Evening star., 1947-07-07


president of the
of the Churches David Lawrence.
OF Christ In America, and Repre-
sentative Reed, Republican, of New
York.
Mr.. Taft in his personal capacity
is an expert on trade relations, hav-
ing recently served very efficiently in
the State Department. So far as
his political and economic back
ground is concerned he is perhaps
as far toward the left" as his
brother 4 the Senator from Ohio, Is
to the right"
Charles Taft testified first In his
personal capacity and made an able
witness, and this correspondent
agrees with him on the views pre-
sented, so the point being made
here has no reference to the merits
of the subject under study by the
Ways and Means Committee. 1t
was when Mr.. Taft testified as a
representative of the Federal Coun-
Gil of the Churches of Christ in
America, an organization of Pro-
testant churches. that Mr.. Reed
asked some searching questions.
Asked About Methodists.
He wanted to know how many
members were in the organization.
Mr. Taft said about 27,000,000 but
stated he was not speaking for any
such number He was then asked
NEo{LNIicfc O rf nt the
group and whether they had a
temperance organization ana
whether, in indorsing the operation
of the reciprocal trade agreements
law. they were really familiar with
what had been happening The
witness said he presumed they were
not.
Mr.. Taft said that the Federal
Council at its Seattle convention
passed a resolution about temper
ance activities, but he added: The
churches today in the Federal Coun-
Gil at least do not stand officially
for prohibition" Thereupon Mr..
Reed inquired:
However, did they take an in
terest in the trade agreements with
Canada in 1886 and 1889 by which
they lowered the duty on liquor
that is whisky-from IS per gallon
70 $2.50?" /
Mr.. Taft replied that he did not
think they took any steps. MI
Reed went on to say:
well, you are representing the
y,oI1cf
be speaking for them here. OF
course, it is a loss of revenue OF
almost $1,000 900 as result of low
ering these taxes A very interest,"
ing thing to me isl know the
churches must have some interest
the fact that they have on the
list, over there in Geneva, to lower
still further the tax on whisky,
brandy, gin, rum, and other dis
titled spirits; champagne, vermouth,
and other wines, with certain ex-
ceptions; beer and ale and malt
products. I can't tell to what ex-
tent. Of course, they had no par
ticular referendum, with fine church
organizations and the like, on this
item
Mr.. Taft commented: Their ex-
perience with prohibition has led
them, to a very considerable degree,
to the position that the promotion
of temperance must be an educa-
tional process and it cannot be done
by law-that is my conviction, sir.
Representative Reed then in
quired: They are using this method
of letting in more liquor to sort of
educate people not to use 1t, is that
the idea?"
Seen as Source of Dollars"
Mr.. Taft thought not and that
It was merely source of dollars
to the British" in world trade ex-
change. Mr. Reed promptly put
into the record long list of figures
showing the recent imports of alco-
holic beverages into the United
States.
The incident illustrates how dis
trustful members of Congress are
of statements by committees pur-
porting to represent the views OF
large church organizations. Thus,
for instance, there are members OF
Congress who do not believe that
the recent statement issue4 by the
social action department Of the Ma
tional Catholic Welfare Conference
arguing for presidential veto of the
Taft-Hartley labor bill was ever
submitted to any large group of
Catholics to pass on but represented
the view of handful of left wing
ers" who tried to use the name OF.
a large and splendid organization
to achieve a political action.
This is the kind of danger en-
countered when church units insist
on dabbling in politics. Congress
long ago recognized this trend when
it passed a law which authorizes
the Bureau of internal Revenue to
withdraw tax exemption from any
church organization, religious body,
charitable institution or foundation
which becomes active in attempting
ito influence Legislation by propa-
ganda or otherwise"
When a tax-exempt organization
insists on the right to engage in
political propaganda. the fact that
moral issues are involved does not
immunize the organization from tax
difficulties. Those individuals who
contribute funds, moreover, run the
risk of having deductibility on tax
returns denied them because politi-
cal contributions are not deductible
for income-tax purposes.
There is no need to run these
risks. For there are plenty of
legitimate propaganda opportunities
for clergymen. acting in their in
dividual capacity, to take good care