with dol- lars.” It is a cry that will be heard much more frequently and openly in the months and years to come. It is an assertion that should be sharply challenged before it becomes, through public inertia and Government propaganda, the pat- tern for our future foreign policy. Isn't it high time that we came to grips with the facts? American dollars failed to resolve the po- litical differences in China between Gen- eralissimo Chiang Kai-shek and the Com- munists. We threw away hundreds of mil- lions in a vain effort to bring order out of gnace and came away with nothing but the itter taste of another political retreat. George Weller, of the Chicago Daily News Foreign Service, says that the postwar policy of “pay, preach, and retreat,” which has failed on a gigantic scale in China, has failed in the Balkans, too, and it has cost the Ameri- can people in postwar aid nearly €500,000,000 to lose their political shirts at the “little table” in tiny Greece as at the “big table” in China, The Daily News favored the British loan @s an outright gift, with no thought that it would ever be repaid. We believed that the gift of a few billion dollars would prove either that Great Britain could survive as a great power with this assistance, or that her economy had disintegrated so badly that it could no longer be propped up even with American financial support, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The British are now back in the market for another “loan.” We made a very sizable loan to France, timing it to provide a potent argumont for the Rightists in the French elections. Yet France, with no semblance of strong leadership or direction, continues to drift gradually to the left. In the cace of Greece, British insistence upon restoration of the monarchy prevented the people from having a government of their own choosing. We have backed the British experiment in Greece to the hilt and now find ourse:ves the unhappy legatees of a moral and material bankruptcy. IDEOLOGIES ARE NOT FOR SALE Can we fight communism with dollars? The projected $350,000,000 gift to Greece is but another in a sertes of well-intentioned but utterly futile efforts to buy off the Com- munists at so much a head. The history of the world proves that indi- viduals with strong ideological conv‘ctions are not for sale at any price, except when it suits their purpose to be cooperative until the money has been spent. There might be some military justification for the Greek gift if, in return, we obtained a few naval bases in Greece and Turkey. Financially, it could be justified if Britain agreed to transfer Greek credits frozen in London to the United States, so that Greece could buy some of the things it needs with its own money instead of borrowing from us. It might even be morally justifiable if it meant a thorough political housecleaning in Greece with new elections, so that the psople might select the type of government they prefer. But, as George Weller pointe out, we are in effect only throwing more money into the bottomlees kitty of nations who have anti- communism for sale. RELIEF NEEDS SHOULD BE MET Can we fight communism with dollars? For one, I am convinced that we cannot. The tragic plight of the Greeks can be alleviated through privately supported groups such as the Greek War Relief Asso- ciation, which has had years of experience in this fleld. Our Government should be ready to ship surpluses of food and supplies and let their distribution be supervised by trained and competent organizations which understand the problem. But the policy of paying Greece to support a token force of British troops as a bulwark against the vastly superior Russian armies in the northern Balkans is unrealism at its worst. For once did 1 agree with S2nator CiaupE Peprrr, in his suggestion that the Greek question be referred to the United Nations on the theory that it is a global ,-oblem vitally affecting the peace of the world. As time goes on and international diff- culties increase, it will be impossib!e for the United States to patch up the remnants of shaky regimes and empires the world over. If the United Nations is to refute the ris- ing tide of cynical comment that it is just another debating society, the Pclestine and Greek problems must have its immediate at- tention. IF THEY WANT COMMUNISM At this point, someone may well ask: “If we are not to fight communism with dol- lars, what is the solution?” Unfortunately, the very simplicity of the question makes the answer more difficult. There seems to be almost universal agree- ment that communism is abhorrent to free men. But who shill say that the people of ‘any nation may not havo communism if that 1s what they desire? If the ideological and military conflict with Russia is as inevitable as the wise men of
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the radio proclaim it to be, another little nation or two gone communistic won't prove to be the deciding factor in an atomic war. Let them demonstrate whether the com- munistic system can be successful. Let it be shown that people are happier without free speech, free elections, and freedom of opportunity. The capitalistic system is under constant attack from disaffected Americans who em- its imperfections while enjoying all of its ‘benefits. Perhaps the communistic system can pro- vide better living conditions, more abun- dant crops, finer cars, superior houeehold: accessories, and greater liberty than we have in America. Possibly some people could be happier living under the constant scrutiny of the secret police. Even a few of our sons and daughters see considerable merit in the com- munistic system. Let this be shown. We might all be convinced. Meanwhile, efforts to combat communism in the Balkans with American dollars are not likely to succeed. Then, when we have bankrupted cu-celves trying to bail out the staggering nations of Europe, communism will have a field day in the United States. Of course, the capitalistic system will be blamed for the debacle when actually it is being drained so systematically that, even today, it has considerably less than an even chance to prove its worth. We have poured forth a golden and scem- ingly endless stream of Amcrican dollars in our policy of pay, preach, and retreat. With nothing to show for cur immature generosity except more calls for help, the time has come to call a halt before we join our friends in the international bread line. Jouw S. KnicutT. [From the Chicago Daily News of March 15, 1947] ‘TRUMAN Po.icy For Grerce Risks BANK- RUPTCY AND WAR So that our readers will clearly understand what is in store for them, I quote a paragraph from a New York Times dispatch by James B. Reston, their specialist in international affairs: What worries President Truman's advisers at the moment is not this Joan to Greece and Turkey, but the next one. In that one sentence Mr. Reston epitomizes our future foreign policy: Fight communism with dollars. It is an easy slogan and should go down well with timid Americans who put the ¢cv- ers over their heads every night just in case the Russians might decide to crop a few atomic bombs in their neighborhood for tar- get practice. The true meaning of the slogan should frighten them even more, for actually it means: Fight communism with dollars—and men if necessary. MORAL POSITION HIGHLY UNTENABLE The President, influenced by his military advisers, for whom he has a profound re- spect, has in effect told Russia to keep hands off Greece and Turkey although we have con- sistently encouraged Great Eritain to rule the Greeks with force through a puppet king. In view of the idealistic statements made by the leaders of all countries during the early days of the United Nations, our moral posi- tion with regard to the Greeks is highly un- tenable. What we are actually proposing to do, although the vast majority of Americans seemingly are failing to grasp its significance, is to assume the burden of world security with American dollars and troops. This is a step that goes far beyond our humanitarian desire to aid Greece in her postwar d‘ficulties, the premise upon which many people are blindly accepting the Presi- dent's recommendations. With unconscious irony, President Tru- man's address to Congress was delivered while an 1l-nation commission from the United Nations Council is in Greece trying to get the facts. In by-passing the United Nations so cas- ually the President has dealt that organiza- tion's prestige a serious blow. Did we not accept the UN as the means to world peace, to security fcr the small na- tions? Why, then, should the United States take unto itself the full responsiblity for deciding how world peace shall be maintained w' en the prob!em had been specifically as- signed to the Untted Nations from the cut- eet? REMEMEER WHAT WE SAID? Lest your memories be short, a few quota- tions from ecrifer pronouncements by United Nations Icaders are in order: April 26, 1945: “This conference is called upon to consider the problem cf setting up an crganization to protect the general peace and sscurity of nations after the war. * * It is obvicus that no one wishes to restore a Leatue of Nations which had no rights or power. * * * The Soviet Government is a sincere and firm champion of the estab- lishment of a strong international organiza- tion of security. * * * We will fully co- Operate in the solution of this great prcblem with all the other governments which are genuinely devoted to this noble caus?."— V. M. Molotov, chairmen of the S:viet dele- gation to the San Francise) Conference. July 15, 1945: “We all have to recognize— no msiter how great our cirengeh—that we must deny ourselves the liccrse to do always as we please. No one nation, no regional group can, or should, expect any special Erivilege which harms any cther nation * * that is why we h-ve here resclved that power be used not to wage war, but to kcep the world at peace and free from the fear of war."—President Truman at the San Francisco Conference. June 21, 1945: “Both the Greek Govern- ment and the reople as a wiole look friend- lily and admiringly at the Soviet Union by whose sides they fought for the maintenance of humen liberties."—-Under Eecretary Za- kynthinos of the Greek press and informa- tion department. November 23, 1915: “What does it concern Great Britain whether Greece is a mon- archy o1 a rcpublic? It is not for us to de- cide.""—Foreign Minister Ernest Bevin. February 22, 1945: “The three powers pledged joint action to uphold the right pro- claimed in the Atlantic Charter cf ali peo- ples to choose the form of government un- der which they shall live."—Edward R. Stet- tinius, Jr., Secretary of State. March 1, 1945: “Vaguely defined spheres of influence are incompatible with the basic principles of international collcboration."— From Franklin D. Roosevelt's report on the Yalta meeting. June 26, 1945: “Established a special or- ganization for defense of peace and incur- ance of security from among the representa- tives of the peace-loving nations; to place at the disposal of the steering body of this organization the maximum quantity of armed forces sufficient for the suppression of aggression.”"—A. A. Gromyko, acting chair- man, the Soviet delegation at San Francisco. OUR LEADERS FORESEE WAR The noble words quoted above are just as noble today. The tragic difference is that they have been so soon forgotten. Ruesia is guilty of obstruction and hair- splitting in the councils of the UN while practicing a determined isolationism for her own selfish advantage. Great Britain, facing economic collapse and loss of empire, and living in fear of Rus- Al059 sia, has turned once again to the United States for succor, Our political and military leaders are 50 sure that we will eventually go to war with Russia that they heave determined to call Russia’s hand in the Balkans, a course of ac- tion that may ignite the first spark of the war they would avoid. The fallacy of our position is that: 1. We are not supforting a rcpresentative government in Greece. 2. The Greek problem is a world problem and not one specifically reserved to the United States and Great Britain. 3. A political loan to Greece further we-k- ens the United Nations. 4. We ave inzugurating a change in for- eign policy which commits us morally to batling out every totte-ing nation in Europe and liquidating ite Communists. od. The consiant drain upcn our own re- sources will eventually make it impossibie for us to aid anyone. 6. We are asking for a war with Russia. WHY NOT USE THE UN FUND? Granting that Greece needs money, what ab-ut the 89,000,000,000 that ave gathering dust in the world Kank of the United Na- tions? What is being done with Greek asscts frozen in London? Why can’t the siabiliza- tion iund cf the Uniied Nations proceed to Stabilize her currency? Amcrican tuxpayers have already poured €4C0,000,C00 into Grecce since the end of the war. The Greek army, dcecribcd by Preci- dent Trtiman as “small and ill-equipped,” hes abscrbed about 644,000,000 worth of equipment, some of it second-hand lend- leace. D> the dreaded Greek guerrillas from the mountains have more? When we have made the loan advocated by President Truman, what a"scut the 70 per- cent of Greece’s overscas dcbts that are held by Br-iish banks? Will we pay them toc? It was Franklin D. Roosevelt's concessions at Tchran that gave Russia nine-tenths of the Balkans. Having handed so much to the Commu- nists on a silver platter, we now belatcdly determine to save the ecnd picce for Great Britain. We intend to do it by opposing the guer- rillas who fought the Germans under BErit- ish and American orders. Vie intend to do it by backing the Greek Army which upon Chicaso Daily News cor- respondent G:orge Wellcr’s authority is “heavily ep'ked with quirling members and Officers of the pro-Germsn eccurity bat- talions.” These are the “democratic fcrces which new American loans will arm in their anti-Communist crusade arsairst the moun- taireers who fought the Nazis." Weller alco asks wity, if President Trur-en's claim is true that 85 percent of the G-ecks eucport the royalist government, it shculd cost so much Ainerican moncy for the British-armed five-sixths of the population to annihilate that sixth men.” I do not believe the American peopie real- ize the gravity of the step which President Truman has advocated. It is not a question of sending $400,000,000 to aid Grccce and Tur- key but rather the escertion of our determ!- nailon to combat the spread of communism everywhere. If this policy is carried out to its logical conclusion, it will drain our Treasury while destroying any hope that the United States and Russia can ever work together. Our decision to appropriate the policing functions of the United Nations is a step fraught with such grave potentials that Con- gress should not be stampeded into giving blanket approval to the Presidcnt's proposal. For, as President Theodore Roosevelt once said, “You can't shake your fist and then shake your finger.” Joun S. KNIGHT.
Al1069 Typical War Department Extravagance EXTENSION OF REMARKS oFr HON. GEORGE B. SCHWABE OF OKLAHOMA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 17, 1947 Mr. SCHWABE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I have received numerous ru- mors of extravagance on the part of the War Department and our armed services generally. The men who served in World War II can tell you of many un- necessary and extravagant expenditures during the days of hostilities. Those who were still in the Army when the shooting ended, can tell you of multiplied in- stances where waste and extravagance were the direct results of orders from high officials of our armed forces. These observances and experiences are on the lips of thousands of boys who have re- turned since the war, and they do not like it because they know that, eventu- ally they will have to pay the bill. The worst feature of this situation is that it continues, and is going on at an inexcusable rate even to this late day. I have received letters from several re- Mable sources telling me that these con- ditions are almost unbelievable. For example, I received a letter from a lawyer friend-of mine, a man who has had at least 12 or 15 years’ experience in the practice of law, and who was em- ployed by the War Department as a law- yer to go to the Philippine Islands or to Japan, and sailed under his new assign- ment some time in December 1946. He got as far as Manila, and on February 12, 1947, wrote me at some length, stat- ing that he had been in Manila for over a month and expected to board a ship within a day or so to return to the States because he had been declared surplus. The fact is that I was informed by the War Department, before this man was accepted for this appointment, that law- yers were so badly needed in Manila that they anticipated flying this man across the Pacific to the post of duty to which he was supposed to be assigned in con- nection with war trials involving the prosecution of those accused of war crimes. Yet, no sooner did he reach his post than he was declared surplus. Listen to this man’s narration of the extravagance of the War Department in this connection. He says: Here's the story: Two days after our ar- rival, and before I was allowed to report for duty, I was notified that I, along with the two attorneys who came on the with me, had all been declared “surplus” to the requirements of this command. They also informed us that there were many more de- fense attorneys already here and engaging in the trials that were not needed and that they expected to declare some six or eight of them excess by the ist of March. Since learning the foregoing (some 3 weeks ago) every transport has brought additional attor- neys until now there are some eight or nine of us here waiting to be repatriated without ever reporting for duty. Just yesterday, the head man at the Personnel Office told me that there were 15 or 16 more en route all of whom would be declared surplus upon their arrival. I cannot for the life of me understand why they persist in hiring these attorneys and sending them on this eight or ten thousand mile trip only to have them arrive here and turn around and go directly back. Further- more, we are here from a month to 6 weeks before we are able to get boat accommoda- tions back (our group of three have now been here over a month) all at heavy cost to the Government. To point out my picture and situation which is not at all unusual, but quite typical of the others here, so that you can see the hardship and embarrassment involved in this sort of a thing—-I announced in the paper that I was closing my office and was going to Manila under a 2-year contract with the War Department to engage in the Japanese war-crimes trials. I was given a farewell party by a large group of my {friends and presented with a Gladstone bag as a going- away present. I leased my office intact and he has even had my name scraped off the doors and windows and his painted thereon. I also purchased a considerable amount of tropical clothing for my stay here. And of course the biggest disappointment of all, the financial return I had envisioned by my 2 years service here. Not that I am neces- sarily pressed financially, becavse I am not, but I had made definite future plans with this money I had hoped to receive. Of course there are the many other unsatisfac- tory angles, like the long hard trip, the abso- lute waste of 3 cr 4 months, the tremendous expenditure by the Government for which it has not received a dime in return, and £0 forth, and so forth. Frankly, my case is not nearly as bad, bad as it is, as some of the others here waiting to go back. Mr. Sveaker, I am now in receipt of a second letter from this same attorney, dated March 6, 1947, and written and mailed at Manila, in which he says: Thought I would drop you a line to advise you I am atill in Manila but that I am defi- nitely scheduled to board the _* * 8 This is the fourth time I have been set up to leave and I feel that this is surely “it.” Most of the other lawyers that were declared “surplus” at the time I was, or around that time, are making this boat. Almost every boat arriving brings’in from two to four or five lawyers that are immediately declared “surplus.” I don’t understand why the War Department continues to send these lawyers only to declare them “surplus” and send them back. However, literally dozens of civillan employees in other categories are declared excess upon arrival. They either find other jobs for them, make jobs for them, or repatriate them to the States. I think you will agree it is all quite confusing. From a waste of money standpoint this sit- uation is really “small potatoes” as the extravagance and waste here is actually be- yond comprehension—particularly by the Army officers. There are so many officers over here (about 90 percent seem to have little if anything to do) that it is almost a situation of “all chiefs and no Indians.” Mr. Speaker, in these days when we hear so much about maintaining our na- tional defense and security at a high level, and we receive letters from our con- stituents requesting that Congress not impair the efficiency of our armed forces—which letters, by the way, are generally inspired by those on the pay roll wanting things to continue as they are—it certainly is a difficult situation to solve. If the public could only begin to realize, and if the taxpayers were only made aware of the typical extravagance of the War Department such as narrated in the letters from my friend, from which I have quoted excerpts, I think the people would change their minds and insist that their Representatives in Congress take steps to eliminate many forms of waste APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD and extravagance now indulged in by the War Department. I am sure there is no Member of the Congress who wants to do anything that will in any way impair or jeopardize our military strength and na- tional security. But when we receive such evidence as I have just cuoted, from people in whom we have the utmost con- fidence, it does make the Members of Congress wonder if there should not be a curtailment of much of the useless waste and extravagance of the War Depart- ment. Furthermore, there are thousands of swivel-chair operators in the Pentagon Building here in Washington and else- where scattered over the world, who are not needed at all and who should be dropped from the pay roll voluntarily by the heads of the military organizations of this country. If they are not dropped, and if this waste and extravagance is not eliminated by our armed forces, it is the duty of the Members of the Congress to see that they are eliminated as fast as such conditions come to the attention of the Congress. Juvenile Delinquency REMARKS HON. FRANK B. KEEFE OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 17, 1947 Mr. KEEFE. Mr. Speaker, one rarely picks up a newspaper these days without seeing headlines announcing some brutal crime committed by a mere child. The head of the FBI, Mr. J. Edgar Hoover, is making a determined fight throughout the Nation in an effort to curb juvenile delinquency. I heard a broadcast this morning et 7:30 over WOL by Mr. George E. Reedy dealing with that sub- ject, which I conceive to be so entirely worth while that I am including it in this statement. It is as follows: A United Press story date-lined Albany, N. Y., reveals the confession of a 14-year-old boy to the brutal hanging of an 8-year-old child, in a wooded area on the outskirts of Albany. Rapid-fire developments caught up with the teen-age killer who, District At- torney Julian B. Erway said, “Just decided to hang the little fellow.” Well, in Washing- ton this morning and every other city that has a morning newspaper, in this Nation of ours, there is disheartening confirmation in today's headlines, that we are paying for the years of neglect of our children. It is in the form of a report, by FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, and its facts are straight-from-the- shoulder, and unpleasant. The chief of the G-men tells us that we are in a dark period of crime, where the old gangs are regrouping for major forays. Fur- thermore, he says the effects of a “spirit of wartime abandon have not run their course.” At first glance there seem to be a few rays of sunshine in Mr. Hoover's report. He tell us that for the first time since the war started teen-agers have fallen from their leading position in crime. The top group in 1946 was the 21-year-old age bracket. However, after stating that fact, he goes on to warn us that it only reflects the pay- off for the neglect of our children during the war years. To put 1t bluntly, the teen- age petty thieves of yesterday have gradu-