A442 throughout the West. Sueh has been the policy of mutually helpful develop- ment viewed generally, but it has not been entirely good and wholesome in all respects. POLICY OF THE EAST TOWARD THE WEST Perhaps we ought not to mention ex- ceptions to the rule, but the policy of the East toward the West in American his- tory has not been altogether altruistic and consciously helpful. There have been some unworthy exploitations and considerable neglect of the offspring by the parent. There have usually been in each generation some timid souls in the old home portion of the country who fear the West and who wish to legislate and so shape national policies as to curb the growing communities of the West. Other selfish souls have desired and at- tempted to exploit the West, and I am sorry to say have succeeded in too many cases. That is the reason why, in de- scribing the attitude of the mother East toward the offspring in the West, it is only in general and viewed as a whole that we can say it has been wise, broad visioned, and mutually helpful. Politically, the founding fathers not only made it possible for new common- wealths to be peopled and developed in the West, but gave encouragement to such a policy and then gave to all of them a share in the political heritage of Amer- ica and a rightful place in the political system of our Government. Several or- dinances, beginning in 1784, but particu- larly the ordinance of 1787, furnished wise provision of law for the colonizing of the West and offered great induce- ment for settlers to move out of the old communities and make their homes in such new communities. The Constitu- tion of the United States, framed in 1787, went even further in this wise and gen- erous policy by providing that new States should be formed as the western terri- tory became settled, and when such new States were formed, they should be ad- mitted to thjs Union on terms of equality with the original States. With all of these generous basic provisions, the American people were enticed to leave their homes in the Eastern States when conditions became a little too crowded and to make new homes further west where all the politica] advantages, rights, and privileges of citizens, should prevail and be fully as wholesome and American as those they had previously known. Thus the United States of America has grown from Thirteen Original States to @ group of 48 equal States in one inde- structible Union. ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES “OUT WEST” It was the economic opportunities that appealed to many Americans to move west, but without political equality of- fered in the new home, every western migrant might have hesitated to give up what he had and was sure of in the old home along the Atlantic seaboard to go into a new commonwealth, or a common- wealth to be, some place farther west. What were these economic inducements? Well, they were many and varied. Per- haps the first that should he mentioned was land—new land. There was an abudance of land all during the early years of American history, for for- tunately our young Republic from the beginning had extended boundaries, of- fering plenty of room to grow. Until recently, the presence of a great body of land belonging to the Government and considered as public domain, and which might be had for the asking, has been @ powerful drawing card. As time passed, much of this good land was taken by settlers as new homes in private own- ership. While great areas still remain as public domain, we reached a time about a generation ago when it appeared that practically all of the good land had been taken by settlers and that which re- mained was hardly worth the taking. This last conclusion seems logical, as is generally accepted, but it is found not to be so, and I shall want to return to it later for an explanation. Besides the inducement of free land on which to make new homes, there was wealth to be expoited in the West. Some of this natural wealth might be consid- ered separate and apart from ownership of the land, although some of it was bound up with land ownership. One of the greatest sources of natural wealth offered the daring and hardy American adventurers at the very beginnings of western exploitation was in the valuable pelts of the fur-bearing animals. A host of American pioneers became hunters and trappers. Daniel Boone might well be cited as an example of those early pioneers who lived by their skill as hunt- ers. The area west of the Mississippi River was first explored and made to yield profits by the fur hunter and the trapper. Not only did the Hudson Bay Co. in the northern wilds have a vast army of men gathering pelts from all over North America, but American citi- zens under the Stars and Stripes, and often before our flag was raised, rivaled the Great English Hudson Bay Co. in that business. Certainly first explorers in the Rocky Mountain area were the fur trappers and traders. The story is told that an east- ern traveler, seeing a huge sign over a trading post with the letters “H. B. C.,” which meant, of course, the Hudson Bay Co., said, “I presume that means ‘Here before Christ’.” Well, the Hudson Bay Co.’s men were in the West not before Christ but before any other white men or civilized men attempted to live there. However, the Hudson Bay Co. employees, even in the Rocky Mountain region, which is now a part of the United States, were not there before our own hardy and courageous American mountain men who were tapping the same re- source and rivaling the British company in this work. Our Nation clinched its hold upon the Columbia River watershed because American fur traders beat the British at this game in that area. John Jacob Astor not only built a fortune out of Rocky Mountain pelts, so that it may be said “he made his money out of our hides,” but he established America’s claim to what is now our Pacific North- west, because of this successful business. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Astoria, near the mouth of the Columbia River, attests to that success. The wealth in the hidden minerals was another great inducement to move west. Of course, gold was the chief attraction to begin with, and still is important, but other minerals regarded as less vaiuable have caused great portions of the West to be developed. Silver has been only a little less significant than gold, and cop- per and other utilitarian metals have caused entire communities to grow up and whole commonwealths to be sup- ported by the wealth taken from the earth. The history of American mining is a thrilling and exciting one, and the gold rushes have been only a little more dramatic than some of the other mining developments. Whole chapters in Amer- ican economic history have been written by gold, by silver, yes—even by copper— when the story is completely told. Now, some of these natura] sources of wealth may have been exploited and apparently exhausted and new sources have come into play to take their place, but I know of none of these original sources which have been completely ex- hausted and the end of their story writ- ten. Such is not true even of the fur trade that it is ended, for the West is still producing furs. Certainly it is not true of mineral production, for the West has scarcely been scratched as to its pos- sibilities for producing mineral wealth. All that has already happened in Ameri- can mining is but a prelude to the whole story. Stock raising and grazing on the public domain has been another fruitful source of wealth to the western pioneer, and a great inducement for people to go out West to make their homes. This in- dustry has been one of the basic founda- tions of every far western community, and although there is now less range land that may be profitably grazed to- day, the livestock industry in the West is not declining, but rather it is now go- ing through a stage of evolution with the prospect that it may be a greater source of wealth than heretofore. No more thrilling or interesting history can be found in the whole epic of America than the story of the cattle industry and re- lated branches of the livestock industry on the Great Plains, in the mountains, and on the ranges between the Missis- sippi River and the Pacific Ocean. Regardless of what language is spoken, or rather what accent is used, in about 20 of our Western States, there is always to be found a cowboy or many cowboys named “Tex” because they are from Texas. That is rather logical because the four-footed inhabitants also came from Texas. Their first basic economy in most of these Western States was a bovine economy which also came out of Texas. Not that the cattle phase over- shadows the human phase of the civiliza- tion, but altogether the civilization of 20 Western States may not inappropriately be called “a bovine civilization.” The Longhorns out of Texas, north and west, gave economic stability and wealth to the Great Plains and to the intermoun- tain region, and: put meaning into the
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD statement that “the cow is the mother of the West.” The story of the West cannot be told without that part of it which deals with trail blazing and trail making. This in- volves not only routes of travel but meth- ods of travel. Especially does it involve the thrilling story of the conquest of desert and mountain in such a way that orly a decade or two before was thought to be impossible. Less than 20 years before the driving of the golden spike near Ogden, Utah, which completed the first Pacific railroad, it was universally believed that it would never be humanly possible to build a railroad from the Mis- sissippi Biver to the Pacific Ocean. Therefore, the conquest of the West in- cludes the conquest of hostile area. and the making of quick and easy transporta- tion possible. The iron horse did it. IRRIGATION—GREATEST PHASE OF WESTERN DEVELOPMENT In recent years the development of new farm homes on irrigated land has become the most noticeable phase of western development. For four decades the Government, through the Bureau of Reclamation, has been reclaiming arid and semiarid lands in 17 Western States and making such land, otherwise value- less, the most productive in the world. Nearly a billion dollars to date have been expended of Gcvernment funds in this great capital development. Under the provisions of a wise reclamation law, sponsored by Theodore Roosevelt and other leaders in his day and enacted in 1902, every dollar of Federal funds thus invested in revlamation projects is re- imbursable and thus returned to the Fed- eral Treasury. Of the 20,000,000 acres of irrigated lands in our West, only 20 percent has been developed by the Government through the Bureau of Reclamation, the other 80 percent having been privately developed. This private development, however, was encouraged by the Govern- ment assistance in the program, and much of it could not have been done without the basic work which the Gov- ernment provided. It should be clearly understood that, although another 20,- 000,000 acres are possible of reclamation through the maximum water uses in the West, the easier projects which private enterprise could and did develop have now beer completed and practically all of the remaining work must be done by the Government, if done at all, An im- portant fact to bear in mind is that the investment which the Government has made, which outlay itself is returnable to the Treasury, has been the cause of many times that amount of private wealth production. The benefits are multiplied, for irrigation projects have each year brought into the Treasury, through taxes, more than the total the Government has thus far spent on them through these four decades. In the critical periods of our national economy following each war, the West has offered wealth-producing opportu- nities which the American people have wisely utilized. Not to go back to the earliest wars, I need but mention that after the Civil War many veterans who had worn the blue and many who had worn the gray made their homes in the far West, and the energies of our young Nation went into conquering the wilder- ness—a part of which consisted of build- ing transcontinental railroads. The im- possible was accomplished in a remark- ably short time, and a vast area greater than the original United States was added to America’s economic map and to our National Capital. After the First World War, there was the same west- ward urge for veterans, and a dispropor- tionately large number made their homes in the West. The manufacture of mil- lions of automobiles and automotive ve- hicles, the paving of millions of miles of public highways, gave an outlet to the Nation's energy, gave employment to the released labor force, and increased the Nation’s wealth. The Second World War, having been greater than all the others, now calls for opportunities of recuperation greater than the others. My thesis is that a wise and proper de- velopment of the West will answer the Nation’s needs in the present post-war period for expanding economy, profitable employment of labor, and opportunity of creating new wealth better than the West has ever done that before. How can this be done? It can be done with renewed effective- ness by extending each and every line of western development which has hereto- fore been used so profitably. To pass over the possibilities of mineral develop- ment, livestock production, and the gar- nering in the natural wealth of the land, I would first suggest the development of our western rivers, using their life- giving waters for making the warm earth fruitful, and in conjunction there- with producing an abundance of hydro- electric power. Even with a $1,000,000,000 investment in reclamation projects and 20,000,000 acres of land irrigated, al- ready less than 20 percent of its possible wealth production has thus far occurred even though 50 percent of the land pos- sible of irrigation has been reclaimed. I am convinced of the accuracy of the figures just quoted, but I can see the need of further explanation of them which I hope later to give. THE SUNSHINE RUSH There are intangible values which can- not be measured in the Nation’s balance sheet. Great and dramatic as the gold rush was, the sunshine rush has been greater, even.more dramatic, and I think of greater value to our people. Climatic advantages throughout the West are recognized so that a great and increasing stream of migration, much of it under doctor’s orders, is heading toward the West. The West is not only a good place in which to get well but is even better as a place in which to stay well. Tourists and the sight-seeing public find that the marvelous West has a cure for the mind as well as the body, and for that reason Jarge sections of the West have become the Nation’s recreational area and the playground of the people. In stabilizing our postwar economics and building a better America, the best and most fruit- ful section of the country on which to spend our energies is the far West. A443 The Jenkins Resolution EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THOMAS A. JENKINS OF QIIIO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 6, 1947 Mr. JENKINS of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, hundreds of manufacturers of highly competitive products, such as textile, shoes, glassware, watches, and pottery, and their many thousands of employees are very fearful of the great influx of goods into our country that is sure to follow from the free-trade policies of the present New Deal State Department. The cheap-labor countries, now that the war is over, are stepping up their production tremendously. The State De- partment under free-trade policies of Hull and Clayton have reduced tariff rates until many of them are lower now than they have ever been. They pro- pose to lower them further. The result can only be a flood of our markets with the cheap labor goods of the world. In 1946 more goods were imported than in any year in our history Europe and Japan are already preparing to take our markets. What will our workingmen do who produce these commodities? The situation demands immediate action and the Republican Party cannot shirk the responsibility. House Resolution No. 52, known as the Jenkins resolution, would, if passed and carried out by the President, relieve this situation. These manufacturers and their employces have been loyally sup- porting this resolution. It is important that something be done at once for the State Department is making all prep- arations to go to the Geneva Conference in April to carry out its well-known pur- pose of establishing free trade. According to the press, certain promi- nent Senators are cooperating with the State Department in a program which will not relieve the situation and which plan has been rejected by the Repub- lican membership of the Ways and Means Committee. The Ways and Means Committee now proposes to hold public hearings on the whole subject commencing on February 24. I am sure that these hearings will develop facts that will justify the immediate adoption of the Jenkins resolution. The industries and their employees know that they can expect no relief from the State Department. Naturally, they are looking to the Republican Party. I hope the Republicans will assume this responsibility courageously. The State Department’s claim, that no course ex- cept its course will assure the success- ful completion of peace conferences now pending, is not well founded. We have not forgotten the State Department's strong claims made before the war that the passage of the reciprocal-trade- agreements bill was absolutely necessary and would be a complete guaranty of peace. In spite of this guaranty we had the greatest war that the world has ever seen.
A444 It is one thing to give away food and clothing to the needy, but it is another thing to give away our industry and the jobs of workers of our country. Pertinent Observation Concerning Income Tax Reduction EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. NOAH M. MASON OF YLLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 6, 1947 REDUCED TAXES AND INDUSTRIAL UNREST Mr. MASON. Mr. Speaker, a cut of 20 percent in our personal income taxes would amount to a rebate of three and a half billion dollars to the American tax- payers. Treasury officials tell us that the greater part of the three and a half bil- lion rebate would go to taxpayers in the lower brackets. That means Uncle Sam would not dip his big hand quite so deeply into the pay envelopes of the workingmen of America; it means their take-home pay would be increased by that amount; and it means the house- wives of America would have that much more to spend for necessary food, clothes, fuel, and rent. Such a tax reduction, therefore, would operate the same as a pay increase for the workers of America. Today rumblings of industrial unrest fill the air. Threats of strikes and work stoppages that are to come are heard everywhere. An automatic increase in take-home pay for the workers of America at this time, brought about by a reduction in the amount Uncle Sam ex- tracts from their pay envelopes, would act as an antidote for these threatened strikes for higher pay. HOW OUR PRESENT INCOME TAX WORKS Mr. Speaker, here are three illustra- tions of how our present income tax works: First. John Jones is a successful farm- er. As such he pays a 20 percent Federal income tax. He raises 1,000 busheis of corn, or wheat, or soybeans, or any other grain. Uncle Sam takes 200 bushels of the 1,000 bushels for taxes, leaving John Jones 800 bushels for him- self. If John Jones raises cattle or hogs, Uncle Sam takes one out of every five for taxes. Second. John Smith is a factory worker receiving geod pay. He works 40 hours per week. Uncle Sam takes 8 hours pay out of the wages John Smith earns each week for taxes, leaving John Smith 32 hours’ wages. John Smith therefore works one 8-hour day each week for Uncle Sam, and four 8-hour days each week for his family. Third. John Doe is a successful lawyer, doctor, dentist, teacher, or merchant, with a good income. He has to pay Uncle Sam more than 20 percent of his income in taxes, so he works for Uncle Sam more than one day in five each week. Perhaps Uncle Sam is getting more than his share of the American tax- payer’s time and money. Mr. Speaker, the following is the tenta- tive tax program of the Zightieth Con- gress as I see it: First. Freeze war-excise-tax rates at present levels for an indefinite period to give time for a complete study and over- hauling of the whole tax structure. Second. Reduce Federal income taxes immediately to carry out a definite promise made; to stimulate business ex- pansion; and to provide necessary in- vestment capital. Third. Make a thoroughgoing study of the entire Federal tax structure with the view of making necessary adjust- ments, removing present inequities, abolishing certain nuisance taxes, and with the hope that a tailor-made, inte- grated, smooth-working, efficient tax program can be worked out that will fit into the economic situation of today. This is a monumental task that will re- quire exhaustive public hearings, months of time, and real work. This task must be done if we want to insure industrial activity, full employment, and an ex- panding economy in the years ahead. DO YOU KNOW? Mr. Speaker, a $1,500-a-year man, with a family of two children, pays no Federal income tax. A $2,500-a-year man, with a family of two children, pays $95 Federal income tax. A $3,000-a-year man, with a family of two children, pays $190 Fed- eral income tax. A $5,000-a-year man, with a family of two children, pays $569 Federal income tax. A $10,000-a-year man, with a family of two children, pays $1,862 Federal income tax. A $50,000- a-year man, with a family of two chil- dren, pays $24,111 Federal income tax. A $500,000-a-year man, with a family of two children, pays $406,600 Federal in- come tax. A $1,000,000-a~year man, with a family of two children, pays $838,850 Federal income tax. And on top of these Federal taxes the taxpayer must pay State income taxes in most States which further greatly re- duces the amount he has left after Uncle Sam gets his. Mr. Speaker, under the unanimous- consent request that was granted, I now insert two short timely editorials that I want every Republican Member of this House to read and ponder over. {From the Chicago pane of February 8, | Tue Rervsuican Tax Procaam When Representative Kwotsdw first pro- posed the 20-percent cut across the board in taxes on 1947 individual fnoomes, the pian proposal. ampie, a few days after the election, Repre- sentative Maurin of Massechusectts, slated for the Speskeranip, wave the plan his blessing. said Congress should approve the 20-per- cent out as quickly as posstble and then, when plenty of time was evailable, consider the longer range tax program. qnhat ws good advice in November and it 1s Patture to follow it will The people threw out the New Dea! because they had had more than enough cf New APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Deal theories of government, prominent among which was the use of taxation as an instrument for social revolution. The New Dealers for years had been using the taxing power to punish success in business and the professions. The Republicans won; and now we find many influential leaders of the Re~ publican Party in Congress talking like the best of New Dealers. “As a dog returneth to his vomit,” reads returneth to his folly.” Mr. EnvutTson’s plan are out-dogging the proverbial dog. It isn’t their own folly to which they are returning but the folly of the party whose policies they were pledged to overthrow. Representative Ewoar of Michigan is known as an able and conscientious Congressman but he deserved the rebuke that Mr. K»ur- sow handed him the other day. Mr. Kwuraonw wanted to know if Mr. Encet had joined the CIO, and it was a fair thrust for Mr. ENGEL is behaving in this matter like a faithful ex- ponent of the CIO line. The Knutson proposal is comprehensive and comprehensible, great and rare virtues ina tax bill. Everybody can understand what the plan means without the assistance of learned counsel and a certified public ac- countant. A return to the New Deal theory of taxation for punishment will achieve noth- ing better than confusion of the public, divi- sion in the Republican ranks, and the re- sumption of class conflict in all its hitter- ness. In these circumstances, the victory in November will prove to have been nothing more than the victory of the Republican New Dealera over the Democratic New Dealers. [From Washington Times-Herald of February 1, 1947) Piss oz Cur Balt Tax reduction is taking up much of the at- tention of the Republicans controlling the Elghtieth Congress. From remarks dropped in the last few days by men like Speaker Joe MAgtTIN, of the House, and Representative Ewnvrson, of Minnesota, we infer that the tax- cutting job does not look as easy now as it did before the election. Mastin, for instance, says that, while the Republicans still would love to cut personal income taxes 20 percent across the board, “of course, that has to come after we find out whether we can balance the budget.” The budget referred to is the Truman re- quest for more than thirty-seven and one- half billions for the Government to spend in the fiscal year beginning next July 1. When the President first unveiled these colossal de- about slashing them by four to eight billions. Now, apparently, the facts of budget life are coming home to Martin, Knutson & Co. The Democrats have greeted this shift with loud and joyous yelps of “flip-flop” and the Our own feeling is that the Republicans had better, by some means and at this session of Congress, cut taxes substantially, balance the budget, and put a payment of reasonahie size on the national debt. That is what they said they could do in the campaign which led to their sweep at the polls last November 5. Voters’ memories are proverbially short. But a spectfic tax-cut campaign is one thing which most tax-burdened voters can remem- ber, espectaliy if it tm’t kept. Most of the e voters are aware, of course, that the Republicans inherited a frightful gov- ernmental mess from the New Dealers, the
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD most extravagant gang of wastrels ever yet to hold power in Washington for any con- siderable time. It will be no easy job to clean up that mess. But the Republicans said during the cam- paign that they could clean it up, and would welcome the assignment if the voters would give it to them. The voters did as requested, It is now up to the GOP leadership in Con- gress, we think, to fish or cut bait. A SIGN OF UNEASINESS In which connection, a printer friend of ours the other day made a few remarks which we would like to pass along. As not too many people know, most printers are as shrewd, acute and tough-minded gents as you can find anywhere. This one was discussing the Republicans’ recent decision to keep the 20 percent luxury taxes; and here is about what he said: “Well, of course I can’t sob over people who buy 86,000 mink coats and have to pay 20 percent taxes on them. Just the same, those Republicans told us they would reduce taxes, and now they have reneged on these particu- lar taxes. “It looks to me as if they may be horsing around to find, after a while, that nothing can be done about any of the taxes. Hope I’m wrong—maybe it’s too soon to squawk— but—.” O. Max Gardner EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. HAMILTON C. JONES OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 6, 1947 Mr. JONES of North Carolina. The Nation has lost one of its greatest men in the passing of Hon. O. Max Gardner, former Ambassador to England. The State of North Carolina has sustained an irreparable loss in this great leader. Governor Gardner, as he is affectionately called, has been a leader of the Nation and of the State of North Carolina for a good span of years. When quite a young man, Max Gard- ner began to lead the people of his State even before graduating from college. He attended State College at Raleigh, N. C., where he was one of the recognized col- lege leaders of the State. He then came to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill for the study of law. He was recognized as one of the outstanding young men of North Carolina and one of the best star athletes of football at both State College and the University of North Carolina. Upon leaving college Max Gardner began to lead the youth of the State ina conspicuous and intelligent manner. He served at an early age in the State sen- ate, became speaker pro tempore, and then Lieutenant Governor of North Carolina. Later, without any opposition, he was elected Governor of his State. He began his duties as Governor during the depression days, specifically, in 1929. North Carolina, like the Nation, was faced with financial crisis, and by his fine judgment and business sense steered the State through these trying times and launched it upon a period of success from which it has never turned even mo- mentarily backward. In a program of economy Governor Gardner combined the University of North Carolina into one great institu. tion, including the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, State College at Raleigh, and the Woman's College at Greensboro, and today I believe that Max Gardner should be given credit for the splendid institution known as the Great- er University of North Carolina. His administration was characterized by business acumen, good judgment, and far-seeing, sound principles of govern- ment. As Governor of North Carolina, he was one of the advisers of President Franklin Roosevelt in his aspirations to become President and helped pave the way for a nomination for the Presidency in 1932. After his ascendancy to the Presidency, Franklin Roosevelt naturally had Gov- ernor Gardner as one of his early closest advisers. At the expiration of his term as gov- ernor, Max Gardner established a most successful law firm in Washington with Dr. Fred Morrison in the city of Wash- ington. This firm is continued today as one of the outstanding law firms in America, Governor Gardner’s able son, Ralph Gardner, becoming a member of the firm when his father was appointed Under Secretary of the Treasury. Governor Gardner served most capably and with such distinction as Under Sec- retary of the Treasury that President Truman appointed him to the high honor of Ambassador to the Court of St. James’s, as great an honor as an American can reach, with the exception of the Presidency of the United States. In business life Governor Gardner was conspicuously successful, engaging in many activities of business, and espe- cially in the textile fleld, where he was operator of the large Cleveland Cotton Mill at Shelby, N.C. He sold this plant at an attractive price to enter the high position of Under Secretary of the Treasury. As a civic leader, he was in the fore- front of practically every worthy cause in North Carolina during his adult life. In the field of farming especially did he lead out in urging a program of “live at home.” After leaving the office of Gov- ernor of North Carolina, in connection with other distinguished leaders of Cleveland County, he established his native county of Cleveland as the lead- ing cotton-growing county of North Carolina. As a lawyer, Governor Gardner was successful, most able, and ever ready to undertake any legal task that would promote the welfare of his State or the Greater University of North Carolina. At the time of his death, he was engaged in an important lawsuit to bring to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill a much-needed museum of art. As a patriotic citizen of his Nation and State, he was conspicuously outstanding, contributing all of his great talents and ability to every war effort or war en- deavor that he was called upon by the President of the United States to under- take. He served in the capacity of chairman of the Advisory Commission to the Director of War Mobilization and Reconversion Division. A445 As a churchman, he was a lifelong and devoted member of the Baptist church, conducting a bible class in the First Baptist Church of Shelby, N. C., and being a leader in this large and in- fluential church for many years. His Christianity expressed itself in many philanthropic gifts, especially to Gard- ner-Webb College to which he gave liberally. The Nation and especially the State of North Carolina have lost a distin- guished citizen, an able Jawyer, a pro- gressive and unselfish civic leader, a talented and brilliant public official, and one of the most patriotic and con- spicuously able leaders in the life of our Nation today in the passing of the Hon- orable O. Max Gardner. They Also Served EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THOMAS J. LANE OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 6, 1947 Mr. LANE. Mr. Speaker, the Muster- ing-Out Payment Act of 1944, designed to give each veteran a stake with which to pick up the ways of civilian life, ex- cluded men over 38 who were discharred because they were unable to keep up with the physical demands of military service from the benefits of this act. We drew a false line between those who served—and those who Served. Under the strain of emergency, per- haps it might have been excused; but as we look at it now, we have no recourse but to change this amendment and make restitution to those who have been justly offended by our discrimination against them. Most of these older men were called up in 1942 when the war was going badly for us. They were called long before millions of younger men were called. And though they were beyond their phys- ical prime, they were pooled with men who were as young as their sons, and were subjected to the same rigorous training. For them, the effort was doubly difficult. They did not seek to evade military serv- ice Decalse of their age. They were called, and they responded. Surely it was no fault of theirs that they could not keep up with the exhausting demands of military life. But as the hospitals began to fill up with these men, the Army made a dis- covery which most of us knew all along. A man of 38 or over cannot compete physically with a man of 21, or 26, or 28. It was as biologically simple and pathetic as that. The Army did not admit this in so many words. It felt called upon to dis- charge these men, while saving its own face, and so this pretext was found. Men over age were released on their own initiative to accept employment essen- tial to the war effort. As if, having gone through what they did, they would do any less. Millions of civilians found war work attractive and profitable. But the
A446 Army seemed to imply that these men who were the victims of the Army's mis- guided policy would loaf, and so the Army acded insult to injury. But this diversionary language did not fool the men over 38. They knew that the Army was passing the buck to them for its own mistakes. However, when the Congress itself fol- lowed the same line and excluded them from the benefits of the Mustering-Out Payment Act, they were surprised and embittered. They had served on ex- actly the same basis as other men who remained in this country, and yet a line was drawn between the two. Some got mustering-out pay and others did not. Somehow, the implication was made that their service was dishonorable, for how else could this unfair discrimi- nation be justified? Denying them the mustering-out pay was one wrong. Putting them in the same category as those who were dis- honorably discharged was another and more grievous one which still rankles in the hearts and minds of several hundred thousand men. The charitable view is that Congress was careless in the matter, for which it is not too late to make amends. For our own self-respect, and in justice to the veterans who were released because they were over age, I ask the Members of this Congress to correct the oversight and grant mustering-out pay to the men who were treated so unfairly in the original bill. They look to us to do the right thing— now. Extension of Sugar Controls EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ROBERT HALE OF MAINE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 6, 1947 Mr. HALE. Mr. Speaker, I am today filing a bill to permit the extension of sugar controls until March 31, 1948. The present authority to control sugar expires on March 81 of this year. The bill which Iam filing would, however, allow the Sec- retary of Agriculture to discontinue con- trols prior to that time if, in his opinion, the supply situation would allow of an orderly marketing and distribution of sugar. This bill is being filed primarily in the interests of the housewife or family con- sumer of sugar. The existing world shortage of sugar cannot be relieved until another crop-year comes around. In the meantime if controls were lifted, the housewife would be obliged to compete in an open market for her sugar not only against industria] users of sugar but also against all the nations of the world. The price would inevitably rise very high, and it is doubtful if the amount which the housewife would be able to purchase would be as great as she can get under orderly rationing and pricing. I am hopeful that both the housewife and the industrial user of sugar in this coun. try will be able to get a larger allotment than last year, and I am also hopeful that when next year’s world sugar crop can be ascertained, it will be sufficient to allow the Secretary of Agriculture to lift all controls before the expiration date of this bill. . Many people in this country, unfor- tunately, have the impression that be- cause the United States purchased the entire Cuban sugar crop, we should be allowed to consume all of it within the United States. The purchase of that en- tire crop waS made by agreement with other nations in order that the entire world should not be competing for the small supply available, thereby driving the price to exorbitant heights. Other nations in staying out of the Cuban mar- ket have trusted us to make a fair alloca- tion, and we have a strong moral obliga- tion to do this. Even with rationing, our consumption of sugar will be as great, if not greater, per capita than that of any other nation in the world. The text of the bill reads as follows: House Joint Resolution 112 Joint resolution to extend to powers and au- thorities under certain statutes with re- spect to the distribution and pricing of sugar, and for other purposes Whereas the war has resulted in an acute shortage of sugar to an extent which is im- pairing the reconversion of the national economy from war to peace; and Whereas it is in the interest of national Gefense and security to effectuate an orderly distribution of sugar at reasonable prices in order to prevent profiteering, hoarding, mar- ket manipulation and speculation in sugar, waste or spoilage of perishable agricultural commodities, and to prevent or eliminate other disruptive practices arising out of the scarcity of sugar: Therefore be it Resolved, etc., That notwithstanding any other provisions of law (1) the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942 (56 Stat. 23), the Stabilization Act of 1942 (56 Stat. 765), title TII and title XIV of the Second War Powers Act, 1942 (56 Stat. 177), and the act of July 2, 1940 (54 Stat. 714), all as amended and extended, shall continue in effect with respect to sugar to and including March 31, 1948; (2) sugar may be allocated without regard to the provisions of title II of the War Mo- bilization and Reconversion Act of 1944 (58 Stat. 787); and (3) the term “sugar,” as used in this act, means any grade or type of sac- charine product derived from sugarcane, sugar beets, or corn, including liquid sugar, sirups, molasses, or mixtures thereof, and sugar-containing products, which contain sucrose, dextrose, or levulose. Sxc. 2. Prior to the expiration of this act the Secretary of Agriculture is hereby au- thorized and directed to remove any or all controls with respect to any product over which control is authorized by this act when in his judgment the supplies of sugar are sufficient to warrant such action. Bec. 3. (a) The powers, functions, and duties of (1) the President under title III of the Second War Powers Act, 1942; (2) the President or any executive department under the act of July 2, 1940; and (3) the Price Administrator under the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942 and the Stabiliza- tion Act of 1942, all as amended and ex- tended, shall, insofar as they relate to sugar, be vested in and executed by the Secretary of Agriculture upon the enactment of this ac (b) All orders, directives, rules, and regu- lations relating to any function transferred by this section or issued in connection there- with by any agency heretofore performing such function, which are in effect on the date APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD of enactment of this act, shall continue in full force and effect uniess and until modified or revoked by the Secretary of Agriculture or at his direction or under his authoriza- tion, (c) S80 much of the unexpended balances, appropriations, or other funds available for the use of any agency in the exercise of the functions transferred by this act as the Di- rector of the Bureau of the Budget shall de- termine, shall be transferred for use in con- nection with the exercise of such functions. (d) With respect to violations, liabilities incurred, or appeals taken thereunder, all provisions of orders, directives, rules, and regulations, pertaining to sugar heretofore used under the act referred to in section 1 hereof, shall be deemed to remain in full force and effect for the purpose of sustain- ing any proper sult, action, or other proceed- ing with respect to any such violations, lia- bilities, or appeals. Sec. 4. The provisions of this act shall be- come effective immediately upon enactment. Organization of the World for Peace EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOSEPH C. O’MAHONEY OF WYOMING IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, January 27, 1947 Mr. O’MAHONEY. Mr. President, it was my privilege last Saturday night to be present at a meeting of the New York State Bar Association which was ad- dressed by our former colleague, Senator Austin, now the representative of the United States at the seat of the United Nations. Senator Austin spoke about the prob- lem, in all of its aspects, of organizing the world for peace. The address is of such importance that I ask unanimous consent that it be printed in the Appen- dix of the Recorp. I am advised that the address will fill more than the two pages allotted under the rule, and that therefore it is neces- sary to submit an estimate of the cost. The estimate indicates that this manu- script will occupy about two and one- third pages of the CoNGRESSIONAL RECORD and its printing will cost $165.67. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: We are at a most critical point in the long struggle of man to progress from savagery to civilization through the rule of law in international relations. The great question before us today and in the years immediately ahead is this: Can our present efforts to develop a genuine com- munity of nations, living at peace under law enforced by collective will and action, suc- ceed where all previous efforts in this direc- tion have failed? I believe that there are valid reasons for confidence that this time we can succeed. Never before have so many people seen so clearly that wars cannot continue without resulting in destruction of civilization as we know it. Never before have so many people made up their minds that the choice no longer lies between winning or losing the next war. The choice lies between prevent- ing World War III and irreparable disaster from atomic bombs and other weapons of possibly greater destructiveness.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The memory of failures of the past will spur us forward as we face the imperatives that contemporary science and technology have placed upon social progress. To save mankind, we must speed the control of the terrible and wonderful forces that could otherwise destroy us. In the Charter and institutions of the United Nations we have created the instru- ments by which we seek to build, upon the experience of the past, the peaceful world society of the future that the imperatives of the present demand of us. We have heard it sa'd that because it is not a world gov- ernment, the United Nations is too weak an instrument for the purpose. Certainly the United Nations is not a world government. It could not be at this stage in history, but this does not mean that it is incapable of exercising, in effective combination, the sev- eral sovereignties of its member states. Others look upon the record of history and all the dangers and tribulations of the pres- ent and fear that the cause is hopeless any- way, thus leaving no choice but to prepare for th’ suicide of western civilization. We can afford neither to minimize nor ex- aggerate the difficulties and obstacles in our path. We cannot afford to misunderstand the fundamental assumptions and require- ments of our times. It will be my thesis here tonight that the United Nations is firmly based on the realities and that the potential power inherent in its Charter and in the de- velopment and uses of its institutions is far greater than is commonly supposed. The Charter of the United Nations, which is now part of the law of nations, finds its sources tn the evolution of international law over the past century, and especially over the past 50 years I do not need to remind this distinguished assembly of jurists and members of the legal profession that the sources of international law are the convictions and standards of right and wrong that men apply to the con- duct of nations. International law reflects the development of the wisdom and the spiritual progress of the peoples of the world. Take, for example, the evolution of inter- national law in its attitude toward war over the past 50 years. The first Hague Convention in 1899 bound the nations to settle disputes by pacific means whenever possible. The third Hague Con- vention of 1907 provided that “the contract- ing parties recognize that hostilities between themselves must not commence without pre- vious and explicit warning, in the form either of a reasoned declaration of war or of an ultimatum with the conditional declaration of war.” Thus far, pacific settlement was en- couraged and undeclared wars were branded crimes, but war, itself, provided sufficient warnings were given, was not branded as illegal. In 1919, after the First World War, the League of Nations Covenant bound the mem- bers not to resort to aggressive war and pro. vided means for the peaceful settlement of disputes and sanctions against aggression. Then, in 1924, the Geneva Protocol for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, later signed by 48 nations, declared that “a war of aggression constitutes an interna- tional crimes.” In 1927 the League of Nations unanimously adopted a resolution to the same effect. The Habana Conference of American States in 1928 declared that a “war of ag- gression constitutes a major crime against the human species * * * all aggression is considered illicit and as such is declared prohibited.” In the same year all the sig- natories of the Kellogg-Briand Pact of Paris renounced war as an instrument of national policy. . Thus, between 1907 and 1928, all civilized nations had advanced in their conception that war was merely undesirable and when fought should be fought according to the rules, to the concept that aggressive war is a criminal act. In the perspective of the long centuries of recorded history this evo- lutionary change in the law reflected re- markable progress in the attitude of men toward war. Nevertheless, the law against aggressive war has been feloniously and treacherously violated. The aggressions of the Axis Powers cul- minating in the Second World War were the first to be committed since the law against Waging war had acquired full validity as part of the law of nations. But they did not de- stroy the law. The law prevailed and the civilized community applied individual pun- ishment to the leaders who planned and carried out this crime against humanity. I shall return in a moment to the great significance for the future of the United Na- tions, of the charters of the Nuremberg tribunal and of the tribunal of the Far East. Now I wish to point out three significant and hopeful factors: First, the law against aggressive war gained universal acceptance and validity only a short time ago. Second, it was possible to defeat the first nations to violate the law and to punish them only because the great majority of the nations of the world joined together to enforce the law. It is true that they were slow to under- stand that their self-preservation was de- pendent upon such collective action, but they did understand and act in time to prevent the victory of those who broke the law. Third, the doctrine of individual responsi- bility for an international crime has been applied for the first time. Just as democracy has brought the prince or governor under the law of the state, so the development of international law has brought him under the law of nations and made him responsible to the civilized com- munity of mankind for violations of that law. Thus, great strides have already been made toward the rule of world law and peaceful order that we seek to establish under the Charter of the United Nations and through its institutions. These institutions and the powers con- ferred upon them through the charter by the member states are so designed that they @re capable of developing the law of nations to an extent and at a rate previously impracticable. In the first place they are by their nature most responsive to the opinions and the judgments of the peoples of the world, They are also by their nature catalysts for the evolution and crystallization of these Judg- ments and opinions, which are in turn a source of law. The Security Council has been in existence for less than a year and it has had the usual difficulties of new institutions, Yet it has already demonstrated its great potentialities in this regard. It meets in public. It is so organized as to function continuously. Its application on a continuous basis of the pub- lic and peaceful methods of the Council chamber to the settlement of disputcs be- tween nations is a new technique in interna- tional relations of the highest significance for the future. Through its influence and public scrutiny it has demonstrated how much !t can do as it grows in strength and experience toward directing the nations into the paths of conciliation and agreement in accordance with standards of law and justice. I believe that every delegate who attended the recent session of the General Assembly here in New York was deeply impressed by the great power of public opinion which the Assembly's deliberations focused upon the policies of the member nations, This power was reflected in the results that were achieved. The Assembly does not legislate. It rec- ommends, Its recommendations can acquire the force of law only when they are accepted by the member states. But this meeting of the General Assembly clearly showed that its A447 recommendations had behind them a moral equivalent of the power of enforcement, Time after time the delegates declared that their nations would feel morally obligated to accept and act upon a recommendation of the Assembly even though they were not technically bound to do so. The Economic and Social Council, like the Security Council and the General Assembly, meets in public. It is the focal point of a network of commissions and _ specialized agencies through which the members of the United Nations have begun to work together on an organized and continuing basis in al- most every field of human activity in which they have a common interest. These organs of the United Nations—above all the General Assembly—have a role to play in the development and codification of in- ternational law. Decisions of the Security Council can establish precedents that will raise the standards of law and justice as ap- plied to the settlement of international dis- putes. The General Assembly has the power to recommend to the member states con- ventions or treaties on any matter affecting the general welfare, or the maintenance of international peace and security. These recommendations will gain the force of law when they are ratified. The Economic and Bocial Council and its related specialized agencies have the power to build up a vast new body of law relating to such matters as human rights, international trade, economic development, and social welfare by winning agreement on and ratification of treaties and conventions on matters in this field. The General Assembly, at its recent ses- sion, took a most significant first step toward strengthening the law of nations. On the initiative of the United Stater it affirmed the principles of international law recognized by the charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal. It created 2 committee to study the codification and development of international law. It directed this committee to place primary im- portance in this connection upon the prin- ciples of the charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal in the context of a general codifica- tion of offenses against the peace and security of mankind, or of an international criminal code. Note the progress in international law tefiected by this affirmation by 54 nations and the potentialities in cffective and en- forceable law of the phrase “international criminal code.” I intend, in this connec- tion, to call to the attention of the Assem- bly’s Committee on Codification the Charter of the International Military Tribunal of the Far East so that this charter may be placed side by side with the Nuremberg Charter. That charter was agreed upon by 11 states, representing more than one-half the popu- lation of the earth. The General Assembly also affirmed that the crime of genocide—the deliberate exter- mination of a race or class, or any other human group—is a crime under interna- tional law for which the punishment of those responsible is a matter of interna- tional concern. Here is another case where individuals, as well as states, are to be made responsible before the international bar of justice. At the center of this developing system of international law stands, of course, the International Court of Justice. All members of the United Nations have bound them- selves under the charter to comply with the decision of the Court on any case to which it is a party. The Security Council is directed “to take into consideration that legal disputes should as a general rule be referred by the parties to the International Court.” Both the General Assembly and the Security Council may request the Court to give an advisory opinion on any legal ques- tion, including interpretation of the charter. The statute of the Court also enables the member states voluntarily to accept in ad- vance compulsory jurisdiction of the Court
A448 in relation to any other state accepting the same obligation in all legal disputes con- cerning: “(a) The interpretation of a treaty; “(b) Any question of international law; “(c) The existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation. “(d) The nature or extent of the repara- tion to be made for the breach of an inter- national obligation.” A-similar provision in the statute of the old World Court was accepted by 44 nations. The United States, which refused even to join the old Court, has now not only become a member but has accepted the compulsory jurisdiction clauses of the statute of the pres- ent Court. This advance acceptance of the jurisdiction of the Court is essential to the establishment of a rule of law in the world. Neither the existence of a Court nor the existence of a body of law can bring this about if it is pos- sible for a state party to a dispute to stand on its own interpretation of the law and re- fuse to submit to an tmpartial adjudication. so far the members of the United Nations have been slow in acting to accept the com- pulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice. Only six acceptances have been deposited to date. All members of the United Nations should, and I believe will, accept this obligation. The United States, in accepting compul- sory jurisdiction of the Court, ‘made one reservation which I regret. Matters which are essentially within domestic jurisdiction are not within the competence of the Inter- national Court. It deals only with ques- tions concerning the rights and dutics of States toward each other. The United States has, however, reserved the right to decide for itself which questions are essen- tially within its domestic jurisdiction in- stead of leaving the question of jurisdiction to be decided by the Court itself. It is easy to understand why the United States Senate wanted this reservation. In making as broad an acceptance as we did we were taking a step far in advance of any- thing that would have been possible 10 years ago. Furthermore the Senate debate made it clear that this country should invoke the reservation only in @ clear case. Nevertheless the reservation has implica- tions going far beyond any use that may be made of it by the United States. If generally adopted, this type of reservation would create a large loophole by which states desir- ing to do so could withhold their cases from the Court and our long-range goal of utiliz- ing the Court to advance the rule of law would be impaired. I’ was for this reason that I stated in the Senate debate that I preferred the resolution without this reser- vation. I mention this now because the reservation has already received considerable comment. Our declaration is in force until 1951, and the matter seems to be one to which the legal profession could well give some throughtful consideration during the intervening period. This question involves the relationship of the sovereignty of the individual nations to the organization of the international com- munity of nations. That relationship, in turn, lies at the heart of the greatest task of all that remains to be accomplished if we are to develop and maintain a peaceful world order under law. I refer to the sanctions of the spirit and the sanctions of force that must be created or perfected to maintain and enforce the law of nations. The United Nations 1s rightly founded on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its members. The sovereignty of the United States is sacred to all of us. But no nation is now, or ever has been, absolutely sovereign in relation to other nations. Sovereignty is relative. Every nation’s sovereignty is lim- ited by all its treaties and agreements with other states. Every member of the United Nations has relinquished some part of its sovereignty to the organization. By this act, however, ex- ternal sovereignty is not lost. No member of the United Nations has lost any degree of its independence in relation to an, other nation by adhering to the Charter, because each makes the same relative contribution to the common authority. The States of our Federal Union remain sovereign States. Through an original act of external sovereignty they granted in our Conatitution those powers to the Federal Government that they deemed necessary for their common welfare and security. But all the powers not granted to the Federal Gov- ernment were and still are reserved to the States or to the people. The most imperative function of sov- ereignty is such exercise of it as will pre- serve the security of the state and the lives and property of its citizens. That being the case, there can be no more vital or impera- tive exercise of sovereignty than to use it in partnership with other nations to estab- lish and maintain security from war. To use external sovereignty in order to build collective security is not to impair the free- dom and independence of this or any other state member of the United Nations, but to protect that independence and preserve that freedom. Neither could exist for long without collective security. The sovereign members of the United Na- tions have agreed upon this proposition in the Charter of the United Nations. The Charter carries within it duties and obliga- tions that point the way to the development of collective security, both through the pro- gressive removal of the causes of war and through provision for collective enforcement of the laws of peace. The Charter, however, is not self-operating, nor do its terms in themselves create all the means that will be required. The obliga- tions are there. The powers are there. The obligations must be carried out, the powers used, Building a system of collective security that will develop and enforce the rule of law is the supreme task before us now. It will not be completed this year, nor next year, but the urgency of it is with us today and will be with us from day to day until it is completed. The Security Council, the Atomic Energy Commission, and the Military Staff Com- mittee are now engaged upon two phases of this great enterprise. One phase is the com- pletion of the special agreements called for under article 43 of the Charter, which will place at the disposal of the Security Council peace forces to enforce its decisions. The other phase is the development of a system of international control over atomic energy and over armaments generally. This is at the very heart of the problem of achieving collective security. If such a system can be established, complete with pro- visions for effective international operating controls, including international inspection, and for appropriate punishments that can- not be obstructed by a violator, then we shall have established safeguards that will enable the world to disarm with security. The world can achieve neither security nor disarmament without such a system. The price that all the nations will have to pay is a further delegation of sovereignty. The stake that is involved is civilization itself. I said a moment ago that the obligations and the powers upon which such a system can be erected already reside in the Charter. What remains is to reach agreement on applying and using them. There is the obligation “to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace” contained in article 1 as the first purpose of the United Nations. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD There is the obligation to “refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the pur- poses of the United Nations,” contained in article 2. These, like other obligations of the Charter are definitive and unequivocal. They are the law. They are not circumscribed by any voting rules whatsoever. They apply to the permanent members of the Security Council equally with all other members of the United Nations. The rule of unanimity of the per- manent members does not legalize any viola- tion of these or any other obligations. In- deed, to use the so-called veto power to pro- tect an aggressor from punishment would be as much a violation of the Charter as the act of aggression itself. It would be nullifica- tion. No country can veto itself out of its obligations. : The United States supports the rule of unanimity in the Security Council for the reasons that placed it in the Charter. It is there to promote agreement on positive ac- tion to carry out the Charter among the great nations that possess among them the power to keep or break the peace. It is there to preserve and strengthen, and place at the service of the peace and security of all na- tions, that concert of power that brought retribution to the Axis criminals who de- stroyed peace and security in the last war. It is there to discourage division among these nations so that a world that can remain at peace only if it remains one, does not become irrevocably split into hostile camps. The United States believes that the rule of unanimity in the Security Council should be used in order to promote and not to hinder agreement on precisely such positive steps to carry out the purposes of the Charter as the establishment of international control of atomic energy and other armaments. With- out unanimity of the great nations on its provisions such a system could not be estab- lished. As a corollary to this, however, the United States believes that there is an obligation on all the great powers to find agreement on such a system, with all the effective controls and genuine safeguards that go with it, be- cause without such a system the central pur- pose of the United Nations, security from war, cannot be fulfilled. The Charter of the United Nations confers primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security upon the Security Council and imposes the rule of unanimity upon its permanent members. But the Charter does not confer on the Se- curity Council exclusive responsibility for the maintenance of peace and security. That re- sponsibility is shared by other organs, pri- marily the General Assembly, and by the individual member states, Furthermore, the Charter provides safe- guards against any act of nullification by a permanent member which could result in temporarily paralyzing the Security Council. I have referred to the general obligation of article 1 to take collective action against a threat to the peace, or breach of the peace. This obligation exists, whether or not the Security Council acts. It could be carried out through a recommendation by the Gen- eral Assembly directly to the member states to take such action. There is also article 61 which specifically reserves the right of col- lective, as well as individual, self-defense against an armed attack, in the event of any failure or delay by the Security Council in fulfilling its responsibilities. Any or all these provisions of the Charter could be drawn upon and used as the basis of those ultimate safeguards in regard to collective enforcement that the control treaties must include. I emphasize the word “collective,” for individual self-defense is not the answer that we seek. They should be explored and thoroughly discussed.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD In so great a matter as the control of atomic energy to insure ite use for peaceful purposes only, and control of other major weapons of mass destruction, the great na- tions should be ready and willing to apply the obligations and use the powers of the Charter. That means agreement on a system under which international controls are so effective that violations can be surely detected and corrected before they endanger the peace. In addition, however, it is essential that full provision be made for collective enforcement of the law against any nation whose viola- tion is such as to constitute a threat or act of aggression, without that nation being able legally to protect itself from the conse- quences of its crime. The Congress of the United States has acted specifically with respect to this prob- lem in section 10 (a) (1) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1946, which reads as follows: “That until Congress declares by joint reso- lution that effective and enforceable inter- national safeguards against the use of atomic energy for destructive purposes have been established, there shal] be no exchange of in- formation with other nations with respect to the use of atomic energy for industrial purposes.” The report of the Atoni- Energy Com- mission and the General Assembly's resolu- tion or the regulation and reduction of armaments represent enccuraging progress in the direction of agreeing on the essential principles of such a system. But an im- mense amount of further negotiation, ex- ploration, and study of the problems, and all of the drafting of air-tight treaty provi- sions, remain to be accomplished in the Se- curity Council] and the Atomic Energy Com- mission. The Unitea States stands firmly in sup- port of the principles embodied in the General Assembly's resolution and the rec- ommendations of the Atomic Energy Com- mission to the Security Council. In our concern with these problems, we can never forget that no matter to what degree w> perfect the provisions of the law against war and for enforcement of the law, this alone will not bring the certainty of abolition of war. The ultimate sanction of law does not reside in treaties or constitu- tions or in anything written upon paper. It resides in the hearts and minds of the peoples of the world. By using and developirg the Charter of the United Kations to the full, mankind can meet the great challenge of our times, provided the dictates of the public con- acience give life and force to the law of na- tions. As we use and develop the institutions of the Unived Nations to the full, we will gain the experience in cooperative action, and the fuller understanding that will habituate the nations to living and working in peace together for the common welfare. To that goal, with patience and firm deter- mination, let us dedicate ourselves. Lincoln Day Address by Hon. Dwight H. Green, Governor of Illinois EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. C. WAYLAND BROOKS OF ILLINOIS IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, February 7, 1947 Mr. BROOKS. I ask unanimous con- sent that there be printed in the Ap- pendix of the Recorp a very able address delivered last night by Gov. Dwight H. XCIII—App.——29 Green, of Illinois, at the Lincoln Day banquet sponsored in Washington by the Republican Members of Congress. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Thank you all for this opportunity to join in the tribute of the Republican Members of the Congress and the Republican women of the District of Columbia, to the humblest, the greatest, and the best beloved of all the heroes of our Republic. This is the seventh year in which, as Gov- ernor of the State of Illinois where Lincoln laid the foundations of his service to our country, it has been my privilege to par- ticipate in ceremonies honoring the anni- versary of his birth. Always on these occa- sions I have a feeling within me which I think is best described in Kipling’s famous words of the Recessional, “an humble and &@ contrite heart.” I cannot hope that any words of mine can properly measure the glory of Abraham Lincoln; I know that no words are needed to tell Americans of his immortal work, which preserved our Union and advanced the cause of liberty and opportunity and tolerance throughout the world. I can only hope that all who are gathered here, and who are listening in the radio audience, can be as aware of the nearness of Lincoln as I am on these occasions, and particularly in our annual Lincoln Day ceremony at Springfield, when we lay a wreath upon his tomb. Certainly there is no more fitting place to honor Lincoln than here in Washington, where he guided our Nation through the greatest crisis of its history, and where he laid down his life for his country, and it is altogether proper that the tribute is arranged by the Members of Congress, to which he himself came as a new Member of the House of Representatives 100 years ago. I am par- ticularly glad that the celebration is ar- ranged by members of the Republican Party. Lincoln, indeed, belongs to the ages, and to all men of every age, yet the first Re- publican President always will be the spe- cial hero and the source of inspiration for the party which gave him to the Nation. In these days, when party service is too often looked upon as something less than patriot- ism, it is well to remember that LincoJn was a product and an exponent of our party sys- tem. Just as the Republican Party probably would not exist today if it had had no Lin- coln, just as surely he never would have been President, and the course of history might have been sadly altered, but for the ardor, the enthusiasm, and the effective political work of the Republicans of his day. The record shows that Lincoln was a good party man. In the old capitol of Illinois at Vandalia they still show you the window through which, legend says, the long-legged Lincoln vaulted in order that no quorum should be present for the adoption of a measure which his party opposed. In Con- gress, he was a good Whig and, as President, he was a good Republican, In the fateful days in which he assumed the Presidency, he gathered into his Cabinet the leaders of his party, even those who had most actively and bitterly opposed his nomination for the Presidency. I emphasize that point to remind all Ameri- cans, and particularly young men and women who may wish to honor Lincoln by doing their full duty as citizens, that under our American two-party system effective citizen- ship begins with active participation in the political party of their choice. To every student of American history—be he the. most learned professor or an amateur reader—comes the great realization that the tragedy of the assassination was that it re- moved from the American scene the wisdom and mercy of Lincoln in the difficult days of postwar reconstruction. A449 The task of “binding up the Nation's wounds,” as Lincoln described it in the sec- ond inaugural, and restoring real peace and prosperity to a war-ravaged and divided country, called for both an uncompromising devotion to fundamental principles of liberty and justice and an almost divine spirit which could look upon a vanquished enemy without malice, and see in every man—friend or foe—the image of his God. Lincoln had both of these attributes, as few mortals do. Had he lived, the story of reconstruction might have been very different. Today, we are on the threshhold of an- other period of reconstruction—the recon- struction of a war-ravaged world, divided by hates and fears—and the reconstruction of our own American life, disturbed by conflicts resulting from that struggle. For the solu- tion of these difficult problems, we must. find the guidance and the inspiration for Lincoln- jan conduct in the study of the works of the Great Emancipator. The fine words of the Covenant of the United Nations, and all the elaborate ma- chinery of its operations, will only mock our hopes for lasting world peace unless we get back to firm allegiance to the moral philos- ophy of the historical documents which are signed simply, A. Lincoln. It is impossible to imagine the Lincoln who believed in the letter and the spirit of the Constitution doing what wae done at Yalta or Potsdam. We dishonor the memory of him who said, “This Nation cannot exist half slave and half free,” when we try to organize the world on that basis. When we give secret or tacit consent to the permanent enslavement of prisoners of war, taken in battle by us and our allies, and when we subscribe to the abolition of national freedom, the suppres- sion and persecution of religion, and mass exile and starvation of peoples in Poland and the other countries which have been over- run by agents of the Red Empire—when we do that, we throw out the window the three documents which Lincoln held to be the most sacred things in life—the Declaration of In- dependence, the Constitution of the United States, and the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The way to reconstruction in 1947, as in 1867, is to be found not in the law of “an eye for an eye,” but the nobler law of the Sermon on the Mount. Perhaps at this point some cautious soul would rise to remind us that ours is a prac- tical problem, to maintain friendly relations with a grent and powerful nation. That Is our problem; but have we solved it by the futile policy of appeasement of the last two Presidents, In which we have abandoned the noble principles for which 300,000 Americans believed they were fighting when they laid down their lives in the most terrible war of the world's history? Are we weaker today than in the darkest days of the War Between the States, when Lincoln defiled the mighty British Empire on the issue of its interference in behalf of the Confederacy? We want peace and we shall work for peace. Yet our hope for peace must be our faith in the right as God gives us to see the right, and in the preservation of every military and economic resource of our national strength. Today, as never before, the strength and courage of a free America is the hope of lib- erty-loving men and women everywhere. When we say the preservation of every mil- itary and economic resource of our national strength we must mean all that those words imply. We must mean the full development of atomic weapons until the world has reached a condition of security far beyond what confronts us today. We must mean the prompt acquisition and full equipment of every essential naval and air base to protect the continent of America from attack by any conceivable instruments of modern warfare. We must mean the maintenance and ad- vancement of the American air supremacy which was established during the war.
A450 We must mean the conservation and pro- tection of the economic assets of our natural resources and our industrial system to fit the possible military requirements of our na- tional defense. That must imply the full pro- tection of our world trade by every means essential to guaranteeing adequate supplies of all basic materials not produced in our own country, Specifically it must mean the development of American lines of world air commerce in order that in international avia- tion we shall not be dependent upon the fa- cilities of any other nation, no matter how friendly. Particularly we must not permit the British to monopolize international air lines with exclusive privileges in many parts of the world, for which the British Govern- ment proposes to spend $600,000,000 borrowed from the American people. No more than could Don Quixote, can we correct all the evils of the world, but we can—and must—refuse to be a partner in the perpetuation of wrongs. We will, as we have, spend our money to relieve starvation and acute suffering. Yet it is high time to quit wasting the American people’s tax dollars in vain attempts to buy international good will and in financing the experiments of govern- ments founded on philosophies we believe tu be false and sustained by actions we know to be morally wrong. Above all, we must remember that our first objective in Europe, and all sections of the world, should be to adopt and promulgate policies which will restore justice, order, and decency, so that the sons of the plain people of the United States, whom Lincoln never forgot, shall not be required to stand guard 1 day longer than is necessary over smolder- ing tinder boxes of hatred and despair. There, as I see them, are the fundamentals for an approach to an American policy for world reconstruction. I believe they are the principles guiding the Republican leadership in Congress which has undertaken, so in- telligently and so energetically, to straighten the faltering course of our ship of state, both abroad and at home. I hope they will be the principles which will guide General Marshall in the State Department, and that @ united America may support and advance them. : The Republican Party, to which the people of America turned for relief from confusion and distress last November, has equally grave problems to meet in the restoration of pros- perity and tranquillity to our domestic eco- nomic life. There, again, we shall need the firmness of a Lincoln in adhering to our deep convictions, and at the same time, his kindly and genuine concern for the rights and well- being of all the people. The cornerstone of our Republican do- mestic program, I venture to suggest, must be the speedy fulfillment of our party's pledge for a 20-percent reduction in personal in- come taxes. The fulfillment of that promise will be a boon to every man who works for the advancement of himself and his family, regardless of the amount of his earnings. More than that, it will provide the increased investment capital, the lower costs, and the added buying power which may be the de- termining factor in whether or not the busi- ness recession—about which the economic experts are now arguing—is really to over- take us. Yet there is another aspect to the ful- fillment of that pledge which is perhaps even more important. When the Republican Con- Gress enacts the income-tax-reduction legis- lation, which already is in the legislative process, it will mark an end to the double- dealing and deceit which the American peo- ple have come to expect from their political leadership after 14 years of sad experience with the false promises of the New Deal. The speedy fulfillment of that pledge will be in sharp contrast to the record of the Demo- crats, whose every campaign plank of economy has been mocked by new extrava- gant and wasteful expenditures. The 20-percent income-tax reduction will be proof to the American people that the word of the Republican Party in 1947 is as good as it was when it was voiced by Abra- ham Lincoln. Therefore, with our Repub- lican leaders in Congress, I say to the doubt- ing Thomases and the reluctant defenders of the New Deal philosophy of tax and spend— and elect—the tax reduction can be done, and it must be done. And to that I would add the ominous warning which I sometimes heard from a Hoosier schoolmaster back in Indiana, “It had better be done.” Another principal pledge of the Republican campaign of 1946—to end the governmental controls which were shackling the produc- tion of American industry, agriculture, and labor—also is in process of fulfillment, In- deed, so sound was our logic, and so plain were the election returns, that a sadder but wiser Truman administration had removed many of the controls even before Congress con- vened. The soundness of our position is now proved by the record. Supplies of scarce foods and materials are constantly in- creasing, and the trend of prices is down- ward. In spite of all the wailing forecasts of the champions of OPA, the experts in the Bureau of Labor Statistics now estimate that by the end of 1947 the cost of living in Amer- ica will have declined from 1946 levels by from 5 to 12 percent. It now remains for us to finish the job and to repeal the laws which might permit a future bureaucracy to fasten similar need- Jess chains on our free America. Also, we must separate from the national pay roll the bureaucrats who still remain in offices no longer functioning, or who have fled to tem- porary security on the pay rolls of overstuffed Sections of the permanent departments of the Government. The Republican Party also quite properly has undertaken to deal with the grave perils to economic stability, and even to the health and safety of our people arising from labor strife in our land. Yet in dealing with our complex and perplexed labor relations, we have particular need of following the watch- word of the second inaugural, “With malice toward none.” Perhaps we need to remember that Abra- ham Lincoln said at Hartford, Conn., on March 5, 1860, “I thank God that we have a system of labor where there can be a strike.” Strikes are always an expensive and wastoful way to settle labor disputes, but the right to refuse to work is still the cornerstone of the worker's freedom, In the reexamination of our labor laws, let us be sure that the faults in their operation have been in the laws, and not in foolish rules and obstructive attitudes of those who have been entrusted with their enforcement. Let us remember that when we talk about enforcing labor contracts, we are undertaking to determine who broke the contract which js violated. Let us never forget that under our system of free enterprise, the hope for easy labor relations lies in free collective bargaining between honest employers and honest employees. There has been much loose talk about punitive labor legislation. There is no oc- casion to punish labor. The American Gov- ernment, which is the American people, has no quarrel with the American workers. But there should be effective means to deal with leaders of labor or management who are false in their responsibilities to their members or their stockholders, We must prevent the arbitrary action of ruthless men from causing the paralysis of our systems of transportation, communica- tions, lighting, and heating. Individual workers must be protected from the auto- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD cratic power of union officials, who in certain cases have exercised dictatorial power over their members’ right to earn a living, and even their freedom of speech and political action. Certainly a government which regu- lates industry and commerce to insure fair competition and honest practices should re- quire as much from labor organizations. Let us guard the gains which American labor has made through the trade-union movement as carefully as we guard the wel- fare of the American farmer. Let us never forget that American high wages and the American standard of living provides the greatest market for American producers we have ever known. That market has been built through the years largely by the per- sistent effort of the leaders of American labor. What America needs most today to solve {ts labor problems is a clear realization of the interdependence of labor and capital, which is expressed so often in the writings of Lincoln, He appreciated it so thoroughly because he had been both employee and employer. Indeed, the greatest peril to American prosperity today comes from the Marxian theories which swept the world in the period of the dictators and even permeated so much thinking under the New Deal regime. Those ideologies did not dle with Hitler and Musso- lini. They now govern the economic policies of most of the countries of the world outside America, and we must constantly be On our guard against them here. The Republican Party has no more im- portant tusk ahead of it than the war it hus undertaken to stop the spread of com- munism here in America. Wo must be un- relenting in our efforts to drive the Com- munists from every hiding place in our National Government. We must fight their doctrines which threaten not only our sys- tem of free enterprise, but our American idenis of personal and religious liberty. On that issue our position must be as final as that of Abraham Lincoln on slavery. You will recall that when he called his Cabinet together to read them the Emancipation Proclamation, he told them: “I do not ask your opinion on this. I have decided to issue it.” Finally, in our plans for the reconstruction of America in 1947, we must give the welfare of our veterans the same position of promi- nence which he gave it in the second inaugu- ral. It is still our responsibility ‘to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan.” Urgent as is the need for national econ- omy, we must not stint in our provisions for those who are paying, and through the years must still pay, the price of American victory in the war. We must not stint in the fulfill- ment of the provisions of the GI bill of righte for education and other services to our vet- erans. I think we must be prepared to ex- tend all the benefits of that bill to the brave young Americans who, since the end of hos- tilities, have interrupted their lives to un- dertake the responsibilities of military serv- ice to meet the continuing needs of our country. . Certainly we owe it to the veterans to find an adequate answer to the most urgent and the most perplexing problem confronting our Nation, the housing of our people. The one great challenge which our Government and our free-enterprise system face together is to find the means by which we shall construct, sell, and rent the houses and apartments without which the pursuit of happiness will be in vain for millions of Americans, Yet our obligation to our veterans goes far beyond the individual benefits which we may provide for them. Our basic responsibility is to preserve for them the freedom and the opportunities of our American life, the op-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD portunities which permitted Lincoln to rise from humble and obscure beginnings, through his own efforts, to a position of na- tional leadership and service. The obligation of all of us in every branch of Government is to cilng to the ideals of honest public service which Lincoln preached and lived. We must guard well the sacred heritage which we have received from each generation of free Americans, so thet we may turn it over, safe and unsullied, to the brave generation which protected it on the world battlefields. We shall best honor Lincoln, not by our homage and praise, but by drawing from the inspiration of his words and his martyrdom some share of his faith in America and tte people and a new devotion to our own tasks in the America of today. National Representation for the District of Columbia EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ARTHUR CAPPER OF KANSAS IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, February 7, 1947 Mr. CAPPER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record an able editorial on national representation for the District of Co- lumbia, which appeared in the Washing- ton Evening Star of yesterday. There being no objection, the editorial! was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: THE HEARING WE DESERVE Decision of the Senate Judiciary Commit- tee not to hold hearings on the national representation amendment is understand- able. Volumes of testimony on the subject from past hearings are available. Additional hearings would present little that is new. We have, here in Washington, a glaring con- tradiction of the fundamental principles of our own system of government. We are taxed without representation. We are held to all the obligations of citizenship und de- nied the most valued privilege of citizens. All this is known and d. There aro few men willing to defend it. The simplest and most effective remedy is an amendment to the Constitution, giving to Congress the power—which it now lacks—to confer on the people who inhabit the seat of Government the degree of representation, in Congress and in the choice of a President, that Congress considers wise. There would be no confilct between such an amendment and the wise control, by the Nation, of its seat of govern- ment. The District of Columbia would not become a State. It should not become a State. The District would attain a new and unique status in a Union of sovereign States. Its status is now unique. But the new status would be in keeping with the principles of representative government, whereas the present status is a stigma on representative government. We do not need new hearings on this question, with repetition of so much that has been said before. We need the will- ingness of men, who have the power to do it, to submit the question to the Members of Congress and to the people of the United States and to submit it in the spirit of men anxious to right a wrong. The hearing that should be given now is in the forum of Senate debate. The members of the Judiciary Com- mittee have the opportunity to make that hearing possible. They should have the will to do 80. Economic Nationalism EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. BRIEN McMAHON OF CONNECTICUT IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, February 7, 1947 Mr. MCMAHON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the REcorp an editorial entitled “Economic Nationalism,” pub- lished in the Stamford (Conn.) Advo- cate of January 27, 1947. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: ECONOMIC NATIONALISM It is often stated that American isola- tionism is dead. Maybe so. But its twin brother — economic nationalism —is very much alive, indeed. This is evidenced by the growing debate about our trade-agreements program. Last. November the Government announced its intention “to enter into concerted trade- agreement negotiations with 18 other prin- cipal and representative trading nations for the reciprocal reduction of trade barriers and the substantial elimination of trade dis- criminatione among the nations participat- ing.” Not only are the projected negotia- tions now being challenged in responsible Republican quarters but the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act in its entirety is once again under attack. This act was originally passed, und later extended, over strong Republican opposition. It will not come up for renewal until 1948, and before then it can hardly be repealed over a Presidential veto. But the attitude of the Congress toward the whole subject can seriously hamper all negotiations in the intervening period. On this account, it is well to point out the importance attached by the administra- tion to its program. According to the State Department, it is central to the structure of international economic cooperation; It is necessary to achieve the objectives of the Atlantic Charter and of article 7 of our mutual-aid agreement; it is necessary to strengthen and support the foundations of the International Monetary Fund and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and to pave the way for the kind of economic world envisaged in the Charter for an International Trade Organi- vation, which is to be the subject of dis- cussion at the Geneva conference in April. The device of reciprocal-trade agreements grew out of our experience following the First World War. We had been trans- formed from a debtor into a creditor Nation, with constantly growiny, claims against the rest of the world. The interest and amorti- gation on our foreign advances could only be paid in gold or in goods. We raised our tariffs so as to make payment in goods ex- ceedingly difficult, and we drew gold from other nations in such volume as to under- mine their banking and currency systems. The world sank into a morass of competing economic nationalisms, and the great de- pression was ushered in. We learned a bit- ter lesson, and under the enlightened lead- ership of Secretary Hull we embarked upon @ new course. There is danger that this lesson may be forgotten and that the course we have set may be heedlessly modified. It is quite true, as some have pointed out, that we have had little peacetime experience under the trade agreements already negotiated. But we have had recent and ample proof of the impossi- A451 bility of sanely pursuing a restrictive tariff policy in the face of our creditor position. The devastating effect on our economy of such a policy was convincingly demonstrated in the years of the great depression. Trade agreements have been cautiously negotiated. Insofar as they permit the en- try into this country of a larger volume of varied foreign goods at a lower price, the standard of living of our people is increased. As they are reciprocal, easier access to for- eign markets is obtained by American pro- ducers, and this adds to the general prosper- ity. But above all, they are an essential ele- ment in the development of a well-knit and prosperous world economy, which in turn is the only secure cornerstone for world peace. Accordingly, they further a broad national interest which should outweigh the clamor of every special interest. And parentheti- cally, there is as yet little convincing evi- dence that any special interest is in fact threatened with adverse consequences. It would be tragic if congressional agitation were to interfere with the success of the ad- ministration program. Once again we face & world at peace as a great creditor nation. We have acquired a wider knowledge of the interplay of economic forces. We can ill afford to repeat past mistakes. Address of Hon. Arthur H. Vandenberg, of Michigan, Before Michigan Republi- can State Convention EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WALLACE H. WHITE, JR. OF MAINE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, February 10, 1947 Mr. WHITE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there be in- serted in the Recorp a great address delivered by a great Senator of the United States, the Senator from Michi- gan [Mr. VANDENBERG], the President pro tempore of the Senate, before the Michi- gan Republican State Convention at Grand Rapids on February 8, last. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Rrecorp, as follows: Mr. Chairman, | am happy to greet the militant, forward-looking, forward-march- ing Republicans of Michigan at a moment of both triumph and dedication. It is my first opportunity to thank you for your generous support throughout the last cum- paign when I was unavoidably absent on business for the Nation and for peace. The result required no recount. I thank you from a very grateful heart; and I pledge you every effort within my power to vindi- cate your faith. This also is my first opportunity to present my compliments to Michigan's new, hard- riding, hard-fighting Republican leader for whom the honor and integrity of the peo- ples’ government takes priority over every other trust. I salute Governor Sigler with complete conviction that he will brilliantly serve the State which has so spectacularly ac- claimed him its first citizen. This also is my chance to pay tribute to my Republican colleagues from Michigan in the Congress at Washington. Michigan, indeed, bas come into her own. Five important chairmanships out of 19 in the stream- lined House of Representatives are held by Republicans from Michigan, as is also the
A452 Republican conference leadership; and, in the Senate, I am proud to report that the junior Senator from Michigan, Mr. Fercuson, has made a more powerful place for himself in four short years than any first termer I have ever seen. The Senate’s conscience is in the best of hands when he walks sentry post. I feel sure, Mr. Chairman, that republi- canism will justify its new responsibilities and thus, by its deserving works, will assure America's final and complete achievement of sane, sound, solvent Republican administra- tion in 1948. I hasten to add that this is my only interest in 1948. I charge you to ignore all consideration of localized allegi- ance, if such there generously be, and, when the time appropriately comes, to join freely in the Nation-wide Republican quest for the best available next President of the United States. But having thus set the long-range sights, I prayerfully suggest that we forget 1948 for the time being; that we concentrate on the critical tasks at hand; that we undertake to deliver the goods; and that we proceed on the invincible theory that the best service we can render is the best politics we can play. In these perilous times, which require all the vision and all the courage we can muster, we are once more at Gettysburg with Lin- coln as he pled that government of the peo- ple, for the people, and by the people shall not perish from the earth. Republicanism— now as then—is not an cnd within itself. It is the means to an end. The end is the healthy preservation here in the United States of free institutions, free enterprise, and free men, amid a disorganized and dis- traught world not yet recovered from the shock and wreckage of total war. The end is the restoration of those stabilities which shall rekindle the hopes of all western de- mocracy everywhere that here is the true way of life, liberty, happiness, and peace. The end is the maintenance of this Ameri- can bulwark against all the sinister forces of commun'stic subversion, no matter how plausible their guise, which thrive upon chaos and treachery and confusion, and which threaten not only the freedoms but the very souls of men. The American people have turned to the Republican Party as the means to these ends. We must not let them down. The task is bigger than any party. It is as big as destiny itself. It forecasts not only the kind of a country but also the kind of a world in which we shall live. If we concentrate upon this task we shall find that we have raised standards to which men and women of all Parties will repair. And 80, my fellow Re- publicans, let this be our grand strategy. Let us plan to win because we plan to deserve to win, and because We plan that America wins with us. This should not be too difficult for men of good will, common sense, Lincoln tradition, and constitutional fidelity. Indeed, here at home, there probably is no reason why the people of the United States should not right now be upon the threshold of their greatest era of sustained, mass prosperity. If we quit abusing our illimitable opportunities; if we quit making senseless war against each other here at home; if we quit false theories of fake economics, still dished up by the repudiated peddlers of yesterday's nostrums; if we quit corruption, including corruption of the spirit; if we quit shackling initiative and stifling thrift; if we quit the tyranny of bureaucrats and pressure groups and special interests; in a word, if we quit aborting the American way of life the future is rich with cheer. I take it, Mr. Chairman, that we have a mandate from the American people not to quit ourselves until all the rest of this quit- ting is accomplished. America has the resources. It has every ele- ment for a great and wholesome prosperity. It has this great chance. I sometimes wonder if our people fully realize their relative bless- ings—particularly when they allow them- selves even temporarily to flirt with alien lures or with the phobias of some of our high- falutin domestic crackpots and fellow trav- elers or with the melancholy nonsense of such distinguished, so-called liberals us the top agitator of them all who warned us in 1945 that we would have from six to eight million unemployed in 1946. Let me give you an exhibit which points a mora] to adorn this tale. At the last General Assembly of the United Nations, we had to allocate to each of the 55 member nations its share of the annual budget on the basis of relative capacity to pay. Experts presented an intensive study of the subject and said that the United States has 50 percent of the total income capacity of all these 65 nations. I fought the accuracy of this study as a basis for assessments. But I said to my Soviet colleague and his satel- lites: “If our economic system 1s so good thut 5 percent of the people of the earth have any- thing like 50 percent of all its income capaci- ty, then our economic system ought to be made mandatory for all members of the United Nations so they can catch up with us.” That rankled for about 10 days. Then I got this public answer from my Soviet colleague: “You have put the wrong interpretation on these statistics, they do not testify to the superiority of your economic system, they simply reflect the fact that not one bomb fell on America in World War I and not one bomb fell on America in World War II.” Mr. Chairman, we both were right. On the one hand, it is very necessary for us to re- member that, despite all our tremendous sacrifice and loss in the war, we were merci- fully spared the physical destruction which made a tragic shambles of countless Allied areas—and we are not through with our war responsibilities until we have cooperated in their recuperation. On the other hand, if, even in the presence of these dislocations, the United States with 6 percent of the earth’s population, has even 40 percent of the world's income capacity (and that is the tem- porary figure finally certified), our system of free enterprise and freemen is unanswerably demonstrated to be the best on earth. We would be fools to desert it in any aspect. It must be faithfully nourished and main- tained. And that is what the American people said with their ballots last November. And that is our Republican job. Now, my fellow countrymen, this calls, first of all, for peace—and I mean peace at home. With this tremendous heritage, it is sheer public suicide for labor and capital to be ever at each other's throats; and it is wanton neglect of the public welfare, in- cluding the true welfare of every man who toils, to longer ignore the need for rational progress in the law respecting labor-man- agement relationships. I hasten to say that the surest improvements will be those which flow from voluntary agreements and from mutual acceptance of the axiom that in the long run capital and labor will sink or swim together. Their destiny is indivisible. But some new law seems unavoidably required— not in a punitive spirit of revenge because of recent threats to the whole national life, but in a spirit of prudent preparedness against a repetition of evils which must end for the common good, including the good of healthy organized labor itself. I am thinking, for example, that strikes against the Government or summary strikes against public health and safety, like any other civil rébellion, cannot be tolerated; that jurisdictional strikes and secondary boy- cotts must stop; that unions must be made as effectively responsible for the integrity of contracts as are their employers; that the new monopoly power of labor leadership must be tempered with greater rank-and-file de- mocracy; and that violence and force must be as illegal here as in every other phase of life under law in America. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD I would protect labor’s total right to free collective bargaining—on a two-way, fair- play basis—to the last ditch. I would not retrogress 1 inch. But free, collective bar- gaining will be the more impregnable when it is reasonably mutualized and when it is purged of the excesses which cost it 80 heavily and so dangerously in popular good will, I would seek for labor the highest prac- ticable wage. Our national economy requires it. But I would recognize the fact that high wages must be accompanied by high produc- tion or high prices will continue to nul- lify the net gain and will pyramid to ruin for all concerned—despite reliance too often on fanciful, deceptive, self-serving statistics to the contrary. I should like to hear an authentic labor voice in the United States saying what the seasoned President of the British Trade Union Congress recently said: “We shall have to reexamine many union- trade practices where they tend toward re- striction on production. If high real wages— high purcha:ing power for workers—is the goal our own leadership must preach the gospel of high production.” In my view, that way lies high wages, low prices, and a minimum of frictions. Then if you will add a constant study of the flexible profit-sharing principle—despite its compli- cations and its difficulties—and if we may re- duce work stoppages to a minimum, we may find the greatest good for the greatest num- ber, and we can here perpetuate free enter- prise for freemen under an economic system which is the envy of the common man all around the globe. The advantage, to say nothing of the joy, flowing from the current lull in industrial strife—compared with 113,- 000,000 man-days of idleness from this source last year—is a stimulating sample of the universal importance of pursuing these ob- jJectives to the last attainable degree. Now, Mr. Chairman, let me repeat my theme. The people have told us with their ballots that they want this American way of life nourished and maintained, and this is our Republican job. There can be no doubt this means the earliest possible termination of all wer controls—with rare and temporary exceptions where supply lags far behind de- mand. It means the utmost voluntary re- straint in pricing lest shortsightedness in- vite consumer reprisals. It means the maximum demobilization of bureaucrats and overlords. It means that red tape must be fought as relentlessly as red ink. It means ageressive social progress without state so- cialism—and nowhere has this possibility been better demonstrated, as in public health, than right here in Michigan. It means the vigilant preservation of free com- petition against monopoly. It means a chance for little business as well as big. And certainly it means sleepless battle against the poisons of imported Communist subversion which gnaws not only at our livelihoods but also at the very foundation timbers of the Republic. It means, also, an end to waste and ex- travagance in Government; an end to the morass of deficit spending; a beginning of sound fiscal policy which reduces expendi- tures, public debts and taxes—each in its own time and place. The President's budget of $37,500,000,000 is timid medicine. It re- quires major surgery. It would mean that in our third postwar year we shall be spending 88 percent of our wartime maximum, By contrast, in the third postwar year after World War I, expenditures had fallen to 19 percent of the wartime level. Further, the proposed $37,500,000,000 expenditure com- pares with only 13 billions in the last prewar budget of 1940 and is 4 times our budget in 1939. Such comparisons make a mockery of the President's budget, and suggest a con- genital hang-over from the reckless New Deal yesterdays when a dollar too often was just something to print instead of something to earn,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The Republican pruning knife is out and sharpened, It must not cut at the expense Of adequate national defense during this oritical era when there are still great powers which think only in terms of force. It can- not cut at the expense of our veterans. It must not be Shylock's knife. But it can and it must cut at the expense of every dis- pensable expenditure in the vast and still swollen Federal machine. The benefite must go, first, to a reasonabie reduction in the public debt which is a priority mortgage upon everything that any of us own or hope to own; and then it must go to reasonable relief for the hard-pressed taxpayer particu- larly in the lower brackets where the in- creased costs of living have imposed a par- ticularly cruel burden. Republican administration cut the na- tional debt 40 percent in 10 years after World War I. Republican administration also cut the peoples’ taxes. Yes; and it is signifi- cantly worth remembering that every time the rates went down the resultant revenues went up. I venture the belief that the country this year will enjoy sound, fiscal management for the frst time in fourteen prodigal years. Now, Mr. Chairman, I should like to sub- mit a few swift paragraphs on a few other matters before coming to my final and most important theme of all. I should like to say that the Republicans in the Senate have insisted upon maintain- ing the famous Truman committee for the impartial and implacable investigation of war frauds, despite the united opposition of our political opponents who sought to de- tour this chastening justice into other hands. It is my view that the American people want a complete and relentless audit of the $400,- 000,000,000 spent in the war years; and one of their mandates to us is to see that the guilty, if such there be, shall not escape the retribution due those who took illicit toll of our sacrificial flesh and blood. That’s what jails are for. Then I should like to say, Mr. Chairman, that we Intend to do something about this scandalous portal-to-portal outrage which violates every American concept against ex post facto laws; which abuses the legislative intent of Congress, not a man of whom re- motely contemplated any such perversion when the Wages and Hours Act was passed; which threatens the solvency of many a busi- ness and the jobs of its employees—to say nothing of the Treasury of the United States. Imagine what labor would say if the courts, in a reverse situation, were to find some ex- cuse for employers to go back over the years and recapture some of the wages paid upon jobs long since finished and forgotten. The principle of the thing cannot be allowed to stand if any sort of a stable economy is to save America. Again, Mr. Chairman, I should like to say that it is the Republican purpose at this ses- sion to initiate studies which shall lead to a liberalization of coverage and benefits in old-age insurance on a pay-as-we-go basis. This involves elementary, humane, and de- cent fair play for those who are paasing into sunset years which must not be poorhouse years. I should like to say that we are urgently seeking ways and means to straighten out the housing mess. Also I have no doubt that we shall en- thusiastioally give the Michigan Legislature a chance to enthusiastically approve a con- ‘Then, Mr. Chairman, I should like to take to make one other sugges- I wish tt might make ble poll-tax legislation, against antilynching legislation, and against the FEPC, although T have consistently supported all of this leg- islation without a break from start to finish. Tt was an unmitigated lie. Probably it did no harm. That is beside the point. It was a@ filthy fraud upon the electorate. To the credit of some CiO leaders with whom I have discussed the matter, I hasten to say they agree that any such bald perversion of facts ought to be stopped. I do not mean these were the only offenders. There are plenty of others on all sides. Nor would I for an in- stant curb free speech. Nor would I fail to realize that certain latitudes of the imapina- tion are a traditional part of our campaigns. But for the sake of decency and honest elec- tions I wish you could find a way to put de- liberate, self-confessed, political libel and slander out of business. And now, Mr. Chairman, I come finally to the subject dearest to my heart and to the heart of the Nation and the world. I speak of something which utterly transcends poli- tics. I speak of peace. I speak of stopping World War III before it starts. I speak with what I hope is justified pride in a record of Republican cooperation which has done its full part in making possible united American foreign policy in pursuit of peace with justice in a free world of freemen. If Republicanism is true to its best instincts, this cooperation will continue to the last practicable degree. None of us can face the facts of life and deny to science the grim and sanguinary credit for such progress in the bitter arts of cruel mass destruction that another total war—measured perhaps in minutes instead of months—would almost literally consume the earth. Time and space and distance no longer matter. Pearl Harbor ended one era. Hiroshima began another. Therefore none of Us Can face the facts of life and deny that no nation hereafter can defend its peace alone. The peaceful nations of the world must de- fend their peace together. They must cove- nant in advance against the aggressor of to- morrow. In our own enlightened self-interest we have helped to build the United Nations, and for the sake of our own children we must give it all our strength and all our prayers. I have no illusions regarding ite sufficiency. It needs growth, improvement, and power. But neither have I any illusions regarding its indispensability. Already it has tempered many a situation which, under the old order, could have flamed into the racing pratrie fires of conflict. It is the world's safety valve. So long as it works, the world’s bouers will not blow up. So long as we keep controversy in the council chamber it will not graduate to battlefields. Under the auspices of the United Nations we hopefully approach the beginnings of world disarmament. Our own American po- sition ts clear. We shall not disarm alone. We shall not trust to example. We shall not repeat our mistakes of 265 years ago. We shal] take no “sweetness and light” for granted behind the iron curtain which still blacks out great sectors of the earth. We do not intend to be at anybody's mercy; nor do we intend to emasculate our author- ity with those who atill think in terms of force. But we will joyfully match the utmost limits of disarmament to which other great powers will go, if there be summary disci- plines which guarantee against bad faith. I repeat, however, that this cannot happen in ambush or on a one-way street. So, too, with atomic bombs. We monopo- lise the secret for yet a few more years. In the greatest exhibition of international good will since time began, we are prepared to abandon this advantage if, as, and when all the world ts prepared to outlaw the de- structive use of atomic energy for keeps; if, as, and when this renunciation is pro- tected by totally and provably competent inspections and controls; if, as, and when the world in general—and Soviet Russia in particular—agrees: to swift and conclusive A453 punishment which shall stop treachery at its source. This is our price; and the price must be paid. We shall not trust alone to fickle words. Too many words, as at Yaita and at Potsdam and in Poland at this very hour, have been distorted out of all pre- tense of integrity. We ask nothing for our- selves. We ask everything for peace. The record, Mr. Chairman, stands clear. We plan no conquests against any other power on earth. We are no shadow of a threat to any peace-loving land. We shall no longer condone or appease the conquests of others. We shall maintain maximum na- tional defense until alternative reliances prove their dependability. There are dead- lines in our ideais which ali the world must come to know we shull never again desert. To this end we must always say what we mean and mean what we say. We will live and let live in this world of rival ideologies, if we are allowed to do so. For the sake of all these objectives, Mr. Chairman, we must faithfully sustain all sound efforts, both economic and political, to make collective security succeed through international co- operation, international law, and interna- tional good will in behalf of peace with jus- tice in this wrecked and mangled warld. Anything less would be treason to our own self-interest. I hope we shall make it plain to an earth which craves our moral leader- ship that no change in American adminis- trations will dilute these fidelities. As an American first, and then as a Republican, for myself, I take this pledge. Ladies and gentlemen of the convention, it has been a great joy for me to have been able, at long last, to come back to home sweet home with these greetings to my fellow citi- zens who have been so generous to me in my absence. I congratulate Republicanism upon its reborn vigor and vitality. I congratulate you particularly upon your magnificent sweep of victory in Michigan. I congratulate Re- publicanism upon its opportunities—and then upon its destiny when we make good. Soon we shal] be celebrating our dedica- tion to the memory of the greatest of all Republicans—the immortal Lincoln—on the approaching anniversary of his birth. If we may catch some measure of his spirit, of his dedication, and of his pattern, we can deserve the good opinions of mankind. God willing. this is our great chance. A Plan To Prevent Depression EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FRANCK R. HAVENNER OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 10, 1947 Mr. HAVENNER. Mr. Speaker, I am in receipt of a letter from Mr. Paul F. Fratessa, prominent attorney at law of San Francisco, Calif., in which he en- closes a copy of an article which he has written entitled “Positive Prevention of Depressions.” For many years Mr. Fratessa has made a study of the American economic and financial system, and he has asked me to bring his conclusions to the attention of the Members of Congress. I am comply- ing with his request under permission to extend these remarks in the Appendix of the ConeRrssiowaL REcorD. Mr. FPratessa’s article is as follows: POSITIVE PREVENTION OF DEPRESSIONS (By Paul F. Fratessa) Depressions can be eliminated, but only if we work from the bottom and reconstruct
A454 our entire capitalistic systems. We must provide the necessary mechanics to sustain the entire population and thereby produce conditions which will wipe out communism forever. The cause of our economic difficulty is the failure of the capitalistic system to deliver sufficient purchasing power to every person who is in need of purchasing power. The theory of profit is sound, provided the profit (which is added to the cost of production and distribution) is not locked up in a safe- deposit box. At present it goes completely out of reach of some consumers who really need the purchasing power it embodies, be- cause we have failed to take the precautions to see that it is actually returned to the consumers who can keep it in circulation. When industry as a whole thinks it has created a profit and deposits it in a bank, that profit is to all intents and purposes locked away in a safe-deposit box. For a sound economy all such profits should be immediately put back into circulation, or the equivalent in new credits. Unemploy- ment could not exist if such a course were universally pursued. We have about 45,000,000 families in the United States today with an average of 3 to each family. No one will question that it requires at least 8800 per month to maintain a family of 3 at the present cost of living. This means 300 times 45,000,000 or thirteen and one-half billion dollars per month as a minimum income to sustain our population. Anything less means “want in the midst of plenty.” Every person willing and able to work should be able to do so at an anual living wage, but labor must understand that we must all prosper together, One group should not take more of its just share, which is true of all those who make a living from profit. When labor, through strikes and Jock-outs, forces wages to rise inordinately, it also forces up the cost of living to the detriment of a vast group of s0-called white-collar workers and helpless people dependent upon a fixed income. This creates as definite an injus- tice as anything which could be done by capitalism. Profits must always be reason- able and this principle applies to labor as @ commodity exactly as it applies to more tangible merchandise. Those who cannot work through no fault of their own should be provided with a liv- able income; otherwise it throws our entire economy out of gear. Common sense dic- tates that we should stop quibbling over this question and proceed to determine the fact by setting up the machinery which will de- liver the proper income to all potential con- sumers, then communism will disappear. We must make our choice—either subsidize all industry, including agriculture, in order to guarantee them a reasonable profit so that they can pay a living annual wage to all workers without this continual strife; or, subsidize all low-income groups. At pres- ent we are paying siibsidies in various forms: Newspapers and magazines are being han- dled by the post office at a loss; banks are collecting interest on bonds which cost them but a book entry; certain farmers, air lines, and steamship companies are receiving aid. If our present subsidies are justifiable, then @ general subsidy for the purpose of putting an end to the quarrels between capital and labor is more than justified. Where is the money coming from, you will ask. Where did our present money come from? We, the people, as & whole, have, through our sovereign power, created some of it and the rest was created by our banks through power delegated to them by Con- gress in violation of our Constitution. When enough people understand this truth, the mystery of money will disappear, and then we can elect men to office who will act for the common good. We then can punish the profiteer as profiteering is the cause of the @eclining value of our dollar. When Congress rectifies this mistake of allowing the private creation of money, every State in the Union would then pass the necessary legislation and take over the op- eration of every function required for the common good. When the people use their own money, there will be no interest charge attached to it, and every State could be fur- nished with new credits by the Federal Gov- ernment so that they could keep their budgets balanced, and at the same time make proper provision for the entire population irrespec- tive of amount. Congress could make a condition precedent requiring every State to pass legislation that every man shall do his just share of work in producing for the common good and re- ceive just compensation. Each State should regulate the profits and prices in the same manner as we now regulate our public utili- ties and thus completely control the cost of living in order to determine what constitutes @ livable income for those who cannot work through no fault of their own and a just living annual wage for those who are able to work. Congress can do this without taxa- tion—at least for several years. This would only increase the size of everybody's bank account. To do this, Congress must first exercise the right it has to purchase the Federal Reserve System from private owner- ship. This action would enable the Treasurer of the United States to issue noninterest- bearing certificates and deliver them to the Federal Reserve System to be monetized, all for the cost of bookkeeping. Our public debt could be wiped out, which would still further reduce the cost of living. This one act alone would forever remove our economic shackles. Our States, having assured to industry and agriculture a reasonable profit, to the worker a living annual wage, protection against profiteering, there can no longer be any fear of inflation which has always been the cry of free enterprise each time we desire to correct the existing wrongs in our monetary system, When our national debt, in fact, all public debt, has been wiped out by having the own- ers of the bonds deposit them as cash in their own bank accounts, such a program will make all government the real servant of all the people. We know that local government re- sponds more promptly to the will of the people, and for that reason the Federal Gov- ernment should only do the financing and withdraw entirely from every field which can be better handled by our local governments, At the present time, due to lack of proper administration, too many are drawing unem- ployment benefits. This is the fault of the system which fails to supply the job, but instead permits the benefits to be paid while there is work to be done. When we have a general subsidy for all operations, the banks can be called upon to see that all social benefits are paid to the right people and only to those who are justly entitled to them. If we abolish Federal] taxes completely for several years, our bank balances will then be so large that we can abolish all local tax- ation and adopt one method for all purposes, which again would further cut the cost of living. Congress can levy a tax once a year upon all bank accounts, allowing the local tax authorities to collect it, turn it over to the State for distribution to the Federal, county, and other political subdivisions. This plan would necessitate the issuance of new money once a year in order to collect the tax on the outstanding money, as well as the money in the bank, thereby preventing hoarding and counterfeiting. Our foreign transactions can be simpli- fied. Every nation in the world now owes us money, which it cannot pay unless we ac- cept goods or send travelers to those coun- tries to spend their own money. Our Gov- ernment can sell money orders to those who Gesire to travel, which would be honored by APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the foreign countries if they, too, owned their central bank of issue, as herein pro- posed. Under such an arrangement, every government would be in a position to pay the shipper for all materials and goods sent to any foreign nation and a record of the trans- action be made by some division of the United Nations. This would mean more em- ployment for the shipping nation paid for by its own government. No nation should al- low the shipment of any item to another nation without a request from the buying nation. It is sheer nonsense for any nation to import goods which can be manufactured at home, thus creating unemployment. All raw materials in any nation should be ac- ceasible to every other nation upon request. National boundary lines have been estab- lished without any consideration being given to the location of raw materials, which has been at least one of the causes of war between nations. We must recognize this as one world with every nation and every individual being entitled to their just share of whatever is required for their existence—otherwise, there can be no peace. God has provided we must distribute ac- cording to his will, so that all may live with- out fear of one another, in complete security, by making every government the servant of all the people and not of a few groups who have been controlling our economy. Pope Leo XIII understood this principle 50 years ago and issued an admonition to the industrialists regarding it. Had this ad- monition been heeded, socialism and com- munism would be unheard of today. We recommend to the attention of all earnest thinking people, the Report of the Vancouver Board of Trade of British Columbia; also Out of Debt, Out of Danger by Jerry Voorhis, former Congressman from California. Let us seek, not to patch up the old ma- chinery which has failed us so many times already, but to create new implements to meet the needs of the modern world. Un- less we do this, we cannot prevent the next depression which will overshadow any finan- cial calamity we have ever known. Memorial to Jewish Children Slain in Europe EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. OWEN BREWSTER OF MAINE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, February 10, 1947 Mr. BREWSTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there be inserted in the Appendix of the Rrcorp @ statement regarding a children’s memorial forest in Palestine, a gift of America’s Christian children in memory of a million Jewish children slain in Europe. There being no objection, the state- ment was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: CHILpren’s MEMORIAL Forest IN PALESTINE— Gurr or AmMERICA’s CHRISTIAN CHILDREN IN Memory or 1,000,000 Cuutprrn SLAIN IN EuRore History has not recorded a tragedy equal to that which befell the Jewish children in Europe. Between September 1, 1939, and May 10, 1945 (VE-day), the Nasi mass mur- derers cruelly put to death more than 1,000,- 000 boys and girls, hopeful and like our own. ‘This criminal slaughter of the innocent was carried cout methodically in concentration camps by starvation, medical
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ul a , | 3 Hi ; i si Af 7 i i? wh i 4 i i victims nor our freak-ciown of Christian It seems mest appropriate therefore that Christian Ameriea be given an opportunity to express a sense of bereave- ment and at the sme time a high resolve : gf : gift of the Christétan children of America tm memory of the Jewish children who were siam during the retgn of hate in Europe. This is the great and living shrine in the planting of which al! Christians are invited the tragedy which we seek to memorialize. Situs’ fm the hills of Galllee, on the where our Saviour trod and taught, the children’s memortal forest will be an everlasting monument to the souls of martyrs and a testimontal to the keen and pulsating conscience of America. i Que of the brightest chapters tn the dark record of the war yours is the rescue of some of Europes Jewish children. This number was, ales, too small. The life-eaving work was facilitated by the sand dunes into thriving cittes, swamps and wastelands into flourishing settlements. Isaiah's prophecy that the “desert shall blos- gom as the rose” is coming true, Christians who love Palestine because it was the home- land of Jesus have an opportunity now to help make it not only more habitable for the descendants of His people but also beautiful and productive for all mankind. Since VE-day hundreds of surviving chil- dren have arrived in Palestine, but many more still remain in Europe, living only with the hope of eventually going to their home- land. Once there, these children are cared for in special training centers and agricul- tural settlements where they are reared in a free, happy. self-reapecting way of life. The children’s memorial forest will serve every hood home of Jewus. “a TAME PLANTED BY SrezaMs oF WaétEn” ouily plants the trees but exercises vigilant oare over them. During the tast 45 years the Jewish people have planted more than 60 forests compris- ing many miiltons of trees. Notable among these 1s the George Washington Forest Planted in 1982 on the occasion of the bi- centennial anniversary of Washington’s birth and situated at Kfar Ha’Choresh in the hills of Galtiee. During the centuries since the time of Jesus all ancient forests of Palestine were destroyed. The early Jewish pioneers found @ treeless land and their first act was to plant trees. For the tree has a vital and canstruc- tive purpoge to serve. It conserves the soil, converts uncultivabie areas into fertile fields, geciaims malarial swamps, prevents soil ero- sion, beautifies the landscape, and provides parks and playgrounds for the youth. The chiidren’s memorial forest will com- Prise the kind of trees familiar to al] readers of the Bible. Here they are pictured with their names. When the prophets and seers of the Bible ecught a fitting symbol to por- tray a righteous cause or an upright man, they were likened to a tree. The Pealsnist describes the godiy man as one who “will be like a tree planted by streams of water.” Today, as in antiquity, the tree in Palestine 1s not only a symbol of growth, but an essen- tial of life and hope. Through the memorial forest Christians will give life and hope to a suffering people. CHRISTIAN LEADERS SUPPORT THE PROGRAM The chitdren’s memorta!l forest fs the ful- fillment of a wish—widely expressed through- out the country—for some concrete way in which Christians might give expresston to their feelings of horror at what happened in EZurope, and to their hope for what Paies- tine may mean to the Jews of the world. This project was originally the suggestion of Mrs. Ruth Abernethy, secretary of the 8t. Paul Chapter of the American Christian Palestine Committee. Announcement of it has evoked a spontaneous chorus of en- thusiasm and approval from Christian leaders throughout the country. Here are some of the messages received: “I believe in everything for which the chil- dren's memorial forest will stand—the fer- tility of the soil, the beauty of nature, the sacredness of childhood, the supreme value of human personality, and the brotherhood ofman.” (Rt. Rev. Henry Knox Sherrill, pre- aiding bishop, Protestant Episcopal Church.) “The children's memorial forest is not only an expression of sympathy but a condemna- téon of anti-Gemitiom everywhere. May it ever stand as a testimony to Christian good will.” (G. Bromley Oxnam, bishop of the Methodist Church, the New York area.) “The One whom we worship as Saviour and Lord was a Jew who loved the hills and valleys, the streams and trees, and al! living things of His native land. The children’s memorial forest will help restore the barren wastes of Palestine to their ancient beauty and glory and will, at the same time, help to fulfill His dream of security for all chil- dren everywhere.” (Dr. Daniel A. Poling, editor, Christian Heraid.) “As Christian children participate in the children’s memorial forest, they will devetop a new appreciation of the meaning of inter- national cooperation and world brotherhood. This project will not only beautify the home country of Jesus, but provide for the needs of some of the surviving chitdren of Europe.” (Harold E. Stessen, president, International Council of Religious Education.) appropriate expression of sytapathy, but aleo a testimontal to our faith ma new wortd In which all children may henceforth ve tm freedom from fear and A455 “The idea of the children’s meracrial for- eat appeals to me greatly and I am sure will be equally appeating to a multitude of Christians throughout America. Christians think of Palestine as the land of the Jews, and {t is most appropriate that this forest, in memory of Jewish children, should be planted near the boyhood home of Jesus.” (Alf M. Landon.) “The opportunity for Christian Americans to express their horror at the murder of the Jewish children of Europe will appeal to the hearts of all. The children’s memoria) for- est will stand as a new evidence of our dedi- cation to damocratic principles and our belief in the justice and decency in human rela- tionships.” (Harold L. Ickes.) “The Christian women of America will surely support the planting of the children’s memorial forest. It will ever stand as an indignant protest against the ‘murder of in- nocents’ and as evidence of our desire to provide for children everywhere the oppor- tunities of rich and abundant living.” (Car- rie Chapman Catt.) “Christians should share in the redevelop- ment of Palestine, and in what more appro- priate way can this be done than in planting @ forest near Nazareth, as a symbol of our faith in a kindifter, more cooperative, and more brotherly world.” (Dr. Ralph W. Sock- man, minister, Ohrist Methodist Church, New York.) “The children's memorial forest is a mag- nificent conception. Those who cooperate in the planting of this forest will not only beautify and enrich the Holy Land but they will be cultivating the spiritual resources of their own souls.” (Dr. Norman Vincent Peale, minister, Marble Coliegiate Church, New York.) “Christians everywhere should welcome the opportunity to participate in a demonsira- tian of such high social sensitiveness as the children’s memorial forest. It will ever re- main as a symbol of hope for a better world.” (Rt. Rev. W. Bertrand Stevens, Episcopal Bishop of Los Angeles.) “On behalf of the Christians of this area, I can assure you of our cooperation in the planting of the children’s memorial forest in Palestine. Long may this forest stand as Visible evidence of our common spiritual heritage.” (Raimundo de Ovies, Dean, Ca- thedral of Bt. Phillip, Atlanta, Ga.) “Reclamation and restoration by Jewish colonization of old damaged lands in Pales- tine is a worthy miracle of modern times. A children's memorial forest will increase the growing productivity of the Holy Land as a gymbol of conservation of natural and hu- man resources and as a lasting benediction on the children of the future.” (Dr. Walter Clay Lowdermilk, Assistant Chief, Soil Con- servation Service, U. S. Department of Agri- culture.) “I am happy to commend the children's memorial forest in Palestine. Such an un- dertaking on the part of children around the world will serve to emphasize in their own minds the deadly nature of prejudice and suspicion, and will make them all the more conscious of the necessity of creating under- standing and good will.” (Dr. Edward Hughes Pruden, minister, First Baptist Church, Washington, D. C.) HOW YOU CAN HELP You can have a direct part in the planting of the children’s memorial forest in Pales- tine—you, and every other American with whom you will want to associate in express- ing your interest in the establishment of this Atting memorial of a great tragedy. The appeal tugs at your heartstrings; ite spiritual significance is more than worth the small investenent tt . There are several ways in which individual donors, church groups, and schools oan participate: i. Te cost of planting one tree is only 61.50. Buy at least one tree. Piant it in t name or in the name of a child you love.
A456 II. Get others to plant trees, either as in- dividuals or as a special project of any group to which you belong. The children’s me- mortal forest is a manifestation of our will to brotherhood and cooperation. Every person opposing hate and prejudice, as destructive of our democratic ideals, will wish to partici- pate with you. Ill. Group contributions of 100 trees or more will constitute a garden bearing the name of the group. IV. Every Sunday School should plant trees. Here is a unique opportunity for every child to share in the active experience of brotherhood and to practice the Christian faith that they are taught. Some children will wish to plant a tree all by themselves. Others may make the planting of trees in the children’s memorial forest a class project. In that case, the class will be listed as donor. V. Committees are being formed in many cities all over the country. You may wish to take part in this project as a member of the community in which you live. A grove (1,000 trees) named for your community will be the aim of the committee in your city. Give it your cooperation, support, and active assist- ance. RECOGNITION FOR TREE PLANTERS All donors, both individuals and groups, will receive memorial certificates. A facsimile of the attractive certificate which will have lasting significance is reproduced below. In sending in group remittances, please make sure that individual donors and their accu- rate addresses are listed. The names of donors wiil be recorced in permanent and appropriate form within the area of the children’s memorial forest. Their names will thus forever be linked with the trees which will beautify the hills of Galilee. Gardens and groves will be named for the groups, communities, or individuals who pur- chased the requisite number of trees. The Sunday Schools which in proportion to their size have the highest record of giv- ing—not only in terms of trees, but in the number of contributing children—will be ap- propriately recognized. CONTRIBUTIONS All gifts should be sent to Dr. Daniel A. Poling, treasurer, post office box 206, Grand Central Station, New York, N. Y. Children's memorial forest offices are located in Suite 7107, 41 East Forty-second Street, New York, N. Y. American Christian ralestine Committee, 41 East Forty-second Street, New York, N. Y.: Founders and honorary chairmen, Senator Robert F. Wagner, Rev. Dr. Henry A. Atkin- son; cochairman, Hon. Owen Brewster, Hon. James M. Mead, Rev. Dr. Daniel A. Poling; vice chairmen, William Green, Eric A. John- ston, Hon. Fiorello H. LaGuardia, Hon. John W. McCormack, Senator Warren Magnuson, Representative Josgph W. Martin, Jr., Dr. Daniel L. Marsh, Bishop Francis J. McCon- nell, Philip Murray, Mrs. Ruth Bryan Rohde, Hon. Arthur H. Vandenberg, Hon. Sumner Welles; secretary, Hon. Helen Gahagan Douglas; treasurer, Dean Alfange; director, Dean Howard M. LeSourd; extension secre- tary, V. D. Furnad; executive council, Rev. Dr. Carl Hermann Voss, chairman, Father George B. Ford, Prof. Carl J. Friedrich, Rev. Dr. John Haynes Holmes, Prof. Eduard C. Lindeman, Mrs. Walter Clay Lowdermlik, Ed- gar Ansel Mowrer, Prof. Reinhold Niebuhr, Robert E. Smith, Rev. Dr. Ralph W. Sockman; national advisory council, Prof. James Luther Adams, J. M. Blalock, Dr. John W. Bradbury, Hon. Oscar Chapman, Rev. Karl M. Chwo- rowsky, Rev. Dr. Clark Walker Cummings, Rev. Dr. Alber: E. Day, Representative Everett Dirksen, Mrs, Walter Ferguson, Representa- tive Daniel J. Flood, Judge John Gutknecht, Prof. 8. Ralph Harlow, Rev. David R. Hunter, Dean Sidney Lovett, Dr. Walter Clay Lowder- milk, Prof. Halford BE. Luccock, Rev. Dr. Leslie T. Pennington, Senator Claude Pepper, Hon. Frank A. Picard, Miss Daphne Robert, Rev. Dr. Harold Paul Sloan, Senator Elbert D. Thomas, Prof. Paul Tillich, Dr. Howard B. Warren, Prof. Henry N. Wieman, Dr. Mary E. Woolley. Responsibilities of Reserve Officers EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ELBERT D, THOMAS OF UTAH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, February 10, 1947 Mr. THOMAS of Utah. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an article prepared by me for the Reserve Officer magazine and appearing in the Decem- ber issue. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed irf the REecorp, as follows: WHAT I8 PAST IS PROLOGUE (By Senator Expert D. THomas, chairman, Senate Military Affairs Committee) In the moment of the blinding flash of the first offensively used atomic bomb at Hiro- shima the strategic situation of this Nation, as of all nations in this world, was drastically revised. We are yet engaged in the toil of comprehending the consequences of the bomb and the portent of the weapons of war promised for development in this new era, but it is not too early to accept the realiza- tion, in consideration of military matters, that henceforth this Nation’s primary defense is the political defense. The simple fact of our democratic and constitutional structure prevents this coun- try from taking the initiative in war. We might take a threatening position with an array of military might, but we cannot start the fighting. It is quite possible that the aggressor in any future war may achieve such an advantage that any retaliatory effort will be inadequate to turn the tide. Such & concept involves a pessimistic point of view perhaps, but it nevertheless accentuates the need for developing real international political strength to preclude the possibil- ity. And it also defines with clarity and force the assignment devolving upon each of us as members of a peace-loving nation; to provide our elected leaders with the active support essential to their successful nego- tiation with the representatives of foreign governments. The form of our Government as devised by the gifted framers of our Constitution has been preserved. We have had to fight to re- pel threats to our Government from within and without, but we have preserved it by exerting the utmost of our physical strength because we have the proof that it works in our best interest. But there have been in- terilm periods when reaction from such exertion caused a deterioration in the solid- ity of the foundation for our Government. That foundation is, of course, the people, for our Government is yet dependent on the peo- ple it serves. The defeat of President Wil- son's carefully nurtured plan for peace after the first great war may be cited as an exam- ple, despite its controversial nature. That defeat was engendered by a Senate reflecting the will of an indifferent populace hastily withdrawing into the darkened folds of iso- lationism. There is much evidence available today that too many people proudly wearing the title of “Citisen of the United States” have not bothered to acquaint themselves with APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the duties and responsibilities which go along with the title. Each of us should be students, in the best sense of the word, of governmental problems. In this dawning era we must conscientiously attempt to re- main abreast of the issues pertinent to our international relations. That only means accepting the theory of our Government. The Reserve officer is one who has learned at first hand the lesson of modern warfare with its significant implications for the future. Also, he is one who generally holds & position of influence at least in his imme- diate sphere of action. It is my belief that the reserve officer is thereby specially quali- fied and enabled to stimulate interest in his fellow men in the problems of the day. If real interest is generated in those prob- lems public opinion thereon will inevitably find its expression. That opinion lends great weight to the efforts of the diplomats who serve as our international representatives. Public thought was recently aroused by the inci- dents occurring in Yugoslavia and it is not to be denied that the settlement of the issues created there was heavily influenced by the very fact that our citizenry was aroused and that our press reflected a practical unanimity of feeling in this country. I have stated before that men do not steal governments from those who are watchful of their rights. In this conception we can consider such indifference as characterized our reaction from the last war an enemy to our future security. Intelligent study, due consideration, and reasoned judgment will create a potent force for the subjugation of that enemy. As a Reserve officer you will constantly be reminded of your duty to maintain your Knowledge of the methods of warfare. Asa former reserve officer and one intimately connected with military matters I would be the last to derogate the importance of dili- gence in that respect. I would only ask that you more fully discharge your responsibility as the holder of a commission by extending your influence as a citizen to prevent the necessity of again becoming an actively en- gaged soldier. No greater opportunity ex- ists for any of us than to aline ourselves with the founding fathers and to assist, through study and action, in the accom- plishment of the purposes of which they dreamed when they set up this Nation for the benefit of mankind. Let us all remember that no nation on earth is worse off than one whose people refuse to be bothered with the questions that may decide their fate. Congressman Gordon L. McDonough Urges Corrective Labor Legislation REMARKS HON. GORDON L. McDONOUGH OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 10, 1947 Mr. McDONOUGH. Mr. Speaker, I wish to call to the attention of the mem- bership an editorial recently written by David Lawrence in which, in my opinion, he makes a very keen observation con- cerning the proposed labor legislation we shall be called upon to pass. He says that he believes that the labor legisla- tion we pass will be prolabor for the reason that the average man in labor's ranks expressed himself at the polls last
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD November to free himself from the auto- cratic and dictatorial leadership of his individual union. He knew that the votes at the polls would be counted prop- erly where in many instances in various unions they would not be, and for that reason the majority of the members of the Republican Party were elected for the purpose of paSsing not punitive labor legislation but beneficia) labor legislation for the rank and file of labor. I believe the rank and file of labor want jurisdictional and sympathetic strikes abolished; they want secondary boycotts abolished; they want equal rights and obligations for employee and employer by amending the Wagner Act. They want the right to express them- Selves freely, by ballot, without threat or fear; who should be their leaders and whether the questions involved between employer and employee are serious enough to require a strike. Sentiment is growing in favor of permitting employees to determine by free, secret ballot whether they want a closed shop or not. In short, the rank and file of labor are a little weary, yes, perhaps downright disgusted and resentful of autocratic dictatorial leadership who have used them as pawns to promote their own selfish ambitions, Having lost faith in their leadership they are looking to the Congress to protect them and prevent useless work stoppages, which have caused them useless loss of wages and brought misery to themselves and their families. The rank and file of labor want steady jobs, good wages, peace and freedom from pugnacious leadership which has dominated them. They want freedom, and this Congress should see that they get it. The public and nonunion mem- bers want peace, prosperity, and produc- tion and this Congress should see that they get it. IT am convinced that this Congress will pass, and I shall support, corrective labor legislation that will protect the wage earner whether he be union or non- union member, legislation which will protect the public interest and bring peace, prosperity, and production. I wish everyone would read this edi- torial. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include this editorial as part of my remarks. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Cal- ifornia? There was no objection. The editorial referred to follows: LABOR LAWS TO BE PROLABOR (By David Lawrence) WasHinoron, February 4.—Predictions by labor leaders of an era of good feeling be- tween management and labor come like soothing sirup at a time of irritation. But such assurances sre illusory. They have been made time and again whenever Con- gress has become aware of an aroused public opinion and started to legislate a remedy for labor troubles. Then when all threats of leg- isiating at a particular session vanish, labor strife usually is resumed. Naturally, the labor leaders are trying by every means to dissuade Congress from do- ing any legislating at all. The Truman ad- ministration would really like to leave the situation unchanged, although it does spon- sor some unimportant changes. The left- wing propaganda machines are working over- time with the old wheeze that legislation cures nothing, but the moment anybody sug- gests a repeal or amendment of existing laws, which are also “legislation,” there is a howl of protest. The truth is Congress is face to face now with legislating on the labor problem not only because the employers want it but be- cause the rank and file of the workers really want it, too. The biggest issue before the country ts the emancipation of the worker from the totalitarian dictatorships that exist in labor unions. The closed-shop issue is not merely a mat- ter of monopoly whereby the Nation's eco- nomic system can be paralyzed. It is a mat- ter of liberation of the individual worker from the clutches of oligarchies which can determine his livelihood unless he bows to the will of a clique or pays tr:bute to them. If the Americun people want to erect a supergovernment which shall transcend their representative system, they will get it through closed-shop monopolies and a system whereby the employers collect dues and really maintain the membership rolls for the unions at the behest of unions. But the workers themselves are beginning t» talk. Information is flowing into Con- gress which is opening the eyes of Members to the abuses which exist inside labor unions and particularly the undemocratic procedure whereby minority rights are so readily trampled on. The labor issue is a deep-seated one. No proposals have been advanced by anybody in Congress to weaken collective bargaining or to take away basic rights from labor, but the remarkable opposition being manifested by labor unions toward any changes in existing laws is confirming the general impression that vested interests and special privileges die hard, no matter whether on the side of labor or management. What the labor leaders may not realize is that the rank and file are out of sympathy with the high-handed tactics of the inter- national and national boards of unions and that the safeguards in local unions against cxooked use of the ballot and mishandling of union finances are not adequate. The majority in Congress, consisting of Re- publicans and Democrats wh want to pass legislation to cure the labor situation, is by no means antilabor. It is more prolabor than any Congress has been in 20 years, be- cause it is trying to follow the mandate of the last election. The rank and file of the workers found in the secret ballot a chance to protest against irresponsible strike action and the dictatorial conduct of labor unions. It was the votes of labor-union members which brought the Republican Party into power. One Hundredth Anniversary of the Settle- ment of Utah—Official Centennial Pic- ture, Ramred EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ELBERT D. THOMAS OF UTAH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, February 10, 1947 Mr. THOMAS of Utah. Mr. Presi- dent, I ask unanimous consent to have inserted in the Appendix of the RecorD a statement I have prepared concerning the premier of the picture, Ramrod, which has been designated as the official centennial picture in connection with A457 the one hundredth anniversary of the settlement of Utah. There being no objection, the state- ment was ordered to be printed in the REcorpD, as follows: For generations, thousands upon thou- sands of tourists from all parts of America and the world have come to the State of Utah to enjoy its hospitality and scenic wonders. This year, marking Utah's centennial, through the magic of the motion-picture camera, additional millions will enjoy its awe-inspiring grandeur. During the past summer a production unit of Enterprise Studios, of Hollywood, has been on location at Zion National Park, in south- ern Utah, for the filming of the motion pic- ture entitled “Ramrod.” I have been in- formed that this picture, Ramrod, has been designated as the official Utah centennial picture by the Utah Centennia) Commission and will receive its world premier at Salt Lake City on February 21 as part of the Utah centennial celebration now in progress. Because of its spectacular natural attrac- tions Utah is now recognized as an impor- tant production area by the motion picture industry. Mr. Harry Sherman, well-known Hollywood producer, selected Zion National Park as the locale for Ramrod after ex- ploring thousands of miles throughout the West. The production unit was based at Zion National Park Lodge. and the State of Utah cooperated in many ways in the filming of this epic. More than 100 Utahans. resi- dents of Rockville. Springdale, and St. George, found employment while the Enter- prise company was at work. I am sure that I speak for all of the people of Utah when I say that we are delighted that through the eyes of the motion picture camera, millions of theatergoers at home and abroad will be visiting our glorious State during our centennial celebration. Truly, Zion National Park is one of the most mag- nificent of God's creations. Brilliant in hues, sweeping in grandeur and inspiration, its majestic precipices, indeed, reminded the early settlers of the temples of God. Utah has been richly endowed. In addi- tion to her scenic splendor, she has been blessed with an industrious people who cherish their pioneer heritage; mineral re- sources and fine agricultural products have made her economy stabie, prosperous, and progressive. Through the medium of Ramrod many of Utah’s friends will have an opportunity to revisit scenes of many happy hours, and countless friends will be made Enterprise Studios is to be congratulated for dedicating this picture to the Utah centennial. In do- ing so, it has projected our great State to all parts of the world. and has brought us still closer to our neighbors. Statement of Hon. Styles Bridges, of New Hampshire, in Opposition to Confirma- tion of Nomination of David E. Lilien- thal EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. STYLES BRIDGES OF NEW HAMPSHIRE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, February 10, 1947 Mr. BRIDGES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp a statement which I issued to the press this morning
A458 in opposition to the confirmation of the nomination of David E. Lilienthal to be Chairman of the Atomic Energy Com- mission. There being no objection, the state- ment was ordered to be printed in the REcorp, as follows: I am strongly opposed to the confirmation of David E. Lilienthal as Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission. The study of Mr. Lilicnthal’s nomination has gone on side issues, among which is Senator McKr.uar’s personal objection to Mr. Lilienthal. The vital issue is being obscured. The chairmanship of the Atomic Energy Commission is one of the most important administrative jobs ever created in the his- tory of American government. There are few positions within any government as closely relatea to the destiny of the world. It follows, then, that the American people have a right and duty to be absolutely cer- tain of the qualifications of the citizen who is to fill this post. We simply cannot afford to take a chance where there is a shadow of a doubt. Mr, Lilienthal is an extreme New Dealer. In part, I base my objection to his confirma- tion upon that fact. As with all lett- wingers, it is indicated Lilienthal is sympa- thetic towards Russia which is Communist controlled. The report he wrote for Mr. Acheson proposed to turn over the atom bomb and secret to the United Nations, in- cluding Communist Russia, without the safe- guards later insisted upon by Mr. Baruch. It is such a proposal as Lilienthal’s that Russia completely approves and has fer- vently hoped for. In the light of Russia's persistent indifference towards basic prin- ciples of peace, neither America nor the world at large can afford to have an appeaser of Russia as Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission. Mr. Lilienthal has directed the Tennessee Valley Authority, a social experiment, which is a wide departure from the American sys- tem of private ownership of property. Mr, Lilienthal’s personal belief in public owner- ship is so profoundly strong as to tend towards socialism. It is a belief shared generally by extreme New Dealers. At the last election, a majority of the American people repudiated the New Deal and the philosophy of government which Mr. Lilienthal shares, Certainly that repu- diation was intended to include a bar against the appointment of an extreme New Dealer to such a vital post as the Chairmanship of the Atomic Energy Commission. The Senate is asked to confirm extreme left-winger, New Dealer Lilienthal in a posi- tion which would give him almost unlimited power over all atomic energy and many other phases of American life related directly or indirectly to the development of atomic energy. The Commission will have jurisdic- tion over tremendous manufacturing plants and whole communities of American people. The Commission can well become America's and the whole world’s hand of fate. Mr. Lilienthal has a domineering person- ality. He has displayed it frequently, par- ticularly in his ousting of Arthur Morgan from TVA. There is every reason to conclude that he might deal with this atomic power of life and death by the same New Deal method of stretching statutory powers into complete government, if not personal domination. My expression of opinion is no reflection upon Mr. Lilienthal’s character, It is simply a statement of a fundamental difference with his political philosophy which the American people repudiated last November, I believe the Republican majority in the Senate will be subject to the serious, em- phatic criticism of the people if they weakly approve the Lilienthal nomination, America’s future security and the peace of the world are so uncertain that we cannot afford to gamble. There are many out- standingly capable men in America who could serve as Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission and upon whom no doubts have been or could be cast. In this vital hour it is the duty of the President to nominate and the Senate to confirm one of these. For the chairmanship of the Atomic Energy Commission, the Senate should not confirm any man concerning whom there is the slightest doubt. The country expects the Senate to be firm in that position, Preparation for Emergencies EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ALEXANDER WILEY OF WISCONSIN IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, February 10, 1947 Mr. WILEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there be printed in the Appendix of the Recorp the text of a radio address which I delivered yes- terday. This message was in the form of an open letter to President Truman. It was broadcast from Station WPIK, in Alexandria, Va., on the “Charles Parmer From Washington” program. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the REcorp, as follows: An OPEN LETTER TO THE PRESIDENT TIME EXISTS NO MORE My Dear MR. PRESIDENT: The atomic bomb which dropped on Hiroshima blotted out for- ever the time which we formerly used to rectify our mistakes—the mistakes of not being prepared to defend our homeland from attack from without. Since the human brain, especially wherf it is encircled by gold braid, has a tendency to lag and forget, Iam making this letter public, Mr. President, in the belief that an aroused public opinion will demand that you, as Com- mander in Chief, together with America’s military and naval leaders, the Members of Congress, and all of us, take action to protect our Nation of 140,000,000. On behalf of these millions—who have been kept in ignorance of our true world situation and our helpless state—I respect- fully urge the need for more immediate push- button plans for the push-button warfare that will come unless the nations of the earth will otherwise and, particularly unless the Big Five, will create an international organ- ization that will do away with all warfare, The hope of humanity is that UN will per- form that function. But, Mr. President, we must plan for gov- ernment by remote control, and for a con- tinuity of succession if the Central Govern- ment including you and Members of Con- gress are wiped off the map by atomic attack on our Nation's Capital. Your plan doesn’t meet that problem. I warn, Mr. President, there will be no time then—and we in au- thority will be primarily to blame if we do not take leadership now. No one under- estimates the multitude of problems which you face, but national defense must take No, 1 place on your priority. THE RECORD OF REJECTED APPEALS Need I remind you, Mr. President, that those who urge you to do this are not mere flashes in the pan. Long before Pearl Har- bor, I, for one, warned our administrative authorities of this Mation’s needs—and was APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD grandly given the brush-off. Ten months be- fore we were disgraced by Japan I called for the Secretary of State to make a report in executive session to the Senate on the far eastern situation. Proposal rejected! We and the Nation were kept in ignorance. I urged stock-piling of hemp—the War Department ignored my suggestions, to its bitter regret. I presented a measure to give us needed zinc ores and slab zinc—but the administration wouldn’t listen to that until it was too late. I recommended to the Naval Secretary that Great Lakes shipyards be con- structed immediately to produce great fleets of corvettes. My recommendation gathered dust; yet within 2 years we suffered terrible losses in the oil fleet—for lack of small vessels to meet the submarine menace off our coasts. My humble proposals were but a few of many constructive suggestions offered by others, which were also cold-shouldered. It matters not one jot that it was my personal recommendations that were rejected; their authorship is absolutely immaterial; what is important was that sound ideas Were cal- lously spurned. THE SITUATION NOW Well, Mr. President, we are now living in two worlds, ideologically. There stands the Russian Bear, whose official literature pro- claims inevitable conflict between the come munistic and capitalist worlds. Are we ready? We are not, Mr, President. Nor have we even made plans to be ready. Many of the brass hats, fattening on be- lated success, are lolling back in the same mental attitude as that of 1917, and of 1939, After the First World War they were con- tent to improve on “squads right,” sink our battleships, and ignore Billy Mitchell’s warn- ings. In fact, the brass hats tried to dis- grace him for his patriotic warnings * * * then came World War II. Hitler’s chieftains had not been asleep, as ours had. They mechanized and synchronized their forces. Twelve panzer divisions of 32,000 men each, synchronized with Stuka strafing planes, brought 3,000,000 armed Frenchmen to their knees. Oh, yes, I know: we've synchronized and mechanized now. But that’s just a step be- yond the last war. We can’t let it go at that in a shrunken world where time no longer exists. What is sufficient for one era is not necessarily so for another. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF AMERICAN ¥LANS We must announce total preparation to meet any emergency. This will be a warning to any potential enemy that we will not again be caught in a Pearl Harbor sitting-duck posture, This over-all, total war plan which I pre- sent does not in the least interfere with cre- ating harmony among nations, nor will it interfere with operations of a world police force. A United States defense second to none 1s still the best insurance of world peace. If we are to bring peace and harmony to nations, Mr. President, we must not ignore history. We had a League of Nations. It failed. We passed the Kellogg-Briand Pact outlawing war—and war came. Now we would outlaw the atomic bomb, nevertheless we should maintain our national police and fire departments, so to speak, ready to go into action instantly; for our safety and peace. First things come first. Here is a proposal for total defense against over-all warfare which I urge you to spon- sor—not as a party leader, but as an Ameri- can. Announce it to all the world, so poten- tial enemies will know we are ready, that at- tack on us will be useless. The first target in the next war, Mr. Presi- dent, may well be the White House and you, and Congress and us; for a nation whose governing heads are stricken will be thrown into chaos.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD So let’s prevent that. Let us lay plans for government and legislation by television, if need be. Let us have procedure for imme- diate succession of authority and continuity of government if we are killed by atomic at- tack. All this must be done now, for there will be no time in the next war, TOTAL PLANS AGAINST TOTAL EMERGENCY Let us—you, and the Congress—be ade- quate to meet every emergency ana to have plans ready beforehand. These plans should include: 1. The economic fleld: The Army and Navy must encourage decentralized factories, in mountainous and other relatively inacces- sible spots. These must be ready to go into production within a few hours’ notice from Washington. 2. Unification. The minimum we should seek is unification of manufacture, purchase and distribution of supplies for all armed services. Need I mention the need for stand- ardization of shells and other matériel? 3. Personnel: We want no more wagon generals and rowboat admirals. We want Army, Navy, and Air personnel advanced by selection and fitness, men fully equipped for atomic and bacteriological warfare. 4. Appropriations: Necessary as economy is, we must not slash vital appropriations for our defenses, especially for bacteriological, atomic, and guided-missile research and for a world-wide intelligence system superior to that of any other power. 5. Research: Colleges and universities must be encouraged to continue research, particu- larly in the field of pure science; we must have on tap a reservoir of scientists trained in atomic and bacteriological warfare—not for popgun fighting. This means we should have physicians, nurses, technicians trained to cope with diseases which may infect us in the next war—a war which will have no rules. 6. Stock piling: We must have and main- tain in usable condition stock piles of every essential needed by the civilian populuce as well as the military to carry on in event of attack. Espectally basic commodities. Shall I recall our failure, of civilian and military and nival heads, to have adequate supplies of rubber, hemp, zinc—and even hoats—at the beginning of the last war? 7. Housing: The surest way to hold back production is to lack available personnel. If we have decentralized factories, and that is a first essential, then adequate housing facilities must be nearby, ready to move thereinto. 8. Emergency agencies: There'll be no time for setting up Fedcral emergency agencies— this mutt be done in advance; an agency for every conceivable activity must be planned on paper, set up in skeleton form, and from time to time “dry runs” must be held to show the feasibility of details. No bureau- cratic empires, no maze of offices tying each other up in Knots, but streamlined offices designed for split-second decisions. 9. Psychological: Sound trite, Mr. Presi- dent, but we must remind our people that eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. That while the millennium may be around the corner, it is a far-away corner’ to foster our esprit, we should do what I urged in 1939, maintain mental poise, spiritual balance, and morally rearm, while keeping our powder dry. Above all, Mr, President, let me urge again the need of providing for government by re- mote control, and for a continuity of suc- cession, if you in the ‘Vhite House and we in the Congress are smashed off the earth's face in one atomic flash. There is no more time, Mr. President. Sincerely yours, ALEXANDER WILEY. Comments by Hon. Elbert D. Thomas, of Utah, on Article Entitled “The Armed Forces” EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ELBERT D. THOMAS OF UTAH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, February 10, 1947 Mr. THOMAS of Utah. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp a letter, dealing with demobilization, which I wrote to the publisher of the magazine Fortune on August 29, 1946, in connec- tion with an article entitled ‘The Armed Forces,” published in the September issue. Portions of my letter have been pub- lished in Fortune. There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the Rrecorp, as follows: Avcust 29, 1046. Mr. WiLL1aAM D. GEER, Publisher, Fortune Magaztne, New York, N.Y. My Dear Mr. Geer: It happens frequently that I am called upon for comments regard- ing magazine articles on Various topics. By nature I am inclined to make a serious at- tempt at compliance with the apparent spirit of such requests, although I have no real evidence that my comments are ever re- ceived with equal seriousness. At any rate, I have read with much interest the proofs on the article entitled, “The Armed Forces.” which is to appear in the September tissue of Fortune, and I appreciate your asking for my comments thereon. Befitting the standard of Fortune the article is, 1n my opinion, well written. It does seem, however, that it emerged from @ rather narrow avenue of thought. We are now a year advanced from VJ-day and therefore may enjoy a vantage point for appraising the developments which have followed the victory. The most notable of those developments from a national stand- point is, of course, demobilization. In a very real sense demobilization was a retreat, commanded by the people of our country. (That the command had a general source is very nearly stated in the article by ref- erence to the serviceman, his family, his friends, and Congressmen—or that grouping excludes very few in our populace.) Retreat is an important fundamental in military tactics; to be successful it must be an orderly movement, in which circum- stance it differs from a flight or a rout. The very fact of demobilization, ag it has been accomplished in 1 year, bespeaks the success of the operation. Actually it was accomplished with a real measure of dis- cipline and I believe it is deserving of our acclaim as a magnitudinous operation ex- ecuted in order and with dispatch. Cer- tainly it is not deserving of the description, utilized in the article, as a rout. With regard to the personnel difficulties which have accrued to the Armed Forces from demobilization, it is no doubt true that they have been many and great. But they have not been insurmountable. In this connection the lead paragraph of the article employes the example of a naval craft which wallowed helplessly at sea a few hours after beginning its voyage because it was so sadly undermanned. The personnel capabilities were patently evident before that voyage was A459 begun, apparently, and in the absence of explanation that the voyage was compelled by necessity it seems an error in its incep- tion, and not an inescapable consequence of demobilization. Granting its purpose as that of a preface to a severely stated report on the state of our armed forces, the extreme- ness of the example flavored the report a lit- tle too strongly for my taste. The use of the term “bodies,” despite its alleged origin in usage among militury lead- ers, continues an extreme point of view. There was practically an entire conversion of the purpose of our armed forces folluw- ing the cessation of combat, which came with @ suddenness that enlarged the difficulty of conversion. And there was a conversion of the will of the supporting civilian populace, which found expression in the call for the wartime soldier to be returned since “peace” had been achieved. The natural opinion so gencrally shared was that the atomic bomb precluded the danger of further warfare for some time to come, and that it practically guve assurance that the peace treaties would be promptly negotiated in terms of neces- sity. Our military authorities understood the new purpose, as well as it could then be defined. With cognizance of the minimum strength necessary to carry out their as- signments they did, however, devise and carry out a program of demobilization on a scale and at a rate which exceeded the de- mands of Congress, acting as spokesmen for the people. It was obviously desirable to compose that minimum strength entirely with voluntecr soldiers. Because our na- tional character broods anathema for com- pulsory military service once the shooting has stopped it was hardly reasonable to infer that the nonprofessional trained sol- diers could have been held, in any majority, for the postwar tasks. There was the solid core in the service composed of the of- ficers and men who conscientiously and proudly were “regulars,” but their number was too small. Volunteers stayed on to join them, but the means were never developed to immediately attract sufficient volunteers. The replacements who were necessarily in- ducted to maintain the necessary minimum strength of the armed torces were subject to many distractions naturally incident to the transition which were detrimental to thelr training. Also, many of them felt the punitive effect which the draft inevitably tends to produce after it has been in oper- ation over a relatively long period of time. It is to be admitted that many men in uni- form today are ineffectively trained, and some are serving expressly against their will. But the number of good soldiers in the armed forces today is far too great to warrant the hypercritical connotation implied by the use of the term “bodies” in reference to the unt- formed personnel. On the point of matériel it is yet a mat- ter of proof that this country occupies a superior position. The research programs now under way promise our continued re- tention of predominance in the ficld of ordnance. It will be our manifest duty to foster the growth of these research programs and to apply the developments in a manner consistent with our position of dominance among the nations of the world. It is agreed that it is paradoxical that the men who were discharged in such great numbers from the Army and Navy during the past year form the reservoir of manpower which the armed forces are now dependent upon for strength in depth in consideration of the prospect of another war. For at least 2 years, in all probability, it will remain @ reservoir of trained manpower. These men are being cared for in many ways authorized by Congress, and it is demonstrative of an encouraging consciousness on their part of
A460 the necessity for preparedness that so many have elected to assume a formal Reserve status. During the past year much has been done to assist the establishment of our armed forces on a sounder basis than they have previously enjoyed in peacetime. By in- creasing the size of our armed forces and by adopting measures calculated to enhance the attractiveness of the service as a career our forces in the air, on the sea, and those trained for ground combat should be properly repre- sentative of this Nation. It is significant that all of the measures designed for the improvement of the armed forces have re- ceived at least tacit ratification from the peo- ple. We have had such a stern lesson in war- fare this time that the Army and Navy should never again have to suffer the neglect of a disinterested public. The two main tasks confronting the armed forces in the past year were policing and de- mobilizing. The latter task was admirably performed, while the job of bringing defeated countries under peacetime military control, with all of its ramifications has been handled at least satisfactorily, and historians may well find this accomplishment worthy of ac- claim. It was a turbulent year, but the armed forces maintained thelr balance quite well, all things considered. Again I say that I enjoyed reading the ar- ticle, and I am sure that the interest in it for me was greatly increased by your solici- tation of my comments. It would be my preference to discuss such a topic as this in & personal conversation, but in lieu of that possibility I have enjoyed setting forth these few comments here. With best wishes, I am, Sincerely yours, ELBERT VD. THOMAS. America’s Declaration Accepting Juris- diction of World Court EXTENSION OF REMARKS or . HON. WAYNE MORSE OF OREGON IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, February 10, 1947 Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, in the closing days of the Seventy-ninth Con- gress the Senate adopted what was known as the World Court resolution. The’ resolution contained certain amendments, one known as the Connally amendment, and another known as the Vandenberg amendment. The resolu- tion, as amended, has resulted in con- siderable discussion within the legal pro- fession of the country. I received a let- ter from Mr. William L. Ransom, past president of the American Bar Associa- tion, calling my attention to a very scholarly article by Manley O. Hudson, that appears in the December issue of the American Bar Association Journal. As the Senate knows, Mr. Hudson formerly was a judge on the World Court. The article is in keeping with the pre- vious scholarly writings of Mr. Hudson on the problem of the relation of the World Court to international law. . I suppose no one will doubt that Mr. Hudson, now of Harvard University, is considered at least one of the two or three greatest living authorities in the field of international law. Mr. Ransom suggests, in his letter to me, that this article is of such a very high quality that it should be read by the Members of the Senate, and that it would, therefore, be quite appropriate to have it published in the Appendix of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. Therefore, Mr. President, I ask unani- mous consent to have Mr. Hudson’s ar- ticle entitled “The World Court: Amer- ica’s Declaration Accepting Jurisdiction.” published in the Appendix of the Recorp. Iam advised by the Government Print- ing Office that the manuscript of the article is estimated to make three and three-quarter pages, and will cost $266.25. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the REcorpD, as follows: Tuer Worip Court: AMERICA’S D.CLARATION ACCEPTING JURISDICTION (By Manley O, Hudson) Has the United States set wha’. might be- c. ne an unfortunate precedent for other na- tions, in the reservations and conditions which it attached to its acceptance of the jJu- risdiction of the World Court? Judge Hud- son discusses both the gioune gained in the American declaration and the questions which it leaves unsettled for th: troubled time when a provocative dispute may arise. Because of his long and outstanding services to international law and adjudication, his present article will be read and studied by lawyers in all lands. Most heartening news is his demonstratio:r that the Chinese Gov- ernment, in its recent declaration, did not follow the pattern set by the United States, During the past 2 years Judge Hudson has worked closely with an for the association's special committee for peace and law through United Nations. President Truman's declaration by which the United States recognized th. compulsory jurisdiction of the World Ccurt under article 36 of its statute, was deposited with the Sec- retary-General of the United Nations on Au- gust 26, 1946.' The action marks a turning point in American history. At long last it brings the United States partially into line with other states in a significant develop- 'The text of the declaration, as published in the Bulletin of the Department of State, September 8, 1946, pages 452-453, is as fol- lows: “I, Harry S. Truman, President of the United States of America, declare on behalf of the United States of America, under article 36, paragraph 2, of the Statute of the Inter- national Court of Justice, and in accordance with the resolution of August 2, 1946, of the Senate of the United States of America (two- thirds of the Senators present concurring therein), that the United States of America recognizes as compulsory, ipso facto and without special agreement, in relation to any other state accepting the same obligation, the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in all legal disputes hereafter arising concerning: “a, The interpretation of a trenty; “b. Any question of international law; “c. The existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation; “d. The nature or extent of the repara- tion to be made for the breach of an inter- national obligation: “Provided, That this declaration shall not apply to: “a, Disputes the solution of which the parties shall entrust to other tribunals by virtue of agreements already in existence or which may be concluded in the future; or “b. Disputes with regard to matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdic- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ment of international law. Paradoxically, however, the declaration is in such form that it may inaugurate a seriously reactionary development. Great progress has been achieved in the field of international adjudication since the statute of the World Court first entered into force 25 years ago. With an adequate tri- bunal at hand in the Permanent Court of In- ternational Justice, many states showed a willingness to confer jurisdiction upon it. Hundreds of treaties were concluded which e ntainecd provisions adapted to this end, and in the interwar period 46 states subjected themselves to the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court for definite or indefinite periods of time. The Court exercised the jurisdic- tion thus conferred in a substantial number of cases, and without any untoward inci- dent? Naturally, thereforc, when the revision of the Court’s statute was undertaken in 1945, many states were disposed to drop the op- tion left to states by article 36 of the 1920 statute with reference to the recognition of compulsory jurisdiction,» and to make such recognition obligatory for every party to the revised statute. That disposition did not prevail at San Francisco largely because of the opposition of the United States and the Soviet Union, neither of which had become a party to the 1920 statute. LONG STANDING ATTITUDE OF THE SENATE Insofar as the United States was concerned, the reluctance of the American delegation was due to a long-standing Senate tradition ‘ which, over a period of 40 years, had pre- tion of the United States of America as de- termined by the United States of America; or “c. Disputes arising under a multilateral treaty, unless (1) all parties to the treaty affected by the decision are also parties to the case before the Court, or (2) the United States of America specially agrees to jurisdtc- tion; and “Provided further, That this declaration shall remain in force for a period of 5 years and thereafter until the expiration of 6 months after notice may be given to termi- nate this declaration. “Done at Washington this 14th day of August 1946. “HARRY S. TRUMAN.” *See Hudson, Permanent Court of Inter- national Justice, 1920-1942, chap, 21. * Avticle 36 of the 1920 Statute provided: “The jurisdiction of the Court comprises all cases which the parties refer to it and all matters specially provided for in treaties and conventions in force. “The Members of the Leugue of Nations and the states mentioned in the Annex to the Covenant may, either when signing or ratifying the Protocol to which the present Statute is adjoined, or at a later moment, declare that they recognize as compulsory ipso facto and without special agreement, in relation to any other Member or state ac- cepting the same obligation, the jurisdiction of the Court in all or any of the classes of legal disputes concerning: “(a) the interpretation of a treaty; “(b) any question of international law; “(c) the existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an tnternational obligation; “(d) the nature or extent of the repara- tion to be made for the breach of an inter- national obligation. “The decluration referred to above may be made unconditionally or on condition of reciprocity on the part of several or certain Members or states, or for a certain time. “In the event of a dispute as to whether the Court has jurisdiction, the matter shall be settled by the decision of the Court.” ‘This was admitted by Senator VaNnpEN- BERG in 91 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, page 8108 (July 27, 1945).