8328 CON_GRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 8 Robert W. Minnihan, A0975553. Robert F. Morgan, 0806307. Ralph A. Muhich, A097571S. John A. Rogness, A0975897. Carl M. Russell, A0975359. Dasil C. Smith, 0576313. Paul H. Stavig, 0975709. John F. Tracey, A0969834. To be first lieutenants, USAF (Dental) Ashur G. Chavoor, A0959918. John W. Cofer, 0420370. Robert K. Davis, A0959924. Charles Jaslow, A0789320. Vernon J. Sture, A0975820. The following-named person !or appoint­

ment in the United States Air Force, in the grade indicated, with date of rank to be de­termined by the Secretary of the Air Force under the provisions of section 102, Public Law 36, Eightieth Congress (Army-Navy Nurses Act of 1947): To be second lieutenant, USAF (Women'•

Medical Specialist) Barbara L. Northrup, AR2524. The following-named distinguished avia­

tion cadets for appointment in the United States Air Force in the grade indicated with dates of rank to be determined by the Secre­tary of the Air Force, under the provisions of section 506, Public Law 381, Eightieth Con­gress (Officer Pers.onnel Act of 1947):

To be second lieutenants Arthur C. Balke, Jr. Wallace A. Scannell William J. Baugh Carl L. Stoneking William C. Becker Francis A. Swartz Richard E. Cronan, Jr.Lloyd D. Taylor Russel E. Hain FTederick S. Thatcher Thomas J. McKernan Lloyd J. Thompson William A. Rowland Donald J. Torres

Subject to physical qualification and sub­ject to designation as distinguished military graduates, the following-named distin­guished military students of the Senior Divi­sion, Reserve Officers' Training Corps, for ap­pointment in the United States Air Force in the grade of second lieutenant, with dates of rank to be determined by the Secretary of the Air Force, under the provisions of sec­tion 506, Public Law 381, Eightieth Congress (Officer Personnel Act of 1947);

Christoffer P. Bolvig Luther T. Brantley, Jr.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES THURSDAY, JONE 8, 1950

The House met at 12 o•clock noon. Dr. Wilbert E. Benson, Emmanuel

Lutheran Church, Rockford, Ill., offered the following prayer:

o God, most holy, open Thou the channels of wisdom that this day's de­cision may permit Thy will to be done among the nations of this earth, and more particularly in our beloved Amer­ica.

Bless each Member of this House and the constituency he represents. Keep U3 ever mindful of the fact that we are responsible directly unto Thee. Endow us with Thy heavenly grace and the higher patriotism which will enable our Nation to remain ever pleasing in Thy sight.

In the name of Christ we pray. Amen. The Journal of the proceedings of yes­

terday was read and approved. MESSAGE-FROM THE SENATE

A message from the Senate, by Mr. Mc­Daniel, its enrolling clerk, announced

that the Senate had passed, with amend­ments in which the concurrence of the House is requested, a bill of the House of the following title:

H. R. 5943. An act to provide for the erec­tion of a monument at the grave c..: Con­stantino Brumidi.

The message also announced that the Senate had passed joint resolutions of the following titles, in which the con­currence of the House is requested:

S. J. Res. 170. Joint resolution to provide for the transfer of the paintings The Grand Canyon of the Yellowstone and The Chasm of the Colorado from the United States Capitol to the Department of the Interior; and

S. J. Res. 171. Joint resolution transferring the plaster cast of the statue of G'eorge Wash­ington from the United States CapJ.tol to the Smithsonian Institution. ·

The message also announced that tl:ie Senate agrees to the report of the com­mittee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amend­ment of the Senate to the bill <H. R. 4567) entitled "An act to amend the Dis­placed Persons Act of 1948."

THE MAN WHO DIED

Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Mon­tana?

There was no objection. Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. Speaker, there

are times when all of us in this Chamber find life difficult to cope with. But I want to call to the attention of the membership of this body a Montanan, a man I do not know, but about whom I heard just last week. He is known as '.The Man Who Died and his name is Donald Clark. He lives in Billings, Mont. He was on the U.S. S. Hornet, and dur­ing the war he was one of those casual­ties who was not even treated, for the time being, because the ship's doctor, Dr. Frederick B. Hartman, his friend, felt there was no use.

Quoting Dr. Hartman, the following statement is made: -

As far as we were concerned, he had died. I started operating on those I thought had some chance to live.

Later they found this man, Clark, still breathing, gave him 14 transfusions in 2 hours, and brought him back to life with the loss of his two legs. The men of the Hornet met in Washington last week, and here is what Dr. Hartman, the man who saved Donald Clark's life, had to say:

Every man left aboard a little bit of his life, blood, sweat, tears, heartaches, Which amalgamated, become a ship's soul.

Bill Brinkley, the reporter of the Washington Post who wrote the story of Donald Clark, summed up the feelings of all of us when he said:

Clark left quite a bit. He brought back more.

I want to pay my deepest respects to Donald Clark and his family-the very best in the years ahead. They have earned this,

The story from the Washington Post of June 4, 1950, follows: THE MAN WHO DIED JOINS HORNET MATES

(By Bill Brinkley) · The man who "died" was at the Shoreham

yesterday, looking as shipshape as you can imagine despite having no legs.

Donald Clark, 26, had come with his wife Barbara, all the way from Billings, Mont., for the reunion of ship's company of the U.S. s. Hornet, CV12.

For the first time since May 1, 1944, the former aviation machinist's mate met the Navy doctor who snatched him back after the doctor thought death had taken him.

Quite a day, that bloody May Day. Dr. Frederick B. Hartman, of New London, Conn., told the story of it:

A plane landed on the Hornet's flight deck after a South Pacific strike. The pilot, thinking he had dropped all his bombs, started to taxi forward and opened his bomb bay. A 100 pounder dropped out. .

They carried the 40 casualties to sick bay. Among them was Clark, who had been vir­tually blown apart.

Hartman saw Clark in the emergency treat­ment room-mangled, unconscious, white, like a corpse.

"As far as we were concerned he had died. I started operating on those I thought had some chance to live," the doctor said.

Back from the operating room, the surgeon walked over to the corpse, found Clark breathing.

Clark was taken into the operating room, where Hartman did the only thing that might save him-amputated both legs.

"We gave him 14 transfusions in 2 hours • • •. It was a kind of record."

By the time the ship put into Kwajalein a few days later, Clark was on his way back to health. The men of the Hornet raised $8,700 and left it with the aviation ma­chinist's mate to start life over again.

The first year and a. half Clark spent in hospitals.

Then he went back to Billings, Mont., with the money the crew had collected.

He married his childhood sweetheart. To .. day they have two children, Jackie Lee, age 4, and Donna Lynn, 2 months.

He got a job winding electric motors and does it full time today. You don't need legs for that. He drives his own car, too.

There probably wasn't a happier man in Washington than Dr. Hartman.

The Hornet outfit had a banquet last night. In the afternoon they had a session and the doctor, who was also the ship's historian, traced the story of the Hornet. ·

Clark was asked to stand. As he came to his feet on his crutches the west ballroom of the Shoreham shook with applause.

The doc said o.f the Hornet: "Every man left aboard a little bit of his

life, blood, sweat, tears, heartaches, Which amalgamated, become a ship's soul."

Clark left quite a bit. He brought back more.

TAX RELIEF

Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks.·

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Ne­braska?

There was no objection. Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Speaker, it cannot

be said that the majority party is not in favor of tax relief for some people. As soon as the Eighty-first Congress assem­bled two actions for tax relief were set 1n motion.

The first action was the attempted passage of a bill which waived the ad­mission tax on the inaugural festivities

1950. CON~RESSIONAL RECORD_- _HOU_SE 8329 so that the patronage boys and the eco .. nomic royalists who filled their war chests would have entertainment tax~ free while the rest of the country pays.

The other relief measure was the hold• Ing of the Jackson Day dinner without the usual tax imposed where entertain ... ment is furnished when food is served.­This again was tax re~ief for the favored few. ·

The high Fair Deal brass still resists tax reduction for the rank and file of the people. The measure pas~ed in the Eightieth Congress which took 7,000,000 low-income people off the income-tax rolls had to be passed over President Truman's veto. Although excise tax re­lief was promised the country, the high Fair Deal leadership is opposing it. To the working men and women who must have a telephone in order to pick up their day-to-day employment and are required to pay a high wartime tax on their telephone bill, the Fair Dealers an­swer, "The budget cannot be trimmed." They do this while they give tax relief to the political bigwigs and take the tax­payers' money to rebuild the gambling casinos of France.

We have our highest peacetime taxes. Everything and everybody is taxed. Yet, in spite of all those tax receipts, the Fair Deal is running an annual deficit of over $5,000,000,000 which is more than equal to the total cost of the Government when they took over in the early thirties. SHOOTING DOWN OF NAVY PLANE BY

RUSSIAN AIRMEN

Mr. SCRIVNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Kansas?

There was no objection. Mr. SCRIVNER. Mr. Speaker, Mr.

Acheson's recent spee~h made no refer­ence to the shooting down of our Navy plane by Russian airmen-for which they were decorated by their Govern­ment-with the loss of · 10 American crewmen.

The loss of the plane is not great; it can be replaced. The loss of the lives of the crewmen is irreparable. I feel it more keenly than other Members of Con­gress, perhaps, because one of those crew members was Ensign Tommy Burgess, of Osawatomie, Kans. Tommy was more than a constituent. He was a friend, the son of friends. As a matter of fact, only yesterday I accompanied Tommy's mother to the Pentagon Building for a visit with Admiral Sherman, who was most cordial, courteous, and sympathetic.

While many have lauded what they call Mr. Acheson's firm policy toward Russia, the attitude of the State Depart­ment in this Navy plane incident is far from firm. It is timid; it is weasly; it is spineless.

.True, Mr. Kirk, our Ambassador, act­ing on State Department instructions, has written a note to Russia denying

-their spurious, fake charges that this plane was armed and over Russian-con-

trolled waters. That is all. That is not firmness. It is pussyfooting.

If the United Nations is worth its salt. here is a flagrant case of armed aggres .. ; sion _which it should investigate and pun~ ish. But until our State Department re­quests such action, of course, the United Nations will not act. They will not even debate it. The United Nations may not be able to get results because of Russia's obstinate, noncooperative attitude, but that should not stop us from trying to get something done.

Mr. Speaker, as I have demanded in writing-in letters to the Secretary of State-I now publicly demand that the State Department urgently request, yes, demand, a full investigation of this ruth­less murder of 10 Americans; and that our representative on the United Nations follow this action through to its final and ultimate conclusion, urging the imposi .. tion of all punishment possible under the Charter of the United Nations against this aggressor, Soviet Russia.

Any move short of this will be simply an open invitation to a repetition on a. greater and a more devastating scale. To drop this · incident now, to call it closed, is not firmness. It is cringing, weakness, and will be so recognized by Russia. Unless we try to get action, Rus .. sia wins again by default. Russia will figuratively and actually be getting by with murder.

In view of this hesitancy on the part of the State Department I am today in­troducing the following resolution:

Resolved, That the Secretary of State be, and he is hereby, directed to call upon the United Nations to make a full investigation of the shooting down of an American Navy plane by Russian airmen on April 8, 1950, and to request and urge that the United Nations impose such punishment as is provided under the Charter of the United Nations for this unwarranted attack and this violation of the rights of the United States.

EXPANDING ACTIVITIES WITHIN FOREIGN-TRADE ZONES

Mr. BOGGS of Louisiana. Mr. Speak .. er, I call up the conference report on the bill <H. R. 5332) to amend section 3 of the act of June 18, 1934, relating to the ·establishment of foreign-trade zones, and ask unanimous consent that the statement of the managers on the part of the House be read in lieu of the re­port.

The Clerk read the title of the bill. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to

the request of the gentleman from Loui­siana?

There was no objection. The Clerk read the statement. The conference report and statement

are as follows: ,

CONFERENCE REPORT (H. REPT. NO. 1437)

The committee of conference on the dis­agreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 5332) entitled "An act t9 amend section 3 of the act of June 18, 1934, relating to the es­tablishment of foreign-trade zones," having met, after full and free conference, have agreed to recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses as follows:

That the Senate recede from its amend­ment numbered 2.

That the House recede from its disagree­ment to the amendment, of the Senate numbered 1 and agree to the same.

R. L. DOUGHTON, JERE COOPER, HALE BOGGS,

Managers on the Part of the House. WALTER F. GEORGE, TOM CONNALLY, HARRY F. BYRD,

Manager on the Part of the Senate.

STATEMENT

The managers on the part of the House at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 5332) entitled "An act to amend section 3 of the act of June 18, 1934, relating to the establishment of for­eign-trade zones", submit the following statement in explanation of the effect of the action agreed upon by the conferees and recommended in the accompanying confer .. ence report:

Amendment No. 1: The Senate amendmeE.t added a new section to the bill amending paragraph 1803 of the Tariff Act of 1930 to provide for the importation free of duty of evergreen Christmas trees. The amend­ment would be effective as to articles entered !or consumption or withdrawn from ware­house for consumption on or after the first day of the first month which begins more than ten days after the date of enactment of the act. The House recedes.

Amendment No. 2: The Senate amendment added a new section to the bill amending paragraph 1519 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, to require the President to promulgate regulations on the importation of fw·s and fur articles to the extent de­termined necessary by the Tariff Commission to prevent serious injury to the domestic fur-producing industry. Such a requirement would appear to duplicate to a large extent existing procedures which have been estab­lished to protect domestic industries against possible serious injury as a result of in­creased imports resulting from concessions made in trade agreements. The Senate re­cedes.

R. L. DOUGHTON', JERE COOPER, HALE BOGGS,

Managers on the Part of the House.

Mr. REED of New York. Mr. Speak­er, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BOGGS of Louisiana. I yield. Mr. REED o:i New York. Will the gen­

tleman make just -a brief explanation of the conference report?

Mr. BOGGS of Louisiana. Yes; I shall be very glad to. ·

The Senate added two amendments to the House bill and under the conference agreement the House would recede on one amendment and the Senate would recede on the other.

The first amendment would amend the Tariff Act of 1930 to provide for the duty-free importation of evergreen Christmas trees, which are now subject to a rate of 5 percent ad valorem. This bill is identical with a bill reported by the Committee on Ways and Means in the Eightieth Congress. On this legis­lation, the Treasury Department favor­ably reported as follows:

Serious administrative difficulties which have been encountered in determining the dutiable values of evergreen Christmas trees in their natural state will be eliminated 1f the proposed legislation is enacted.

8330 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE . JUNE 8 Under the conference agreement the

House recedes. The second amendment would amend

the Tariff Act of 1930 to require the President to establish "such regulations on the transportation of furs and fur articles as are determined necessary by the Tariff Commission to prevent serious injury to the domestic fur industry." This provision would seem to be un­necessary sirice it would duplicate to a large extent the existing procedures es­tablished to protect domestic industry against possible serious injwj from in­creased imports resulting from conces­sions made in trade a;greements.

With but minor exceptions, the bind­ing ·of undressed furs on the free list is subject to an escape clause. The escape clause provides that tariff concessions may be modified or withdrawn, and G>ther obligations may be suspended, as a result of unforeseen developments and of the concession or other obligation in the trade agreement when any article is being imported in such increased quan­tities and under such conditions as to cause or threaten serious injury to do­mestic industries.

Under an Executive order procedures are established for the Tariff .commis­sion to investigate, determine, and recommend to the President for his con­sideration whether the escape clause should be invoked with regard to any particular concession on any article.

The Secretary of State in a letter dated September 30, 1949, addressed to the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means expressed objection to the amendment as follows:

SEPTEMBER 30, 1949. The Honorable ROBERT L. DOUGHTON,

Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means, House of Representatives.

MY l>EAR MR. DOUGHTON: I note that an amendment has been proposed to H. H. 5332 requiring the President to establish such regulations on the importation of furs and fur articles as are determined necessary by the Tariff Commission to prevent serious injury to the domestic fur-producing indus­try.

The position of the Department is that this amendment is subject to the following .five major objections: ·

1. Its provisions are not necessary because they duplicate, to a large extent, existing procedures which have been established to protect domestic industries against serious injury as a result of increased imports result­ing from concessions made in trade agree­ments. The rates on most undressed furs were bound in the general agreement on tariffs and trade which contains an escape clause which may be inv_oked by the Presi­dent upon the recommendation of the Tar­iff Commission after a determination of ac­tual or threatened injury.

2. Limitation of imports of furs would not be effective in solving the problems of the domestic fur-producer's industry. These problems are chiefly caused by changes in fashion which have affected a certain segment of the industry severely and resulted in liqui­dation of stocks, and by the luxury tax which has tended to keep prices at a higher level than consumers are willing to pay. Although imports in a few categories of undressed furs are somewhat larger than prewar on a volume basis, generally there has been little increase and in some categories im­ports are less.

3. If special treatment were to be accorded furs as a result of the adoption of the pro-

posed amendment, a precedent would be established for the same type of special treatment for many other products, the pro­ducers of which will undoubtedly claim that they are also threatened by imports. In effect such a precedent might be a crip­pling blow to the entire trade agreement pro­gram.

4. The use of absolute quotas on imports has been generally avoided under the United States Government's established economic foreign policy and the United States has consistently condemned their use by other countries on tfie grounds that they are uneconomic, rigidly restrictive, and easily applied in a discriminatory manner.

5. The substance of the amendment is not germane to the purpose of H. R. 5332.

Because of the urgency of this matter this report has not been cleared with the Bureau of the Budget to which copies are being sent.

Sincerely yours, ERNEST A. GROSS,

Assistant Secretary (For the Secretary of State).

Under the conference agreement the Senate recedes.

Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question.

The previous question was ordered. The conference report was agreed to. A motion to reconsider was laid on the

t:::.ble. LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

Mr. MARTIN of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to ad­dres:::: the House for 1 minute.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?

There was no objection. Mr. MARTIN of Massachusetts. Mr.

Speaker, I take this time to inquire of my friend, the majority leader, as to the program for next week.

Mr. McCORMACK. On Monday busi­ness in order under the 21-day discharge rule will be considered.

House Resolution 350, which is un­finished business, provides for the con­sideration of House Joint Resolution 334 to amend certain laws providing for membership and participation by the United States in certain international organizations. There are 9 minutes de­bate remaining for debate on the rule.

· It is the intention of the gentleman from West Virginia [Mr. KEE] on Monday to call that up and to come to a vote on the adoption of the rule. However, if the rule is adopted, it is not the intention to proceed with the consideration of House Joint Resolution 334 in Commit­tee of the Whole as provided by the rule. Of course, I will give the leadership on the other side, my good friend from Massa-chusetts, adequate notice as · to when it is proposed to consider the res­olution in Committee of the Whole and of course the House generally will have adequate notice. Therefore, the inten­tion is on Monday to pass on the ques­tion of whether or not the rule is to be adopted. . No District bills will be called up on Monday, but later on in the week some bills may be taken up from the Com­mittee on the District of Columbia which can be passed by unanimous con­sent only. That is a matter which I will discuss later. Of course, only those bills which can be brought up and passed by unanimous consent will be called up.

I understand there are two bills, and possibly three of that nature.

The Senate is now considering the rent-control bill. It was my intention to program the extension of the rent­control legislation for next Tuesday, but at the time I had formed my intention I was not aware that the Senate would proceed. to the consideration of the bill before that time. The Senate is now considering the bill. Naturally, it would be unwise to have the same bill being considered by both branches of the Con­gress at the same time. If the Senate should act upon the bill before next Tuesday, then the bill will be pro­gramed for next Tuesday. If the Sen­ate does not finally act on that bill by next Tuesday, it will not come up in the House. I pref er not to make any statement now, except that I will confer with the chairman of the committee, and naturally I will confer with the gentle­man from Massachusetts in connection with another day, if it is necessary to bring the bill up next week. Of course, the time is getting short. The termi­nation date is June 30. That is a press­ing matter which cannot be overlooked. But it is programed for next Tuesday, if the Senate acts upon it before that time. If not, it will not be taken up next Tuesday.

Mr. MARTIN of Massachusetts. It happens that I have a Flag Day speecl} engagement, scheduled several month~=> ago, and I would appreciate it if the gentleman would put that down fc sometime after Wednesday. ·

Mr. McCORMACK. That is a very frank observation, and I appreciate it. If the Senate does not pass the bill by Tuesday, it will come up Wednesday. I will give that promise now. I may have to bring it up on Thursday, but I am not commiting myself on any con­tingency now, except that if it does not come up on Tuesday I can arrange so that it will not come up on Wednesday.

Mr. MARTIN of Massachusetts. How much time is allowed under the rule?

Mr. McCORMACK. I think it is 3 hours.

Mr. MARTIN of Massachusetts. Is it expected that it can be passed in a single day?

Mr. McCORMACK. No. As far as I am concerned, if the sentiment is to pass it in a day, I would cooperate in every way possible. If it comes up on Tues­day, in the light of commitments of Members, I hope it may be passed on Tuesday, although as far as I am con­cerned it would not be necessary. But we will know on Monday whether it will be taken up Tuesday or not. Then, if necessary, we can agree to meet at 11 o'clock, if that is the desire of the gen­tleman from Massachusetts.

Aside from that there is one resolution from the Rules Committee. I may take it up next week, but I do not ·want to program it now. That is a resolution creating a select committee to study food products. It is my intention to bring it up promptly, but I am not prepared to state now when I shall program it.

Mr. RICH. Mr. Speaker, will the gen­tleman yield?

Mr. MARTIN of Massachusetts. I yield.

1950 CON~RESSIONAL RECORD_-HQUSE 8331 Mr. RICH. I would like to ask if it

would not be a wise thing for the House to know at least 1 day ahead, if possible, about these bills that are going to be taken up by unanimous consent. I think it would be fair to the House if that could be arranged. I hope the majority leader will give us as much time on these matters as possible because some­times people differ in their opinions.

Mr. McCORMACK. May I state to my friend that the request is a very rea­sonable one, but in practical operation it is a difficult one.

Mr. RICH. I appreciate that. Mr. McCORMACK. Take, for exam­

ple, this conference report just adopted. I knew nothing about it until it came on the floor today. Everyone was in agree­ment. But I may say to my friend that all these unanimous-consent-request matters are very carefully screened, and while I cannot disagree to the fairness of the request, yet in practical operation it might be very difficult. ·

Mr. MARTIN of Massachusetts. I might add that the practice has never been to bring anything very controversial up under a consent request.

Mr. NICHOLSON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. McCORMACK. I yield. Mr. NICHOLSON. I would like to ask

if there are any plans as to when we can dispose of business and go home to get reelected, if possible?

Mr. McCORMACK. From the side­lines comes the observation: "That is a good question." Certainly, it is a ques­tion I wish I were capable of answering, but I am not at the present time. I can assure the gentleman that I am' very anxious to have Congress adjourn as quickly as possible. If the gentleman \\·ere to confer with the leadership on the other side, which I shall ·have to do, the gentleman might be in a better posi­tion to get the same information that I will have to get myself to form a good opinion.

Mr. NICHOLSON. Well, I will say_ to the gentleman from Massachusetts that I trust him to take care of these things expeditiously and let us go home.

Mr. McCORMACK. I thank the gen­tleman for that, but I am sure the gen­tleman would also trust me outside of that; would he not?

Mr. NICHOLSON. Yes,, indeed. TO LOWER TAXES AND BALANCE THE

BUDGET OUR JOB

Mr. RICH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unani­mous consent to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Pennsylvania?

There was no objection. · Mr. RICH. Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether it is not about time that the Congress stop putting about a dozen pands in the pocket of everybody in the United States and taking almost every­thing they find in i~. leaving just enough for a bare living. Let us get the taxing hand of the Government out of the pockets of the people of this country. Let us do it now. First let us cut down on our spending; second, cut down on

taxation: third, get a little more effi­ciency into government. If we will do that and balance the ·budget and run this Government on a good sound busi­ness basis so that our children do not have to pay for your folly, then we will do this country the greatest possible good. If we are going to put the pay­ment of this debt and the cost of this squandering administration onto our children and our children's children we are ;Joing to wreck them; and when we wreck our children and our children's children, we wreck this Nation. Let us not wreck the Nation, · let us make up our minds as Members of Congress that we are going to cut down on this spend­ing and that we will balance the budget. It can be done, it should be done, and it must be done. Will you Congressmen all help do it? · Be nifty and thrifty in fifty.

EXTENSION OF REMARKS

Mr. LUCAS asked and was given per­mission to extend his remarks.

Mr. MORRISON asked and was given permission to extend his remarks and include a letter from Mr. Hoover.

Mr. BURDICK asked and was given permission to extend his remarks and include a speech the late Honorable Wil­liam Lemke had intended to deliver. · Mr. KEATING asked and was given

permission to extend his remarks in two instances and include extraneous mat­ter.

Mr. GATHINGS asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in two instances and include in each .an article.

Mr. McGUIRE asked and was given permission to extend his remarks and include an editorfal which appeared in the Meriden <Conn.) Record.

Mr. HAND asked and was given per­mission to extend his remarks and in­clude an editorial.

Mr. PATMAN asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in two instances, in one to include an address by Hon. LYNDON JOHNSON, at the Jetrer­son-Jackson Day dinner in Austin, Tex., on May 27, and in the other an article by Leon Keyserling, Chairman of the Coun­cil of Economic Advisers.

Mr. McCORMACK asked and was given permission to extend his own remarks.

Mr. RAMSAY asked and was given permission to extend his remarks and include an article by Mr. A. E. Eisen­menger on the value of r eat inspection to the people of America.

Mrs. ST. GEORGE (at the request of Mr. SADLAK) was given permission to ex­tend her remarks · and include an edi­torial.

Mr. SADLAK asked and was . given permission to extend his remarks and include an editorial.

Mr. VAN ZANDT asked and was given permission to extend his remarks on three different occasions and include ex­traneous matter.

Mr. JENSEN asked and was given permission to extend his remarks and include an article.

Mr. SHORT asked and was given per­mission to extend in the Appendix of the REcoR.n an article on undersea warfare by Rear Adm. c. B. Momsen, not-.

withstanding the fact that it will exceed two pages of the RECORD and is estimat­ed by the Public Printer to cost $184.50; and was likewise given permission to ex­tend in the Appendix of the RECORD the annual report of the national com-

. mander of the Civil Air Patrol to the Congress, notwithstanding the fact that it will exceed two pages and is estimated by the Public Printer to cost $184.50.

Mr. CELLER asked and was given per­mission to extend his r.emarks in two instances.

PERSONAL PRIVILEGE

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of personal

. privilege. The SPEAKER. The gentleman will

state his grounds. Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr.

Speaker, in the Journal-Gazette of Fort Wayne, Ind., on April 23, 1950, there ap­peared under the caption, "Interference in trade-unionism," a statement by exec­utive board of UE local 901, Lester Green, president, which contained the following statement:

Another member of the Hartley committee which KRusE now uses is the notorious CLARE E. HOFFMAN, who stooped to using outright forgery in a strike-breaking attempt against the UE in Dayton, Ohio, in 1948. This same Hartley committee which KRUSE uses, black­listed and fired union men in Evansville, Ind., that same year.

This statement, published in the Jour­nal-Gazette of Fort Wayne, Ind., reflects upon the integrity, in his official capacity, as Representative of the Fourth Congres­sional District of Michigan.

The SPEAKER. The Chair thinks the gentleman has stated sufficient grounds to constitute a ·question of personal privilege.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, happy days are here again. That is, happy days for the Communists, the Reds, the fellow travelers, the leftists, all those who do not believe in our form of government, and for some of those who honestly and sincerely think· that

• certain members of the Republican Party are perhaps tinged with disloyalty and lack of patriotism when they fail to go along wholeheartedly all the way with .the New Deal program. Some Republi­cans think the New Deal program has a Red tinge.

Someone recently said: The Natfon sorely needs a Republican

victory. But I do not want to see the Re­publican Party ride to political .victory on the four horsemen of calumny-fear, igno­rance, bigotry, and smear.

Unjustifiable fear instilled by the New Deal-fear of the necessity of working if one would survive, of fighting for one's principles because of denunciation of one's motives; ignorance of realities, of the policies proposed; bigotry or intoler­ance of any opposition and smear of all those who opposed the New Deal or any of its policies, did give the New Deal political victory.

Lack of courage to fight for principle, to combat policies which we knew to be ruinous to constitutional government, have overlong prevented the Republican Party from winning a major political vic­tory.

8332 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 8 AI:, was recently said, some who "shout - He is also accused of a lack of loyalty, ticular document was one which gave a

. the loudest about Americanism in mak- of a lack of patriotism. diagram or a description of the lay-out ing character assassinations are all too If one exercises his constitutional ln the plant. , often frequently those who,'' by their "right to criticize,'' "right to hold un- There was a perfectly obvious and rea­own words and acts, ''ignore some of the popular beliefs," "right to protest," "right sonable ground for the issuing of such basic principles of Americanism-the of independent thought," he is by the . a document. For example, as the union right to criticize, the right to hold un- administration-yes, by the President is engaged in collective bargaining, and popular beliefs, the right to protest, the ·himself-and many of its supporters im- as a question as to the conditions of the right of independent thought." mediately set apart in a category re- safety of the employees arise in connec-

Truthfully, it has been said that- ·served for the enemies of our country. tion with those hearings, there was noth-The exercise of these rights should not This statement in the Fort Wayne pa- ing wrong in the union, if it desired,

cost one single American citizen his reputa- per caused me to take this time in order sending out a description of a plant, by tion or his right to a livelihood nor should that I may carry the fight to the smear it locating the various machines and de_. he be in danger of losing his reputation or artists, who, this being a campaign year, scribing those machines so that any de­livelihood merely because he happens to are whetting their knives, shoving their . sired safety appliances might be attached know some one who holds unpopular beliefs. blackjacks under the tail of their coats. to them. Who of us does not? · This statement in the Fort Wayne pa- But, instead of accepting that, the

Now, I have no "declaration of con­science." I have a declaration of war-a declaration that I-and I speak for no others-intend to continue my efforts to restore constitutior.al government to these United States.

No one, if I know it will, unrebuked ·by me, falsely charge that I am disloyal or unpatriotic.

Any and all efforts to intimidate me, to prevent critic.ism of the New Deal, whether they come from "me-too" Re­publicans, from internationalists, or from Communists, will be challenged.

There is no section of this country, there is no faction in the Republican

· Party, which can, unchallenged, ques­tion my motives, my patriotism, my Re­publicanism.

There are some folks who apparently follow the thought line of a few colum­nists and commentators who conceive themselves to be anointed, as was Saul of old, to dictate to the rest of us what we should think, say, and how we should act.

I need no "declaration of conscience.·~ My conscience is clear. I need no in­structions from the so-called statesmen of other nations, from those who in this country, because of the section in which they live, ape these foreign statesmen in thinking and in declarations of policy.

Statements, presumably made to guide the policy of the Republican Party ,.into the fold of the New Dealers and the. internationalists, fall, so far as I am con­cerned, on deaf ears.

I need no trips abroad; I need no en­tertainment, no wining, no dining, to convince me that my duty as a Congress­man is to first listen to the call of my people; to protect them, the country in which we live, the form of government which has made us as a Nation what we are. · · In making that declaration, I am fully aware of the fact that I shall again sub­ject myself to a campaign of abuse, vili­fication, and misrepresentation.

Bitter experience has demonstrated to me that whenever one opposes the New Deal, the Fair Deal, or any of its politi­cally powerful allies or supporters, he immediately becomes the recipient of all sorts of misrepresentation.

He is not only charged with being ig­norant and stupid, but with being the tool of the princes of privilege, the. reac­tionaries-in brief, all of those who have the hardihood, when they believe in the principles of our Constitution, in our form of Government, to publicly vigor­ously express their views.

. per is obviously untrue in at least two union denied that it ever sent out that respects. For example. the first state- document, because the witness claimed ment is that the Representative from that the document was put out so that that district, the gentleman from Indi- in the event of a strike the strikers could ana [Mr. KRusE], a fine young man. was sabotage the activities in the plant. using me in his campaign. There were two possible r,easons for

Of course, the only way he could use the putting out of such a document, but me, I assume, would be to try to get the instead of accepting the logical one, the labor vote and to say that I was against lawful one, one which nobody would have everything the union was for, and that any objection to, they chose to -take the he disapproved of my views. other view, and then later claimed the

By the way, the charges made against letter was a forgery. The committee him were false and he was elected. merely accepted the document when

Then, here is a further statement: offered as evidence. So much for that. This same Hartley committee which KRuSE The point, however, is this, and I am

uses blacklisted and fired union men in -going back to former years. We have Evansville, Ind., that same year. now the beginning of a campaign to

That, on the face of it, ls-an absurd frighten individual Members of this Con-. statement because the Hartley commit- gress who desire to exercise their con­tee could not have anything to do with stitutional right to send out material to the hiring or firing of any employees. their constituents, to make speeches from

My point is that today, again, as back the floor of the House. 1n the early forties, a campaign of in- Recently, on June 5, the gentleman timidation is being practiced against from Wisconsin [Mr. BIEMILLER] and the Members of Congress. not only by this gentleman from Texas [Mr. PATMAN]­union, the UE you will notice in this case, and let me say here and now and in all but by others, including reds, pinks, sincerity, in no way are the motives of gangsters, and blind partisans as well. those gentlemen, or their right to ex-

All through the years at times I have press their <>Pinions challenged-made charged on the floor, from the ·platform speeches on the floor of this House in in public meetings, and also in the press, which the gentleman from Wisconsin­that the UE had in it communists who and he is here on the floor-criticiz~d were influencing and dominating its ac- two organizations, the Constitutional Ed­.tions. For that I was branded as anti- ucational League and the League for labor when my purpose was to force the Constitutional Government, because of CIO to clean house. views which had been expressed by them.

That those charges were true have The gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. been demonstrated beyond any argument BIEMILLERJ criticized the statements sent by the fact that after hearings held by out by Mr. Pettengill, who for years rep. the CIO it was forced to expel and did resented in this House an Indiana dis­expe1 a number of those unions, includ- trict; he was a Democratic Member of ing the CIO-UEW. At last Phil Mur- the House, and as I recall, and to my ray saw the light I had been attempting knowledge, he had the respect of every to show him. Member on both sides of the aisle. His

As to the statement that forged docu- integrity, his patriot.ism, and his ability ments were used, the situation is this: never were questioned. Until he began In those hearings which were held at to denounce Communists and the New Dayton, Ohio, a company had been ' Deal, he was not criticized. struck. There was so much disorder, so The gentleman from Wisconsin, of much lawlessness, so much violation of course, is strictly within. his rigpts, and court ·orders, that the governor of the there is no criticism of any expression State called out and had in the city, I of opinion by him; that is his right. think it was, some 3,000 members of the Never since I have been here, never State troops in order to end violence· and since I came here in 1935, have I criti­restore order. cized, knowingly, at least, either the abil­. Now, during the hearings some wit- ity, or questioned the ability, the sin­nes~and I do not at the moment recall cerity, or the patriotism of any Member his nam~ame in With a copy of a letter of the House, and I do not now, and I which had been sent out, it was alleged, hope the gentlemen so understand me. by a union from another city. The union As I said here yesterday on the floor, official, or some official of that union, the gentleman has a pleasing person­had an office in connection with certain ality, a fine gentleman, I admire him for individuals who were charged with being, those things, but I do not agree, so far or alleged to be, Ce>rnmunJ.§ts. This pa~ I fillQW, wit!! a~ .h~ ever ex ...

1950 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 8333 pressed from the floor of the House. That is a difference of opinion, and thank God that under our system of government we each have that right.

Mr. RICH. Mr. Speaker, will the gen­tleman yield?

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

Mr. RICH. In speaking of Sam Pet­tengill from Indiana, I served with Sam Pettengill here in the House and I do not know of anybody that I ever had greater. respect for. I do not know any­body that worked harder than Sam Pet­tengill, and I always considered him one of the finest, most honest, most honor­able Members of Congress that I have ever seen. And, he was a Democrat.

· Men might differ with Sam Pettengill, but when you question his integrity or his ability, I think that some people should ' make an examination of their own personal character and attitude

· when they do that, because Sam Petten­gill is certainly one of the finest men I ever knew.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. I thank the gentleman for his contribution.

Mr. CROOK. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.

Mr. CROOK. I should like to make just a brief comment with regard to this statement made by my good friend

'- from Pennsylvania. I wish to say that sainuel Pettengill rode into this Con­gress on the coattails of Franklin D. ·Roosevelt, and pretty soon he was co~­·nected with the big utility companies and turned the tables an~ went Republi­can.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. I refuse to yield any further.

The views just expressed are not the views of the Members of the House who served with Mr. Pettengill.

Mr. COX. Mr. · Speaker. will the gentleman yield to me?

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. I cannot yield at this time. I want to make a. statement today because I think it is something the people, at least my con­stituents, should know. I will not yield for a denunciation of any former Mem­ber of the House. Certainly not for condemnation of Mr. Pettengill. I was here served with him, and will not yield time' for unjustified statements which reflect upon him.

I yield to the gentleman from Georgia. Mr. COX. I simply wanted to de­

nounce the statement of the gentleman from Indiana if he meant to imply any­thing unfavorable to Sam Pettengill That is all I meant to say.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. . I just do not want to get into that end of it. I have expressed my opinion of Mr. Pet­tengill. We all have a right to our opin­ions. I know of no Member of the House who served with Sam Pettengill who ever questioned his integrity.

Mr. COX. I have noticed for a long time that every time any individual or any group of individuals raise their voices in the defense of this country as we know it, understand it, and love it, he or they make themselves a target for the gentlemen of the left who wish .. to break them down by smear and slander.

XCVI--525

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, I want to say to the gentleman from Georgia that he is no more aware of that situation than am I. I agree with his statement.

I remember very, very well in 1942. . when I entered the well of this House and made two talks. I think it was on January 27 and 30. They were after­ward consolidated and appeared under the title "Don't Haul Down the Stars and Stripes," because at that particular time I was opposing this one-world movement. I had to undergo the same sort of persecution that the newer Mem­bers of the House, the Members who came here the last couple of years, will have to take if, as the gentleman from Georgia said, they raise their voices in defense of constitutional government.

· Raise your voices against corruption. . dirtiness, or nastiness in the administra­tion and you will be criticized. Ghal­lenge the Reds and brickbats begin to come your way. There is no question about that.

Mr. NICHOLSON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Very briefly.

Mr. NICHOLSON. I want to ask the gentleman if there is something wrong about somebody's being for public utm.:. ties in the United States.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Micp.igan. Of course not-except in the minds of the

-Socialists and Communists. Mr. Speak­er; I ask unanimous consent to extend my remarks by including the talk I made . at that particular time under that title. I include that so that you may know, if you care to read, for what a Member of this House can be criticized and yilified.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman ·from Mich­igan?

There was no objection. Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. That

talk was as follows: DON'T HAUL DOWN THE STARS AND STRIPES (Remarks of CLARE E. HOFFMAN of.Michigan

in the House of Representatives January 27 and 30, 1942)

(January 27, 1942) Mr. HOFFMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanl~

mous consent to revise, to delete from, to ex­tend, and to combine, for the purpose of reprinting and distribution, the remarks I .made on the fioor of the House on January 27 and on January 30, 1942, so that the two, as rewritten, may be printed and distributed together.

The SPEAKER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

There was no objection. A JUDAS

Mr. HOFFMAN. Mr. Chairman, on the as­sumption that, following the Declaration of Independence, guided by the prin~iples enunciated in the Constitution, our people have established here a Nation where the average man enjoys a greater degree of ma­terial prosperity, i~tellectual advancement, and religious freedom than in any other part of the world, the people of these United States of America are fighting a war, so it. ls said, to carry those blessings to all other people.

That war, the cost of which no man can estimate and which, if carried on according ~o present plans, will take the lives of mil­lions o! American men, the President and his supporters tell us ~ being fought to

bring to other peoples the same right of independence and self-government which we have enjoyed.

The hypocrisy of those who claim that to' be the purpose of our present involve­ment in this war is clearly demonstrated when we receive from them a petition to repudiate our own independence, surrender our existence as an independent Nation, and become a part of a United States of the World.

It is quite true that, under our Constitu­tion, men have the right of a free press and . free speech; that, under the provisions of that Constitution and the security granted by it, they may advocate its repudiation. Therefore, the man Streit and all those who join with him in asking us to surrender our independence and become a part of a world nation are withih their legal rights.

However, Hitler, Mussolini, Hirohito are, it 1s said, also seeking to destroy our inde­pendence and make us a part of a world group. Streit an~ his associates seek to ac­complish the same end-the destruction of our independence-by a more subtle and a peaceful method, and they say for a differ­ent purpose.

Our Constitution was adopted in order that there might be formed a more perfect Union of the States. Streit and his adher­ents would destroy that Union. This Nation of ours is a Union of 48 States. The Civil War was fought to preserve the Union. Most of us many times have said:

"I pledge allegiance to the fiag of the ·united States and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation indivisible, with liberty _and justice for all."

THEY WOULD BETRAY US

Streit and his associates now . repudiate that pledge of allegiance to the Republic, one Nation indivisible, and would make it a part-and only a part-of a world nation.

Misapplied ambition is a ruinous thing • Unchecked, it destroys everything it touches, tearing down the good with the evil it seeks to end.

"To reign is worth ambition, although in hell. Better reign in hell than serve in heaven."

This country of ours, for more than 150 years, has not only been the haven but the heaven of those who in other lands were op­pressed, enslaved, and denied opportunity. Yet Streit and Ickes and their assocJates, however, distinguished they may be, would rather form and reign in a hell made up of all the nations of the world, of all the peo­ple of the world, than serve under the Con­stitution to which they have pledged alle­giance, in a land where all have equal oppor­tunity.

Ever since the President had his conference with Churchill on the high seas, we have been hearing from editorial writers, radio commentators, and New Deal spokesmen of the United Nations. Now comes a member of the President's Cabinet, Ickes; a member of the United States Supreme Court, Roberts; both of whom have sworn to up­hold and defend the Constitution, and add their endorsement to the Judaslike betrayal of our people into and as one of a United States of the World.

While Germany, Italy, and Japan seek by force of arms to overthrow us as a Nation, to make us subservient to a group of world pow­ers headed by themselves. Streit and his as­sociates seek, through propaganda, to accom­plish the same thing and make us a part of a United States of the World, dominated by England, Russia, China, and whatever other nations may seek to participate in a world re­distribution of .the wealth of the United States and its people.

Alexander the Great wept because there were no other worlds to conquer. Is not Franklin Delano Roosevelt satisfied with be­ing a third-time President of the United States, an honor which the patriotism of

8334 :CONGRESSIONAL :RECORD-HQ_USE JUNE 8 Washington forbade him to accept? Is he not satisfied with his opportunity of con­quering the whole world, far greater than in Alexander's day? Are his spokesmen behind this move to surrender our independence, our national existence; become a part of a United States of the World, and make Frank­lin Delano Roosevelt the president of that world nation?

Yes; ambition is a cancerous growth and often in the past, as history discloses, has destroyed the one who harbored it. Alex­ander was ambitious. Caesar was ambitious. Napoleon was ambitious. Hitler was ambi­tious. But the people who were the play­things of their ambition suffered and died. So, too, if this move to make us a part of a world nation-and a subservient part at that--goes through, will our people suffer, our independence, our Nation die.

It is said that we are the richest Nation in the world. It is undenied that the average citizen of these United States of America enjoys more of everything that goes to make man contented and happy than the people of any other land or nation. And . yet these men, like Ju.das, who betrayed his Master, would, before we are fairly in this war, be­tray our people; surrender our independence; connive to destroy our liberty and our free­dom. They would surrender that for which the war is being fought--our national ex­istence-before the war is fairly begun. . Let them be stripped ·of their hypocrisy. Let us expose them for what they are­enemies of the Republic, boring from within. They seek to take adva·ntage of our involve­ment in this war and while the attention of the people is directed to the winning of the war. They would do what the armies of the Confederacy could not accomplish--destroy us as a nation, one and indivisible; make us a part of a United States of the World, where the communistic Russian, who denies the existence of God, where the Chinese, the Hot­tentot, and the people of India would have equal voice in curtailing the liberties, spend­ing the tax money, of American workers, farmers, and businessmen-a United States of the World where all the peoples of the world would be glorified participants in a WPA, a PWA, a Federal housing program, the triple A-a program to rebuild after the war all the cities, towns, and villages which may be destroyed in that war-and all at the ex­pense of tb,e American taxpayer.

Oh, that Streit and all his associates who are dissatisfied with our Declaration of Inde­pendence, with the working of our Constitu­tion, with our country, would only go and take up permanently their residence in some one of the many countries. whose system of government they evidently so greatly admire.

Let Streit go and live with the Chinese. Let Ickes go to Russia and live with the Com­munists, who tell us that religion is a fraud. Let Justice Roberts sojourn a while in India with G.andhi, who is demanding that Britain grant freedom to millions of the oppressed in his native land.

If the administration wants to win this war, let it put aside the ambition of the President's advisers to 'make him or one of themselves a president of the world. Let this administration get rid of the more than a thousand Communists on the Federal pay­roll-bloodsuckers seeking to destroy our na­tional existence.

Let the ambitious politicians remember that the first thing, the important thing, is the winning of the war, and that the Ameri­can people will only devote themselves en­thusiastically and wholeheartedly to that purpose as they believe in our own Govern­ment, the maintenance of our own freedom and independence.

[January 30, 1942) A BIRTHDAY GIFT

llr. HoFFMAN. Mr. Speaker, inasmuch as it is th~ President's birthday, it may not be

out of place to call attention to the fact that a birthday gift has been requested of Con­gress for the Chief Executive.

The 4th day of July 1776 was the day when our Declaration of Independence was adopt-

. ed. Here is an organization which un­doubtedly has expended considerable sums,

. which now proposes to celebrate the Presi· dent's birthday by having Congress adopt a ·

. resolution doing away with the Declaration of Independence. I do not know; I have not been able to learn, whether any Member of the House has introduced such a resolution.

I have introduced a resolution-it was in­troduced yesterday-House Resolution 425-asking for the appointment of a committee to investigate the purpose and ascertain who are the members of these two or three or­ganizations which advocate the surrender of our independence and the sources from which they derive the funds which they are spending.

This movement to surrender our independ· ence and become a part of a world super­government has the support of Cabinet Mem• ber Ickes, Justice Roberts of the Supreme Court, Federal Union, Inc., Red Christian Fronters, and Communists.

While we are celebrating today the Presi­dent's birthday we should have this other movement in mind. There are many of us who in the past have bitterly opposed some of the President's political policies. There are some of us who will continue to oppose ,those domestic policies while giving him sup­.port in the effort to win the war. There is none, however, who should in my judgment at least not be able and willing to join in the hope that God will grant him many hap­'pier returns of the day. We can all join in the request that God give him wisdom, and strength, and courage .to frown upon such _efforts as the one which is here suggested.

THE DAY FIXED FOR OUR BETRAY AL

The people will now back this administra­tion in this war effort, they will give whole­hearted support to the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force; but how about the future when the people learn that their is in ad­ministration circles, or at least entertained by one member of the Cabinet, the purpose to destroy our independence?

The answer to that question depends upon whether they consider the war ,a just war; a worth-while war; a war to preserve our independence; a war to perpetuate our Na­tion; a war to protect our freedom and our liberty.

At the present time, our people believe that this war must be won. They are will­ing, even though it cost billions of dollars, millions of lives; even though it means the lowering of the standard of living for many generations to come in order to meet the tax bills which will follow this war, to make whatever sacrifices may be necessary to win.

But let our people once discover or arrive at the conclusion, sound or unsound, that they are being betrayed; that their sacrifices are in vain; that at the end of the war they will have lost their independence, our con­stitutional form of government, our exist­ence as a free and independent nation de­stroyed, and no longer will this administra­tion have their support.

Of our more than 130,000,000 people, thoEe who think believe in some vague way that we today, as our forefathers in the Revo­lutionary War, as in the days of the Civil War, are not only fighting for; the preserva­tion of our Nation, but that, when we win, the freedom of the individual, the inde­pendence of the Nation, will be rendered more secure and its permanency insured.

We know that Hitler, Mussolini, and Hi· rohito, at the heads of their respective na­tions, are our enemies. They would destroy our national existence. They, according to this administration, would enslave us, de­stroy what has been described as the Amer­ican way of life. There are other en·emi"es

who would accomplish the same purpose. These others are a greater menace than are Hitler, Mussolini, and Hirohito, for they carry on their battle to destroy us, not di­rectly, not openly, with announced pur­poses, but in an underhand, treacherous, traitorous way, pretending they would make secure the freedoms and liberties, · the na­tional existence, which they seek to destroy.

Using the false plea that we can win the war and after it is over establish permanent peace throughout the world-a desirable ob· jective-Federal Union, Inc., headed by Clar­ence K. Streit, by the expenditure of' thou­sands of dollars, is carrying on a campaign of propaganda, the purpose of which is, while our attention is distracted by the war, to cause us to surrender our independence and our national existence and become the eco­nomic slaves of other world powers.

That organization would inveigle our citi­zens into a united states of the world where their property, their incomes, would be at the mercy of Old World politicians.

• Federal Union, Inc., and World Fellowship,

Inc., which has a similar objective, would make-the American taxpayer the Santa Claus of the .world; . the peoples of Europe, Asia, and Africa glorified members of a world WPA. We Americans-workers, farmers, merchants, industri!),lists, p~ofession~l men and women, all of us-would furnish the money for the boondoggling and the war­ring of princes, dukes, kings, and dictators.

We would, in addition, furnish the cannon fodder for the war games which they might play when they grew tired of boondoggling.

Is the foregoing · but a creature of the imagination? In full-page ads in newspa­pers of the East the campaign to do the things just mentioned is being carried on.

Yesterday, January 29, to me, as a Con­g;:essman, and no doubt to every other Con­gressman and to every Senator, from World Fellowship, Inc., came propaganda asking that, as a Member of the House of Repre­sentatives, I support a joint resolution which this organizatiun asks be passed on the President'_s birthday, Ja;nuary 30, 1942, as, I quote, "a present to him, to us, to the world." The word "him" is capitalized. A proposal for a birthday gift which the Presi­dent should lose no time in condemning.

That resolution proposes, as step 1, among other things:

"That the Congress of the United States of America does hereby solemnly declare that all peoples of the earth should now be united in a commonwealth of nations to be known as the United Nations of the World, and to. that end it hereby gives to the President of the United States of America all the needed authority and powers of every kind and de­·scription without limitations of any kind that are necessary in his sole and absolute discretion to set up and create the Federa­tion of the World, a world peace government under the title oI the United Natfons of the World, in.::luding its constitution and per­sonnel and all other matters_ needed or ap­pertaining thereto to the end that all nations of the world may by volmifary action become a part thereof under the same terms and conditions."·

If you are an American citizen, willing to make the needed sacrifices to · win this war. if you believe in the independence of our Nation, what do you think of this proposed grant of al,lthority to the President of the United States to set up a United Nations of the World? Why should Congress grant to the President of the United States power to create a new world government; United Na­tions of the World, of which we would be a part?

By what stretch of the imagination can it be assumed that we, the people of the United States, have the right, or, for that matter, the power tci set up a world government entitled "United Nations of the World," and to write

· 1950 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 8335 and prescribe a constitution and to pick the officers of such a government?

If the President of the United States 11 not satisfied with the office which he holds, if _he and his advisers and supporters or any of the rest of us are not content to live under the Constitution which we have sworn to maintain and uphold, then why does not he, his wife Eleanor, Iclfos, Perkins, and the horde of Reds which surround him, and those of us who are not satisfied, emigrate to Russia, or to Germany for that matter­for Hitler has the safne idea of uniting all the peoples of the world under his rule-and there establish the world government?

This proposed joint resolution contains this further provision:

"There ls hereby authorized to be appro­priated out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated the sum of $100,-000,000 or so much thereof as may be neces­sary to be expended by the President in his so:e and absolute discretion to effectuate the purposes of this joint resolution."

Consider this language. This organization asks, in this time of war, when every dollar is needed to support the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force, for an appropriation of $100,-000,000 to be expended by the President of the United States, without accounting to anyone in any manner, for the purpose of establishing a United Nations of the World.

The resolution contains this further lan­guage, immediately following the foregoing:

"And in addition, the sum of $1,000,000,-000 for the immediate use of the United Na­tions of the World under its constitution as set up and created by the President of the United States of America as provided in this joint resolution."

While MacArthur is fighting in the Phil­ippines; while American soldiers and sailors are dying there and in many, many places throughout the world in the belief that they are fighting for the preservation of our Gov­ernment; for the safety and the independ­ence of the folks at home; for their parents, their brothers, and their sisters, here at home, in America, through the mails of the United States Government comes this prop­aganda, which would destroy all that these boys have fought and died to save.

The Treasury of the United States is not only empty of funds, but in it are stored obligations which call upon future genera­tions for the payment of billions of dollars in taxes. Yet this organization, these men and women who sponsor it, whose purpose 1s the surrender of our independence, the destruction of our constitutional form of government, destroy the morale of our fight­ing men. They sap the courage of our citi­zens. They create the· feeling that this ad­ministration, by permitting their efforts to go unrebuked, may be charged with not carrying on a war to preserve the American way of life, to protect our people, to render our Government secure and permanent, but, driven by ambition, seeks to make us a part of a world power.

Let this administration-let the Presi­dent of the United States-without delay, assure the American people that he wants no part in the creation of a United States of the World-in the formation of a. United Nations of the World. ·

Let him assure us that when this war ts won-that when this war ls over-our

. independence as a nation will be sacredly preserved and that we will not become a part of any world political union.

I append hereto, as exhibit A, excerpts from the full-page ad of Federal Union, Inc.; also appended, as exhibit B, are ex­cerpts from World Fellowship, Inc.

Yesterday I introduced a resolution­House Resolution 425--calling for an inves­tigation of this movement, I ask that a. copy of that resolution be printed herewith as exhibit C.

Here we are-a nation billions of dollars in debt, needing every resource at our com­mand, not only to carry on a war, as the President said, on every continent and in every sea, but to prepare for our own national defense here at home; and yet come these men and ask that we appropriate $100,000,000 to aid in forming a United Nations of the World, and an added $1,000,000,000 to be ex­pended by that organization when formed.

They ask that we surrender our independ­ence, appropriate $1,100,000,000, and offer it to the President of the United States, Frank­lin Delano Roosevelt, as his birthday gift on January 30, 1942.

Yes; I wish the President many returns of this birthday of his. I hope that each of those days wm bring less for him to worry about; that the morning sun of each of those days will rise upon a world at peace-upon a United States of America still independent-1ndivisible.

God grant that each of those birthdays of our President and the dawn of many suc­ceeding centuries will see us as a people free, independent, our liberties secure; our Na­tional Government, the United States of America, a republic, still the refuge, still the hope of the oppressed throughout the world.

Oh, I ask you, I appeal to the leaders of the House, to the dean of the House as he

·sits here, because he said he believes in the independence of our country, our institu­tions, and our form of government, are we going to let pass unchallenged such appeals as these, which have been sent to every Mem­ber of the House, undoubtedly, and to every Senator? This same proposition ls being advocated by full-page advertising in the great daily newspapers. I ask you, Mr. SA­BATH, chairman of the Committee on Rules, to give us a rule in support of the resolution which I have introduced, and let us learn who is back of this movement and who is paying for it.

EXHIBIT A [From the Washington Evening Star of

January 5, 1942) "IN UNION Now LIES POWER To WIN THE WAR

AND THE PEACE-A PETITION ''That the President of the United States

submit to Congress a program for forming a powerful union of free peoples to win the war, the peace, the future;

"That this program unite our people, on the broad lines of our Constitution, with the people of Canada, the United Kingdom, Eire, Australia, New Zealand, and the Union of South Africa, together with such other free peoples, both in the Old World and the New, as may be found ready and able to unite on this Federal basis;

"We welcome President Roosevelt's con­ferences with Prime Minister Churchill and the 'declaration of united nations.' "

(Churchill ls the man who said, "Give us the tools, and we will finish the Job," and who, since these remarks were made on the fioor of the House and after the fall of Singapore, said, referring to the entry of the United States into the war: "That is what I have droomed of, aimed at, and worked for, and now it has come to pass.")

Referring to this proposed supergovern­ment, the advertisement continues:

"Now the responsibility ls ours either to create or defer too long that 'common com­munity or state• whose importance Mr. Churchill stressed in the Senate December 26 .

"Organizing the democracies effectively in a union need take no longer than organizing. them in an ineffective alliance or supreme war council, and will safeguard their na­tional rights far more securely and equally.

·There already exist carefully studied con­crete plans for just the kind of emergency union that we need. These plans provide for

representation responsible to the people and in proportion to self-governing population. They work out the details and assure the American people a majority in the union congress at the start." THE SOVIET STATES HAVE A COMMON GOVERN•

MENT (Note those who would pull down our flag

and run up in its place the symbol of Union. Now graciously tell us that, at the begin­ning, we are to have a majority vote in this new supergovernment. They fail to tt:ll us that, shortly, outvoted by the more numer­ous peoples of Russia, the British Empire, and others, we would become but a vassal state.)

"We gain from the fact that all the Soviet republics are already united in one govern­ment, as are also all the Chinese-speaking people, once so divided. Surely we and they must agree that union now of the democ­racies wherever possible is equally to the general advantage."

(Yes, Union Now advocates suggest-in fact, they insist-that we now accept, as full partners and as participants, not only in the carrying on of the war but in our do­mestic affairs, in our daily lives, Communists of Russia and the people of China.)

"Let us begin now a World United States. "THIRTY MILLION AMERICANS FAVOR UNION "Thirty million American adults, accord-

ing to the December Fortune survey, already believe the United States, 'after the war,' should 'Join a union of democracies in all parts of the world to keep order.'

"The surest way to shorten and to win this war is also the surest way to guarantee to ourselves, and our friends and foes, irhat this war will end in a union of the free. The surest way to do all this is for us to start that union now."

(In other words, surrender our independ­ence; burn the Declaration of Independence and substitute in its place a declaration of interdependence. Pull down the Stars and Stripes and run up the fiag of Union NGw. 'J'hat ls the plea these men are making.)

The advertisement continues: "As citizens to our fellow citizens, we rec­

omme:q.d this proposal to your serious consid­eration.

"Robert Woods Bliss, Grenville Clark, Gardner Cowles., Jr., Russell W. Davenport, Harold L. Ickes, Owen J. Roberts, Daniel Calhoun Roper, William Jay Schieffelin, John Fos­ter Dulles.

"Inviting you to help create now a living, growing World United States.

"FEDERAL UNION, INC., "10 East Fortieth Street; New York, N. Y. "(A nonprofit membership association) "Please put me, an American citizen, on

. record as favoring your petition for union­now, as explained in your advertisement in the Evening Star, Washington, D. c., January 5, 1942. .. ______________ 1942.

"Name------------------------------------"Street _________________ CitY--------------

"Check here for an enrollment card , literature , reprints of this advertise-ment .

"We need funds to carry on this campaign quickly. If everyone who believes in a World United States will give now what he can to help create it, we shall have it soon. Please insert here -------- the amount of any gift you enclose.

"Federal Union, Inc.: A. J: G. Priest, chair­man; Clarence K. Streit, president; E. W. Balduf, director; P. F. Brundage, secretary; John Howard Ford, treasurer; Patrick Welch, acting director. .

"Philadelphia, Architects Building, Wash­ington, D. C., 726 Jackson Place, Republic 2425. Chicago, 135 La Salle Street. St. Louis,

8336 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 8, Arcade Building. San Francisco, Russ Build­ing. Los Angeles, 1717 North Vine Street. Hollywood.

"National headquarters. 10 East Fortieth Street, New York City."

EXHIBIT B "IN TIME OF WAR PREPARE FOR PEACE--WORLD

FELLOWSHIP, !NC.

"(Started in 1918-the armistice year) "To Members of the Senate and the House of

Representatives oj the United States of America: ·

"We ask the Members of the Senate and House to take the three steps presented here for your consideration.

"We hope these two joint resolutions wm · be introduced and passed by Congress on the President's birthday, January 30, 1942. A present to him, to us, to the world.

"STEP I

"To be enacted by the Senate and Hquse of Representatives of the United States' of America in Congress assembled. "Joint resolution authorizing the· President

of the United States of America to set up and create a Federation of the World, a . World Peace Government, under the title of the 'United Nation~ of the World' "Now, therefore, be it "Resolved, etc., That the Congress of the

United States of America .does hereby sol­emnly declare that all. peoples of the earth should now be united in a commonwealth of nations to be known as the United Nations of the World, and to that end it hereby gives to the President of the United States of America all the needed authority and pow-. ers of every kind and description, . without limitations of any kind, that are necessary in his sole and absolute discretion to set up and create the Federation of the World, a world peace government under the title of the 'United Nations of the World,' includ~ng its constitution and personnel and all other matters needed or appertaining thereto to the end that all nations of the world may by voluntary action become a part thereof un­der the same terms and conditions.

"There is hereby authorized to be appro­priated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $100,-000,000, or so much thereof as may be neces­sary, to be expended by the President, in his sole and absolute discretion, to effectuate the purposes of this joint resolution, and in addi­tion the sum of $1,000,000,000 for the im­mediate use of the United Nations of the World under its constitution as set up and created by the President of the United States of America as provided in this joint resolu­tion.

"The President may appoint such commit­tees and summon such advisers, from any part of the world, as he may deem necessary to effectuate the foregoing purposes with all convenient speed."

EXHIBIT C

"[H. Res. 425, 77th Cong., 2d sess.]

"Whereas, through full-page advertise­ments published in many great dailies, Fed­eral Union, Inc., Clarence K. Streit, president, ls now advocating the surrender of our na­tional independence and our entrance into a United States of the World; and

"Whereas World Fellowship, Inc., ls now propagandizing Congress to appropriate $1,100,000,000 for the purpose of forming a United Nations of the World, which would involve the surrendering of our national in­dependence; and

"Whereas such activities tend to under­mine the morale of our people and to raise in their minds a suspicion that there ls on foot a powerful movement which, notwith­standing the winning of the war, would, 1f i;;ucce:::sful, result in the surrendering of ow::

national independence, the destruction of the liberty of the citizen: Now, therefore. be it

"Resolved, That the Speaker of the House of Representatives be, and he is hereby, au­thorized to appoint a special committee to be composed of five members for the purpose of conducting an investigation to ascertain-

" ( 1) The . extent, character, and objectives of Federal Union, Inc.; of World Fellowship, Inc.; and of any and all similar organizations, and the members of such organizations in the United States;

"(2) The sources from which such organiza­tions and individuals receive the funds which enable them to carry on their activities; the amount and the date of contributions made for ·that purpose; and the names, places of residence, and occupation of the persons con­tributing; and

" ( 3) All other questions in relation thereto that would aid Congress in any advisable remedial legislation. ·

"That said special committee, or any sub-- committee thereof, is hereby authorized to

sit and act during the .present Congress at such times and places within the . United States, whether or not ~he House ls sitting, has recessed, or has adjourned; to hold such hearings, to require the attendance of such witnesses and the production of such books, papers, and documents, by subpena or other­wise, and to take such testimony, as it deems necessary. Subpenas shall be issued under the signature of the chairman and. shall be served by any person designated by him. The chairman of the committee or any mem­ber thereof may administer oaths to wit· nesses. Every per.son who, having. been sum· moned as a witness by authority of said com· mittee; or any subc0mmittee thereof, will­fully makes default, or who, having appeared. refuses to answer any question pertinent to the investigation heretofore authorized, shall be held to the penalties provided by section

_ 102 of the Revised Statutes of the United States (U. S. C., title 2, sec. 192).

"SEc. 2. The committee shall file its report to the House on October 31, 1942, or may file same earlier in the event the House ls not in session, with the Speaker of the House for printing as a public document."

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Be­cause that talk-those two talks-were made_ on the rioor of the House, through the influence of the Washington Post and others, I was haled down before the grand jury four times, and what did they

·want to know? I cite that because al .. though you may not think that situation relevant-the things that happened at that time-they are relevant for the reason that at the present time a com· mittee of this House is following a course, unwittingly-now, note that, I believe unwittingly, not realizing what is hap. pening-is following a course where it is being used by Communists or those fa. vorable to and sympathetic with Com· munists, being used to smear Members of this House. Just as the Post, some New Dealers, caused some to be smeared then. That I will come to and substan­tiate in a few moments.

I was called down before this grand jury. The attorney in charge of it was afterward convicted of disorderly con­duct in the streets of Washington and the Supreme Court in one case and the . lower Federal Court in two cases con. demned him for his unethical procedure in other cases. I asked, "What is wrong in the talks I made?'" There was no criticism of the talks. That is, there was nothing illegal and nothing improper about them. . They were justifiable criticisms from my standpoint. The

answer was, "We are not objecting to what you said, we are objecting to your receiving money or the Public Printer re· ceiving money in payment for printing these speeches and letting them be sent out."

I waived any congressional immunity that I had. I was not required to talk to them or tell them anything, but I went down every tim:e I was asked, as did my secretary, and she went six times, and I gave them a list of the people who had asked for these speeches and I gave them a statement of every dollar that had ever been paid-not to me but to the Public Printer for reprinting these speeches-

. and I told them how many were sent out. to whom sent; and gave them the whole history of the thing.

And yet I was branded as being unpa­triotic and as being disloyal. A state­ment was so published in a Detroit paper. and I was foreed to sue that paper for libel and make them publicly retract that statement, which they did just be· fore my reelection came up. I was grateful for -the timing that they gave . that.

That is the same kind of thing that . is happening now. Why do I say that? I say that for this reason. The gentle­man from Wisconsin [Mr. BIEMILLERJ­I do not recall whether the gentleman from Texas [Mr. PATMAN] repeated the statement-criticized the Constitutional Educational League and the other~the Committee for Constitutional Govern .. ment-because of their views. That was justifiable from his standpoint.

But, in my humble judgment, he is completely mistaken in opposing the views of those organizations, unless it be that he does not believe in our form of government, and that alternative I just cannot accept.

But what I am asking the Members of the House is this: Just why-just why should every Member who disagrees with the gentleman from Wisconsin in his political philosophy be criticized because he inserts in the RECORD something that one of these organizations has printed or put out and then _permits that organiza .. tion or anyone else to contribute to the payment of the bill of the Public Printer? Has he ever complained about what the CIO-the PAC sent out or induced Con· gressmen to send out?

What is this Committee on Lobbying doing? Their rep·resentative went down to the folding room. Two Democratic Members of the House and three Repub· licans called me yesterday and said, "Do you know what they are trying to do to you?" I said, "No." Then I said, "What are they doing?" and I was told that a

·staff member of this committee was in. quiring as to what speeches I had sent out, how many had been sent out and who paid for the printing of the speeches.

If I did something wrong, I want to say to the .Members of the House, the chances are, although there may be a mistake sometime, but the chances are I know what I am doing and I will have to take the consequences.

I am saying here and now that, in sending out speeches, I have violated neither the spirit nor the letter of the law as to the use of the frank. Nor do I pro· pose to remain silent just because some

-.

1950 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 8337

New Dealer, some Red or Pink or Com­munist, does not agree with my political philosophy.

Now this gentleman went down to the folding room and inquired as to what the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. MAsoNl­and I see some of them before_ me-had been sending out. They inquired what the gentleman from New York [Mr. GWINN] had been sending out; and they inquired what the gentleman from Penn­sylvania [Mr. RICH] had been sending out.

Mr. RICH. Who? Me? Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Oh, that

is not an invitation, Bob; but all right, go ahead.

Mr. RICH. Well, I am like you are. I do not care what they say about me. That is like pouring water on a duck's back.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. That I well know you are a gentleman of cour­age as well as of convictions. They wanted to know what the gentleman from California [Mr . . JACI{SONJ had sent out.

Now, do you see what they did? They picked on Members of the House who they thought were easily intimidated and could easily be frightened. That is what they did.

Of course, I cannot speak for the other gentlemen, but here is what happened in my own case. That fell ow did not need to go down to the folding room. I wish· the Committee on Lobbying would tell us his background, his true name and whether he is traveling under an alias.

If he had wanted to learn what I sent out and what it cost and where it went. I would have told him.

I made a talk on the fioor, Frame­up in Steel, expressing my views of the Presidential Fact-Finding Board. That speech was reprinted. Three reprints of that, one with illustrations and two with­out, were made. One was by one of these constitutional organizations. They asked my permission, and being a sort of a shrinking violet and not caring too much for publicity, I told them, "Yes, you can print some of them if you want, but not too many." They did.

I think the speech was a good one. I made it. I am proud of it. The reprint was a good job and I received many com­plimentary letters.

It was a speech which demonstrated­at least I think so-the futility of get­ting justice through a partisan so-called fact-finding board.

They printed them. They paid for them. They sent them out and they paid the postage on them. What of it? Whose business is ft but mine and theirs and the fellows who contributed the money to that organization?

Then, the other organization had them printed in two forms and they sent them out. Some of them I sent out under my frank. Sure. What is wrong about that? It is just like it was in that old case against the seditionists. As I said to the attorney, William Power Maloney, "It is none of your business what I send out, if there is nothing improper in that particular talk or essay, whichever you may call it." Just so I obey the law. and I did, and I do, and I expect to continue to do so. So, in these recent

instances, I do not see that there is anything wrong.

Now, what happened? This organi­zation sent down here-I have forgotten how much it was, I think it was $400 to pay for one of these reprints, but they did not send enough by $114. I paid that $114.

I want to say right now, if there is anybody in America who wants to send me a dollar, some Methodist Church­and some Methodist Churches did pay for Don't Haul Down the Stars and Stripes-and some school boards-if there is anyone or any other religious group who wants to send me a dollar or ten dollars or a hundred dollars or five thousand dollars or even ten thou­sand dollars, I will be very happy to use it to send out documents which I think will induce our people to repudiate the Fair Deal and the New Deal and elect a President and Congressmen-I do not ref er to all the Members of the House; I would not want them all defeated, by any . means, because there are a lot of good Americans here-to send to Con­gress individuals who will uphold our Government and get back on a sound basis, if that is possible.

I have just as much right to speak for and send out speeches in favor of the maintenance of our independence. the retention of our sovereignty, objec­tions to joining an international organ­ization, as have those who have con­tributed millions of dollars to involve us in entanglements with foreign nations.

Another argument was put out by the league-I think two of them. in fact­and I asked permission to put them in the RECORD, and they paid to send them out. Now, what is wrong about that?

Oh, it is all right so they say for Mr. Ewing, with Government money, in vio­lation of a statute-and I heard him testify that it was his duty as well as his right-to go out and lecture and propagandize for policies and plans which he advocated, although there is a statute on that; there is no reason on earth, legal or ethical, or moral, why a Congressman should not-in fact it is his duty to send out material which he be­lieves will lead the people to a better government, to natiorial security, and to the avoidance of war.

These departments draw no line. They send out tons and tons of propa­ganda material. I think some of the members of the Committee on Lobbying would be interested-I see the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. LANHAM] and I see the gentleman from Oklahoma [Mr. ALBERT]-! think they will be interested in knowing that if they uphold the ac­tivities of those individuals who are in­quiring about Congressmen sending out this material, they will be surprised to know that one of their investigators cam­paigned all through the last election in Pennsylvania in favor of FEPC. Ap­parently he is receiving the support of the members of the committee.

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker. will the gen­tleman yield?

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. I yield. Mr. COX. If the group to which the

gentleman refers pursues the campaign of snooping , on its fellow-members

that it has actually initiated, I shall ask the privilege of taking the floor of this House and denouncing the activity and the group in such terms as will admit of no doubt as to the scorn and contempt that I have for such activity.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, at this point I ask permission to insert, following the remarks of the gen­tleman from Georgia, an article from National Affairs, page 11, under date of June 10, which purports to be a state­ment made by the gentleman from Georgia.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection?

There was no objection. Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. That

statement is as fallows: IGNORE LOBBYING QUIZ, Cox URGES

Officials of 166 corporations have been urged by Representative Cox, Democrat, of Georgia, to ignore a request by Chairman BUCHANAN, of the House Select Committee on Lobbying, for a wide variety of informa­tion regarding their activities since January l, 1947.

Here is the full text of a statement Repre­sentative Cox released to the press on June 2:

"If the demand made upon 166 leading business concerns of the country June 1 by the chairman of the House Select Committee on Lobbying Activities and his staff is not immediately withdrawn, I shall offer a reso­lution to abolish the committee and insist upon its adoption.

"People upon whom this demand has been served should ignore it in its entirety, as it is but an outrageous and scandalous assump­tion of power which the committee has no right to exercise. It is not only an abuse of legislative power but is a serious reflection upon the House. If the order had been made by Earl Browder it could not have been a meaner attack upon business and our whole system of private enterprise." -

Much confusion has resulted from the three-page letter-questionnaire which Mr. BUCHANAN sent out. It requested that the information be returned to the committee not later than June 15.

The House Select Committee on Lobbying was authorized and directed to conduct a study and investigation of "(1) all lobbying activities intended to influence, encourage, promote, or retard legislation; (2) all activi­ties of agencies of the Federal Government intended to influence, encourage, promote, or retard legislation."

Notwithstanding this rather specific and, to some extent, limited area of investiga­tion, the committee questionnaire seeks in­formation which, for the most part, is un­related to the purpose for which the com­mittee was established.

For example, the committee seeks complete and detailed information with regard to every trip to or from Washington for which the listed companies have paid expenses, whether or not such trip was related in any way to legislative matters.

The committee also requests detailed in­formation with regard to the maintenance of Washington offices, even though it is recog­nized that such offices, more frequently than not, serve functions of a nonlegislative char­acter such as sales and service establish­ments, obtaining and giving information with regard to Ggvernment business, etc.

Expenditures for printed or duplicated matter, together with copies of such mate­rial, are requested as well as expenditures for advertising services. The committee in addi­tion would like to know about expenditures, 1f any, in connection with a list of eight specified organizations.

Also included ls a request for information about contributions made to organizations

8338 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 8. exempt from taxation under section 101 of the Internal Revenue Code, and with respect to amounts deducted from gross income as having been paid to charitable organizations or business leagues as a trade or business expense.

The committee did not send the question­naire to labor unions also, and thus far has made no pretense of investigating lobbying activities on the part of employees in vari­ous agencies of the Federal Government. The latter, in particular, has been the sub­ject of general condemnation in both Cham­bers of Congress whenever the subject of lobbying has been discussed.

As of ~ he present time, there is no indica­tion that the committee will try to enforce replies to this questionnaire with the use of its subpena power or even that it would be successful in the event it should try. Any subpena which might be issued would. have to be directed more specifically to the precise information sought.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield for an inquiry from either the gentleman from Mich­igan or the gentleman· from Georgia? ·

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. If I correctly understand the allusions, I think certain references are being made to the Special House Committee on the Investigation of Lobbying Activities. Am I correct in that assumption?

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. I have been referring to that committee created under House R.esolution 298.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I would, then, like for the gentleman to give me one moment to make this statement? I am a minority member of that committee. The minority members of the committee have not been informed as to the activi­ties of the committee. We have not been advised, and as of the moment I do not know, who the members of the staff of the committee are. We were not ad~ vised that certain subpenas were issued. We had protested, and I personally pro­tested, against the carrying of blank subpenas around over the country and going into the various organizations without the knowledge and consent of the committee.

I want to a:3ure the gentleman and the House that as far as I am concerned I have never been a party to such tac­tics. In the hearings last week I had to demand, and demand, and demand the right as a minority member of that com­mittee even to see copies of the sub­penas that had been issued in the name of the committee, in my opinion, with­out any right under the law; and I had quite a great deal of difficulty even to maintain the right of the minority to ask a question in that committee. I h~we protested against it and I make the statement-it is a matter of public record and I want to make it a matter . of public record again here that I was amazed and ashamed at the tactics that had been followed by that committee and by men to my knowledge who are not employees of the Federal Government who are out representing the committee. So I want to absolve myself of any re­sponsibility for that which has gone on and to advise the gentleman and the House that I have protested, and that if such tactics continue I expect to make a

speech on the floor of the House cover­ing the entire matter.

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, will the gen­tleman yield?

Mr. HOFFMArl of Michigan. I yield. Mr. COX. I should like to make this

observation for the benefit of the 166 reputable business concerns throughout the country who received a subpena is­sued by the committee in question re­quiring them to furnish information wholly irrelevant to the investigation authorized to be made, and I want to

. confirm what the gentleman has already said, that the proceedings before this committee where reputable citizens of this country were subjected to the third degree and a hijacking operation under subpenas that were wholly invalid, that had been issued by the chairman of the committee without any authorization whatever having been given him by the committee were outrageous. And I make this dare, I challenge this committee to cite any one of the gentlemen who ap­peared before them, and who failed to give completely responsive answers to the questions propounded to them. I challenge them to cite any one of them for contempt.

Mr. LANHAM. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman :yield?

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Just a minute; I want to reply to the gentle­man from Georgia.

Mr. COX. It was an outrageous oper­ation.

The SPEAKER. Does the gentleman from Michigan yield to a member of the committee? The Chair is going to be forced to interrupt; the Chair is going to cut this kind of debate off under a question of personal privilege.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Under that ruling I will have to yield to the gentleman from Georgia. I believe, how­ever, I am discussing this question of personal privilege in a proper manner.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman is exceeding the discussion of the question of personal privilege.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. With that statement I do not a~ree. Under the circumstances I am forced to yield now. Not later as I intended.

Mr. LANHAM. I just wanted to cor­rect the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Cox], whom I esteem very highly. He made a misstatement which I am sure he did not intend when he said that 166 businessmen were sent subpenas. I am sure he did not mean to indicate that. They were sent a letter asking for certain information; it was not a sub­pena.

Mr. COX. Such subpenas were issued to certain individuals calling for like information; and the· individuals were subjected to the most awful abuse and mistreatment I have ever seen accorded any citizen in any court of law or before any committee of this Congress. The record will support what I have said. When I saw the subpena or question­naires it aroused suspicions in my mind and I went over to the committee room on Tuesday to observe what was going on. I came away with a feeling of jus­tification for the suspicions that I had.

Mr. LANHAM. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield further?

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. May I say to the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. LANHAM], to correct any misunder­standing, that I will ask unanimeus con­sent at this time to insert the letter. which went out, together with the paper which is attached, calling upon the cor- · porations and the answer made by one corpora ti on.

Mr. cox. I want to make one further ·observation.

Mr. 3ROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, if the gen­tleman inserts in the RECORD this . par­ticular document, I wish he would also include a list of the corporations cov­ered so that we may see the ones in- . eluded and the ones .that have been left out.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. That is part of my exhibit.

Mr. COX. The gentleman might also include a statement showing who the · counsel of this committee happens to be· and give something of his background.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Michigan?

There was no objection. Mr . . HOFFMAN of Michigan. The

press release, the letter from the chair­man of the committee, the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. BucHANAN], together: with the list of the corporations to whom the letter was sent, are as fol­lows: [Press release of the House Select Committee

on Lobbying Activities] Chairman FRANK BUCHANAN, Democrat,

Pennsylvania, of the House Select Commit­tee on Lobbying Activities, announced today that 166 business corporations have been asked to provide itemized accounts of ex­penditures since January 1, 1947, designed to influence policy or public opinion on na­tional issues.

In a letter sent yesterday to the president of each of the firms, BUCHANAN requested detailed breakdowns on such _items as the cost of maintaining Washington 9ffices,

. travel to and from Washington, printed ma­terial and advertising dealing with public issues which might be the subject of Federal legislative action, contributions to organi­zations which may promote national legis­lative objectives, and any other payments for attempts to influence, directly or indi­rectly, passage or defeat of legislation by Congress.

BUCHANAN'S committee has been ordered to investigate all lobbying activities in­tended to influence, encourage, promote, or retard legislation.

The chairman said the questionnaire to business firms should provide reliable in­formation as a guide to us in determining whether the Federal Regulation of Lobbying Act needs improvement.

JUNE 5, 1950, Hon. FRANK BUCHANAN,

Member of Congress, House Office Building,

Washington, D. C.: In an obvious attempt to use intimidation

in limiting the exercise of the right of free speech by millions of citizens in opposing or supporting proposed legislation, you have de­manded an entirely unreasonable volume of informatton to be furnished to you within a 10-day period. This telegram is to exprees deepest resentment· and indignation at this brazen attempt at thought-control and free .. dom of expression on l:ehalf of the citizens of whom you are the servant and not the master. The savings of millions of citizens

1950 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HQUSE 8339 ·are invested in Institutions whose properties are devoted to furnishing products and serv­ices vitally important in the daily lives of the people, from one end of the country to the other. The gravest and most serious threat to these vital service institutions to­day arises from actions and P.roposed actions by Government. The dangerous and de­structive instruments of governmental power represented by abuse of money and public credit, taxation, and other controls which affect all the economic activities of all the citizens, c:an only be curbed through the power of public opinion operating through democratic processes. Those who seek to ex­tend power of Government try to close the mouths of citizens who dare to oppose or to inform public opinion on the dangers in­volved, and one of the most effective means of accomplishing this subversive objective is to intimidate, through harassing investiga­tions and smearing innuendos, the efforts of citizens to defend themselves. Your in­quisitorial and extremely burdensome de­mand for information which you have no moral right to demand is a most alarming example of the use of this means of intimi· dation.

We cannot now say definitely whether it is humanly possible to furnish, within the time limit, the extremely detailed information as to all printed material, advertising, public statements, talks and conversations, business trips, expenditures or expenses which might have had some direct or indirect effect upon the world-wide field covered by the Federal legislation of today. But we can at once give you our reaction to the enormity of the tyranny implied in your demand, and this wire 1s sent for that purpose. We are send· tng copies to others interested, including our 90,000 stockholders, for the purpose of in­forming them of how public servants are now becoming masters, and in the hope that the indignation which we feel, and have at­tempted inadequately herein to express, will be aroused in others who wm likewise feel disposed to let you hear from them.

Finally, it 1s suggested that those responsi­ble for this bold attempt to suppress freedom of speech and of the press should review

· their early American history and learn there­from what caused the revolt in which this Nation was born.

Respectfully, W. C. MULLENDORE,

President, Southern California Edf· son Co.

-- , CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES,

HOUSE SELECT COMMITTEE ON LOBBYING ACTIVITIE~,

May 31, 1950. GENTLEMEN: You are requested to furnish

this committee with the following informa­tion for the period from January 1, 1947, to date, in order to assist the committee in its investigation being carried out pursuant to House Resolution 298, E'ighty-first Congress.

(a) Travel expenses: As to each trip to or from Washington, D. C., which your or­ganization has paid for any person, please supply details in tabulated form under the headings: Date of trip, total expenses paid by your organization, name of person making trip, title of office of person making trip, purpose of trip.

(b) Maintenance of Washington office: Please supply details in t abulated form under the headings: Year, total cost, purpose of office.

Total cost should include salaries paid, rent, telephone and telegraph, office supplies, etc. It is realized, of course, that such of­fices sometimes serve functions of a non· legislative nature.

(c) Expenditures for printed or duplicated matter: As to each expenditure by your organization for printed or duplicated matter dealing with public issues which might be tbe subject of Federal legislative action,

. please supply details in tabulated form un-

der the headings: Date, cost of such printed or duplicated matter, cost of distribution, title of printed or duplicated matter, process used (mimeographed, multigraphed, printed, etc.), brief description, number of copies is­sued, source of printed or duplicated matter, disposition of such copies.

Forward copies of such matter where available.

The committee specifically desires you to include all expenditures in connection with the following organizations:

1. American Enterprise Association. 2. America's Future, Inc. 3. Committee for Constitutional Govern­

ment, Inc. 4. Constitutional Educational League. 5. Constitution and Free Enterprise

Foundation. 6. Economists National Committee for

Monetary Policy. 7. Foundation for Economic l!:ducation. 8. Public Affairs Institute. (d) Expenditures for advertising services:

As to each newspaper or other periodical ad­vertisement (dealing with public issues which might be the subject of Federal legis· lative action) paid for or whose insertion was arranged by your organization, please supply details in tabulated form under the headings: Date, cost of insertion, brief de­scription of matter, where published.

Forward copies of such advertisements where available.

( e) Contributions: As to each contribution made by your organization: (i) To any or­ganization which, to your knowledge, was exempt from taxation under subdivisions (6) or (7) of section 101 of the Internal Revenue Code; or (11) Which was deducted by your organization from gross income under section 23 (q) of the Internal Revenue Code (charitable or other contributions by corporations); or (iii) Which was deducted by your organization from gross income under section 23 (a) of the Internal Revenue Code (trade and business expenses) , and was made to an organization which prepares and/or distributes books,'pamphlets, or other printed or duplicated matter dealing with public issues, please supply details in tabu­lated form under the headings: Date, amount, recipient (give name and address­address need not be listed more than once) , category (add the code description (i), (11), or (iii), or the appl:cable combination, de­pending on which of the above-listed cate· gories encompasses the contribution) .

(f) Expenditures in connection with legis­lative interests: As to each expenditure by your organization relating to any attempt to influence, directly or indirectly, the passage or defeat of any Federal legislation (and not elsewhere listed in this reply), please list details in tabulated form under the head­ing: Date or dates, amount, name and ad­dress of recipient, purpose. Expenditures in connection with testimony before congres­sional committees should be included here.

It b requested that the reply to each sub­division of this letter be started on a separate sheet of paper. The response to each sub­division should be submitted as completed, rather than waiting until the entire reply is prepared. It is reque;:;ted that this informa­tion be submitted to the committee not later than June 15, 1950. Each reply letter should identify the person responsible for the ac­curacy of the statements contained therein. Immediate acknowledgment of receipt of this letter is requested.

Very truly yours, FRANK BUCHANAN,

Chairman. '

CORPORATIONS RECEIVING THE ATTACHED LETTER

Allied Chemical & Dye Corp, New York, N. Y.; Ams-Chalmers Manufacturing Co., Milwaukee, Wis.; Alumin um Co. of America,

Pittsburgh, Pa.; American Automobile In­surance Co., St. Louis, Mo.; American Can Co., New York, N. Y.; Amedcan & Foreign Power Co., Inc., New York, N. Y.; American Gas & Electric Corp., New York, N. Y.; Amer­ican Power & Light Co., New York, N. Y.; American Telephone & Telegraph Co., New York, N. Y.; American Tobacco Co., New York, N. Y.; American Viscose Corp., Phila· delphia, Pa.; Anaconda Copper Min'ing Co., New York, N. Y.; Armco Steel Corp., Mid­dletown, Ohio; Armour Co., Chicago, Ill.; Armstrong Cork Co., Lancaster, Pa.; Associa­tion of Casualty & Surety Cos., Manhattan, N. Y.; Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co., Chicago, Ill. ·

Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co., Baltimore, Md.; Beech Aircraft Corp., Wichita, Kans.; Belden Manufacturing Co., Chicago, Ill.; Bethlehem Steel Corp., New York, N. Y.; Bor­den Co., New York, N. Y.; Burroughs Adding Machine Co., Detroit, Mich.

Carolina Power & Light Co., North Caro­lina, Raleigh, N. C.; Celanese Corp. of Amer· ica, New York, N. Y.; Central Power & Light Co. (Texas), Corpus Christi, Tex.; Champion Spark Plug Co., Toledo, Ohio; Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co., Cleveland, Ohio; Chrysler Corp., Detroit, Mich.; Cities Service Co., New York, N. Y.; Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co., Cleveland, Ohio; Coca-Cola Co., New York, N. Y.; Columbia Gas & Electric Corp., name change: Columbia Gas System, New York, N. Y.; Columbus & Southern Ohio Electric Co., Columbus, Ohio; Common· wealth Edison Co., Chicago, Ill.; Common· wealth & Southern Corp., Wilmington, Del.: CJnnecticut Light & Power Co., Hartford, Conn.; Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc., New York, N. Y.; Consumers Power Co. (Michigan). Jackson, Mich.; Con­tinental Can Co., Inc., New York, N. Y.; Curtiss-Wright Corp., Wood-Ridge, N. J.

Deere & Co., Moline, Ill.; Delaware Power & Light Co., Wilmington, Del.; Detroit Edi­son Co. (Michigan), Detroit, Mich., and New York, N. Y.; Distillers Corp.-Seagrams, Ltd., Montreal, Canada; Dow Chemical Co., Mid· land, Mich.; E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Wilmington, Del.

Eastman Kodak Co., Rochester, N. Y.; Elec­tric Pt>wer & Light Corp., New York, N. Y.; Empire Gas & Fuel Co., Ltd., Wellsville, N. Y.; Empire State, Inc., New York, N. Y.; Erie Railroad Co., Cleveland, Ohio.

Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., Akron, Ohio; Florida Power & Light Co., Miami, Fla.; Ford Motor Co., Dearborn, Mich.; Fruehauf Traner Co., Detroit, Mich.

General Electric Co., Schenectady, N. Y.; General Motors Corp., Detroit, Mich.; Geor­gia Power Co., Atlanta, Ga.; B. F. Goodrich Co., Akron, Ohio; Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Akron, Ohio; Great Northern Railway Co., St. Paul, Minn.; Gulf Oil Corp., Pitts-burgh, Pa. -

Harnischfeger Corp., Milwaukee, Wis.; Humble Oil & Refining Co., Houston, Tex.

Illinois Central Railroad Co., Chicago, Ill.; Indianapolis Power & Light Co., In· dianapolis, Ind.; Inland Steel Co., Chicago, Ill.; International Elevator Co., New York, N. Y.; International Harvester Co., Chicago, Ill .; International Hydro-Electric System, Boston, Mass.; International Nickel Co., Inc., New York, N. Y.; International Paper Co., New York, N. Y.; Int ernational Telephone & Telegraph Co., New York, N. Y.

Jersey Central Power & Light Co., Asbury Park, N. J.; Johns-Manvme, New York, N. Y.; Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., Pittsburgh, Pa.

Kennecott Copper Corp., New York, N. Y.; Kentucky Utilities Co., Inc., Lexington, Ky.; Kohlberg, Alfred, Inc., New York, N. Y.; Kresge, S. H., Detroit, Mich.

Libby-Owens Ford Glass Co., Toledo, Ohio; Liggett & Myers Tobacco Co., S~. Louis, Mo.; Eli, Lily & Co., Indianapolis, Ind.; Lone Star Cement Corp., New York, N. Y.; Lone Star Gas co., Dallas, Tex.

8340 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 8 Manufacturers Mutual Fire Insurance Co.,

Manhattan, New York; Marshall-Wells Co., Duluth, Minn.; Mellon National Bank & Trust Co., Pittsburgh, Pa.; The Middle West Corp., Wilmington, Del.; Monongahela Power Co., Fairmont, W. Va.; Monsanto Chemical Co., St. Louis, Mo.; Montana Power Co.; Butte, Mont.; Montgomery Ward Co., Chi­cago, Ill.; Mountain States Power Co., Albany, Oreg.

Nash-Kelvinator Corp., Detroit, Mich.; Na­tional Dairy Products Corp., New York, N. Y.; National Distillers Products Corp., Richmond, Va.; National Steel Corp., Wilmington, Del.; New York Airbrake Co., New York, N. Y.; National Power & Light Co., New York, N. Y.; New York Central Railroad Co., New York, N. Y.; Niagara Hudson Power Corp., Syracuse, . N. Y .; Norfolk & Western Railway Co., Roan­oke, Va.; North American Co., New York, ·?f. Y .; Northern I~diana Public Service Co., Hammond, Ind.; Northern Pacifi~ Railway Co., St. Paul, Minn. . · Ohio Edison Co., Akron, Ohio; Owens Illi­nois Glass Co., Toledo, Ohio.

Pacific Gas & Electric Co., San Francisco, Calif.; Pacific Power & Light Co., Portland, Oreg.; Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co., San Francisco, Calif.; Pennsylvania Electric ·co., Johnstown, Pa.; Pennsylvania Power & Light Co., Allentown, Pa.; Pennsylvania Rail­road Co., Philadelphia, Pa.; Philadelphia Elec­tric Co., Philadephia, Pa.; Pittsburgh · Plate Glass Co., Pittsburgh, Pa.; Potomac Electric Power Co., Washington, D. C.; Proctor & Gam­ble Co., Cincinnati, Ohio; Public Service Co, of Colorado, Denver, Colo.; Public Service co. of Indiana, Inc., Indianapolis, Ind.; Public

·Service Co. of New Hampshire, Manchester, N. H.; Public Service Corp. of New Jersey (Pub­lic Service Electric & Gas Co:), Newark, N. J.; Public Service Co. of Oklahoma, Tulsa, Okla.; Public Service Electric & Gas Co., Newark, N. J.; Puget Sound Power & Light Co., Seattle, Wash.; Pullman, Inc., Wilming-ton, Del. ·

Radio Corp. of· America, New York, N. Y.; -The Reading Co., Philadelphia, Pa.; Republic Steel Corp., Cleveland, Ohio; R. J, Reynolds

. Tobacco Co., Winston-Salem, N. C.; Roches­ter Gas & Electric Corp., Rochester, N. Y.

San Diego Gas & Electric Co:, San Diego, Calif.; Schenley Distillers Corp., New York,

. N. Y.; Sears, Roebuck & Co., Chicago, Ill.; Shell Oil Corp., New York, N. Y.; Singer Man­ufacturing Co., Elizabeth, N. J.; Socony-Vac­uum Oil Co., Inc,, New York, N. Y.; South­ern Calif. Edison Co., Ltd., Los Angeles,

. Calif.; Southern Pacific Co., San Francisco, Calif.; Southern Railway Co., Washington, D. C.; Southwestern Gas & Electric Co., Sheveport, La.; Standard Oil Co. of Calif., San Francisco, Calif.; Standard Oil Co. (Ind.), Chicago, Ill.; Standard Oil Co. (New Jersey), New York, N. Y.; Sun Oil Co., Phila­delphia, Pa.; Swift & Co., Chicago, Ill.; Standard Gas & Electric Co., New York, N. Y.

The Texas Co., New York, N. Y.; Texas Electr ic Service Co., Fort Worth, Tex.

Union Carbide & Carbon Corp., New York, N. Y.; Union Electric Co. of Missouri, St. Louis, Mo.; Union Pacific Railroad Co., New York, N. Y.; United Gas Improvement Co., Philadelphia, Pa.; United States Gypsum Co., Chicago, Ill.; United States Rubber Co., New York, N. Y.; United States Steel Corp., New York, N. Y.; Utah Power & Light Co., Salt Lake City, Utah.

Virginia Electric & Power Co., Richmond, Va .

The Washington Water Power Co., Spo­kane, Wash.; Western Electric Co., Inc., New

· York, N. Y.; Western Massachusetts Electric Co., Greenfield, Mass.; Westinghouse Electric Corp., Pittsburgh, Pa.; Wisconsin Electric Power Co., Milwaukee, Wis.; Wisconsin Power & Light Co., Madison, Wis.

Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co., Youngs­town, Ohio.

The f oregping is a most remarkable list-remarkable because of the omis ...

sion of the names of certain individuals, organizations, and corporations which :over the years have been·carrying on and spending-my estimate would be-mil­lions of dollars-in lobbying, in propa­gandizing; for New Dealism, socialism, and internationalism . .

Ye::;, a letter of this kind, although it probably would not have been answered, might have been sent to the United Na­tions or to some of the representatives of communism. One might even have been sent to the Daily Worker, if the com­mittee's staff had been interested.

Mr. LANHAM. Mr. Speaker, will the gentltman yield?

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. I yield 'to the gentleman from-Georgia.

Mr. LANHAM. I regret very much that this matter has come up in the House when the chairman of the com­mittee, the gentleman from Pennsyl­vania [Mr. BUCHANAN], is not here. I have the utmost confidence in the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. BUCHANAN], and I am sure if any Mem­ber will read the testimony that has been taken in all of .these hearings he will find that the chairman has leaned over backward to try to be fair to all groups and to all witnesses who have come before that committee.

Mr. COX. Is that the gentleman's ap­praisal of the conduct of the chairman before the committee on Tuesday last?

Mr. !iANHAM. It is. Mr. COX. Is that the appraisal of the

gentleman of his own conduct? Mr. LANHAM. Yes, and I have no

apology to offer for what I said or did. Mr. COX. What happened at that

time was a reflection upon this House. Mr. LANHAM. Mr. Speaker, I thiilk I

have a right to proceed for a brief time in answer to this tirade that has come upon this committee.

It is pretty difficult to walk down the middle of the road. Whenever you do, you get brickbats from both sides. This committee set out to try to make an ob­jective investigatiOn of lobbying. We have maintained that attitude through­out to the disgust of the newspapers, I am afraid, who expected a lot of head­lines.

I want to pay tribute to the members of the minority side of this committee who have gone along with this investi­gation. There was very· little difference of opinion about the way the hearings were being conducted until these three organizations were subpenaed to bring their records before the committee. We made no effort to criticize any one of these gentlemen for their views, but we do believe that a congressional . commit-

. tee has a right to have its subpena duces tecum obeyed. What occurred in the

· hearing the other day when these three · gentlemen were present was entirely in order and if any person will read the hearings I am sure they will agree with me about that.

On this question of snooping on Con­gressmen, there was testimony before the committee that seven carloads of mail was sent out under the frank ·of one Member of Congress.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Will the gen­tleman give the source of that testimony?.

Mr. LANHAM. Yes. I do not mind giving it. I think it was Mr. Goodman of the CIO. It does not make any differ­'ence where it came from. One member :of the committee, who is not present toda.y, asked, as I understand, that the staff investigate this matter to see wheth­er or not that statement is true.

I have no criticism of any Member of Congress who exercises his right of the franking privilege and t:bis committee has no criticism of any Member of Con­gress even if he has mailed out seven carloads of this propaganda under his frank. I do not know whether it is true or not, but this member of the commit­tee, the gentleman from California [Mr . DoYLEJ, as I understand it, asked the staff to see whether that was true. Now, if the staff has been asked to investi­gate any other Member of Congress, or the mail that he sends out, I know noth­ing of-it at all.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. I want to say to the gentleman from Georgia ·and to every other Member of the House that I am not criticizing the members of this committee. I think some member of its staff has put one over on it for an ulterior purpose of his own.

Mr. LANHAM. :i: do not know then what criticism is, if this is not• criticism of the members of this committee.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. It is not. I am criticizing whoever was responsible. I have an idea that the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. LANHAM], who is now speaking, does not have the slightest

· inkling of the background of all the ·members of the staff.

Mr. LANHAM. That is true. Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Yes.

that is true. There you are. My asser­tion is, and it is made in all kindness be­cause I have been a victim of some of

·these things myself, that that commit­tee is being used at the present time for an assault on all those who advocate constitutional government. -

Mr. LANHAM. That is not true. Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Well,

that is a matter of opinion. The facts as they come out will settle that issue.

Mr. LANHAM. That is not true, I am sure.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. I yield. Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I asked the gen­

tleman to yield simply to make it verY, clear that the minority members of the committee were not consulted in anyway

-about the questionnaire sent to the 166 business concerns; knew nothing of it until the newspapermen brought it to us. They were not consulted in ariy way in connection with the so-called investiga .. tion of Members of the House as to the use of the franking privilege. We were not consulted or notified or informed as to the various questions that were asked of various organizations over the coun .. try as to Members of Congress and indi­vidual Members of Congress, and were rather very much surprised and shocked at the slanted, one-sided way in which this entire thing has been handled.

Mr. HALLECK. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.

1950 - CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 8341 Mr. HALLECK. I think, in fairness,

it ought to be pointed out that as far as the questionnaire is concerned, my in­formation is that the majority members as well as the minority members of the committee, other than the chairman, did not know of the fact that the ques­tionnaire was being mailed out. The committee never acted on it.

Mr. MASON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. MASON. I am one of the Mem­bers of this House that was accused be­fore this committee by a CIO represent­ative of having sent out a carload or so of franked mail. Actually, 100,000 speeches were sent out. I appeared be­fore the committee and I made the statement and I make it now, because I want every Member of this House to know it, that no material of any kind has ever been sent out under my frank that was not my own words and my dwn speeches. I have leaned over backward in the 14 years that I have 'been a Mem­ber of this House not to violate and not to disobey any of the rules of this House. I did make a speech on the floor of this House last January-and I have it in my hands-entitled "The Judicial Usur­pation in the Cement Case." And if I do say it myself, it received very wide publicity. I had 5,000 copies of the speech printed to send to the members ·of the cement-workers union in my dis­trict to show them that I was protecting, as much as I could, their interest, and because the speech received wide pub­licity I was asked by one of these or­ganizations if I would have any oppo­sition to their sending out that speech. I said, "No; you pay for it. I cannot afford it. You pay for it and send it out." And they did. The speech was an analysis of the Supreme Court deci­sion overruling a 50-year custom which affected all heavy industry all over the country, and in view of the fact that two cement mills are located in my own city, of course, I was interested in protecting their interests. I feel that I was justi­fied-legally, morally, and in every other way. My frank has never been misused.

Mr. KRUSE. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield to me for a brief state­ment about the case?

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. For how long?

Mr. KRUSE. Just a few minutes. Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Let me

finish one thing, then I will gladly yield. I have one other point, and that will conclude my part of this matter.

Something was said by the gentleman from Wisconsin, I think Mr. BIEMILLER, &bout the conviction of one Joseph Kamp for contempt of Congress. Joe Kamp was convicted because he refused to give the Anderson committee a list of the contributors to his organization. I remember when that hearing was held. Joe was advised by me to give them the information. He said, "To protect the people who gave this and not subject them to harassment or to criticism, I do not intend to give it." I said, "Joe, you will end up by going to jail," because I have always insisted that witnesses shoultj. answer a congressional commit-

tee even though perhaps the testimony was not relevant to that particular issue. But Joe persisted; he was sentenced, and Friday he is going to jail.

Tomorrow Joe Kamp goes to jail to serve, I think it is, 4 months. He was convicted of contempt because he refused to give a House committee the names of those who contributed to the Constitu­tional Education League and the amount which each contributed.

Joe was warned by me that jail would follow his refusal. He chose deliberately to suffer the penalty rather than give the committee the information it sought, which he believed, which I believe, would have been used by Communists and or­ganizations supporting Communists to harass and annoy those who had made contributions to an organization which was attempting to maintain constitu­tional government.

Joe did what the President and mem­bers of his Cabinet, McGrath and Ache­son, have since done.

The President, you recall, has refused to give to a Senate committee the files which would demonstrate the truth or the falsity of the charges which have rec~ntly been made that there are Com­munists in the executive department.

Joe was attempting to protect those who, in his opinion, were loyal Ameri­

- cans, contributing to the preservation of our Government.

Behind the refusal of the President­the denial of information by McGrath and Acheson-Communists have hidden.

The President and, under his direction, two members of his Cabinet, are defying the whole membership of the United States Senate, which directed its com­mittee to obtain files in the executive department in which there is. inf orma­tion bearing upon the issue of whether Communists are directing the foreign policy of our Government.

Kamp, when he reft,Ised to testify be­fore the Anderson committee, was, ac­cording to his belief, defying the head of the Communist spy ring, John Abt, who was then acting, according to Kamp, as an agent of Sidney Hillman, who, Kamp alleges, had met in secret with the House Committee on Campaign Ex­penditures and demanded that the com­mittee secure the names of the contrib­utors to the league's campaign against communism.

Mr. ANDERSON, of New Mexico, was chairman of the committee which cited Kamp for contempt. Mr. ANDERSON af­terward became Secretary of Agriculture, and refused to honor a Senate subpena which called for the names of speculators in grain trading. This, according to Kamp, was on the ground that to have the names made public would hurt a lot of innocent people. .

You may recall that it was at that time disclosed that Brig. Gen. Wallace H. Gra­ham, the President's physician, was one whose name was on the list.

Now, if it be said that Kamp's publi­cations contain untruthful statements, it should be remembered that for many years Kamp has been :figh~ing the Com­munists, sending out pamphlet after pamphlet, news release after news re­lease; that he has many times offered a reward of $1,000 for proof of any false

statement made by him. So far as I know, that reward has never been claimed; nor has Kamp, so far as I know, ever been sued for libel or slander.

Kamp it was, who, 7 months before the spy ring was exposed by Elizabeth Bent­ley and Whittaker Chambers, printed the charge that Abt was the head of the Communist spy ring.

Joseph Kamp had a statement he wanted to give to the Lobbying Commit­tee when he appeared ave;: there. They would not permit it to go in. I am going to include it right at this point as an ex­tension of my remarks. I have already received unanimous consent to do so. It was an explanation <>f his attitude. As I read his· statement, he does not criticize this· committee, he does not criticize the committee whicl .. cited him, he insists that they were deceived and misled by very smart, intelligent, well-educated Communists.

Mr. COX. Mr. Speaker, will the gen­tleman yield?

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. I yield to the gentleman from Georgia.

Mr. COX. Joe Kamp goes to jail be­cause he had the courage and decency to live up to the high ethics of the news­paper profession. Every newspaperman in the gallery ought to ring a bell for the couJ."age he showed.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Many newspapermen have refused to give the source of their information because it was confidential. Joe did nothing more than that.

Mr. COX. That is all. Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. The

Kamp statement is as follows: STATEMENT OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL EDUCA•

TIONAL LEAGUE, INC., BY JOSEPH P. KAMP, EXECUTIVE VICE CHAIRMAN, TO THE SPECIAL HOUSE COMMITTEE INVESTIGATING LOBBYING

ACTIVITIES, JUNE 6, 1950 I am at a loss to understand on what

ground this committee is interested in the private affairs of the Constitutional Educa­t ional League, Inc., which has never engaged in lobbying, and whose efforts ha·ve been con­fined almost solely to fighting communism.

According to the statement of your chair­man, as reported in the New Yorlt -'.rimes, this hearing is not designed to go particu­larly into the activities of the organizations summoned here. The Times quotes your chairman as saying that the purpose is to give them an opportunity to answer why they refused to give our investigators in­formation concerning their financial angels.

On behalf of the Constitutional Educa­tional League, I shall answer that question and make our position clear.

To begin with, the gentleman representing your committee who called at our offices gave no reason for demanding the information he sought. He acted as though his demand were authority enough.

Without any preliminaries, he said he had come to look at our list of contributors, and that he had a group of his assistants he wanted to put to work going through our files. I told him that he could not see the names of our contributors or look at our files until he could show me that the league came under the authority of your committee and within the scope of the resolution,

I told him that we had never engaged in lobbying. I asked him if he had any evidence that we had done so. He said that he could not tell until he had examined our list of contributors.

I explained that that was putting the cart before the horse. I said that he would have

8342 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 8 to establish that we had engaged in lobbying before he could see our records. I asked him who was the counsel to the committee. He said that h~ was.

I then told him that I would be glad to answer any questions he might have regard­ing our act ivities, and that I would be glad to demonstrate to him that our work con­sisted almost exclusively of fighting commu­nism. He said that he was not interested in asking questions; that, if I did not give him access to the names of our contributors, the committee would have to issue a subpena for them.

It seems to me that the chairman of this committee is under a similar misapprehen­sion regarding the powers and duties of this committee and the prescribed scope of this investigation. Mr. BUCHANAN, according to the United Press, is quoted as saying: "The key thing in the investigation is who their financial backers are."

I respectfully submit that the key thing in any investigation of this nature is for the committee to establish a basis of perti­nency before it decides to investigate any group, or anybody. A mere· whim, a com­pelling curiosity, or even "-an old grudge against" us on the part of Mr. BUCHANAN (to quote the Christian Science Monitor) is an insufficient ground on which to initiate a congressional investigation.

The congressional power of inquiry is not unrestricted. One obvious limit ation upon this particular sort of inquiry is that some reasonable relevancy and justification must appear. In the absence of activities by our organization of a nature reasonably within the purview of the resolution creating this committee-indeed, in the absence of any trace of evidence of such activities-any claim of possible pertinency of our source of in­come to the purposes of the investigation is manifestly absurd.

I submit that neither this committee, nor any other committee of Congrei:s, has a right to engage in a mere fishing expedition.

A few years ago when Senator ELMER THOMAS, Democrat, of Oklahoma, was ap­pointed to a Senate investigating committee, he made this statement:

"As a member of the committee, I will not be willing to go on any fishing expeditions. Decisions of the Court are strictly against that."

I emphatically deny that this committee could have any evidence in its possession, or that there is any evidence, that the Consti­tutional Educational League, Inc., ever, in any way, has att empted to influence the enactment of, or the defeat of, any piece of legislation either by lobbying or in any other way.

In its 30 years of activity, no representative of the league ever has appeared before any committee of Congress to testify either in support of, or against any pending bill. The league never has adopted any resolutions denouncing or approving any piece of legisla­tion. No Member of Congress ever has been approached by anyone either connected Y.'ith, or speaking for, the league, and solicited to vote for, or against, any pending measure. In none of the league's literature have read­ers ever been requested to communicate with their Congressmen to urge support for, or action against, any legislation on any sub­ject; nor has the league ever issued any state­ments to the press calling for the support or the defeat of any bill before Congress.

I maintain, therefore, that since the Con­stitutional Educational League, Inc., never has done anything that even faintly could be construed as lobbying, this committee exceeds its authority when it presumes to inquire into our affairs, and demands the names of our contributors and the purchas­ers of our literature.

If the committee persists in its demand for the names of our contributors, then the committee, on the basis of adequate evidence, first must come to the conclusion that the

league has engaged in lobbying activities which specifically urged, or attempted to in­fluence, either the adoption or rejection of legislation; otherwise .the demand is pat­ently illegal.

No congressional committee has a consti­tutional right to question the validity, scope, or nature of any expression of opinion on current questions, or to inquire into the affairs of persons, or groups of persons, be­cause they were responsible for such expres­sions of opinion.

I am hopeful tr.at this committee will accept this presentation in the good faith in which it is offered, despite the fact that my position here has been seriously preju­diced as a result of the statement given to the press by your chairman. According to the New York Herald Tribune, Chairman BUCHANAN said that I have a record of re­fusing to cooperate with congressional com­mittees. He recalled that the Supreme Court recently upheld a lower court con­viction of Kamp for contempt of Congress.

I do not doubt that many readers of the newspapers, and perhaps even members of this committee, were led to the opinion that here is a man who has no respect for legal authority, who brazenly defied congressional committees, who should go to jail, and that it is about time that your committee put this brash fellow .in his place, and, as your chairman told the press, "Find out the facts that Congress and the people are entitled to know."

I want to make it perfect1.Y clear that I have the greatest respect for the Congress of the United States as an institution. I also have great respect for most Members of Con­gress. I · have great respect for the law, and above all for the Constitution of the United States.

It is because of my profound respect for, and confidence in, American institutions that I feel obliged to present my considered opinion regarding our legal position in re­spect of my contention that in attempting to inquire into the affairs of the league this committee is going beyond the scope of its authority. In the belief that the members of the committee have an equal respect for American institutions I am confident that my presentation will have this committee's most careful consideration.

The burden of establishing pertinency rests with this committee. If you can es­tablish pertinency by showing that the league ever has engaged in lobbying, then we shall have to submit to your authority or s:iffer the consequei1ces.

. So far, however, no one has even suggested that the league has engaged in lobbying. The final proof that we have not engaged in lobbying is the fact that we are not regis-

. tered under the Lobbying Act. If the De­partment of Justice had any evidence, or could have gotten any evidence that we had engaged in lobbying, we would long since

. have been indicted and prosecuted for not having registered under the act.

According to the statement given to the press by your chairman, I may infer that the league is involved in this investigation in part because Mr. BUCHANAN is displeased with the defeat of Senator PEPPER in Florida.

The New York Herald Tribune story con­cludes with this paragraph:

"The three organizations were 'very active' in the recent Florida primary election and have been active in North Carolina, where a primary is slated tomorrow, Representative BUCHANAN said."

Just suppose-but without my conceding­that I wrote material used by Congressman SMATHERS in his speeches. Suppose-with­out my conceding-that I prepared some of · his literature. What would that have to do with this committee? This committee is not authorized to inquire into political activity.

While we are on the subject, let me make 1t clear that the league has no interest in :oolitics, partisan or otherwise, We stand for

principles. We fight the enemies of our country.

And that ls all that we do. Since I am quite sure the members of

this committee have been given a false pic­ture of the League, let me tell you very briefly about our organization.

The Constitutional Educational League, Inc., was founded in 1919 by veterans of World War I, who returned to their home communities to find the Hisses and the Lat­timores of those days on soap boxes openly denouncing the American Government and advocating its overthrow. These veterans of World War I believed that if the American form of government was worth fighting and dying for in France, it worth defending at home.

The League was organized-and I quote from its charter-"to bring about a more complete understanding of the function of our Government and the guaranties and provisions of its basic instrument, ·the Con­stitut ion of the United States; to inculcate patriotism and love of country; to investi­gate and expose the subversive elements which are seeking to undermine the faith of the American people in their institu­tions."

Since the day of its inception, 30 years ago, the League has endeavored to live up to these patriotic aims, and it has never gone beyond the scope of its purposes.

The Constitutional · Educational League, Inc., is strictly what its name implies-an educational organization which concerns it­self with principles, the principles of govern­ment which have mad.e this Nation great. It defends those principles in its publications allii it combats the enemies of our country who despise those principles and who are determined to destroy the free institutions and the Government which those principles support and maintain.

The first amendment to the Constitution guarantees us the right to carry on this educational work by either the printed or the spoken word, and the Congress can pass no law abridg~ng that right.

It follows, then, that since the Congress cannot legislate in this area of activity, that it has no power to investigate.

The congressional power of inquiry is not unrestricted. There is no basis in authority, policy, or logic for holding that a congres­sional committee is entitled to a preferred constitutional position. Freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and the other guaran­ties incorporated in the Bill of Rights do have a preferred constitutional position. The power of investigation, like the power of taxation, stops short of restricting the free­doms protected by the first amendment to the Constitution.

Any congressional action that tends in any manner to restrict expressions of opin­ion which Congress may not prohibit violates the first amendment. .Congressional action in the nature of investigation is no excep­tion. Civil liberties may not be abridged in order to determine whether or not they should be abridged.

Aside from the legal aspect; however, there is one other factor that is of more impor­tance in the circumstances.

Were it not for this other factor I would most certainly not be here. For, had the request for information been made under different circumstances, I would have said to your counsel, "Go right ahead. Go through our files to your heart's content. We have nothing to hide. We are very proud of the good patriotic work that we are doing. You . will find that we are sup­ported by the finest people in this country, by good Americans in every walk of life, by people who believe in American institutions and who are trying to do their little part in upholding and defending constitutional gov­ernment.''

And I would have added, "I know you have no legal right to inspect our personal

1950 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 8343 and confidential records, but if we can be of any assistance to Congress, we are only too happy to cooperate."

I sincerely regret that a situation which seriously involves this committee makes it impossible for me to take such a stand. It is with great reluctance that I feel obliged to assert my constitutional rights, and to insist that this committee observe strict ad­herence to the letter of the law.

I assure you that my position is not meant to reflect any lack of confidence in the mem­bers of this committee. I am sure that you are innocently involved. I am certain that the situation I am about to call to your attention will be an amazing revelation to each and every one of you.

I can best illustrate the seriousness of this situation by referring back to your chair­man's reference to my alleged record of re­fusing to cooperate with congressional com­mittees.

In view of that statement, it ls obvious that he is not famiilar with the facts. If he had known the truth I am sure he would have been very careful not to bring up the matter.

But since it has been brought up, I think, in all fairness, that this committee should know the exact truth.

I want to say for the record, with all the forcefulness of which I am capable, that I have never refused to cooperate with any congressional committee that was acting on its own initiative and respons1b111ty, and which was honestly and sincerely doing its job in the public interest.

With equal vigor I am proud to say that I have refused to cooperate when Commu­nist agents, without the knowledge of com­mittee members, managed to use congres­sional committees for their own subversive purposes.

My alleged record of refusing to cooperate dates back to my experience with the so­called Senate Civil Liberties Committee. This was r:ot a congressional committee in any sense of the word. This committee was conceived by the Communists, and was born in the Cosmos Club. The master mind who wrote the resolution and then became coun­sel to the committee was John Abt, who has since been identified, in sworn testimony before your Committee on Un-American Activities, as the head of the original Com­munist spy ring. Elizabeth Bentley testified that she met these Communist spies and re­ceived stolen Government secrets from them 1n Abt's New York apartment.

It was Mr. Abt, in the name of the Senate committee, who first subpenaed the names of our contributors.

However, I was never .given a chance to refuse to comply. The committee postponed my appearance for months. I wired Vice President John N. Garner demanding the right to be heard. I appeared at a public liearing and the committee refused to hear me. They didn't dare hear me because, in my release to the press, I promised to prove that "the committee's activities were the culmination of a conspiracy entered into between representatives of Communist and· other Red organizations and the chairman of the committee." You will find that state­ment in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.

Months later, the subpena was withdrawn. In 1944, Communist spy-ring leader John

Abt sat in a secret session of the House Com­mittee To Investigate Campaign Expendi­tures and demanded that the committee in­vestigate the source of our funds. Again a subpena was issued calling for the names of our contributors.

I want to make it perfectly clear that no member of this committee had the faintest idea that Abt was a Communist, or that he was the leader of a Red spy ring. He was there representing Sidney Hillman, and be­cause Abt had held important Government jobs-had been an Assistant Attorney Gen­eral-special courtesies were extended to him.

During the hearings I informed the com­mittee that Abt was the husband of Jessica. Smith, "editor of the Moscow-financed Com­munist propaganda magazine, Soviet Russia Today." I also charged that subversive out­siders were meddling in the affairs of the committee, and I told the committee that I could not cooperate in what I said was an "attempt to use the Congress to further the conspiracy to sovietize America."

It is understandable that the committee could not believe my charges. They sounded too impossible. So I was cited, indicted, and finally convicted and sentenced to jail for contempt of Congress."

But on April 21, 1948, your esteemed late colleague, Representative Ralph Church, in a speech on the floor, not only verified the truth of my charges but added to them. He also introduced a resolution to rescind the citation for contempt voted against me 4 years before, on the ground that the citation · was not the legal act of the committee.

In his speech Mr. Church declared that he had introduced the resolution in an attempt "to rectify • • • an injustice which re­sulted from the fact that outsiders managed somehow to. inject themselves into the affairs of the so-called Anderson House Committee on Campaign Expenditures, of which I was a member."

He told how false information had been planted with the committee, how documents had been removed from the files of the com­mittee, how important testimony had been deleted from the printed record without the knowledge of the members of the committee. He named the man who had manipulated the committee, James H. Sheldon, whom he identified as an organizer for the American League Against War and Fascism, "the larg­est and most active of the Communist move­ments which was identified as a subversive Communist front by the Department of Jus­tice." He said also that Sheldon was an agent of the "International Labor Defense 'Which was branded as the legal arm of the Communist Party by former Attorney Gen­eral Biddle."

A few months after Mr. Church made his speech Sheldon served as a delegate to an international conference-a Communist con­ference-behind the iron curtain.

Representative Church came to this con­clusion: "Had the members of the Anderson committee known the identity and commu­nistic background of the men who obviously gave his false information to the committee, had they known of the Red revolutionary activities of the man who purloined the let­ters and memorandum foisted on the com­mittee, and had they known the subversive and even criminal nature of the organization with which these men were connected, I am certain that there would have been no occa­sion for any controversy between the com­mittee and Mr. Kamp, and, most certainly, there would have been no citation for con­tempt."

What Mr. Church did not tell the House was that Sheldon was also the agent of another subversive movement which makes a practice of planting its agents on, or with, congressional committees.

Four of its agents worked with the Mc­Cormack-Dickstein committee. Only one was on the payroll of the committee; the others were on the payroll of this private subversive movement while they contributed their services to the committee. The man who was on the committee's payroll called himself Richard Rollins. His real name was Isadore Rothberg. Chairman McCORMACK introduced one of the volunteers who used the name ·Frank Prince, as the chief inves­tigator. Actually he was chief of an un­American gestapo. Under his real name of Morris Czech he had a long criminal record. Prince, or Czech, sabotaged the committee's investigation of communism.

When, some years later, the Special House Committee on Un-American Activities was

being set up,' an attempt was made to plant this same Frank Prince in the top spot on the staff under Chairman Martin Dies, but Dies discovered who Prince was, and the plot fizzled. But shortly thereafter another agent of this subversive un-Ameri­can underground managed to get himself on the Dies committee payroll. He called himself John Metcalf. His real name was Oberwinder.

Now this movement has an agent on your committee.

He is your chief counsel, Louis Little. He is a member of B'nai B'rith, which in

itself ls a reputable fraternal organization to which many good Americans of the Jewish faith belong. But, like the labor unions and the Government, the B'nai B'rith has been infiltrated by Communist agents.

. They are in control of its committee, the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith, which does the dirty work fm the Commu­nists. Aside from its pro-CoP'lmunist com­plexion, the Anti-Defamation League is a vile racket which promotes hate, breeds in­tolerance and maintains its own sinister gestapo spy network. Respectable Jews are ashamed of it. Alert Americans of the Jewish faith bitterly denounce it.

It is headed by New York Supreme Court Jtistice Meier Steinbrink, and has other reputable window dressing, but it is made up largely of thieves, spies, racketeers, and character assassins.

Its principal mouthpieces and hatchetmen are Walter Winchell and Drew Pearson.

Already private and confidential informa­tion of this committee has found its way into the hands of Winchell and Pearson, and was used by them for smearing purposes.

Two months ago, the B'nai B'rith, of which your chief counsel is a member, was given an editorial dressing down by the Jewish Daily Forward for the procommunism and libels against America which appeared in its monthly magazine.

Three months a.go. the Antidefamation League of B'nai B'rith issued its annual re­port in the form of a smear book which made violent and vicious false attacks against the leading movements fighting communism in the United States.

The book was plugged day after day by Walter Winchell.

The author of the book and the chief di­rector of the Antidefamation League of B'nai B'rith is a man who calls himself Arnold Forster.

If you can get President Truman to let you look at the FBI files, you will discover that Forster's right name is Fastenberg, and that he was a member of the Communist spy ring.

No wonder the names of contributors to the anti-Communist campaigns of the Con­stitutional Educational League have been subpenaed again.

It is a criminal outrage that we constantly have to fight for the right to combat the enemies of the Constitution of the United States, and that obstacles are unwittingly placed in our way by Members of the Con­gress, who have taken an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Why should this committee want the names of our contributors? You would have no earthly use for them. But the subversive forces who are using this committee for their own ulterior purposes do want those names so that they can harass, smear, and intimi­date our contributors and the purchasers of our literature. They boast that it is their intention to kill off our sources of financial support.

·It is a remarkable coincidence that one unit of this Anti-Defamation League net­work of Communist aiding snoop-and-smear organizations, the so-called Friends of De­mocracy, has sent a confidential memoran­dum to its chief supporters which names as its targets practically the same organizations which this committee wants informatloD about from leading industrialists.

"'

8344 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 8 This memorandum was sent out after your

investigators had started going through the files of at least two of the organizations named. It is significa:r,.~ to me that these miscalled friends of democracy were able to boast to their supporters that "a list of such contributors (to the organizations named) has been obtained and friends of Democracy is in ·the midst of a project of approaching these contributors • • •. Letters are be­ing sent to the boards of directors of t:P.e corporations. • / ' • Some of the meet­ings of the boards of director~ of these big corporations have already been attended. • • • When this project is completed; Friends of Democracy is certain that 70 to 75 percent of the support of these subversive groups will be eliminated." No~ · that word '.'subversive,'' which this

outfit is applying to reputable patriotic and business organizations which only endeavor. to uphold, defend, and protect the American way of life-organizations such as the Con­stitutional Educational League, the Freedoms Foundation, the National Industrial Confer­ence Board, the Committee for Constitu­t ional Government, America's Future, Con­stitution and Free Enterprise Foundation, the Foundation for Economic Education, and the National Association of Manufacturers.

This trick should be understandable when. I tell you that Friends of Democracy is headed by Rex Stout, a former editor and part· owner of the Communist weekly magazine, New Masses, and when I explain that 17 members of the national committee of Friends of Democracy ~ 1ave a total of 191 Communist-front citations in the files of your House Committee on Un-American Activities, including 54 affiliations with or­ganizations designated by the Department o! Justice as Communist and subversive.·

May I suggest that the foregoing circum­stances, together with the leaks from this committee to Drew Pearson and Walter Win­chell, constitute a situation that cries to high heaven for a thorough investigation. The integrity of this committee, in fact the very integrity of Congress itself, demands prom:pt and thorough action.

It would hardly be fair for this committee to investigate itself. But it would be appro­priate for this committee to request the ap­point'D.ent of a special House committee to conduct such an investigation without delay, and to include in such. investigation the activities of the Communist-aiding Antidef­amation League of B'nai B'rith and its asso­ciated movements and organizations, which constitute the most powerful lobby in the United States, with more than $7,000,000 a year to spend. They do put the heat on Congress, on the President, and on everybody else. They really do influence legislation.

Was that one of the reasons why a B'nal B'rith agent was placed on your committee­to make sure that nobody would get inquis­itive about the Antidefamation League and

·the alarming · power it wields over the Con­gress?

This is a situation which demands that Congress must, to use the words of your chairman, "find out the facts· that Congress and the people are entitled to know."

Mr. LANHAM. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. I yield to the gentleman from Georgia.

Mr. LANHAM. I believe the gentle-' man said that the committee refused to accept Mr. Kamp's statement. ·

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Am I wrong?

Mr. LANHAM. I think the gentleman is wrong. We refused to accept it until he had responded to the subpena. so· long as the witness was in contempt of. the committee, we refused·to let him use the committee as a sounding board.

Mr. COX. Why not ask the gentleman if, operating under the subpena that was in evidence before them, they had the right to demand anything of Joe Kamp or anybody else?

Mr. LANHAM. That is a question for the· court to· pass on.

Mr. COX. What is the gentleman's opinion? Does the gentleman believe himself that the subpena was a legal subpena?

Mr. LANHAM. I do not know, frank­ly, but we had to proceed on the basis that the subpena was properly issued. That is the only way the committee could proceed.

Mr. COX. Did the chairman have the power to issue that subpena?

Mr. LANHAM. I do not know whether the chairman did or not.

Mr. COX. Then the gentleman has no opinion? . Mr. LANHAM. I do not, because I do not know, frankly.

Mr. RICH. Then why send the gen­tleman to jail?

Mr. LANHAM. We have not attempt­ed to send him to jail. I will be frank and tell you I suggested to the chairman before any action was taken toward citing any witness for contempt that he determine the question from the Parlia­mentarian as to whether or not the sub­pena was properly issued.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. The sit­uation that developed was this, that he was not permitted to make his statement when he came there and appeared and was required to testify. Kamp was not permitted to read or file his statement?

Mr. LANHAM. Not until he had com­plied with the subpena duces tecum. On that I am sure the committee was right.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. I yield. Mr. BROWN of Ohio. !'should like to

point out that you cannot have a sub7 pena duces tecum to bring in any records if the subpena is invalid and illegal. When I brought up the simple question I was ridden down by the com­mittee, including the gentleman from Georgia. You all said, "Oh, no, we have this power. You are going to answer first. You are going to produce every­thing before you even go into the ques­tion."

I asked that the Parliamentarian of the House be called and that even the Speaker of the House be consulted to find out whether we followed legal pro­cedure under the rules of the House and the provisions of the Reorganization Act~

Mr. LANHAM. The Chairman re­sponded that he had consulted the Parliamentarian.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. And I had con­sulted him. Let us find out what was going on. I think the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. LANHAM] will admit that I had great difficulty even in seeing copies at that late date of the subpenas that had been issued. I wonder if the gentle­man contends that subpenas should be issued and statements be given to the newspaper prejudging cases saying, "We are going to send so-and-so to jail for contempt if they do not answer what we asked them today," before the minority members, at least, of the committee even

know the subpenas have been issued or · have an opportunity to ·see them. It is a shame, and it is a blot on democracy. "Democracy in action"-bah !

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. The gentleman fr-0m Ohio at that time was asked whether he represented Mr. Kamp, as I recall.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Yes ; I was asked, as I remember, by one gentleman on the majority whether I was repre­senting the defendant.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Yes; and as I remember, the reply was that you were representing the people of your district and the people of the Nation. · Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Yes; that is right, and I was not representing any subversive groups. I might say that I am quite fed up on the whole thing.

Mr. HALLECK. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. l!OFFMAN of Michigan. I yield . Mr. HALLECK. I, too, am a member

of the Committee on Lobbying Investi­gation. Unfortunately I had a long­standing commitment to be in my dis­trict on last Tuesday on a matter of con­siderable consequence to a community in my district. Therefore, I was not privileged to be at the meeting. But I want to say upon my responsibility as a member of the committee that certainly I shall exercise every power at my com­mand to find out what the legal situa­tion is and what the liabilities and re­sponsibilities are under any action that has been taken before I will support any action for contempt. Certainly I think the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. LAN­HAM] would feel the same way about it.

Mr. LANHAM. And I so advised the chairman.

Mr. HALLECK. I am sure the gentle­man from Georgia [Mr. LANHAM], good lawyer as he is, would feel that way about it.

Mr. LANHAM. Yes; and I so advised the chairman.

Mr. HALLECK. And unless it is clearly established that the proper sub­pena was issued and that the matter was p1:operly a matter into which the committee could inquire, and that there was a real contempt of a legal process of the Congress of the United States, then certainly I would think any member of the committee under his responsibility would not vote for any citation for con­tempt.

Mr. COX. The gentleman, as a re­sponsible member of the committee, ought to exercise himself in behalf of bringing the committee back within the prov1s10ns of the resolution which brought it into existence or else the committee ought to be abolished.

Mr. HALLECK. May I say in response to that that it is always unpleasant to have these controversies about these things, and yet sometimes it seems they must arise. I referred a moment ago to the sending out of the questionnaire which has caused a great deal of con­sternation in the minds of many people who received it, because clearly on its face as it was drafted it was much broader than I believe . we could expect anyone 'to respond to.

Many of the persons to whom it was addressed have pointed out that under-

1950 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 8345 taking to comply with the request would in many particulars be most burden­some, impossible of accomplishment within the specified time, highly expen­sive to them, and in the final analysis would have no bearing at all upon lobby­ing, or any investigation of lobbying, or with the statute or its application, and I agree with them.

There have been some clarifications of the intendment of that questionnaire. Those clarifications have not gone as far as I had hoped they would go, I still think the matter is in a state of con­fusion and it ought to be corrected and clarified. I have otherwise indicated that the committee ought to operate as a committee and Members ought to know what is going on-not with respect to every minute detail of operation. Every-· thing need not come before the entire committee, but certainly matters of broad concern and far-reaching impli­cation and potentiality ought to be the subject of committee action so that we will have a chance to exchange ideas and try to make some determination as a committee as to what ought to be done.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, just a word on this question of answering subpenas. I have always been a firm believer in the idea that the law meant what it says and that we have a statute which requires the appearance and attendance of witnesses in answer to subpenas.

But there seems to be a distinction or rather a difference as to the enforcement of that statute.

It was on March 9, 1948, when a House committee was endeavoring to discover whether Communists were influencing the action of a certain organization here in Washington, that a subpena was is­sued. Here is the reply which came down in answer to that subpena:

THE WHITE HOUSE, Washington, March 9, 1948.

Hon. CLARE HOFFMAN, House of Representatives,

Washington, D. C. . MY DEAR. MR. CONGRESSMAN: I am return­

ing to you herewith two subpenas recently issued to me on behalf of your subcom­mittee. On Saturday March 6, I received a subpena calling for my attendance at a hearing to be held that afternoon. On Monday, March 8, I received another sub­pena calling for my attendance at a hearing to be held the same day.

As you know, my official duties are to ad­vise and assist the President of the United States. After the receipt of each of these subpenas, I promptly informed the Presi­dent and in each instance the President di· rected me, in view of my duties as his assist­ant, not to appear before your subcommittee.

Sincerely yours, JOHN R. STEELMAN,

The Assistant to the President.

Now, my point is this: If Mr. Steel­man had the privilege of claiming immu­nity, all right, no fault could be found. But so has the doctor, the lawyer, the preacher, or more accurately the patient, the client, the parishioner a privilege to refuse to testify to certain matters when called by a court or a congressional com­mittee. The President of the United States, like Joe Kamp, defied a congres­sional committee when it wanted to know whether or not the GS!, through Gen­eral Fleming, had been told to deal with

a communistic-controlled union, the Mr. LANHAM. Both sides of the international organization, headed by street. Abram Flaxer: president, and one Bern- Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Has any-stein, secretary-treasurer. '!'hat was the body investigated the PAC? situation then. Mr. LANHAM. Yes. Mr. Goodman, of

The committee had been advised that, the CIO, has testified. at a meeting in the White House at which Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. How it was said Mr. Fleming, Mr. ' Clifford, much did they contribute? Mr. Steelman, and the President were Mr. LANHAM. They were quizzed ex­present, the President had insisted that tensively, especially by the gentleman word be conveyed to the GSI officials that from Ohio [Mr. BROWN]. He asked them they should deal with the local union, for identically the same thing that we whose officers had failed to take the anti- asked Mr. Rumely. Communist oath, or else measures would Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I want to chal-be taken to cancel the GSI contract. lenge that statement as being incorrect.

To ascertain whether the President of Mr. LANHAM. I ask you to read the the United States was attempting to record. The gentleman inquired of Mr. evade the provisions of the Taft-Hartley Goodman how many of the booklets they Act and to force a nonprofit corpora- were distributing or had been distributed tion, managed by a board of directors and how they had been distributed. Just who were in the executive department, read the record. to deal with a Communist-controlled Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Will the union~ the subpena herE;inbefore referred gentleman yield to me just a minute? to was issued and the answer which has Mr. LANHAM. Surely. been printed was received from Mr'. Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. If I am Steelman. in error, you can correct me, but you

Now we have a statute. It will be have one counsel who has volunteered found in chapter 6, under the title "Con- to serve you without comp~nsation. gressional Investigations," and under That is this gentleman from Philadel­section 192 of title 2 of the United States phia, Mr. Lewis Lettle-what is his Code. That statute provides that- name? Is that his name? I have

Every person who, having been summoned offered to help you out, if you want coun­as a witness by the authority of either House sel. I will serve without compensation of congress to give testimony • • • who in asking these CIO boys some questions. willfully makes default or who, having ap- Mr. LANHAM. You are a great help peared, refuses to answer, shall be punished to us today. by a fine of not more than $1,000 nor less Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. I could than $100, and imprisonment in a. common jail for not less than 1 month nor more than and would help YOU a lot if you would 12 months. let me.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I suggest the Now, my point is that, while Mr. Steel- gentleman from Michigan find out who

man might possibly have claimed privi-· the members of the staff are and advise lege had he appeared, and might, because the minority members. of his privilege, like the doctor, the law- Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. · I have yer, the preacher, or the priest, refuse a resolution in for that. I am trying to answer and so been excused, there to learn who they are. Does the gentle­was no excuse for Mr. Steelman refus- . man from Georgia [Mr. LANHAM] join ing to appear. me in yielding to the gentleman from .

Joe Kamp, I repeat, violated the stat- Indiana? ute. He was punished for contempt. Mr. LANHAM. In just a minute. In· He is going to jail. But the President the first place, this committee was set ordered Mr. Steelman to violate the stat- up just before we went home last autumn. ute and the House took no notice of that The resolution gave the chairman the refusal, either by instituting contempt right to select the staff. He told the . proceedings or otherwise, for it was well minority members if they wanted to known that .the then Attorney General select members of the staff they would would not prosecute such proceedings. be permitted to do that. I know nothing

Equal justice under law? Who said about the gentleman to whom you refer. it? Who believes it? This is what I want to say, and I am

Civil rights? For some, for all, or just sure the gentlemen on the minority side for those who are in favor with the will confirm what I say, that the com­administration? mittee has been very careful to protect

Mr. LANHAM. I would like to make the names of Congressmen, or Congress­this statement, and after I have made men whose names -have been inadvert­this statement I have finished, and I will ently brought before the committee. In­be glad to yield back the time after I evitably, in this testimony witnesses have have completed this statement. referred to various Members of Congress.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. That is The committee has made every effort to very kind of you, and I appreciate it. protect Members of Congress.

Mr. LANHAM. I am perfectly Willing Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. for the record of the committee to stand Speaker, I cannot yield further. If the as it is written. I am sure the gentleman gentleman is willing-and I .want him from Indiana [Mr. HALLECK] will confirm and every other Member of Congress to what I say when I say that the committee understand that I am not criticizing the has tried to be altogether objective. We members of the committee; what I think have not sought the headlines. We have is that he and his committee have been tried to investigate both sides of the taken in by some pretty smart f elluws. street. That was what we were attempt- Mr. LANHAM. I do not think we have ing to do. been taken in, but we have been taken for

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Both a ride this morning. We know what wa sides of the street? are doing. .

8346 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 8 Mr. COX. The gentleman, then, .is the

only Member of Congress that knows what his committee ·is doing, · Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. I fear the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. LAN­HAM] and his committee have been taken for a ride by the committee staff.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.

Mr. KRUSE. Mr. Speaker, I wish to make a brief statement in regard to this matter, for the incident which started all this occurred in my district.

Several weeks ago some friends asked me relative to whether or not I was of the opinion that the Communists had in­filtrated to any extent the electrical in­dustry of this country. After a very thorough investigation of all available information that I could get my hands on ~ advised my friends that I was con­vinced that there most certainly was Communist infiltration and control in some respects of the United Electrical Workers in the United States, and I am still of that opinion. My views were pub­lished in the Fort Wayne newspapers, and it was a. matter of serious consideration at the time in view of the fact that a Na­tional Labor Relations Board election was being held to determine the proper bargaining unit as between the United Electrical Workers and the IUE which has been making a very militant and ag­gressive effort to rid itself of commu­nistic influences.

I was immediately subjected to a slan­derous and vicious attack. In the same statement in which I was attacked, the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. HOFF­MAN] was also subjected to the same type of slanderous attack.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield for a question?

Mr. KRUSK I yield. Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Was

there any communication between us of any kind?

Mr. KRUSE. I was just going to say that there had been absolutely no com­niunication between myself or any other individual Member of Congress which would have justified the attack which appeared in the Fort Wayne papers and which was initiated by the United Elec­trical Workers in tny district. I am very happy to say that UE was soundly and disa:;trously defeated by the IUE in my district.

I think that is the point of the matter at issue in this whole thing, Some peo­ple seems to be mistaken about the meaning of article I, section 1 of the Constitution that the legislative power resides in the Congress of the United States. I deplore and condemn the tac­tics of this man, UE, or anyone else in labor, business, or whatever it may be, who attempts to dominate, coerce, or intimidate any Member of Congress, whether or not I happen to agree with his views. That is the danger that faces us today. That, briefly, is what set off the incident here.

I join the gentleman from Michigan in his condemnation of this kind of tactics.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, one reason for my- statement

was that I did not want the Members of Congress who came here recently to feel too badly if . somebody said some­thing unpleasant about them; it is· one of the things that we must all expect if we make a fight for orderly constitu­tional government. It has .been said at times that the fellow who did the most and made the hardest fight got the most abu.se. Do not let criticism from sub­versive organizations worry you.

SPECIAL ORDER

The SPEAKER. Under the previous order of the House, the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. HOFFMAN] is recognized for 10 minutes.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I yield back my time. SIGNING <;>F . ENROLLED BILLS I;>URINC:

ADJOURNMENT OF HOUSE

Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that notwith­standing the adjournment of the House until Monday next the Clerk be author­ized to receive messages from the Senate, and that the Speaker be authorized to sign any enrolled bills and joint resolu­tions duly passed by the two Houses and found truly enrolled. ·

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?

There was no objection. SPECIAL ORDER

The SPEAKER. Under previous order of the House, the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. WILLIAMS] is recognized for 10 minutes: .

Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr.' Speaker, last Monday, June 5, 1950, will be remem­bered in the history of our Republic as a day of national disgrace. It was on that day that the Supreme Court of the United States shed its robes of historic dignity, laid aside its conscience, dragged

· the Constitution in the dirt, and came forth with the four most shameful polit­ical decisions ever rendered by that body,

Its rulings in the ·Sweatt, McLaurin, Henderson, and Tidelands cases strike at the fundamental basis on which American freedom has stood for almost two centuries. Brazenly, and without apparent qualms of conscience, the Supreme Court reversed precedent of a hundred and fifty years' standing, to sur­render abjectly to the demands of organ­ized minorities engaged in a war of attri­tion again.3t our democratic institutions.

Disregarding the constitutional desig­nation of authority ·to the legislative branch to pass and repeal laws, and in complete contradiction of their limited functions, they have voluntarily com­mitted a crime of usurpation which can be measured only by the yardstick of their own degradation. They are usurp­ing the constitutionally designated func­tions of the States and the elected Con­gress to legislate judicially that which the Congress, for a century and a half, has consistently refused to enact.

For years, Congress has been under constant assault from Communists and other organized minorities to outlaw segregation and to amalgamate our peo­ple into one mongrel race. To the ever­lasting credit of the Congress, let it be pointed out that it has consistently re-

pelled their onslaughts, and has resisted their efforts to degrade our civilization. . Yet, in the face of these acknowledged facts the Supreme Court has taken it upon' themselves to outlaw, by judicial fiat, a social custom ,which, has main­tained to the advantage of all races for 200 years.

I have long had the opinion that the present Supreme Court, deliberately stacked with party patronage seekers, has ceased to be a court of law to be­come instead a vehicle by which the alier. philosophies of certain machine politicians could be farced upon an otherwise free people.

Never, in the history of our great Na­tion, has public confidence in that tri­bunal been so low; and never before has that Court so obviously favored . mo­mentary political expediency over his­toric principle and established prece­dent. , Let us ,not be deceived; the motivat­ing force behind this usurpation of leg­islative power rests in the present ad­ministration. It has openly dedicated itself to the destruction of southern and American racial customs and institu­tions; to a destruction of States' Rights; and to the destruction of moral integrity iP. the name of material security, . If there are those in · the South who still believe that the President is their friend, let them but read the briefs of hL Justice Department, and the Court's qpinio11s_ in these cases.

It was my nauseating experience, in the fall of last year, to read the Justice Department's brief in the so-called Hen­derson case-:-asking the Supreme Court to reverse its former decisions permit­ting "separate and equal" facilities for the races. ·

In their brief, the Justice Department admitted that they did not seek an in­tewretation of the law, but demanded that the Court disregard the law as writ­ten, and interpret it in the light of the Justice Department's demands. I quote from their brief : ·

What we seek ls not justice under the law as it ls. What we seek is justice to which law in its making should conform.

Where is the authority of any court to interpret the law on the basis· of what they think it should be, rather than what it is?

Similar briefs were filed· in the Hen­derson case by the CIO, which hopes to use the Negro as a club with which to beat the white people of the South into submission; the NAACP, a gang of Negro racketeers bent upon creating racial strife and exploiting their own people; the AVC, an alleged veterans' organization, which, from its inception, has caused nothing but trouble for legitimate veterans' groups.

The briefs filed by these organized gangs, including that of the Justice De­partment, would have insulted the in­telligence of any backwoods justice of the.peace.

Last fall, in a speech to the House, I listed typical authorities cited in the Henderson case by the Justice Depart­ment in support of their contentions, and which, it now appears, became the basis for the Court's decisions.

1950 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-· HOUSE 8347 Some of these are: Native Son, a

novel; Caste and Class in a Southern Town, a prejudiced lay attack upon the South; the Bolshevik; the Soviet Repre­sentative to the United Nations; and various Soviet publications.

Thomas Jefferson said that-The germ of dissolution of our Federal

Government is in the Constitution of the Federal judiciary.

And-The States should be watchful to note

every material usurpation on their rights; to denounce them as they occur in the most preemptory terms; to protest against them as wrongs • • • not as an acknowl­edgment of rights, but as a temporary yield­ing to the lesser evil, until their accumula­tion shall overweigh that of separation.

In the light of that stated philosophy, I ask you: By what right do the Presi­dent and his political cohorts-embrac­ing as they do the alien Marxist theories of socialism, arid the Hamiltonian ideas of an absolute state-parade under the sacred banner of Thomas Jefferson?

Disraeli distinguished between poli­ticians and statesmen when he pointed out that "politicians work for the next election; statesmen for the next genera-tion." ·

Never in the turbulent history of our Nation have we needed statesmen more, or have we ever been so devoid of them. The time has come when Americans must awaken to the dangers lurking on the road down which we are being taken, and rise as one to exterminate the weevils that are undermining our con­stitutional freedoms; if we are to survive as a Nation and as a people, it is incum­bent upon both major political parties to return to morality. Only through this, coupled with an application of hon­est statesmanship by those concerned with Government management, can we preserve the constitutional freedoms which are our heritage.

EXTENSION OF REMARKS

Mr. CHESNEY asked and was given permission to extend his remarks and include an editorial from the Chicago Daily News.

Mr. MANSFIELD asked and was given permission to include with the previous remarks he made a newspaper story. r Mr. DONOHUE <at the request of Mr. McCORMACK) was given permission to extend his remarks and include a Me­morial Day address.

Mr. POAGE <at the request of Mr. LUCAS) was given permission to extend his remarks. SENATE JOINT RESOLUTIONS REFERRED

Joint resolutions of the Senate of the following titles were taken from the Speaker's table and, under the rule, re­f erred as follows:

S. J. Res. 170. Joint resolution to provide for the transfer of the paintings The Grand Canyon of the Yellowstone and The Chasm of the Colorado from the United States Cap­itol to the Department of the Interior; to the Committee on House Administration.

S. J. Res. 171. Joint resolution transferrini the plaster cast of the statue of George Wash­ington from the United States Capitol to the Smithsonian Institution; to the Committee on House Administration.

SENATE ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED

The SPEAKER announced his signa­ture to enrolling bills of the Senate of the fallowing titles:

S. 274. An act for the relief of Constantin E. Aramescu;

S. 356. An act for the relief of Hugo Geiger; S. 404. An act for the relief of Emma L.

Jackson; S. 749. An act for the relief of Ferd H.

· Gibler; S. 764. An act to confer jurisdiction upon

the Court of Claims to hear, determine, and render judgment upon the claim of the Forest Lumber Co.;

S. 765. An act to confer jurisdiction upon the Court of Claims to hear, determine, and render judgment upon the claim of the Algoma Lumber Co. and its successors in in­terest, George R. Birkelund and Charles E. Siddall, of Chicago, Ill., and Kenyon T. Fay, of Los Angeles, Calif., trustees of the Algoma Lumber Liquidation Trust;

S. 766. An act to confer jurisdiction upon the Court of Claims to hear, determine, and render judgment upon the claim of the Lamm Lumber Co.;

S. 947. An act for the relief of the Baggett Transportation Co., Inc.;

S. 977. An act for the relief of Jacques Yedid, Henriette Yedid, and l!':thel Danielle Yedid;

S. 1146. An act for the relief of Franc~s W. Dodge;

S. 1423. An act for the relief of Alex Morn­ingstar;

S. 1510. An act for the relief of James I. Bartley;

S. 1693. An act for the relief of Karin .Mar­gareta Hellen and Olaf Christer Hellen;

S. 1798. An act for the relief of Mrs. Minda Moore;

S. 1856. An act for the relief of Sisters Maria Rita Rossi, Maria Domenica Paone, Rachele Orlando, Assunta Roselli, Rosa Inno­centi, and Maria Mancinelli;

S. 1863. An act for the relief of Fremont Rider;

S. 1929. An act for the relief of Anna Samu­dovsky;

S. 2070. An act for the relief of the Clark Funeral Home;

S. 2108. An act for the relief of Italo Vespa de Chellis;

S. 2156. An act for the relief of Sister Edel­trudis Clara Weskamp;

S. 2338. An act for the relief of J. M. Arthur;

S. 2339. An act for the relief of the Davis Grocery Co., of Oneida, Tenn.;

S. 2385. An act for the relief of Edward C. Ritchie;

S. 2611. An act for the relief of Roland Roger Alfred Boccia, also known as Roland Barbera;

S. 2646. An act for the relief of the Artic-aire Refrigeration Co.; and ·

S. 3090. An act for the relief of Lt. (jg) Charles W. Ireland, Supply Corps, United States Navy, and for other purposes.

ADJOURNMENT

Mr. BIEMILLER. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly <at 1 o'clock and 33 minutes p. m.) , under its previous order, the House ad­journed until Monday, June 12, 1950, at 12 o'clock noon.

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, ETC.

Under clause 2 of rule XXIV, executive communications were taken from the Speaker's table and referred as follows:

1492. A letter from the Secretary of Com-merce, transmitting the Annual Report of the Foreign-Trade Zones Board, for the fiscal

year ended June 30, 1949, together with copies of the annual reports of the city of New York, the Board of Commissioners of the Port of New Orleans, and the Board of State Harbor Commissioners for the Port of San Francisco, covering operations for the cal­endar year 1948 of Foreign-Trade Zones Nos. 1, 2, and 3 at the above respective ports, pursuant to · section 16, Public Law 397, Seventy-third •Congress, second session; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

1493. A letter from the Postmaster General, transmitting a draft of a proposed bill en-

. titled "A bill to amend title 18 of the United States Code, relating to the mailing of ob­scene matter"; to the Committee on the Judi· ciary.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 2 of rule XIII, reports o! committees were delivered to the Clerk for printing and reference to the proper calendar, as follows:

Mr. GARMATZ: Joint Committee on the Disposition of Executive Papers. House Re­port No. 2209. Report on the disposition of certain papers of sundry executive' depart- • ments. Ordered to. be printed.

Mr. GARMATZ: Joint Committee on the Disposition of Executive Papers. House Re­port No. 2210. Report on the disposition of certain papers of sundry executive depart­ments. Ordered to be printed.

Mr. GARMATZ: Joint Committee on the Disposition of Executive Papers. House Re­port No. 2211. Report on the disposition of certain papers of sundry executive depart· ments. Ordered to be printed.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 2 of rule XIII reports of committees were delivered to the Clerk for printing and reference to the proper calendar, as follows:

Mr. WALTER: Committee on the Judi­ciary. S. 118. An act for the relief of Cle­mente Sabin Dopico; without amendment (Rept. No. 2193). Referred to the Commit­tee of the Whole House.

Mr. WALTER: Committee on the Judi­ciary. S. 330. An act for the relief of George Gabriel Herrmann, Greta (Marketa) Herr­mann (wife), and Alice Herrmann ( daugh­ter) , known also as George Gabriel Herr­man, Greta Herman, and Alice Herman; without amendment (Rept. No. 2194). Re­ferred to the Committee of the Whole House.

Mr. WALTER: Committee on the Judi­ciary. S. 1452. An act for the relief of Dr. Juan A. Queralt Balleste; without amend­ment (Rept. No. 2195). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House.

Mr. WALTER: Committee on the Judi­ciary. S. 1484. An act for the relief of Au­gustina Marlia; without amendment (Rept. No. 2196). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House.

Mr. WALTER: Committee on the Judi­ciary. s. 16a7. An act for the relief of Marie Henriette de Bruyn; without amendment

· (Rept. No. 2197). Referred to the Commit­tee of the Whole House.

Mr. WALTER: Committee on the Judi­ciary. S. 1672. An act for the relief of Efro­sini Abad; with amendment (Rept. No. 2198). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House.

Mr. WALTER: Ccmmittee on the Judi· ciary. S. 2265. An act for the relief of Ma­rina George Papadopoulos; without amend­ment (Rept. No. 2199). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House.

Mr. WALTER: Committee on the Judi­ciary. S. 2511. An act for the relief of Dr. John R. Portaria; without amendment

8348 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 9 (Rept. No. 2200). Referred to the Commit­tee of the Whole House.

Mr. WALTER: Committee on the Judi­ciary. S. 2556. An act for the relief of Mrs. Billy J. Knight and Dorothea Knight; with­out amendment (Rept. No. 2201). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House.

Mr. WALTER: Committee on the Judiciary. S. ~f29. An act for the relief of Marianne Bruchner; without amendment (Rept. No. 2102). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House.

Mr. WALTER: Committee on the Judiciary. S. 2714. An act for the relief of Thomas Pfeiffer; without amendment (Rept. No. 2203). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House.

Mr. GRAHAM: Committee on the Judi-. ciary. H. R. 7079. A bill for the relief .of Mrs. Gin Shibasaki Okafuji; with amend­ment (Rept. No. 2204). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House. -

Mr. GRAHAM: Committee on the Judi­ciary. H. R. 7820. A bill for the relief of Keiko Uchida and her minor child; with amendment (Rept. No. 2205). Referred to. the Committee of the Whole House.

Mr. GRAHAM: Committee on the Judi­ciary. H. R. 7970. A bill for the. relief of Regina Watanabe (Mrs. Regina Anderson); Wi',h amendment (Rept. No. 2206). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House.

Mr. GOSSETT: Committee on the Judi­ciary. H. R. 84.40.. A bill for the relief of Noae Kawashima; without amendment (Rept. No. 2207). Referred to the Commit­tee of the Whole House.

Mr. GOSSETT: Committee on the Judi­ciary. H. R. 8451. A bill for the . relief of Yoshie Nozawa; without amendment (Rept. No. 2208 ) . Referred to the Committee of the Whole House.

PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 3 of rule XXII, public bills and resolutions were introduced and severally referred as follows;

By Mr. MORRIS: H. R. 8762. A bill to authorize the con­

struction, operation, and maintenance by the Secretary of the Interior of the Cobb Creek reclamat ion project, Oklahoma; to the Com­mittee on Public Lands.

By Mr. DENTON: H. R. 8763 . A bill to amend the Clayton

Act with respect to the recovery of triple damages under the antit rust laws, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. DINGELL: H. R. 8764. A bill to amend and supple­

ment the Federal-Aid Road Act, approved July 11, 1916 (39 stat. 355), as amended and supplemen".;ed, to authorize appropriations for continuing the construction of highways, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Public Works.

By Mr. DONOHUE: H. R. 8765. A bill to terminate the war tax

rates on certain miscellaneous excise taxes, and for ot her purposes; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

By Mr. UNDERWOOD: H. R. 8766. A bill to establish rearing ponds

and a fish hatchery in the State of Ken­tucky; to the Committee on Merchant Ma­rine and Fisheries.

By Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee: · H. R. 8767. A bill to authorize the exclu­

sion from the mails of all obscene, lewd, lascivious, indecent, filthy, or vile articles, matters, things, devices, or substances, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service.

By Mr. RODINO: H. R. 8768. A bill to amend the Immigra­

tion Act of 1924, as amended; to the Com­mittee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. LODGE: H. Con. Res. 220. Concurrent resolution ex­

pressing the sense of the Congress that the President should rescind foreign-trade agree­ments with Communist-controlled countries; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

By Mr. McCORMACK: H. Res. 635. Resolution providing for the

appointment of a special committee of the House of Representatives to investigate the campaign expenditures of the various candi­dates for the House of Representatives, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Rules.

By Mr. SCRIVNER: H. Res. 636. Resoiution directing the Sec­

retary of State to call upon the United Na­tions to investigate shooting down of Amer­ican Navy plane by Russian airmen on Apr.il 8, 1950, and to request United Nations to impose punishment as ,provided in its Charter; to the Committee on Foreign Af­fairs.

By Mr. CELLER: H. Res. 637. Resolution to provide · funds

for the Committee on the Judiciary; to the Committee on House Administration.

By Mr. HOFFMAN ·of Michigan: H. Res. 638. Resolution to create a Com­

mittee To Investigate the Select Committee on Lobbying Activities; to the Committee on Rules. · ·

MEMORIALS

Under cla~se 3 of rule XX!!, memorials were presented and referred as follows:

By the SPEAKER: Memorial of the Legis­lature of the State of Louisiana, memorializ­ing the President and the Congress of the United States not to federalize the practice of medicine; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commei'ce.

PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 1 of rule XXII, private bills and resolutions were introduced and severally ~eferred as follows:

By Mr. BAILEY: H . R. 8769 . A bill for the relief of Ann­

m arie Stritter and her minor daughter; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. BARTLETT: H . R. 8770. A bill to confer jurisdiction

upon the District Court for the Territory of Alaska to hear, determine, and render judg­ment upon certain claims of William Ber­gen; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. BOGGS of Delaware (by re-quest): ·

H. R. 8771. A bill for the relief of Maria Sulikowska Forbes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. DENTON: H. R. 8772. A bill for the relief of Ah-Kim

Wong; to the Committee on the Judiciary. By Mr. DURHAM:

H. R. 8773. A bill for the relief of Chiyako Ozam a ; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

H . R. 8774. A bill for the relief of Yoshie Murakami; to the Committee on the Judi­ciary.

By Mr. FULTON: H. R. 8775. A bill for the relief of Lor.eta

Marino; to the Committee on the Judiciary. By Mr. GREGORY:

H. R. 8776. A bill for the relief of the Bir­mingham Ferry Co.; to the Committee on the · Judiciary.

By Mr. O'NEILL: H. R. 8777. A bill to renew patent No.

1,906,593, issued May 2, 1933, relating to sani­tation equipment; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. JOSEPH L. PFEIFER: H. R. 8778. A bill for the relief of Salvatore

Esposito; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. PRIEST: H. R. 8779. A bill for the relief of Mrs. Lula

Huggins Wingler; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

I:y Mr. SAYLOR: H . R . 8780. A bill for the relief of Leila M.

Dodd; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

PETITIONS, ETC.

Under clause 1 of rule XXII, petitions and papers were laid on the Clerk's desk and ref erred as fallows:

2188. By the SPEAKER: Petition of F. A. Pierson, secretary, Nebraska State Dental As~ sociation, Lincoln, Nebr., opposing enactment of any legislation favoring the principle· of any ·form of compulsory health insurance;

·to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

2189. Also, petition of Joseph E. Nesbitt, president, Public_ Forum of Spokane, Spok· ane, Wash., relative to the passing of Hon. John Lesinski, of Michigan, and conveying deep sympathy; to the Committee on House Administration.

SENATE FRIDAY, JUNE 9, 1950

<Legislative day of Wednesday, June 7, 1950) .

The Senate. met at 11 o'clock a. m., on the expiration of the recess.

Dr. Conrad Bergendoff, president, Au­gustana College, Rock Island, Ill., offored the following prayer :

O Lord who dost guide the course of nations toward Thine own eternal goal:

We pray Thee for the vision of Thy will and for light to take the next step on Thy way.

We thank Thee for the goodly heritage of our beloved land and for our oppor­tunities at this moment of history.

We pray Thee that amid the tumult of the crowded day our minds may be responsive to the promptings of Thy spirit.

So that Thou mayest lead us to hallow Thy name in the earth and to bring to men the kingdom of Thy Son our Lord and Sa vi our, Jesus Christ.-

For Thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory for ever and ever. Amen.

THE JOURNAL

On request of Mr. LucAs, and by unan­imous consent, the reading of the Jour­nal of the proceedings of Thursday, June 8, 1950, was dispensed with.

MESSAGES FROM THE PRESIDENT­APPROV AL OF BILL

Messages in writing from the Presi­dent of the United States were commu­nicated to the Senate by Mr. Miller, one of his secretaries, and he announced that on June 8, 1950, the President had approved and signed the act <S. 3118) relating to the forwarding and return of second-, third-, and fourth-class mail, the collect.ion of postage due at the time of delivery, and for other purposes.