The Wilmington morning star. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1909-1990, 1945-05-21
Fair Enough

I
II
Editors note-The Star and the News
accept no responsibility for the personal
views of Mr.. Pegler, and often disagree
with them as much as many OF his read
ers His articles serve the good purpose
of making peop!e Think
BY WEsTBRO0K PEGLER
Copyright, 1915, by King Features Syndicate)
The most fascinating political novelty since
the proposed ham n eggs amendment to the
California Constitution has lately sprouted in
the dank fungus beds Of queer ideas in Los
Angeles and Hollywood Ham n eggs, it NAV
be remembered, was Hitlerian proposition
of $1,000 words, a document so long, com
pick and wild that only few editorial writ
ers and lawyers bothered to struggle through
it and understand its portent. Many of the
unions, nevertheless, endorsed it and the COM
munists of course gave it bowling support be-
cause it would have repudiated money and the
public debt, abolished the state and federal
constitutions and placed dictator above the
governor with power to appoint his own sue
cessor.
The strenuous efforts of the intelligent mi
nority of the population, frightened by the
enormity of a plan of dictatorship disguised
as an old age pension, were necessary to de-
feat it at the polls by small margin.
The recent agitation not only in Congress
but among well meaning outsiders for an in
crease in the pay of the members of both
houses has prompted coldblooded sugges-
ton that union organizations might adopt
pet statesmen in both chambers and subsi-
die them to the extent of their present pay
which is $4,000 year. I have inquired of
friend in the Treasury intelligence service, an
authority on most tax problems, and find that
as far as he knows, there is NO law to forbid
the gift or acceptance of such bounty.
The money would be gift in each case
and taxable as such, but raise in pay would
be taxable, under both federal and state laws
in those states having the income tax, where
as the gift in most cases would not be sub
ject to a state gift tax. There would seem to
be no violation of the Corrupt Practices Act
in such transaction, and existing law forbid
ding payments to members of Congress by
persons interested in pending legislation, ap-
parently could be avoided with ease and grace
by persons of the same ethics that dictated
the decision in favor of Sidney Hillman's Po-
litical Action Committee year ago.
The purpose and the entire activity of the
committee were, by any honest appraisal, abb
solutely political and yet cynical judgment
of convenience permitted this group to disre-
gard the obvious, decent intent of Congress in
amending the corrupt practices act so as to
include unions as well as corporations. In one
celebrated case, years ago, member of Con-
gress successfully defended himself against an
Indictment charging acceptance of a fee from
a constituent for his efforts in connection with
pending legislation. Obviously, the only reason
why any union would adopt a congress
man as a protege and give him money would
be that he had proved by past performances,
or had satisfied the union by pledges, that he
would serve its special interests reliably in all
cases. Yet it might be impossible to prove that
the gift referred to any particular issue before
Congress- as the basis for criminal proceed
ings.
second glimpse reveals, however, the
possibility that big business interests too
might play the game of patron and protege.
The United States Steel Corporation or chain
Of retail stores, for example, could not legal
ly make such gift, but group of steel cor
porations or chain store companies could form
an institute or foundation, meaning, frankly
a lobby supported by contributions from the
component member companies, and use its
funds to encourage its friends. And of course
here is the old reliable subterfuge of the hon.
orarium for learned discourses before public
meetings. BY this device, a congressman still
sitting received, a few years ago, about $18,-
300 from corrupt company. later exposed as
such, for pushing legislation for its special
interests
Nv ~ 10 Aiot IiC pOSolO1lty Is new mere |
The possibility has always existed unnoticed.
The point is that this interesting thought has
oeen discussed here at time when Congress
IS demanding raise.
Although the present Congress is the best
since 1888, the fact remains that the legisla-
i've branch, as an institution, now occupies a |
degraded position. 1t has not asserted its man.
hood against the Executive, the Supreme Court
or the unions and if Congress does not soon,
~ positive action, establish its superiority
over the union movement, it may never be
able to do so. This movement has an income
If about one thousand million dollars a wear.
Various union bosses at times have declared
frankly their intention to spend as much money
as might be necessary to elect candidates
pledged in advance to obey orders. They have
elected many such candidates and they have
obeyed orders. Congress can save its own
by passing laws to forbid the
subsidy in any form or guise from any source
and to thwart the leering hypocrisy of the
Judgment which enabled Hillman's group to
Tout the congressional intent of 1914.
Editorial Comment