A2882 surrounded them in the past. The Commu- nists understand this situation very well. They are trying to move in and take advan- tage of these aspirations, They are making glittering promises about the benefits of Communism. They reach directly to the peasant or the villager in these vast areas, and talk to him directly in his own tongue about the things he has learned to desire. They say that they can get these things for him, And too often he hears no voice from our side to dispute them. We know how false these Communist promises ate. But it is not enough for us to know this. Unless we get the real story across to people in other countries, we will lose the battle for men’s minds by default. The Communist propaganda portrays the Soviet Union as the world’s foremost advo- cate of peace and the wes cf defense- less poogles. The conms av .cn between what ioc Commurist leaders have promised and what they have actually done 1s so startling that we are amazed that anyone can tbe deccived. In Berlin, in Czechoslovakia, in the Balkans, in the Far East, they have proved, time after time, that their talk about peace is only a cloak for imperialism. But their intended victims will not learn these facts from Soviet propaganda. We are the ones who must make sure that the truth about communism is known everywhere. At the same time, we must overcome the constant stream of slander and vilification that the Communists pour out in an effort to discredit the United States and other free nations. Soviet propaganda constantly reviles the United States as a Nation of war mongers and imperialists. You and I know how ab- surd inc ct. We know that the United States is wholly dedicated to the cause of peace. We have no purpose of going to war except in defense of freedom. Our actions demonstrate that we mean exactly what we say. But when men throughout the world are making their choice between communism and democracy, the important thing is not what we know about our purposes and our actions—the important thing is what they know. Communist propaganda also seeks to de- stroy our influence in the world by saying the American economy is weak and about to collapse. We know this is preposterous. The industrial production of the United States is equal to that of the rest of the world combined. Our agricultural produc- tion is more than adequate for our needs, Our people enjoy the highest standard of living in the world’s history. Our economic strength is the bulwark of the free world. From every standpoint, our free way of life is vastly superior to the system of oppres- sion which the Communists seek to impose upon mankind. In many parts of the world, however, where men must choose between freedom and communism, the true story is going untold. ‘We cannot run the risk that nations may be lost to the cause of freedom because their people do not know the facts. I am convinced that we should greatly ex- tend and strengthen our efforts for making the truth known to people in all the world. Most of us have recognized for years, of course, how important it is to spread the truth about freedom and democracy. We are already doing some very good work—through the Voice of America and the United States information offices and libraries in many parts of the world, through the exchange of students, through the United Nations and its affiliated organizations, and in other ways. But events have shown, I believe, that we need to do much more, both ourselves and in collaboration with the other free nations. We must use every means at our command, private as well as governmental, to get the truth to other peoples. Private groups and organizations have an important part to play. Our labor unions have already done fine work in communicat- ing with labor in Europe, in Latin America, and elsewhere. The story of free American Jabor, told by American trade-unionists, is a better weapon against Communist propa- ganda among workers 1n other countries than any number of speeches by Government offi- cials. The same principle applies to other groups. The best way for farmers in other countries to find out about us is to talk directly with our own farmers. Our businessmen can speak directly to businessmen abroad. We need to promote much more direct contact between our people and those of other coun- tries. We should encourage many more people from other countries to visit us here, to see for themselves what is true and what is not true about our country. We should find more opportunities for foreign students to study in our schools and universities. They will learn here the skills and techniques needed in their countries. They will also see at first hand the rights and duties of citi- gens in our land of democratic institutions. Our colleges should train more Americans to go abroad as teachers, especially to teach modern methods of farming, industry, and public health—and, by example, to teach our concepts of democracy. The notable record of our many charitable and religious organi- zations who send teachers abroad is proof of what can be done, Another major part of our effort must be carried out through our great public in- formation channels—newspapers and maga- zines, radio, and motion pictures. We must strive constantly to break down or leap over barriers to free communication wherever they exist. We must make full use of every ef- fective means of communicating informa- tion, in simple, understandable form, to peo- ple whose backgrounds and cultures are dif- ferent from ours. This poses an enormous challenge to groups such as yours, a challenge which can be met only by extraordinary inventive- ness and enterprise. I am confident that the American press can and will make a tremendously useful contribution toward finding new solutions. The Government’s programs for telling the truth about the United States to the peoples of the world also need constant improve- ment. Our present overseas information and educational exchange program is get- ting results. For example, the Voice of America has been carrying to people behind the iron curtain the true story of world events. It has been so successful that the Soviet Government is using a vast amount of costly equipment in an attempt to drown out our broadcasts by jamming. We must devise ways to break through that jam- ming and get our message across. And we must improve and strengthen our whole range of information and educational serv- ices. This is not a conclusion reached by Gov~ ernment officials alone. We have had the valuable aid of the United States Advisory Commission on Information created by the Congress. Your own society is ably rep- resented on that Commission by Mr. Mark Ethridge and Mr. Erwin D. Canham. The members of the Commission have given in- tensive study to the overseas-information program and have made repeated recom- mendations that it be substantially expand- ed. Similar recommendations for the ex- change program have been made by the Advisory Commission on Education, headed by Dr, Harvie Branscomb, I have been glad to see that many Members of the Congress have urged an improved and expanded pro- gram in these fields—as shown, for example, by the resolution introduced recently by Senator Benton for himself and a number of his colleagues. Because of the pressing need to increase our efforts along this line, I have directed APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the Secretary of State to plan a strengthened and more effective national effort to use the great power of truth in working for peace. This effort will require the imagi- nation and energies of private individuals and groups throughout the country. We shall need to use fully all the private and governmental means that have proved suc- cessful so far—and to discover and employ new ones Qur task is to present the truth to the millions of people who are uninformed or misinformed or unconvinced. Our task is to reach them in their daily lives, as they work and learn. We must be alert, ingen- ious, and diligent in reaching peoples of other countries, whatever their educational and cultural backgrounds may be. Our task is to show them that freedom is the way to economic anc social advancement, the way to political independence, the way to strength, happiness, and peace. This task is not separate and distinct from other elements of our foreign policy. It is a@ necessary part of all we are doing to build @ peaceful world. It is as important as armed **ren-th cr economic aid. The Mar- shall picr rz avy aid, point 4-—these and other programs depend for their success on the wnderts1dine and support of our own citize:: ‘a ..:. « of other countries. We must make ourselves Known as we really are—not as Communist proveqenda pictures us. We must pool our cMo:.s yun those of the other free peoples in a sus- tained, intensified program to promote the cause of freedom against the propnganda of slavery. We must make ourselves heard round the world in a great campaign of truth. We have tremendous advantages in the struggle for men’s minds and loyalties. We have truth and freedom on our side. The appeal of free institutions and self-govern~ ment springs from the deepest and noblest aspirations of mankind. It is based on every man’s desire for liberty and opportunity. It is based on every man’s wish to be self- reliant and to shape his own destiny. As we go forward with our campaign of truth, we will mrke lasting progress toward the kind of world we seek—a world in which men and nations live not as enemies but as brothers. Budenz’ Unerring Finger EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. WALTER H. JUDD OF MINNESOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, April 21, 1950 Mr. JUDD. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following article by Charles T. Lacey, from the Washington Daily News for April 21, 1950: BupENz’ UNERRING FrNaER (By Charles T. Lucey) There is no blithe laughing off of the testimony of Louis F. Budenz by Government officials who have worked most closely with him since he renounced communism 5 years ago. They look back over the record and give him credit for solid devotion to facts. Time and again the ex-Communist, now teaching at Fordham University in New York, has appeared publicly against the Com- munists, and repeatedly his testimony has led to court convictions or has been borne out by subsequent events. Mr. Budenz was the Government’s leading witness in the long New York trial of 11
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Communist leaders. For days he sweated under vigorous cross-examination of defense lawyers trying to shake his story. But in the opinion of some who followed the case almost microscopically, they never laid a glove on hima. This same man earlier had put the finger on Gerhart Hisler as the No. 1 power in United States communism. Most Americans never ked heard of the little commussar—they thought Earl Browder, later tosssd out by Moscow, was the chief revolutionary. But Mr Budenz, who held an important Communist command post as managing edi- tor of the party’s newspaper, The Daily Worker, was able to tell how Mr. Eisler be- raisd and pushed around lecser fry. Mr. Eisler subsequently was convicted fer con- temnt of Congress, sk.pped the country, and today serves Stalin in the Russian zone of Germany. In Aucust 1948, Mr. Budenz test:Aed that wi among Communist Parvy offi- Ww York that Alger H.ss was linked elois. sro. vw helyed put the Racer on Sam Cazz, cony.cscd in connect.on with the opcra- tion of the Communist spy ring in Cansaca. T2 testified azainst John Santo, sceretary- treaturer cf the New York City Transzort won—the man brouvht to New im anige the subway system for the Commuies—in a detortavion case that led to Santo’s voluntary deparvure frcm Lhe United States. In that case he knew his past private life wos sure to be the target for a smear cam- pa.cn by the Communists, but he went ahead anrway. These who know Mr. Budenz well say 1t has been only after the deepest soul search- ing that he has decided to tell all he knows about the operations of the Communist Party in this country. When he renounced communism in 1915, it wasn’t a case of sud- erly seeing the light, but of prolonged mental strvegie within himself. It was not so difficult for him, his friends gay, to expose the party’s top leaders, but it was dificult to discloze facts concerning personal friends in the Communist move- ment. But eventually he made his decision on the ground that this had to be dene to tell the whole story of what communism was at- towne in this country. 3 uery took the step that gave dra- matic substance to his renunciation of com~ munism on October 10, 1945, in St. Pat- rick’s Cathedral in New York. There, with his wile and three daughters, he made the profession of faith that carried him back into the Catholic Church he had left many years before. Another Boost for Big Government EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. PAUL W. SHAFER OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, April 20, 1950 Mr. SHAFER. Mr. Speaker, I want to discuss Fresident Truman’s veto of the Kerr amendments to the Natural Gas Act. Because many consumers of nat- ural gas are of the opinion that the President’s veto has warded off the threat of higher rates for this popular fuel, I believe it is well that you should know there is far more danger of higher gas rates now than there would have been had the President signed the Kerr bill. In spite of all the fog that was thrown up during consideration of the Kerr bill, it was purely a measure simply to retain to the various States the con- trol over their natural-gas resources they hitherto have enjoyed; also centrol over distribution of gas within their borders. In vetoing the bill the President de- liberately breke his word, both express and implied, to leaders of his own politi- cal party. He did so, 1t is obvious, sotely because of the tremendous pressure put upon him because cf a Nation-wide prep- aganda campaign sponsored ky thos who would centralize all power in Wash- ington. Tha people of the United States were told that putting the Kerr bill on the statuta books would constitute a victory for moncopoliscs and would result in higher naiural-gas prices for ultimate consumers. No statement in this con- nection cculd pessibly have keen move false. Yet, the Fres:ident, who should have known better, if he did not, delib- erately inserved this false propaganda in his veto message. In saying these things I am sure I express the conviction cf a majority in Consress. Yes; a majority of both po- litical parties. Everyone on Capitol Hill knows that the Terr bill, as finally passed, had been rewritten in exact accordance? with the expressed wishes of the President. The leaders cf his own party in Congress fought for the bill. But the President, coldly and cynically, betrayed them. It must be assumed that he deserted those who trusted him and were loyal to him to curry favor with thos? whose political philosophy is that of big government—bigger and bigger government, until socialism is the end result. We all know now that socialism is a form of social and economic slavery. We know it to be the precursor of com- munism, the antichrist, the ultimate terror. Now, why did the majority of both Houses of Congress vote to pass the Kerr bill? Was it marely to serve the inter- ests of a selfish minority who would boost the price of natural gas, or was it to defeat the conspiracy of a still smaller and far more selfish minority in Gov- ernment, in this instance to take another long step toward the ultimate socializa- tion of the Nation’s economy? Was a vote for the Kerr bill a vote for big gov- ernment or a vote for the right of States and municipalities to handle their own business within their borders? Was it a vote for higher or lower gas prices? Let me tell you about that. Let me make it clear to you that many have been misled by those who would give the bureaucratic Federal Power Commission virtually dictatorial powers over the pro- duction and sale of the natural gas they find so cheap and convenient for their daily household uses. When Congress passed the Natural Gas Act in 1938, the intent was to pro- vide for Federal regulation solely of nat. ural gas moving through interstate pipe lines and interstate commerce—this and nothing more. This policy, moreover, was confirmed by amendments to the act in 1942 and 1947, But as it hap- A2883 pened there was a flaw in the statute—a flaw which the Kerr bill was designed to correct. As written, the Natural Gas Act provides that the Federal Power Commission may assume regulatory jurisdiction over a pipe-line comzvany only after it has officially designated it as a natural-gas company as distin- guisned from a gas-producing or dis- triobuting company. Under the statute, such a company must be engaged in interstate commerce and qualify as a natural-gas company. In the so-called Hast Ohio case, which was litigation involving only the city cf Cleveland end the pipe lines overated entirely within the State by the Hast Ohio Gas Co., the Federal Power Com- raissicn intervened. The East Chio Co. was designated as a naturel gas com- pany. Thus, the Federal Pover Com- mission assumed jurisdiction over a mat- ter pertaining scicly to the State and not involving interstate commerce at all. The Supreme Court of the United-States later upneid this action of the Federal Pewor Commission. Fiaying thus suscescfully invaced the rignts of States to handle their own ef- fairs in this resnect, more recently the Federal Power Commission has sougnt to assume jurisdiction over the production and gathering of gas witun the States for sale to interstate pipe line companies. A hoaring in this connection 1s now pend- ing in Oklahema and, I understand, there are nearly 59 other jurisdiction cases listed. From all this, it bzcomes appar- ent that the Federal Power Commission seeks regulatory power over natuzal gas all the way from its discovery under ground to the point where it is burned in the kitchen stove. That is big govern- ment; it is socialization. Why is it socialization? Simply be- cause by this means Washington bureau- crats would determine not only whether the people gat gas at all, bui how much gas they gst, how and where they get it, when they get it, and how much they pay for it. Precucers and distributors of gas would, in effect, become appendages of a Government bureau, subject to its every wim. From all I have said thus far, Mr. Speaker, you may understand that the Federal Power Commission has chal- lenged the authority of every State public utility commission in America, includ- ing our own Michigan Public Service Commission. It has arrogantly disre- garded the will of Congress by seeking, and in large measure obtaining, author- ity over every natural gas distributing company in America; and unless stopped, will take authority over the production ‘and gathering of gas. Now, aside from the socialistic implica- tions of this grab for power, what may be expected so far as concerns the quantity and price of the natural gas available to the consumer under total regulation by the Federal Power Commission? The answer is not a difficult one. Over the past two or three decades, since natural gas became an important factor in the Nation’s fuel market, under State regulation, the price of natural gas at the well-head and at the end of the gathering line, where it is delivered to
A2884 the interstate pipe-line companies, con- sistently has moved downward. Under State regulation the price of natural gas has become lower from year to year. It is cheaper tcday than it was 20 years ago. Over the past 12 years, under Federal Power Commission regulation of inter- state transmission of gas, the price of gas delivered to distributing companies by the interstate pip lines has consistently moved upward. Natural gas delivered at the home is still cheaper than it was 20 yearsago. But the increases of late years are due almost entirely to the policy of the Federal Power Commission. This policy is to grant rates which yield the interstate pipe-line companies 6 percent above a rate base that contains all costs. These costs include all financing, all op- erations, amortization of the total invest- ment, local, State and Federal taxes, and everything else a lot of smart lawyers can think up and persuade the Commis- sion to allow in the rate base. If the Federal Power Commission gains jurisdiction over production and gath- ering of natural gas, and its sale at retail by distributing companies, there will be a direct condict of authority between State and Federal commissions. It would throw the natural-gas business into chaos for many years to come, until the battle is won by on2 side or the other. Moreover, gas producing and distribut- ing companies would have to keep at least two sets of books, one for the State and the other for the Federal authorities, and these increased costs would have to be paid by gas consumers through higher gas rates. At any rate, being on the ground and knowing the conditions at first hand, State commissions have reduced natural- gas rates at both producing and dis- tributing ends, while permitting the producers enough income to enable them to explore for new wells and the distrib- utors enough incoms to give good service. With the Federal Power Commission the opposite has been the case. Prices charged distributing companies have gone up and only in part because of in- creased costs of labor and materials. The State commissions have regulated natural gas business within the States without having to hire large numbers of people, at high cost to the taxpayers. But if the Federal Power Commission has its way, you may be sure that thousands will be added to the Govern- ment pay roll. Even if the Federal Power Commis- sion should reduce rates still further at the wells and at the gas burners in your home, you would undoubtedly pay more in boosted taxes to pay for the hordes of new Federal Power Commission em- ployees than you would save in gas rates. moreover, natural gas rates at the wells are now so low that some States have been forced to put floors under prices to make sure that gas producers have enough money to explore for new wells and thus maintain the supply. The President said interstate pipe lines must be protected from high prices at the wells, because they can buy gas only in restricted areas. This is a direct misrepresentation of the facts. Gas wells cannot be moved from one place to another, but gas pipe lines can be moved. The gas producers need the protection. The President put the cart before the horse, in order to make it look as if he were driving in the direction of lower gas prices instead of higher. So I submit to you, that a vote for the Kerr bill was a vote for lower gas prices to the consumer, and fer ever-growing supplies of gas. The Kerr bill was well designed to prevent further socialization of the natural-gas industry, and to maintain States’ rights. It was a bill to protect gas consumers, and not to exploit them. As I remarked once before, in Wash- ington things hardly ever are what they seem. And in this instance, as in so many others, the Committee for Demo- cratic Action and other big Government boosters were not concerned with the welfare of the people, or even with the truth. They were concerned only with the furtherance of their socialistic ideology. The National Capital Sesquicentennial EXTENSION OF REMARKS oO HON. BEN F. JENSEN OF IOWA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, April 21, 1950 Mr. JENSEN. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- orp, I include the following speech of the gentleman from Washington, Hon. Watt Horan, as part of the Salute to Freedom pageant, April 15, 1950, on the steps of the Capitol: We Americans are gathered here today to launch a Nation-wide celebration of the founding of our Nation’s Capital. It is the only capital city in the world that was hewn out of a wilderness to shelter a govern- ment that was first created on paper, then erected of brick and stone. This National Capital, dedicated to freedom, was George Washington’s last legacy to the American people. It vindicates Lafayette’s prediction, for it has become the central star of the constellation that enlightens the whole world, I know I can safely say that never before in history has there been an anniversary so important as that which we begin to observe on this spot today. In 150 years this city has become the capital of the greatest nation on earth and the hub of the whole civilized world. And it is the world’s symbol of hope for the future of humanity, of free indi- viduals, of government without tyranny. Freedom—let me repeat, freedom—must be the heart and theme of this sesquicen- tennial birthday of the Federal City of Wash- ington. Every feature and event that you witness in the months to come will be dedi-~ cated to that theme—just as our country itself is dedicated to preserving the precept of freedom. For more than 7 months this proud and beautiful city will enact the dramatic Pageant of Freedom. Let each and every one of us be impressed with what it means to APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD be a free American. We of the Sesquicen- tennial Commission pray that every man, woman, and child in America will, in some way, participate. We pray for a lasting ap~ preciation of the good fortune and tre- mendous responsibility which are ours. We earnestly hope that an increasing sponta- neity will develop the greatest civic cclebra- tion in history—-an unprecedented display of mutual, nonpartisan faith and good will. We commemorate today the laying of the cornerstone of the District of Columbia. One hundred ard fifty years ago today that cornerstone was laid at Jones Point, in which is now the city of Alexandria, a part of the Federal reservation that has since been ceded back to Virginia. The 22d of November marks the day when, 7 months later, the Sixth Congress convened, the first to meet in the new Federal City of Washing- ton, The infant community,.made up of segments of the colonies of Maryland and Virginia, really deserved its early nicknames of “the city of streets without houses,” and “the city of magnificent mudholes.” Our farsighted patriots were still wrenching it from the wilderness. Recently I read about the discovery in Asia Minor, on the Persian Gulf, of stone tablets. They told of the principles of gov- ernment of the anclent Sumerian resion of Babylonia, many hundreds of years before Christ. There, in the very cradle of civili- zation, scientists have unearthed the first known record of a nation with true social conscience. They found a government which not only allowed but demanded the participation of all its people, great and humble—truly a predecessor of our own Republic, dedicated as it is to government of the people, by the people, and for the people. It is good that this ideal has somehow per- severed, to spread from the Tigris and the Euphrates to the Potomac and the Hudson, over thousands of years and miles. Today we Americans can take pride in the fact that our own land has produced the highest ful- fillment of that ideal—and created the mod successful government ever to be based up it I think that in all the writings of the man whose vision and triumph we celebrate here today, there are none more appropriate than this passage from Washington’s Farewell Address: “The unity of government which consti- tutes you one people is now dear to you. It is justly so; for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the sup~ port of your tranquillity at home; your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very liberty which you so highly prize.” But as it is easy to foresee that from difer- ent causes and different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed, to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth—as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of inter- nal and external enemies will be most cuon- stantly and actively (though covertly and insidiously) directed—it is then of infuite moment that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national uniun to your collective and individual happiness— discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion that it can in any event he abandoned, and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now Unk together the various parts, These are the most stirring words I can summon with which to welcome all of you to the National Capital Sesquicentennial Cele- bration, and commend to your keeping the future of our country and the preservation of the ideals which have made it sa great.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Report on Israel EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KENNETH B. KEATING OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, April 20, 1950 Mr. KEATING. Mr. Speaker, under the sponsorship of the American Zion- ist Emergency Council, Rabbi Leon Stit- skin, a distinguished clergyman of Roch- ester, N. Y., and liaison officer between the council and New York State gov- ernment officials in Washington, visited the infant State of Israel last year and there made a detailed study of political, economic, social, and religious problems. His report has been forwarded to me with the suggestion that it might merit the attention of my colleagues by inclu- sion in the Recorp. I am happy to ac- cede to this suggestion, due to the ex- tremely high qualifications of the author and the great importance of the issues he discusses. Although I realize their controversial character in part, the con- tribution of Rabbi Stitskin to the think- ing on this timely subject is significant. The report follows: Report oN IsraEu (By Rabbi Leon Stitskin) The political cauldron in Israel seethes over four issues which I was asked to investi- gate: One, the Arab refugee problem; two, territorial adjustment; three, the status of Jerusalem; four, the holy places. As to the problem of Arab refugees, a wave of slanderous propaganda has been unleashed which distorts the facts and leads to erro- neous conclusions. As a result of the propa- ganda, the Foreign Minister of Israel was forced into a compromising, almost suicidal, position when he consented to the admission of 100,000 refugees into the cramped and impoverished territory of Israel against the protest of the cabinet. Nobody with a prac- tical knowledge of Israel believes that the country can integrate into its strategy and social economy 100,000 Arabs. Nevertheless, our State Department continued to pressure Israel for the admission of 250,000 Arab refugees. On November 29, 1947, the people of Israel were fully prepared to set up a State on the basis of a settlement which entailed that at the outset 45 percent of 1ts population would be Arabs. This would indeed have been effected had the Arab nations, too, accepted the UN decision and cooperated in maintain- ing the peace. But the Arabs revolted against the UN decision and wrecked the peace. They did so both within Israel and from without, forcing Israel to fight against five implacable armies, that converged upon the Jewish state from all sides, and an in- surgent army from within. Their efforts failed. The invasion and rebellion collapsed. Then followed the Arab exodus. The Arabs fled despite the pleadings of the Jews for them to remain. Why did they go? Who prevailed upon them to leave? It was the Arab high command that promised them that the British were going to reinforce their armies and within a few days all the Jews would be drowned in a torrent of blood and they could return to divide the spoils and take possession of Jewish homes and belong- ings, settlements, and cities. The primary and most decisive considera- tion in the Arab refugee problem is Israel’s security. A flood of returning Arabs is liable to blow up the State from within. The Arab refugees will constitute a potential fifth column. Even if those who return may now be seek- ing peace, they could not be relied upon in the event of new outbreaks. A mass re- patriation of refugees without peace with the neighboring countries would be an act of suicide on the part of Israel. No government placed in such a position would think of do- ing anything of the sort. Israel is told not to worry about future outbreaks. But who is ready to give a pledge of peace to Isracl? In the hour of need, who offered it a helping hand? The UN stood by impotent. The United States imposed an embargo on the export of arms to aggressor and victim alike. Today the Arab states have assurances that Great Britain will renew the supply of arms to them. Egypt has recently increased her war budget and she received eight warships from England, Lebanon is increasing her army to 10,000. Syria has sent 500 men to train in the British Air Force. Arab radio stations are daily pouring forth a stream of vituperative propaganda directed against Israel, threatening a second round. Such be- ing the position of Israel, where is the moral and political justification for the unreason~ able demands that are being made upon her? Why should this infant state be asked to undermine its national security with its own hands? Then there is the economic factor. The truth of the matter is that the Arab economy in Israel has collapsed. Moreover, a large part of the geographical and economic vacuum created by the exodus has been filled by the new immigrants. A mass return of Arab refugees would require a creation of a new Arab economy. Thirdly, the State is harnessing all its energy and resources to the great task of absorbing the new immigrants. This calls for unusual sacrifice in terms of high taxa- tion and austerity which would have to be shared by the Arab population on an equal basis. The Arabs would no doubt resent being drafted for helping increase the Jewish population and there would be some Jjustifi- cation for their disgruntlement. What then is the solution? One of the wisest international measures taken after the First World War was the exchange of popula- tions between Greece and Turkey. If any single factor has contributed to terminate the age-old enmity between those two coun- tries, it has been the removal of the minority populations. But this may appear to be a far-fetched solution at the moment. In the meantime, Israel has declared its readiness to help in the resettlement of the displaced Arabs. Israel is prepared to pay compensation for abandoned lands (there are not many prece- dents for this) and will continue to help in. the reunion of families which were sep- arated by the catastrophe. Israel will also admit 100,000 more refugees and will inte- grate them in its social economy. (We must not forget, however, that there are already jn Israel at present close to 170,000 Arabs.) This will be accomplished only after peace negotiations are completed and the Clapp Commission will make its final recommenda~ tions on the economic development of that part of the world. The second point at issue is the territorial question. Although Israel has fully earned its right to the Negev, Egypt has not become reconciled to this state of affairs. Great Britain, too, is dissatisfied with Israel’s hold on the Negev. Why? In case of another war it would serve the best interest of Brit- ain that all Arab countries be united by land as well as by sea, The assignment of part of the Negev to Egypt would establish a direct route from Egypt to Transjordan while depriving Israel of the important stra- A2885 tegic port of Akaba. Thus, if Egypt were to close the Suez, Israel would have no outlet to the sea. But aside from this consideration, Israel must have natural boundaries. The Jewish state needs bridgeheads and outposts to pro- tect the heart of the nation. The Negev will not only serve as a vast reservoir for the resettlement of thousands of refugees but also as a military zone protecting the south- ern entrance to Israel. Every colony and settlement is in a sense a strategic outpost, @ military zone, in addition to being an agricultural settlement. Hence Israel needs the Negev not only for settlement but also as a natural boundary for the defense of the land. The natural frontiers between Israel and Egypt, Lebanon and Syria, are the former boundaries between British mandated terri- tory and these three countries. The same holds good for the frontier between Israel and Transjordan. In the case of Egypt there is a special problem of the Gaza-Rafa strip. In this matter, too, the Government of Israel is prepared to seek a solution by negotia- tions. The same is true of the road to Bethlehem, which is in Jewish hands, and the road to Mount Scopus, held by the Arabs. Yet Israel can on no account acquiesce in the seizure by invading armies of any strip of territory forming part of the area of the Jewish state. For this reason Israel will never agree to leave in the hands of Syria the strip lying to the east of the Jor- dan and Lake of Galilee. Mr. Sharett has pointed out it will not do to encourage the Arab aggressors by intimat- ing that they might succeed in obtaining ter- ritorial concessions by political pressure. Said Sharett: “The contribution made by the United States of America toward adoption of that great historic decision will never be forgotten, just as the outstanding contribu- tion of the Soviet Union and of other powers, large and small, will be remembered. But the lesson taught by the fate of that resolu- tion and the mortal pains of its implemen~ tation has also been deeply engraved in let~ ters of fire when the state of Israel at birth hung between life and death. It was not the resolution of November 29, 1947, which proved its salvation. Israel’s soldiers did not sacrifice their lives in gaining for this state defense positions and security zones in order that political leaders of the nation should throw away this sacred, blood- drenched patrimony.” The status of Jerusalem is the most controversial and explosive issue. As far as Israel is concerned, Jerusalem constitutes the heart of the nation. It is vital to its future security and Israel will therefore never accept any compromise on New Jerusalem. Any attempt to force the internationaliza- ticn will lead to renewed warfare in the Middle East. The new city of Jerusalem is 95 percent Jewish and is an integral and in- separable part of the Jewish state. During the war Israel paid for the defense of Jeru- salem with untold sacrifices and a heavy toll of life. Israel has made many concessions, but on this question there will be no com- promise. As to the holy places in Jeru- salem, it is pointed out that 95 percent are situated in the old city, and Israel will agree to accept some form of international super- vision over the holy places and shrines, With regard to the holy places in Israel, slanderous and libelous campaign propa- ganda has been conducted by certain quar- ters who are pressing for the international- ization of Jerusalem. There has been a great deal of misrepresentation and mis- chievous fabrication. Atrocity stories have been published about alleged violations of the rights of the church,
A2886 arrests of priests and high ecclesiastical dig- nitaries. What are the facts? There are within the area assigned to Israel approximately 200 Christian churches and monasteries administered by 12 Chris- tian denominations. The value of Christian property within the territory of Israel amounts to $80,000,000 of which damages 1n- curred during the war constitutes less than one-half percent, or less than $500,000. The war damage to Christian property is vir- tually confined to one Jerusalem church, The Notre Came, because the Arabs turned it into a fortress. The Jewish Army was re- luctant to train its guns on this church, until its position became untenable. There is no damage to any church property in Nazareth. The Government has promised to make all necessary repairs and has set up @ special department to look after the in- terests and welfare of Christian and Moslem sacred shrines. The Israel Ministry for Religious Affairs watches over the holy places with a vigilance and zeal which cannot be surpassed. Anum- ber of heads of Christian churches have their seats in Israel and are active in protecting their rights and interests. They enjoy every facility and are working in close contact with the Israel Ministry for Religious Affairs and the local authorities. I have a copy of a letter addressed by Father Terence, patriarchal vicar of Jerusa- lem to the Ministry of Religions of Israel in which he categorically denies “the exag- gerated and false impression made public on May 18, 1949, concerning an incident which is said to have occurred in Ain Karem.” Another Catholic leader, Father Terence Kuehn, vicar general for the southern area of Israel and a member of the Franciscan Order in Jerusalem, also testified that the Israel Government’s attitude is one of defi- nite good will. “A number of incidents have occurred at the hands of fanatics, includ- ing the breaking off of some locks from doors of Franciscan property and the throw- ing of stones at one of the windows, but I do not think that circumstances would have been different under another government considering what has taken place in the Holy Land. The Jews have made true efforts and I am sure the position of the church in Israel will improve.” Rev. Leigh F. Irish, pastor of the Ameri- can Gospel Church, who said his church was the first American church in Jerusalem, de~ scribed the Israel Government as most agree- able, kind, and considerate. He ruled out persecution and desecration, and said: “I am against the false type of propaganda some persons are spreading in the United States and elsewhere to slander Israel. Israel deserves the utmost commendation for what it has done.” Rev. Robert Lindsay, leader of the Jerusa- lem Baptist Congregation, smiled at the suggestion of any desecration of church property. He expressed opposition to the internationalization of Jerusalem “which would put the Holy City on a pragmatic Israel has done just as good a job in’ basis. Jerusalem, if not better, than others could have done.” In conclusion: Israel’s accomplishments during the first 2 years are phenomenal. Everywhere there is marked progress. The functions of the Government are conducted with western efficiency. Law and order rule supreme. The humanitarian impulse and the willingness to build cooperatively a state based on justice, equity, and peace—are auspicious portents for the future. All in all, Israel is the best investment as far as western democratic ideals are con- cerned in a sea of reaction and primitive feudalism. The Jewish state constitutes an oasis in a desert of undeveloped areas. Dr. Shoulders Endorses Hospital Con- struction Program EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ALBERT GORE OF TENNESSEE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, April 21, 1950 Mr. GORE. Mr. Speaker, since mak- ing the statement here on April 4 that I would offer at the proper time in con- sideration of this bill an amendment to restore the unjustified $75,000,000 reduc- tion in funds for construction of hos- pitals under the Hill-Burton Act, and giving my reasons therefor, I have re- ceived many letters and telegrams en- dorsing the program and urging support of the amendment. One of the most thoughtful letters on the subject comes from Dr. H. H. Shoul- ders, of Nashville, Tenn. Dr. Shoulders, who endorses the hos- pital construction program and endorses, too, the amendment which I propose to offer, makes such an interesting com- mentary upon certain of my remarks re-~ garding the scarcity of doctors, in which he raises a point of view that I did not have thoroughly in mind at the time I spoke, that I would like to read certain excerpts of Dr. Shoulders’ letter, which I think my colleagues will find interest- ing: My Dear ALBERT: I have read your speech with interest. I heartily approve of the position you have taken on this issue. [I heartily approve of the arguments you have made with one exception. I hope I can ex- press myself with regard to this exception in such a way as not to offend you, but rather amplify your arguments in favor of the amendment you propose. You cite figures as to the number of doc- tors in Tennessee in 1921 and 1948, together with an increase in the population, and in- terpret these facts to mean there is a marked shortage of doctors and urgent need of less waste of time on the part of the physician, This is another important reason for the sup- port you are giving to the Hill-Burton pro- gram. It is also a reason why those figures, however accurate, don’t tell the story. I have used just two examples. I could use many more. There is not an over-all dearth of physi- cians, in my opinion, at all. The deficiency in physicians exists where hospital facilities do not exist. There is a surplus of physicians in many areas where hospitals exist. It is my opinion, therefore, that the maldistribution of physicians is due very largely to the mal- distribution of hospital facilities and that this maldistribution of physicians will be corrected automatically by accomplishing a more even distribution of hospital facilities, and without the Federal Government enter- ing into the field of medical education and without the enactment of any compulsory measures whatsoever. I would now cite to you the fact that more than 20,000 young graduates of medicine were inducted into military service in World War JI on the completion of only 9 months of postgraduate training. Under the GI bill of rights these young physicians have been able to carry their post- graduate training to completion. Many have already completed training and are looking for locations where hospital facilities exist, Certainly a young surgeon with com- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD plete training could not utilize the skills and judgment he has acquired in his training in a town or community where hospital facili- ties do not exist. I don’t know of a place where a good, modern, new hospital has lo- cated in which a well-trained young man has not located soon thereafter. The point Iam trying to make is this, that this correction of maldistribution takes place as a result of the Federal aid in medical education. The figures, as is often true of siatistics, are misleading. I will endeavor to state my reasons for such an opinion. To a marked extent the same things have happened in medicine that have happened in agriculture. A very much smaller num- ber of farmers, as result of progress in farm« ing techniques and equipment, are still pro- ducing a surplus for a greatly increased population, Progress in the art, science, and techniques of medicine have also altered practices in medicine. For example: Before the days of the antibiotic drugs (penicillin, ctc.) a physician treating a case of pneumonia in the home would probably make daily visits or twice daily visits to the patient for a period of 7 to 15 days, whereas today he may visit the patient twice or three times. In 1921, a vast majority of deliveries took place in the home. The physician in at- tendance spent a majority of his time in waiting for developments. Each of those patients today would be ad- mitted to a hospital if accessible. As a re-~ sult the time of the physician is not con- sumed in travel and waiting. He could properly treat both cases under modern conditions in a modern hospital with great advantage to both types of patients without spending a vast majority of his time in travel and waiting. Other progressive developments have tak-~ en place which have an intimate bearing on this question also. Roads have been improved. Modes of transportation have been altered. A fow miles of distance between a patient and a hospital is not the handicap it used to be. By car or ambulance any patient can be brought to a modern hospital facility where the physician can render the most modern type of service under the most advantageous conditions with establishment of modern facilities and that it is not a result of a compulsion in any sense and that the HUll- Burton program does not disturb in any way the local autonomy of the institution nor the freedom of the patient and the phy- sician. The Hill-Burton program is going for- ward in Tennessee in fine shape, in my opinion. Most sincerely yours, H. H. SHovunpers, M. D. Mr. Speaker, the amendment will probably be voted upon next Monday. I request your careful consideration and urge support of this meritorious pro- gram. Tariff Rates on Shoes and Rubber and Canvas Footwear EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDITH NOURSE ROGERS OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, April 21, 1950 Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my re-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD marks in the Recorp, I include the fol- lowing letters: TREASURY DEPARTMENT, Washington, March 30, 1950. Hon. EpvrrH Nourse RoGsErs, House of Representatives, House Office Building, Washington, D.C. Dear Mrs. Rocers: For the Secretary, I wish to acknowledge your letter of March 29, 1950, in which you state that you have received a copy of the communication which Mr. Max- well Field, executive vice president of the New England Shoe and Leather Association, directed to the Secretary, asking that action be taken under the Anti-Dumping Act of 1921 in connection with the alleged dumping of Czechoslovakian shoes in the United States. This matter has been brought to the at- tention of the appropriate Treasury Officials for consideration and a reply will be forth- coming as soon as possible. Very truly yours, Wr.iiam L. Lyncn, Acting Administrative Assistant to the Secretary. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, April 6, 1950. The Honorable EpirH Nourse Rocrrs, House of Representatives. My Dear Mrs. RoGeErs: The receipt is ac- knowledged of your letter of March 29, in which you state you have received a copy of a letter dated February 28 from Mr. Field, executive vice president of the New England Shoe and Leather Association, Boston, Mass. In accordance with your request, the fol- lowing is the text of the Department’s reply to Mr. Field’s letter of February 28: “The receipt is acknowledged of your letter of February 28, in which you request infor- mation on the official policy of the Depart- ment of State with respect to the importa- tion of footwear from Czechoslovakia. You also state it has been brought to your atten- tion that the Department of State has ap- proved the importation of these shoes and has set a quota on the quantity of shoes which can be imported from Czechoslovakia to the United Staes during 1950. “The Department of State has not estab- lished a quota on shoes and, in fact, has no authority to establish such a quota. Neither can it be said that the Department has ‘ap- proved’ the importation of these shoes. “Trade between the United States and Czechoslovakia is carried on within the framework of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, concluded at Geneva, Switzerland, October 30, 1947, the signatories of which include the United States’'and Czechoslovakia. On April 22, 1948, the Presi- dent proclaimed the following changes in rates under paragraph 1530 (e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, which rates were negotiated with Czechoslovakia under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade: General agreement rate Commodity: Percent Boots, shoes, or other footwear: McKay sewed, other than skating _..----.~...-.-----..- 20 Molded soles laced to uppers... 10 Other (principally cemented soles) .-.--.--.-..----+-----= 20 With fabric uppers and leather soles___.----.~.--~-~-~---.-.6 20 “These concessions are subject to Article XIX (the ‘escape clause’) which permits a contracting party to withdraw or modify any concession if, as a result of unforeseen de- velopments and of such concession or other obligations, increased imports threaten or cause serious injury to domestic industry. If it is felt that injury is being suffered in this case, a request for consideration and action should be addressed to the United States Tariff Commission, Washington, D. C.” Sincerely yours, Jack K. McFauu, Assistant Secretary (For the Secretary of State). —— Unirep StaTes Tarirr COMMISSION, Washington, D. C., April 7, 1950. The Honorable EprrH Nourse RocERs, House of Representatives, Dear Mrs. Rocers: I have your letter of March 29, 1950, in which you refer to a bill which would reduce the duty on imported rubber and canvas footwear. Enclosed with your letter are several pages from the Con- GRESSIONAL RECORD Of March 28, giving your remarks concerning the competition from Czechoslovakia on rubber shoes and canvas shoes. We have no information concerning a bill which would reduce the duty on rubber and canvas footwear. Possibly the editorial in the Watertown Sun refers to a bill, men- tioned in the press in recent weeks, which would change certain customs administrative laws. This bill is being drawn up by the Treasury Department and I suggest you refer your request for a copy of the bill to that agency. Under article VII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade signed at Geneva in 1947, the United States has agreed to change its method of evaluating merchandise for duty purposes which, when carried out, would preclude the use of American selling price as a basis of customs valuation. This basis is currently used for the assessment of duty on rubber footwear and on rubber-= soled footwear with canvas uppers. Before the United States could carry out this part of the general agreement, legislation by Con- gress would be necessary. Whether or not the bill being drafted by the Treasury De- partment will containta provision on Amer- ican selling price has not been finally de- termined. I should like to point out that if the basia of -valuation is changed, the United States has the right to adjust the rate of duty so that the total amount of duty collected will be the same under the new basis as it would have been under the old basis. If this right is exercised, it does not appear that the rubber-footwear ‘industry is likely to be in- jured as a result of such a change in the basis of valuation. I am enclosing an excerpt from the Tariff Commission’s publication, Summaries of Tariff Information, which gives information on production and imports of rubber foot- wear through 1947. Also enclosed are tables which show more recent import statistics on rubber footwear. If I can be of any further service in this or any ether matter, please do not hesitate to call upon me. Sincerely yours, Oscar B. Ryprr, Chairman. —— Locaz No. 22763, Russer WorkKERS F. L. UNION, Maiden, Mass.,-April 10, 1950. Mrs. EnrrH Nourse Rocsrs, House of Representatives, Office Building, Washington, D. C. Dear Mrs. Rocers: I observed in the Bos- ton Globe of Sunday, April 9, an Associated Press .dispatch from Washington which carried the headline “Tariff board denies move to cut duty on rubber footwear.” There followed a story to the effect that a . report had been addressed to you from the United States Tariff Commission which stated that there was no move to cut directly duty on rubber foetwear, but that there A2887 might be a change in the method of comput- ing the duty. Several weeks ago when we first learned of the proposals to cut the tariff on rubber foot- wear, I wrote letters to the entire Massa- chusetts delegation in Congress and some of the replies that I received from the Mas- sachusetts members were accompanied by letters from the United States Tariff Com- mission over the signature of Mr. Oscar B. Ryder, chairman, which, I supect, were simi- lar to the communication Mr. Ryder ad- dressed to you. With your permission, I would like to point out that this letter is considerably less reassuring than it at first appears to be, and that the newspaper article referred to above indicates. Firstly, there is a paragraph in Mr. Ry= der’s letter, in my copy, it is the second par- agraph which says that the duty on rubber sole footwear with fabric uppers, which is now 35 percent ad valorem, based on the American selling price, could be reduced to 1744 percent; it then goes on to state fur- ther that the rate on other rubber footwear, “which is now $1.50 per dozen pairs, but not less than 12% percent nor more than 25 per- cent ad valorem, based on American selling price, could be reduced to 1244 percent ad valorem.” The inference here is that this is some- thing which might occur. Actually, it has occurred. The duty on Czechoslovakian rubber footwear is now 12% percent ad valorem on the American selling price. You are probably familiar with the concern the leather shoe industry is manifesting over imports from Czechoslovakia. In fact, they make the charge of “dumping.” The second point, and this is major, is that under article 7 of the general agree- ment on tariff and trade, the United States has agreed to change its method of valuing merchandise for duty purposes which would preclude the use of the American selling price. The argument is then advanced that the rubber-footwear industry will not suffer from this arrangement because the United States has reserved the right to adjust the rate of duty so that the total amount of duty collected will be the same under the new basis as it would be under the old. This is unconvincing and unsatisfactory to us because the foreign invoice price is vari- able and subject to governmental control; and because these industries are either socialized or subsidized, and therefore, the Czechoslovakian Government, for instance, could determine both the price and the quantity to be exported according to its need for dollars. The percentage rate necessary to yield the same protection as now granted would be at the rate of several hundred per- cent. It would be difficult to determine; it would be fantastically high; and would therefore be a far greater violation of admin- istration trade policies than anything else which could possibly be proposed. It would appear to be also a considerable amount of movement to the end result of merely re- maining in the same place. However, even if present policy makers were to arrange ad- justments of the rate of duty furnishing the industry with the same measure of protec- tion which it has now, the fact still remains that with the abrogation of the American selling-price principle, the way would be open for any future set of policy makers to open the floodgates to a deluge of products from these low-wage nationalized or subsi- dized industries. The abrogation of the American selling price principle may occur in either of two ways—(1) is from a bill to be introduced by the Treasury Department which has the harmless sounding title of a Bill to Revise the Administrative Procedures of the Bureau of the Customs. This bill contains provisions to revoke the American selling price prin- ciple as it applies to rubber footwear,
A2888 The other means by which tariff reduc- tions eould occur would be through negotia- tions under the framework of the general agreement on tariff and trade which would take place in December 1950. We feel that this is areal threat. We know that our industry cannot possibly compete with the nationalized industries of Czecho- slovakia or with the products of Japanese workers, with their Oriental wage and living standards. And even if the maximum which is promised by the Tariff Commission is awarded us in the way of protection, the re- moval of the American selling price principle would leave us in the state of permanent uncertainty. The rubber-footwear industry is located chiefly in southern New England, a very sub- stantial portion of it in Massachusetts. This is the section which already has more than its share of distressed areas and which has already seen two of its major industries— leather shoes and textiles—blighted in the last few years. The nature and source of this low-wage competition should also he taken into con~ sideration. Very truly yours, FRancls MuLcary, President. UnrreD STATES RUBBER Co., New York, N. Y. As & supplier of materials entering into the manufacture of our waterproof rubber footwear and canvas-upper rubber-soled footwear, we feel you would wish to be in- formed as to the possible jeopardy of this truly American enterprise and its effect upon you. This situation will develop if the State Department and other governmental agen- cies continue along the lines of encouraging foreign imports through a lowering of tariffs to a point where the American manufac- turer can no longer compete and survive. Tariff rates at the present time on these commodities apply on the domestic selling price of American-made footwear like or similar to the impcrted items. We have un- official but <uthoriive information that under the guise of revising the admunistra- tive procedures of the Bureau of Customs, a bill is to be introduced in the House of Representatives repealing the American selling price principle established by a Pres- idential proclamation in 1933 and which was sustained in 1937 by President Roosevelt when a Czechoslovakian trade treaty was under consideration. At the Reciprocal Trade Conference held in Geneva in 1947, the American delegation granted concessions in duty rates on water- proof rubber footwear to this same iron- curtain country which for practical purposes cut the American duty in half. This was done over the clearly defined and logical protests of the entire American industry involved in the production of this necessary commodity. This trade treaty became effec- tive in April 1948. Fortunately, canvas-upper rubber-soled footwear was not on the 1947 agenda—but will probably appear without too much ad- vance notice on the list of products to be considered for tariff concessions in the re~ ciprocal trade-agreement negotiation with foreign countries to be held in southern Eng- land in September of this year. The attached schedule tends to show the effects that can be expected if the American selling price principle is abolished and if the duty on canvas footwear is reduced by the full 50 percent which is permissible under the Reciprocal Trade Act. Members of Congress in both Houses in the States in which you operate could be helpful in bringing this problem to the at- tention of the President, the Secretary of -Labor, the Secretary of Defense, and others, including Members of Congress from other States. If your employees are organized, they could probably call the situation to the attention of their various labor organi- zations. The enclosed booklet, The Case of Rubber Footwear, contains some pertinent facis. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD As one of your customers, we earnestly solicit your cooperation in our effort to pro- tect this old and long-established industry. We should like to specifically request that you let us know what you think you can do to help us and yourselves. Very truly yours, H.A JoHNSON, Division Purchasing Agent. Imports of rubber footwear—waterproof and canvas Approx Price of imate Total one Item invoice Tariff rate Tariff landed | United price priee States landed itern _—_—____— Men’s canvas oxford (Japan)... $049 | At“ >< a Meee LT $0. 62 $1. 11 $1, 80 Do . At H ue : dl 80 1 80 .49 | At tee =. «17 . 66 1 80 49) At ‘os soe tt - = t 085 . 575 1.80 ¥ .99 | At 25 percent American seiung price-- 61 1. 60 2. 50 D 99 | Ati2t7y me tem cette at ee Tt «805 1 295 2.50 -99 | At 12} . ' +125 1.115 2.50 i 1 47 | At 25 percent Ameri¢an seiuing price. — 1. 04 2, 51 4 25 D - 1.47 | At 1214 percent American selling price. 52 199 4.25 1.47 | At 1214 percent ad valorem....-------- «18 1.65 4.25 na URNS SIN SISSIES NanOUIII I cue The above tabulations are intended as a rough measure to indicate the effects which would result from the 59-percent reduction in the existing duty on rubber-soled canvas footwear and the effects of the elimination of the American-selling-price principle on both waterproof and canvas footwear. This tabulation is based on a Men’s canvas oxford (Japanese) which is being offered for delivery in New York this spring. The tabu- lations on the waterproof items are from offerings that were made during the past season. With reference to the canvas oxford, line 1 reflects the approximate delivery price in New York after duty based on the present 85 percent of the American selling price. Line 2 shows what would happen if that duty is cut in half which is permissible under the present Reciprocal Trade Act. Line 3 shows what would happen if the present rate of duty (85 percent) was applied on the ad valorem rather than the American selling price. Line 4 shows the result of cutting in half the present 85 percent rate of duty and applying it on an ad valorem basis rather than on the American selling price. In the tabulations on the waterproof items, line 1 takes a duty of 25 percent of the American selling price which was effective prior to the reduction granted at the Geneva Conference in 1947 and which became effective April 1948. Line 2 reflects the present duty, 1214 percent of the American selling price. Line 3 reflects the approximate result if the Amer- ican-selling-price principle is repealed and the present 1214-percent duty is applied on an ad valorem hasis. The extreme right- hand column is the American selling price of like or similar articles quoted by one mem- ber of the footwear industry. Encouragement of Science EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. CARL HINSHAW OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, April 21, 1950 Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rzc- orD, I include the following article enti- tled “Encouragement of Science,” by Robert Oppenheimer, of the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, N. J., based on an address given at the awards banquet of the ninth annual science talent search in Washington, D. C., March 6, 1950: ENCOURAGEMENT OF SCIENCE (By Robert Oppenheimer, the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, N. J.) Science has profoundly altered the condi-~ tions of man’s life. During the last centu- ries, the discoveries in science and their ap-~ plcations to practice have changed the ma- terial conditions of life. They have changed as well many matters of the spirlt. They have changed the form in which practical problems of right and wrong come before us; they have changed the focus of moral is- sues, both for the individual and for govern- ments. They have given us new methods for defining the meaning of problems that face us, and for judging whether or not our solu- tions are just. The most manifest of the changes are the material ones. Yet even here it takes a cer- tain perspective to see their true extent, Ad- vances in the study of man and other living forms have extended our life span by dec- ades. Discoveries in physical science have immeasurably HUghtened our tolk and en- riched our lives. They have given leisure to an ever-widening group of men. They huve made a reasonable education not a special privilege, but a common right. They have made the world, in its physical dimensions, a small place, and established the means by which people in remote parts of the earth can communicate with each other, can get to know each other, and can learn to work together. They have put at the disposal of everyone the resources of physical power, of ease, and of knowledge that were in the past reserved for the few. Not all of the changes in material well- being that science offers are realities. Yet the very fact that they are possibilitics has changed the nature of the responsibility that we bear, both as individuals and as a com- munity of men and women banded together in government. In the Greek cities, political democracy, and civilization itself, appearcd possible only on the basis of a slave economy. Technology, born of science, has altered that; it has enabled mankind, as it has forced mankind, to deal with the issues of slavery as a moral issue. Poverty has always been an ugly thing, and in its extremes a desperate one. Today, it is an evil, in the sense that it les within human hands and human
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD hearts to abate it. Science can provide us, for the first time in history, with the means of abating hunger for everyone on earth. Perhaps nowhere has the impact of science more clearly altered the specific terms of a great political issue than in the effects of scientific development on warfare. This is a can of worms with which I have myself unhappily been engaged for some years. It would not be honest to say—as it would be folly not to hope—that the very terror of modern weapons would in itself put an end to war, it would not even be honest to say that because of this terror the abolition of war and the maintenance of peace have be- come the one absoiute, final objective of all political decisions. There are other things in man’s life: his freedom, his decency, and his sense of right and wrong, that cannot so lightly be subjected to a single end. But what we need to remember is that war to~ day has become, and is increasingly becom- ing, something very different from what it was a century ago or a millennium ago. We need to recognize the new situation as new; we need to come to it with something of the same spirit as the sclent'si’s, wuen he has conducted an experiment and finds that the results are totally other than those that he had anticipated. Four months before Hiroshima, in the last days of his life, President Roosevelt’s thoughts turned to these questions. In the last words that he wrote, in words he did not live to speak, the President looked to the future, to the atomic age. He looked to the past, to the days of the founding of the Republic. He wrote: “Thomas Jefferson, himself a distinguished scientist, once spoke of the ‘brotherly spirit of science, which unites into one family all its votaries of whatever grade, and how- ever widely dispersed throughout the differ- ent quarters of the globe.’ “Today science has brought all the differ- ent quarters of the globe so close together that 1t is impossible to isolate them one from another. “Today we are faced with the preeminent fact that, if civilization is to survive, we must cultivate the science of human rela- tionships—the ability of all peoples, of all kinds, to live together and work together, in the same world, at peace.” Science has greatly extended the range of questions in which man has a choice; it has extended man’s freedom to make significant decisions. Is there anything in the meth- ods of science itself, or in the spirit of sci- ence, that can help in the making of these decisions? To what extent is there a play on the word “science” which can mislead us and take us up false roads when we speak of this science of human relationships? Is there anything we can learn from the rele- vance of science to politics? If we are to answer these questions, and answer them honestly, we must recognize important and basic differences between problems of science and problems of action, as they arise in personal or in political life. If we fail to recognize these differences, we shall be seeking magic solutions and not real ones. We shall delude ourselves into laying aside responsibility, which it is an essential part of man’s life to bear. In most scientific study, questions of good and evil, or right and wrong, play at most a minor and secondary part. For practical de- cisions of policy, they are basic. Without them political action would be meaningless. Practical decisions and, above all, political decisions can never quite be freed from the conflicting claims of special interest. These, too, are part of the meaning of a decision and, of course, of action, and they must be an essential part of the force of its imple- mentation. Political decisions are unique acts. In politics there is little that can correspond to the scientist’s repetition of an experiment. An experiment that fails in its purpose may be as good as or better than one that suc- ceeds, because it may well be more instruc- tive. A political decision cannot be taken twice. All the factors that are relevant to it will conjoin only once. The analogies of history can provide a guide, but only a very partial one. These are formidable differences between the problems of science and those of prac- tice. They show that the method of science cannot be directly adapted to the solution of problems 1n politics and in man’s spiritual life. Yet there is relevance of a more subtle, but by no means trivial, kind. In trying more fully to explore this rele- vance, I should like to start with a text. This text is a letter! written by Thomas Jef- ferson to a young man who had enquired of him as to the usefulness of his studies of science. It was written in the middle of the year 1799, the year in which Napoleon abol- ished the directory and began to assume dictatorial power in France, the year before Thomas Jefferson was elected for the first time as President of the United States. Jef- ferson and the diverse brave and hopeful men who with him laid the foundations of our own. Government had learned much from the peoples of other nations. Many of their highest political ideals and their most power- ful political instruments were built on the experience, the insight and wisdom of Euro- pean scientists and philosophers. Even today we need to remember that this was so, and that there may be much that we can learn from others, and that we should be glad to learn, as in turn by example we should be glad to teach. Jefferson’s letter starts with a survey of the subjects in science which he believes young Munford ought to pursue. I will quote one characteristic passage which may strike a familiar and homely note for you: “The science of calculation also is indis- pensable as far as the extraction of the square and cube roots; Algebra as far as the quadratic equation and the use of logarithms are often of value in ordinary cases; but all beyond these is but a luxury; a delicious luxury indeed; but not to be indulged in by one who is to have a profession to follow for his subsistence.” But that is not really the part of Jeffer- son’s letter which I commend to you. Here it 1s: “T am among those who think well of the human character generally. I consider man as formed for society, and endowed by nature with those dispositions which fit him for society. I believe also, with Condorcet, as mentioned in your letter, that his mind is perfectible to a degree of which we cannot as yet form any conception, It is impossible for a man who takes a survey of what is already known, not to see what an, immensity in every branch of science yet remains to be discovered, and that too of ar- ticles to which our faculties seem adequate.” And later, in the same letter, still more explicitly: “And it is still more certain that in the other branches of science great fields are yet to be explored to which our faculties are equal, and that to an extent of which we cannot fix the limits. I join you therefore in branding as cowardly the idea that the human mind is incapable of further ad- vances. This is precisely the doctrine which the present despots of the earth are in- culcating, and their friends here reechoing; 1I am indebted to Dr. Julian Boyd, of Princeton University, for the copy of this hitherto unpublished letter. A2889 and applying especially to religion and poli- tics; ‘that it is not probable that anything better will be discovered than what was known to our fathers.’ We are to look back- ward then and not forward for the im- provement of science, and to find it amidst feudal barbarism and the fires of Spitalfields. But thank heaven the American mind is already too much opened, to listen to these impostures; and while the art of printing is left to us, science can never be retrograde; what 1s once acquired of real knowledge can never be lost. To preserve the freedom of the human mind then and freedom of the press, every spirit should be ready to devote itself to martyrdom; for as long as we may think as we will, and speak as we think, the condition of man will proceed in improve- ment. The generation which is going off the stage has deserved well of mankind for the struggles 1t has made, and for having arrested that course of despotism which had over- whelmed the world for thousands and thou- sands of years. If there seems to be danger that the ground they have gained will be lost again, that danger comes from the gen- eration of your contemporary. But that the enthusiasm which characterizes youth should lift its parracide hands against freedom and science would be such a monstrous phenom- enon as I cannot place among possible things in this age and this country.” To me there are two striking impressions this letter of Jefferson’s makes, even beyond its eloquence and its beauty. The first is that the letter is pervaded with the idea of progress, that ideal that owes so much to the development of science and that in turn has provided the great enriching human faith in which scientific discovery and in- vention has flourished. Jefferson is con- fident that an increased understanding of the world will lead to progress; he is con- vinced that the barbarisms of the past cannot stand up against inquiry and understanding and enlightenment; he is confident in man and sure that as men know more they will act more wisely and live better. In our contemporary expressions of hope that catas- trophe could be averted and civilization yet be saved, that confidence has lost much of its robustness. The second point is that for Jefferson there is something in the ways of science that is relevant to political life. Even in religion and politics, he holds that it 1s probable that things better will be discovered than what was known to our fathers. This conviction that new Knowledge is possible, and that not all the answers are known, is, of course, the stuff of the day-to-day hfe of the scientist. Science itself does progress; new knowledge is possible; and new knowledge, because it does not destroy or ignore the old, can only increase our understanding. The very idea of the development of science is an example of progress, and of progress which in no true sense can ever be reversed. But this is only part of the story. It is true, as Jefferson knew, that, in the large, science has flour- ished in conditions of human freedom, and that its growth is parallel to the growth of democratic institutions. Today, looking back on more than a century and a half of further history, we can be even more sure of this. We have seen not only the inspir- iting example of science and democracy flour- ishing together, but the tragic examples of their foundering together. We express the hope that of this tragedy we shall soon have seen the end. What are these lessons that the spirit of science teaches us for our practical affairs? Basic to them all is that there may be no barriers to freedom of inquiry. Basic to them all is the ideal of open-mindedness with regard to new knowledge, new experi- ence, and new truth. Science is not hased
A2890 on authority. It owes its acceptance and its universality to an appeal to intelligible, communicable evidence that any interested man can evaluate. There is no place for dogma in science. The scientist is free to ask any question, to doubt any assertion, to seek for any evi- dence, to correct any error. Where science has been used in the past to erect a new aGogmatism, that dogmatism has found itself incompatible with the progress of science; and in the end, the dogma has yielded, or science and freedom have perished together, Our own political life is predicated on openness. We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to op- erate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it; that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that the wages of secrecy are corruption. We know that in secrecy error, undetected, will flour- ish and subvert. Let me be clear. Science is not skepticism. It is not the practice of science to look for things to doubt. It was not by deliberate attempt of skepticism that physicists were led to doubt the absolute nature of simul- taneity, or to recognize that the ideas of strict causality embodied in classical physics could not be applied in the domain of atomic phenomena. There is probably no group of men who take more for granted in their daily werk than the scientists. Common sense, and all that flows from it, is their principal basis for what they do in the laboratory and for what they make of it on paper. But for scientists it 1s mot only honorable to doubt, it is mandatory to do that when there ap- pears to be evidence in support of the doubt. In place of authority in science, we have and we need to have only the consensus of in- formed opinion, only the guide of example. No scientist needs to order his colleagues to use a new technique of experiment or to enter a new field of discovery. If he has done this, it will be an invitation to his fel- lows to follow. These then are some of the attitudes of mind, these are some of the disciplines of spirit, that grow naturally in the scientist's world. They have grown there in part as a result of a humane and liberal tradition in political life, and in part as a cause of that. The open mind, the reliance on example and persuasion, rather than on authority—these are the heritage of the centuries in which science has altered the face of the earth. Sclence can help in diverse ways in preserv- ing and extending this heritage. Its very universality speaks across frontiers to make truth manifest in lands otherwise darkened; its material applications create the precon- ditions—in leisure, in education, in means of communication—for the converse of men with each other. Science provides the mate- rial and the intellectual basis for a world in which example and understanding can help all men to fulfill their hopes. Today we need to remember that our country, founded on these practices, and grown strong by their exercise, owes its strength to them, In this time of crisis, we need to cherish that strength. Resolutions of Agriculture Committee of American Small Business Organizations EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN W. HESELTON OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, April 21, 1950 Mr. HESELTON. Mr. Speaker, under leave granted me to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I want to insert certain resolutions adopted by the Conference of American Small Business Organizations at its eleventh national session here on March 27-29, 1950. In my judgment, these resolutions con- stitute constructive and affirmative sug- gestions worthy of the immediate and careful consideration of the congres- sional committees concerned and of all of us. I call particular attention to the rec- ommendation of the creation of a spe- cial commission charged with the careful and compiete study of the agriculture problem and the recommendation for enactment of basic legislation covering agriculture in the United States. We have had a clear demonstration of how effective such a commission could be in the work of the so-called Hoover Com- mission. Certainly with the problem of the agricultural program involving the jurisdiction of so many congressional committees, it would seem as though a single approach by a single commission, composed of members of our congres- sional committees, leaders in recognized farm organizations, businessmen and businesswomen, men and women in the fields of education and labor, offers the best prospect of the satisfactory solution of the problem which is of vital impor- tance to the future cf this country. I am also including a copy of the reso- lution I have filed today covering this suggestion. The matters follow: CONFERENCE OF AMERICAN SMALL BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS, ELEVENTH NATIONAL SES- SION, WASHINGTON, D. C., Marca 27-29, 1950 AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE RESOLUTION ON THE FARM-PRICE-SUPPORT ISSUE Whereas for 2 years this conference has expressed its steadfast opposition to uneco- nomically high price supports for agricul- tural commodities and has repeatedly ex- horted Congress and the Department of Agriculture in carrying out existing price- support laws and commitments to aim for price-support levels which would prevent serious subnormal agricultural income, but yet would avoid price incentive to excess production; and Whereas, despite the admonition of many competent agricultural leaders, Congress has seen fit to continue Government price-sup- port operations at such high price levels as to bring certain inevitable evil results, viz: (1) The piling up of unmanageable sur- pluses of many of the supported commodi- ties involving Government inventories and loans already in excess of $4,000,000,000; (2) Consequent prohibitive cost of these operations, already requiring additional bil- lions to handle 1950 crops; (3) The loss of export markets for many of these commodities except on a give-away basis to foreign countries; (4) The displacement of private taxpay- ing business from the handling of these commodities; (5) The extensive and growing regimenta~ tion of agriculture through acreage, produc~ tion, and marketing controls; (6) The gradual elimination of opportu- nity for individuals to freely enter agricul- tural pursuits where acreage already in pro- duction is being rigidly prescribed; (7) The projection of agriculture into the realm of partisan politics; and Whereas the people of the United States do need, and must have, an assurance of adequate food and fiber production from an APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD economically healthy and stable agricul- ture: Therefore be it Resolved: 1. That the Congress of the United States be, and herewith is, petitioned by the Con- ference of American Small Business Organ- izations to set up a special commission to consider the whole situation of necessary and adequate farm legislation. 2. That the commission be composed of outstanding national leaders, headed by some individual whose fairness, wisdom, and loyalty are recognized by a majority of our people; with committees to include Mem- bers of Congress, leaders in recognized farm organizations, businessmen, and men from the fields of education and labor. 8. That this commission, from informa- tion and recommendations from its commut- tees, be directed to formulate and then to report to the Congress, within a time reason- ably adequate for careful and complete study of the problem, a recommendation for enact- ment of basic legislation covering agricul- ture in the United States. NO. 1—COMMODITY EXCHANGE: Whereas the commodity exchanges have successfully for over a century broadened and stimulated the marketing of agricultural products at the lowest cost to the producer and redounding to the benefit of the con- sumer: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Conference of American Small Business Organizations endorse the continuance of our free competitive system of marketing commodities; and be it further Resolved, That the present government regulatory powers over the conduct of com- modity exchanges are ample and that Con- gress should guard against the granting of more arbitrary Federal powers of control over these exchanges which might readily lead to their sudden destruction. NO. 2—-COMMODITY CREDIT CORFORATION Whereas it is the function of the Com- modity Credit Corporation to make loans on, and to support the prices of, agricultural commodities under requirements of law; and Whereas the Corporation now has nearly $5,000,000,000 of available funds for its pro- grams, and is asking for another $2,000,0U0,~ 000; and Whereas in spite of restrictions in present law the CCC is tending toward the acquiring of permanent interests in real estate, which if effected would threaten further the many small-business firms of the Nation with which they now are in direct or indirect com- petition: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Conference of American Small Business Organizations does oppose any authority to the CCC which will enable it to own real estate, and opposes authority which allows CCC to expand emergency com-~ modity storage facilities without public establishment of the necessity therefor. NO. 4—GOVERNMENT ECONOMY IN AGRICULTURE Whereas the cost of the Federal Govern- ment has reached an almost prohibitive level; and Whereas the continued high cost of Gaov- ernment operation places the solvency of our Government in jeopardy; and Whereas the first step toward the reduction of our national debt must bo the drastic re-~ duction in the cost of peacetime operation of Government: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Department of Agricul- ture be streamlined to the end that the ap- propriations for the Department would be reduced substantially without affecting the good work done by the Department, and that to carry out the purpose of this resolution the recommendations contained in the Hoover Commisison Report be given most careful consideration.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD NO. 5—-ANTITRUST LAWS Whereas various agricultural industries have been indicted by the Federal Govern- ment on antitrust charges rather frequently; and Whereas even when cleared the adverse publicity has done irreparable harm and de- stroyed public confidence unjustly: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Conference of Ameri- can Small Business Organizations meeting in Washington, D. C, March 27, 28, and 29, 1659, endorses and supports the work of the Sawyer committee to bring about clarifica- tion and codification of the various antitrust laws. NO. 6—THE KEFAUVER BILL Whereas H. R. 2784, called the Kefauver bill or the accuisition of assets bill, has pasced the House and is now in Senate Committee; and Whereas this bill prohibits the purchases of small businesses to eliminate competition, and may limit or prevent sale of small busi- nesses to larger competitors and so work harcship on owners or heirs of small busi- nesses: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Conference of American Small Business Organizations meeting in Washington, D. C., March 27, 28, and 29, 1950, opposes the passage of this bill. A bill for the establishment of a Commission to study the agriculture situation and to recommend adequate farm legislation Be it enacted, ete.— Srcrion 1. (a) There is hereby established @ bipartisan commission to be composed of 12 members appointed as follows: (1) Four appointed by the President of the United States, two from the executive branch of the Government and two from private life; (2) Four enpointed by the President pro- tempore of ihe Sentie, two from the Senate and two from private life; and (3) Four appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, two from the House of Representatives and two from pri- vate life. (b) Of each class of two members men- tioned in subsection (a), not more than one member shall be from each of the two major political parties. (¢c) Any vacancy in the Commission shall not affect its powers, but shall be filled in the same manner 1n which the original ap- pointment was made. Src.2. The Commission shall elect a Chairman and a Vice Chairman from among its members. Src. 3. Seven members of the Commission shall constitute a quorum. Sxc. 4. (a) Members of Congress who are members of the Commission shall serve with- out com»ensation in addition to that re- ceived for their services as Members of Con- fress' but they shall be reimbursed for trav- ci. svbsirtence and other necessary expenses jiucurred by them in the performance-of the duties vested in the Commission. (b) The members of the Commission who are in the executive branch of the Govern- ment shall each receive the compensation which he would receive if he were not a member of the Commission, plus such addi- tional compensation, if any (notwithstand- ing section 6 of the act of May 10, 1916, as amended; 39 Stat. 582; 5 U. S. C. 58), as is necessary to make his aggregate salary $12,500; and they shall be reimbursed for travel, subsistence, and other necessary ex- penses incurred by them in the performance of the duties vested in the Commission. (c) The members from private life shall each receive $50 per diem when engaged in the performance of duties vested in the Com- mission, plus reimbursement for travel, sub- sistence, and other necessary expenses in- curred by them in the performance of such duties. Szc. 5. The Commission shall have power to appoint and fix the compensation cf such personnel as it deems advisable, in accord- ance with the ~**-‘-i--~ -* the civil-servics laws and the Ci: aa Act of 1249, as amended. Src. 6. (a) The Commission shall study and investigate the present organization and methods of operation of all departments, bu- reaus, agencies, boards, commissions, offices, independent establishments, and instrumen- talities of the executive branch of the Gov- ernment engaged in agriculture or related activities, to determine what changes therein are necessary to prevent serious subnormal agricultural income without placing an undue burden on the consumers and taxpayers of the country. (b) Within 80 days after the Highty-second Congress is convened and organized, the Commiussion shall maize a report of its find- ings and recommendations to the Congress, Src. 7. (a) The Commission, or any mem- ber thereof, may, for the purpose of carry- ing out the provisions of this act, hold such hearings and sit and act at such times and places, and take such testimony, as the Com- mission or such member may deem advis-~ able. Any member of the Commission may administer oaths or affirmations to witnesses appearing before the Commission or before such member. (b) The Commission is authorized to se- cure directly from any executive department, bureau, agency, board, commission, Office, in- dependent establishment, or instrumental- ity information, suggestions, estimates, and statistics for the purpose of this act; and each such department, bureau, agency, board, commission, office, establishment, or instrumentality is authorized and directed to furnish such information, suggestions, estimates, and statistics directly to the Com- mission, upon request made by the chair- man or vice chairman. Sec. 8. There is hereby authorized to be appropriated, out of any money in the Treas- ury not otherwise appropriated, so much as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this act. How To Buy More Unemployment EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. PAUL W. SHAFER OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, April 20, 1950 Mr. SHAFER. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks I include an article by Henry Hazlitt, How to Buy More Unemployment, which I helieve is “must” reading for all Members of Con- gress. The article appears in the cur- rent issue of Newsweek. How To Buy More UNEMPLOYMENT (By Henry Hazlitt) In the first 8 months of this year, accord- ing to official estimates, there has been an average of nearly 4,500,000 unemployed. This is paradoxical and premonitory. For this unemployment, the greatest since pre- war days, exists not in a depression but in the midst of an inflationary boom. It exists, in fact, in a period when the Administration boasts that personal incomes have reached the highest levels in our history. A2891 Yet this paradox is not inexplicable. It is simply what discerning economists predicted was certain to happen if we continued to push up wage rates and labor costs faster than prices and productivity. And we have kept boosting labor costs recklessly through union policy, pension demands, Government fact-finding awards, the Wagner-Taft-Hart- Jey Act, and the new law jumping mini- mum-wage hourly rates from 40 to 75 cents last January. The presumptive effect of this last factor is striking. Unemployment averaged 3,395,000 throughout 1929 and stood at 38,489,000 in December. This January it shot up to 4,480,000. Does the administration recognize the cause of this unemployment? Has it taken warning? On the contrary, it does every- thing to intensify the problem. In a mes- sage to Congress on April 6, President Tru- man called for a further increase in unem~ ployment benefits. For existing unemploy- ment he offered two explanations, both wrong. He explained that more people have been coming into the labor market every year. But they have been doing that since the beginning of our history, with the annual increase in population. Increased popula- tion means not only more people looking for jobs; it also means more consumers and consumer demand. Mr. Truman’s other explanation is that “as new plants and equipment have been added * * * businessmen have been able to produce more with the same number of workers.” This assumes the immemorial fal~ lacy that machinery creates net unemploy- ment. But as man-hour productivity in- creases, prices go down or wages and profits go up, and per capita demand increases with per capita supply. Because he makes the wrong diagnosis, Mr. Truman proposes the wrong remedy. We need not examine here the real revisions re- quired in unemployment insurance. It is enough to point out that all Mr. Truman’s own arguments ignore the sailent fact that as we increase the amounts and period of payment of unemployment benefits we en- courage an increase in unemployment it- self. The more we pay men who are idle, the more we reduce the penalties and in~ crease the incentives for idleness. Mr. Tru- man wants to pay aman who has been earn- ing $60 a week as high as $42 a week for not working. But if this man 1s offered an- other $60 job before his unemployment ben- efits expire, he may logically ask himself: “Why should I work for only $18 a week?” Or if he is offered a temporary $42 job: “Why should I work for nothing?” Our national labor policy is, in fact, the equivalent of the farm-price-support policy. Government support boosts the price of farm products so high that part of the supply must remain unsold. The taxpayer is then forced to hold the unsold surplus. Govern- ment and union labor policy, likewise, pushes up wage costs to the point where part of the labor force must remain unem- ployed. Then the taxpayer must pay un- employment benefits to this idle labor. “Sur- plus” labor rots in storage like “surplus” eggs, butter, and potatoes. The present American situation—of high unemployment even at the peak of an infla- tionary boom—is not unprecedented. Pre- elsely the same anomally occurred in Ger- many in 1927, and for the same reasons. In 1927 economists like Gustav Cassel warned in vain that the German wage pol- icy was senseless. Will such warnings to- day, in America, prove equaily futile?
A2892 Oil and Blood EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. OLIN E. TEAGUE OF TEXAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, April 21, 1950 Mr. TEAGUE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I wish to include an article by David Berry entitled “Cil and Blocd” which appeared m the Vet-Times, on April 22, 195°: Om anp Boop (By David Berry) Congress is hip-deep these days in its fa~ Vorite election-year sport—investigation. Its newest target is the Reconstruction Finance Corporatlon—the RFC—which aids private business with loans not otherwise available from commercial lenders and in- vestors. Ordinarily we don’t run a ‘empevecure when a big multimillion-dollar ( orporev:o2 such as RFC gets tangled up with Congress; nor do we lose any sleep if the big and little oil interests of the country get slapped around a little. However, we remember that, Just 5 years back, oil meant life and death to mullions of American GI’s fighting in Europe and Asia. In the final analysis, oil was the vital component which kept the machinery of freedom lubricated. All that—and the fact that civilian travel in this country was slowed down materially * py the wartime shortage of gasoline and oil— seems to have been forgotten by some Mem- ers of Congress, as they seek an issue on which to curb the authority o* the RFC to lend money to private business interests. To some Congressmen—and some news- papers—RFC looks like a fat target and the poys are whetting their knives. Perhaps we wouldn't even run a temperature in this case except that some veterans are involved. We like a good investigation as well as the next man—when the conditions and the facts support it. But our memory is not as short as the memories of some Congressmen. What could be more important to the United States—and to its fighting men—than to lend financial assistance to increase our national capacity to produce oil in case the threat of world war III becomes real? In this case it appears that politics is more important. A subcommittee of the Senate, headed by Senator J. Wrmtrm Fousricar (Democrat, Arkansas), presently is exercis- ing itseli—and the newspapers—over the fact that RFC is considering approval of the ap- plication of a group of World War II veterans for a $10,000,000 loan to develop proved oil lands in Texas and five other States. The veterans control the Texmass Petro Jeum Co., which, as the name implies, in- volves a number of big and little investors in Texas and Massachusetts. We'll concede that the veterans weren’t enlisted men; sev- eral were lieutenant colonels, and one was a full colonel during the war, and their branches of service included the Air Force, the Infantry, and armored divisions. Nowadays most people admit that officers helped win the war—and thus are entitled to be known as veterans. From reading the papers and reading Sen- ator FULBRIGHT’s remarks we aren’t quite sure what—if anything—these Texmass veterans have done to warrant coming under the in~ vestigative nye of the subcommittee. As far as we can make out, their presumed crime is . than the company’s. twofold: They want to develop $44,500,000 worth of proved and productive oil lands and wells located in six States—that’s on the basis of Government estimates—and they want to borrow $10,009,060 from RFC to reha- bulitate the properties and pay off long-term lenders under a general reorganization plan. Consider this charge from a Scripps-How- ard “o-wsnnnen editorial: “Maybe it is a good lean, oui ¥.%1. does the RFC mean using taxpayers’ money to take such risks?” Maybe it -vould be smarter to risk defeat in world war ITI? And consider this remarks by Senator FuLsricut: “Without wanting to prejudge the case, 1t looks to me like an unjustified use of RFO lending power” Perheps, mstead of approving a loan to preduce oil in the United States, we should appropriate a few hundred millions under the point 4 program, to use searching for oil in the undeveloped areas of the world. Both the newspaper’s and the Senator’s statements are, in themselves, damaging statements, but each is hedged with quali- fying phrases. Why? Why? If it’s a bum deal, 1t’s a bum deal. As a matter of fact, from all we can gather, it’s a good deal. The fact is that the Tex- mass Co., as presently constituted, is a sound business enterprise. It has title to 493 pro- ducing oil and gas wells located on 20,000 acres of proved oil lands in 6 States—proved lands being areas in which oil reserves have been geologically and scientifically measured. In addition, it holds the lease on 2,000 addi- tional acres of proved land which have not yet been drilled. Independent petroleum engineers, hired by the company, have estimated that these lands have reserves of more than 15,500,000 barrels of oil, plus 34,800,000,C09 cubic feet of natural gas, and this does not include estimated reserves of 14,600,000 barrels of oil in undrilled lands. The Texmass engineers place the total valuation of the company, exclusive of allow- ances for drilling and other operations, at $48,000,000. But the RFC, upon receipt of their loan application, didn’t accept that as gospel. To protect the taxpayer, it hired its own pe- troleum engineers, whose minimum estimate of reserves was only 3,000,000 barrels less And the RFC’s own estimate of collateral is $44,500,000, which is only $4,000,000 less than the company’s. Even then the RFC hesitated. The com- pany had sought a $15,100,000 loan to re- habilitate its properties and pay off long-term lenders. Said RFC: Raise $5,000,000 in pri- vate capital and we'll lend you the other $10,000,000. This Texmass did. And then came the Fulbright committee—and the newspapers. A “questionable investment,” they called it. Why? Because RFC had never been in the oil business before. They hadn't been in the housing or automobile business either until they made their first loans in those industries. “Too speculative,” said the com- mittee and the press, apparently confusing proved oil leases with wildcatting operations which are two entirely different problems. The charge that the investment is bad business is interesting in the light of a re- cent article in the magazine O11 World by Fred Florence, president of the Republic Na- tional Bank of Dallas—largest oil bank in the country. “Making oil loans is good busi- ness,” he wrote. “Just how good is indicated by this institution’s loss record on. oil loans. During the last 16 years net losses in this field have totaled $90,000, a sum substan- tially less than 1 month’s interest and rep- resenting a loss ratio of 0.03 percent of the total loans made.” not unusual. And that’s typical— APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD We're willing to forget that the Texmass Co. 1s representative of World War II vet- erans trying to put free enterprise to work for themselves and their investors. However, we aren’t willing to forget that oul is to war machinery what blood 1s to you and me. And we hope Senator FULBRIGHT and Congress don’t forget that this time. Rent Control or Chaos EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. SIDNEY R. YATES OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, April 21, 1950 Mr. YATES. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following editorial from the Chicago Sun-Times of April 19, 1950: RENT CONTROL OR CHAOL Federal rent control will end within 11 weeks unless Congress takes action to ex- tend it. If Congress does nothing, the State of Illi- nois should follow the example of New York State and adopt an emergency rent law. In the absence of any law, rents in Chicago probably will go up on an average between 20 and 40 percent. That’s the finding of Sun-Timesman Bruce Taylor, who has been talking with real estate people, public offi- cials, and others interested in the housing problem. If you are a tenant, the amount of rent boost you can expect depends on your in- dividual case. In the confusion that is certain to follow if rent controls die, ravvicine’ court judges probably will allow dic.... os i.me before en- forcing eviction notices. But even such con- sideration will not spare Chicago-~which has an extraordinarily severe housing shortage— from undergoing chaos that could bring se- vere economic damage and social turmoil. What’s the answer? Will Congress extend controls? There is stronger pressure on Congress to wipe out rent controls now than at any time since war’s end. Owners contend that they have been deprived of their property without due process of law. Although the law has provided for rent increases to prevent hard- ship on landlords, many have failed to take advantage of those provisions. The land- lord resentment at continued rent controls while most other prices have gone sky high has made an impression on many Members of Congress. As we have often said in this column, we believe landlords are entitled to reasonable increases in their rent collections. Let’s re- peat that word: Reasonable. And, to their credit, many landlords have been reasonable, If controls are stopped suddenly many gougers will turn the screws on helpless tenants and demand unreasonable increases, As long as there is a real housing shortage the gougers will be able to profit from it, Any society has the right and the duty to provide for the general welfare by prohibit- ing profiteering that results from famine, dis- aster or the effects of war. Congress is expected to consider a bill which would extend rent controls but make it mandatory upon cities to allow citizens to vote on continued controls within 6 months. If such a bill passes, Chicago would have to vote to retain rent control—probably at the November election—or else allow controls to die here on January 1.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Chicago’s housing shortage is so acute that it’s unlikely that there would be a popu- lar vote in favor of ending controls. There is a question whether such a vote would satisfy the need for fairness. Tenants would naturally vote to retain controls. Just be- cause there are more tenants than landlords doesn’t mean that they should be able to keep their rents down by ballot. Rents should be controlled for the general welfare, not for individual welfare. Landlords, too, are entitled to consideration. Rather than lift rent control completely, or continue as is, it seems to us a limited rise in rents would be rvoferroed =The main idea is to prevent i:™.sort.e rent in« creases that would throw the city into an economic tailspin. RFC Versus ECA—Or Which Govern- ment Agency Can Produce the Greatest Absurdity EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. PAUL W. SHAFER OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, April 20, 1950 Mr. SHAFER. Mr. Speaker, with the kind forbearance of my distinguished colleagues, I should like to take the time of this House to tell a bedtime story to those who will listen, in the hope that it will not put them to sleep. It may cause the more thoughtful among us first to roll in the aisles and then to start tearing their hair. You know, Mr. Speaker, so many things happen in so many different places in Washington, it is difficult for our right hand to know what our left hand is doing. I cannot pretend that I keep up with everything that happens in all the thousands of bureaus, in which hundreds of thousands of bureaucrats take part, but I do believe that I must see a few more of the absurdities than others. As a result I am constantly puzzled. Puzzled at the American peo- ple for keeping such a gang in power. Puzzled at the bureaucrats who are taking part in these absurdities, for these bureaucrats are Americans and, at heart, in most instances, should realize that they are going to have to live in the country they are creating. Puzzled at sensible men—many of them on the Re- ‘publican side of the aisle, but most of them fortunately on the other side—who not only smile at these absurdities, but sometimes protect the men and policies that bring such absurdities to pass. Now, let us read about the absurd happenings. The first thing to keep in mind in this bedtime story is that the United States, under the New Deal and Fair Deal, for years has been heading toward a free- trade policy. Cordell Hull, James F. Byrnes, Dean Acheson, and all the other free-traders have been saying that we must encourage European manufactur- ers to sell more over here so that our manufacturers, in turn, could sell more XCVI—App.——183 over there. They have been promoting this policy through lowering our tariffs, giving huge sums to European industri- alists with which to build plants to com- pete with ours, and otherwise striving to tear down America and build up Europe, Asia, Africa—any place but the old home place. Now, during World War ITI, our Gov- ernment faced almost a blockade for a while, due to the submarine menace. There was a great hue and cry about the lack of skilled watchmakers—men who could work with precision machinery, to make bombsights, and so forth. Every- body suddenly realized that it was a goof thing we had an American watch industry, although the New Deal had been trying for 10 years to build up the Swiss watch industry and to kill the American watch industry. Then, the war ended. We won, or at least, we defeated the enemies. Now, the American watch industry begins to fold. Waltham Watch Co., in Massa- chusetts, went on the financial rocks. It was hopelessly lost, so everyone thought. The New Deal finally had killed the Waltham Watch Co. Elgin Watch Co., which recently has been cut- ting off workers, is going on the rocks eventually unless something is done. But be that as it may, what then hap- pens? The State Department, keep in mind, has been killing Waltham Watch Co. through its low-tariff policies. Now, another Government agency, the Recon- struction Finance Corporation enters the picture. Mr. John L. Hagerty, one of the RFC’s bright boys, cooks up a plan by means of which RFC can lend about $6,000,000 to Waltham. Mr. Hagerty, after selling RFC on the plan, promptly resigned and became $30,000-a-year president of the newly-reorganized Waltham Watch Co. He was going to do wonders for it, in spite of the mean old State Department and its absurd policies. But he coula not. Not even a Fair Dealer, working inside with other Fair Dealers, can repeal the laws of eco- nomics. RFC directors finally decided they would not let even their fair-~haired Mr. Hagerty have the balance of $2,- 000,000 v-orth of credit which they origi- nally promised. Now, instead of being punished in any ‘way, scolced in any way, for having poured $4,000,000 worth of RFC money down a drain, what happens to our good Fair Dealer, Mr. Hagerty? Why, he turns up “advising” the RFC at $10,330 a year. What advice he could give that would be worth 10 cents a year, I am not in a position to say, but there he rests. Unfortunately for our sanity, this is not the end of the story. While all of this is going on—while RFC is lending a stricken industry money to get well, if it can, and the Depart- ment of State is perpetuating policies to kill the same industry, another alpha- betical agency enters the picture. Slyly, ‘to be sure, but it enters the picture never- theless. We learn from a release put out by the Economic Cooperation Administration, the ECA, to those who are not familiar A2893 with the bureaucratic alphabetical jar- gon, that the ECA has authorized to the General Time Instruments Corp., New York, N. Y., $1,000,000 in cash “to estab- lish the manufacture of clocks and watches in the United Kingdom.” Ac- cording to the ECA release, this loan “will reduce previous heavy United King- dom imports of timepieces from the United States and Switzerland.” In other words, Mr. Speaker, it is bad for us old Republicans to think of keep- ing a watch industry alive in the United States just in case there is a war and we need the help of the skilled employ- ees in that industry. That is reaction- ary. It is obscurantism. It is Hawley- Smoot, and all those other bad terms the New Republic and our liberals toss from one to the other. But, it is good, it says here in the ECA release, for American money to be sent to Great Britain so that Great Britain can reduce its imports of clocks and watches. In other words, we are sup- posed to be dumb and stupid enough to think we ought to kill the watch industry in the United States, but should build up the watch industry in the United King- dom with American money. That is progress. It is enlightenment. It is, by some magic abracadabra, economic progress as the Fair Deal interprets it. More unemployed in the United States. More watchmakers in the United King- dom. This ECA grant is not even in line with the Department of State’s apparent purpose to create the only watch-making industry in the western world in a little country we know as Switzerland, which, incidentally, never has been an ally of ours in any war. Then, in case of a war, Russia could neutralize Switzerland and our Nation would be caught without any watch-making industry, without any of the skilled workers such an industry would have prepared for use in our mili- tary and other highly strategic industry. Mr. Speaker, I must confess that none of this makes sense to me. As I noted before, the actions of our bureaucrats, each working at cross-purposes and each in possession of huge public sums to throw around, are so absurd as to make a sensible man want to bite tenpenny nails. If we could not develop a sense of humor, it is likely most of us could not last until the time comes when the people, long-suffering and patient, awaken to the stupidities which are being perpetrated in the name of “progress.” If there is any man who can explain the action of our Department of State, our Reconstruction Finance Corporation, and our Economic Cooperation Adminis- tration in relation to the question of watches, their import and export, and the protection of America in case of an emergency, I should like to hear him make the explanation in simple words. That is the end of this bedtime story, but I am afraid it will not put many Americans to sleep. Itisa mystery. The final chapter might be entitled, “Which agency actually killed the American jeweled-bearing industry?”
A2894 Collectivism Subsidized by United States of America EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LAWRENCE H. SMITH OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, April 19, 1950 Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. Mr. Speak- er, Henry Hazlitt, of Newsweek, again points out how private enterprise in this country supplies the money to make col- lectivism in Europe possible. The ad- ministration takes the profits from a free economy to support State cartels and phony exchange controls. I commend to all Members a2 challenging article by Mr. Hazlitt which I include as part of my remarks: How WE SUBSIDIZE COLLECTIVISM (By Henry Hazlitt) The action of the House on continuance of ERP does not indicate that we are going to use any more common sense in dealing with the European economic problem in the future than we have in the past. The administration has dismissed all criti- cal discussion of the Marshall plan as par- tisan and isolationist. It attempted to drive the new ERP bill through Congress under a@ barrage of emotional slogans and scare words. Though we originally offered Mar- shall aid to Communist Russia itself, it is now represented as our chief weapon for com~ bating communism. Once more it is im- plied, by the President, that refusal to vote for the administration bill may bring on the third world war. “Failure to enact its full amount,” he writes, “would do irreparable damage.” : Properly resenting these tactics, but with- out leadership of their own, a bipartisan ma- jority in the House did have the temerity to cut the authorization by the moderate amount of $250,000,000. They also cut the authorization for point 4 by $20,000,000. But they failed to recognize that in accepting the premise of point 4—that the American taxpayer owes the rest of the world 4 living— they were letting him in for a bottomless obligation. If the Senate is interested in the kind of revision that is really needed in the ERP program it could not do better than to read the article by Dr, William Roepke in the Com- mercial and Financial Chronicle of March 16. Writing from his European watch tower in Geneva, Dr. Roepke says supremely well what some of us have also been trying to say over here for the last 3 years. The present eco- nomic troubles of the countries of western Europs, he reirte out, spring mainly from the suenpsititt policies being pursued within those countries: “It is no longer necessary to define those national policies. They are familiar ever since Hitler came to power and, under the guidance of Dr. Schacht, set the example of a@ type of national economic policy which we propose to call national collectivism. It is the well-known combination of repressed inflation, collectivist controls, ‘full employ- ment,’ exchange control, State, monopolies, bilateralism, subsidies, fiscal socialism, ‘cheap money’ policies, and the strange mixture of the restriction of private consumption and of public waste which goes under the name of Austerity. * * * “With the exception of Switzerland and Belgium, all European governments still practice national collectivism to the extent that they feel compelled to retain exchange It is exchange control which is the * oe Oe control. real keystone of national collectivism. “Phe devaluations certainly eased the strain, and they were in most countries the indispensable condition for the removal of exchange control. * * * But the chance of- fered by the devaluations has not been used, which means that the European governments resemble a surgeon who opens the abdomen without removing the inflamed appendix.” Dr. Roepke then turns to the proposed European Payments Union. “It is being realized by most observers that convertibility of currencies is the cardinal problem. To restore convertibility, however, is tanta- mount to abolishing exchange control. Not daring to face this thorny issue, many people prefer to believe that there is something ‘ale most just as good.’ It is the idea of a Guro- pean Clearing Union. * * * “The crucial point, however, is again whether the national governments retain ex- change control or not. If they do, then the idea of a European Currency Union has hardly more sense than an American cur- rency system would have if the United States would split into 49 systems of state collec- tivism and of state exchange control. If they abolished exchange control, then we have all the monetary integration we need without the new cumbersome machinery of a@ European Monetary Union.” As a result of the evangelistic and in- tolerant fervor with which its sponsors pro- mote the ERP over here, none of these eco- nomic realities is getting any serious atten- tion. . Government Policies Are a Menace to the Coal Industry REMARKS or HON. JAMES E. VAN ZANDT OF PENNSYLVANIA . IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, April 21, 1950 Mr. VAN ZANDT. Mr. Speaker, much is being said today about the'coal indus- try being ‘“‘sick” and the need for a Gov- ernment Coal Commission to study the industry. .. . My congressional district is one that depends upon coal for its lifeblood and when the miners are digging coal and the railroads are transporting it to mar- ket we have a happy population. The idea has become prevalent that the coal industry is sick, but I do not be- lieve that is a complete diagnosis of the ills that have befallen it. Nor do I believe that the creation of a Coal Commission is the answer to the problem. Any information that a Coal Commission could develop is already available through Federal agencies, the United Mine Workers of America, and through the National Caal Association. In discussing the plight of the coal in- dustry I recognize the differences that from time to time have existed between labor and management. Then, too, there is a natural trend on the part of the consumer to use substitute fuels for many reasons. Anyone who has studied the coal in- dustry has found that the industry’s greater threat comes from policies of the Government of the United States. All of APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD these policies have been formulated by Congress. Therefore; if any real contri- bution is to be made to the coal industry, Congress is its only means of salvation. Before discussing how Government policies are destroying the coal industry, it is imperative that we realize how the demand for coal has fallen sharply from war and postwar levels. Let me quote information on this sub- ject from an article in the March 21, 1950, issue of the Wall Street Journal, written by Staff Correspondent Philip Geyelin: In 1947 exports to coal-short European countries and to Canada totaled 69,000,000 tons. Last year they were down to some 2'7,000,000 as European mines got back in full operation. In this country 3 years ago, coal was sup- plying 50 percent of the energy for homes and industry. By last year its share was down to 38.9 percent. The railroads have been taking less and less coal as they put in more oil-burning Diesel engines. In 1947 they bought 109,- 000,000 tons of coal. Last year they took Jess than 70,000,000 tons, a drop of 37 per- cent. More electric utility companies are finding it’s an economy to shift to oil, too. They consumed only 80,000,000 tons of coal Jast year, compared with 95,000,000 in 1948. Meanwhile, householders have been swing- ing to oil at arapid clip, Last year oil burn- er sales were up 39 percent over 1948, while factory shipments of warm-air coal furnaces dropped 47 percent. Where natural gas is available, this fuel is grabbing some coal customers, too. | These shifts to competitive fuels are ex- pected to continue apace unless the coal industry can lower the price of its fuel, in- dustry observers believe. In discussing Government policies and their threat to the coal industry let us consider the Tennessee Valley Authority, commonly called TVA. As of June 30, 1949, the Congress of the United States had appropriated for TVA approximate- ‘ly $767,000,000 with an additional appro- priation of $49,500,000 made available as ‘of July 1, 1949. - If you total the cost of TVA to the taxpayers including interest and: tax costs of TVA production that are not paid by TVA, you then have an over-all figure ranging from $884,000,000 up to $1,200,000,000. During the fiscal year ending June 30, 1949, the TVA, which operated at a total net loss of over $113,000,000, if interest cost of financing is charged to TVA for the period from 1934 through 1947, gen- erated by water power more than 13,- 000,000,000 kilowatt-hours of electricity. This production of electricity, subsidized by the Government up to $1,200,000,000 in terms of coal equivalent, amounts to about eight and one-half million tons. This amount of coal means over $44,- 000,000 in revenue to coal companies and over $23,000,000 in miners’ wages, or an annual wage of $4,000 to 5,750 workers, To the railroads the eight and one-half million tons of coal displaced by TVA means a loss of twenty-seven and one- half million dollars in revenue, with over $12,000,000 representing wages of rail- road employees, or a salary of $3,600 a year to 3,333 railroad workers. In addition to the TVA and passing over similar Government projects, we have the threat of the St. Lawrence sea-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD way project which has been in and out of Congress since 1914. The total esti- mated cost of this economic monstrosity has been placed at anywhere from one and one-half billion dollars to almost three times that amount, or three and one-half billion dollars. These estimates of the St. Lawrence seaway were made prior to 1940 and must be increased to reflect price in- creases if a true cost as of today is to be shown. By increasing these esti- mates in the same proportion as whole~ sale prices of all commodities other than farm products and foods increased in January 1950 over January 1940, they range from three-quarters of a billion dollars to over $2,000,000,000. It is recognized that the United States portion of the cost is more than half, and therefore the cost of the St. Law- rence seaway could easily cost the Amer. ican taxpayer more than the TVA has cost to date, which is up to $1,200,000,000. The St. Lawrence project as originally planned, looking at the power part of it, only would displace about five and one-~ half million tons of coal annually, which would mean a loss in revenue to coal companies of $28,000,000. Of this amount, almost $15,000,000 would be lost in miners’ wages, or an annual salary of $4,000 to 3,750 workers. From the standpoint of the railroads, they would likewise suffer a loss of over $18,000,000 in revenue, with about $8,000,000 of that amount representing a loss to railroad employees in wages, or a salary of $3,600 a year to 2,222 employees. Another factor to be considered is the importation of cheap foreign oil, as well as any foreign oil. At the present time foreign oil is being dumped on our Amer- ican market at the rate of 885,000 barrels a day and covers all grades and kinds of oil. This is an increase of 72 percent over the daily average in 1947. Out of this total of 885,000 barrels, about 460,000 barrels are fuel oil, and this quantity is equal to 115,000 tons of coal per day. I do not claim that every barrel of low-priced oil from foreign countries displaces coal, but the great majority of the foreign oil imported does take the place of coal. Over a period of a year, this quantity of foreign oil dis- places 40,000,000 tons of coal, which means the loss of $104,000,000 in miners’ wages, or an annual wage of $4,000 to 26,000 workers. It also means the loss of $130,000,000 in railroad revenue, of which about $59,000,000 would represent work- ers’ wages, or $3,600 annually to 16,389 railroad employees. Let us look at the steel industry for a moment. Because of importers of for- eign-made steel offering fast delivery at prices 10 to 18 percent lower than do- mestic vendors, our steel industry suffers, as does coal, from the result of our for- eign-trade policy. As I said in the beginning, Government policies are a menace to the coal indus- try, and the present administration or Congress cannot deny this fact. If the Government wants to help the coal in- dustry, let it cease the program of sub- sidizing hydro-power projects, such as TVA and others. Let Congress shelve the St. Lawrence seaway project and let the administration restrict imports of foreign-mined coal, oil, and steel. The coal industry can-be helped if it receives assistance in regaining its mar- kets which have been lost through the use of subsidized fuels. One Hundred and Seventy-fifth Anniver- sary of Lexington and Concord EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. ANGIER L. GOODWIN OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, April 21, 1950 Mr. GOODWIN. Mr. Speaker, I am sure I reflect the gratitude of every Member from Massachusetts when I ex- press appreciation of the action of the House and Senate in passing the reso- lution providing for the creation of a Commission to celebrate the one hundred and seventy-fifth anniversary of Lexing- ton and Concord and I am grateful to you, Mr. Speaker, for honoring me by an appointment to that Commission. We who come from the old Bay State take intense pride in our possession of hallowed: shrines in those two historic Middlesex towns and April 19 has long been celebrated in our State as a legal holiday. Among all the historic spots in Massa- chusetts, none are revered more highly. As long as tourists flock to New Eng- Jand to draw inspiration from that part of. our land where liberty began, loyal and patriotic Americans will visit the site of the rude bridge that arched the flood and thrill at the realization that here was fired the shot heard round the world. Then at Lexington Green, the same loyal Americans will gain in- spiration from the letters hewn in the everlasting granite quoting the undying words of Captain Parker “if they mean to have a war, let it begin here.” As long as history is written, our boys and girls of succeeding generations will read the thrilling story of Lexington and Concord and realize that here was the actual birthplace of the Nation. A century and three-quarters has passed into history since that April morning in 1775 during which time the people of the globe have seen this Na- tion of ours write glorious history until our onward and upward path to pros- perity and power has become one of the wonders of the world. Now, after 175 years, we find ourselves in a world doubtful and confused. This much we do know, that war-weary peo- ples across the seas are looking to Amer- ica for direction and guidance just as surely as the mariner scans the dark- ness of the night for the reassuring rays of the beacon light. This much also we must bear in mind as we seek to evalu- ate the lesson from Lexington and Con- cord, that if an emergency should arise where our leadership is actually in need, A2895 we will hardly be in a position to make that leadership fully effective unless we continue to hold fast the principles of freedom and liberty and self-reliance which were the prime elements in the spiirt of the Minutemen of ’75. Our Defeat in China EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. RALPH W. GWINN OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, April 20, 1950 Mr. GWINN. Mr. Speaker, the sabo- teurs, who twist American foreign policy at the orders of a foreign power, are more dangerous to American security than those who trained to sabotage our railroads or our munitions plants. The United States has suffered a mili- tary defeat in China, more serious than its defeat at Pearl Harbor. The voters did not know for years how great our losses were in Pearl Harbor. So it will be in the case of China. How vulnerable has it made our own coast? Who is re- sponsible for this terrible defeat? Mc- Cartxy is trying desperately to find out. The administration is covering up. It hides behind national security crisis talks. The defeat of China was accomplished in our State Department. People believe that there was something rotten in that Department long before the MeCartHy charges. Since then Peurifoy admits nearly 100 sex perverts have been fired. Obviously that is only part of what has caused the fantastic defeat of the once most powerful military Nation on earth. For 10 years we have had a Commu- nist cell in charge of our foreign policy- making. These men are not deluded young students. Their business is to confuse our top officials so that they will adopt policies advantageous to the U. S. S. R. and fatal to our military security. Ten years ago, there began a@ curious series of resignations and transfers of officials, like Ambassador Grew. He had had long and honorable experience in our far-eastern policy. Such men were replaced by newcomers who consistently favored Soviet Russia in their decisions. We had a succession of men as Secretary of State who were either blind or were suddenly relieved from office when they began to see. When Marshall was made Secretary, after the very sudden resignation of Byrnes, he went to China and insisted on a truce. He demanded that the Chi- nese Nationalist armies be disbanded and sent home. But he got no reciprocal action from the Communists. He im- posed an embargo on our shipment of war material to free China, but he got no embargo on shipments of arms from So- viet Russia to Communist China. Why? Was it because he was surrounded by ad- visers who favored the Communist side? The Republican Eightieth Congress op- posed President Truman’s abandonment
A2896 of China and insisted that aid be given the Nationalist government. The Chi- nese bought arms of us, but, because of the State Department red tape, they could not get ammunition. Nor, oddly enough, could they get permits for ship- ment. These permits had to come from a bureau in the Commerce Department. The chief of this bureau was born in Manchuria. He had been appointed by Henry Wallace, although twice rejected for American citizenship for his un- American opinions, The paper work on these arms shipments was for some strange reason not finished until Harry Bridges had called a strike on the west coast. Then not a vessel could move from our Pacific ports to China or Alas- ka. That was, curiously enough, the moment when the Communist armies began their final push in China. McCartHy wants more light on this. The Fair Deal Party has chosen to laugh at his charges. Great names are used to inspire feelings of danger to our foreign policy. What foreign policy? When China fell, we lost the air bases from which bombers could fly to inner Siberia, bases which were our best in- surance against war. Some morning we may wake up and learn that the Philippines have been captured, as China was captured, by a domestic up- rising, armed by the U.S. 8. R. Then Formosa, Japan, and Korea will be out- flanked. Alaska and California will be our front line. Such mistakes are paid for in the lives of our young men. They may have to retake, under withering fire, what our State Department so lightly gave up, We must clean the Communists and all their dupes out of our foreign policy-~ making. Then the United States can resume its obligations to its ally, free . China, and help train the Chinese sol- 'diers who are bravely trying to recapture the air bases on the Chinese mainland. Such air bases might not only serve China but also constitute our first line of defense, The New President General of the Na- tional Society, Daughters of the Ameri- can Revolution, Mrs. James B. Patton, of Columbus EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FRANCES P, BOLTON OF OHIO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, April 21, 1950 Mrs. BOLTON of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, Chio is very proud that, at the National Congress of the Daughters of the Ameri- can Revolution, just ended, Mrs. James B. Patton, of Columbus, Ohio, was elected president-general. lirs. Patton is known far and wide for her fine Christian spirit, her executive ability, and her understanding of human needs. She has had a long term in the organization, serving her State with consecrated devotion. Her elevation to national responsibility is a natural recog~ nition of her capacity. The Ohio Republican delegation, hav- ing extended their felicitations to her, have asked me to express their appreci- ation of this recognition, congratulating both the new president-general and the national organization. Adézess of Brig. Gen. E. Dorman 0’Gowan EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. PHILIP J. PHILBIN OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, April 21, 1950 Mr. PHILBIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased indeed to insert in the Recorp as part of my remarks the excellent speech of a former distinguished officer of the British Army which admirably sets forth certain strategic elements in our present distressing world situation. - General O’Gowan, who is Irish-born, has brilliantly pointed up some of the weaknesses arising from the iniquitous partition of Ireland, which in event of war might well bring dire and disastrous results to western civilization. It is time that this Congress and this Government, in self-interest as well as altruism, took cognizance of ‘the plight of Ireland and her unanswerable claims to unity and self-determination. I hope and urge that action may be taken at an early date to eliminate partition and implement full-fledged, total, and com- plete self-government for Ireland. The address follows: As you have heard, I served for 32 years in the British Army. Five years ago I retired to my birthplace in Ireland, where I hoped to settle down to archeology and farming. Instead, my proximity to what has become the Anglo-Irish boundary, inside my home Province, Ulster, compelled me to look into Irish and Anglo-Irish affairs. So much did I dislike what I saw, both from the national and international angle, that archeology had to go by the board, and, at this moment, the farm is looking after itself. Neither of these facts do I regret since I am today being given an opportunity to present you with some of my conclusions. I need hardly remind you that my youth was spent in an undivided Ireland. Then the very idea of there even being three sepa-~ rate governments involved in Ireland would have seemed fantastic. Though this thing has happened it still seems fantastic. To the great Anglo-Irish parliamentarians of the late eighteenth century the idea of the parliamentary union with Britain must have seemed equally fantastic, but it happened, and it has had to be undone. It is natural for me, therefore, to regard the division of Ireland as the final effects of that act of union, and something in due course to be undone in the interest of sanity. You have been told something of my mili- tary record. I would like you to realize that its importance lies in my almost unique ex- perience of disaster in the operational and organizational flelds, for most of my actual eperience in war has been at the losing end, before the winning began. In two world wars I have seen the price, the enormous price, and the quite unnecessary price, which civilization has had to pay for fundamental unpreparedness, particularly for political APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD unpreparedness, before the war began. Civ- ilization has survived. But each time with a smaller margin. There is no guaranty, in fact there is little likelihood that, if we enter unprepared into the third crisis of this cen- tury, should that occur, our civilization will again survive. War preparedness in a democracy, or group of democracies, must be fundamen- tally political preparedness. It is the busi- ness, it is the duty, of political leaders to provide their military planners with a realis- tic and practical political background. It is the business and the duty of military planners to indicate to their politicdl chiefs any deficiencies in this regard. But they seldom do so. The military mind is allergic to politics. And the military mind is ac- customed to working, particularly in times of peace, with a large basis of assumption. A trained staff officer can assume almost anything, and start working from there. Nothing is more dangerous to war prepared- ness, or in fact to any human activity, than to begin action on an unreal political basis. A body such as this, so well grounded in the past, and so highly trained in prognos- tication of the future, will hardly require me to support this contention by many examples. Let me remind you that the Maginot line, constructed at enormous expense, was left with its northern flank in the air at Mezieres, because political planning was unable to tell the French High Command, what, in the circumstances of a war with Germany, neu-~ tral Belgium would do. Again the British fortified Singapore only against seaward at- tack. Those great weapons never even fired, because the “Nips”? who took Singapore, had the advantage of operating from an unre- solved political situation, no political as- sumption having been made covering the entry of Japan into Indochina and Thai- land and so into the Malay peninsula. Similar examples cover the failure of po- litical planning for the defense of Burma. To return to the west, the British General Staff had authority to plan for military ac- tion in France and Germany, but the possi- bility of its forces being thrown off the con- tinent, had never been foreseen. Yet this possibility was inherent in the political set- up in western Europe at the beginning of World War II. In Cairo, in April 1941, when I was Di- rector of Operations, General Wavell handed me one morning a slip of paper on which was noted “Start cxamining the WPC.” General Wavell is a man of few words, and normally I respected reticence, but I asked him, so that I could begin work, whoat WPC meant. He replied, “Eric, you should know by now it can only mean one thing. The Worst Possible Case.” General Wavell is a consummate strategist and a high-grade political philosopher. In fact the only soldier I know supreme in both fields, Elsenhower excepted. It is from him that I learned that in all military matters politics must take precedence of operational planning. War is fought between two extremes, the best possible case, when our side has com- plete freedom of action, and the worst pos- sible case, when one’s own side has no free- dom at all. It is a curlosity of the military mind that, before war begins, planning only takes account of the period prior to either side achieving any freedom of action. This, of course, was not unreasonable 20 years ago, today having regard to the speed and range of ballistics and logistics, it is patently ab- surd. Prewar operational planning has now to be total planning, and must therefore, because of the speed at which victory and defeat can be expanded, take into account, from the beginning, the worst possible case. You are aware of the vast effort financial, military, and political, now being made to ensure, in the case of world war III, an
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Atlantic Pact victory east of the Rhine But supposing Lord Montgomery, who has never yet fought any enemy superior in armament and numbers to himself, should fail. There can be for us only one unsuc- cessful battle in northwest Europe, in the opening phase of the war. There is only territorial room, in the pres- ent set-up, for one lost battle in northeast Europe. The worst possible case may begin, on land, 1 week after world war III breaks. In fact, taking account of the range and blast power of guided missiles, the worst possible case may well begin for the in- habitants of southern Britain from D+1 minutes. The gage in this early struggle is Russian access from the Baltic to the east- ern Atlantic, past the barrier of the British Isles. If that eventuates, the east coast of the United States becomes the front line. That is, ultimately, civilization’s worst pos- sible case. Our immediate problem then is to insure in the event of defeat in Europe that the British Isles do not fall to Russia, as the Philippines fell to Japan. This can only be insured by an over-all defense co- ordination of the British Isles, politically and strategically, to cater for the worst possible case, long before war begins, in the light of the foreseeable effects that will result should Russia reach the Atlantic coast and the ehannel, Clearly southern and eastern Britain will then become a war zone, exposed to heavy guided-missile bombardment from the conti- ment, on a scale which might well demand a major shift of the civil population to a safer area, which would certainly necessitate the deployment of large military forces in southern Britain, and would, partially at least, incapacitate such vital ports as Liver- pool and Glasgow, and totally cancel out the port of London, on which Britain depended for survival in World War II. Besides, not only would guided missiles reach southern Britain from France, eastern England and eastern Scotland would get those coming in from Norway. In such circumstances any planning which presumes the nonparticipa- tion of all Ireland, condemn Britain to fight without depth in her strategical set-up, and largely without entrance ports. Moreover, we westerners may omit Ireland from our strategy, but will the Russians do so? In such lamentable circumstances, the arrival of an airborne invasion in Ire- land, might well be the end. In World War Il Britain escaped invasion after the fall of France because the Germans had never planned for their best possible case, the rapid total defeat of France, which took place unforeseen. They began, only then to study, too late the follow-up into Britain. Were history to repeat itself, that hiatus would not recur. Why is there this hole in the strategical map of the Atlantic Pact where Ireland is? Surely, it is because the politi- cal chiefs of the Atlantic Pact fail to see the necessity for a sound political background for their strategical planning, and have not yet realized that any strategical plan, with- out a worst-possible-case codicil is unrealis- tic. Conceive for a moment the cooperation which would be required, were a politically integrated Ireland to be called into the plan- ning councils of the Atlantic powers. It would be necessary, not only to prepare Ireland operationally as an air base, to ring its coasts with the most modern radar de- vices, to arm and organize Ireland’s man power for defence against modern air-borne invasion, but also to organize the country logistically, so that when the great ports of Britain became ineffective, Ireland would become a depot and a material base, from which would go a wide-front shuttle-transit of air craft and small ships, to the invul- nerable, because highly dispersed harbors and coves and emergency landing grounds in the west of Britain, and, for that purpose, it might be necessary to create on the coast of Connaught, in the deep flords of southeast Munster, modern Mulberry harbors, able to receive the seaborne traffic which, under present planning, will expect to use the great vulnerable target-ports of Glasgow, Liverpool, and Bristol. Again, where is the displaced population of southeast Britain to go if not to Ireland once the rockets and V2’s come rolling in on the south coast of Britain and on London? No provision for these serious matters can be written into the Atlantic Pact planning, because the political leaders of Ireland are excluded, by a politi- cal situation created by one of the major Atlantic powers, from even thinking of such contingencies as I have just outlined. This, of course, is highly unrealistic, and yet is inherent in the very wording of the Pact itself, which, without full consideration of the meaning involved, guaranteed the integ- rity of existing frontiers in western Europe, and thus underwrote among other frontiers, the Anglo-Irish frontier, in the middle of the Irish Province of Ulster; so making it politically impossible for any Government of Ireland to survive for 24 hours, if it sought to cooperate in the Atlantic Pact, at the price of underwriting the partition of its own ter- ritory, and thus abandoning, for all time, its conationals who are unwilling British sub- jects inside the British bridgehead in Ulster. The Government of the United Kingdom rules in Northern Ireland for reasons of im- perial politics, economics, and strategy which were obsolete by the end of World War I, and thereadbare during World War II. You have therefore the paradox of the Irish na- tion, a nation recognized by Russia to be fundamentally hostile to communism, the one nation in the whole Atlantic world where there cannot be a Communist fifth column, a nation which is almost certainly marked down for the most condign re-education should she ever fall into Russian hands, re- maining for political reasons, aloof, frustrat- ed, and powerless to assist the anti-Com- munist powers. It may be said, that, with this background, it will be easy, border or no border, to involve Ireland to the full once war starts. Any such drastic and high-~ handed action would meet with rigid non- cooperation on the part of Irish democracy. But moreover, it would be ineffectual in the short run because it would be both belated and uncoordinated. If, however, Ireland were to be occupied without consent it would be a sine-qua-non of effective action, that the insular defense of Ireland should be con~ ducted under one military command, re- sponsible or, at least geared to, one gov-~ ernment, an all-Irish government. Of course, in such circumstances, Britain might be only too ready to cut her losses in Ireland, if the alternative were her own na- tional extinction, a contingency which did not arise in World War II with the same force. But is it not absurd that, while civil- ization is forging the chain which will hold her from ultimate collapse, neither the po- litical nor military leaders of the western world seem to be aware of this missing link? It bas been said by the agents of the British Government in British Northern Ire- land, that there is no incompatibility in the government of Free Ireland taking part at this moment in the Atlantic Pact, and the Irish Government’s failure to do so is un- realistic and pedantic. There are no pedants in the Irish Government. It is a realistic government. In World War I, Ireland, gov- erned as a unit by Britain, could both sup- press a serious internal rising, and also pro- vide large bodies of troops for external use, because it was under one military command responsible to the then government in Dub- lin. In World War II the situation was con- siderably more hazardous for all concerned, though the worst did not happen. But prep- arations to defend Ireland in World War III would, in present circumstances, demand collaboration between three governments, A2897 two sovereign and one subordinate. All would be exposed to heavy internal political strain, because, for historical reasons, that collaboration would be opposed by the Orange element in Northern Ireland as well as the extreme national element in the republic. In the military field, were the British Gov- erhment to assure the role of senior partner, that would be equivalent to the renewed military subordination of the Irish nation to Great Britain, an unthinkable political situation. Any attempt to involve the Brit- ish command in northern Ireland in a de- fense plan in which the Irish Government was the senior partner, would be opposed by the pro-British minority in Belfast and the Tory party in Britain. With unity these fac- tions would disappear, Till then these po- litical factors are supreme. While they con- tinue to obtain they nullify all strategical planning before the outbreak of war. In consequence there is no more vulnerable in- strument today than the Atlantic Pact, as at present constituted. It can, like so many other pacts in the past, for instance the British guaranty to Poland, make it pos- sible for war to begin; it can also make it possible for defeat to be swift and complete. As a soldier with considerable high-level operational experience I find the situation alarming. As a citizen of Ireland, I find it little short of desperate. I may be for- given by saying that I do not believe we should permit the obsolete prejudices of a 20-percent minority of the population of Ire- land, less than 300,000 adults concentrated unfortunately around Belfast, to nullify the great edifice of nonaggressive defense which the people of the United States are con- structing in their own interest, and that of civilization. Particularly when in fact the susceptibilities of the Ulster Orangemen are completely out of place in our own time. Moreover, We must realize that those suscep- tibilities would rapidly wilt and wither, were they not backed by successive United King- dom Governments be they Conservative or Socialist. It has been necessary, in the in= terest of a better world, to break down this residual imperialism in the British mind in India and elsewhere. It was equally necessary to insist, demo- eratically, on the Netherlands being real- istic in the matter of Indonesia. Is it im- possible at this present time, with all its urgency, to tackle as a world problem, the Anglo-Irish issue, and persuade the British people that not until they finally withdraw from Ireland’s six northern counties, can their own strategical safety be guaranteed? The United States, Ireland, Canada, and the United Kingdom should sit down together at the council table to strive to compose old differences in the face of such new and urgent dangers. When that day comes a reunited Ireland will not be unworthy of her responsibilities to Europe and America. Reorganization of Government EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN W. HESELTON OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, April 21, 1950 Mr. HESELTON. Mr. Speaker, under leave granted me to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I am inserting the press release issued by the Commission on Or- ganization of the Executive Branch of the Government at the time it made its report on certain recommendations as
A2893 to the basic organizational changes, con- solidating major land agencies and grouping them in the Department of Agriculture. Basic organizational changes which would consolidate major land agencies and group them in the Department of Agriculture were proposed today by the Commission on Or- ganization of the Executive branch of the Government. The Commission recommended that the Jand activities of the Department of the Interior, chiefly the public domain (except mineral questions), be transferred to the De- partment of Agriculture. Water-develop- ment activities (except the local farm supply of water) would be transferred to the De- partment of the Interior. “There has been a long and wasteful con- flict and overlap between certain soil con- servation, range, forest and allied services due to the division of their functions between the Department of Agriculture and the De- partment of the Interior,” the Commission declared, adding that it “believes the logic and public policy require that major land agencies be grouped in the Department of Agriculture.” (Separate views of a minority of the Commission will be filed with a subse- quent report on the reorganization of the Department of the Interior.) : The report on the Department of Agricul- ture is the sixth section in a series of about 15 which will be given to Congress between now and March 18 by the 12-man, bi- partisan Commission which was created by Congress in July 1947, The report proposes an extension of the functional organiza- tions of the Department of Agriculture and a new grouping of major purpose activities. It also recommends a thorough overhaul of the Department at State, county, and farm levels. The report notes that “The Department of Agriculture has been a vital and effective agency of Government since its creation in 1862, In the last 20 years the Department has expanded from about 22,000 employees to over 82,000 and expenditures have increased from about $25,800,000 to $834,000,000 in the fiscal year 1948.” " PROPOSED DEPARTMENTAL STRUCTURE The Commission recommends that the present positions of Under Secretary and two Assistant Secretaries be retained and that an additional Assistant Secretary and an Ad- ministrative Secretary be added. These of- ficials should be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate with the possible exception of the Administrative Assistant Secretary. The duties of these officials in supervision of De- partmental activities should be assigned by the Secretary. All officials below the Under Secretary and the Assistant Secretaries should, preferably, be appointed from the career service. It is intended that the Administrative As- sistant Secretary should have charge of staff services and should, if possible, be selected from the career service. The Commission recommends that opera- tional functions of the Department in Wash- ington be grouped into eight major units: 1. Staff services; 2. Research Service; 3. Ex- tension Service; 4. Agricultural Resources Conservation Service; 5. Commodity Adjust- ment Service; 6. Regulatory Service; 7. Agri- cultural Credit Service; 8. Rural Electrifica~ tion Service (pp. 8-9~10). DEFICIENCIES OF THE DEPARTMENT (P. 3) The Commission’s task force on agricul- tural activities enumerates the following problems in the organization of the Depart- ment: “(a) Its rapid growth has resulted in some 20 different offices reporting directly to the Secretary, causing an unnecessary diffusion of authority. “(b) The Department has grown to its present size without sufficient integration of its parts and with considerable overlap and Guplication. It is a loose confederation of independent bureaus and agencies. “(ce) There are agricultural activities in other parts of the Government which overlap and duplicate those of the Department of Agriculture. “(d.) The Cooperative Extension Service established by the Federal Government and the States for educational purposes is being increasingly bypassed by several of the bu- reaus and agencies of the Department. “(e) With the rapid growth of new activi- ties, many field organizations at State and county levels have developed. Their work results in duplications, overlappings, and often conflicting policies. They confuse and multiply the difficulties of the farmer in his relations to the Department. +(£) The Department has organized a va- riety of local advisory committees at the county level, and their members tend to be- come local administrators of uncoordinated agencies instead of advisers. “(g) The inspection of agricultural prod- ucts for protection of the consumer and the farmer is scattered through many agencies of the Government, and the resulting con- fusion requires producers and manufacturers to comply with regulations issued by agencies of two or more departments or administra- tions. “(h) The present systems of budgeting, treatment of intra-departmental funds and earmarking of recurring funds have the cu- mulative effect of obscuring bureau expend- itures and of promoting waste. “(i) The services and policies of the sev- eral Farm Credit Agencies overlap. Their organization is contrary to sound banking principles. Some of them make loans which require costly individual supervision.” FIELD ORGANIZATION (P. 11) The Commission recommends a.thorough overhaul of the organization of the Depart- ment at State, county and farmer levels. State level: “The State governments op- erate effective agricultural departments and have in the past engaged in effective co- operative activities with the Department at State, county, and farmer levels: In recent years, the Department has not taken full advantage of the established and effective State organizations in performing many ag- ricultural programs and has thereby pro- duced some duplication of national and State effort at local levels.” County level: “The Commission was un- able to conduct a detailed survey of activi- ties at the county level. Sampling in- quiries, however, revealed that considerable duplication has developed. For example, 47 employees attached to 7 distinct and sep- arate field services of the Department of Agriculture in one cotton-producing county in Georgia were working with 1,500 farmers; a fruit and grazing county in the State of Washington has 184 employees of separate field services working with some 6,700 farm- ers: a dairy county in Maryland had 88 employees attached to these fleld services working with less than 3,400 farmers. In these and other counties, representatives of each agency frequently advise the same farmers on the same problems. Farmers are confused and irritated, as climaxed in one Missouri county where a farmer recently received from five different agencies varying advice on the application of fertilizer on his farm.” The Commission noted that the separate field services usually found at the county level include the Soil Conservation Service; Extension Service; Farmers Home Adminis- tration; Production and Marketing Admin-~ istration with its conservation payment pro- gram and school-lunch program; Farm Credit Administration through its Produc- tion Credit Associations and National Farm APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Local Associations and the Rural Electrifica- tion Administration. In addition, the Forest Service may be represented by Federal-State farm forest management advisers; the Bureau of Ani- mal Industry by specialists on animal dis- ease eradication programs; and the Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine by others who work on plant disease eradication and insect control. Separate from those of the Department of Agriculture, representatives of the Vet- erans Administration are usually present to administer the on-farm industrial training program for veterans. The farm labor rep- resentatives of the Federal-State Employ- ment Service and Federal-State Department of Agriculture may also be in the field at the county level. ‘ A multitude of county advisory commit- tees of farmers has been created and em- ployed by these various activities at a cost exceeding $5,000,000 a year. The Commis- sion’s task force recommends that only one committee be set up for each county and estimates that their annual cost for the en- tire Nation would not exceed $700,000. Farmer level (p. 13): The Commission recommends that Department of Agriculture councils comprising representatives of the several departmental services in each county be organized to exchange information on their programs. “In view of the widespread activities of the State governments in agriculture, the Commission recommends that, except in the most unusual circumstances, activitics that are services to individual farmers should be administered in the fleld by departmental ermployees through offices based on the States as units,” the report says. “The services at county levels and to farm units should be so merged as to reduce the number of duplicat- ing and unnecessary employees, with due re- gard to avoiding divided authority.” The Commission also recommends the establishment of one State council in each State, and one county council in each agri- cultural county, as aids to orderly operations in the fleld (p. 14). FURTHER RECOMMENDATIONS (P. 15) “‘(a) In the future, new Federal agricul- tural research stations should generally be established only where existing joint Federal- State facilities cannot be developed to fill the need, “(b) We recommend that conservation payments to a farmer should be restricted to those which will bring about the adoption of complete and balanced conservation pro- grams on his farm. They should not be used as income supplements in disguise. When the conservation plan on any farm has been completed, such payments to the owner should stop. “(c) We recommend that adjustment pro- grams with respect to commodities and com- modity groups should be operated on a stand- by, rather than a continuous, basis. “(d) To obtain economy and efficiency, this Commission recommends that inspection costs on farm products, when imposed for the benefit and protection of the general public, be paid by the Federal Government. Inspec- tion and grading services primarily for the benefit or protection of producers or proces~ sors should be paid for by the producers or processors. “(e) We recommend that customs receipts now allotted directly to the Department be paid into the Treasury and that direct an-~ nual appropriations be made by the Congress for specified purposes.” AGRICULTURAL CREDIT ACTIVITIES (P. 17) The Government has an investment of about $2,000,000,000 in a maze of agricul- tural credit agencies. Current loans approx~ imate $3,500,000,000 as compared with lend- ing authorizations of nearly $7,000,000,000. Borrowings from rrivate sources included in 1
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the above total authorization have been util- ized to the extent of approximately $1,200,- 000,000. The Commission in its upcoming report on business enterprises will recom- mend a number of requirements which apply in part to the agricultural lending agencies. These recommendations are designed to strengthen and simplify the agriculture credit structure and to bring about savings of capital and expenditures. The administration cost to the Federal Government of these agencies might be re- duced by more than $36,000,000 while much larger sums can be saved by better organized lending agencies. IRRIGATION PROJECTS (P. 18) The Commission notes that long-contin- ued friction between the Bureau of Rec- lamation in the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture has marked the planning and operation of irri- gation projects. The Commission recom- mends that the Department of Agriculture be required to report to the President and the Congress on all irrigation or reclama- tion projects about their use or timeliness. REGULATION OF FOOD PRODUCTS TO PROTECT CONSUMER (P. 19) There are some 21 legislative acts bearing on the purity of food and drugs, standards and grades of products, etc. (See annex II, p. 35.) The Agriculture Department is vest- ed with regulatory authority to grade various agricultural products, is directed to inspect meat, animal-virus serum, toxins, insecti- cides, and seeds. It also supervises the standardization of containers. The Federal Security Agency, the Federal Trade Com- mission, and the Bureau of Internal Revenue in the Treasury are also involved in similar regulatory activities. “Many of these authorities were once in the Department of Agriculture,” the Com- mission said. ‘Their separation from other departmental activities in these fields cre- ates great overlap and also confuses the pub- lic. The Department (Agriculture) is much better equipped for research in these mat- ters. * * * We believe, as does our task force, that the Department of Agriculture will be vigorous in the protection of con- sumer interest.” TRANSFER OF BUREAUS FROM OTHER DEPART~ MENTS (P, 22) Certain major questions of functions to be included in this Department or removed to other departments of the Government have necessitated major conclusions by this Commission. Citing a “long and wasteful conflict and overlap” because of a division of functions between the Department of Agriculture and the Department of the Interior, the report says one of the important areas of duplica- tion relates to the management of the forest and range lands of the public domain. The Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Manage- ment, and in some areas the Soil Conserva- tion Service, operate on adjacent or inter- mingled Federal land areas under different statutory and administrative policies. Con- flicting, confusing, and duplicating activi- ties of the agencies concerned present prob- lems, the Commission said, which call for basic organizational changes. The Commission’s report says: 1. “Our task forces on agriculture, natu- ral resources, and public works all urgently recommend the consolidations of these agen- cies. It has been urged for many years by students of government. The Commission agrees with this recommendation.” (Annex I, p. 31.) 2. “This Commission believes that logic and public policy require that major land agencies e grouped in the Department of Agriculture. (Separate views of a minority of the Commission will be filed with a sub- sequent report on the reorganization of the Department of the Interior.) It recom- mends that the land activities of the De- partment of the Interior, chiefly the public domain—except mineral questions—and the Oregon and California revested lands, be transferred to the Department of Agricul- ture, and that the water-development activi- ties—except the local farm supply of water— be transferred to the Department of the Interior. Finally, the Commission recommends: “That on completion of the organization of the Department as contemplated in this report, the Secretary of Agriculture institute immediately a comprehensive management survey to determine further savings, and to eliminate facilities, stations, and offices that duplicate facilities and work otherwise con- ducted by the Department or the States.” The Commission’s task force on agricul- ture was headed by Dean H. P. Rusk, of the Illinois State College of Agriculture. The committee included: Dean H. W. Martin, of the Rutgers University School of Agriculture; Dr. D. Howard Doane, of the Doane Agricul- tural Service; F. W. Peck, of the Farm Foun- dation; Prof. John Gaus, of Harvard Univer- sity; Dean W. A. Schoenfeld, of Oregon State College; Chester Davis, president of the Fed- eral Reserve Bank of St. Louis; and Wilham Rhea Blake, of the National Cotton Council. G. Harris Collingwood was research direc- tor of the task force and Frederic P. Lee its legal counsel. Consultants were Gen. H. P. Seidemann, formerly of Brookings Institu- tion, and E. H. Taylor, associate editor of the Country Gentleman. COMMISSIONERS Hon. Herbert Hoover, Chairman, New York, N. Y. Hon. Dean Acheson, Vice Chairman, Secre- tary of State, State Department, Washing- ton, D.C. ° - Hon. George D. Aiken, Senate Office Build- ing, Washington, D. C. Hon. Clarence J. Brown, House Office Build- ing, Washington, D. C. Hon. Arthur S. Fiemming, president, Ohio Wesleyan University, Delaware, Ohio. Hon. James Forrestal, Secretary of Defense, Pentagon, Washington, D. C. Hon. Joseph P. Kennedy, New York, N. Y. Hon. John L. McClellan, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. Hon. Carter Manasco, Washington, D. C. Hon. George H. Mead, Dayton, Ohio. Hon. James K. Pollock, professor and chair- man of the department of political science, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich. Hon. James Rowe, Jr., Washington, D. C. Ore Hundredth Anniversary of Clinton, Mass. EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. PHILIP J. PHILBIN OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, April 18, 1950 Mr. PHILBIN. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrec- ORD, I would like to include excerpts from a recent editorial appearing in the Clin- ton Daily Item on the growth and prog- ress of the town of Clinton since its founding. The community is celebrat- ing its one hundredth anniversary this year. ' ‘The matter. referred to follows: In the field of music, John Redmond and William H. Heagney, both of New York City, today, hold high rank in the field of music, while Clarence E. Brown, a former resident of A2899 Grove Street, as considered among the top movie directors, in Hollywood. Carroll Gibbons, a Clinton native, has at- tained international fame, for many years, as the director of the Hotel Savoy Orchestra, in London. Edward O’Connor, of 26 Prescott Street, is in charge of the Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer inter- ests in Indonesia and Al Altman, both born here, serves as a M-G-M talent scout, with headquarters in New York City. Just before the turn of the century Clinton claimed more big league baseball players than any town or city, 1n Massachu_etts, with such famous diamond stars as the late William R. Hamilton, whose stolen base record has stood untouched for 50 years; Shavey Ryan and Malachi Kittredge, of the Chicago Cubs; Frank H. Connaughton, of the Boston Braves, and John C. McGeachey of the Indianapolis Club, a member of the old Na- tional League at one time. Clinton saw the genesis of Brockelman Bros,, Inc., which originated in a little store, on Green Street, until its removal to the Tyler Block, when it acquired the Boston branch store, then located at the northerly end of that structure and which soon ex- panded into its present quarters embracing the entire ground floor and basement. Singularly enough the site of the chain enterprise which now operates units in many New England cities and towns is in the same building where Gustavus F. Swift and his brothers conceived the idea of bringing dressed beef east in refrigerators cars from Chicago, which at that period, was rapidly becoming the center of shipments of cattle for slaughtering. . The Swifts removed from Cape Cod to Clinton in the early seventies and operated, in the Tyler block, a meat and provision store, and in accordance with the then pre- vailing universal custom of retail merchants of food products owned a small fleet of meat carts which went from house to house on established routes serving local and out-of- town customers. In 1850 Clinton sported but few streets, all of short length. Berlin Road was not laid out until 1852, and the road to Sterling came into being in 1853 and 1854, while Boylston Road was not built until 1860 and 1861. The new town spent $603 87 in 1850-51 for the construction of Grove Street, California Road, Wilson Hill Road, and bridges, but today Clinton has 35 miles of modern high- ways. In 1850 the selectmen asked for and re- ceived an appropriation totaling $8,200 for expenditures during that year, and according to Ford’s History of Clinton the amount raised, by taxation, was $9,059.33 on a total valuation of $262,808, and at the rate of 87 per $1,000 valuation. The town had 575 poli-tax payers, and Ford’s History reports the debt that year of $24,525, a few thousands over the 1950 debt of $18,000. Clinton’s expenditures totaled approxi- mately $1,450,000 in 1949, with most of the income coming from the taxation of real estate and personal property valued at $11,947,000 on a tax rate of $55.80 per $1,000. At the date of the incorporation Clinton possessed, according to the assessors, a popu- lation of 2,788, but the United States census, taken that year, announced a population of 3,118. It was a time of beginning for all residents of the new-born town. Economy in the present for the sake of a competence in the future was the motto of private life, but, at the same time, the spirit of enterprise was abroad with a full recogni- tion of the fact that false economy in laying the foundations of our municipal institu- tions spelled a great increase of expenses in the future, and the citizens wisely adopted a@ farseeing program of liberality.
A2900 While the town owned some school prop- erty and a few roads and bridges it lacked provisions for the care of the poor, a place for interment of deceased citizens, and a pro- tection against fire. ‘When the needs of the community are con- ’ sidered the 88,200 -z™"w1rct‘c~ asked by the selectmen appears "1°, y." ‘4 the close of the first year of municipal life a net balance in favor of the town of $371.11 remained in the treasury. It is a far ery from the modest living costs of 1850 and the average share of the Federal debt of that period that was borne by every Clintonian with those prevailing as the town enters upon its second century of municipal existence and even a contrast with 50 years ago when it observed its semicentennial is amazing. The average share of every Clinton man, woman, and child of the 1950 Federal debt is $1,694, or 113 times as much as it was in 1902 and 130 times larger than it was in 1912. He or she owes nearly 11 times as much as in 1932, 5 times as much as in 1947, 7 years after Roosevelt entered the White House, and 3 times as much as in 1942. These authentic figures were revealed by the United States Census Bureau, December 16, 1949, in a survey of tax trends, Federal, State, and local. Back in 1902, the per capita amount of the debt of each Clintonian was $15, and 10 years later, in the Taft administration it was $13. In 1982, in the Hoover administration, it had risen to $156, and in 1940, after 7 years of the Roosevelt administration, it stood at $326, and in 1942 at $538. Until the New Deal came in, the statistics showed that State and local government ac- tually cost more than the Federal Govern- ment. In 1902, the State and local debts of cach person was $28; in 1912, it was $46, and in 1982 it stood at $157. ‘Today, it is even less than it was in 1982— $140, or one-twelfth the average citizen’s share of the Federal debt. Added together the per capita public debt stands at $1,834, with the Federal debt 92.4 percent, and the State and local debt only 7.6 percent. The Federal debt, the Census Bureau fig- ures showed, was $252,770,000,000 at the end of this fiscal year, while the 48 States owed $4,024,000,000 and local governments $16,- 851,000,000, for an over-all public debt of $273,645,000,000. In contrast, the total public debt, in 1902, was $3,3'73,000,000, of. which $1,178,000,000 was Federal and $2,195,000,000 was State and local. ’ The Federal debt has multiplied 80 times in the period between 1902 and 1950, and is 4% times larger than in 1940 and about 83 times that of 1942. State and local debts have remained about the same since 1932. In that year they to- taled $19,576,000,000 and in 1940 they had increased to $20,246,000,000 and dropped steadily during World War II to $15,992,000,- 000 in 1946 and have since risen to $20,875,< 000,000, or still less than one-twelfth of the Federal debt. On top of the debt of each Clinton man, woman, and child the average citizen pays $39 a year in interest alone, of which $35 goes to the Federal Government and $1 and $3, respectively, to the State and local gov- ernments. The interest charges on the entire public debt amount to $5,'732,000,000 more than the total debt itself in 1912. The Massachusetts State debt, as broken dewn by the Census Bureau, was $207,261, 000 in 1947 and $179,296,000 in 1948. The interest on the Federal debt is $5,188,- 000,G00 each year; on the State debt, $87,< 000,009 and on local debts, $45'7,000,000. - al. The men who make up the State budgets have been doing right well, too, as not since 1933 has a single one of the 48 States de- creased the amount of money it took from taxpayers. In 1949, the States alone grabbed $8,342,- 000,000 out of the pockets of their taxpayers and between Uncle Sam, the 48 States and the cities and towns in the Nation they paid $54,500,000,000 in tax levies, in 1948 one- fifth of the entire national income of all the people in the country, according to the official figures of the United States Census Bureau. This year, three governors have decided that a little thrift might come in handy . with two of them actually urging their re- spective legislatures to save the taxpayer a few dollars. One of the most astute leaders of the Democratic Party was the late Gov. Albert C. Ritchie, of Maryland, a thoughtful man and an exceedingly clear-headed statesman who, in perusing the national situation a few days after the second election of Roosevelt remarked to a group of friends: “‘They have started something that can’t be stopped.” His reference was to the political program of appealing to large groups of voters, not with reason but with promises and gifts. The gifts, of course, came from the United States Government and from the pockets of every taxpayer and formed the foundation of the New Deal—cash subsidies for the farmers, unemployment relief for the idle, social-security payments for the indigent and the aged, legislative favors and White House support for the labor union bosses, unlimited pay-roll patronage for the poli- ticians, all of which created the huge deficits which the Democratic Party had pledged to decrease and pile up the national debt to hitherto unapproached heights, but which was laughed off as Wholesome, particularly the national debt, “because,” as those in power said, “we owe it to ourselves.” Of course it was apparent to the man in the street that it was poor arithmetic and worse logic but it was eminently successful at the polls. Conditions in 1950, 12 years later, make it clear that the Maryland Gov- ernor knew what he was talking about. In that period we have gone to extremes in the business of buying groups that were not dreamed of when 1t was started, with more than 2,000,000 on the Federal pay rolls and with one out of every nine persons in the United States directly or indirectly receiving Government funds, The size of the national debt and the depth of the recurring annual deficits are far beyond the direst predictions of the most pessimistic of the antispending element. _ The Washington administration and the ~ party in power are more closely bound to the labor bosses, particularly the CIO than ever , before. To the lonely voices of Democratic Senator Harry F. Brrp and a few others, who for years, have pointed out that this policy of buying voting groups and ever enlarging the Government pay rolls was the sure way to calamitous national bankruptcy has now been added the powerful one of former Supreme Court Justice, former Secretary of State, and former Governor of South Carolina. Perilously unsound as these vote-buying policies are and little as some of their con- Spicuous advocates believe in them, their political success has been so great that few men in public life have had the courage to rise up and say so. ' Most of them are pusillanimously content to coast along cheered by the notion that the collapse will not come in their own time. It is, of course, a cowardly path they have taken but it is the one they are committed to and they can’t stand still either. They realize that if they don’t turn around they have to go on. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD A notable example of this condition is in the present passionate advocacies of pensions for the aged which have broken out in both major political parties all over the country. A decade ago, both parties shunned the so- called Townsend plan and branded its pro- ponents as morons or crackpots, but not today by any means. Just a few months ago James Roosevelt announcing his gubernatorial candidacy in California, came out for pensions for every- body, while the Secretary of Labor in addition is urging $1 an hour as a minimum wage and insisting that the country must, at once, in- augurate a plan to give every retired per- son a pension of $100 a month, That was the original Townsend plan a few years ago. The record shows that every pension pro- posed to which Congress has given close study and consideration has eventually been enacted into law and the warning of the Brros and the Byrneses do not even slow them up. If we are not over the brink be- fore this $100 a month pension plan passes we will be after it becomes law. The results of economic ignorance, the kindest phrase that can be used, applies the worst dictionary definition of “liberal”— “licentious.” By feeding their bible of slo- gans and catch-phrases through blinding propaganda machinery the electorate has been deluded with dizzy pictures of the wel- fare state, a brief synonym for totalitarian collectivism and only a reactionary step from the slave state which the United States Con- stitution was designed to wrench from its age-old grip. The taxation of pay rolls by the Federal Government has became one of the devices by which the New Deal strove to convert the United States into a socialistic welfare state. The gadget is that pay roll taxes may pro- duce, in small units, enormous sums of money which need not be especially ac- counted for and which may be used as economic planners desire. This insidious form of taxation was introduced when the Social Security System was adopted. ' Dual taxes up to $30 a year each were levied on employees, being made deductible from their pay envelopes, and also on em- ployers for the avowed purpose of providing old-age retirement pensions for the workers. At the same time other taxes were imposed on employers along in conjunction with State unemployment compensation pro- grams. Under the second arrangement State agencies operated the unemployment com- pensation programs but the Federal Govern ment collects three-tenths of 1 percent of pay rolls to pay for the administrative ex- penses of the State agencies, which is a subtle scheme that makes the State dependent on the bureaucracy. ' In both instances the taxes exacted by the Federal Government have been greatly in excess of current requirements and billions of dollars for old-age pensions have been collected and spent by the Federal Govern- ment with only a minor portion being needed for the legitimate payment of pensions. Almost $2,000,000,000 have been paid by employers to the Federal Government for State expenses under the unemployment- compensation program. Out of this sum the States have received back only $850,000,000, or less than half of the total, leaving a sur- plus of more than $900,000,000 in the custody of the Federal Government. Morally this surplus is a trust fund he- longing to the State governments or to the employers from whom it was needlessly taken. But a rapacious Federal bureaucracy wants to spend the money to influence pay roll votes and accordingly the Secretary of Labor proposes that the unearned surplus be used up by requiring the the States “‘to increase the amount and duration of jobless benefits under Federal standards.”
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Actually the scheme would perpetuate a steal on every State and employer in the country. Not only every employer but every State legislator, every worker, and every voter ought to become aware of the encroaching danger to free enterprise and to individual liberty that exists in Federal pay-roll taxes. Such is the outlook, in Clinton, in 1950, as the town starts on its one hundred and first year—a municipality of small area, but with every life essential within easy reach; lines of three railroads, with direct connec- tions with the main arteries of travel to all parts of the Nation; postal service unsur- passed by any town of its size in the country; ample banking facilities, telegraphic and telephonic connections with the entire world; an industrious population with thousands Owning their homes and all skilled and thrifty; a fine market for the surplus prod- ucts of the farms in the six agricultural towns that adjoin it and with a potential consumer public of between 25,000 and 30,000 souls; a modern gravity system of the purest water to be found anywhere in Worcester County and unrivaled for domestic and man-« ufacturing purposes; a well-equipped fire de- partment, an efficient police department, un- surpassed school facilities, an extensive pub- lic library, churches of many denominations, @ collection of municipal buildings un- equaled by any town of its size in the Com- monwealth; four parks; a health country so elevated as to command extensive views of unusual New England beauty; modern high- ways, shaded residential streets and a law- abiding population. It is not within the ken of any of us to predict the future of our beloved town, but every resident hopes that the fears besetting them at the present time may be only ephem- eral and that the next 100 years will be as fruitful as those that are closing. New Low in Crime EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN B. SULLIVAN OF MISSOURI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, April 21, 1950 Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I include an editorial from the St. Louis Star-Times of Wednesday, April 19, 1950, entitled “New Low in Crime,” which discusses the tragedies and near-tragedies in airplane transportation. These man-made “ac- cidents,” caused by heartless fiends seek- ing vengeance on one particular person and involving other helpless passengers, is fully discussed in this fine editorial, and a remedy is suggested. I commend this editorial of the Star-Times to my colleagues in the Congress. I am sure this subject will receive the attention of our Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. The editorial follows: New Low In CRIME It is only because of a miracle that the headlines today do not read “16 Die As Air- liner Crashes in Flames.” That miracie was the discovery of a home-made bomb ‘by a United Air Lines baggageman. Only the accident of the baggageman’s dropping a ‘ gasoline-filled suitcase, causing it to catch fire just before the take-off, saved the pas- sengers and crew, not to mention the plane costing several hundred thousand dollars. It is hard for a normal human being to realize that this world includes fiends who would murder their families and a dozen to 50 other persons to collect a life-insurance policy. But it is a fact, as has been proven three times. It happened once near St. Joachims, Que- bec, when a twin-engined Canadian Pacific air liner exploded in the air and crashed, bringing 23 people to their deaths, Included among them were E. T. Stannard, president of the Kennecott Copper Co.; Arthur D. Stork, who reportedly was touring the company’s facilities before succeeding Stannard as pres~ ident; and R. J. Parker, vice president. The other time it happened was in the Philip- pines. It almost happened again on the Los An~ geles-San Diego flight of a twin-engined United Air Lines DC-3. John H. Grant had planted the gasoline~filled suitcase, along with a time bomb, in the baggage of a plane that was to carry his wife and two small children. It almost went undiscovered. There is no way of Knowing whether any of the other unexplained crashes after an airplane burst into flames in the air may have been due to the same cause. In the St. Joachims, the Philippines, and the Los Angeles cases the culprits were caught. Catching them is not enough, how- ever. That will not bring back to life the 23 victims of the Canadian accident; it would not have brought back the 16 persons on the United air liner who would have been killed if it had not been for the miracle. Clearly a Federal law is needed, so dras-~ tic that it will wipe out such crimes. This can be done as certainly as the Lindbergh law has wiped out kidnaping, and by the same method. Congress should pass a Fed- eral law that any attempt, successful or not, to blow up or wreck an airplane in inter- state travel is punishable by death. Every such case would then automatically fall to the FBI, which would almost certainly find the motive and the murderer every time such a heinous crime was attempted. An effort should be made now to get such & law while memory is keen and indignation high about the Canadian and California incidents. A Good Citizen of the World EXTENSION OF REMARKS o! HON. OLIN E. TEAGUE OF TEXAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, April 21, 1950 Mr. TEAGUE. Mr. Speaker, my at- tention has recently been directed to the thinking of some of our young citi- zens and their concern over accepting the responsibilities of American citizen- ship as well as receiving the many bene- fits from it. In particular, are the thoughts of one young citizen, Cyrus Johnston, of Corsicana, Tex., whose theme on the subject of a good citizen of the world won an award from the local civic organizations. Under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrcorp, I wish to include this theme by Cyrus Johnston of the Corsicana High School, Corsicana, Tex.: A Goop CrrizEN oF THE WoRLD The dictionary tells us that a citizen is “an inhabitant of a city or. town—specifi- cally one enjoying its privileges and free- dom as freemen. A member of a state; a person, native or naturalized, who owes allegiance to a government.” Upon birth one becomes a citizen of a city or town, a A2901 county, a State, the United States. Especially since World War II the world has been brought very close together. The airplene has made distance a matter of hours. The United Nations organization has brought representative citizens from most of the countries of the world around the same table in New York City. As one observes these citizens of many nationalities, one wonders how long it may take to build a world of good citizens with the fundamental things in common. As citizens we have privileges. We enjoy citizenship, which is the relation of an in- dividual to his state, which relationship is of a dual nature in our country: “That of the Nation and that of the particular State of which one is a resident.” The meaning of our citizenship is defined in the four- teenth amendment of the Constitution. Along With this privilege of -citizenship goes protection of the person and his property at home and abroad. Accompanying privileges are responsibili- ties. Every citizen owes obedience and loy-~ alty for this protection. It is the citizen’s responsibility to grow physically, mentally, morally, socially sound, clean, and right, so that he may do his share in developing his country to the best interests of all the peo- ple. In this development education is very important. The first citizens of our coun- try—our forefathers—who came from other parts of the world, believed that education was not only a right but a duty which free- men owed to their Creator. They believed that church members should choose their own pastor and help rule their own church, As you know, this democratic idea can be traced wherever the church spire rises in an American town. These pioneers created self-governing towns which were the basis of local government, and they established the first free schools in America, I mention these things because they are fundamental - in the spiritual, mental, and moral growth of good citizens. They are the factors that make people good citizens. What is a good citizen? What qualities may a person have that place him in the cat~ egory of a good citizen There are many such qualities that might be named, but I shall name and comment briefly on seven. In the first place, I think a good citizen is a working citizen. Work is a noble thing, and by noble, honorable pursuits man goes forward and makes the world a better place to live in. Someone has said “Better to wear out than to rust out,” and ‘tis true that “The dog that trots around finds a bone.” The men we call great, the men who have been good world citizens, the ‘men whose birthdays are marked on the calendar have been the men who have worked and found the bone. They have been hard-working citizens. Take Abraham Lincoln as an out- standing example. He worked himself, and he believed in a man’s right to work and keep the fruits of his labor. He believed in free enterprise which has come to be known as the American way of life. This is the system of work that has made our country great, and as the generation that will be in places of leadership tomorrow, we high-school students must take advantage of our opportunities—opportunities made possible by good citizens from all over the world who have had the courage to work for that which they loved. The thrifty person, one who is frugal, in- dustrious,~ and provident, is a good citizen to have anywhere in this world. When we think of the quality of thrift, our mind turns to the good and great Benjamin Franklin. His ‘philosophy as stated by Poor Richard is well known, for who of us has not read The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin?